Federal Register Vol. 81, No.148,

Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 148 (August 2, 2016)

Page Range50605-51074
FR Document

81_FR_148
Current View
Page and SubjectPDF
81 FR 50726 - Sunshine Act Meeting; Record of Vote of Meeting Closure (Pub. L. 94-409) (5 U.S.C. 552b)PDF
81 FR 50683 - Foreign-Trade Zone (FTZ) 279-Terrebonne Parish, Louisiana; Notification of Proposed Production Activity; Thoma-Sea Marine Constructors, LLC, Subzone 279A (Shipbuilding), Houma and Lockport, LouisianaPDF
81 FR 50721 - 60-Day Notice of Proposed Information Collection: Request for Withdrawals From Replacements Reserves/Residual Receipts FundsPDF
81 FR 50701 - National Advisory Council for Environmental Policy and TechnologyPDF
81 FR 50705 - Notice of the General Services Administration's Labor-Management Relations Council MeetingPDF
81 FR 50622 - Safety Zone; Chesapeake Bay, Cape Charles, VAPDF
81 FR 50684 - Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip from India: Preliminary Results and Partial Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2014-2015PDF
81 FR 50701 - Clean Air Act Advisory Committee (CAAAC): Notice of MeetingPDF
81 FR 50757 - Sunshine Act MeetingPDF
81 FR 50728 - Sunshine Act Meeting NoticePDF
81 FR 50617 - Correction to Applicability Date for Modification of Regulations Regarding Price Adjustments in Antidumping Duty ProceedingsPDF
81 FR 50683 - Lightweight Thermal Paper From the People's Republic of China: Notice of Rescission of Countervailing Duty Administrative ReviewPDF
81 FR 50721 - 60-Day Notice of Proposed Information Collection;PDF
81 FR 50652 - Regulations Governing Fees for Services Performed in Connection with Licensing and Related Services-2016 UpdatePDF
81 FR 50713 - Proposed Collection; 60-day Comment Request; NCI's Center for Cancer Training Application Form for Graduate Student Recruitment Program (NCI)PDF
81 FR 50714 - National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases; Notice of Closed MeetingsPDF
81 FR 50715 - National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases; Notice of MeetingsPDF
81 FR 50713 - National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences; Notice of MeetingsPDF
81 FR 50729 - Biweekly Notice; Applications and Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses and Combined Licenses Involving No Significant Hazards ConsiderationsPDF
81 FR 50718 - Federal Property Suitable as Facilities To Assist the HomelessPDF
81 FR 50696 - Combined Notice of Filings #1PDF
81 FR 50697 - Combined Notice of Filings #1PDF
81 FR 50699 - Spartan Renewable Energy, LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 AuthorizationPDF
81 FR 50696 - Golden Fields Solar I, LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 AuthorizationPDF
81 FR 50695 - Combined Notice of Filings #1PDF
81 FR 50700 - Records Governing Off-the-Record Communications; Public NoticePDF
81 FR 50699 - Combined Notice of Filings #2PDF
81 FR 50728 - Notice of Permit Applications Received Under the Antarctic Conservation Act of 1978PDF
81 FR 50705 - Federal Travel Regulation (FTR); Reimbursement for Use of Transportation Network Companies While on Official TravelPDF
81 FR 50723 - Alaaeldin A. Babiker, M.D.; Decision and OrderPDF
81 FR 50792 - Pricing for the 2016 American Liberty Silver MedalsPDF
81 FR 50722 - Notice of Filing of Plats of Survey; ColoradoPDF
81 FR 50781 - Texas Disaster Number TX-00474PDF
81 FR 50780 - North Carolina Disaster # NC-00075PDF
81 FR 50712 - Advisory Council on Alzheimer's Research, Care, and Services; MeetingPDF
81 FR 50722 - Notice of Termination of Uinkaret Mountains Landscape Restoration Project Environmental Impact Statement, ArizonaPDF
81 FR 50785 - Buy America Waiver NotificationPDF
81 FR 50782 - Projects Rescinded for Consumptive Uses of WaterPDF
81 FR 50782 - Projects Approved for Consumptive Uses of WaterPDF
81 FR 50682 - Agenda and Notice of Public Meeting of the Delaware Advisory CommitteePDF
81 FR 50621 - Eighth Coast Guard District Annual Recurring Marine EventsPDF
81 FR 50687 - Atlantic Highly Migratory Species; Meeting of the Atlantic Highly Migratory Species Advisory PanelPDF
81 FR 50780 - Announcement of Funding Pool Size for the Growth Accelerator Fund CompetitionPDF
81 FR 50704 - Change in Bank Control Notices; Acquisitions of Shares of a Bank or Bank Holding CompanyPDF
81 FR 50704 - Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Holding CompaniesPDF
81 FR 50782 - Policy Statement on Implementing Intercity Passenger Train On-Time Performance and Preference Provisions of 49 U.S.C. 24308(c) and (f)PDF
81 FR 50624 - Procedures Relating to the Disposition of Property Acquired by the United States Postal Service Office of Inspector General for Use as EvidencePDF
81 FR 50781 - California Disaster #CA-00248PDF
81 FR 50784 - Petition for Exemption; Summary of Petition Received; Diamond Aircraft Industries GmbHPDF
81 FR 50613 - Amendment of Class E Airspace for the following Indiana Towns; Goshen, IN; Greencastle, IN; Huntingburg, IN; North Vernon, IN; Rensselaer, IN; Tell City, IN; and Washington, INPDF
81 FR 50788 - Notice of Receipt of Petition for Decision That Nonconforming Model Year 2014 Bentley Flying Spur Saloon/Continental Passenger Cars Are Eligible for ImportationPDF
81 FR 50787 - Agency Information Collection Activity Under OMB ReviewPDF
81 FR 50786 - Agency Information Collection Activity Under OMB ReviewPDF
81 FR 50784 - Notice of Industry MeetingPDF
81 FR 50688 - Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council; Public MeetingPDF
81 FR 50687 - Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council (MAFMC); Public MeetingPDF
81 FR 50706 - Request for Nominations for Individuals and Consumer Organizations for Advisory CommitteesPDF
81 FR 50621 - Drawbridge Operation Regulation; York River, Yorktown, VAPDF
81 FR 50690 - Agency Information Collection Activities Under OMB ReviewPDF
81 FR 50692 - Agency Information Collection Activities Under OMB ReviewPDF
81 FR 50701 - Information Collection Being Submitted for Review and Approval to the Office of Management and BudgetPDF
81 FR 50789 - Privacy Act of 1974; Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, DOT/FAA854 Requests for Waivers and Authorizations Under 14 CFR Part 107 System of Records NoticePDF
81 FR 50759 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; International Securities Exchange, LLC; Order Disapproving a Proposed Rule Change To Amend Rule 804(g)PDF
81 FR 50761 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; BOX Options Exchange LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend the Fee Schedule on the BOX Market LLC (“BOX”) Options FacilityPDF
81 FR 50777 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; BOX Options Exchange LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend the Fee Schedule on the BOX Market LLC (“BOX”) Options FacilityPDF
81 FR 50763 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change Relating to the Listing and Trading of Shares of SolidX Bitcoin Trust Under NYSE Arca Equities Rule 8.201PDF
81 FR 50759 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Designation of a Longer Period for Commission Action on a Proposed Rule Change to List and Trade Shares of the Global Currency Gold Fund Under NYSE Arca Equities Rule 8.201PDF
81 FR 50757 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; ISE Gemini, LLC; Order Disapproving a Proposed Rule Change To Amend Rule 804(g)PDF
81 FR 50750 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change for a New NYSE Arca Rule 13.9 and a New NYSE Arca Equities Rule 11.9 and To Make Conforming Changes to NYSE Arca Rule 3.2 and NYSE Arca Equities Rule 3.2PDF
81 FR 50689 - Proposed Information Collection; Comment Request: Socioeconomics of Ocean Recreation Operations in the Monterey Bay, Greater Farallones and Cordell Bank National Marine SanctuariesPDF
81 FR 50680 - Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement: Amendments Related to Sources of Electronic Parts (DFARS Case 2016-D013)PDF
81 FR 50605 - Margin and Capital Requirements for Covered Swap EntitiesPDF
81 FR 50618 - Republic of Tunisia Loan Guarantees Issued Under Section 7034(o) of the Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations Act of 2016-Standard Terms and ConditionsPDF
81 FR 50711 - Institutional Review Board Written Procedures: Guidance for Institutions and Institutional Review Boards; Draft Guidance; AvailabilityPDF
81 FR 50702 - Disclosure of Certain Documents in Enforcement and Other MattersPDF
81 FR 50727 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request; Sale of Securities To Reduce Indebtedness of Party in Interest, Prohibited Transaction Class Exemption 1980-83PDF
81 FR 50694 - Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Northern New MexicoPDF
81 FR 50693 - Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, PaducahPDF
81 FR 50694 - President's Council of Advisors on Science and TechnologyPDF
81 FR 50708 - Determining Donor Eligibility for Autologous Donors of Blood and Blood Components Intended Solely for Autologous Use-Compliance Policy; Guidance for Industry; AvailabilityPDF
81 FR 50717 - National Institute on Aging; Notice of MeetingPDF
81 FR 50717 - National Institute on Aging; Notice of Closed MeetingsPDF
81 FR 50716 - National Cancer Institute; Notice of Closed MeetingPDF
81 FR 50716 - National Cancer Institute; Notice of MeetingPDF
81 FR 50717 - National Cancer Institute; Notice of MeetingPDF
81 FR 50726 - Notice of Lodging of Proposed Consent Decree Under the Clean Air ActPDF
81 FR 50682 - Agenda and Notice of Public Meeting of the Connecticut Advisory CommitteePDF
81 FR 50715 - National Institute of General Medical Sciences; Notice of MeetingPDF
81 FR 50628 - Air Plan Approval; Florida; Regional Haze Progress ReportPDF
81 FR 50626 - Promulgation of State Implementation Plan Revisions; Infrastructure Requirements for the 2008 Lead, 2008 Ozone, 2010 NO2,PDF
81 FR 50630 - Allocations of Cross-State Air Pollution Rule Allowances From New Unit Set-Asides for the 2016 Compliance YearPDF
81 FR 50686 - Request for Comments on Post-Quantum Cryptography Requirements and Evaluation CriteriaPDF
81 FR 50710 - Determination That SAMSCA (Tolvaptan) Tablets, 60 Milligrams, Were Not Withdrawn From Sale for Reasons of Safety or EffectivenessPDF
81 FR 50671 - Information Reporting of Catastrophic Health Coverage and Other Issues Under Section 6055PDF
81 FR 50657 - Reporting for Qualified Tuition and Related Expenses; Education Tax CreditsPDF
81 FR 51041 - Privacy Shield FrameworkPDF
81 FR 50652 - Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement; Technical AmendmentsPDF
81 FR 50650 - Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement: New Qualifying Countries-Japan and Slovenia (DFARS Case 2016-D023)PDF
81 FR 50635 - Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement: Detection and Avoidance of Counterfeit Electronic Parts-Further Implementation (DFARS Case 2014-D005)PDF
81 FR 50793 - Medicare Program; Advancing Care Coordination Through Episode Payment Models (EPMs); Cardiac Rehabilitation Incentive Payment Model; and Changes to the Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement Model (CJR)PDF
81 FR 50630 - Cloquintocet-mexyl; Pesticide TolerancesPDF
81 FR 50742 - Applications and Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses and Combined Licenses Involving Proposed No Significant Hazards Considerations and Containing Sensitive Unclassified Non-Safeguards Information and Order Imposing Procedures for Access to Sensitive Unclassified Non-Safeguards InformationPDF
81 FR 50615 - Airports/Locations: Special Operating RestrictionsPDF

Issue

81 148 Tuesday, August 2, 2016 Contents Agency Agency for International Development RULES Republic of Tunisia Loan Guarantees Issued under Section 7034(o) of the Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations Act of 2016—Standard Terms and Conditions, 50618-50620 2016-18192 Centers Medicare Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services PROPOSED RULES Medicare Program: Advancing Care Coordination Through Episode Payment Models (EPMs); Cardiac Rehabilitation Incentive Payment Model; and Changes to the Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement Model, 50794-51040 2016-17733 Civil Rights Civil Rights Commission NOTICES Meetings: Connecticut Advisory Committee, 50682-50683 2016-18160 Delaware Advisory Committee, 50682 2016-18263 Coast Guard Coast Guard RULES Drawbridge Operation Regulation: York River, Yorktown, VA, 50621 2016-18214 Safety Zones: Chesapeake Bay, Cape Charles, VA, 50622-50624 2016-18339 Special Local Regulations: Eighth Coast Guard District Annual Recurring Marine Events, 50621 2016-18257 Commerce Commerce Department See

Foreign-Trade Zones Board

See

International Trade Administration

See

National Institute of Standards and Technology

See

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

Commodity Futures Commodity Futures Trading Commission NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 50690-50693 2016-18212 2016-18213 Comptroller Comptroller of the Currency RULES Margin and Capital Requirements for Covered Swap Entities, 50605-50613 2016-18193 Defense Acquisition Defense Acquisition Regulations System RULES Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplements: Detection and Avoidance of Counterfeit Electronic Parts; Further Implementation, 50635-50650 2016-17956 New Qualifying Countries—Japan and Slovenia, 50650-50652 2016-17958 Technical Amendments, 50652 2016-17959 PROPOSED RULES Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement: Amendments Related to Sources of Electronic Parts, 50680-50681 2016-18194 Defense Department Defense Department See

Defense Acquisition Regulations System

Drug Drug Enforcement Administration NOTICES Decisions and Orders: Alaaeldin A. Babiker, M.D., 50723-50726 2016-18278 Energy Department Energy Department See

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

NOTICES Meetings: Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Northern NM, 50694-50695 2016-18187 Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Paducah, KY, 50693-50694 2016-18186 President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology; Teleconference, 50694 2016-18185
Environmental Protection Environmental Protection Agency RULES Air Quality State Implementation Plans; Approvals and Promulgations: Florida: Regional Haze Progress Report, 50628-50630 2016-18155 Utah: Infrastructure Requirements for the 2008 Lead, 2008 Ozone, 2010 NO2, 2010 SO2, and 2012 PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standards, 50626-50628 2016-18154 Allocations of Cross-State Air Pollution Rule Allowances from New Unit Set-Asides for the 2016 Compliance Year, 50630 2016-18152 Pesticide Tolerances: Cloquintocet-mexyl, 50630-50635 2016-17534 NOTICES Meetings: Clean Air Act Advisory Committee, 50701 2016-18329 National Advisory Council for Environmental Policy and Technology; Teleconference, 50701 2016-18342 Farm Credit Farm Credit Administration RULES Margin and Capital Requirements for Covered Swap Entities, 50605-50613 2016-18193 Federal Aviation Federal Aviation Administration RULES Airports/Locations: Special Operating Restrictions, 50615-50617 2016-17161 Class E Airspace; Amendments: Goshen, Greencastle, Huntingburg, North Vernon, Rensselaer, Tell City, Washington, IN, 50613-50615 2016-18229 NOTICES Meetings: Aircraft Access to System Wide Information Management Demonstration Project, 50784 2016-18219 Petitions for Exemption; Summary of Petitions Received: Diamond Aircraft Industries GmbH, 50784-50785 2016-18232 Federal Communications Federal Communications Commission NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 50701-50702 2016-18209 Federal Deposit Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation RULES Margin and Capital Requirements for Covered Swap Entities, 50605-50613 2016-18193 Federal Election Federal Election Commission NOTICES Disclosure of Certain Documents in Enforcement and Other Matters, 50702-50704 2016-18190 Federal Energy Federal Energy Regulatory Commission NOTICES Combined Filings, 50695-50699 2016-18282 2016-18284 2016-18287 2016-18288 Initial Market-Based Rate Filings Including Requests for Blanket Section 204 Authorizations: Golden Fields Solar I, LLC, 50696 2016-18285 Spartan Renewable Energy, LLC, 50699-50700 2016-18286 Records Governing Off-the-Record Communications, 50700 2016-18283 Federal Highway Federal Highway Administration NOTICES Buy America Waivers, 50785-50786 2016-18270 Federal Housing Finance Agency Federal Housing Finance Agency RULES Margin and Capital Requirements for Covered Swap Entities, 50605-50613 2016-18193 Federal Reserve Federal Reserve System RULES Margin and Capital Requirements for Covered Swap Entities, 50605-50613 2016-18193 NOTICES Changes in Bank Control: Acquisitions of Shares of a Bank or Bank Holding Company, 50704 2016-18243 Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Holding Companies, 50704-50705 2016-18242 Federal Transit Federal Transit Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 50786-50788 2016-18224 2016-18225 2016-18226 Food and Drug Food and Drug Administration NOTICES Determinations That Products Were Not Withdrawn from Sale for Reasons of Safety or Effectiveness: SAMSCA (Tolvaptan) Tablets, 60 Milligrams, 50710-50711 2016-18139 Guidance: Determining Donor Eligibility for Autologous Donors of Blood and Blood Components Intended Solely for Autologous Use--Compliance Policy, 50708-50710 2016-18183 Institutional Review Board Written Procedures, 50711-50712 2016-18191 Requests for Nominations: Individuals and Consumer Organizations for Advisory Committees, 50706-50708 2016-18216 Foreign Trade Foreign-Trade Zones Board NOTICES Proposed Production Activities: Thoma-Sea Marine Constructors, LLC, Foreign-Trade Zone 279—Terrebonne Parish, LA, 50683 2016-18350 General Services General Services Administration NOTICES Federal Travel Regulation: Reimbursement for Use of Transportation Network Companies While on Official Travel, 50705-50706 2016-18279 Meetings: Labor-Management Relations Council, 50705 2016-18340 Health and Human Health and Human Services Department See

Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services

See

Food and Drug Administration

See

National Institutes of Health

NOTICES Institutional Review Board Written Procedures, 50711-50712 2016-18191 Meetings: Advisory Council on Alzheimer's Research, Care, and Services, 50712-50713 2016-18273
Homeland Homeland Security Department See

Coast Guard

Housing Housing and Urban Development Department NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Assessing Public Housing Authorities (PHAs) Compliance with Insurance Requirements Under the Consolidated Annual Contributions Contract and Regulations, 50721-50722 2016-18296 Request for Withdrawals from Replacements Reserves/Residual Receipts Funds, 50721 2016-18349 Federal Properties Suitable as Facilities to Assist the Homeless, 50718-50720 2016-18289 Interior Interior Department See

Land Management Bureau

Internal Revenue Internal Revenue Service PROPOSED RULES Reporting for Qualified Tuition and Related Expenses Education Tax Credits, 50657-50671 2016-18032 Reporting of Catastrophic Health Coverage and Other Issues Under Section 6055, 50671-50680 2016-18100 International Trade Adm International Trade Administration RULES Applicability Date for Modification of Regulations Regarding Price Adjustments in Antidumping Duty Proceedings, 50617-50618 2016-18305 NOTICES Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Investigations, Orders, or Reviews: Lightweight Thermal Paper from the People's Republic of China: Rescission of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review, 50683-50684 2016-18302 Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip from India, 50684-50686 2016-18333 Privacy Shield Framework, 51042-51074 2016-17961 Justice Department Justice Department See

Drug Enforcement Administration

See

Parole Commission

NOTICES Proposed Consent Decrees under the Clean Air Act, 50726 2016-18161
Labor Department Labor Department NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Sale of Securities to Reduce Indebtedness of Party in Interest, Prohibited Transaction Class Exemption 1980-83, 50727-50728 2016-18189 Land Land Management Bureau NOTICES Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc.: Uinkaret Mountains Landscape Restoration Project, AZ; Termination, 50722-50723 2016-18272 Plats of Surveys: Colorado, 50722 2016-18276 National Highway National Highway Traffic Safety Administration NOTICES Petitions for Decision: Nonconforming Model Year 2014 Bentley Flying Spur Saloon/Continental Passenger Cars are Eligible for Importation, 50788-50789 2016-18227 National Institute National Institute of Standards and Technology NOTICES Post-Quantum Cryptography Requirements and Evaluation Criteria, 50686-50687 2016-18150 National Institute National Institutes of Health NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: National Cancer Institute Center for Cancer Training Application Form for Graduate Student Recruitment Program, 50713-50714 2016-18294 Meetings: National Cancer Institute, 50716-50717 2016-18162 2016-18163 2016-18164 National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, 50713 2016-18291 National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, 50714-50715 2016-18292 2016-18293 National Institute of General Medical Sciences, 50715-50716 2016-18159 National Institute on Aging, 50717-50718 2016-18165 2016-18166 National Oceanic National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Socioeconomics of Ocean Recreation Operations in the Monterey Bay, Greater Farallones and Cordell Bank National Marine Sanctuaries, 50689-50690 2016-18195 Meetings: Atlantic Highly Migratory Species Advisory Panel, 50687-50688 2016-18248 Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council, 50688-50689 2016-18218 Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council, 50687 2016-18217 National Science National Science Foundation NOTICES Antarctic Conservation Act Permits, 50728 2016-18281 Nuclear Regulatory Nuclear Regulatory Commission NOTICES Facility Operating and Combined Licenses: Applications and Amendments Involving Proposed No Significant Hazards Considerations, etc., 50729-50750 2016-17477 2016-18290 Meetings; Sunshine Act, 50728 2016-18312 Parole Parole Commission NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 50726-50727 2016-18450 Postal Service Postal Service RULES Procedures Relating to the Disposition of Property Acquired by the United States Postal Service Office of Inspector General for Use as Evidence, 50624-50625 2016-18234 Securities Securities and Exchange Commission NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 50757 2016-18322 Self-Regulatory Organizations; Proposed Rule Changes: BOX Options Exchange LLC, 50761-50763, 50777-50780 2016-18205 2016-18206 International Securities Exchange, LLC, 50759-50761 2016-18207 ISE Gemini, LLC, 50757-50759 2016-18202 NYSE Arca, Inc., 50750-50757, 50759, 50763-50777 2016-18204 2016-18201 2016-18203 Small Business Small Business Administration NOTICES Announcement of Funding Pool Size for the Growth Accelerator Fund Competition, 50780-50781 2016-18244 Disaster Declarations: California, 50781 2016-18233 North Carolina, 50780 2016-18274 Texas, 50781 2016-18275 Surface Transportation Surface Transportation Board RULES Fees for Services Performed in Connection with Licensing and Related Services, 50652-50656 2016-18295 NOTICES Policy Statement on Implementing Intercity Passenger Train On-Time Performance and Preference Provisions; Withdrawal, 50782 2016-18241 Susquehanna Susquehanna River Basin Commission NOTICES Projects Approved for Consumptive Uses of Water, 50782-50784 2016-18267 Projects Rescinded for Consumptive Uses of Water, 50782 2016-18268 Transportation Department Transportation Department See

Federal Aviation Administration

See

Federal Highway Administration

See

Federal Transit Administration

See

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

NOTICES Privacy Act; Systems of Records, 50789-50792 2016-18208
Treasury Treasury Department See

Comptroller of the Currency

See

Internal Revenue Service

See

United States Mint

U.S. Mint United States Mint NOTICES Pricing for the 2016 American Liberty Silver Medals, 50792 2016-18277 Separate Parts In This Issue Part II Health and Human Services Department, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, 50794-51040 2016-17733 Part III Commerce Department, International Trade Administration, 51042-51074 2016-17961 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.

81 148 Tuesday, August 2, 2016 Rules and Regulations DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Office of the Comptroller of the Currency 12 CFR Part 45 [Docket No. OCC-2015-0023] RIN 1557-AD00 FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM 12 CFR Part 237 [Docket No. R-1415] RIN 7100-AD74 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION 12 CFR Part 349 RIN 3064-AE21 FARM CREDIT ADMINISTRATION 12 CFR Part 624 RIN 3052-AC69 FEDERAL HOUSING FINANCE AGENCY 12 CFR Part 1221 RIN 2590-AA45 Margin and Capital Requirements for Covered Swap Entities AGENCY:

Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, Treasury (“OCC”); Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (“Board”); Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”); Farm Credit Administration (“FCA”); and the Federal Housing Finance Agency (“FHFA”).

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

The OCC, Board, FDIC, FCA, and FHFA (each an “Agency” and, collectively, the “Agencies”) are adopting exemptions from the initial and variation margin requirements published by the Agencies in November 2015 pursuant to sections 731 and 764 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (the “Dodd-Frank Act” or the “Act”). Pursuant to Title III of the Terrorism Risk Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2015 (“TRIPRA”), this final rule exempts certain non-cleared swaps and non-cleared security-based swaps with certain financial and non-financial end users that qualify for an exception or exemption from clearing.

DATES:

This final rule is effective October 1, 2016.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

OCC: Ang Middleton, Risk Specialist, Financial Markets Group, (202) 649-7138, or Carl Kaminski, Special Counsel, Legislative and Regulatory Activities Division, (202) 649-5490, for persons who are deaf or hard of hearing, TTY (202) 649-5597, Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, 400 7th Street SW., Washington, DC 20219.

Board: Sean D. Campbell, Associate Director, (202) 452-3760, Anna M. Harrington, Senior Supervisory Financial Analyst, (202) 452-6406, or Lesley Chao, Senior Supervisory Financial Analyst, (202) 974-7063, Division of Banking Supervision and Regulation; Victoria M. Szybillo, Counsel, (202) 475-6325, or Adam Cohen, Counsel, (202) 912-4658, Legal Division, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, 20th and C Streets NW., Washington, DC 20551.

FDIC: Karl R. Reitz, Corporate Expert, Capital Markets, [email protected]; Michael E. Spencer, Chief, Capital Markets Strategy Section, [email protected], Division of Risk Management Supervision, (202) 898-6888; Thomas F. Hearn, Counsel, [email protected], (202) 898-6967, or Catherine Topping, Counsel, [email protected], (202) 898-3975, Legal Division, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, 550 17th Street NW., Washington, DC 20429.

FCA: J.C. Floyd, Associate Director, Finance & Capital Markets Team, Timothy T. Nerdahl, Senior Policy Analyst—Capital Markets, Jeremy R. Edelstein, Senior Policy Analyst, Office of Regulatory Policy, (703) 883-4414, TTY (703) 883-4056, or Richard A. Katz, Senior Counsel, Office of General Counsel, (703) 883-4020, TTY (703) 883-4056, Farm Credit Administration, 1501 Farm Credit Drive, McLean, VA 22102-5090.

FHFA: George Sacco, Senior Financial Analyst, Division of Housing Mission and Goals, (202) 649-3276, [email protected], or Peggy K. Balsawer, Associate General Counsel, Office of General Counsel, (202) 649-3060, [email protected], Federal Housing Finance Agency, Constitution Center, 400 7th St. SW., Washington, DC 20219. The telephone number for the Telecommunications Device for the Hearing Impaired is (800) 877-8339.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background

The Dodd-Frank Act was enacted on July 21, 2010.1 Title VII of the Dodd-Frank Act established a comprehensive new regulatory framework for derivatives, which the Act generally characterizes as “swaps” and “security-based swaps.” 2 As part of this new regulatory framework, sections 731 and 764 of the Dodd-Frank Act added, respectively, a new section 4s to the Commodity Exchange Act of 1936 (the “Commodity Exchange Act”), and a new section 15F to the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Securities Exchange Act”), which require registration with the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (the “CFTC”) of swap dealers and major swap participants and with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) of security-based swap dealers and major security-based swap participants.3 These registrants are collectively referred to in this preamble as “swap entities.”

1 Public Law 111-203, 124 Stat. 1376 (2010).

2 “Swaps” are defined in section 721 of the Dodd-Frank Act to include interest rate swaps, commodity-based swaps, equity swaps and credit default swaps. “Security-based swaps” are defined in section 761 of the Dodd-Frank Act to include a swap based on a single security or loan or on a narrow-based security index. See 7 U.S.C. 1a(47); 15 U.S.C. 78c(a)(68).

3See 7 U.S.C. 6s; 15 U.S.C. 78o-10. Section 731 of the Dodd-Frank Act requires swap dealers and major swap participants to register with the CFTC, which is vested with primary responsibility for the oversight of the swaps market under Title VII of the Dodd-Frank Act. Section 764 of the Dodd-Frank Act requires security-based swap dealers and major security-based swap participants to register with the SEC, which is vested with primary responsibility for the oversight of the security-based swaps market under Title VII of the Dodd-Frank Act. Section 712(d)(1) of the Dodd-Frank Act requires the CFTC and SEC to issue joint rules further defining the terms swap, security-based swap, swap dealer, major swap participant, security-based swap dealer, and major security-based swap participant. The CFTC and SEC issued final joint rulemakings with respect to these definitions in May 2012 and August 2012, respectively. See 77 FR 30596 (May 23, 2012); 77 FR 39626 (July 5, 2012) (correction of footnote in the Supplementary Information accompanying the rule); and 77 FR 48207 (August 13, 2012). 17 CFR part 1; 17 CFR parts 230, 240 and 241.

Sections 731 and 764 of the Dodd-Frank Act require the Agencies to adopt joint rules that apply to all swap entities for which any one of the Agencies is the prudential regulator,4 imposing capital requirements and initial and variation margin requirements on all swaps and security-based swaps not cleared by a registered derivatives clearing organization or clearing agency.5 After a rulemaking process that began in 2011, the Agencies published a joint final rule to implement these Dodd-Frank Act requirements on November 30, 2015 (the “joint final rule”).6

4 Section 1a(39) of the Commodity Exchange Act defines the term “prudential regulator” for purposes of the capital and margin requirements applicable to swap dealers, major swap participants, security-based swap dealers and major security-based swap participants. 7 U.S.C. 1a(39).

5See 7 U.S.C. 6s(e)(2)(A); 15 U.S.C. 78o-10(e)(2)(A).

6 80 FR 74840 (November 30, 2015).

The capital and margin requirements under sections 731 and 764 of the Dodd-Frank Act apply to non-cleared swaps and non-cleared security-based swaps and complement other provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act that require the CFTC and SEC to make determinations as to whether certain swaps or security-based swaps, or a group, category, or class of such transactions, should be required to be cleared.7 If the CFTC or SEC has made such a determination, it is generally unlawful for any person to engage in such a swap or security-based swap unless the transaction is submitted to a derivatives clearing organization or clearing agency, as applicable, for clearing.

7 7 U.S.C. 2(h); 15 U.S.C. 78c-3. The Commodity Exchange Act and the Securities Exchange Act set out standards that the CFTC and the SEC, respectively, are required to apply when making determinations about clearing, which generally address whether a swap or security-based swap is sufficiently standardized to be cleared. 7 U.S.C. 2(h)(2)(D); 15 U.S.C. 78c-3(b)(4).

The clearing requirements, however, do not apply to an entity that is not a financial entity, is using a swap or security-based swap to hedge or mitigate commercial risk, and notifies the CFTC or the SEC, in a manner set forth by the appropriate Commission, how it generally meets its financial obligations.8 Thus, a particular swap or security-based swap might not be cleared either because it is not subject to the mandatory clearing requirement or because one of the parties to the swap is eligible for, and elects to use, an exception or exemption from the mandatory clearing requirement. Such a swap or security-based swap is “non-cleared” for purposes of the capital and margin requirements established under sections 731 and 764 of the Dodd-Frank Act.

8See 7 U.S.C. 2(h)(7); 15 U.S.C. 78c-3(g). Further, the CFTC has authority to exempt swaps from the clearing requirement. 7 U.S.C. 6(c)(1). Pursuant to this authority, the CFTC has provided an exemption from clearing to certain cooperatives that are financial entities. See 17 CFR 50.51. The SEC has similar exemptive authority under section 36(c) of the Securities Exchange Act. 15 U.S.C. 78mm(c).

Sections 731 and 764 direct the Agencies to impose initial and variation margin requirements on all non-cleared swaps and non-cleared security-based swaps. The joint final rule takes into account the risk posed by a covered swap entity's counterparties in establishing the minimum amount of initial and variation margin that the covered swap entity must exchange with its counterparties.9 In implementing this risk-based approach, the joint final rule distinguishes among four separate types of swap counterparties: (1) Counterparties that are themselves swap entities; (2) counterparties that are financial end users with a material swaps exposure; (3) counterparties that are financial end users without a material swaps exposure, and (4) other counterparties, including non-financial end users, sovereigns, and multilateral development banks.10 The joint final rule makes a covered swap entity's collection of margin from these “other counterparties,” including commercial end users, subject to the judgment of the covered swap entity. In particular, a covered swap entity is not required to collect initial and variation margin from these “other counterparties” as a matter of course; a covered swap entity should collect initial or variation margin at such times and in such forms and amounts (if any) as the covered swap entity determines appropriate in its overall credit risk management of the covered swap entity's exposure to the customer.11

9 Each Agency has codified its rule within its respective title of the Code of Federal Regulations. Specifically, the Agencies codified the rules as follows: 12 CFR part 45 (OCC); 12 CFR part 237 (the Board); 12 CFR part 349 (FDIC); 12 CFR part 624 (FCA); and 12 CFR part 1221 (FHFA).

10See § _.2 of the joint final rule for the various definitions that identify these four types of swaps counterparties. The terms “non-financial end user” and “commercial end user” are used interchangeably throughout this preamble. Although the term “commercial end user” is not defined in the Dodd-Frank Act, it is used in this preamble to mean a company that is eligible for the exception to the mandatory clearing requirement for swaps under section 2(h)(7)(A) of the Commodity Exchange Act and section 3C(g)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act, respectively. This exception is generally available to a person that (1) is not a financial entity, (2) is using the swap to hedge or mitigate commercial risk, and (3) has notified the CFTC or SEC how it generally meets its financial obligations with respect to non-cleared swaps or security-based swaps, respectively. See 7 U.S.C. 2(h)(7)(A) and 15 U.S.C. 78c-3(g)(1); see also 80 FR 74848 note 70.

11See §§ _.3(d) and _.4(c) of the joint final rule.

On January 12, 2015, President Obama signed TRIPRA into law.12 Title III of TRIPRA, the “Business Risk Mitigation and Price Stabilization Act of 2015,” amends the statutory provisions added by the Dodd-Frank Act relating to margin requirements for non-cleared swaps and non-cleared security-based swaps. Specifically, section 302 of TRIPRA amends sections 731 and 764 of the Dodd-Frank Act to provide that the initial and variation margin requirements do not apply to certain transactions of specified counterparties that would qualify for an exception or exemption from clearing, as explained more fully below. Qualifying non-cleared swaps and non-cleared security-based swaps of entities covered by section 302 of TRIPRA are not subject to the Agencies' joint final rule.

12 Public Law 114-1, 129 Stat. 3 (2015).

Section 303 of TRIPRA requires the Agencies to implement the provisions of section 302 by promulgating an interim final rule pursuant to which public comment is sought before a final rule is issued. On November 30, 2015, the Agencies published and sought comment on an interim final rule, which added § _.1(d) to the joint final rule.13 The Agencies are adopting as a final rule without change the interim final rule that went into effect on April 1, 2016.

13 80 FR 74916 (November 30, 2015) (the “interim final rule”).

II. Summary of Public Comments on Matters Raised in the Interim Final Rule

Three banking organizations, two individuals, two trade associations, and one nonprofit finance cooperative submitted comments in response to the interim final rule.14 Four of the commenters expressed strong support for the approach taken in the interim final rule.

14 The Agencies carefully considered all comments received on the interim final rule. In addition, representatives of the FDIC and FCA had a telephone call with one commenter after the comment period closed. Comments received on the interim final rule, as well as a summary of the call with this commenter, are available on the applicable Agencies' respective public Web sites.

Comments were received from two public sector entities organized under foreign laws whose obligations are guaranteed by foreign governments (“foreign public sector entities”). These commenters argued that, even though they are not included among the type of entities expressly covered by section 302 of TRIPRA, foreign public sector entities should still not be subject to the joint final rule because the CFTC has determined that these types of entities are not subject to the mandate to clear swaps that are otherwise required to be cleared.

The Agencies are not providing the relief requested by these commenters since the purpose of this final rule is to incorporate the terms of section 302 of TRIPRA, and the treatment of foreign public sector entities is not specified by section 302. Even though the CFTC has interpreted the Commodity Exchange Act to exclude certain foreign public sector entities from the clearing mandate that the Dodd-Frank Act added to the Commodity Exchange Act, such entities are not addressed in section 302 of TRIPRA.15

15 Alternatively, each of these two foreign public sector entities sought clarification that it meets the definition of “sovereign entity” or “multilateral development bank” under the joint final rule. The joint final rule expressly excludes from the definition of “financial end user” an entity that meets the definition of “sovereign entity” or “multilateral development bank.” Whether an entity meets the definition of “sovereign entity” or “multilateral development bank” depends on facts and circumstances that may vary from entity to entity and is outside the scope of this rulemaking. The Agencies note that they considered similar comments received on the joint final rule and determined not to exclude entities guaranteed by a foreign sovereign from the definition of financial end user. See 80 FR 74,840, 74,856 (The Agencies explained: “[a]n entity guaranteed by a sovereign entity is not explicitly excluded from the definition of financial end user in the final rule, unless that entity qualifies as a central government agency, department, or central bank. The existence of a government guarantee does not in and of itself exclude the entity from the definition of financial end user.”)

One commenter asked for clarification that swap transaction documentation that contains “flip clauses” or “rating agency condition” (“RAC”) provisions cannot qualify for an exemption from the Agencies' joint final rule or this final rule.16 Specifically, the commenter stated that Title III of TRIPRA does not exempt a swap with a flip clause or RAC provision from the margin requirements of the joint final rule. The commenter further requested that an entity covered by section 302 of TRIPRA be required to file with the CFTC a signed affidavit stating that all swaps that are exempt from the joint final rule's margin requirements because of section 302 of TRIPRA do not have a flip clause or any other clause that can be reasonably classified as a walk-away provision or RAC provision. Finally, the commenter recommended that the prudential regulators should obligate a covered swap entity to post initial margin and variation margin to its guarantor or hedging affiliate against a swap that contains a “flip clause” or any other clause that can be reasonably classified as a walk-away provision. The Agencies are declining to make the requested changes, since the purpose of the final rule is to incorporate the terms of section 302 of TRIPRA, and the treatment of flip clauses or RAC provisions is not specified by section 302.

16 The commenter has previously referred to a description of a “flip clause” as a contractual provision in a swap to which a special purpose vehicle (“SPV”) is a party and under which the payments owed by the SPV to a swap provider are at least pari passu with interest of the senior most class of debt issued by the structured finance vehicle. In the description that the commenter referred to, a “flip clause” was described as a provision that provides that should the swap provider be the defaulting party to a swap, such default causes the swap provider to “flip” to a more junior position in the priority of payments.

The Agencies received one request for clarification with respect to paragraph (1)(xi) of the definition of “financial end user” set forth in the joint final rule. Specifically, the commenter asked the Agencies to clarify and consider the use of certain terms and phrases (i.e., “investing or trading,” “other assets,” and “primarily”) in this prong of the financial end user definition. While § _.1(d), as adopted in this final rule, works in conjunction with the joint final rule, the Agencies find this comment does not relate to § _.1(d) and thus is outside of the scope of the interim final rule, which implements section 302 of TRIPRA.

The Agencies also received four comments in support of the treatment of certain cooperative entities under the interim final rule. One comment was received from an individual expressing his support for the approach taken in the interim final rule.

III. Description of the Final Rule

The interim final rule adopted § _.1(d) to implement section 302 of TRIPRA. The final rule makes no changes to § _.1(d).

TRIPRA provides that the initial and variation margin requirements in sections 731 and 764 of the Dodd-Frank Act do not apply to qualifying non-cleared swaps and non-cleared security-based swaps of certain categories of counterparties. In particular, section 302(a) of TRIPRA amends section 731 of the Dodd-Frank Act so that initial and variation margin requirements will not apply to a swap in which a counterparty (to a covered swap entity) is:

(1) A non-financial entity (including a small financial institution and a captive finance company) that qualifies for the clearing exception under section 2(h)(7)(A) of the Commodity Exchange Act;

(2) A cooperative entity that qualifies for an exemption from the clearing requirements issued under section 4(c)(1) of the Commodity Exchange Act; or

(3) A treasury affiliate that satisfies the criteria for an exception from clearing in section 2(h)(7)(D) of the Commodity Exchange Act.

Similarly, section 302(b) of TRIPRA amends section 764 of the Dodd-Frank Act so that initial and variation margin requirements will not apply to a security-based swap in which a counterparty (to a covered swap entity) is:

(1) A non-financial entity (including a small financial institution) that qualifies for the clearing exception under section 3C(g)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act; or

(2) A treasury affiliate that satisfies the criteria for an exception from clearing in section 3C(g)(4) of the Securities Exchange Act.

Below is a discussion of each type of entity covered by section 302 of TRIPRA as well as a discussion of how related reporting requirements can be satisfied.

A. Non-Financial Entities

TRIPRA provides that the initial and variation margin requirements of the joint final rule shall not apply to a non-cleared swap in which a counterparty qualifies for an exception under section 2(h)(7)(A) of the Commodity Exchange Act or a non-cleared security-based swap in which a counterparty qualifies for an exception under section 3C(g)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act.17 Section 2(h)(7)(A) and section 3C(g)(1) except from clearing swaps or security-based swaps where one of the counterparties: (1) Is not a financial entity; (2) is using the swap to hedge or mitigate commercial risk; and (3) notifies the CFTC or SEC how it generally meets its financial obligations associated with entering into non-cleared swaps or non-cleared security-based swaps. A number of different types of counterparties may qualify for an exception from clearing under section 2(h)(7)(A) and section 3C(g)(1), including non-financial end users and small banks, savings associations, Farm Credit System institutions, and credit unions. In addition, captive finance companies qualify for an exception from clearing swaps under section 2(h)(7)(A).18

17See 7 U.S.C. 2(h)(7)(A); 15 U.S.C. 78c-3(g)(1).

18 There is no corresponding exclusion from clearing security-based swaps under section 3C(g)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act for captive finance companies. Similarly, with respect to financial cooperatives, TRIPRA exempts such entities from exchanging initial and variation margin under the joint final rule on all swaps that are subject to the exemption from clearing provided by the CFTC. See 7 U.S.C. 6(c)(1). There is no corresponding exclusion under the Securities Exchange Act.

Non-financial end users. A counterparty that is not a financial entity 19 and that is using swaps to hedge or mitigate commercial risk generally would qualify for an exception from clearing under section 2(h)(7)(A) or section 3C(g)(1) and thus from the requirements of the joint final rule for non-cleared swaps and non-cleared security-based swaps pursuant to § _.1(d).

19See 7 U.S.C. 2(h)(7)(A); 15 U.S.C. 78c-3(g)(1); 17 CFR 50.50. A “financial entity” is defined to mean (i) a swap dealer; (ii) a security-based swap dealer; (iii) a major swap participant; (iv) a major security-based swap participant; (v) a commodity pool; (vi) a private fund as defined in section 202(a) of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940; (vii) an employee benefit plan as defined in sections 3(3) and 3(32) of the Employment Retirement Income Security Act of 1974; and (viii) a person predominantly engaged in activities that are in the business of banking, or in activities that are financial in nature, as defined in section 4(k) of the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956. See 7 U.S.C. 2(h)(7)(C)(i); 15 U.S.C. 78c-3(g)(3).

Small banks, savings associations, Farm Credit System institutions, and credit unions. Section 2(h)(7)(C)(ii) provides that the CFTC shall consider whether to exempt small banks, savings associations, Farm Credit System institutions, and credit unions with total assets of $10 billion or less from the definition of financial entity. Pursuant to this authority, the CFTC has exempted small banks, savings associations, Farm Credit System institutions, and credit unions with total assets of $10 billion or less from the definition of “financial entity,” thereby permitting these institutions to avail themselves of the clearing exception when they are using swaps to hedge or mitigate risk.20 As a result, non-cleared swaps used by these small financial institutions to hedge or mitigate commercial risk would also qualify for an exemption from the initial and variation margin requirements of the joint final rule pursuant to § _.1(d).

20See 7 U.S.C. 2(h)(7)(C)(ii); 17 CFR 50.50; 77 FR 42560 (July 19, 2012); as recodified by 77 FR 74284 (December 13, 2012).

Similarly, section 3C(g) provides that the SEC shall consider whether to exempt small banks, savings associations, Farm Credit System institutions, and credit unions with total assets of $10 billion or less from the definition of “financial entity.” 21 If the SEC were to implement an exemption for such entities from clearing, non-cleared security-based swaps with those entities would be eligible for the exemption in the joint final rule pursuant to § _.1(d) as required under TRIPRA, provided they met the other requirements for the clearing exemption.22

21See 15 U.S.C. 78c-3(g)(3)(B).

22 On December 21, 2010, the SEC proposed to exempt security-based swaps used by small depository institutions, small Farm Credit System institutions, and small credit unions with total assets of $10 billion or less from clearing. See 75 FR 79992 (December 21, 2010).

Captive finance companies. Section 2(h)(7)(C) also provides that the definition of “financial entity” does not include an entity whose primary business is providing financing and uses derivatives for the purposes of hedging underlying commercial risks relating to interest rate and foreign exchange exposures, 90 percent or more of which arise from financing that facilitates the purchase or lease of products, 90 percent or more of which are manufactured by the parent company or another subsidiary of the parent company (“captive finance company”).23 These entities can qualify for a clearing exception when they are using swaps to hedge or mitigate commercial risk and thus non-cleared swaps of these entities would be eligible for the exemption in the joint final rule pursuant to § __.1(d).

23See 7 U.S.C. 2(h)(7)(C)(iii).

B. Treasury Affiliates

Section 302 of TRIPRA provides that the initial and variation margin requirements shall not apply to a non-cleared swap or non-cleared security-based swap in which a counterparty satisfies the criteria in section 2(h)(7)(D) of the Commodity Exchange Act or section 3C(g)(4) of the Securities Exchange Act. At the time the interim final rule was published, these sections provided that, where a person qualifies for an exception from the clearing requirements, an affiliate of that person (including an affiliate predominantly engaged in providing financing for the purchase of the merchandise or manufactured goods of the person) would have qualified for the exception as well, but only if the affiliate is acting on behalf of the person and as an agent and uses the swap to hedge or mitigate the commercial risk of the person or other affiliate of the person that is not a financial entity (“treasury affiliate acting as agent”).24 Under the interim final rule, non-cleared swaps and non-cleared security-based swaps of a treasury affiliate acting as agent that met the requirements for a clearing exception would also be eligible for an exemption pursuant to § _.1(d) from the joint final rule.

24See 7 U.S.C. 2(h)(7)(D); 15 U.S.C. 78c-3(g)(4). This exception does not apply to a person that is a swap dealer, security-based swap dealer, major swap participant, major security-based swap participant, an issuer that would be an investment company as defined in section 3 of the Investment Company Act of 1940 (15 U.S.C. 80a-3) but for section 3(c)(1) or 3(c)(7) of that Act, a commodity pool, or a bank holding company with over $50 billion in consolidated assets.

The Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2016 (“Appropriations Act of 2016”), which was enacted on December 18, 2015, amended section 2(h)(7)(D) of the Commodity Exchange Act and section 3C(g)(4) of the Securities Exchange Act.25 Specifically, section 705 of the Appropriations Act of 2016 removed the requirement that treasury affiliates must act on behalf of a person and as an agent in order to avail themselves of the clearing exception. The Appropriations Act of 2016 also included certain conditions on the application of the treasury affiliate exception 26 and imposed certain limitations on the types of entities that can qualify for the exception.27

25 Pub. L. 114-113, 129 Stat. 2242 (2015).

26 Under section 705 of the Appropriations Act of 2016, a treasury affiliate may qualify for an exception from the clearing requirements only if the affiliate (i) enters into the swap to hedge or mitigate the commercial risk of the person or other affiliate of the person that is not a financial entity, and the commercial risk that the affiliate is hedging or mitigating has been transferred to the affiliate; (ii) is directly and wholly-owned by another affiliate qualified for the exception under section 2(h)(7)(D)(i) of the Commodity Exchange Act or an entity that is not a financial entity; (iii) is not indirectly majority-owned by a financial entity; (iv) is not ultimately owned by a parent company that is a financial entity; and (v) does not provide any services, financial or otherwise, to any affiliate that is a nonbank financial company supervised by the Board of Governors (as defined under section 102 of the Financial Stability Act of 2010). With respect to the treasury affiliate exception, the affiliate may not enter into any swap other than for the purpose of hedging or mitigating commercial risk; and neither the affiliate nor any person affiliated with the affiliate that is not a financial entity may enter into a swap with or on behalf of any affiliate that is a financial entity or otherwise assume, net, combine, or consolidate the risk of swaps entered into by any such financial entity, except one that is an affiliate that qualifies for the exception. Further, any swap entered into by an affiliate that qualifies for the exception shall be subject to a centralized risk management program of the affiliate, which is reasonably designed both to monitor and manage the risks associated with the swap and to identify each of the affiliates on whose behalf a swap was entered into. See Pub. L. 114-113, 129 Stat. 2242 (2015).

27 For example, the treasury affiliate exception will not apply if the affiliate is a swap dealer, a security-based swap dealer, a major swap participant, a major security-based swap participant, a commodity pool, a bank holding company, a private fund (as defined in section 202(a) of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940), an employee benefit plan or government plan (as defined in paragraphs (3) and (32) of section 3 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974), an insured depository institution, a Farm Credit System institution, a credit union, a nonbank financial company supervised by the Board, or an entity engaged in the insurance business and subject to capital regulation by an insurance regulator. The Appropriations Act of 2016 further prohibited the treasury affiliate exception from applying to affiliates which are themselves affiliated with swap entities unless the CFTC or the SEC, as applicable, determines that doing so is in the public interest. See Pub. L. 114-113, 129 Stat. 2242 (2015).

Since the exemption in § __.1(d) of the final rule incorporates the treasury affiliate exception by reference to section 2(h)(7)(D) of the Commodity Exchange Act and section 3C(g)(4) of the Securities Exchange Act, the exemption will by operation of law apply to qualifying non-cleared swaps and non-cleared security-based swaps of treasury affiliates, acting as either principal or agent. For this reason, no changes to the regulatory text were necessary to reflect these changes to the underlying statutes.28

28 Accordingly, the Agencies find it unnecessary to provide further notice or seek further public comment regarding the effect of the Appropriations Act of 2016 on this final rule.

C. Certain Cooperative Entities

Section 302 of TRIPRA provides that the initial and variation margin requirements shall not apply to a non-cleared swap in which a counterparty qualifies for an exemption issued under section 4(c)(1) of the Commodity Exchange Act from the clearing requirements of section 2(h)(1)(A) of the Commodity Exchange Act for cooperative entities as defined in such exemption.29 The CFTC, pursuant to its authority under section 4(c)(1) of the Commodity Exchange Act, adopted a regulation that allows cooperatives that are financial entities to elect an exemption from mandatory clearing of swaps that: (1) They enter into in connection with originating loans for their members; or (2) hedge or mitigate commercial risk related to loans or swaps with their members, or arising from certain swaps with members.30 The swaps of these cooperatives that would qualify for an exemption from clearing also would qualify pursuant to § __.1(d) for an exemption from the margin requirements of the joint final rule.

29See 7 U.S.C. 6(c)(1). The CFTC, pursuant to its authority under section 4(c)(1) of the Commodity Exchange Act, adopted 17 CFR 50.51, which allows cooperative financial entities that meet certain qualifications to elect not to clear certain swaps that are otherwise required to be cleared pursuant to section 2(h)(1)(A) of the Commodity Exchange Act.

30See 7 U.S.C. 6(c)(1); 17 CFR 50.51.

D. Compliance With Eligibility Requirements

Section 302 of TRIPRA identifies the types of non-cleared swaps or non-cleared security-based swaps with counterparties that are excluded from the margin requirements of the joint final rule by referring to specific sections of the Commodity Exchange Act and the Securities Exchange Act. These provisions, in turn, set forth clearing exceptions and exemptions for these counterparties. To qualify for such exceptions and exemptions, the counterparty must, in addition to falling within the class or type of entity exempted or excepted by the respective statutory provisions, also be entering into the swap or security-based swap to hedge or mitigate commercial risk, and must report to the applicable Commission (in a manner set forth by the applicable Commission) how it generally meets its financial obligations associated with entering into non-cleared swaps or non-cleared security-based swaps.31

31 7 U.S.C. 2(h)(7)(A); 17 CFR 50.50(b); 15 U.S.C. 3C(g)(4). Other provisions of the Commodity Exchange Act and the Securities Exchange Act separately impose additional governance requirements on an entity that elects a clearing exemption and that is an issuer of securities registered under section 12 of, or that is required to file reports under section 15(d) of, the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. 7 U.S.C. 2(j); 15 U.S.C. 3C(i).

Swaps and Security-Based Swaps Required to be Cleared

For swaps that the CFTC has determined are required to be cleared, the CFTC has adopted regulations that establish requirements by which an eligible entity may elect its option not to clear that type of swap and comply with the related substantive hedging and reporting requirements.32 For such a swap, compliance with the CFTC regulatory requirements for a swap subject to clearing will provide the covered swap entity with sufficient information about the eligible entity and the swap to establish the swap is also exempt from the margin requirements of the joint final rule.33 The Agencies believe that whenever a covered swap entity transacts in a swap with an eligible entity that uses the clearing exemption for that swap in compliance with these CFTC requirements, the covered swap entity needs no additional information from the eligible entity to proceed with that swap pursuant to the final rule's exemption from the margin requirements of the joint final rule.

32 17 CFR 50.50(b), 50.51(c), 50.51. In addition to providing reporting requirements, these CFTC rules further define the entities that are eligible for exceptions and exemptions from the clearing requirements and define when a swap is used to hedge or mitigate commercial risk.

33 Whenever a qualifying non-clearing entity has elected its option to not clear a swap that the CFTC has determined should be cleared, the entity's eligibility as well as its compliance with the associated hedging and reporting requirements must be demonstrated either: (1) In an annual filing by the entity reporting to an appropriate Swap Data Repository (SDR) or, if no registered SDR is available to receive the information, to the CFTC, which will be applicable to all such swaps entered into by the entity for 365 days following the date of such filing; or (2) on a swap-by-swap basis through a report filed by the eligible entity or the covered swap entity with the applicable SDR or, if no registered SDR is available to receive the information, the CFTC. The rule requires that the reporting counterparty have a reasonable basis to believe that the electing counterparty is an eligible entity that meets the associated hedging and reporting requirements. See 17 CFR 50.50(b)(2)-(3) and 50.51(c).

With respect to security-based swaps, the SEC has not yet made determinations requiring any security-based swap to be cleared, and has not yet adopted final rules related to how eligibility and compliance with the associated substantive requirements can be documented.34 For a security-based swap subject to clearing, compliance with the SEC regulatory requirements, once finalized, will provide the covered swap entity with sufficient information about the eligible entity and the security-based swap to establish that the security-based swap is also exempt from the margin requirements of the joint final rule. Until such time as determinations are finalized by the SEC, the Agencies expect that covered swap entities will take appropriate steps to establish a reasonable belief that the entity is of a type eligible for the exemption and is using the security-based swap to hedge or mitigate commercial risk, as described below for other non-cleared swaps and non-cleared security-based swaps.

34 In December 2010, the SEC proposed reporting requirements for a counterparty exercising an exception from clearing, which would require the entity to report to a security-based SDR that it is an eligible entity and: that the swap is being used to hedge or mitigate commercial risk; how it generally meets its financial obligations associated with entering into non-cleared security-based swaps, and, if a registered issuer of securities, whether a committee of the board has reviewed and approved the decision to enter into security-based swaps subject to the clearing exception. 75 FR 79992 (December 21, 2010).

Swaps and Security-Based Swaps Not Required To Be Cleared

There are also cases where a covered swap entity may enter into a non-cleared swap or non-cleared security-based swap with an eligible entity that the CFTC or SEC, respectively, does not require to be cleared. For swaps that are not subject to a CFTC or SEC clearing requirement, the Agencies expect that covered swap entities will take appropriate steps to establish a reasonable belief that the counterparty is an entity eligible for the exemption and is using the swap to hedge or mitigate commercial risk.35 The final rule does not prescribe any specific procedure or standard in this regard, and instead leaves covered swap entities the flexibility to collect information specifically on these points, take cognizance of information they already have about their counterparties and their non-cleared swap and non-cleared security-based swap transactions, or a combination of both. The Agencies believe it would be reasonable for a covered swap entity to rely in good faith on reasonable representations of its counterparty in making these assessments.36

35 As noted above, this category of non-cleared swaps includes all non-cleared security-based swaps during the interim until the SEC adopts final regulations requiring clearing of security-based swaps and associated exemptions from clearing.

36See the Agencies' joint final rule at 80 FR 74858 (November 30, 2015), discussing covered swap entities' reliance in good faith on reasonable representations of a counterparty as to whether the counterparty is a financial end user with a material swaps exposure; see also 17 CFR 50.50(b)(2)-(3) and 50.51(c).

In addition to the entity type requirements and the hedging requirements specified in the statutory clearing exceptions and exemptions referenced under section 302 of TRIPRA, there are requirements for reporting to the relevant Commission, in the manner set forth by the Commission, when the clearing exceptions and exemptions are elected. The Agencies expect covered swap entities subject to the joint final rule to comply with any reporting requirements that the relevant Commission may impose on covered swap entities in order to permit the use of the margin exemptions pursuant to section 302 of TRIPRA.

IV. Effective Date

The Riegle Community Development and Regulatory Improvement Act of 1994 (the “RCDRIA”) requires that the OCC, the Board, and the FDIC, in determining the effective date and administrative compliance requirements of new regulations that impose additional reporting, disclosure, or other requirements on insured depository institutions, consider, consistent with principles of safety and soundness and the public interest, any administrative burdens that such regulations would place on depository institutions, including small depository institutions, and customers of depository institutions, as well as the benefits of such regulations.37 In addition, new regulations by the OCC, the Board, or the FDIC that impose additional reporting, disclosures, or other new requirements on insured depository institutions generally must take effect on the first day of a calendar quarter that begins on or after the date on which the regulations are published in final form.38 Accordingly, this final rule, which adopts the interim final rule without change, will be effective on October 1, 2016 as required under the RCDRIA.

37 12 U.S.C. 4802(a).

38 12 U.S.C. 4802(b).

V. Administrative Law Matters A. Solicitation of Comments on Use of Plain Language

Section 722 of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, Public Law 106-102, sec. 722, 113 Stat. 1338, 1471 (Nov. 12, 1999), requires the OCC, Board and FDIC to use plain language in all proposed and final rules published after January 1, 2000. The OCC, Board and FDIC sought to present the final rule in a simple and straightforward manner and did not receive any comments on the use of plain language.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act Analysis

Certain provisions of the final rule contain “collection of information” requirements within the meaning of the Paperwork Reduction Act (“PRA”) of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3521). In accordance with the requirements of the PRA, the Agencies may not conduct or sponsor, and the respondent is not required to respond to, an information collection unless it displays a currently valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number. The OMB control number for the OCC is 1557-0335, the FDIC is 3064-0204, and the Board is 7100-0364. The information collection requirements contained in this final rulemaking have been submitted to OMB for review and approval by the OCC and FDIC under section 3507(d) of the PRA and § 1320.11 of OMB's implementing regulations (5 CFR part 1320). The Board reviewed the final rule under the authority delegated to the Board by OMB. The Agencies received no comments on the PRA.

The final rule contains requirements subject to the PRA. The reporting requirements are found in § _.1(d). The final rule implements statutory language that requires certain swaps of certain counterparties to qualify for a statutory exemption or exception from clearing in order to not be subject to the initial and variation margin requirements of the joint final rule.

Proposed Information Collection

Title of Information Collection: Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements Associated with Margin and Capital Requirements for Covered Swap Entities.

Frequency of Response: Annual, daily, and event-generated.

Affected Public: The affected public of the OCC, FDIC, and Board is assigned generally in accordance with the entities covered by the scope and authority section of their respective final rule. Businesses or other for-profit.

Respondents:

OCC: Any national bank or a subsidiary thereof, Federal savings association or a subsidiary thereof, or Federal branch or agency of a foreign bank that is registered as a swap dealer, major swap participant, security-based swap dealer, or major security-based swap participant.

FDIC: Any FDIC-insured state-chartered bank that is not a member of the Federal Reserve System or FDIC-insured state-chartered savings association that is registered as a swap dealer, major swap participant, security-based swap dealer, or major security-based swap participant.

Board: Any state member bank (as defined in 12 CFR 208.2(g)), bank holding company (as defined in 12 U.S.C. 1841), savings and loan holding company (as defined in 12 U.S.C. 1467a), foreign banking organization (as defined in 12 CFR 211.21(o)), foreign bank that does not operate an insured branch, state branch or state agency of a foreign bank (as defined in 12 U.S.C. 3101(b)(11) and (12)), or Edge or agreement corporation (as defined in 12 CFR 211.1(c)(2) and (3)) that is registered as a swap dealer, major swap participant, security-based swap dealer, or major security-based swap participant.

Abstract: This final rule implements Title III of the Terrorism Risk Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2015 (“TRIPRA”), which exempts from the Agencies' swap margin rules non-cleared swaps and non-cleared security-based swaps in which a counterparty qualifies for an exemption or exception from clearing under the Dodd-Frank Act. This final rule is a companion rule to the joint final rule adopted by the Agencies to implement section 731 and 764 of the Dodd-Frank Act.

Reporting Requirements

The final rule implements statutory language that requires certain swaps and security-based swaps of certain counterparties to qualify for a statutory exemption or exception from clearing in order to not be subject to the initial and variation margin requirements of the joint final rule. The reporting requirements are found in § __.1(d) pursuant to cross-references to other statutory provisions that set forth the conditions for an exemption from clearing. For example, TRIPRA provides that the initial and variation margin requirements of the joint final rule shall not apply to a non-cleared swap or non-cleared security-based swap in which a counterparty qualifies for an exception under section 2(h)(7)(A) of the Commodity Exchange Act or section 3C(g)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act, which includes certain reporting requirements established by the CFTC or the SEC.39 Certain other counterparties that are exempt from clearing pursuant to other provisions are also required to meet these reporting requirements to notify the CFTC or the SEC.40 Thus, in certain cases, the statutory exemption from clearing requires a notification to the CFTC or SEC. These counterparties may be required to meet the same notification requirements that are required for an exception or exemption from clearing in order to qualify for an exception or exemption pursuant to § __.1(d) from the initial and variation margin requirements established by the Agencies under sections 731 and 764 of the Dodd-Frank Act. Since this final rule serves to implement exemptions and exceptions by reference to existing statutory provisions, § __.1(d) imposes new reporting requirements that are required under the relevant statutory provisions.

39See, e.g., 17 CFR 50.50(b).

40 For example, certain exempt cooperatives must meet these reporting requirements to qualify for an exemption from clearing. See 17 CFR 50.51(c). Similarly, exempt treasury affiliates also must be an affiliate of a person that qualifies for an exception from clearing that notifies the CFTC or SEC how it generally meets its financial obligations associated with entering into non-cleared swaps or non-cleared security-based swaps. See 7 U.S.C. 2(h)(7)(D); 15 U.S.C. 78c-3(g)(4).

Estimated Burden per Response: § _.1(d)—1 hour.

Annual Frequency: 1,000.

OCC

Number of respondents: 20.

Total estimated annual burden: 20,000 hours.

FDIC 41

Number of respondents: 1.

Total estimated annual burden: 1,000 hours.

41 The FDIC had initially estimated that three of its institutions might register as a swap dealer, major swap participant, security-based swap dealer or major security-based swap participant but no state non-member bank nor any state savings association has so registered, so FDIC is reducing its estimate to one as a placeholder for its information collection.

Board

Number of respondents: 50.

Proposed revisions only estimated annual burden: 50,000 hours.

Total estimated annual burden: 86,964 hours.

FCA: The FCA has determined that the final rule does not involve a collection of information pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act for Farm Credit System institutions because Farm Credit System institutions are Federally chartered instrumentalities of the United States and instrumentalities of the United States are specifically excepted from the definition of “collection of information” contained in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3).

FHFA: With respect to any regulated entity as defined in section 1303(20) of the Federal Housing Enterprises Financial Safety and Soundness Act of 1992, as amended (12 U.S.C. 4502(20)), the final rule does not contain any collection of information that requires the approval of the OMB under the PRA.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act Analysis

Board: An initial regulatory flexibility analysis, in accordance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) (“RFA”),42 was included in the interim final rule. In the initial regulatory flexibility analysis, the Board requested comments on all aspects of the initial regulatory flexibility analysis, and, in particular, comments on its conclusion that the interim final rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The Board also requested comments on any significant alternatives to the interim final rule that would minimize the impact of the rule on small entities. The Board has since considered the potential impact of this final rule on small entities in accordance with section 604 of the RFA and has prepared the following final regulatory flexibility analysis. Based on the Board's analysis, and for the reasons stated below, the Board believes that the final rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

42See 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.

1. Statement of the need for, and objectives of, the final rule. As explained in detail above, this final rule implements section 302 of TRIPRA, which provides that initial and variation margin requirements will not apply to specified non-cleared swaps or non-cleared security-based swaps of certain counterparties (to a covered swap entity). The reasons and justification for the final rule are described above in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.

2. Summary of the significant issues raised by public comment on the Board's initial analysis, the Board's assessment of such issues, and a statement of any changes made as a result of such comments.The Board did not receive comments specifically on the initial regulatory flexibility analysis contained in the interim final rule, but the Agencies did receive comments on other aspects of the rule. A full discussion of all comments received by the Agencies with respect to this rule is contained in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION, above.

3. Small entities affected by the final rule.This final rule may have an effect on the following types of small entities: (i) Covered swap entities that are subject to the joint final rule's capital and margin requirements; and (ii) certain counterparties (e.g., non-financial end users and certain other small financial counterparties) that engage in swaps or security-based swaps with covered swap entities.43

43 The Board notes that the RFA does not require the Board to consider the impact of the final rule, including its indirect economic effects, on small entities that are not subject to the requirements of the final rule. See e.g., In Mid-Tex Electric Cooperative v. FERC, 773 F.2d 327 (D.C. Cir. 1985); United Distribution Cos. v. FERC, 88 F.3d 1105, 1170 (D.C. Cir. 1996); Cement Kiln Recycling Coalition v. EPA, 255 F.3d 855 (D.C. Cir. 2001).

Under Small Business Administration (the “SBA”) regulations, the finance and insurance sector includes commercial banking, savings institutions, credit unions, other depository credit intermediation and credit card issuing entities (“financial institutions”), which generally are considered “small” if they have assets of $550 million or less.44 Covered swap entities would be considered financial institutions for purposes of the RFA in accordance with SBA regulations. The Board does not expect that any covered swap entity is likely to be a small financial institution, because a small financial institution is unlikely to engage in the level of swap activity that would require it to register as a swap dealer or major swap participant.45 None of the currently registered covered swap entities are small entities. The final rule would have an indirect effect on certain counterparties to non-cleared swaps and non-cleared security-based swaps. Many of these counterparties would be considered “small” under the SBA's regulations.46 However, the effect of TRIPRA and the final rule will be to exempt many of the non-cleared swaps and non-cleared security-based swaps of these counterparties from the margin requirements of the Agencies' joint final rule.

44See 13 CFR 121.201 (effective December 2, 2014); see also 13 CFR 121.103(a)(6) (noting factors that the SBA considers in determining whether an entity qualifies as a small business, including receipts, employees, and other measures of its domestic and foreign affiliates).

45 The CFTC has published a list of provisionally registered swap dealers (as of February 9, 2016) and provisionally registered major swap participants (as of March 1, 2013) that does not include any small financial institutions. See http://www.cftc.gov/LawRegulation/DoddFrankAct/registerswapdealer and http://www.cftc.gov/LawRegulation/DoddFrankAct/registermajorswappart. The SEC has not provided a similar list since it only recently adopted rules to provide for the registration of security-based swap dealers and major security-based swap participants. See 80 FR 48963 (August 14, 2015); 17 CFR parts 240 and 249.

46See 13 CFR 121.201. In addition to small financial institutions with assets of $550 million or less, swap counterparties could also include other small entities defined in regulations issued by the SBA, including firms within the “Securities, Commodity Contracts, and Other Financial Investments and Related Activities” sector with assets of $38.5 million or less and “Funds, Trusts and Other Financial Vehicles” with assets of $32.5 million or less.

4. Projected reporting, recordkeeping and other compliance requirements of the final rule. As described above, this final rule implements statutory language that requires certain swaps of certain counterparties to qualify for a statutory exemption or exception from the applicable clearing requirements in order to not be subject to the initial and variation margin requirements of the joint final rule. The reporting requirements are found in § _.1(d) of this final rule pursuant to cross-references to other statutory provisions that set forth the conditions for an exemption or exception from clearing. In certain cases, the statutory exemption from clearing and related regulations may require a counterparty to report information, such as how it meets its swaps obligations, to the CFTC or SEC. These counterparties may be required to meet the same notification requirements that are required for an exception or exemption from the relevant CFTC and SEC regulations. Other than this potential overlap of reporting obligations of this final rule and the relevant CFTC and SEC regulations, the Board is not aware of any other Federal rules that duplicate, overlap, or conflict with this final rule. In light of the exemptions provided for the non-cleared swaps and non-cleared security-based swaps of many small entities, the Board does not believe that the final rule would have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entity counterparties.

5. Significant alternatives to the final rule. Since the final rule was required by TRIPRA, the Board does not believe that there are any significant alternatives to the rule which would accomplish the stated objectives of the applicable statute.

In light of the foregoing, the Board does not believe that this final rule would have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

FDIC: The RFA requires an agency, in connection with a notice of final rulemaking, to prepare a Final Regulatory Flexibility Act analysis describing the impact of the rule on small entities (defined by the SBA for purposes of the RFA to include banking entities with total assets of $550 million or less) or to certify that the final rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

Using SBA's size standards, as of June 30, 2015, the FDIC supervised 3,357 small entities. The FDIC does not expect any small entity that it supervises is likely to be a covered swap entity because such entities are unlikely to engage in the level of swap activity that would require them to register as a swap entity. Because TRIPRA excludes non-cleared swaps entered into for hedging purposes by a financial institution with total assets of $10 billion or less from the requirement of the final rule, the FDIC expects that when a covered swap entity transactions non-cleared swaps with a small entity supervised by the FDIC, and such swaps are used to hedge the small entity's commercial risk, those swaps will not be subject to the final rule. The FDIC does not expect any small entity that it supervises will engage in non-cleared swaps for purposes other than hedging. Therefore, the FDIC does not believe that the interim final rule results in a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under its supervisory jurisdiction.

The FDIC certifies that the interim final rule does not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small FDIC-supervised institutions.

OCC: The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 47 generally requires an agency that is issuing a proposed rule to prepare and make available for public comment an initial regulatory flexibility analysis that describes the impact of the proposed rule on small entities. The RFA does not apply to a rulemaking where a general notice of proposed rulemaking is not required.48 For the reasons described above in the Supplementary Information, the OCC has previously determined that it was unnecessary to publish a notice of proposed rulemaking for this final rule. Accordingly, the RFA's requirements relating to an initial and final regulatory flexibility analysis do not apply.

47See 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.

48See 5 U.S.C. 603 and 604.

FCA: Pursuant to section 605(b) of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, the FCA hereby certifies that the final rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Each of the banks in the Farm Credit System, considered together with its affiliated associations, has assets and annual income in excess of the amounts that would qualify them as small entities. Nor does the Federal Agricultural Mortgage Corporation meet the definition of a “small entity.” Therefore, Farm Credit System institutions are not “small entities” as defined in the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

FHFA: FHFA certifies that the final rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities, since none of FHFA's regulated entities comes within the meaning of a “small entity” as defined in the Regulatory Flexibility Act (see 5 U.S.C. 601(6)), and the final rule will not substantially affect any business that its regulated entities might conduct with any such small entity.

List of Subjects 12 CFR Part 45

Administrative practice and procedure, Capital, Margin requirements, National Banks, Federal Savings Associations, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Risk.

12 CFR Part 237

Administrative practice and procedure, Banks and banking, Capital, Foreign banking, Holding companies, Margin requirements, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Risk.

12 CFR Part 349

Administrative practice and procedure, Banks, Holding companies, Capital, Margin requirements, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Savings associations Risk.

12 CFR Part 624

Accounting, Agriculture, Banks, Banking, Capital, Cooperatives, Credit, Margin requirements, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Risk, Rural areas, Swaps.

12 CFR Part 1221

Government-sponsored enterprises, Mortgages, Securities.

Department of the Treasury Office of the Comptroller of the Currency 12 CFR Chapter I PART 45—MARGIN AND CAPITAL REQUIREMENTS FOR COVERED SWAP ENTITIES Accordingly, the interim final rule amending 12 CFR part 45, which was published at 80 FR 74916 on November 30, 2015, is adopted as a final rule without change. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System 12 CFR Chapter II PART 237—SWAPS MARGIN AND SWAPS PUSH-OUT Subpart A—Margin and Capital Requirements for Covered Swap Entities Accordingly, the interim final rule amending 12 CFR part 237, subpart A which was published at 80 FR 74916 on November 30, 2015, is adopted as a final rule without change. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation 12 CFR Chapter III PART 349—DERIVATIVES Accordingly, the interim final rule amending 12 CFR part 349 which was published at 80 FR 74916 on November 30, 2015, is adopted as a final rule without change. Farm Credit Administration 12 CFR Chapter VI Accordingly, the interim final rule amending 12 CFR part 624 which was published at 80 FR 74916 on November 30, 2015, is adopted as a final rule without change. Federal Housing Finance Agency Chapter XII—Federal Housing Finance Agency Subchapter B—Entity Regulations PART 1221—MARGIN AND CAPITAL REQUIREMENTS FOR COVERED SWAP ENTITIES Accordingly, the interim final rule amending 12 CFR part 1221 which was published at 80 FR 74916 on November 30, 2015, is adopted as a final rule without change. Dated: June 21, 2016. Thomas J. Curry, Comptroller of the Currency.

By order of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, July 26, 2016.

Robert deV. Frierson, Secretary of the Board. Dated at Washington, DC, this 21 of June 2016.

By order of the Board of Directors.

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. Robert E. Feldman, Executive Secretary. Dated: June 22, 2016. Dale L. Aultman, Secretary, Farm Credit Administration Board. Dated: June 27, 2016. Melvin L. Watt, Director, Federal Housing Finance Agency.
[FR Doc. 2016-18193 Filed 8-1-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4810-33-P; 8070-01-P; 6705-01-P; 6714-01-P; 6210-01-P; 4810-33-P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 71 [Docket No. FAA-2016-4291; Airspace Docket No. 16-AGL-7] Amendment of Class E Airspace for the following Indiana Towns; Goshen, IN; Greencastle, IN; Huntingburg, IN; North Vernon, IN; Rensselaer, IN; Tell City, IN; and Washington, IN AGENCY:

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

This action modifies Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface at Virgil I. Grissom Municipal Airport, Bedford, IN; Goshen Municipal Airport, Goshen, IN; Putnam County Airport, Greencastle, IN; Huntingburg Airport, Huntingburg, IN; North Vernon Airport, North Vernon, IN; Jasper County Airport, Rensselaer, IN; Perry County Municipal Airport, Tell City, IN; and Daviess County Airport, Washington, IN. Decommissioning of non-directional radio beacons (NDBs), cancellation of NDB approaches, and implementation of area navigation (RNAV) procedures have made this action necessary for the safety and management of Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) operations at these airports. This action also updates the geographic coordinates of Goshen Municipal Airport, Putnam County Airport, North Vernon Airport, Jasper County Airport, and Perry County Municipal Airport to coincide with the FAA's aeronautical database. O'Neal Airport, Vincennes, IN, is removed from this rule as the Class E airspace area was removed in a rule published in the Federal Register of October 23, 2015.

DATES:

Effective 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.

ADDRESSES:

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

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

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Jeffrey Claypool, Federal Aviation Administration, Operations Support Group, Central Service Center, 10101 Hillwood Parkway, Fort Worth, TX 76177; telephone (817) 222-5711.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106 describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority as it amends Class E airspace at Virgil I. Grissom Municipal Airport, Bedford, IN; Goshen Municipal Airport, Goshen, IN; Putnam County Airport, Greencastle, IN; Huntingburg Airport, Huntingburg, IN; North Vernon Airport, North Vernon, IN; Jasper County Airport, Rensselaer, IN; Perry County Municipal Airport, Tell City, IN; and Daviess County Airport, Washington, IN.

History

On May 3, 2016, the FAA published in the Federal Register a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) (81 FR 26499) Docket No. FAA-2016-4291, to modify Class E airspace at Virgil I. Grissom Municipal Airport, Bedford, IN; Goshen Municipal Airport, Goshen, IN; Putnam County Airport, Greencastle, IN; Huntingburg Airport, Huntingburg, IN; North Vernon Airport, North Vernon, IN; Jasper County Airport, Rensselaer, IN; Perry County Municipal Airport, Tell City, IN; Daviess County Airport, Washington, IN; and remove controlled airspace at O'Neal Airport, Vincennes, IN. Interested parties were invited to participate in this rulemaking effort by submitting written comments on the proposal to the FAA. No comments were received. Subsequent to publication, the FAA found that Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface at O'Neal Airport, Vincennes, IN, was previously removed in a rule published in the Federal Register of October 23, 2015 (80 FR 64316) Docket No. FAA-2015-2049.

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

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

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

The Rule

This amendment to Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 modifies Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface at the following airports:

Within a 6.5-mile radius of Virgil I. Grissom Municipal Airport, Bedford, IN; Within a 6.8-mile radius of Goshen Municipal Airport, Goshen, IN, and updates the geographic coordinates of this airport; Within a 6.5-mile radius of Putnam County Airport, Greencastle, IN, and updates the geographic coordinates of this airport; Within a 6.5-mile radius of Huntingburg Airport, Huntingburg, IN, with a segment extending from the 6.5-mile radius to 11.2 miles east of the airport; Within a 6.5-mile radius of North Vernon Airport, North Vernon, IN, and updates the geographic coordinates of this airport; Within a 6.4-mile radius of Jasper County Airport, Rensselaer, IN, and updates the geographic coordinates of this airport; Within a 6.4-mile radius of Perry County Municipal Airport, Tell City, IN, and updates the geographic coordinates of this airport; and Within a 6.4-mile radius of Daviess County Airport, Washington, IN.

Airspace reconfiguration is necessary due to the decommissioning of NDBs, cancellation of NDB approaches, or implementation of RNAV procedures at the above airports. Controlled airspace is necessary for the safety and management of the standard instrument approach procedures for IFR operations at the airports.

O'Neal Airport, Vincennes, IN, is removed from this rulemaking as the airspace was removed in a previously published rulemaking (80 FR 64316, October 23, 2015), Docket No. FAA-2015-2049.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

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

Environmental Review

The FAA has determined that this action qualifies for categorical exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act in accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F, “Environmental Impacts: Policies and Procedures,” paragraph 5-6.5.a. This airspace action is not expected to cause any potentially significant environmental impacts, and no extraordinary circumstances exist that warrant preparation of an environmental assessment.

Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

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

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

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

§ 71.1 [Amended]
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.9Z, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 6, 2015, and effective September 15, 2015, is amended as follows: Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas Extending Upward From 700 Feet or More Above the Surface of the Earth. AGL IN E5 Bedford, IN [Amended] Bedford, Virgil I. Grissom Municipal Airport, IN (Lat. 38°50′24″ N., long. 86°26′43″ W.) Bedford, Bedford Medical Center Heliport, IN Point In Space (Lat. 38°51′51″ N., long. 86°31′27″ W.) That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface within a 6.5-mile radius of Virgil I. Grissom Municipal Airport, and within a 6-mile radius of the Bedford Medical Center Heliport point in space coordinates at lat. 38°51′51″ N., long. 86°31′27″ W. AGL IN E5 Goshen, IN [Amended] Goshen Municipal Airport, IN (Lat. 41°31′35″ N., long. 85°47′39″ W.) That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface within a 6.8-mile radius of Goshen Municipal Airport. AGL IN E5 Greencastle, IN [Amended] Greencastle, Putnam County Airport, IN (Lat. 39°38′01″ N., long. 86°48′50″ W.) That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface within a 6.5-mile radius of Putnam County Airport. AGL IN E5 Huntingburg, IN [Amended] Huntingburg Airport, IN (Lat. 38°14′57″ N., long. 86°57′13″ W.) That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface within a 6.5-mile radius of Huntingburg Airport and within 2 miles either side of the 091° bearing from the airport extending from the 6.5-mile radius to 11.2 miles east of the airport. AGL IN E5 North Vernon, IN [Amended] North Vernon Airport, IN (Lat. 39°02′43″ N., long. 85°36′20″ W.) That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface within a 6.5-mile radius of North Vernon Airport. AGL IN E5 Rensselaer, IN [Amended] Rensselaer, Jasper County Airport, IN (Lat. 40°56′52″ N., long. 87°10′58″ W.) That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface within a 6.4-mile radius of Jasper County Airport. AGL IN E5 Tell City, IN [Amended] Tell City, Perry County Municipal Airport, IN (Lat. 38°01′08″ N., long. 86°41′33″ W.) That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface within a 6.4-mile radius of Perry County Municipal Airport. AGL IN E5 Washington, IN [Amended] Washington, Daviess County Airport, IN (Lat. 38°42′02″ N., long. 87°07′47″ W.) That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface within a 6.4-mile radius of Daviess County Airport.
Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on July 25, 2016. Walter Tweedy, Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, ATO Central Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2016-18229 Filed 8-1-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 91 [Docket No.: FAA-2015-8059; Amendment No. 91-333A] RIN 2120-AA66 Airports/Locations: Special Operating Restrictions AGENCY:

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION:

Final rule; technical amendment.

SUMMARY:

This action amends the Appendix listing airports/locations with special operating restrictions in FAA's general operating and flight rules. Specifically, this action corrects the entry for Kansas City, MO (Kansas City International Airport) and updates the name of twelve (12) other airports listed in Appendix D, section 1. Additionally, this action updates the name of thirteen (13) airports listed in Appendix D, section 3, and the name of four (4) airports listed in Appendix D, section 4. The FAA is taking this action to correctly identify the airports listed in the appropriate special operating restrictions sections of the Appendix consistent with FAA aeronautical database information.

DATES:

Effective Date: September 1, 2016.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Colby Abbott, Airspace Policy Group, AJV-11, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591; telephone (202) 267-8783, email [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background

Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR), part 91, appendix D, sections 1, 3, and 4, list the airports where special operating restrictions apply. Specifically, section 1 lists the locations at which aircraft operating within 30 nautical miles (NM) of the listed airports, from the surface upward to 10,000 feet mean sea level (MSL), must be equipped with an altitude encoding transponder. The locations listed in this section are intended to be the Class B airspace area primary airports. Further, section 3 lists the locations at which aircraft fixed-wing Special VFR operations are prohibited and section 4 lists the locations at which solo student, sport, and recreational pilot activity is not permitted.

On April 28, 1975, the FAA issued a final rule (40 FR 18414) Docket No. 73-WA-11, FR. Doc. 75-10970, which established the Kansas City, Missouri (MO), Terminal Control Area (TCA), listing the Kansas City International Airport as the primary airport. In 1993, as a result of the Airspace Reclassification rule (56 FR 65638) Docket No. 24456, FR Doc. 91-29869, TCAs were changed to Class B airspace areas and the Kansas City, MO, TCA became the Kansas City, MO, Class B airspace area with the Kansas City International Airport listed as the primary airport. However, when the Airspace Reclassification final rule amended the regulatory text in 14 CFR 91.215(b)(2) to read “All aircraft. In all airspace within 30 nautical miles of an airport listed in appendix D, section 1 of this part . . .”, the airports listed in Appendix D, section 1, inadvertently included Kansas City, KS (Mid-Continent International Airport) in error instead of Kansas City, MO (Kansas City International Airport). This action corrects that inadvertent error in Appendix D, section 1.

Further review of the airports listed in Appendix D, section 1, highlighted that the airport name for twelve other airports listed in the section were incorrect and had changed since originally having been included as a result of the Airspace Reclassification rule. The twelve airports include: Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport, Baltimore/Washington International Thurgood Marshall Airport, Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky International Airport, Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport, Detroit Metropolitan Wayne County Airport, George Bush Intercontinental/Houston Airport, Minneapolis-St. Paul International/Wold-Chamberlain Airport, Newark Liberty International Airport, Louis Armstrong New Orleans International Airport, Pittsburgh International Airport, Miramar Marine Corps Air Station, and Joint Base Andrews.

Similarly, review of the airports listed in appendix D, section 3, identified that the airport name for thirteen airports listed in the section were incorrect and had changed since originally having been included as a result of the Airspace Reclassification rule. The thirteen airports include: Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport, Baltimore/Washington International Thurgood Marshall Airport, Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky International Airport, Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport, Dallas Love Field Airport, Detroit Metropolitan Wayne County Airport, George Bush Intercontinental/Houston Airport, Louisville International Airport-Standiford Field, Minneapolis-St. Paul International/Wold-Chamberlain Airport, Newark Liberty International Airport, Louis Armstrong New Orleans International Airport, Pittsburgh International Airport, and Joint Base Andrews.

Lastly, review of the airports listed in appendix D, section 4, identified that the airport name for four airports listed in the section were incorrect and had changed since originally having been included as a result of the Airspace Reclassification rule. The four airports include: Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport, Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport, Newark Liberty International Airport, and Joint Base Andrews.

This action administratively updates the airport names listed in Appendix D, sections 1, 3, and 4 to correctly identify the airports consistent with FAA aeronautical database information.

The Rule

The FAA is amending 14 CFR part 91, Appendix D, sections 1, 3, and 4 to correct an inadvertent error listing Kansas City, KS (Mid-Continent International Airport) instead of Kansas City, MO (Kansas City International Airport) in section 1, and update the airport names listed in sections 1, 3, and 4 to match FAA aeronautical database information. Additionally, this action corrects a typographic format error for the Chicago, IL, entry in section 1. The amendments are as follows:

Appendix D, Section 1

Change “Atlanta, GA (The William B. Hartsfield Atlanta International Airport)” to “Atlanta, GA (Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport)”.

Change “Baltimore, MD (Baltimore Washington International Airport)” to “Baltimore, MD (Baltimore/Washington International Thurgood Marshall Airport)”.

Add “Camp Springs, MD (Joint Base Andrews)” where it falls alphabetically.

Change “Chicago, IL Chicago-O'Hare International Airport)” to “Chicago, IL (Chicago-O'Hare International Airport)”.

Change “Covington, KY (Cincinnati Northern Kentucky International Airport)” to “Covington, KY (Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky International Airport)”.

Change “Dallas, TX (Dallas/Fort Worth Regional Airport)” to “Dallas, TX (Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport)”.

Change “Detroit, MI (Metropolitan Wayne County Airport)” to “Detroit, MI (Detroit Metropolitan Wayne County Airport)”.

Change “Houston, TX (George Bush Intercontinental Airport/Houston)” to “Houston, TX (George Bush Intercontinental/Houston Airport)”.

Change “Kansas City, KS (Mid-Continent International Airport)” to “Kansas City, MO (Kansas City International Airport)”.

Change “Minneapolis, MN (Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport)” to “Minneapolis, MN (Minneapolis-St. Paul International/Wold-Chamberlain Airport)”.

Change “Newark, NJ (Newark International Airport)” to “Newark, NJ (Newark Liberty International Airport)”.

Change “New Orleans, LA (New Orleans International Airport-Moisant Field)” to “New Orleans, LA (Louis Armstrong New Orleans International Airport)”.

Change “Pittsburgh, PA (Greater Pittsburgh International Airport)” to “Pittsburgh, PA (Pittsburgh International Airport)”.

Change “San Diego, CA (Marine Corps Air Station Miramar)” to “San Diego, CA (Miramar Marine Corps Air Station)”.

Change “Washington, DC (Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport and Andrews Air Force Base, MD)” to “Washington, DC (Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport)”.

Appendix D, Section 3

Change “Atlanta, GA (The William B. Hartsfield Atlanta International Airport)” to “Atlanta, GA (Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport)”.

Change “Baltimore, MD (Baltimore Washington International Airport)” to “Baltimore, MD (Baltimore/Washington International Thurgood Marshall Airport)”.

Add “Camp Springs, MD (Joint Base Andrews)” where it falls alphabetically.

Change “Covington, KY (Cincinnati Northern Kentucky International Airport)” to “Covington, KY (Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky International Airport)”.

Change “Dallas, TX (Dallas/Fort Worth Regional Airport)” to “Dallas, TX (Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport)”.

Change “Dallas, TX (Love Field)” to “Dallas, TX (Dallas Love Field Airport)”.

Change “Detroit, MI (Metropolitan Wayne County Airport)” to “Detroit, MI (Detroit Metropolitan Wayne County Airport)”.

Change “Houston, TX (George Bush Intercontinental Airport/Houston)” to “Houston, TX (George Bush Intercontinental/Houston Airport)”.

Change “Louisville, KY (Standiford Field)” to “Louisville, KY (Louisville International Airport-Standiford Field)”.

Change “Minneapolis, MN (Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport)” to “Minneapolis, MN (Minneapolis-St. Paul International/Wold-Chamberlain Airport)”.

Change “Newark, NJ (Newark International Airport)” to “Newark, NJ (Newark Liberty International Airport)”.

Change “New Orleans, LA (New Orleans International Airport-Moisant Field)” to “New Orleans, LA (Louis Armstrong New Orleans International Airport)”.

Change “Pittsburgh, PA (Greater Pittsburgh International Airport)” to “Pittsburgh, PA (Pittsburgh International Airport)”.

Change “Washington, DC (Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport and Andrews Air Force Base, MD)” to “Washington, DC (Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport)”.

Appendix D, Section 4

Change “Atlanta, GA (The William B. Hartsfield Atlanta International Airport)” to “Atlanta, GA (Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport)”.

Add “Camp Springs, MD (Joint Base Andrews)” where it falls alphabetically.

Change “Dallas, TX (Dallas/Fort Worth Regional Airport)” to “Dallas, TX (Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport)”.

Change “Newark, NJ (Newark International Airport)” to “Newark, NJ (Newark Liberty International Airport)”.

Remove “Andrews Air Force Base, MD”.

Administrative Procedure Act

The Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 553(b)) requires agencies to publish a notice of proposed rulemaking and provide opportunity for comment except when the agency for good cause finds (and incorporates the finding and a brief statement of reasons therefor in the rules issued) that notice and public procedure thereon are impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest. The FAA finds that notice and the opportunity for comment are unnecessary for this action as the action merely changes the names of airports to conform to the names included in the FAA aeronautical database. The FAA also finds that not changing these names in the regulations is contrary to the public interest as not changing the names could cause confusion or errors in charts or other documents produced using the aeronautical database and regulations.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 91

Air traffic control, Aircraft, Airmen, Airports, Aviation safety.

The Amendment

In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation Administration amends Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations part 91, as follows:

PART 91—GENERAL OPERATING AND FLIGHT RULES 1. The authority citation for part 91 continues to read as follows: Authority:

49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 1155, 40101, 40103, 40105, 40113, 40120, 44101, 44111, 44701, 44704, 44709, 44711, 44712, 44715, 44716, 44717, 44722, 46306, 46315, 46316, 46504, 46506-46507, 47122, 47508, 47528-47531, 47534, articles 12 and 29 of the Convention on International Civil Aviation (61 Stat. 1180), (126 Stat. 11).

2. Amend appendix D to part 91 as follows: a. In Section 1, by revising the entries for Atlanta, GA; Baltimore, MD; Chicago, IL; Covington, KY; Dallas, TX; Detroit, MI; the first Houston, TX, entry; Minneapolis, MN; Newark, NJ; New Orleans, LA; Pittsburgh, PA; the first San Diego, CA, entry; and Washington, DC; adding entries for Camp Springs, MD, and Kansas City, MO in alphabetical order; and removing the entry for Kansas City, KS. b. In Section 3, by revising the entries for Atlanta, GA; Baltimore, MD; Covington, KY; both Dallas, TX, entries; Detroit, MI; Houston, TX; Louisville, KY; Minneapolis, MN; Newark, NJ; New Orleans, LA; Pittsburgh, PA; and Washington, DC; and adding an entry for Camp Springs, MD, in alphabetical order. c. In Section 4, by revising the entries for Atlanta, GA; Dallas, TX; and Newark, NJ; removing Andrews Air Force Base, MD; and adding an entry for Camp Springs, MD, in alphabetical order.

The revisions read as follows:

Appendix D to Part 91—Airports/Locations: Special Operating Restrictions

Section 1. * * *

Atlanta, GA (Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport) Baltimore, MD (Baltimore/Washington International Thurgood Marshall Airport) Camp Springs, MD (Joint Base Andrews) Chicago, IL (Chicago-O'Hare International Airport) Covington, KY (Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky International Airport) Dallas, TX (Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport) Detroit, MI (Detroit Metropolitan Wayne County Airport) Houston, TX (George Bush Intercontinental/Houston Airport) Kansas City, MO (Kansas City International Airport) Minneapolis, MN (Minneapolis-St. Paul International/Wold-Chamberlain Airport) Newark, NJ (Newark Liberty International Airport) New Orleans, LA (Louis Armstrong New Orleans International Airport) Pittsburgh, PA (Pittsburgh International Airport) San Diego, CA (Miramar Marine Corps Air Station) Washington, DC (Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport)

Section 3. * * *

Atlanta, GA (Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport) Baltimore, MD (Baltimore/Washington International Thurgood Marshall Airport) Camp Springs, MD (Joint Base Andrews) Covington, KY (Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky International Airport) Dallas, TX (Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport) Dallas, TX (Dallas Love Field Airport) Detroit, MI (Detroit Metropolitan Wayne County Airport) Houston, TX (George Bush Intercontinental/Houston Airport) Louisville, KY (Louisville International Airport-Standiford Field) Minneapolis, MN (Minneapolis-St. Paul International/Wold-Chamberlain Airport) Newark, NJ (Newark Liberty International Airport) New Orleans, LA (Louis Armstrong New Orleans International Airport) Pittsburgh, PA (Pittsburgh International Airport) Washington, DC (Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport)

Section 4. * * *

Atlanta, GA (Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport) Camp Springs, MD (Joint Base Andrews) Dallas, TX (Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport) Newark, NJ (Newark Liberty International Airport)
Issued in Washington, DC, on July 14, 2016. Dale A. Bouffiou, Acting Director, Office of Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 2016-17161 Filed 8-1-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration 19 CFR Part 351 [Docket No. 140929814-6136-02] RIN 0625-AB02 Correction to Applicability Date for Modification of Regulations Regarding Price Adjustments in Antidumping Duty Proceedings AGENCY:

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

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

The Department of Commerce (the Department) is modifying the applicability date contained in the final rule published in the Federal Register on March 24, 2016. The original applicability date language did not convey the Department's intention, i.e., to apply the newly amended regulations to all segments of proceedings initiated on or after the effective date contained in the rule. This action is necessary to ensure that there is no ambiguity in the application of the modified regulations.

DATES:

Effective date: September 1, 2016.

Applicability date: This rule will apply to all segments of proceedings initiated on or after September 1, 2016.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Jessica Link at (202) 482-1411.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

On March 24, 2016, the Department published a final rule in the Federal Register modifying 19 CFR 351.102(b)(38) and 19 CFR 351.401(c). Modification of Regulations Regarding Price Adjustments in Antidumping Duty Proceedings, 81 FR 15641 (March 24, 2016) (Final Rule). The DATES section of the Final Rule states: “Effective date: April 25, 2016. Applicability date: This rule will apply to all proceedings initiated on or after April 25, 2016.”

On June 20, 2016, the Department published a proposed rule to correct the applicability date of the Final Rule. See Correction to Applicability Date for Modification of Regulations Regarding Price Adjustments in Antidumping Duty Proceedings, 81 FR 39873 (June 20, 2016). In its proposed rule, the Department explained that the applicability date in the Final Rule does not convey the Department's intention, i.e., to apply the newly amended regulations to all segments of proceedings initiated on or after the effective date of the Final Rule. The Department further explained that, although “proceedings” can be interpreted generally to include any segment of an administrative case before Enforcement and Compliance that is initiated on or after the effective date, “proceeding” and “segment of proceeding” are defined separately in 19 CFR 351.102(b)(40) and 19 CFR 351.102(b)(47), respectively. Thus, to avoid any ambiguity and to clarify the Department's intent, the Department proposed to modify the applicability date of the Final Rule such that the Final Rule will apply to all segments of proceedings initiated on or after 30 days following the publication date of the final rule that results from this rulemaking.

The Department received no comments on the proposed rule. Thus, the Department is modifying the applicability date of the Final Rule as discussed above. As the prior applicability date was not included in the modified regulations, 19 CFR 351.102(b)(38) and 19 CFR 351.401(c), the Department is not amending its regulations. The only change to the Final Rule being addressed in this final rule is a change to the applicability date of the Final Rule.

Changes From the Proposed Rule

There are no changes from the proposed rule.

Classification Executive Order 12866

It has been determined that this final rule is not significant for purposes of Executive Order 12866.

Paperwork Reduction Act

This final rule contains no new collection of information subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35.

Executive Order 13132

This final rule does not contain policies with federalism implications as that term is defined in section 1(a) of Executive Order 13132, dated August 4, 1999 (64 FR 43255 (August 10, 1999)).

Regulatory Flexibility Act

In accordance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., the Chief Counsel for Regulation at the Department of Commerce certified to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy, Small Business Administration, at the proposed rule stage that this rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The factual basis for this certification was published with the proposed rule and is not repeated here. No comments were received regarding the certification or on the economic impact of this rule more generally. As a result, the conclusion in the certification memorandum for the proposed rule remains unchanged and a final regulatory flexibility analysis is not required and one has not been prepared.

Dated: July 27, 2016. Ronald K. Lorentzen, Acting Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2016-18305 Filed 8-1-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT 22 CFR Part 239 Republic of Tunisia Loan Guarantees Issued Under Section 7034(o) of the Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations Act of 2016—Standard Terms and Conditions AGENCY:

Agency for International Development (USAID).

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

This regulation prescribes the procedures and standard terms and conditions applicable to loan guarantees to be issued for the benefit of the Republic of Tunisia pursuant to Section 7034(o) of the Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 2016.

DATES:

Effective August 1, 2016.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

D. Bruce McPherson, Office of General Counsel, U.S. Agency for International Development, Washington, DC 20523-6601; tel. 202-712-1611, fax 202-216-3058.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Pursuant to Section 7034(o) of the Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 2016 (Div. K, Pub. L. 114-113), the United States of America, acting through the U.S. Agency for International Development, may issue certain loan guarantees applicable to sums borrowed by Banque Centrale de Tunisie, acting on behalf of the Republic of Tunisia (the “Borrower”), not exceeding an aggregate total of U.S. $500 million in principal amount. Upon issuance, the loan guarantees shall ensure the Borrower's repayment of 100% of principal and interest due under such loans, and the full faith and credit of the United States of America shall be pledged for the full payment and performance of such guarantee obligations.

This rulemaking document is not subject to rulemaking under 5 U.S.C. 553 or to regulatory review under Executive Order 12866 because it involves a foreign affairs function of the United States. The provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) do not apply.

List of Subjects in 22 CFR Part 239

Foreign aid, Foreign relations, Guaranteed loans, Loan programs—foreign relations.

Authority and Issuance Accordingly, part 239 is added to title 22, chapter II, of the Code of Federal Regulations, to read as follows: PART 239—REPUBLIC OF TUNISIA LOAN GUARANTEES ISSUED UNDER SECTION 7034(o) OF THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE, FOREIGN OPERATIONS, AND RELATED PROGRAMS APPROPRIATIONS ACT OF 2016 Sec. 239.1 Purpose. 239.2 Definitions. 239.3 The Guarantee. 239.4 Guarantee eligibility. 239.5 Non-impairment of the Guarantee. 239.6 Transferability of Guarantee; Note Register. 239.7 Fiscal Agent obligations. 239.8 Event of Default; Application for Compensation; payment. 239.9 No acceleration of Eligible Notes. 239.10 Payment to USAID of excess amounts received by a Noteholder. 239.11 Subrogation of USAID. 239.12 Prosecution of claims. 239.13 Change in agreements. 239.14 Arbitration. 239.15 Notice. 239.16 Governing Law. Appendix A to Part 239—Application for Compensation Authority:

Section 7034(o) of the Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 2016 (Div. K, Pub. L. 114-113)

§ 239.1 Purpose.

The purpose of the regulations in this part is to prescribe the procedures and standard terms and conditions applicable to loan guarantees issued for the benefit of the Borrower, pursuant Section 7034(o) of the Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 2016 (Div. K, Pub. L. 114-113). The loan guarantees will be issued as provided herein pursuant to the Loan Guarantee Agreement, dated June 6, 2016, between the United States of America and the Republic of Tunisia (the “Loan Guarantee Agreement”). The loan guarantee will apply to sums borrowed during a period beginning on the date that the Loan Guarantee Agreement enters into force and ending thirty days after such date, not exceeding an aggregate total of five hundred million United States Dollars (U.S. $500,000,000) in principal amount. The loan guarantees shall ensure the Borrower's repayment of 100% of principal and interest due under such loans. The full faith and credit of the United States of America is pledged for the full payment and performance of such guarantee obligations.

§ 239.2 Definitions.

Wherever used in the standard terms and conditions set out in this part:

Applicant means a Noteholder who files an Application for Compensation with USAID, either directly or through the Fiscal Agent acting on behalf of a Noteholder.

Application for Compensation means an executed application in the form of Appendix A to this part which a Noteholder, or the Fiscal Agent on behalf of a Noteholder, files with USAID pursuant to § 239.8.

Borrower means Banque Centrale de Tunisie, acting on behalf of Republic of Tunisia.

Business Day means any day other than a day on which banks in New York, NY are closed or authorized to be closed or a day which is observed as a Federal holiday in Washington, DC, by the United States Government.

Date of Application means the date on which an Application for Compensation is actually received by USAID pursuant to § 239.15.

Defaulted Payment means, as of any date and in respect of any Eligible Note, any Interest Amount and/or Principal Amount not paid when due.

Eligible Note(s) means [a] Note[s] meeting the eligibility criteria set out in § 239.4.

Fiscal Agency Agreement means the agreement among USAID, the Borrower and the Fiscal Agent pursuant to which the Fiscal Agent agrees to provide fiscal agency services in respect of the Note[s], a copy of which Fiscal Agency Agreement shall be made available to Noteholders upon request to the Fiscal Agent.

Fiscal Agent means the bank or trust company or its duly appointed successor under the Fiscal Agency Agreement which has been appointed by the Borrower with the consent of USAID to perform certain fiscal agency services for specified Eligible Note[s] pursuant to the terms of the Fiscal Agency Agreement.

Further Guaranteed Payments means the amount of any loss suffered by a Noteholder by reason of the Borrower's failure to comply on a timely basis with any obligation it may have under an Eligible Note to indemnify and hold harmless a Noteholder from taxes or governmental charges or any expense arising out of taxes or any other governmental charges relating to the Eligible Note in the country of the Borrower.

Guarantee means the guarantee of USAID issued pursuant to this part and Section 7034(o) of the Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 2016 (Div. K, Pub. L. 114-113).

Guarantee Payment Date means a Business Day not more than three (3) Business Days after the related Date of Application.

Interest Amount means for any Eligible Note the amount of interest accrued on the Principal Amount of such Eligible Note at the applicable Interest Rate.

Interest Rate means the interest rate borne by an Eligible Note.

Loss of Investment means, in respect of any Eligible Note, an amount in United States Dollars equal to the total of the:

(1) Defaulted Payment unpaid as of the Date of Application,

(2) Further Guaranteed Payments unpaid as of the Date of Application, and

(3) Interest accrued and unpaid at the Interest Rate(s) specified in the Eligible Note(s) on the Defaulted Payment and Further Guaranteed Payments, in each case from the date of default with respect to such payment to and including the date on which full payment thereof is made to the Noteholder.

Note[s] means any debt securities issued by the Borrower.

Noteholder means the owner of an Eligible Note who is registered as such on the Note Register.

Note Register means the register of Eligible Notes required to be maintained by the Fiscal Agent.

Person means any legal person, including any individual, corporation, partnership, joint venture, association, joint stock company, trust, unincorporated organization, or government or any agency or political subdivision thereof.

Principal amount means the principal amount of the Eligible Notes issued by the Borrower. For purposes of determining the principal amount of the Eligible Notes issued by the Borrower, the principal amount of each Eligible Note shall be the stated principal amount thereof.

USAID means the United States Agency for International Development or its successor.

§ 239.3 The Guarantee.

Subject to the terms and conditions set out in this part, the United States of America, acting through USAID, guarantees to Noteholders the Borrower's repayment of 100 percent of principal and interest due on Eligible Notes. Under the Guarantee, USAID agrees to pay to any Noteholder compensation in United States Dollars equal to such Noteholder's Loss of Investment under its Eligible Note; provided, however, that no such payment shall be made to any Noteholder for any such loss arising out of fraud or misrepresentation for which such Noteholder is responsible or of which it had knowledge at the time it became such Noteholder. The Guarantee shall apply to each Eligible Note registered on the Note Register required to be maintained by the Fiscal Agent.

§ 239.4 Guarantee eligibility.

(a) Eligible Notes only are guaranteed hereunder. Notes in order to achieve Eligible Note status:

(1) Must be signed on behalf of the Borrower, manually or in facsimile, by a duly authorized representative of the Borrower;

(2) Must contain a certificate of authentication manually executed by a Fiscal Agent whose appointment by the Borrower is consented to by USAID in the Fiscal Agency Agreement; and

(3) Shall be approved and authenticated by USAID by either:

(i) The affixing by USAID on the Notes of a guarantee legend incorporating these Standard Terms and Conditions signed on behalf of USAID by either a manual signature or a facsimile signature of an authorized representative of USAID or

(ii) The delivery by USAID to the Fiscal Agent of a guarantee certificate incorporating these Standard Terms and Conditions signed on behalf of USAID by either a manual signature or a facsimile signature of an authorized representative of USAID.

(b) The authorized USAID representatives for purposes of the regulations in this part whose signature(s) shall be binding on USAID shall include the USAID Chief and Deputy Chief Financial Officer, Assistant Administrator and Deputy, Bureau for Economic Growth, Education, and Environment, Director and Deputy Director, Office of Development Credit, and such other individual(s) designated in a certificate executed by an authorized USAID Representative and delivered to the Fiscal Agent. The certificate of authentication of the Fiscal Agent issued pursuant to the Fiscal Agency Agreement shall, when manually executed by the Fiscal Agent, be conclusive evidence binding on USAID that an Eligible Note has been duly executed on behalf of the Borrower and delivered.

§ 239.5 Non-impairment of the Guarantee.

After issuance of the Guarantee, the Guarantee will be an unconditional, full faith and credit obligation of the United States of America and will not be affected or impaired by any subsequent condition or event. This non-impairment of the guarantee provision shall not, however, be operative with respect to any loss arising out of fraud or misrepresentation for which the claiming Noteholder is responsible or of which it had knowledge at the time it became a Noteholder. In particular and without limitation, the Guarantee shall not be affected or impaired by:

(a) Any defect in the authorization, execution, delivery or enforceability of any agreement or other document executed by a Noteholder, USAID, the Fiscal Agent or the Borrower in connection with the transactions contemplated by this Guarantee or

(b) The suspension or termination of the program pursuant to which USAID is authorized to guarantee the Eligible Notes.

§ 239.6 Transferability of Guarantee; Note Register.

A Noteholder may assign, transfer or pledge an Eligible Note to any Person, provided that such transfer is permitted under applicable law and regulation, including, without limitation, the Office of Foreign Asset Control (OFAC) regulations. Any such assignment, transfer or pledge shall be effective on the date that the name of the new Noteholder is entered on the Note Register required to be maintained by the Fiscal Agent pursuant to the Fiscal Agency Agreement. USAID shall be entitled to treat the Persons in whose names the Eligible Notes are registered as the owners thereof for all purposes of the Guarantee, and USAID shall not be affected by notice to the contrary.

§ 239.7 Fiscal Agent obligations.

Failure of the Fiscal Agent to perform any of its obligations pursuant to the Fiscal Agency Agreement shall not impair any Noteholder's rights under the Guarantee, but may be the subject of action for damages against the Fiscal Agent by USAID as a result of such failure or neglect. A Noteholder may appoint the Fiscal Agent to make demand for payment on its behalf under the Guarantee.

§ 239.8 Event of Default; Application for Compensation; payment.

At any time after an Event of Default, as this term is defined in an Eligible Note, any Noteholder hereunder, or the Fiscal Agent on behalf of a Noteholder hereunder, may file with USAID an Application for Compensation in the form provided in Appendix A to this part. USAID shall pay or cause to be paid to any such Applicant any compensation specified in such Application for Compensation that is due to the Applicant pursuant to the Guarantee as a Loss of Investment not later than the Guarantee Payment Date. In the event that USAID receives any other notice of an Event of Default, USAID may pay any compensation that is due to any Noteholder pursuant to the Guarantee, whether or not such Noteholder has filed with USAID an Application for Compensation in respect of such amount.

§ 239.9 No acceleration of Eligible Notes.

Eligible Notes shall not be subject to acceleration, in whole or in part, by USAID, the Noteholder or any other party. USAID shall not have the right to pay any amounts in respect of the Eligible Notes other than in accordance with the original payment terms of such Eligible Notes.

§ 239.10 Payment to USAID of excess amounts received by a Noteholder.

If a Noteholder shall, as a result of USAID paying compensation under the Guarantee, receive an excess payment, it shall refund the excess to USAID.

§ 239.11 Subrogation of USAID.

In the event of payment by USAID to a Noteholder under the Guarantee, USAID shall be subrogated to the extent of such payment to all of the rights of such Noteholder against the Borrower under the related Note.

§ 239.12 Prosecution of claims.

After payment by USAID to an Applicant hereunder, USAID shall have exclusive power to prosecute all claims related to rights to receive payments under the Eligible Notes to which it is thereby subrogated. If a Noteholder continues to have an interest in the outstanding Eligible Notes, such a Noteholder and USAID shall consult with each other with respect to their respective interests in such Eligible Notes and the manner of and responsibility for prosecuting claims.

§ 239.13 Change in agreements.

No Noteholder will consent to any change or waiver of any provision of any document contemplated by the Guarantee without the prior written consent of USAID.

§ 239.14 Arbitration.

Any controversy or claim between USAID and any Noteholder arising out of the Guarantee shall be settled by arbitration to be held in Washington, DC in accordance with the then prevailing rules of the American Arbitration Association, and judgment on the award rendered by the arbitrators may be entered in any court of competent jurisdiction.

§ 239.15 Notice.

Any communication to USAID pursuant to the Guarantee shall be in writing in the English language, shall refer to the Republic of Tunisia Loan Guarantee Number inscribed on the Eligible Note and shall be complete on the day it shall be actually received by USAID at the Office of Development Credit, Bureau for Economic Growth, Education and Environment, United States Agency for International Development, Washington, DC 20523-0030. Other addresses may be substituted for the above upon the giving of notice of such substitution to each Noteholder by first class mail at the address set forth in the Note Register.

§ 239.16 Governing law.

The Guarantee shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the United States of America governing contracts and commercial transactions of the United States Government.

Appendix A to Part 239—Application for Compensation Application for Compensation United States Agency for International Development Washington, DC 20523 Ref: Guarantee dated as of __, 20__:

Gentlemen: You are hereby advised that payment of $__ (consisting of $__ of principal, $__ of interest and $__ in Further Guaranteed Payments, as defined in § 239.2 of the Standard Terms and Conditions of the above-mentioned Guarantee) was due on ____, 20_, on $__ Principal Amount of Notes issued by Banque Centrale de Tunisie, acting on behalf of the Republic of Tunisia (the “Borrower”) held by the undersigned. Of such amount $__ was not received on such date and has not been received by the undersigned at the date hereof. In accordance with the terms and provisions of the above-mentioned Guarantee, the undersigned hereby applies, under § 239.8 of said Guarantee, for payment of $__, representing $__, the Principal Amount of the presently outstanding Note(s) of the Borrower held by the undersigned that was due and payable on __ and that remains unpaid, and $__, the Interest Amount on such Note(s) that was due and payable by the Borrower on __ and that remains unpaid, and $__ in Further Guaranteed Payments,1 plus accrued and unpaid interest thereon from the date of default with respect to such payments to and including the date payment in full is made by you pursuant to said Guarantee, at the rate of _% per annum, being the rate for such interest accrual specified in such Note. Such payment is to be made at [state payment instructions of Noteholder].

1 In the event the Application for Compensation relates to Further Guaranteed Payments, such Application must also contain a statement of the nature and circumstances of the related loss.

All capitalized terms herein that are not otherwise defined shall have the meanings assigned to such terms in the Standard Terms and Conditions of the above-mentioned Guarantee.

By: Gayle Girod, Assistant General Counsel Office of the General Counsel U.S. Agency for International Development July 27, 2016.
[FR Doc. 2016-18192 Filed 8-1-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 100 [Docket No. USCG-2016-0602] Eighth Coast Guard District Annual Recurring Marine Events AGENCY:

Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION:

Notice of enforcement of regulation.

SUMMARY:

The Coast Guard will enforce special local regulations during the Pittsburgh Three Rivers Regatta on the Ohio River, from mile 0.0-0.5, Allegheny River mile 0.0-0.6, Monongahela River mile 0.0-0.5 extending the entire width of all three rivers. These regulations are needed to protect vessels transiting the area and event spectators from the hazards associated with a regatta on the navigable waterway. During the enforcement period, entry into, transiting, or anchoring in the regulated area is prohibited to all vessels not registered with the sponsor as participants or official patrol vessels, unless specifically authorized by the Captain of the Port (COTP) Pittsburgh or a designated representative.

DATES:

The regulations in 33 CFR 100.801, Table 1, Sector Ohio Valley, No. 22 are effective from 12 noon until 11:30 p.m. daily, from August 5, 2016 through August 7, 2016.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

If you have questions about this notice of enforcement, call or email MST1 Jennifer Haggins, Marine Safety Unit Pittsburgh, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone 412-221-0807, email [email protected]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The Coast Guard will enforce special local regulations for the annual Pittsburgh Three Rivers Regatta listed in 33 CFR 100.801 Table 1, Sector Ohio Valley, No. 22 from 12:00 noon until 11:30 p.m., from August 5, 2016 through August 7, 2016. Entry into the regulated area is prohibited unless authorized by the COTP or a designated representative. Persons or vessels desiring to enter into or pass through the area must request permission from the COTP or a designated representative. If permission is granted, all persons and vessels shall comply with the instructions of the COTP or designated representative.

This notice of enforcement is issued under authority of 33 CFR 100.801 and 5 U.S.C. 552(a). In addition to this notice in the Federal Register, the Coast Guard will provide the maritime community with advance notification of this enforcement period via Local Notice to Mariners and updates via Marine Information Broadcasts.

L. McClain, Jr., Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Pittsburgh.
[FR Doc. 2016-18257 Filed 8-1-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 117 [Docket No. USCG-2016-0360] Drawbridge Operation Regulation; York River, Yorktown, VA AGENCY:

Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION:

Notice of deviation from drawbridge regulation; modification.

SUMMARY:

The Coast Guard has modified a temporary deviation from the operating schedule that governs the Coleman Memorial Bridge (US 17) across the York River, mile 7.0, Yorktown, VA. This modified deviation is necessary to perform additional bridge maintenance. This modified deviation allows the bridge to remain in the closed-to-navigation position.

DATES:

This modified deviation is effective from 7 a.m. July 31, 2016, to 7 p.m. on August 28, 2016.

ADDRESSES:

The docket for this deviation, [USCG-2016-0360] is available at http://www.regulations.gov. Type the docket number in the “SEARCH” box and click “SEARCH”. Click on Open Docket Folder on the line associated with this deviation.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

If you have questions on this temporary deviation, call or email Mrs. Traci Whitfield, Bridge Administration Branch Fifth District, Coast Guard; telephone (757) 398-6629, email [email protected]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

On May 26, 2016, the Coast Guard published a temporary deviation entitled “Drawbridge Operation Regulation; York River, Yorktown, VA” in the Federal Register (81 FR 33391). Under that temporary deviation, the bridge would remain in the closed-to-navigation position from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. as follows: Sunday, May 22, 2016; Sunday, June 5, 2016, with an inclement weather date on Sunday, June 12, 2016; Sunday, June 19, 2016, with an inclement weather date on Sunday, June 26, 2016; and Sunday, July 10, 2016, with an inclement weather date on Sunday, July 17, 2016.

The Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT), who owns and operates the Coleman Memorial Bridge (US 17), has requested a modified temporary deviation from the currently published deviation to complete repairs. The bridge must be in the closed-to-navigation position, for an additional two Sundays, in order to perform the complexity of mechanical work, which normally takes two weeks and cannot be accomplished when the bridge is moveable. The bridge is a single bascule span and has a vertical clearance in the closed position of seven feet above mean high water.

Under this modified temporary deviation, the bridge will continue to remain in the closed-to-navigation position from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. as follows: July 31, 2016, with an inclement weather date on Sunday, August 7, 2016; and Sunday, August 21, 2016, with an inclement weather date on Sunday, August 28, 2016. At all other times, the bridge will operate in accordance with the operating regulations set out in 33 CFR 117.1025.

The York River is used by a variety of vessels including deep draft ocean-going vessels, U.S. government vessels, small commercial fishing vessels, recreational vessels and tug and barge traffic. The Coast Guard has carefully coordinated the restrictions with U.S. government and commercial waterway users.

Vessels able to pass through the bridge in the closed position may do so at anytime. The bridge will not be able to open for emergencies and there is no immediate alternate route for vessels unable to pass through the bridge in the closed position. The Coast Guard will also inform the users of the waterways through our Local and Broadcast Notices to Mariners of the change in operating schedule for the bridge so that vessel operators can arrange their transits to minimize any impact caused by the temporary deviation.

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

Dated: July 22, 2016. Hal R. Pitts, Bridge Program Manager, Fifth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2016-18214 Filed 8-1-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 165 [Docket Number USCG-2016-0416] RIN 1625-AA00 Safety Zone; Chesapeake Bay, Cape Charles, VA AGENCY:

Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION:

Temporary final rule.

SUMMARY:

The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone for navigable waters in the vicinity of the inlet of Kings Creek, on the Chesapeake Bay. The safety zone is needed to protect personnel, vessels, and the marine environment from potential hazards associated with a fireworks display, which include accidental discharge of fireworks, dangerous projectiles, and falling hot embers or other debris. Entry of vessels or persons into this zone is prohibited unless specifically authorized by the Captain of the Port Hampton Roads.

DATES:

This rule is effective from 8:30 p.m. on August 6, 2016, through 10:30 p.m. on August 7, 2016. This rule will be enforced from 8:30 p.m. through 10:30 p.m. on August 6, 2016, unless the fireworks display is postponed because of adverse weather, in which case this rule will be enforced from 8:30 p.m. through 10:30 p.m. on August 7, 2016.

ADDRESSES:

To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-2016-0416 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 LCDR Barbara Wilk, Waterways Management Division Chief, Sector Hampton Roads, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone 757-668-5580, email [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

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. It is impracticable for us to publish an NPRM because information about the fireworks was received by the Coast Guard without sufficient time to publish a proposed rule and consider comments on it and then issue an effective rule by August 6, 2016. The Coast Guard will provide advance notifications to users of the affected waterway via marine information broadcasts and local notice to mariners.

Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds good cause for making it effective less than 30 days after publication in the Federal Register. The restriction on vessel traffic is necessary to protect life, property and the environment, on the scheduled day and rain date for the fireworks display when there are expected to be more than 2,000 spectators present. Therefore, due to the need to have a rule effective starting August 6, it is impracticable to delay the effective date of this rule until 30 days after it is published. Delaying the effective date would be contrary to the safety zone's intended objectives of protecting persons and vessels, and enhancing public and maritime safety.

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 Hampton Roads (COTP) has determined that potential hazards associated with fireworks display starting on August 6, 2016, with a rain date of August 7, 2016, will be a safety concern for anyone within a 280 foot radius of the launching site. This rule is needed to protect personnel, vessels, and the marine environment in the navigable waters within the safety zone during the fireworks display. The potential hazards to mariners within the safety zone include accidental discharge of fireworks, dangerous projectiles, and falling hot embers or other debris.

IV. Discussion of the Rule

This rule establishes a safety zone from 8:30 p.m. through 10:30 p.m. on August 6, 2016, with a rain date of August 7, 2016. This rule will only be subject to enforcement on August 7, 2016, if the scheduled August 6 fireworks display is postponed because of adverse weather. The safety zone will encompass all navigable waters of the of the inlet of Kings Creek, on the Chesapeake Bay, within a 280 foot radius of the fireworks launch site in approximate position 37°16′53″ N., 076°00′42″ W. (NAD 1983). The duration of the zone is intended to protect personnel, vessels, and the marine environment in these navigable waters during the fireworks display. No vessel or person will be permitted to enter the safety zone without obtaining permission from the COTP or a designated representative.

V. Regulatory Analyses

We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and Executive 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-year of the safety zone. Vessel traffic will be able to safely transit around this safety zone which will impact a small designated area of the Chesapeake Bay in Cape Charles, VA for one hour. Moreover, the Coast Guard will issue Broadcast Notice to Mariners via VHF-FM marine channel 16 about the zone and the rule allows vessels to seek permission to enter the zone.

B. Impact on Small Entities

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

While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the safety zone may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section V.A above, this rule will not have a significant economic impact on 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 a safety zone lasting two hours that will prohibit entry in all navigable waters within a 280 foot radius of the launching site. 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 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, under the undesignated center heading Fifth Coast Guard District, temporary § 165.T05-0416 to read as follows:
§ 165.T05-0416 Safety Zone, Chesapeake Bay; Cape Charles, VA.

(a) Definitions. For the purposes of this section—

Captain of the Port” means the Commander, Sector Hampton Roads.

Participants” means individuals and vessels involved in explosives training.

Representative” means any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant or petty officer who has been authorized to act on the behalf of the Captain of the Port.

(b) Location. The following area is a safety zone: All waters in the vicinity of the of the inlet of Kings Creek, on the Chesapeake Bay, within a 280 foot radius of the fireworks launch site in approximate position 37°16′53″ N., 076°00′42″ W. (NAD 1983).

(c) Regulations. (1) The general regulations governing safety zones in § 165.23, apply to the area described in paragraph (b) of this section.

(2) With the exception of participants, entry into or remaining in this safety zone is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port, Hampton Roads or his designated representatives.

(3) All vessels underway within this safety zone at the time it is implemented are to depart the zone immediately.

(4) The Captain of the Port, Hampton Roads or his representative can be contacted at telephone number (757) 668-5555.

(5) The Coast Guard and designated security vessels enforcing the safety zone can be contacted on VHF-FM marine band radio channel 13 (165.65Mhz) and channel 16 (156.8 Mhz).

(6) This section applies to all persons or vessels wishing to transit through the safety zone except participants and vessels that are engaged in the following operations: Enforcing laws, servicing aids to navigation, and emergency response vessels.

(d) Enforcement. The U.S. Coast Guard may be assisted in the patrol and enforcement of the safety zone by Federal, State, and local agencies.

(e) Enforcement period. This section will be enforced from 8:30 p.m. through 10:30 p.m. on August 6, 2016, with a rain date on August 7, 2016.

Dated: July 19, 2016. Richard J. Wester, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Hampton Roads.
[FR Doc. 2016-18339 Filed 8-1-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
POSTAL SERVICE 39 CFR Part 230 Procedures Relating to the Disposition of Property Acquired by the United States Postal Service Office of Inspector General for Use as Evidence AGENCY:

Postal Service.

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

This rule establishes procedures for the disposition of abandoned property held by the United States Postal Service Office of Inspector General. The rule establishes procedures for determining the ownership of abandoned property, the advertisement of abandoned items with no apparent owner held by the Office of Inspector General, and the disposal of items declared abandoned.

DATES:

Effective: August 2, 2016.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Gladis Griffith, Office of General Counsel, (703) 248-4683.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

On March 30, 2016, the Postal Service published a proposed rule to establish procedures for the disposition of abandoned property held by the United States Postal Service Office of Inspector General (81 FR 17637).

In the course of conducting official investigations, Special Agents of the United States Postal Service Office of Inspector General frequently recover property lost or stolen from the mail and obtain custody of property needed for use as evidence in proceedings to enforce various provisions of the United States Code. In most cases, such property is returned to the owner at the conclusion of the investigation or any resulting administrative or judicial proceedings. In some cases, however, the owners fail to claim property, and it therefore remains in the custody of the Office of Inspector General after it is no longer needed. The objective of the proposed rule was to establish a fair and uniform procedure to identify the owners of such property, afford them an opportunity to claim its return, and in the event a valid claim is not received, treat such property as abandoned and direct that it be sold or put to official use. Apparent owners would be notified of their right to claim property, and where no apparent owner is known and the value of the property in question exceeds $200, notice would be published on the Office of Inspector General's Web site inviting the owner to submit a claim for its return.

No comments were received in response to the proposed rule. Upon further consideration, however, the Postal Service determined it would be appropriate to make non-substantive changes in proposed §§ 230.31 and 230.42 to clarify their meaning. Accordingly, in § 230.31, the definition of Ruling Official has been clarified; and in § 230.42, more specific instructions have been provided to special agents for the disposition and conversion of abandoned property.

List of Subjects in 39 CFR Part 230

Administrative practice and procedure, Claims, Law enforcement, Property (abandoned).

For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Postal Service amends 39 CFR part 230 as follows:

PART 230—OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 1. The authority citation for part 230 continues to read as follows: Authority:

5 U.S.C. App.3; 39 U.S.C. 401(2) and 1001.

2. Add subpart C to read as follows: Subpart C—Rules of Procedure Relating to the Disposition of Stolen Mail Matter and Property Acquired by the Office Of Inspector General for Use as Evidence Sec. 230.30 Scope. 230.31 Definitions. 230.32 Disposition of property of apparent owners where property is valued over $200. 230.33 Disposition of property of apparent owners where property is valued at $200 or less. 230.34 Disposition of property of unknown owners where property is valued over $200. 230.35 Disposition of property of unknown owners where property is valued at $200 or less. 230.36 Contraband and property subject to court order. 230.37 Determination of type of property. 230.38 Disposition of abandoned property; additional period for filing claims. 230.39 Submission of claims. 230.40 Determination of claims. 230.41 Reconsideration of claims. 230.42 Disposition of property declared abandoned where title vests in the government.
§ 230.30 Scope.

This subpart prescribes procedures governing the disposition of any property (real, personal, tangible, or intangible) obtained by the United States Postal Service Office of Inspector General (Office of Inspector General) for possible use as evidence after the need to retain such property no longer exists.

§ 230.31 Definitions.

The following definitions apply to this subpart:

(a) Apparent. That which is clear, plain, and evident.

(b) Owner. The person recognized by the law as having ultimate control over and the right to use property.

(c) Claimant. A person who submits a claim for abandoned or other unclaimed property.

(d) Ruling official. The official who has the authority to grant or deny a claim for abandoned or other unclaimed property, typically the Executive Special Agent in Charge of the Area Field Office where the property is located, or a designee.

§ 230.32 Disposition of property of apparent owners where property is valued over $200.

Where an apparent owner of property subject to this subpart is known, and the estimated value of the property exceeds $200, the owner shall be notified by certified mail at his last known address. The written notice shall describe the property and the procedure for filing a claim for its return (see, §§ 230.36 and 230.39). Such claims must be filed within 30 days from the date the written notice is postmarked. If the apparent owner of the property fails to file a timely claim, the property is considered abandoned and must be disposed of as provided in § 230.38.

§ 230.33 Disposition of property of apparent owners where property is valued at $200 or less.

Where an apparent owner of property subject to this subpart is known, and the estimated value of the property is $200 or less, the Executive Special Agent in Charge, or a designee, should attempt to return the property to the owner. If successful, the Executive Special Agent in Charge shall request the owner sign a Hold Harmless Agreement. If not, the Executive Special Agent in Charge shall vest title in the Government.

§ 230.34 Disposition of property of unknown owners where property is valued over $200.

(a) Where no apparent owner of property subject to this subpart is known, except property described in § 230.36, and the estimated value of the property exceeds $200, the Executive Special Agent in Charge, or a designee, must publish notice providing the following information:

(1) A description of the property, including model or serial numbers, if known;

(2) A statement of the location where the property was found;

(3) The name, address, and telephone number of the Executive Special Agent in Charge who has custody of the property; and

(4) A statement inviting any person who believes he or she is fully entitled to the property to submit a claim for its return with the Executive Special Agent in Charge identified in the notice. Such claim must be submitted within 30 days from the date of first publication of the notice.

(b) The notice under paragraph (a) of this section must be published for three consecutive weeks on the Office of Inspector General's Web site.

§ 230.35 Disposition of property of unknown owners where property is valued at $200 or less.

Where the owner of property subject to this subpart is unknown and the estimated value of the property is $200 or less, no notice is required, and the Executive Special Agent in Charge, or a designee, should vest title in the Government, subject to the rights of the owner to submit a valid claim as provided in § 230.38.

§ 230.36 Contraband and property subject to court order.

Claims submitted with respect to property subject to this subpart, possession of which is unlawful, must be denied, in writing, by certified mail, and the person submitting the claim must be accorded 45 days from the postmarked date to institute judicial proceedings to challenge the denial. If judicial proceedings are not instituted within 45 days, or any extension of time for good cause shown, the contraband property must be destroyed unless the Executive Special Agent in Charge, or a designee, determines that it should be placed in official use by the Office of Inspector General. Property subject to this part, the disposition of which is involved in litigation or is subject to an order of court, must be disposed of as determined by the court.

§ 230.37 Determination of type of property.

If the Office of Inspector General is unable to determine whether the personal property in its custody is abandoned or voluntarily abandoned, it shall contact the Office of Inspector General, Office of General Counsel for such a determination.

§ 230.38 Disposition of abandoned property; additional period for filing claims.

(a) Upon expiration of the time provided in §§ 230.32 and 230.34 for the filing of claims or any extension thereof, and without the receipt of a timely claim, the property described in the notice is considered abandoned and becomes the property of the Government. However, if the owner satisfies the requirements of paragraph (b) of this section, except for property described in § 230.36, such abandoned property must be returned to the owner if a valid claim is filed within three years from the date the property became abandoned, with the following qualifications:

(1) Where property has been placed in official use by the Office of Inspector General, a person submitting a valid claim under this section must be reimbursed the fair market value of the property at the time title vested in the Office of Inspector General, less costs incurred in returning or attempting to return such property to the owner; or

(2) Where property has been sold, a person submitting a valid claim under this section must be reimbursed the same amount as the last appraised value of the property prior to the sale of such property.

(b) In order to present a valid claim under paragraph (a) of this section, the claimant must establish he or she had no actual or constructive notice that he or she was entitled to file a claim pursuant to § 230.32 or § 230.34 prior to the date the property became abandoned. Publication of a notice pursuant to § 230.34 provides constructive notice, unless a claimant can demonstrate circumstances that reasonably precluded his or her access to the published notice.

§ 230.39 Submission of claims.

Claims submitted pursuant to this subpart must be submitted on Postal Service Form 1503, which may be obtained from the Executive Special Agent in Charge who has custody of the property.

§ 230.40 Determination of claims.

Upon receipt of a claim under this subpart, the Office of Inspector General must conduct an investigation to determine the merits of the claim. The results of the investigation must be submitted to the ruling official, who must approve or deny the claim by written decision, a copy of which must be forwarded to the claimant by certified mail. If the claim is granted, the conditions of relief and the procedures to be followed to obtain the relief shall be set forth. If the claim is denied, the claimant shall be advised of the reason for such denial. For claims involving firearms or contraband, the ruling official shall consult with the Office of Inspector General, Office of General Counsel prior to rendering a decision.

§ 230.41 Reconsideration of claims.

A written request for reconsideration of denied claims must be based on evidence recently developed or not previously presented. It must be submitted within 10 days of the postmarked date of the letter denying the claim. The ruling official shall advise the Asset Forfeiture Coordinator if a timely reconsideration of the denial is made. The Office of Inspector General, Office of General Counsel shall rule on the reconsideration request.

§ 230.42 Disposition of property declared abandoned where title vests in the government.

Property declared abandoned, including cash and proceeds from the sale of property subject to this part, may be shared with federal, state, or local law enforcement agencies. Abandoned property may also be destroyed, sold, or placed into official use. However, before abandoned property can be shared with another agency, sold, or placed into official use, the Executive Special Agent in Charge must confer with the Office of Inspector General, Office of General Counsel. Abandoned property that is not shared with other agencies shall be converted into a monetary instrument and deposited into the Postal Service Fund established by 39 U.S.C. 2003. The Executive Special Agent in Charge of Headquarters Operations, or a designee, in consultation with the Office of General Counsel, shall determine which accounts within the Postal Service Fund will receive the proceeds of abandoned property.

Stanley F. Mires, Attorney, Federal Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2016-18234 Filed 8-1-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R08-OAR-2013-0561, FRL-9949-99-Region 8] Promulgation of State Implementation Plan Revisions; Infrastructure Requirements for the 2008 Lead, 2008 Ozone, 2010 NO2, 2010 SO2, and 2012 PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standards; Utah AGENCY:

Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving elements of State Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions from the State of Utah to demonstrate the State meets infrastructure requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA) for the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) promulgated for ozone on March 12, 2008, lead (Pb) on October 15, 2008, nitrogen dioxide (NO2) on January 22, 2010, sulfur dioxide (SO2) on June 2, 2010 and fine particulate matter (PM2.5) on December 14, 2012. The EPA is also approving 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) for the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. Finally, the EPA is approving SIP revisions the State submitted regarding state boards.

DATES:

This rule is effective on September 1, 2016.

ADDRESSES:

The EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID No. EPA-R08-OAR-2013-0561. 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 either electronically through http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Air Program, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8, 1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado 80202-1129. The EPA requests that if at all possible, you contact the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to view the hard copy of the docket. You may view the hard copy of the docket Monday through Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., excluding federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Abby Fulton, Air Program, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8, Mail Code 8P-AR, 1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado 80202-1129, (303) 312-6563, [email protected]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

Infrastructure requirements for SIPs are set forth in Section 110(a)(1) and (2) of the CAA. Section 110(a)(2) lists the specific infrastructure elements that a SIP must contain or satisfy.

In our proposed rule, the EPA proposed to approve and take no action on some infrastructure elements for the 2008 Pb, 2008 ozone, 2010 NO2, 2010 SO2 and 1997, 2006 and 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS from the State's certifications.1 In this rulemaking, we are taking final action to approve infrastructure elements from the State's certifications. We are also taking final action to approve new Utah Administrative Code (UAC) provisions submitted on March 14, 2016 to satisfy requirements of element (E)(ii), state boards.

1 “Where an air agency determines that the provisions in or referred to by its existing EPA approved SIP are adequate with respect to a given infrastructure SIP element (or subelement) even in light of the promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS, the air agency may make a SIP submission in the form of a certification.” EPA's “Guidance on Infrastructure State Implementation Plan (SIP) Elements under Clean Air Act Sections 110(a)(1) and (2),” September 13, 2013, at 7.

II. Response to Comments

During the public comment period, we received a comment regarding regional haze in California national parks. This comment does not apply to this rulemaking.

We also received comments from the Sierra Club claiming that Utah's SIP is inadequate with respect to air monitoring and modeling requirements of Sections 110(a)(2)(B) and 110(a)(2)(K) for the 2010 SO2 NAAQS. The Sierra Club also contends that Utah's SO2 infrastructure SIP certification does not satisfy requirements of CAA Section 110(a)(1) and (2) because it lacks enforceable emission limits to ensure the implementation, attainment, and maintenance of the 2010 SO2 NAAQS within Utah, as well as adequate provisions prohibiting sources within the State from emitting SO2 in amounts which will contribute to nonattainment and interfere with maintenance of the SO2 NAAQS in neighboring states.

Comments received from Western Resource Advocates (WRA) contend that, because of language regarding startup, shutdown, and malfunction exemptions in Utah's minor and major source permits, Utah's prevention of significant deterioration (PSD) program cannot ensure emissions will not cause or contribute to a violation of any NAAQS or PSD increment, or that Utah's minor source permitting program protects NAAQS. WRA therefore asserts that Utah's infrastructure SIP does not meet requirements of Section 110(a)(2)(A) and (C). WRA also states that Utah's infrastructure SIP does not meet the requirements of Section 110(a)(2)(F) because monitoring frequency of emissions is inadequate and that the State's SIP does not meet the public notice requirements of Section 127.

The EPA generally disagrees with the Sierra Club and WRA's comments. A separate document provides detailed responses to all significant comments received and is included in the docket associated with this action.

III. Final Action

For reasons expressed in the proposed rule and the response to comments document, the EPA is taking final action to approve infrastructure elements from the State's certifications as shown in Table 1. Elements we are taking no action on are reflected in Table 2. We are also approving new UAC rules that the State submitted on March 14, 2016 to satisfy requirements of Section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii), which pertains to state boards (Table 1).

A comprehensive summary of infrastructure elements and new UAC rules being approved into the Utah SIP through this final rule action are provided in Table 1 and Table 2.

Table 1—List of Utah Infrastructure Elements and Revisions That the EPA Is Approving Approval December 3, 2007 submittal—1997 PM2.5 NAAQS: (D)(ii). September 21, 2010 submittal—2006 PM2.5 NAAQS: (D)(ii). January 19, 2012 submittal—2008 Pb NAAQS: (A), (C), (D)(i)(II) element 3, (D)(ii), (E), (F), (G), (H), (J), (K), (L) and (M). June 2, 2013 submittal—2010 SO2 NAAQS: (A), (C), (D)(i)(II) element 3, (D)(ii), (E), (F), (G), (H), (J), (K), (L) and (M). January 31, 2013 submittal—2008 Ozone NAAQS: (A), (B), (C), (D)(i)(II) element 3, (D)(ii), (E), (F), (G), (H), (J), (K), (L) and (M). January 31, 2013 submittal—2010 NO2 NAAQS: (A), (C), (D)(i)(II) element 3, (D)(ii), (E), (F), (G), (H), (J), (K), (L) and (M). December 4, 2015 submittal—2012 PM2.5 NAAQS: (A), (C), (D)(i)(II) element 3, (D)(ii), (E), (F), (G), (H), (J), (K), (L) and (M). March 14, 2016 submittal—New UAC Rules, CAA Section 128: R307-104-1, R307-104-2 and R307-104-3. Table 2—List of Utah Infrastructure Elements and Revisions That the EPA Is Taking No Action On No Action
  • (Revision to be made in separate rulemaking action)
  • January 19, 2012 submittal—2008 Pb NAAQS: (B), (D)(i)(I) elements 1 and 2, (D)(i)(II) element 4. January 31, 2013 submittal—2008 Ozone NAAQS: (D)(i)(I) elements 1 and 2, (D)(i)(II) element 4. January 31, 2013 submittal—2010 NO2 NAAQS: (B), (D)(i)(I) elements 1 and 2, (D)(i)(II) element 4. June 2, 2013 submittal—2010 SO2 NAAQS: (B), (D)(i)(I) elements 1 and 2, (D)(i)(II) element 4. December 4, 2015 submittal—2012 PM2.5 NAAQS: (B), (D)(i)(I) elements 1 and 2, (D)(i)(II) element 4.
    IV. 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 UAC discussed in section III, Final Action of this preamble. The EPA has made, and will continue to make, these documents generally available electronically through www.regulations.gov and/or in hard copy at the appropriate EPA office (see the ADDRESSES section of this preamble for more information).

    V. Statutory and Executive Orders Review

    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 October 3, 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. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See CAA Section 307(b)(2)).

    List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

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

    Authority:

    42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    Dated: July 19, 2016. Shaun L. McGrath, Acting Regional Administrator, Region 8.

    40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

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

    42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    Subpart TT—Utah 2. Amend § 52.2320, paragraph (c) table, by adding in numerical order, center heading “R307-104. Conflict of Interest” and entries “R307-104-01”, “R307-104-02”, and “R307-104-03” to read as follow:
    § 52.2320 Identification of plan.

    (c) * * *

    Rule No. Rule title State
  • effective
  • date
  • Final rule
  • citation,
  • date
  • Comments
    *         *         *         *         *         *         * R307-104. Conflict of Interest R307-104-01 Authority 6/01/2016 [Insert Federal Register citation], 8/02/2016. R307-104-02 Purpose 6/01/2016 [Insert Federal Register citation], 8/02/2016. R307-104-03 Disclosure of conflict of interest 6/01/2016 [Insert Federal Register citation], 8/02/2016. *         *         *         *         *         *         *
    3. Amend § 52.2355 by adding paragraph (c) to read as follows:
    § 52.2355 Section 110(a)(2) infrastructure requirements.

    (c) Gary R. Herbert, Governor, State of Utah, provided submissions to meet the infrastructure requirements for the State of Utah for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS on December 3, 2007; 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS on September 21, 2010; 2008 Pb NAAQS on January 19, 2012; 2008 ozone NAAQS on January 31, 2013; 2010 NO2 NAAQS on January 31, 2013; 2010 SO2 NAAQS on June 2, 2013; and 2012 PM2.5 on December 4, 2015. The State's Infrastructure SIP is approved with respect to the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS with respect to CAA Section 110(a)(1) and element (D)(ii) of Section 110(a)(2). The State's Infrastructure SIP is approved with respect to the 2008 ozone NAAQS with respect to CAA Section 110(a)(1) and the following elements of Section 110(a)(2): (A), (B), (C), (D)(i)(II) prong 3, (D)(ii), (E), (F), (G), (H), (J), (K), (L), and (M). The State's Infrastructure SIP is approved with respect to the 2008 Pb, 2010 SO2, 2010 NO2, and 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS with respect to CAA Section 110(a)(1) and the following elements of Section 110(a)(2): (A), (C), (D)(i)(II) prong 3, (D)(ii), (E), (F), (G), (H), (J), (K), (L), and (M).

    [FR Doc. 2016-18154 Filed 8-1-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R04-OAR-2015-0361; FRL-9950-01-Region 4] Air Plan Approval; Florida; Regional Haze Progress Report AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the State of Florida through the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) on March 10, 2015. Florida's March 10, 2015, SIP revision (Progress Report) addresses requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) and EPA's rules that require states to submit periodic reports describing progress towards reasonable progress goals (RPGs) established for regional haze and a determination of the adequacy of a state's existing SIP addressing regional haze (regional haze plan). EPA is approving Florida's Progress Report on the basis that it addresses the progress report and adequacy determination requirements for the first implementation period for regional haze.

    DATES:

    This rule will be effective September 1, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket Identification No. EPA-R04-OAR-2015-0361. All documents in the docket are listed on the www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the index, some information may not be publicly available, i.e., Confidential Business Information or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically through www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Air Regulatory Management Section, Air Planning and Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. EPA requests that if at all possible, you contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's official hours of business are Monday through Friday 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding Federal holidays.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Sean Lakeman, 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. Mr. Lakeman can be reached by phone at (404) 562-9043 and via electronic mail at [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Background

    Under the Regional Haze Rule,1 each state is required to submit a progress report in the form of a SIP revision every five years that evaluates progress towards the RPGs for each mandatory Class I Federal area (also referred to as Class I area in this rulemaking) within the state and for each mandatory Class I Federal area outside the state which may be affected by emissions from within the state. See 40 CFR 51.308(g). Each state is also required to submit, at the same time as the progress report, a determination of the adequacy of the state's existing regional haze plan. See 40 CFR 51.308(h). The first progress report is due five years after submittal of the initial regional haze plan. On March 19, 2010, FDEP submitted the State's first regional haze plan in accordance with 40 CFR 51.308(b).2

    1 Located in 40 CFR part 51, subpart P.

    2 On August 29, 2013, EPA fully approved Florida's regional haze plan (as amended on August 31, 2010, and September 17, 2012). See 78 FR 53250.

    On March 10, 2015, FDEP submitted its regional haze progress report, reporting progress made in the first implementation period towards the RPGs for Class I Federal areas in the State and for Class I Federal areas outside the State that are affected by emissions from sources within Florida. This submittal also includes a negative declaration pursuant to 40 CFR 51.308(h)(1) that the State's regional haze plan requires no substantive revision to achieve the established regional haze visibility improvement goals for 2018. In a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) published on May 24, 2016 (81 FR 32702), EPA proposed to approve Florida's Progress Report on the basis that it satisfies the requirements of 40 CFR 51.308(g) and (h). No comments were received on the May 24, 2016, proposed rulemaking. The details of Florida's submittal and the rationale for EPA's actions are further explained in the NPRM. See 81 FR 32702 (May 24, 2016).

    II. Final Action

    EPA is approving Florida's Regional Haze Progress Report SIP revision, submitted by the State on March 10, 2015, as meeting the applicable regional haze requirements set forth in 40 CFR 51.308(g) and (h).

    III. 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 action merely approves state law as meeting federal requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that reason, this action:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by October 3, 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. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. See section 307(b)(2).

    List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

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

    Dated: July 20, 2016. Heather McTeer Toney, Regional Administrator, Region 4.

    40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

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

    42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    Subpart K—Florida
    2. Section 52.520(e), is amended by adding the entry “March 2015 Regional Haze Progress Report” at the end of the table to read as follows:
    § 52.520 Identification of plan.

    (e) * * *

    EPA-Approved Florida Non-Regulatory Provisions Provision State
  • effective
  • date
  • EPA approval date Federal Register notice Explanation
    *         *         *         *         *         *         * March 2015 Regional Haze Progress Report 3/10/2015 8/2/2016 [Insert citation of publication]
    [FR Doc. 2016-18155 Filed 8-1-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 97 [FRL-9949-93-OAR] Allocations of Cross-State Air Pollution Rule Allowances From New Unit Set-Asides for the 2016 Compliance Year AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Final rule; notice of data availability (NODA).

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is providing notice of emission allowance allocations to certain units under the new unit set-aside (NUSA) provisions of the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR) federal implementation plans (FIPs) and is responding to objections to preliminary calculations. EPA has completed final calculations for the first round of NUSA allowance allocations for the 2016 compliance year and has posted spreadsheets containing the calculations on EPA's Web site. The final allocations are unchanged from the preliminary calculations. EPA will record the allocated allowances in sources' Allowance Management System (AMS) accounts by August 1, 2016.

    DATES:

    August 2, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Questions concerning this action should be addressed to Robert Miller at (202) 343-9077 or [email protected] or to Kenon Smith at (202) 343-9164 or [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Under the CSAPR FIPs, a portion of each state budget for each of the four CSAPR emissions trading programs is reserved as a NUSA from which allowances are allocated to eligible units through an annual one- or two-round process. In a NODA published in the Federal Register on May 27, 2016 (81 FR 33636), EPA described the allocation process and provided notice of preliminary calculations for the first-round 2016 NUSA allowance allocations. EPA also described the process for submitting any objections to the preliminary calculations.

    In response to the May 27 NODA, EPA received one written objection addressing CSAPR NOX annual and NOX ozone season allowance recordations for 2016 to Missouri's existing CSAPR units, and the number of allowances shown as available for allocation to Missouri's new units in 2016 in the May 27 NODA under those programs. Due to an allowance recordation error, two facilities in Missouri with existing units did not receive the CSAPR NOX annual and ozone season existing unit allowance allocations specified in Missouri's approved 2016 CSAPR State Implementation Plan (SIP). This error in turn impacted the number of NUSA allowances shown in the May 27 NODA as available for allocation to Missouri's new units for 2016 under those programs. EPA corrected the recordation error to the existing units by recording a total of four additional CSAPR NOX Annual allowances and two additional CSAPR NOX Ozone Season allowances to two facilities in Missouri, consistent with the allocations for those facilities specified by Missouri in their 2016 CSAPR SIP. EPA in turn adjusted downward the number of allowances available for allocation in Missouri's 2016 CSAPR NOX Annual and CSAPR NOX Ozone Season NUSA's by four and two allowances, respectively. Since the downward correction to the number of allowances available in Missouri's 2016 NUSAs was relatively small, the number of allowances allocated to new units in Missouri in the first round was not affected.

    The final unit-by-unit data and allowance allocation calculations are set forth in Excel spreadsheets titled “CSAPR_NUSA_2016_NOx_Annual_1st_Round_Final_Data”, “CSAPR_NUSA_2016_NOx_OS_1st_Round_Final_Data”, and “CSAPR_NUSA_2016_SO2_1st_Round_Final_Data”, available on EPA's Web site at http://www.epa.gov/crossstaterule/actions.html. The three spreadsheets show EPA's final determinations of first-round 2016 NUSA allocations under the CSAPR NOX annual, NOX ozone season, and SO2 (Group 1 and Group 2) trading programs, respectively.

    Pursuant to CSAPR's allowance recordation timing requirements, the allocated NUSA allowances will be recorded in sources' AMS accounts by August 1, 2016. EPA notes that an allocation or lack of allocation of allowances to a given unit does not constitute a determination that CSAPR does or does not apply to the unit. EPA also notes that NUSA allocations are subject to potential correction if a unit to which NUSA allowances have been allocated for a given compliance year is not actually an affected unit as of January 1 (or May 1 in the case of the NOX ozone season program) of the compliance year.1

    1See 40 CFR 97.411(c), 97.511(c), 97.611(c), and 97.711(c).

    (Authority: 40 CFR 97.411(b), 97.511(b), 97.611(b), and 97.711(b).) Dated: July 18, 2016. Reid P. Harvey, Director, Clean Air Markets Division, Office of Atmospheric Programs, Office of Air and Radiation.
    [FR Doc. 2016-18152 Filed 8-1-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 180 EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0843; FRL-9947-78] Cloquintocet-mexyl; Pesticide Tolerances AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of cloquintocet-mexyl and its acid metabolite in or on multiple commodities which are identified and discussed later in this document when cloquintocet-mexyl is used as an inert ingredient (herbicide safener) in pesticide formulations containing the new active ingredient halauxifen-methyl (XDE-729 methyl). Dow AgroSciences, LLC requested these tolerances under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).

    DATES:

    This regulation is effective August 2, 2016. Objections and requests for hearings must be received on or before October 3, 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-2012-0843, 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-2012-0843 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 October 3, 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-2012-0843, by one of the following methods:

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

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

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

    II. Summary of Petitioned-For Tolerance

    In the Federal Register of December 19, 2012 (77 FR 75082) (FRL-9372-6), 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 2F8085) by Dow AgroSciences LLC, 9330 Zionsville Road, Indianapolis, IN 46268. The petition requested that 40 CFR 180.560 be amended by expanding the tolerances therein to cover residues of the inert ingredient (herbicide safener) cloquintocet-mexyl (acetic acid [(5-chloro-8-quinolinyl) oxy]-, 1-methylhexyl ester; CAS Reg. No. 99607-70-2), and its acid metabolite (5-chloro-8-quinolinoxyacetic acid) when used in pesticide formulations containing the new active ingredient halauxifen-methyl (XDE-729 methyl), in or on barley grain, barley hay, barley straw, wheat forage, wheat grain, wheat hay, and wheat straw. No numerical change to the tolerances for the specific commodities was sought. That document referenced a summary of the petition prepared by Dow AgroSciences LLC, the registrant, which is available in the docket, http://www.regulations.gov. There were no comments received in response to the notice of filing.

    III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety

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

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

    Cloquintocet-mexyl has a low order of acute oral, dermal, and inhalation toxicity. It is slightly irritating to the eyes and non-irritating to the skin. Cloquintocet-mexyl is a skin sensitizer. The chemical is not genotoxic and is not a reproductive and developmental toxicant. There is no evidence of neurotoxicity in the available studies. Cloquintocet-mexyl is classified as “not likely to be a human carcinogen.” The main metabolite for cloquintocet-mexyl is 5-chloro-8-quin-linoxyacetic acid, and testing on the metabolite is part of the toxicology database for cloquintocet-mexyl.

    Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the adverse effects caused by cloquintocet-mexyl 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 Cloquintocet-Mexyl—Updated Human Health Risk Assessment from Uses of Halauxifen-methyl (PC Code 117501) in docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0843.

    B. Toxicological Points of Departure/Levels of Concern

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

    A summary of the toxicological endpoints for cloquintocet-mexyl used for human risk assessment is shown in Table 1 of this unit.

    Table 1—Summary of Toxicological Doses and Endpoints for Cloquintocet-Mexyl for Use in Human Health Risk Assessment Exposure/scenario Point of departure and uncertainty/
  • safety factors
  • RfD, PAD, LOC for risk assessment Study and toxicological effects
    Acute dietary (Females 13-49 years of age) NOAEL = 100 mg/kg/day
  • UFA = 10
  • UFH = 10
  • FQPA SF = 1x
  • Acute RfD = 1 mg/kg/day
  • aPAD = 1 mg/kg/day
  • Developmental toxicity study in rats (MRID 44387429).
  • LOAEL = 400 mg/kg/day based on higher incidence of skeletal variants and decrease in fetal body weights in the high dose group.
  • Acute dietary (General population including infants and children) N/A N/A Based on available data, a suitable endpoint was not identified for the general population because there were no effects observed in oral toxicity studies appropriate to this population that could be attributed to a single dose exposure. Chronic dietary (All populations) NOAEL = 4.3 mg/kg/day
  • UFA = 10x
  • UFH = 10x
  • FQPA SF = 1x
  • Chronic RfD = 0.04 mg/kg/day
  • cPAD = 0.04 mg/kg/day
  • Chronic/Oncogenicity Toxicity—Rat (MRID 44387431).
  • LOAEL = 41.2 mg/kg/day based on thyroid hyperplasia in females.
  • Cancer (Oral, dermal, inhalation) Cloquintocet-mexyl is classified as “not likely to be carcinogenic to humans”. FQPA SF = Food Quality Protection Act Safety Factor. LOAEL = lowest-observed-adverse-effect-level. LOC = level of concern. mg/kg/day = milligram/kilogram/day. MOE = margin of exposure. NOAEL = no-observed-adverse-effect-level. PAD = population adjusted dose (a = acute, c = chronic). RfD = reference dose. UF = uncertainty factor. UFA = extrapolation from animal to human (interspecies). UFDB = to account for the absence of data or other data deficiency. UFH = potential variation in sensitivity among members of the human population (intraspecies). UFL = use of a LOAEL to extrapolate a NOAEL. UFS = use of a short-term study for long-term risk assessment.
    C. Exposure Assessment

    1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary exposure to cloquintocet-mexyl, EPA considered exposure under the petitioned-for tolerances as well as all existing cloquintocet-mexyl tolerances in 40 CFR 180.560. EPA assessed dietary exposures from cloquintocet-mexyl in food as follows:

    i. Acute exposure. Quantitative acute dietary exposure and risk assessments are performed for a food-use pesticide, if a toxicological study has indicated the possibility of an effect of concern occurring as a result of a 1-day or single exposure. Such effects were identified for cloquintocet-mexyl and are applicable only to females 13-49 years old in order to account for fetal effects (higher incidence of skeletal variants and decrease in fetal body weights) that were seen in the developmental toxicity study in rats. In estimating acute dietary exposure, EPA used food consumption information from the 2003-2008 National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys (NHANES). As to residue levels in food, EPA assumed tolerance-level residues of cloquintocet-mexyl and cloquintocet acid in all forms of barley, triticale, and wheat, and assumed that all of those crops are treated (i.e., 100% crop treated).

    ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting the chronic dietary exposure assessment EPA used the food consumption data from the 2003-2008 National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys (NHANES). As to residue levels in food, EPA assumed tolerance-level residues of cloquintocet-mexyl and cloquintocet acid in all forms of barley, triticale, and wheat, and assumed that all of those crops are treated (i.e., 100% crop treated).

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

    2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. The Agency used screening-level water exposure models in the dietary exposure analysis and risk assessment for cloquintocet-mexyl in drinking water. These simulation models take into account data on the physical, chemical, and fate/transport characteristics of cloquintocet-mexyl. 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 First Index Reservoir Screening Tool (FIRST) and the Screening Concentration in Ground Water (SCI-GROW) models, the estimated drinking water concentrations (EDWCs) of cloquintocet-mexyl for acute exposures are estimated to be 0.186 parts per billion (ppb) for surface water and 0.000061 ppb for ground water, chronic exposures are estimated to be 0.005 ppb for surface water and 0.000061 ppb for ground water.

    Modeled estimates of drinking water concentrations were directly entered into the dietary exposure model. As a conservatism in the assessment, the acute drinking water estimate (0.186 ppb), rather than the chronic drinking water estimate (0.005 ppb) was used in chronic dietary assessment.

    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). Cloquintocet-mexyl is not registered for any specific use patterns that would result in residential exposure.

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

    EPA has not found cloquintocet-mexyl to share a common mechanism of toxicity with any other substances, and cloquintocet-mexyl does not appear to produce a toxic metabolite produced by other substances. For the purposes of this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has assumed that cloquintocet-mexyl 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 FQPA Safety Factor (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. There was no evidence of increased susceptibility of in utero or post-natal exposure to rats or rabbits in the prenatal developmental studies or in rats in the 2-generation reproduction study. NOAELs for maternal/parental toxicity were either less than or equal to the NOAELs for fetal or reproductive 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. That decision is based on the following findings:

    i. The toxicity database for cloquintocet-mexyl is sufficient for risk assessment.

    ii. There is no indication that cloquintocet-mexyl is a neurotoxic chemical and there is no need for a developmental neurotoxicity study or additional UFs to account for neurotoxicity.

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

    iv. There are no residual uncertainties identified in the exposure databases. The dietary food exposure assessments were performed based on 100% CT and tolerance-level residues. EPA made conservative (protective) assumptions in the ground and surface water modeling used to assess exposure to cloquintocet-mexyl in drinking water. These assessments will not underestimate the exposure and risks posed by cloquintocet-mexyl.

    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 cloquintocet-mexyl will occupy <1% of the aPAD for females age 13-49, 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 cloquintocet-mexyl from food and water will utilize <1% of the cPAD for all subpopulations. There are no residential uses for cloquintocet-mexyl.

    3. Short-term and intermediate-term risk. Because cloquintocet-mexyl is not registered for use in pesticide formulations that will result in residential exposure, EPA concludes that cloquintocet-mexyl will not pose a short-term or intermediate-term risk.

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

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

    IV. Other Considerations A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology

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

    B. International Residue Limits

    In making its tolerance decisions, EPA seeks to harmonize U.S. tolerances with international standards whenever possible, consistent with U.S. food safety standards and agricultural practices. EPA considers the international maximum residue limits (MRLs) established by the Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as required by FFDCA section 408(b)(4). The Codex Alimentarius is a joint United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization/World Health Organization food standards program, and it is recognized as an international food safety standards-setting organization in trade agreements to which the United States is a party. EPA may establish a tolerance that is different from a Codex MRL; however, FFDCA section 408(b)(4) requires that EPA explain the reasons for departing from the Codex level. The Codex has not established a MRL for cloquintocet-mexyl.

    V. Conclusion

    The residue data indicate that combined residues of cloquintocet-mexyl and cloquintocet acid are unlikely to exceed the existing tolerances for residues in barley, triticale, and wheat commodities, therefore, the existing tolerance levels remain unchanged. However, the active ingredient, halauxifen-methyl, will be added to the list of active ingredients addressed in the tolerance expression for cloquintocet-mexyl as a result of this tolerance amendment for cloquintocet-mexyl.

    Therefore, 40 CFR 180.560 is amended by establishing a tolerance for the combined residues of cloquintocet-mexyl (acetic acid [(5-chloro-8-quinolinyl) oxy]-, 1-methylhexyl ester; CAS Reg. No. 99607-70-2) and its acid metabolite (5-chloro-8-quinlinoxyacetic acid) when used as an inert ingredient (safener) in pesticide formulations containing the active ingredients clodinafop-propargyl (wheat only), dicamba (wheat only), flucarbazone-sodium (wheat only), halauxifen-methyl (wheat or barley), pinoxaden (wheat or barley), or pyroxsulam (wheat only) at 0.1 ppm in/on barley commodities (grain, hay, and straw), wheat grain, and wheat straw; at 0.2 ppm in/on wheat forage; and at 0.5 ppm in/on wheat hay.

    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: June 28, 2016. Susan Lewis, 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 § 180.560, revise the introductory text of paragraph (a) to read as follows:
    § 180.560 Cloquintocet-mexyl; tolerances for residues.

    (a) General. Tolerances are established for residues of the inert ingredient cloquintocet-mexyl, including its metabolites and degradates, in or on the commodities in the following table when used as a safener in pesticide formulations containing the active ingredients clodinafop-propargyl (wheat only), dicamba (wheat only), flucarbazone-sodium (wheat only), halauxifen-methyl (wheat or barley), pinoxaden (wheat or barley), or pyroxsulam (wheat only). Compliance with the tolerance levels specified is to be determined by measuring the combined residues of cloquintocet-mexyl, (acetic acid [(5-chloro-8-quinolinyl)oxy]-, 1-methylhexyl ester; CAS Reg. No. 99607-70-2) and its acid metabolite (5-chloro-8-quinolinoxyacetic acid), expressed as cloquintocet-mexyl, in or on the following commodities:

    [FR Doc. 2016-17534 Filed 8-1-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Defense Acquisition Regulations System 48 CFR Parts 202, 212, 242, 246, and 252 [Docket DARS-2015-0038] RIN 0750-AI58 Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement: Detection and Avoidance of Counterfeit Electronic Parts—Further Implementation (DFARS Case 2014-D005) AGENCY:

    Defense Acquisition Regulations System, Department of Defense (DoD).

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    DoD is issuing a final rule amending the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) to implement a requirement of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012, as modified by a section of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015, that addresses required sources of electronic parts for defense contractors and subcontractors.

    DATES:

    Effective August 2, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ms. Amy G. Williams, telephone 571-372-6106.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Background

    DoD published a proposed rule in the Federal Register at 80 FR 56939 on September 21, 2015, to further implement section 818 of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year (FY) 2012 (Pub. L. 112-81), as modified by section 817 of the NDAA for FY 2015 (Pub. L. 113-291).

    In accordance with section 818, this rule requires DoD contractors and subcontractors, except in limited circumstances, acquire electronic parts from trusted suppliers in order to further address the avoidance of counterfeit electronic parts. DoD contractors and subcontractors that are not the original component manufacturer are required by this rule to notify the contracting officer if it is not possible to obtain an electronic part from a trusted supplier. For those instances where the contractor obtains electronic parts from sources other than a trusted supplier, the contractor is responsible for inspection, test, and authentication in accordance with existing applicable industry standards.

    This rule enhances DoD's ability to strengthen the integrity of the process for acquisition of electronic parts and benefits both the Government and contractors. The careful selection of suppliers and the inspection, testing, and authentication of electronic parts that are not traceable to the original manufacturer are consistent with industry risk-based processes and are steps that a prudent contractor should take notwithstanding this rule. The avoidance of the proliferation of counterfeit electronic parts in the DoD supply chain reduces the risk of critical failure of fielded systems such as aircraft, ships, and other weapon systems, thus protecting troops' lives and safety.

    This rule is part of DoD's retrospective plan, completed in August 2011, under Executive Order 13563, Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review. DoD's full plan and updates can be accessed at: http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=DOD-2011-OS-0036. Eighteen respondents submitted public comments in response to the proposed rule.

    II. Discussion and Analysis

    DoD reviewed the public comments in the development of the final rule. A discussion of the comments and the changes made to the rule as a result of those comments is provided, as follows:

    A. Summary of Significant Changes From the Proposed Rule

    1. Definitions

    • Replaces the definition of “authorized dealer” with a definition of “authorized supplier.”

    • Replaces the definition of “contract electronics manufacturer” with a definition of “contract manufacturer” and a definition of “authorized aftermarket manufacturer.” This also results in a conforming change to the definition of “original manufacturer.”

    • Deletes the definition of “trusted supplier” and adds a definition of “contractor-approved supplier.”

    • Amends the definition of “obsolete electronic part” to utilize the newly defined term “authorized aftermarket manufacturer.”

    • Makes conforming changes throughout the rule in accordance with the added, revised, or deleted definitions.

    2. Amends the following paragraphs of DFARS clause 252.246-7008, Sources of Electronic Parts, with conforming changes to DFARS subpart 246.8, as follows:

    • (b)(1)—Clarifies “in production” and “currently available in stock”.

    • (b)(2) Introductory text—Clarifies “not in production” and “not currently available in stock” and changes “or” to “and” in the condition for use of contractor-approved suppliers, i.e., “Obtain electronic parts that are not in production by the original manufacturer or an authorized aftermarket manufacturer and not currently available in stock from a source listed in paragraph (b)(1) of this clause, from suppliers identified by the Contractor as contractor-approved suppliers . . . .”

    • (b)(2)(i)—For electronic parts not in production and not currently available in stock, adds to the requirement for use of established counterfeit prevention industry standards and processes, the reference to the DoD-adopted standards at https://assist.dla.mil, but allows use of other appropriate standards. Use of DoD-adopted counterfeit prevention industry standards was previously required in the definition of “trusted supplier.”

    • (b)(2)(iii)—Specifies that the contracting officer is the appropriate DoD official to review and audit. This function is also added at DFARS 242.302 as a contract administration function that is delegable to the administrative contracting officer.

    • (b)(3)—Moves former paragraph (d) to paragraph (b)(3), requiring prompt notification in writing, and adds the requirement that the contractor shall make documentation of the inspection, testing, and authentication of such electronic parts available to the contracting officer upon request if the contractor—

    ○ Obtains an electronic part from a source other than any of the sources identified in paragraph (b)(1) or (b)(2) of the clause due to nonavailability from such sources, or a subcontractor (other than the original manufacturer) that refuses to accept flowdown of the clause; or

    ○ Cannot confirm that an electronic part is new or that it has not been comingled in supplier new production or stock with used, refurbished, reclaimed, or returned parts.

    • (c)(2)—Deletes contractor consideration of alternative parts if the contractor cannot establish traceability from the original manufacturer for a specific electronic part, and makes the contractor responsible for inspection, testing, and authentication.

    • (c)(3)—Requires the contractor to maintain documentation of traceability or the inspection, testing, and authentication, and adds the requirement to make such documentation available to the Government upon request.

    • (d)—Adds a new paragraph (d) to address Government sources of electronic parts, to include purchases from the Federal Supply Schedule, purchases from suppliers accredited by the Defense Microelectronics Activity, or requisitioning from Government inventory/stock. Contractors and subcontractors are still required to comply with the requirements of paragraphs (b) and (c) of the clause 252.246-7008, if purchasing electronic parts from the Federal Supply Schedule or from suppliers accredited by the Defense Microelectronics Activity. However, if the contractor or subcontractor requisitions electronic parts from Government inventory/stock, then the Government is responsible for the authenticity of the parts.

    • (e) Does not require clause flowdown to the original manufacturer.

    B. Analysis of Public Comments 1. General Support for the Rule

    Comment: Several respondents expressed support for many of the changes in the proposed rule, indicating that these are a significant step forward, are consistent with industry risk-based processes, and will help align DoD and defense contractor approaches to reduce the proliferation of counterfeit parts in the supply chain.

    Response: Noted.

    2. Applicability of DFARS 252.246-70XX (now 252.246-7008) and Associated Policy at Subpart 246.8 a. Contractors Not Covered by Cost Accounting Standards

    Comment: Several respondents objected to the application of this rule to contractors not subject to the cost accounting standards (CAS), noting that it will apply to small businesses and acquisitions of commercial items. One respondent stated that section 818(c)(3) of the NDAA for FY 2012 does not add contractor responsibilities for avoiding counterfeit electronic parts to other than CAS-covered contractors and that DoD is overstepping Congressional intent when it applies this rule to small businesses and contracts for commercial items. The respondent states that section 818(c)(2) is only directed to contracts subject to CAS.

    Response: Section 818 defines “covered contractors” to mean the same as the definition of the term in section 893(f)(2) of the NDAA for FY 2011, i.e., a contractor that is subject to CAS under section 26 of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy Act (41 U.S.C. 422). Some portions of section 818 address covered contractors (e.g., paragraph (c)(2)), and therefore only apply to contractors subject to CAS. However, paragraph (c)(3) of section 818 does not use the term “covered contractor.” It applies to all DoD contractors and subcontractors when obtaining electronic parts to be provided to DoD under a DoD contract. Section 818 is clear that DoD contractors and subcontractors at all tiers are responsible for detecting and avoiding counterfeit electronic parts. Thus, 252.246-7008 is consistent with the statute.

    Comment: Another respondent stated the opinion that small entities not subject to CAS comprise a large portion of the counterfeit parts that directly threaten the DoD supply chain. The respondent provided several examples of non-CAS covered entities that were found by the Government to have allowed counterfeit parts to enter the DoD supply chain.

    Response: Noted.

    b. Small Entities

    Various respondents addressed application of the rule to small entities. For analysis of applicability to small entities see the regulatory flexibility analysis at section V of this preamble.

    c. Commercial Items (Including Commercially Available Off-the-Shelf Items (COTS Items)

    Comment: Various respondents expressed concerns about the applicability of DFARS 252.246-7008 and associated policy to commercial item procurements, especially COTS items. One respondent expressed specific concern that the proposed expansion of coverage to commercial item contractors could result in reduced sources and increased costs for contractors. Another respondent stated that manufacturers of COTS items are independently motivated by the commercial market to assure that their products function as advertised.

    Response: The Director of Defense Procurement and Acquisition Policy has determined that it is not in the best interest of the Government to exempt commercial items from the applicability of this rule. See section III of this preamble.

    Comment: Several respondents expressed concerns that the proposed rule does not address the dilemma industry continually faces concerning the general lack of acceptance of counterfeit part prevention requirements flowdown by COTS electronic assembly producers and their authorized dealers. One respondent suggested providing relief from the obligation to flow down to COTS electronic assembly manufacturers.

    Response: DoD has modified paragraph (b)(3) of the clause 252.246-7008 in the final rule to specify the required contractor actions if a subcontractor refuses to accept flowdown of the clause, to include notification to the contracting officer; contractor inspection, testing, and authentication of the part; and the requirement to make documentation of such inspection, testing, and authentication available to the Government upon request.

    Comment: Several respondents expressed concerns that mandatory subcontract flowdown in 252.246-7008(e) for commercial items is inconsistent with Federal Acquisition Streamlining Act and that commercial item subcontracts or supplier agreements should be exempted. Another respondent stated that application of unique defense rules to commercial items where not expressly directed in the statute are prohibited without a best interests determination per 10 U.S.C. 2377. According to the respondent, in lieu of such a determination, at several points in the supplementary information, it states that “DoD intends to determine that it is in the best interests to apply the rule to . . . .” The respondent finds it unclear what the Department means by using the word “intends” rather than making the required determination or putting the cost-benefit analysis right in the rulemaking for review by the public.

    Response: The provisions of the Federal Acquisition Streamlining Act (Pub. L. 103-355) with regard to applicability of laws to commercial items are now codified at 41 U.S.C. 1906 (commercial items other than COTS items) and 1907 (COTS items).

    Pursuant to 41 U.S.C. 1906, acquisitions of commercial items (other than acquisitions of COTS items, which are addressed in 41 U.S.C. 1907) are exempt from a provision of law unless the law (i) contains criminal or civil penalties; (ii) specifically refers to 41 U.S.C. 1906 and states that the law applies to acquisitions of commercial items; or (iii) the Federal Acquisition Regulatory Council (FAR Council) makes a written determination and finding that it would not be in the best interest of the Federal Government to exempt contracts (or subcontracts under a contract) for the acquisition of commercial items from the provision of law.

    Pursuant to 41 U.S.C. 1907, acquisitions of COTS items are exempt from a provision of law unless the law (i) contains criminal or civil penalties; (ii) specifically refers to 41 U.S.C. 1907 and states that the law applies to acquisition of COTS items; (iii) concerns authorities or responsibilities under the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 644) or bid protest procedures developed under the authority of 31 U.S.C. 3551 et seq.; 10 U.S.C. 2305(e) and (f); or 41 U.S.C. 3706 and 3707; or (iv) if the Administrator of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy makes a written determination that it would not be in the best interest of the Federal Government to exempt acquisitions of COTS items from the provision of law.

    The Director, Defense Procurement and Acquisition Policy, is the appropriate authority to make comparable determinations for regulations to be published in the DFARS, which is part of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) system of regulations. Therefore, it is not inconsistent with the Federal Acquisition Streamlining Act to apply this rule to the acquisition of commercial items (including COTS items) if the Director of Defense Procurement and Acquisition Policy has determined that it would not be in the best interest of the Government to exempt acquisitions of commercial items, including COTS items, from the provision of law relating to detection and avoidance of counterfeit parts. The Director of Defense Procurement and Acquisition Policy does not make this determination until the final rule stage, in order to allow for review and analysis of public comments received. The Director of Defense Procurement and Acquisition Policy has now made this determination (see section III of this preamble).

    Comment: One respondent expressed concerns that this proposed rule is in conflict with DFARS 252.244-7000, Subcontracts for Commercial Items.

    Response: The flowdown to subcontracts for commercial items is not in conflict with DFARS clause 252.244-7000, Subcontracts for Commercial Items. DFARS 252.244-7000 states that the contractor is not required to flow down the terms of any DFARS clause in a subcontract for commercial items unless so specified in the particular clause. The fact that the new clause in this rule (252.246-7008), as well as the preexisting clause 252.246-7007, specify such flowdown to subcontracts for commercial items that are for electronic parts or assemblies containing electronic parts is, therefore, in conformance with DFARS 252.244-7000.

    d. Original Manufacturers

    Comment: Several respondents recommended revising the clause to make it clear that the flowdown does not apply to the original manufacturers. Several respondents asserted that the flowdown to original manufacturers would be costly to both the manufacturer and the end customer and unnecessary. One respondent stated that as an authorized dealer they would not be able to flow down the requirements to the original equipment manufacturers they represent; they have distribution agreements with them that dictate by contract what each parties' responsibilities are. Another respondent suggested it would also limit the genuine products available to the Government to purchase.

    Response: DoD has revised the flowdown requirement of the clause at 252.246-7008 to exclude the requirement to flow the clause down to the original manufacturer of the electronic part.

    e. Electronic Parts

    Comment: One respondent commented that electronic parts are not the only products, parts, or commodities within the DoD supply system that have counterfeit issues. The respondent also stated that certain parts and commodities require higher standards, such as medical products, food, munitions, and now certain electronic parts.

    Response: This case addresses only the electronic parts as defined by the NDAA for FY 2012. DoD is aware of the threat of counterfeit parts, other than electronic parts, and is taking action to mitigate the threat through policy and quality assurance requirements.

    f. Medical Devices

    Comment: One respondent commented that the proposed rule would impose a substantial burden on manufacturers of COTS medical devices and is unnecessary to resolve concerns that may present a significant mission, security, or safety hazard. This is especially true for medical devices, which are heavily regulated by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and often contain one or more electronic parts. According to the respondent, DoD's application of the rule to all contractors would apply new requirements to a sizeable group of products that already have a highly effective means of addressing the concern of counterfeit electronic parts.

    Furthermore, the respondent commented that the FDA is the Federal agency tasked with protecting the public health by assuring the safety, effectiveness, quality and security of drugs, vaccines, and other biological product and medical devices. The respondent considered that this will not only unduly increase the burden on manufacturers; it has the capacity to cause confusion in the marketplace and result in potential adverse implications for public health. The FDA is in the best position to strike the proper balance of interests in the health care system when establishing requirements for assuring the quality of the products it regulates, assessing the burdens these requirements place on manufacturers, and considering their impact on healthcare costs and healthcare innovation. FDA already regulates purchasing controls for medical device manufacturing, requiring each manufacturer to ensure that all purchases or otherwise received product and services conform to the specified requirements. Medical device manufacturers are required to have robust processes in place to review, investigate, and evaluate external manufacturers and suppliers. The respondent recommended that any additional requirements for FDA-regulated products should be made through the current governing agency, the FDA.

    Response: This rule implements section 818 of the NDAA for FY 2012, as amended by section 817 of the NDAA for FY 2015, and prescribes the policy and procedures for preventing counterfeit electronic parts from entering the supply chain. This rule addresses concerns that DoD has encountered regarding the electronic parts, including those that are COTS items, and including medical devices. DoD recognizes the FDA's authority over drugs and medical devices. DoD recognizes that manufacturers are required to have processes in place to review, investigate, and evaluate external manufacturers and suppliers. However, DoD has a responsibility to protect the warfighter by ensuring that we are utilizing electronic products that are not counterfeit or contain counterfeit parts.

    g. Raw Materials and Minerals

    Comment: Several respondents are concerned that the flowdown requirement is unclear as to whether the flowdown extends to suppliers of raw materials and minerals.

    Response: The clause only flows down to subcontracts that are for electronic parts or assemblies containing electronic parts. Raw materials and minerals are not electronic parts.

    3. Definitions a. “Electronic Part”

    Comment: Various respondents commented favorably on the removal of references to “embedded software” and “firmware” from the definition of “electronic part.” One respondent stated that this revision aligns the term's definition with the underlying substance of the material covered by the regulations. The respondent also stated that it is difficult, if not impossible, to address such elements when an express standard or protocol has not yet been adopted. Another respondent recommended that the introduction of tainted software and firmware into integrated circuits is more appropriately addressed in a separate rulemaking process. Similarly, another respondent stated that the change to the definition will rightly focus contractor attention on identifying counterfeit electronic parts as the statute requires, rather than attempting to perform quality assurance on software and firmware without any DoD guidance on how to reliably perform that function.

    Response: Noted.

    b. “Trusted Supplier”/”Non-trusted Supplier”

    Many respondents commented on the definition of “trusted supplier.”

    Comment: Various respondents stated that the term “trusted supplier” is already in use in DoD, and that duplication would lead to confusion within organizations that deal with both trusted supplier types. For reference, the other usage of trusted supplier is with the Trusted Access Program Office (TAPO), which accredits trusted foundries and suppliers through the Defense Microelectronics Activity. One respondent stated that the clause should not mention trusted suppliers at all, instead completely listing items (1) through (3) in the definition, whenever applicable.

    Response: The phrase “trusted supplier” has been mentioned as a source of confusion since it is was first used in the NDAA for FY 2012 (section 818). The final rule published under DFARS Case 2012-D055, Detection and Avoidance of Counterfeit Parts, avoided use of the term “trusted supplier.” The proposed rule under this case introduced the term because it is the term consistently used in section 818 of the NDAA for FY 2012, and subsequent amendments to that statute.

    However, in response to the public comments, DoD has reverted to an identification of the sources from which a contractor or subcontractor may acquire electronic parts, or items containing electronic parts, without introducing the term “trusted supplier.” In order to facilitate this identification of acceptable sources, DoD has introduced the definition of the term “contractor-approved supplier” to cover the fourth category of sources at DFARS 246.870-2(a)(1)(ii) and 252.246-7008(b)(2), which may be used only if the electronic parts are not in production and are not currently available in stock. This term reflects that this is a supplier that is not authorized to sell the manufacturer's product, but the contractor has assessed and approved this supplier.

    Comment: Several respondents commented on the meaning of the term “trusted supplier.” One respondent agreed with the trusted supplier definition including contractor-vetted suppliers in addition to original manufacturers and authorized dealers. Several respondents disagreed with item (4) in the definition, which allows contractor-approved unauthorized distributors to be a trusted supplier. One respondent went further by claiming that item (3), unauthorized distributors who bought exclusively from the original component manufacturer or an authorized distributor, also should not be included in the definition. One respondent stated that the definition should contain an “or” statement that requires purchase from (1) manufacturer or (2) authorized distributor supplier types before (3) and (4) unauthorized distributors of any sort could be used. Another respondent echoed this sentiment without specifically requesting the change in definition. One respondent stated that the definition should be clarified to be consistent throughout the clause.

    Response: As stated in the prior response, the term “trusted supplier” is no longer used or defined. However, the sources from which a contractor or subcontractor may obtain electronic parts under given circumstances are explicitly provided in section 818(c), as amended, and the statutory provisions are accurately implemented in this rule.

    Comment: One respondent stated that there should also be a “non-trusted supplier” definition, while another respondent stated that a new definition should be developed for small and disadvantaged businesses that should not contain the word “trust.”

    Response: The term “non-trusted supplier” is no longer used in the final rule.

    c. “Authorized Dealer”

    Comments: There were various respondents that were opposed to the use of the term “authorized dealer” and recommended using the term “authorized supplier” instead. According to the respondents, the term “authorized supplier” is used in all of the industry counterfeit electrical, electronic, and electromechanical parts standards, and is commonly used in the electronics industry and by DoD.

    One respondent pointed out that the term “authorized dealer” has different meanings in DFARS 246.870-1 and 252.246-7008, and recommended that they be coordinated with each other.

    Response: The term “authorized dealer” is not used in the electronics industry, nor is it used by DoD activities when referring to electronics sellers. In the final rule, DoD has replaced the term “authorized dealer” with the electronics industry's term “authorized supplier.” All of the commercial standards allow the use of “authorized suppliers” and define how they should be used.

    d. Contract Electronics Manufacturer

    Comment: One respondent recommended amending the definition of “contract electronics manufacturer” to be in line with industry use of the term. According to the respondent, industry understands a contract electronics manufacturer to be a company who builds boards or units for another company, whereas the fabrication of an electronic part “under a contract with, or with express written authority of, the original manufacturer” is the work of an authorized aftermarket manufacturer. According to the respondent, this definition aligns with the industry standards AS5553, AS6171, and AS6081.

    The respondent therefore recommended the following definition: “Contract electronics manufacturer” means an organization that produces goods, using electronic parts, for other companies on a contract basis under the label or brand name of the other organization.

    In addition, the respondent recommended that the concept of “contract electronics manufacturer” should be removed from the definition of “original manufacturer.” According to the respondent, the original manufacturer is regularly understood to be the original component manufacturer or the original equipment manufacturer.

    Response: DoD has revised the definition of “contract electronics manufacturer” consistent with the recommendation of the respondent and removed paragraph (2) from the proposed definition. The removed paragraph has been utilized as the basis for an added definition of “authorized aftermarket manufacturer.” This also resulted in a conforming change to the definition of “obsolete electronic part.”

    DoD also removed the term “electronics” from the defined term, because the other related terms of “original manufacturer,” original component manufacturer,” and “original equipment manufacturer” are not limited to just electronic parts, even though this rule then applies those terms to the acquisition of electronic parts. Having removed the word “electronics” and the portion of the definition that applied to an authorized aftermarket manufacturer, DoD has retained the term “contract manufacturer” as part of the definition of “original manufacturer.”

    4. Supply Base Terminology

    Comment: One respondent recommended that DoD define the supply base in the same way as the commercial defense industry and regulate sources of supply accordingly. According to the respondent, DoD defines the supply base in terms of (1) original equipment manufacturer primes; (2) manufacturers; and (3) dealers, distributors, or others; while the commercial defense industry uses the terms (1) original equipment manufacturer primes; (2) approved manufacturers; (3) authorized dealers/distributors; (4) dealers/brokers/others; and (5) surplus dealers. The respondent asserts that without using the commercial defense industry terms, DoD could procure certain products from potentially unauthorized sources.

    Response: Since the scope of the case is limited to electronic parts, DoD has elected to define the supply base in terms commonly used by the electronics industry, rather than across the entire commercial defense industry, and has utilized the categories identified in the statute, although changing the term “authorized dealer” to “authorized supplier” to be consistent with the electronic industry usage.

    5. Sources of Electronic Parts a. Tiered Approach

    The statute and this regulation provide for a tiered approach for sources of electronic parts.

    • Category 1: Electronic parts that are in production or currently available in stock. The contractor shall obtain such parts from the original manufacturer, their authorized suppliers, or from suppliers that obtain such parts exclusively from the original manufacturers of the parts or their authorized dealers.

    • Category 2: Electronic parts that are not in production and not currently available in stock. The contractor shall obtain such parts from suppliers identified by the contractor as contractor-approved suppliers, subject to certain conditions.

    • Category 3: Electronic parts that are not in production and not available from any of the above sources; electronic parts from a subcontractor (other than the original manufacturer) that refuses to accept flowdown of DFARS 252.246-7008; or electronic parts that the contractor or subcontractor cannot confirm are new or that the electronic parts have not been comingled in supplier new production or stock with used, refurbished, reclaimed, or returned parts. The contractor may buy such electronic parts subject to certain conditions.

    Comment: One respondent supported the requirement to obtain parts that are in production or currently available in stock from original manufacturers, authorized dealers, or suppliers that obtain such parts exclusively from the original manufacturers or authorized dealers.

    Response: Noted.

    Comment: One respondent recommended that contractors and subcontractors only be allowed to purchase from suppliers that obtain such parts exclusively from the original manufacturers of the parts or their authorized dealers only if not available from the original manufacturers or their authorized dealers. Another respondent stated that the most effective method for avoiding counterfeit electronic parts is to purchase these parts from the original manufacturer and their authorized distributors, and authorized aftermarket distributors and manufacturers (i.e., “legally authorized sources”). According to the respondent, purchasing from any other source significantly increases the likelihood of acquiring counterfeit parts.

    Response: The statute unconditionally allows a contractor or subcontractor to purchase electronic parts from suppliers that obtain such parts exclusively from the original manufacturers of the parts or their authorized dealers.

    Comment: One respondent suggested adding “authorized aftermarket manufacturer” to “authorized dealer.”

    Response: The concept of authorized aftermarket manufacturer was already included in the definition of “authorized dealer” (now “authorized supplier” in the final rule).

    b. Not in Production and Not Currently Available in Stock

    Comment: Several respondents requested that DoD clarify terms “in stock” and “available in stock.” One respondent noted that a part could be in production but not in stock, or not in production but available in stock. This respondent expressed concerns about the costly steps necessary to ensure compliance when a part is not acquired from a trusted supplier, so the initial analysis of the supply chain sources could be relevant to how a contractor acquires a specific part and have many assorted cost impacts. Another respondent had concerns with use of the phrase “currently available in stock” as it raises questions about parts that are in production but have lead times. “Unless there is a demonstrated, immediate need for a part in production with a lead time, contractors should not have the option to seek the part from a source with a higher level of counterfeit risk.” That respondent also had concerns with the use of the phrase “parts that are not in production” raising issues about obsolete parts that are not in production by the original manufacturer but may be produced on demand in a timely manner by authorized aftermarket manufacturers.

    One respondent recommended that DoD must require contractors to do a more exhaustive search of the authorized supply channel before utilizing other sources. This respondent also recommended that the rule should clarify that “not currently available in stock” means “not currently available in stock from original manufacturer, authorized aftermarket manufacturers, or authorized dealers.”

    One respondent thought of numerous possibilities of the meaning of “unavailable”:

    • Parts might be unavailable when they exceed a certain multiple of standard pricing.

    • Parts might be unavailable if they cannot be received within an acceptable lead time.

    • Parts might be unavailable and out of production if the original manufacturer and no other foundry make the part.

    • Parts might be unavailable and out of production because the original component manufacturer is no longer producing an electronic part yet has the ability to restart production given appropriate lead time.

    • Parts that seem unavailable because they are not in production could conceivably be available from a trusted foundry.

    This respondent was concerned that parts also might change in availability and asked whether a contractor would be required to switch between sources of supply if a product later becomes available from the original manufacturer or an authorized dealer. This respondent recommended removing the triggering mechanism that use of an “other” trusted source requires that the parts be not in production or not currently available.

    Response: The statute requires that if parts are in production or currently available in stock, the contractor or subcontractor must use a Category 1 supplier. The electronic parts may be in production and currently available in stock, in production and not currently available in stock, or not in production but currently available in stock. Therefore, even if there is a demonstrated, immediate need for a part in production with a lead time, contractors do not have the option to seek the part from other than a Category 1 source. Some of the listed technicalities with regard to potential meanings of “unavailable” are irrelevant, because if the part is in production, it must be bought from a Category 1 supplier, whether or not it is currently available or unavailable in stock.

    DoD has modified the final rule to clarify that “in production” includes by the original manufacturer or by an authorized aftermarket manufacturer, and that “currently available in stock” means from one of the Category 1 sources.

    In addition, DoD changed “or” to “and” in DFARS 246.870-2(a)(1)(ii) and at 252.246-7008(b)(2) because “or” includes circumstances that overlap with paragraphs (a)(1)(i) and (b)(1), respectively, and does not accurately reflect the statutory requirement to specify the sources in circumstances not covered in those paragraphs. The only remaining circumstance to be covered in paragraph (a)(1)(ii) and (b)(2) is “not in production” and “not currently available in stock.”

    A contractor must make a good faith effort to determine whether an electronic part is available from Category 1 sources (DFARS 246.870-2(a)(1)(i)). Any changes to a contractor's use of approved sources would require additional review by DoD. Due to the added costs that may be involved in obtaining a part from a contractor-approved supplier, a contractor is incentivized to locate a Category 1 source.

    This DFARS rule does not address obsolescence management and diminishing manufacturing sources as these areas are outside the scope of this case. DFARS Case 2016-D022 will implement section 803 of the NDAA for FY 2014 to address these issues. This rule takes a risk-based approach to counterfeit prevention. The rule allows contractors to make risk-based decisions (such as testing and inspection) based on supply chain assurance measures (such as the source of the electronic part), which is all subject to review and audit by the contracting officer. DoD uses the Department of Defense Risk, Issue, and Opportunity Management Guide for Defense Acquisition Programs.

    6. Contractor Identification of Contractor-Approved Suppliers a. Selection and Use of Standards

    Several respondents expressed concerns specific to the selection and use of DoD-adopted industry standards and requested that the agency identify application of standards by industry.

    Comment: One respondent commented that by acknowledging that contractors can identify other suppliers as “trusted” if they first qualify the supplier using industry standards and processes for counterfeit prevention, the proposed rule allows for electronic parts, particularly parts for mature platforms near the end of their lifecycles, to be procured after the original manufacturers and immediate authorized dealers and distributors have ceased to manufacture and supply the parts.

    Response: Noted.

    Comment: One respondent questioned the meaning of “DoD-adopted” standards, and recommended that industry standards be the default test for the conformance of contractor-vetted trusted suppliers vice DoD-adopted standards. This respondent also mentioned an inconsistency between the requirements with regard to standards in the definition of “trusted supplier” and the DFARS clause at 252.246-7008(b)(2). Another respondent requested clarification as to where DoD-adopted standards are to be used versus other industry standards.

    Response: A Web site was provided in the proposed rule in the definition of “trusted supplier” that specified DoD-adopted counterfeit prevention industry standards and processes. The following industry standards are currently DoD-adopted and could be used to satisfy contractual requirements: ISO 9001, AS9100, AS5553A, AS6462, AS6081, AS6174A, etc. The definition of “trusted supplier” has been deleted from the final rule. DFARS 246.870-2(a)(1)(ii)(A) and 252.246-7008(b)(2)(i) have been amended to add “such as the DoD-adopted standards at https://assist.dla.mil,” but does not specifically require the use of DoD-adopted standards.

    Comment: One respondent suggested changing FAR 46.203, Criteria for Use of Contract Quality Requirements, to require certification to industry standards vice compliance with industry standards.

    Response: Changing the FAR is outside the scope of this case.

    b. Redundant Validation

    Comment: Several respondents recommended that the proposed rule be revised to eliminate redundant validation of suppliers. The respondents assert that the rule as written would require contractors to validate U.S. Government sources such as the Defense Logistics Agency and the Federal Supply Schedule as trusted suppliers. Several respondents recommend specifying that these sources be considered trusted suppliers. Another respondent recommended presuming suppliers to be “trusted” if the prime and subcontractors have approved processes in place to identify suppliers and provide proof that those processes have been followed. Alternately, this respondent suggested that the Government could work with industry to develop a third party accreditation program to verify that suppliers at all tiers are in compliance with established counterfeit detection and avoidance requirements and identify a pool of accredited suppliers.

    Response: Contractors or subcontractors who purchase directly from another vendor (such as the Federal Supply Schedule or from suppliers accredited by the Defense Microelectronics Activity), or requisition electronic parts from the Government inventory/stock under the authority of DFARS 252.251-7000, Ordering from Government Supply Sources, are still required to comply with the requirements of DFARS 252.246-7008(b) and (c). However, the final rule has been revised at DFARS 246.870-2(a)(3)(iii)(B) and 252.246-7008(d)(3)(ii) to state that if the contractor or contractor requisitions electronic parts from the Government, the Government will be responsible for the authenticity of the parts. If any such part is subsequently found to be counterfeit or suspect counterfeit, the Government will promptly replace such part at no charge and will consider an adjustment in the contract schedule to the extent that replacement of the counterfeit or suspect counterfeit electronic parts caused a delay in performance.

    A third party accreditation program is outside the scope of this rule, which is implementing the statutory requirement to allow contractors and subcontractors to identify trusted suppliers (now termed “contractor-approved suppliers.”

    c. Review and Audit by Government

    Comment: Several respondents addressed the requirement that the contractor's identification of trusted suppliers for parts not in production or not currently in stock is subject to review and audit by DoD.

    One respondent commented that section 818 of the NDAA for FY 2012 only required that selection of “trusted suppliers” (as opposed to non-trusted suppliers) be subject to Government review and audit. One respondent questioned why contractor identified suppliers that also conform to industry standards (DoD-adopted or otherwise) are subject to review and audit by DoD officials. The respondent recommends that no additional review or audit be implemented where system oversight is compliant with DFARS part 246.

    One respondent was concerned that, absent a clear standard, the due diligence required to establish a trusted supplier will vary depending on the judgment of the DoD official conducting the review and audit. This respondent recommended that the Government should establish a presumption that suppliers are trusted if the prime contractor and subcontractors have approved processes in place to identify suppliers and provide proof that those processes have been followed.

    Response: Section 818 of the NDAA for FY 2012 (Pub. L. 112-81) requires, in paragraph (c)(3)(D)(iii), that the selection of additional trusted suppliers by DoD contractors is subject to review and audit by DoD officials.

    Furthermore, section 885 of the NDAA for FY 2016 amends paragraph (c)(3)(D)(iii) of section 818 to require review, audit, and approval by DoD officials. This amendment will be addressed under DFARS Case 2016-D013, Amendments Related to Sources of Electronic Parts.

    d. DoD Establishment of Qualification Requirements

    A number of respondents commented on the need for DoD to establish qualification requirements and expressed concern about the status of DFARS Case 2015-D020, DoD Use of Trusted Suppliers for Electronic Parts.

    Comment: One respondent said that the proposed rule appeared to shift the determination and risk of which suppliers to trust entirely to the contractor community, which the respondent believed is contrary to Congressional intent. The respondent asserted that the intent was for DoD and contractors to share the risk. The respondent further stated that the proposed rule does not provide detailed guidance to contractors on the factors to consider in identifying trusted suppliers.

    One respondent expressed concern that there is a potential loophole for a contractor to procure electronic parts from a high-risk supplier without Government notification. A contractor might locate an obsolete, high-risk part from a poor supplier, and quickly qualify that supplier as trusted, thereby avoiding the notification requirement.

    Another respondent mentioned that there is no current means to qualify a non-authorized electronic part as an original component manufacturer authorized part and purchases of electronic parts from nonauthorized sources threaten the safety and integrity of the DoD supply chain. The respondent recommended that DoD propose regulations that include DoD's use and qualification requirements for trusted suppliers, to ensure consistency with the proposed rule and the final rule in DFARS Case 2012-D055. The respondent stated that DoD should issue the rule to establish qualifications for DFARS Case 2015-D020 simultaneously with this proposed rule to avoid confusion and ensure consistency of implementation. According to the respondent, DoD has not exercised its statutory authority to identify additional trusted suppliers for contracts and subcontracts to use. The respondent encouraged DoD to clarify that the qualification requirements to be established in DFARS Case 2015-D020 may be used by contractors when implementing their trusted-supplier program as required by the proposed clause DFARS 252.246-7008, Sources of Electronic Parts.

    According to one respondent DoD continues to delay regulations for use and qualification requirements of trusted suppliers. One respondent recommended that DoD accelerate resolution of DFARS Case 2015-D020 because the proposed rule requires contractors to guarantee authenticity of electronic parts acquired from the Federal Supply Schedule. Another respondent recommended that DFARS Case 2015-D020 should be aggressively developed.

    Another respondent recommended delaying the proposed rule until DFARS 2015-D020 has been released so they can understand how DoD will define criteria for Trusted and Non-Trusted Suppliers.

    Response: This rule implements section 818 of the NDAA for FY 2012, as amended, which provides in paragraph (c)(3)(D) that regulations to be issued by DoD shall authorize DoD contractors to identify and use “additional trusted suppliers” subject to certain conditions (DFARS 246.870-2(a)(1)(ii) and 252.246-7008(b)(2)). The contractor must use established counterfeit prevention industry standards, including testing, and must assume responsibility for the authenticity of the parts provided by such contractor-approved suppliers. Furthermore, DoD has the right to “review and audit” the contractor selection of “contractor-approved suppliers.” In this final rule, DoD has added this review and audit of contractor identification of contractor-approved suppliers at DFARS 242.302(S-76) as a contract administration function that is delegable to the administrative contracting officer.

    This authority to identify contractor-approved suppliers is independent of section 818(c)(3)(D), which is the subject of DFARS Case 2015-D020. It would not be in the best interest of industry to delay this rule until publication of a final rule under DFARS Case 2015-D020, which has not yet been published as a proposed rule, because the “safe harbor” provisions of section 885(a) of the NDAA for FY 2016 are dependent upon publication of this final rule (see section II.B.9. of this preamble).

    7. Traceability

    Many respondents commented on the requirements for traceability from the original manufacturer to product acceptance by the Government.

    Comment: Several respondents were concerned that traceability will be difficult to establish for parts used in defense systems. According to the respondents, it is likely that very large numbers of electronic parts cannot be traced back to the original manufacturer or authorized dealer.

    Response: The rule expects that traceability is not always possible and provides that the contractor is responsible for inspection, testing, and authentication, in accordance with existing industry standards, if the contractor cannot establish traceability from the original manufacturer for a specific part.

    Comment: Several respondents question the benefit of maintaining end-to-end traceability compared to the cost. One respondent opposes serialized end-to-end traceability throughout the supply chain because the costs of such traceability are prohibitively high as compared to the incremental benefit in increased quality assurance. According to one respondent, there will be increased costs associated with implementation and recordkeeping, which could be significant for smaller businesses. One respondent noted that traceability does not necessarily prove that an electronic component is genuine or that the component has been properly packaged, stored or handled in accordance with the original component manufacturer's specifications and that traceability documents and technologies are subject to counterfeiting.

    Response: DoD has accounted for the recordkeeping requirements related to traceability in the regulatory flexibility analysis and the Office of Management and Budget clearance of the information collection requirement. While DoD acknowledges the burden associated with this requirement and that establishing such traceability does not guarantee the authenticity of all parts, nevertheless DoD considers the costs associated with this burden to be justified in comparison to the harm that can result from introduction of counterfeit parts into the DoD supply chain.

    Comment: One respondent stated that the requirements of the proposed rule do not appear to be based upon risk. One respondent, however, agreed with the proposed rule allowing for risk-based processes including testing and inspections when buying parts from other than an original equipment manufacturer or original component manufacturer, their authorized dealers, or suppliers that purchase parts exclusively from the original equipment manufacturers, original component manufacturer, or their authorized dealers.

    Another respondent stated that the proposed rule adopts an approach recommended by industry subject matter experts. Where traceability to the original manufacturer cannot be established, the contractor or subcontractor must complete an evaluation that includes use of alternative parts, and apply its risk-based systems, including tests and inspections commensurate with risk.

    Response: First, the requirement in DFARS 252.246-7007, Contractor Counterfeit Electronic Part Detection and Avoidance System, states in paragraph (c)(4) that the system shall address risk-based processes that enable tracking of electronic parts from the original manufacturer to product acceptance by the Government. Then in paragraph (c) of DFARS 252.246-7008, it again states that the contractor shall have risk-based processes (taking into consideration the consequences of failure of an electronic part) that enable tracking from the original manufacturer. The level of inspection, testing, and authentication that the contractor would perform if unable to track an electronic part from the original manufacturer would also be commensurate with the criticality of the part. The final rule removes the requirement for contractor consideration of alternative parts. That should be a Government decision.

    Comment: Several other respondents stated that industry does not ordinarily maintain this kind of serialized end-to-end traceability for electronic parts and recommended that the rule should conform to industry standards (such as SAE AS5533) for maintaining traceability of electronic parts.

    One respondent stated that many legacy systems now require electronic parts not available from trusted suppliers as defined here, and pursuant to the requirement of section 803 of the NDAA for FY 2014 to issue guidance on sourcing for obsolete parts, the Department should provide instructions on how to make such determinations of risk and what criteria should reasonably support the contractor's determination. Another respondent requests more explanation as to the required “determination of risk” assessments that contractors, and their supply chains, will need to undertake.

    Another respondent was appreciative that this rule allows the industry to enable the traceability without proscribing the method, so that the industry is able to use processes that maintain the traceability without the added expense and bureaucracy of specific documents and systems.

    Response: DoD is willing to bear the expense associated with maintaining traceability to the extent feasible in order to improve detection and avoidance of counterfeit parts in the DoD supply chain. The final rule provides a course of action for the contractor if traceability cannot be established, i.e., the contractor is responsible for inspection, testing, and authentication in accordance with existing applicable industry standards.

    Regulations to implement section 803 of the NDAA for FY 2014 are still pending (DFARS Case 2016-D022).

    Comment: One respondent asked whether traceability will be a contract deliverable to the Government.

    Response: In the final rule, the clause requires that the contractor and subcontractors maintain documentation regarding traceability and make such documentation available to the Government upon request.

    8. Purchases From Other Suppliers a. Notification

    Several respondents provided comments on the notification requirement of the proposed rule, which required the contractor to notify the contracting officer when buying from a Category 3 source (see DFARS 252.246-7008(b)(3)).

    Comment: Several respondents questioned what is meant by “not possible to obtain an electronic part from a trusted supplier.” According to one respondent, it was unclear on whether the term “not possible” intends to preclude contractors and subcontractors from taking price and schedule impact into account in evaluating the relative risks of purchasing a particular part from a trusted supplier versus an other than trusted supplier.

    Response: DoD has clarified the wording of DFARS 252.246-7008(b)(3)(i)(A), replacing “not possible to obtain” with “due to nonavailability,” for increased consistency with the statute and DFARS 246.870-2(a)(2)(i).

    Comment: One respondent questioned how, when, or to whom subcontractors are supposed to provide the required notification.

    Response: Since the clause flows down to all tiers, subcontractors will provide the required notification up the chain to the prime contractor.

    Comment: One respondent commented that the notification requirements would present a significant challenge in cases where a subcontractor would not accept counterfeit avoidance and detection requirements included in DFARS clause 252.246-7007, Contractor Counterfeit Electronic Part Detection and Avoidance System, particularly when dealing with COTS electronic assembly providers.

    Response: DoD has revised the rule to address the issues raised regarding flowdown clause acceptance of DFARS 252.246-7008, Sources of Electronic Parts, by the subcontractors (see section II.B.2.c. of this preamble), which should sufficiently resolve the concerns of the respondent.

    Comment: Several respondents requested clarification on what is required to be provided in the notice to the contracting officer, when such notice is to be issued, and where in the chain of custody the notice is to originate.

    Response: The final rule has been amended at DFARS 252.246-7008(b)(3)(ii)(A) to require prompt notification to the contracting officer in writing. There is no requirement for content of the notice beyond the common sense facts necessary to convey the circumstances to the contracting officer—what part is being bought, from whom, and why. The notice originates with whatever entity (prime contractor or subcontractor) is making the purchase, and is passed up to the contracting officer through the intervening subcontract tiers and the prime contractor. Documentation of inspection, testing, and authentication of such electronic parts is only required to be furnished to the Government upon request.

    Comment: One respondent referenced the outstanding “Expanded Reporting” FAR case that proposed addressing counterfeit electronic part reporting through the GIDEP mechanism but that case has been held in abeyance for reasons unknown to industry. The respondent requested that DOD ensure that any notice requirements in the new clause are distinguished from other requirements to report counterfeits to the GIDEP portal after discovery.

    Response: DoD has noted the comments regarding the FAR Case 2013-002, Expanded Reporting Requirements. The notice in this case will not conflict with GIDEP reporting, because this notice is not a notice of a nonconforming part, but notice of contracting with a potentially higher-risk supplier.

    b. Is DoD approval required?

    Comments: One respondent commented that the proposed notification requirement does not address whether the contractor or subcontractor is free to purchase the part from an other-than-trusted supplier once the required notification has been given to the contracting officer or whether they cannot proceed with the purchase until it has received some form of approval from the contracting officer. Confirmation of the intent was requested to be included in the rule.

    Response: The rule does not require approval for use of Category 3 sources.

    9. Safe Harbor

    Comment: Several respondents requested a safe harbor under various circumstances:

    One respondent recommended that the DFARS be amended to reflect the “safe harbor” of buying from “legally authorized sources” (i.e., original manufacturer and their authorized distributors, and authorized aftermarket distributors and manufacturers) and that the processes/procedures for detecting and avoiding counterfeit electronic parts only be used for acquisitions from unauthorized sources (i.e., sources other than “legally authorized sources”).

    One respondent requested that the Defense Acquisition Regulation Council should address whether, and the extent to which, an agency's approval following a required notification would act as a safe harbor for any counterfeit problems that were subsequently encountered with the parts that had been approved.

    One respondent recommended that, because traceability is considered an element of the contractor process of acquiring parts where the prime is not a trusted supplier and also part of the detection and avoidance system requirements, DoD provide a safe harbor from liability or contract breach if the contractor acquires an electronic part to support a legacy system and has performed a good faith risk determination in lieu of end-to-end traceability, but the part is determined to be counterfeit at some point in the future after delivery to DoD.

    This respondent also noted that section 885(a) of the NDAA for FY 2016 provides a “conditional safe harbor from strict liability from damage caused by counterfeit electronic parts provided the contractor has a detection and avoidance system, provides timely notice of a counterfeit in the supply chain to DoD, and acquires the parts from a trusted supplier.” This respondent also requested that DoD ensure that any rules be conformed with all legislative changes made to the law since enactment of the NDAA for FY 2012 and that allow for an understandable and cost efficient implementation.

    Response: The language of section 818 of the NDAA for FY 2012, as revised by section 885(a) of the NDAA for FY 2016, exclusively addresses allowable costs for counterfeit parts or suspect counterfeit parts and the cost of rework or corrective action that may be required to remedy the use or inclusion of such parts, and does not provide a safe harbor from liability or harm or damage that may result from the undetected use or inclusion of counterfeit parts. Section 885(a) is being implemented under DFARS Case 2016-D009.

    Contractor developed risk-based processes utilizing industry standards or their internal processes/controls, are the responsibility of the contractors' discretion. Any failure of the contractor counterfeit electronic part detection and avoidance system will require remedial action.

    DoD does not currently approve the acquisition of parts from any particular source.

    10. Cost Allowability

    Comment: One respondent asked for clarification that the costs associated with any new supply chain security measures are allowable. According to the respondent, the rule is silent as to who will bear the added costs of implementing serialized traceability or of the non-recurring engineering associated with utilizing alternate parts or of the testing necessary to establish authenticity. Any new costs associated with the final rule should be clearly stated as allowable.

    Response: The implementation costs associated with compliance with DFARS 252.246-7008 are not unlike any other costs anticipated to be incurred by the contractor or subcontractor to perform the requirements of a contract. Whether a cost is allowable and allocable is generally governed by FAR part 31. Unless a cost is explicitly unallowable, whether a cost is allowable depends on factors such as reasonableness, allocability, CAS standards (and approved disclosure statements), if applicable, otherwise, generally accepted accounting principles and practices appropriate to the particular circumstances, and the terms of the contract. It is unnecessary to address the allowability of costs incurred under every contract requirement. In accordance with FAR 31.201-4, a cost is allocable if it is assignable or chargeable to one or more cost objectives on the basis of relative benefits received or other equitable relationship. Subject to these conditions a cost is allocable to a Government contract if it is (a) incurred specifically for the contract; (b) benefits both the contract and other work, and can be distributed to them in reasonable proportion to the benefits received; or (c) is necessary to the overall operation of the business, although a direct relationship to any particular cost objective cannot be shown.

    11. Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

    See the comments and responses relating to impact on small business in the summary of the Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis in section V of this preamble.

    12. Information Collection Requirement

    Several respondents commented on the information collection requirement.

    Comment: One respondent expressed detailed concerns about the necessity and practical utility of the proposed rule. The respondent was concerned about significantly expanding contractors' tracking, collection, and reporting obligations. Subcontractors may not have such information readily available and may be reluctant to share this information up the supply chain. The respondent also had serious concerns about security and protection of the information. The respondent encouraged DoD to consider whether it is necessary to collect all this data at all tiers and to pass the data up through the supply chain to the Government, before any reportable instance of counterfeit or suspect counterfeit electronic parts.

    The respondent also believed that DoD may already have access to a lot of this data, because DoD has access to databases of thousands of suppliers that provide parts to its acquisition system. The respondent considered that the handful of additional suppliers that may be identified will not provide much return on investment.

    Response: The only definite reporting requirement in the rule is to provide notification to the Government if using a Category 3 supplier. This notification is a statutory requirement. Documentation on traceability or inspection, testing, and validation need only be provided to the Government upon request. This approach is considered necessary by subject matter experts within DoD to implement the statutory requirement and to detect and avoid counterfeit parts within the supply chain.

    Comment: One respondent did not believe that the Government estimated collection time and costs capture all that contractors must do to comply.

    • Hours per response (1 hour per response): Appears to assume that all information is already in a database or otherwise easily accessible and that a single person at a single facility will be able to generate such a report.

    • Frequency of report (1 per year): The proposed rule requires that contractors must notify the contracting officer when they cannot obtain covered parts from a trusted supplier in each instance, or at least on a lot basis. This requirement is event-driven, potentially arising on multiple occasions during any given year.

    • Number of respondents (1,000): In view of the statement in the Federal Register that the rule will cover 33,000 small entities in addition to the large CAS-covered businesses, the respondent considers the estimate of 1,000 respondents too low.

    Another respondent suggested that the information collection portion of the proposed rule be re-estimated to reflect the suggested flowdown requirements to create a more accurate assessment of the true costs of the rule.

    Response: The estimated information collection burden in the proposed rule related only to the required notification when using other than a “trusted supplier.” This should be quite rare, since it only occurs when an item is out of production, not currently available in stock, and not available from a contractor-approved supplier. However, the estimates have been adjusted to acknowledge that in many cases information for such notification may have to be provided by a lower tier subcontractor to the prime contractor.

    In addition, the final rule makes explicit the requirement to maintain documentation with regard to traceability or inspection, testing and authentication and make the documentation available upon request. This is not an added burden for contractors and subcontractors, but an acknowledgement of a burden that was implicit in the proposed rule. These requirements have been calculated for subcontractors, as well as prime contractors. The final information collection requirement estimates are summarized as follows:

    Requirement Respondents Responses Total reporting hours Annual
  • reporting burden
  • ($)
  • 252.246-7008 (c)(3)(ii) 5,049 50,490 41,310 1,900,260 252.246-7008 (b)(3)(ii) 1,575 2,550 2,550 117,300 Total Reporting Burden 6,624 53,040 43,860 $2,017,560
    Recordkeeping Recordkeepers Recordkeeping hours Annual recordkeeping burden 252.246-7008 78,773 2,363,190 $75,622,080

    Comment: The respondent urged reconsideration not only of the estimate of the burdens, but consideration of how the rule might be revised so as to reduce the burdens on industry and the Government.

    Response: DoD has not been able to identify a viable alternative that would meet the objectives of the rule and comply with the statutory requirements. The notification requirement is statutory. The data on traceability or inspection, testing, and validation need only be provided to the Government upon request.

    Comment: One respondent asked for the elimination of the requirement for information collection concerning detection and avoidance of counterfeit electronic parts for products regulated by the FDA.

    Response: See response in section II.B.2.f. of this preamble.

    C. Other Changes

    1. Revised the definition of “original component manufacturer” to replace “is pursuing, or has obtained the intellectual property rights” with “is entitled to any intellectual property rights.” There may not be any intellectual property rights associated with an item or the manufacturer may have the rights on the basis of a trade secret without having filed for a patent.

    2. Moved DFARS 246.870-2(a)(1)(iii) to paragraph (a)(3), so that it is also applicable to (a)(2) of that section.

    3. Corrected the reference at DFARS 246.870-2(a)(2) from “paragraph (c)” to “paragraph (b)(3)(ii) through (b)(3)(iv)” of the clause at 252.246-7008.

    4. Amended DFARS 246.870-2(b)(2)(v) to reference 246.870-2(a), rather than replicate the suppliers to be used under certain conditions. This is consistent with DFARS 252.246-7007(c)(5), as amended in this final rule.

    5. Amended DFARS 252.246-7007(b) to add notification to the contractor that an additional consequence of an unacceptable counterfeit electronic part detection and avoidance system may be a negative impact on the allowability of costs of counterfeit electronic parts or suspect counterfeit electronic parts and the cost of rework or corrective action that may be required to remedy the use or inclusion of such parts, with a cross-reference to the cost principle at DFARS 231.205-71, while deleting the cross-reference to the cost principle at 252.246-7008(b)(2)(ii). The cost principle addresses CAS-covered contractors, which makes a cross-reference to that principle more appropriate in 252.246-7007, which applies only to CAS-covered contractors.

    Also amended paragraph (c)(4) to change “Processes” to “Risk-based processes,” for consistency with DFARS 252.246-7008(c)(1) and referenced the clause at 252.246-7008(c) for details on the notification requirement (comparable to the cross-reference in the 252.246-7007(5)).

    6. Moved paragraph (d) of DFARS 252.246-7008 to paragraph (b)(3) of the clause, restructured, and clarified the wording for increased consistency with the statute and DFARS 246.870-2(a)(2).

    III. Applicability to Contracts at or Below the Simplified Acquisition Threshold (SAT) and for Commercial Items, Including COTS Items

    This rule applies the requirements of section 818(c)(3) of the NDAA for FY 2012, as amended, to contracts at or below the SAT, and to contracts for the acquisition of commercial items, including COTS items.

    A. Applicability to Contracts at or Below the Simplified Acquisition Threshold

    41 U.S.C. 1905 governs the applicability of laws to contracts or subcontracts in amounts not greater than the simplified acquisition threshold. It is intended to limit the applicability of laws to such contracts or subcontracts. 41 U.S.C. 1905 provides that if a provision of law contains criminal or civil penalties, or if the FAR Council makes a written determination that it is not in the best interest of the Federal Government to exempt contracts or subcontracts at or below the SAT, the law will apply to them. The Director, Defense Procurement and Acquisition Policy (DPAP), is the appropriate authority to make comparable determinations for regulations to be published in the DFARS, which is part of the FAR system of regulations.

    B. Applicability to Contracts for the Acquisition of Commercial Items, Including COTS Items

    41 U.S.C. 1906 governs the applicability of laws to contracts for the acquisition of commercial items, and is intended to limit the applicability of laws to contracts for the acquisition of commercial items. 41 U.S.C. 1906 provides that if a provision of law contains criminal or civil penalties, or if the FAR Council makes a written determination that it is not in the best interest of the Federal Government to exempt commercial item contracts, the provision of law will apply to contracts for the acquisition of commercial items. Likewise, 41 U.S.C. 1907 governs the applicability of laws to COTS items, with the Administrator for the Office of Federal Procurement Policy the decision authority to determine that it is in the best interest of the Government to apply a provision of law to acquisitions of COTS items in the FAR. The Director, DPAP, is the appropriate authority to make comparable determinations for regulations to be published in the DFARS, which is part of the FAR system of regulations.

    C. Determination

    The Director, DPAP, has determined that it is in the best interest of the Government to apply the requirements of section 818(c)(3) of the NDAA for FY 2012, as amended, to contracts at or below the SAT and to contracts for the acquisition of commercial items, including COTS items. Counterfeit electronic parts, regardless of dollar value, can seriously disrupt the DoD supply chain, harm weapon system integrity, and endanger troops' lives. Even low dollar value electronic parts can cause critical failure of fielded systems, such as aircraft, ships, and other weapon systems. Furthermore, studies have shown that a large proportion of proven counterfeit electronic parts were initially purchased as commercial items, including COTS items. Therefore, exempting contracts and subcontracts below the SAT or for acquisition of commercial (including COTS) items from application of the statute would severely decrease the intended effect of the statute and increase the risk of receiving counterfeit parts, which may present a significant mission, security, or safety hazard.

    IV. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563

    Executive Orders (E.O.s) 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess all 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). E.O. 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting flexibility. This is a significant regulatory action and, therefore, was subject to review under section 6(b) of E.O. 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, dated September 30, 1993. This rule is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 804.

    V. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    A final regulatory flexibility analysis (FRFA) has been prepared consistent with the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601, et seq. The FRFA is summarized as follows:

    This final rule further implements section 817 of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year (FY) 2014 (Pub. L. 112-81), which amended section 818 of the NDAA for FY 2012. The objective of this rule is to avoid acquisition of counterfeit electronic parts by requiring DoD contractors and subcontractors, except in limited circumstances, to buy electronic parts from the original manufacturers, their authorized supplier, or suppliers that obtain such parts exclusively from the original manufacturer of the parts or their authorized suppliers, in accordance with section 818(c)(3) of the National Defense Authorization Act for FY 2012.

    A. Applicability to Small Business Entities

    Comment: Several respondents recommended that DoD should not apply this rule to small entities, citing the burdens imposed. However, other respondents were very supportive of DoD for establishing requirements on contracts at all tiers and applying to small entities, because counterfeit parts purchased within the supply chain from small entities comprise a large portion of the counterfeit parts that directly threaten the DoD supply chain.

    Response: The law does not exempt small businesses from the statutory requirements. (See response to in section II.B.2.a. of this preamble.)

    B. Burden Imposed

    Comment: Several respondents, including the Office of Advocacy of the Small Business Administration, noted that the increased costs associated with implementation and recordkeeping could be significant for small businesses. Another respondent suggested that DoD weigh the cost and benefits of information collected from contractors when implementing these rules. Most small and some mid-sized companies would not have the resources, experience, and infrastructure necessary to keep up a database of information related to this rule.

    Response: The Government recognizes that the cost of compliance to the DFARS requirement for obtaining electronic parts from trusted sources may deter some small businesses and even suppliers of commercial items and COTS (where the Government is not a major portion of sales). However, the receipt of counterfeit parts represents an unacceptable risk to the Government. The clause requires small businesses and commercial item suppliers to put in place risk-based processes that take into consideration the consequences of failure.

    Comment: The Office of Advocacy stated that the cost of compliance will serve to deter small businesses from participating as prime and subcontractors in the Federal Acquisition process. More specifically, the Office of Advocacy, found it unclear, for parts that are in production, who will absorb the higher costs of restrictions on sources of electronic parts. The Office of Advocacy stated that this was of concern to small businesses. For parts that are not in production, the Office of Advocacy found it unclear how the small business owner is to provide documentation to the prime contractor or the contracting officer whether the part is in production or not. The Office of Advocacy also cites lack of guidance on cost or process or acceptable procedures for the small business to follow.

    Response: The Government recognizes that the cost of compliance to the DFARS requirement for obtaining electronic parts from trusted sources may deter some small businesses and even suppliers of commercial items and COTS (where the Government is not a major portion of sales). However, the receipt of counterfeit parts represents an unacceptable risk to the Government. With regard to cost allowability, the implementation costs associated with compliance with DFARS 252.246-7008 are not unlike any other costs anticipated to be incurred by the contractor or subcontractor to perform the requirements of a contract (see section II.B.10. of this preamble). With regard to the costs of counterfeit electronic parts and suspect counterfeit electronic parts, and the cost of rework or corrective action that may be required to remedy the use or inclusion of such parts, section 818(c)(2)(B), as amended by the section 885 of the NDAA for FY 2016, will make such costs allowable if the contractor obtains such parts in accordance with the regulations to be published under this case; discovers the counterfeit parts or suspect counterfeit parts; and provides timely notice to the Government (see DFARS Case 2016-D010).

    With regard to parts that are not in production, the final rule has added clarification about necessary recordkeeping and documentation that shall be provided upon request (by the next high tier for a subcontractor or by the Government for the prime contractor). There is no requirement to provide documentation of whether the part is in productions. If the part can be obtained from a contractor-approved supplier and the contractor can establish traceability to the original manufacturer, then there is only need to provide documentation of the traceability upon request. If traceability cannot be established, then the contractor is required to maintain documentation of the required inspection, testing, and authentication, and make such documentation available upon request (see DFARS 252.246-7008(b)(3)(ii) and (c)(3)).

    The responsibility of the contractor in paragraph (c)(2), if the contractor cannot establish traceability, has been simplified to be comparable to the requirement in paragraph (b)(3)(ii) (if the contractor buys for a source other than what the statute terms a “trusted supplier”), i.e., the contractor is responsible for inspection, testing, and authentication in accordance with existing applicable industry standards.

    C. Estimates of Burden

    Comment: The Office of Advocacy recommended that DoD should provide more clarity in the Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) as to the actual numbers of small businesses affected by the rule and the cost of compliance for small entities as prime and as subcontractors. The Office of Advocacy questioned whether COTS small businesses were included in the estimates.

    The Office of Advocacy further stated that DoD should have more accurate data on subcontractors, citing the DoD Comprehensive Subcontracting Test Program.

    Response: DoD has revised the estimated number of small business entities affected by the rule from 33,000 to 52,168. The supporting statement for the information collection requirement in the proposed rule only addressed the burden associated with the notification if the contractor is using a source other than a “trusted supplier.” The final rule makes explicit the requirement to maintain documentation with regard to traceability or inspection, testing, and authentication and make it available upon request (see section II.B.12. of this preamble). This is not an added burden for contractors and subcontractors but an acknowledgement of a burden that was implicit in the proposed rule.

    DoD does not have access to subcontract the subcontract data necessary to provide an accurate assessment of the impact of this rule. There are only about ten entities enrolled in the DoD Comprehensive Subcontracting Data Test Program. DoD also considered the data in the Electronic Subcontracting Reporting System. This system accumulates data by prime contractor to assess whether the prime contractor is meeting its subcontracting goals—it does not provide data on whether the subcontracts being reported contain electronic parts.

    D. Alternatives

    Comment: According to the Office of Advocacy, DoD has not explored workable alternatives that will allow the Government to achieve its objectives. The Office of Advocacy suggested several alternatives for consideration:

    • Support an Insurance Pool for small businesses, due to lack of clarity as to what constitutes a counterfeit part and who has ultimate liability.

    • Use DoD testing resources to assist small firms in validating the authenticity of electronic parts or provide through the Mentor-Protege program a structure that would validate and test electronic parts for small subcontractors.

    • Phase in compliance for COTS companies and small business subcontractors at certain dollar thresholds.

    Response: Supporting an insurance pool for small businesses is outside the scope of this rule.

    DoD does not have sufficient resources to take on the responsibility for validating the authenticity of electronic parts for small businesses. Furthermore, this would shift responsibility for compliance away from the prime contractor. 10 U.S.C. 2302 Note, which governs the DoD Mentor-Protege Pilot Program, addresses forms of assistance in paragraph (f) that a mentor firm may provide. This includes “assistance, by using mentor firm personnel in engineering and technical matters such as production, inventory control, and quality assurance.” It appears that this could cover a request by a small protégé firm for assistance by the mentor in compliance with this clause.

    The detection and avoidance of counterfeit parts is too important to delay implementation. A low dollar value undetected counterfeit part from a small business or a COTS item can have equally disastrous consequences as higher dollar value part that is not a COTS item or provided by a small business. Not only is this a requirement of the law, but the criticality of levying this requirements on all vendors is to meet operational mission requirements and prevent loss of life. However, the final rule has been revised to provide a procedure for notification, inspection, testing, and authentication of an electronic part if a subcontractor refuses to accept flowdown of the clause at DFARS 252.246-7008.

    Based on Federal Procurement Data System data for FY 2015, DoD estimates that this rule will apply to approximately 52,168 small entities that have DoD prime contracts or subcontracts for electronic parts, including end items, components, parts, or assemblies containing electronic parts; or services, if the contractor will supply electronic parts or components, parts, or assemblies containing electronic parts as part of the service.

    In addition to the requirements to acquire electronic components from trusted suppliers (in the rule: Original manufacturers, authorized suppliers, suppliers that obtain parts exclusively from original manufacturers or authorized suppliers, and contractor-approved suppliers), contractors and subcontractors that are not the original manufacturer or authorized supplier are required have a risk-based process to trace electronic parts from the original manufacturer to product acceptance by the Government. If that is not feasible, the Contractor shall have a process to complete an evaluation that includes consideration of alternative parts or utilization of tests and inspections commensurate with the risk. If it is not possible to obtain an electronic part from a trusted supplier, the contractor is required to notify the contracting officer. The contractor is responsible for inspection, testing, and authentication, in accordance with existing applicable industry standards, of electronic parts obtained from sources other than a trusted supplier. Notifying the contracting officer if it is not possible to obtain an electronic part from a trusted supplier, or responding to requests for documentation on traceability or inspection, testing, and validation of electronic parts would probably involve a mid-level of executive involvement. Recordkeeping is estimated to be function performed by personnel approximately equivalent to a Government GS-9 step 5 level.

    DoD was unable to identify any significant alternatives that would reduce the economic impact on small entities and still fulfill the requirements of the statute and the objectives of the rule to detect and avoid counterfeit parts in the DoD supply chain. It is not possible to exempt small entities or acquisition of commercial items (including COTS items) from application of this rule or phase in the applicability to such entities, without an unacceptable increase in the risk to of counterfeit parts in the supply chain. (See response to the Office of Advocacy of the Small Business Administration comments on alternatives in this FRFA.) DoD also considered (with the addition of this DFARS clause 252.246-7008, which is applicable to all subcontractors that provide electronic parts, including small businesses) whether the requirements of DFARS 252.247-7007 for a formal system to detect and avoid counterfeit parts could be made inapplicable to small businesses that are subcontractors to a CAS-covered prime contractor. This alternative was not acceptable to DoD policy experts.

    VI. Paperwork Reduction Act

    This rule contains information collection requirements under the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. chapter 35). The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has assigned OMB Control Number 0704-0541, entitled Detection and Avoidance of Counterfeit Parts—Further Implementation.”

    List of Subjects in 48 CFR Parts 202, 212, 242, 246, and 252

    Government procurement.

    Jennifer L. Hawes, Editor, Defense Acquisition Regulations System.

    Therefore, 48 CFR parts 202, 212, 242, 246, and 252 are amended as follows:

    1. The authority citation for parts 202, 212, 242, 246, and 252 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    41 U.S.C. 1303 and 48 CFR chapter 1.

    PART 202—DEFINITIONS OF WORDS AND TERMS 2. Amend section 202.101 by— a. Adding, in alphabetical order, the definitions for “authorized aftermarket manufacturer,” “contract manufacturer,” “contractor-approved supplier,” “original component manufacturer,” “original equipment manufacturer,” and “original manufacturer”; b. Amending the definition of “electronic part” by removing the second sentence; and c. Revising the definition of “obsolete electronic part”.

    The additions and revision read as follows:

    202.101 Definitions.

    Authorized aftermarket manufacturer means an organization that fabricates an electronic part under a contract with, or with the express written authority of, the original component manufacturer based on the original component manufacturer's designs, formulas, and/or specifications.

    Contract manufacturer means a company that produces goods under contract for another company under the label or brand name of that company.

    Contractor-approved supplier means a supplier that does not have a contractual agreement with the original component manufacturer for a transaction, but has been identified as trustworthy by a contractor or subcontractor.

    Obsolete electronic part means an electronic part that is no longer available from the original manufacturer or an authorized aftermarket manufacturer.

    Original component manufacturer means an organization that designs and/or engineers a part and is entitled to any intellectual property rights to that part.

    Original equipment manufacturer means a company that manufactures products that it has designed from purchased components and sells those products under the company's brand name.

    Original manufacturer means the original component manufacturer, the original equipment manufacturer, or the contract manufacturer.

    PART 212—ACQUISITION OF COMMERCIAL ITEMS 3. Amend section 212.301 by adding new paragraph (f)(xix)(C) to read as follows:
    212.301 Solicitation provisions and contract clauses for the acquisition of commercial items.

    (f) * * *

    (xix) * * *

    (C) Use the clause at 252.246-7008, Sources of Electronic Parts, as prescribed in 246.870-3(b), to comply with section 818(c)(3) of Public Law 112-81, as amended by section 817 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015 (Pub. L. 113-291).

    PART 242—CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION AND AUDIT SERVICES 4. Amend section 242.302(a) by adding a new paragraph (S-76) to read as follows:
    242.302 Contract administration functions.

    (a) * * *

    (S-76) Review and audit contractor identification of contractor-approved suppliers for the acquisition of electronic parts, as identified in the clause at 252.246-7008, Sources of Electronic Parts.

    PART 246—QUALITY ASSURANCE 5. Revise section 246.870 heading to read as follows:
    246.870 Contractor counterfeit electronic part detection and avoidance.
    246.870-1 [Redesignated as 246.870-0]
    6. Redesignate section 246.870-1 as 246.870-0.
    7. In newly redesignated section 246.870-0, revise paragraph (a) to read as follows:
    246.870-0 Scope.

    (a) Partially implements section 818(c) and (e) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 (Pub. L. 112-81), as amended by section 817 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015 (Pub. L. 113-291); and

    8. Add section 246.870-1 to read as follows:
    246.870-1 Definition.

    Authorized supplier, as used in this subpart, means a supplier, distributor, or an aftermarket manufacturer with a contractual arrangement with, or the express written authority of, the original manufacturer or current design activity to buy, stock, repackage, sell, or distribute the part.

    9. Revise section 246.870-2 to read as follows:
    246.870-2 Policy.

    (a) Sources of electronic parts. (1) Except as provided in paragraph (a)(2) of this section, the Government requires contractors and subcontractors at all tiers, to—

    (i) Obtain electronic parts that are in production by the original manufacturer or an authorized aftermarket manufacturer or currently available in stock from—

    (A) The original manufacturers of the parts;

    (B) Their authorized suppliers; or

    (C) Suppliers that obtain such parts exclusively from the original manufacturers of the parts or their authorized suppliers; and

    (ii) Obtain electronic parts that are not in production by the original manufacturer or an authorized aftermarket manufacturer, and that are not currently available in stock from a source listed in paragraph (a)(1)(i) of this section, from suppliers identified by the Contractor as contractor-approved suppliers, provided that—

    (A) For identifying and approving such contractor-approved suppliers, the contractor uses established counterfeit prevention industry standards and processes (including inspection, testing, and authentication), such as the DoD-adopted standards at https://assist.dla.mil;

    (B) The contractor assumes responsibility for the authenticity of parts provided by such contractor-approved suppliers (see 231.205-71); and

    (C) The selection of such contractor-approved suppliers is subject to review and audit by the contracting officer.

    (2) The Government requires contractors and subcontractors to comply with the notification, inspection, testing, and authentication requirements of paragraph (b)(3)(ii) through (b)(3)(iv) of the clause at 252.246-7008, Sources of Electronic Parts, if the contractor—

    (i) Obtains an electronic part from—

    (A) A source other than any of the sources identified in paragraph (a)(1) of this section, due to nonavailability from such sources; or

    (B) A subcontractor (other than the original manufacturer) that refuses to accept flowdown of this clause; or

    (ii) Cannot confirm that an electronic part is new or not previously used and that it has not been comingled in supplier new production or stock with used, refurbished, reclaimed, or returned parts.

    (3) Contractors and subcontractors are still required to comply with the requirements of paragraphs (a)(1) or (2) of this section, as applicable, if—

    (i) Authorized to purchase electronic parts from the Federal Supply Schedule;

    (ii) Purchasing electronic parts from suppliers accredited by the Defense Microelectronics Activity; or

    (iii) Requisitioning electronic parts from Government inventory/stock under the authority of the clause at 252.251-7000, Ordering from Government Supply Sources.

    (A) The cost of any required inspection, testing, and authentication of such parts may be charged as a direct cost.

    (B) The Government is responsible for the authenticity of the requisitioned electronic parts. If any such part is subsequently found to be counterfeit or suspect counterfeit, the Government will—

    (1) Promptly replace such part at no charge; and

    (2) Consider an adjustment in the contract schedule to the extent that replacement of the counterfeit or suspect counterfeit electronic parts caused a delay in performance.

    (b) Contractor counterfeit electronic part detection and avoidance system. (1) Contractors that are subject to the cost accounting standards and that supply electronic parts or products that include electronic parts, and their subcontractors that supply electronic parts or products that include electronic parts, are required to establish and maintain an acceptable counterfeit electronic part detection and avoidance system. Failure to do so may result in disapproval of the purchasing system by the contracting officer and/or withholding of payments (see 252.244-7001, Contractor Purchasing System Administration).

    (2) System criteria. A counterfeit electronic part detection and avoidance system shall include risk-based policies and procedures that address, at a minimum,the following areas (see the clause at 252.246-7007, Contractor Counterfeit Electronic Part Detection and Avoidance System):

    (i) The training of personnel.

    (ii) The inspection and testing of electronic parts, including criteria for acceptance and rejection.

    (iii) Processes to abolish counterfeit parts proliferation.

    (iv) Processes for maintaining electronic part traceability.

    (v) Use of suppliers in accordance with paragraph (a) of this section.

    (vi) The reporting and quarantining of counterfeit electronic parts and suspect counterfeit electronic parts.

    (vii) Methodologies to identify suspect counterfeit electronic parts and to rapidly determine if a suspect counterfeit electronic part is, in fact, counterfeit.

    (viii) Design, operation, and maintenance of systems to detect and avoid counterfeit electronic parts and suspect counterfeit electronic parts.

    (ix) Flow down of counterfeit detection and avoidance requirements.

    (x) Process for keeping continually informed of current counterfeiting information and trends.

    (xi) Process for screening the Government-Industry Data Exchange Program (GIDEP) reports and other credible sources of counterfeiting information.

    (xii) Control of obsolete electronic parts.

    10. Amend section 246.870-3 by— a. Revising the section heading; b. Redesignating paragraphs (a)(1) through (3) as paragraph (a)(1)(i) through (iii), respectively; c. Redesignating paragraph (a) as paragraph (a)(1); d. In newly redesignated paragraph (a)(1), removing “paragraph (b)” and adding “paragraph (a)(2)” in its place; e. In newly redesignated paragraph (a)(1)(iii), removing “Services where” and adding “Services, if” in its place; f. Resdesignating paragraph (b) as paragraph (a)(2); g. In newly redesignated paragraph (a)(2), removing “set-aside” and adding “set aside” in its place; and h. Adding new paragraph (b).

    The addition reads as follows:

    246.870-3 Contract clauses.

    (b) Use the clause at 252.246-7008, Sources of Electronic Parts, in solicitations and contracts, including solicitations and contracts using FAR part 12 procedures for the acquisition of commercial items, when procuring—

    (1) Electronic parts;

    (2) End items, components, parts, or assemblies containing electronic parts; or

    (3) Services, if the contractor will supply electronic parts or components, parts, or assemblies containing electronic parts as part of the service.

    PART 252—SOLICITATION PROVISIONS AND CONTRACT CLAUSES 11. Amend section 252.246-7007 by— a. In the introductory text, removing “246.870-3” and adding “246.870-3(a)” in its place; b. Removing the clause date “(MAY 2014)” and adding “(AUG 2016)” in its place; c. In paragraph (a)— i. Adding in alphabetical order the definitions of “authorized aftermarket manufacturer,” “authorized supplier,” “contract manufacturer,” “contractor-approved supplier,” “original component manufacturer,” “original equipment manufacturer,” and “original manufacturer”; and ii. Amending the definition of “electronic part” by removing the second sentence; and iii. Revising the definition of “obsolete electronic part” and d. Revising paragraph (b); e. Revising paragraphs (c)(4) and (5); and f. Revising paragraph (e).

    The additions and revisions read as follows:

    252.246-7007 Contractor Counterfeit Electronic Part Detection and Avoidance System.

    (a) * * *

    Authorized aftermarket manufacturer means an organization that fabricates a part under a contract with, or with the express written authority of, the original component manufacturer based on the original component manufacturer's designs, formulas, and/or specifications.

    Authorized supplier means a supplier, distributor, or an aftermarket manufacturer with a contractual arrangement with, or the express written authority of, the original manufacturer or current design activity to buy, stock, repackage, sell, or distribute the part.

    Contract manufacturer means a company that produces goods under contract for another company under the label or brand name of that company.

    Contractor-approved supplier means a supplier that does not have a contractual agreement with the original component manufacturer for a transaction, but has been identified as trustworthy by a contractor or subcontractor.

    Obsolete electronic part means an electronic part that is no longer available from the original manufacturer or an authorized aftermarket manufacturer.

    Original component manufacturer means an organization that designs and/or engineers a part and is entitled to any intellectual property rights to that part.

    Original equipment manufacturer means a company that manufactures products that it has designed from purchased components and sells those products under the company's brand name.

    Original manufacturer means the original component manufacturer, the original equipment manufacturer, or the contract manufacturer.

    (b) Acceptable counterfeit electronic part detection and avoidance system. The Contractor shall establish and maintain an acceptable counterfeit electronic part detection and avoidance system. Failure to maintain an acceptable counterfeit electronic part detection and avoidance system, as defined in this clause, may result in disapproval of the purchasing system by the Contracting Officer and/or withholding of payments and affect the allowability of costs of counterfeit electronic parts or suspect counterfeit electronic parts and the cost of rework or corrective action that may be required to remedy the use or inclusion of such parts (see DFARS 231.205-71).

    (c) * * *

    (4) Risk-based processes that enable tracking of electronic parts from the original manufacturer to product acceptance by the Government, whether the electronic parts are supplied as discrete electronic parts or are contained in assemblies, in accordance with paragraph (c) of the clause at 252.246-7008, Sources of Electronic Parts (also see paragraph (c)(2) of this clause).

    (5) Use of suppliers in accordance with the clause at 252.246-7008.

    (e) The Contractor shall include the substance of this clause, excluding the introductory text and including only paragraphs (a) through (e), in subcontracts, including subcontracts for commercial items, for electronic parts or assemblies containing electronic parts.

    12. Add section 252.246-7008 to read as follows:
    252.246-7008 Sources of Electronic Parts.

    As prescribed in 246.870-3(b), use the following clause:

    SOURCES OF ELECTRONIC PARTS (AUG 2016)

    (a) Definitions. As used in this clause—

    Authorized aftermarket manufacturer means an organization that fabricates a part under a contract with, or with the express written authority of, the original component manufacturer based on the original component manufacturer's designs, formulas, and/or specifications.

    Authorized supplier means a supplier, distributor, or an aftermarket manufacturer with a contractual arrangement with, or the express written authority of, the original manufacturer or current design activity to buy, stock, repackage, sell, or distribute the part.

    Contract manufacturer means a company that produces goods under contract for another company under the label or brand name of that company.

    Contractor-approved supplier means a supplier that does not have a contractual agreement with the original component manufacturer for a transaction, but has been identified as trustworthy by a contractor or subcontractor.

    Electronic part means an integrated circuit, a discrete electronic component (including, but not limited to, a transistor, capacitor, resistor, or diode), or a circuit assembly (section 818(f)(2) of Pub. L. 112-81).

    Original component manufacturer means an organization that designs and/or engineers a part and is entitled to any intellectual property rights to that part.

    Original equipment manufacturer means a company that manufactures products that it has designed from purchased components and sells those products under the company's brand name.

    Original manufacturer means the original component manufacturer, the original equipment manufacturer, or the contract manufacturer.

    (b) Selecting suppliers. In accordance with section 818(c)(3) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 (Pub. L. 112-81), as amended by section 817 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015 (Pub. L. 113-291), the Contractor shall—

    (1) First obtain electronic parts that are in production by the original manufacturer or an authorized aftermarket manufacturer or currently available in stock from—

    (i) The original manufacturers of the parts;

    (ii) Their authorized suppliers; or

    (iii) Suppliers that obtain such parts exclusively from the original manufacturers of the parts or their authorized suppliers;

    (2) If electronic parts are not available as provided in paragraph (b)(1) of this clause, obtain electronic parts that are not in production by the original manufacturer or an authorized aftermarket manufacturer, and that are not currently available in stock from a source listed in paragraph (b)(1) of this clause, from suppliers identified by the Contractor as contractor-approved suppliers, provided that—

    (i) For identifying and approving such contractor-approved suppliers, the Contractor uses established counterfeit prevention industry standards and processes (including inspection, testing, and authentication), such as the DoD-adopted standards at https://assist.dla.mil;

    (ii) The Contractor assumes responsibility for the authenticity of parts provided by such contractor-approved suppliers; and

    (iii) The Contractor's selection of such contractor-approved suppliers is subject to review and audit by the contracting officer; or

    (3)(i) Take the actions in paragraphs (b)(3)(ii) through (b)(3)(iv) of this clause if the Contractor—

    (A) Obtains an electronic part from—

    (1) A source other than any of the sources identified in paragraph (b)(1) or (b)(2) of this clause, due to nonavailability from such sources; or

    (2) A subcontractor (other than the original manufacturer) that refuses to accept flowdown of this clause; or

    (B) Cannot confirm that an electronic part is new or previously unused and that it has not been comingled in supplier new production or stock with used, refurbished, reclaimed, or returned parts.

    (ii) If the contractor obtains an electronic part or cannot confirm an electronic part pursuant to paragraph (b)(3)(i) of this clause—

    (A) Promptly notify the Contracting Officer in writing. If such notification is required for an electronic part to be used in a designated lot of assemblies to be acquired under a single contract, the Contractor may submit one notification for the lot, providing identification of the assemblies containing the parts (e.g., serial numbers);

    (B) Be responsible for inspection, testing, and authentication, in accordance with existing applicable industry standards; and

    (C) Make documentation of inspection, testing, and authentication of such electronic parts available to the Government upon request.

    (c) Traceability. If the Contractor is not the original manufacturer of, or authorized supplier for, an electronic part, the Contractor shall—

    (1) Have risk-based processes (taking into consideration the consequences of failure of an electronic part) that enable tracking of electronic parts from the original manufacturer to product acceptance by the Government, whether the electronic part is supplied as a discrete electronic part or is contained in an assembly;

    (2) If the Contractor cannot establish this traceability from the original manufacturer for a specific electronic part, be responsible for inspection, testing, and authentication, in accordance with existing applicable industry standards; and

    (3)(i) Maintain documentation of traceability (paragraph (c)(1) of this clause) or the inspection, testing, and authentication required when traceability cannot be established (paragraph (c)(2) of this clause) in accordance with FAR subpart 4.7; and

    (ii) Make such documentation available to the Government upon request.

    (d) Government sources. Contractors and subcontractors are still required to comply with the requirements of paragraphs (b) and (c) of this clause, as applicable, if—

    (1) Authorized to purchase electronic parts from the Federal Supply Schedule;

    (2) Purchasing electronic parts from suppliers accredited by the Defense Microelectronics Activity; or

    (3) Requisitioning electronic parts from Government inventory/stock under the authority of 252.251-7000, Ordering from Government Supply Sources.

    (i) The cost of any required inspection, testing, and authentication of such parts may be charged as a direct cost.

    (ii) The Government is responsible for the authenticity of the requisitioned parts. If any such part is subsequently found to be counterfeit or suspect counterfeit, the Government will—

    (A) Promptly replace such part at no charge; and

    (B) Consider an adjustment in the contract schedule to the extent that replacement of the counterfeit or suspect counterfeit electronic parts caused a delay in performance.

    (e) Subcontracts. The Contractor shall include the substance of this clause, including this paragraph (e), in subcontracts, including subcontracts for commercial items that are for electronic parts or assemblies containing electronic parts, unless the subcontractor is the original manufacturer.

    (End of clause)
    [FR Doc. 2016-17956 Filed 8-1-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001-06-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Defense Acquisition Regulations System 48 CFR Parts 225 and 252 [Docket DARS-2016-0021] RIN 0750-AI97 Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement: New Qualifying Countries—Japan and Slovenia (DFARS Case 2016-D023) AGENCY:

    Defense Acquisition Regulations System, Department of Defense (DoD).

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    DoD is issuing a final rule amending the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) to add Japan and Slovenia as qualifying countries.

    DATES:

    Effective August 2, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ms. Jo Ann Reilly, telephone 571-372-6176.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background

    DoD is amending the DFARS to add Japan and Slovenia as qualifying countries. The Secretary of Defense recently signed reciprocal defense procurement agreements with these countries. These agreements were placed into force on June 4, 2016, for Japan and June 21, 2016, for Slovenia. The agreements remove discriminatory barriers to procurements of supplies and services produced by industrial enterprises of the other country to the extent mutually beneficial and consistent with national laws, regulations, policies, and international obligations. These agreements do not cover construction or construction material. Japan and Slovenia are already designated countries under the World Trade Organization Government Procurement Agreement.

    II. Applicability to Contracts at or Below the Simplified Acquisition Threshold and for Commercial Items, Including Commercially Available Off-the-Shelf Items.

    This rule only updates the list of qualifying countries in the DFARS by adding the newly qualifying countries of Japan and Slovenia. The definition of “qualifying country” is updated in each of the following clauses; however, this revision does not impact the clause prescriptions for use, or applicability at or below the simplified acquisition threshold, or applicability to commercial items. The clauses are: DFARS 252.225-7001, Buy American and Balance of Payments Program; DFARS 252.225-7002, Qualifying Country Sources as Subcontractors; DFARS 252.225-7012, Preference for Certain Domestic Commodities; DFARS 252.225-7017, Photovoltaic Devices; DFARS 252.225-7021, Trade Agreements; and DFARS 252.225-7036, Buy American—Free Trade Agreements—Balance of Payments Program.

    III. Publication of This Final Rule for Public Comment Is Not Required by Statute

    The statute that applies to the publication of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) is 41 U.S.C. 1707 entitled “Publication of Proposed Regulations.” Paragraph (a)(1) of the statute requires that a procurement policy, regulation, procedure or form (including an amendment or modification thereof) must be published for public comment if it relates to the expenditure of appropriated funds, and has either a significant effect beyond the internal operating procedures of the agency issuing the policy, regulation, procedure or form, or has a significant cost or administrative impact on contractors or offerors. This final rule is not required to be published for public comment, because it does not constitute a significant DFARS revision within the meaning of FAR 1.501-1 and does not have a significant cost or administrative impact on contractors or offerors. Japan and Slovenia are added to the list of 23 other countries that have similar reciprocal defense procurement agreements with DoD. These requirements affect only the internal operating procedures of the Government.

    IV. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563

    Executive Orders (E.O.s) 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess all 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). E.O. 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting flexibility. This is not a significant regulatory action and, therefore, was not subject to review under section 6(b) of E.O. 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, dated September 30, 1993. This rule is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 804.

    V. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act does not apply to this rule because this final rule does not constitute a significant DFARS revision within the meaning of FAR 1.501-1, and 41 U.S.C. 1707 does not require publication for public comment.

    VI. Paperwork Reduction Act

    The rule affects the certification and information collection requirements in the clause 252.225-7021, Trade Agreements, currently approved under OMB Control Number 0704-229, entitled “DFARS Part 225, Foreign Acquisition, and related clauses,” in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. chapter 35). The impact, however, is negligible because it merely shifts the category under which items from Japan and Slovenia must be listed.

    List of Subjects in 48 CFR Parts 225 and 252

    Government procurement.

    Jennifer L. Hawes, Editor, Defense Acquisition Regulations System.

    Therefore, 48 CFR parts 225 and 252 are amended as follows:

    1. The authority citation for 48 CFR parts 225 and 252 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    41 U.S.C. 1303 and 48 CFR chapter 1.

    PART 225—FOREIGN ACQUISITION
    225.003 [Amended]
    2. Section 225.003 is amended in paragraph (10), the definition of “qualifying country”, by adding, in alphabetical order, the countries of “Japan” and “Slovenia”, respectively.
    225.872-1 [Amended]
    3. Section 225.872-1 is amended in paragraph (a) by adding, in alphabetical order, the countries of “Japan” and “Slovenia”, respectively. PART 252—SOLICITATION PROVISIONS AND CONTRACT CLAUSES
    252.225-7001 [Amended]
    4. Section 252.225-7001 is amended by— a. In the clause heading, removing the date “(NOV 2014)” and adding “(AUG 2016)” in its place; b. In paragraph (a), the definition of “qualifying country”, adding, in alphabetical order, the countries of “Japan” and “Slovenia”, respectively; and c. In the Alternate I clause heading— i. Removing the date “(NOV 2014)” and adding “(AUG 2016)” in its place; and ii. In paragraph (a), the definition of “qualifying country”, adding, in alphabetical order, the countries of “Japan” and “Slovenia”, respectively.
    252.225-7002 [Amended]
    5. Section 252.225-7002 is amended by— a. In the clause heading, removing the date “(DEC 2012)” and adding “(AUG 2016)” in its place; and b. In paragraph (a), the definition of “qualifying country”, adding, in alphabetical order, the countries of “Japan” and “Slovenia”, respectively.
    252.225-7012 [Amended]
    6. Section 252.225-7012 is amended by— a. In the clause heading, removing the date “(FEB 2013)” and adding “(JUL 2016)” in its place; and b. In paragraph (a), the definition of “qualifying country”, adding, in alphabetical order, the countries of “Japan” and “Slovenia”, respectively.
    252.225-7017 [Amended]
    7. Section 252.225-7017 is amended by— a. In the clause heading, removing the date “(JUN 2016)” and adding “(AUG 2016)” in its place; and b. In paragraph (a), the definition of “qualifying country”, adding, in alphabetical order, the countries of “Japan” and “Slovenia”, respectively.
    252.225-7021 [Amended]
    8. Section 252.225-7021 is amended by— a. In the clause heading, removing the date “(JUN 2015)” and adding “(AUG 2016)” in its place; and b. In paragraph (a), the definition of “qualifying country”, adding, in alphabetical order, the countries of “Japan” and “Slovenia”, respectively; and c. In the Alternate II clause heading— i. Removing the date “(JUN 2015)” and adding “(AUG 2016)” in its place; and ii. In paragraph (a), the definition of “qualifying country”, adding, in alphabetical order, the countries of “Japan” and “Slovenia”, respectively.
    252.225-7036 [Amended]
    9. Section 252.225-7036 is amended by— a. In the clause heading, removing the date “(NOV 2014)” and adding “(AUG 2016)” in its place; and b. In paragraph (a), the definition of “qualifying country”, adding, in alphabetical order, the countries of “Japan” and “Slovenia”, respectively; and c. In the Alternate I clause heading— i. Removing the date “(NOV 2014)” and adding “(AUG 2016)” in its place; and ii. In paragraph (a) definition of “qualifying country”, adding, in alphabetical order, the countries of “Japan” and “Slovenia”, respectively. d. In the Alternate II clause heading— i. Removing the date “(NOV 2014)” and adding “(AUG 2016)” in its place; and ii. In paragraph (a), the definition of “qualifying country”, adding, in alphabetical order, the countries of “Japan” and “Slovenia”, respectively. e. In the Alternate III clause heading— i. Removing the date “(NOV 2014)” and adding “(AUG 2016)” in its place; and ii. In paragraph (a), the definition of “qualifying country”, adding, in alphabetical order, the countries of “Japan” and “Slovenia”, respectively. f. In the Alternate IV clause heading— i. Removing the date “(NOV 2014)” and adding “(AUG 2016)” in its place; and ii. In paragraph (a), the definition of “qualifying country”, adding, in alphabetical order, the countries of “Japan” and “Slovenia”, respectively. g. In the Alternate V clause heading— i. Removing the date “(NOV 2014)” and adding “(AUG 2016)” in its place; and ii. In paragraph (a), the definition of “qualifying country”, adding, in alphabetical order, the countries of “Japan” and “Slovenia”, respectively.
    [FR Doc. 2016-17958 Filed 8-1-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001-06-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Defense Acquisition Regulations System 48 CFR Parts 245 and 252 [Docket DARS-2016-0023] Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement; Technical Amendments AGENCY:

    Defense Acquisition Regulations System, Department of Defense (DoD).

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    DoD is making technical amendments to the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) to provide needed editorial changes.

    DATES:

    Effective August 2, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ms. Jennifer L. Hawes, Defense Acquisition Regulations System, OUSD(AT&L)DPAP(DARS), Room 3B941, 3060 Defense Pentagon, Washington, DC 20301-3060. Telephone 571-372-6115; facsimile 571-372-6094.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This final rule amends the DFARS as follows—

    1. Updates the direction to contracting officers at DFARS 245.402-70 to review the guidance in DFARS Procedures, Guidance, and Information (PGI) for oversight and surveillance of contractor-acquired property; and

    2. In DFARS clause 252.225-7021, Trade Agreements-Alternate II, corrects paragraph (a) definition of “designated country” to include the country of Croatia. DFARS final rule 2013-D005, Clauses with Alternates—Foreign Acquisition, published at 79 FR 65816 on November 5, 2014, created separate prescriptions for each foreign-related basic clause and provision, as well as each of its alternate clauses and provisions. In addition, the rule stated the full text of each clause or provision alternate. In the restatement of the full text of DFARS 252.225-7021-Alternate II, the country of Croatia was inadvertently omitted.

    List of Subjects in 48 CFR 245 and 252

    Government procurement.

    Jennifer L. Hawes, Editor, Defense Acquisition Regulations System.

    Therefore, 48 CFR parts 245 and 252 are amended as follows:

    1. The authority citation for 48 CFR parts 245 and 252 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    41 U.S.C. 1303 and 48 CFR chapter 1.

    PART 245—GOVERNMENT PROPERTY 2. Revise section 245.402-70 to read as follows:
    245.402-70 Policy.

    Review the guidance at PGI 245.402-70 with regard to oversight and surveillance of contractor-acquired property.

    PART 252—SOLICITATION PROVISIONS AND CONTRACT CLAUSES
    252.225-7021 [Amended]
    3. Amend section 252.225-7021 by, in the Alternate II clause—

    a. Removing the clause date “(JUN 2016)” and adding “(AUG 2016)” in its place; and

    b. In paragraph (a) definition of “designated country” in paragraph (i), adding, in alphabetical order, the country of “Croatia”.

    [FR Doc. 2016-17959 Filed 8-1-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001-06-P
    SURFACE TRANSPORTATION BOARD 49 CFR Part 1002 [Docket No. EP 542 (Sub-No. 24)] Regulations Governing Fees for Services Performed in Connection with Licensing and Related Services—2016 Update AGENCY:

    Surface Transportation Board.

    ACTION:

    Final rules.

    SUMMARY:

    The Board updates for 2016 the fees that the public must pay to file certain cases and pleadings with the Board. In this update, the following results are obtained: 18 fees increased by $50 or less, 15 fees increased by $100 to $199, 23 fees increased by $200 to $300, 19 fees increased by more than $300, and the remaining 58 fees will be maintained at their current level.

    DATES:

    These rules are effective September 1, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    David T. Groves, (202) 245-0327, or Andrea Pope-Matheson (202) 245-0363. [TDD for the hearing impaired: 1-800-877-8339.]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Board's regulations at 49 CFR 1002.3 provide for an annual update of the Board's entire user-fee schedule. Fees are generally revised based on the cost study formula set forth at 49 CFR 1002.3(d). As compared with the 2015 fee update, the 2016 fee changes adopted here reflect a combination of a 1.46% across-the-board increase to salary costs; no change in publication cost levels; increases to two of the three Board Overhead cost factors; and a slight decrease to the third Board Overhead cost factor from its comparable 2015 level, resulting from the mechanical application of the update formula in 49 CFR 1002.3(d). Results from the formula application indicate that justified fee amounts in this 2016 update decision either remain unchanged (58 fee items), increase by $50 or less (18 fee items), increase by $300 or less (38 fee items) or increase over $300 (19 fee items) from their respective 2015 update levels. No new fee items are proposed in this proceeding. However, there is an expansion of existing fee item 98 to now include monthly and quarterly Waybill request data. Therefore, the Board finds that notice and comment are unnecessary for this proceeding. See Regulations Governing Fees for Servs.—1990 Update, 7 I.C.C.2d 3 (1990); Regulations Governing Fees for Servs.—1991 Update, 8 I.C.C.2d 13 (1991); Regulations Governing Fees for Servs.—1993 Update, 9 I.C.C.2d 855 (1993).

    Additional information is contained in the Board's decision. To obtain a free copy of the full decision, visit the Board's Web site at http://www.stb.dot.gov or call (202) 245-0245. [Assistance for the hearing impaired is available through Federal Information Relay Services (FIRS): (800) 877-8339.]

    List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 1002

    Administrative practice and procedure, Common carriers, and Freedom of information.

    Decided: July 27, 2016.

    By the Board, Chairman Elliott, Vice Chairman Miller, and Commissioner Begeman.

    Tia L. Delano, Clearance Clerk.

    For the reasons set forth in the preamble, title 49, chapter X, part 1002, of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:

    PART 1002—FEES 1. The authority citation for part 1002 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    5 U.S.C. 552(a)(4)(A) and 553; 31 U.S.C. 9701 and 49 U.S.C. 1321(a). Section 1002.1(g)(11) is also issued under 5 U.S.C. 5514 and 31 U.S.C. 3717.

    2. Section 1002.1 is amended by revising paragraphs (d), (f)(1), and (g)(6) and (7) to read as follows:
    § 1002.1 Fees for records search, review, copying, certification, and related services.

    (d) Photocopies of tariffs, reports, and other public documents, at the rate of $1.50 per letter or legal size exposure. A minimum charge of $7.50 will be made for this service.

    (f) * * *

    (1) A fee of $74.00 per hour for professional staff time will be charged when it is required to fulfill a request for ADP data.

    (g) * * *

    (6) The search and review hourly fees will be based upon employee grade levels in order to recoup the full, allowable direct costs attributable to their performance of these functions. They are as follows:

    Grade Rate Grade Rate GS-1 $12.43 GS-9 $29.02 GS-2 13.53 GS-10 31.95 GS-3 15.25 GS-11 35.11 GS-4 17.12 GS-12 42.08 GS-5 19.15 GS-13 50.04 GS-6 21.35 GS-14 59.13 GS-7 23.72 GS-15 and over 69.56 GS-8 26.27

    (7) The fee for photocopies shall be $1.50 per letter or legal size exposure with a minimum charge of $7.50.

    3. In 1002.2, paragraph (f) is revised to read as follows:
    § 1002.2 Filing fees.

    (f) Schedule of filing fees.

    Type of Proceeding Fee PART I: Non-Rail Applications or Proceedings to Enter Into a Particular Financial Transaction or Joint Arrangement: (1) An application for the pooling or division of traffic $4,800. (2)(i) An application involving the purchase, lease, consolidation, merger, or acquisition of control of a motor carrier of passengers under 49 U.S.C. 14303 2,200. (ii) A petition for exemption under 49 U.S.C. 13541 (other than a rulemaking) filed by a non-rail carrier not otherwise covered 3,500. (iii) A petition to revoke an exemption filed under 49 U.S.C. 13541(d) 2,900. (3) An application for approval of a non-rail rate association agreement. 49 U.S.C. 13703. 30,400. (4) An application for approval of an amendment to a non-rail rate association agreement: (i) Significant amendment 5,000. (ii) Minor amendment 100. (5) An application for temporary authority to operate a motor carrier of passengers. 49 U.S.C. 14303(i) 550. (6) A notice of exemption for transaction within a motor passenger corporate family that does not result in adverse changes in service levels, significant operational changes, or a change in the competitive balance with motor passenger carriers outside the corporate family 1,800. (7)-(10) [Reserved] PART II: Rail Licensing Proceedings other than Abandonment or Discontinuance Proceedings: (11) (i) An application for a certificate authorizing the extension, acquisition, or operation of lines of railroad. 49 U.S.C. 10901 8,000. (ii) Notice of exemption under 49 CFR 1150.31-1150.35 1,900. (iii) Petition for exemption under 49 U.S.C. 10502 13,800. (12) (i) An application involving the construction of a rail line 82,100. (ii) A notice of exemption involving construction of a rail line under 49 CFR 1150.36 1,900. (iii) A petition for exemption under 49 U.S.C. 10502 involving construction of a rail line 82,100. (iv) A request for determination of a dispute involving a rail construction that crosses the line of another carrier under 49 U.S.C. 10902(d) 300. (13) A Feeder Line Development Program application filed under 49 U.S.C. 10907(b)(1)(A)(i) or 10907(b)(1)(A)(ii) 2,600. (14) (i) An application of a class II or class III carrier to acquire an extended or additional rail line under 49 U.S.C. 10902 6,800. (ii) Notice of exemption under 49 CFR 1150.41—1150.45 1,900. (iii) Petition for exemption under 49 U.S.C. 10502 relating to an exemption from the provisions of 49 U.S.C. 10902 7,200. (15) A notice of a modified certificate of public convenience and necessity under 49 CFR 1150.21-1150.24 1,800. (16) An application for a land-use-exemption permit for a facility existing as of October 16, 2008 under 49 U.S.C. 10909 6,600. (17) An application for a land-use-exemption permit for a facility not existing as of October 16, 2008 under 49 U.S.C. 10909 23,300. (18)-(20) [Reserved] PART III: Rail Abandonment or Discontinuance of Transportation Services Proceedings: (21) (i) An application for authority to abandon all or a portion of a line of railroad or discontinue operation thereof filed by a railroad (except applications filed by Consolidated Rail Corporation pursuant to the Northeast Rail Service Act [Subtitle E of Title XI of Pub. L. 97-35], bankrupt railroads, or exempt abandonments) 24,400. (ii) Notice of an exempt abandonment or discontinuance under 49 CFR 1152.50 4,000. (iii) A petition for exemption under 49 U.S.C. 10502 6,900. (22) An application for authority to abandon all or a portion of a line of a railroad or operation thereof filed by Consolidated Rail Corporation pursuant to Northeast Rail Service Act 500. (23) Abandonments filed by bankrupt railroads 2,000. (24) A request for waiver of filing requirements for abandonment application proceedings 2,000. (25) An offer of financial assistance under 49 U.S.C. 10904 relating to the purchase of or subsidy for a rail line proposed for abandonment 1,700. (26) A request to set terms and conditions for the sale of or subsidy for a rail line proposed to be abandoned 24,900. (27) (i) A request for a trail use condition in an abandonment proceeding under 16 U.S.C.1247(d) 300. (ii) A request to extend the period to negotiate a trail use agreement 500. (28)-(35) [Reserved] PART IV: Rail Applications to Enter Into a Particular Financial Transaction or Joint Arrangement: (36) An application for use of terminal facilities or other applications under 49 U.S.C. 11102 20,800. (37) An application for the pooling or division of traffic. 49 U.S.C. 11322 11,200. (38) An application for two or more carriers to consolidate or merge their properties or franchises (or a part thereof) into one corporation for ownership, management, and operation of the properties previously in separate ownership. 49 U.S.C. 11324: (i) Major transaction 1,641,600. (ii) Significant transaction 328,300. (iii) Minor transaction 8,100. (iv) Notice of an exempt transaction under 49 CFR 1180.2(d) 1,800. (v) Responsive application 8,100. (vi) Petition for exemption under 49 U.S.C. 10502 10,300. (vii) A request for waiver or clarification of regulations filed in a major financial proceeding as defined at 49 CFR 1180.2(a) 6,000. (39) An application of a non-carrier to acquire control of two or more carriers through ownership of stock or otherwise. 49 U.S.C. 11324: (i) Major transaction 1,641,600. (ii) Significant transaction 328,300. (iii) Minor transaction 8,100. (iv) A notice of an exempt transaction under 49 CFR 1180.2(d) 1,400. (v) Responsive application 8,100. (vi) Petition for exemption under 49 U.S.C. 10502 10,300. (vii) A request for waiver or clarification of regulations filed in a major financial proceeding as defined at 49 CFR 1180.2(a) 6,000. (40) An application to acquire trackage rights over, joint ownership in, or joint use of any railroad lines owned and operated by any other carrier and terminals incidental thereto. 49 U.S.C. 11324: (i) Major transaction 1,641,600. (ii) Significant transaction 328,300. (iii) Minor transaction 8,100. (iv) Notice of an exempt transaction under 49 CFR 1180.2(d) 1,200. (v) Responsive application 8,100. (vi) Petition for exemption under 49 U.S.C. 10502 10,300. (vii) A request for waiver or clarification of regulations filed in a major financial proceeding as defined at 49 CFR 1180.2(a) 6,000. (41) An application of a carrier or carriers to purchase, lease, or contract to operate the properties of another, or to acquire control of another by purchase of stock or otherwise. 49 U.S.C. 11324: (i) Major transaction 1,641,600. (ii) Significant transaction 328,300. (iii) Minor transaction 8,100. (iv) Notice of an exempt transaction under 49 CFR 1180.2(d) 1,500. (v) Responsive application 8,100. (vi) Petition for exemption under 49 U.S.C. 10502 7,200. (vii) A request for waiver or clarification of regulations filed in a major financial proceeding as defined at 49 CFR 1180.2(a) 6,000. (42) Notice of a joint project involving relocation of a rail line under 49 CFR 1180.2(d)(5) 2,600. (43) An application for approval of a rail rate association agreement. 49 U.S.C. 10706 76,800. (44) An application for approval of an amendment to a rail rate association agreement. 49 U.S.C. 10706: (i) Significant amendment 14,200. (ii) Minor amendment 100. (45) An application for authority to hold a position as officer or director under 49 U.S.C. 11328 850. (46) A petition for exemption under 49 U.S.C. 10502 (other than a rulemaking) filed by rail carrier not otherwise covered 8,800. (47) National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak) conveyance proceeding under 45 U.S.C. 562 300. (48) National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak) compensation proceeding under Section 402(a) of the Rail Passenger Service Act 300. (49)-(55) [Reserved] PART V: Formal Proceedings: (56) A formal complaint alleging unlawful rates or practices of carriers: (i) A formal complaint filed under the coal rate guidelines (Stand-Alone Cost Methodology) alleging unlawful rates and/or practices of rail carriers under 49 U.S.C. 10704(c)(1) 350. (ii) A formal complaint involving rail maximum rates filed under the Simplified-SAC methodology 350. (iii) A formal complaint involving rail maximum rates filed under the Three Benchmark methodology 150. (iv) All other formal complaints (except competitive access complaints) 350. (v) Competitive access complaints 150. (vi) A request for an order compelling a rail carrier to establish a common carrier rate 300. (57) A complaint seeking or a petition requesting institution of an investigation seeking the prescription or division of joint rates or charges. 49 U.S.C. 10705 9,700. (58) A petition for declaratory order: (i) A petition for declaratory order involving a dispute over an existing rate or practice which is comparable to a complaint proceeding 1,000. (ii) All other petitions for declaratory order 1,400. (59) An application for shipper antitrust immunity. 49 U.S.C. 10706(a)(5)(A) 7,700. (60) Labor arbitration proceedings 300. (61) (i) An appeal of a Surface Transportation Board decision on the merits or petition to revoke an exemption pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 10502(d) 300. (ii) An appeal of a Surface Transportation Board decision on procedural matters except discovery rulings 400. (62) Motor carrier undercharge proceedings 300. (63) (i) Expedited relief for service inadequacies: A request for expedited relief under 49 U.S.C. 11123 and 49 CFR part 1146 for service emergency 300. (ii) Expedited relief for service inadequacies: A request for temporary relief under 49 U.S.C. 10705 and 11102, and 49 CFR part 1147 for service inadequacy 300. (64) A request for waiver or clarification of regulations except one filed in an abandonment or discontinuance proceeding, or in a major financial proceeding as defined at 49 CFR 1180.2(a) 650. (65)-(75) [Reserved] PART VI: Informal Proceedings: (76) An application for authority to establish released value rates or ratings for motor carriers and freight forwarders of household goods under 49 U.S.C. 14706 1,300. (77) An application for special permission for short notice or the waiver of other tariff publishing requirements 100. (78) The filing of tariffs, including supplements, or contract summaries 1 per page.
  • (27 min. charge.)
  • (79) Special docket applications from rail and water carriers: (i) Applications involving 25,000 or less 75. (ii) Applications involving over 25,000 150. (80) Informal complaint about rail rate applications 650. (81) Tariff reconciliation petitions from motor common carriers: (i) Petitions involving 25,000 or less 75. (ii) Petitions involving over 25,000 150. (82) Request for a determination of the applicability or reasonableness of motor carrier rates under 49 U.S.C. 13710(a)(2) and (3) 250. (83) Filing of documents for recordation. 49 U.S.C. 11301 and 49 CFR 1177.3(c) 45 per document. (84) Informal opinions about rate applications (all modes) 250. (85) A railroad accounting interpretation 1,200. (86) (i) A request for an informal opinion not otherwise covered 1,600. (ii) A proposal to use on a voting trust agreement pursuant to 49 CFR 1013 and 49 CFR 1180.4(b)(4)(iv) in connection with a major control proceeding as defined at 49 CFR 1180.2(a) 5,600. (iii) A request for an informal opinion on a voting trust agreement pursuant to 49 CFR 1013.3(a) not otherwise covered 550. (87) Arbitration of Certain Disputes Subject to the Statutory Jurisdiction of the Surface Transportation Board under 49 CFR 1108: (i) Complaint 75. (ii) Answer (per defendant), Unless Declining to Submit to Any Arbitration 75. (iii) Third Party Complaint 75. (iv) Third Party Answer (per defendant), Unless Declining to Submit to Any Arbitration 75. (v) Appeals of Arbitration Decisions or Petitions to Modify or Vacate an Arbitration Award 150. (88) Basic fee for STB adjudicatory services not otherwise covered 300. (89)-(95) [Reserved] PART VII: Services: (96) Messenger delivery of decision to a railroad carrier's Washington, DC, agent 35 per delivery. (97) Request for service or pleading list for proceedings 26 per list. (98) Processing the paperwork related to a request for the Carload Waybill Sample to be used in an STB or State proceeding that: (i) Annual request does not require a Federal Register notice: (a) Set cost portion 150. (b) Sliding cost portion 52 per party. (ii) Annual request does require a FR notice: (a) Set cost portion 400. (b) Sliding cost portion 52 per party. (iii) Quarterly request does not require a FR notice: (a) Set cost portion 44. (b) Sliding cost portion 13 per party. (iv) Quarterly request does require a FR notice: (a) Set cost portion 225. (b) Sliding cost portion 13 per party. (v) Monthly request does not require a FR notice: (a) Set cost portion 14. (b) Sliding cost portion 4 per party. (vi) Monthly request does require a FR notice: (a) Set cost portion 180. (b) Sliding cost portion 4 per party. (99) (i) Application fee for the STB's Practitioners' Exam 200. (ii) Practitioners' Exam Information Package 25. (100) Carload Waybill Sample data: (i) Requests for Public Use File for all years prior to the most current year Carload Waybill Sample data available, provided on CD-R 250 per year. (ii) Specialized programming for Waybill requests to the Board 116 per hour.
    [FR Doc. 2016-18295 Filed 8-1-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4915-01-P
    81 148 Tuesday, August 2, 2016 Proposed Rules DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Internal Revenue Service 26 CFR Parts 1 and 301 [REG-131418-14] RIN 1545-BN27 Reporting for Qualified Tuition and Related Expenses; Education Tax Credits AGENCY:

    Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury.

    ACTION:

    Notice of proposed rulemaking and notice of public hearing.

    SUMMARY:

    This document contains proposed regulations that revise the rules for reporting qualified tuition and related expenses under section 6050S on a Form 1098-T, “Tuition Statement,” and conforms the regulations to the changes made to section 6050S by the Protecting Americans from Tax Hikes Act of 2015. This document also seeks to amend the regulations on the education tax credits under section 25A generally as well as to conform the regulations to changes made to section 25A by the Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015 and the Protecting Americans from Tax Hikes Act of 2015. The proposed regulations affect certain higher educational institutions required to file Form 1098-T and taxpayers eligible to claim an education tax credit. This document also provides notice of a public hearing on these proposed regulations.

    DATES:

    Written or electronic comments must be received by October 31, 2016. Outlines of topics to be discussed at the public hearing scheduled for November 30, 2016 must be received by October 31, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Send submissions to: CC:PA:LPD:PR (REG-131418-14), Room 5203, Internal Revenue Service, P.O. Box 7604, Ben Franklin Station, Washington, DC 20044. Submissions may be hand-delivered Monday through Friday between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. to CC:PA:LPD:PR (REG-131418-14), Courier's Desk, Internal Revenue Service, 1111 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20224. Alternatively, taxpayers may submit comments electronically via the Federal eRulemaking Portal at www.regulations.gov (IRS REG-131418-14).

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Concerning the proposed regulations, Gerald Semasek of the Office of Associate Chief Counsel (Procedure and Administration) for the proposed regulations under sections 6050S and 6724, (202) 317-6845, and Sheldon Iskow of the Office of Associate Chief Counsel (Income Tax and Accounting) for the proposed regulations under section 25A, (202) 317-4718; concerning the submission of comments and requests for a public hearing, Regina Johnson, (202) 317-6901 (not toll-free calls).

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Paperwork Reduction Act

    The collection of information contained in this notice of proposed rulemaking has been approved by the Office of Management and Budget through Form 1040 (OMB No. 1545-0074), Form 8863 (OMB No. 1545-0074) and Form 1098-T (OMB No. 1545-1574) in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507(d)). Notice and an opportunity to comment on the proposed changes to burden hours for the forms related to this proposed rule will be published in a separate notice in the Federal Register.

    Background

    This document contains proposed regulations to amend the Income Tax Regulations (26 CFR part 1) under section 25A of the Internal Revenue Code (Code) and the Procedure and Administration Regulations (26 CFR part 301) under section 6050S, to reflect the amendments to sections 25A and 6724 under the Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015 (Pub. L. 114-27 (129 Stat. 362 (2015)) (TPEA) and the amendments to sections 25A and 6050S under the Protecting Americans from Tax Hikes Act of 2015 (Pub. L. 114-113 (129 Stat. 2242 (2015)) (PATH). Furthermore, the document contains proposed regulations to amend the Income Tax Regulations under section 25A to update the definition of qualified tuition and related expenses in § 1.25A-2(d) to reflect the changes made by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Pub. L. 111-5 (123 Stat. 115) (ARRA)), to clarify the prepayment rule in § 1.25A-5(e), and to clarify the rule for refunds in § 1.25A-5(f).

    1. Section 25A—Education Tax Credits

    The Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997 (Pub. L. 105-34 (111 Stat. 788) (TRA '97)) added section 25A to provide students and their families with two new nonrefundable tax credits to help pay for college (education tax credits). Pursuant to TRA `97, section 25A allowed eligible taxpayers to claim either the Hope Scholarship Credit or the Lifetime Learning Credit (LLC) for qualified tuition and related expenses paid during the taxable year for an academic period beginning during the taxable year. In general, either the student or the parent who claims a dependency exemption for the student may claim a credit for the student's qualified tuition and related expenses. Section 25A(f)(1) defines “qualified tuition and related expenses” as tuition and fees required for enrollment or attendance at an eligible educational institution (institution). Section 25A(f)(2) generally defines an “eligible educational institution” as an institution described in the Higher Education Act of 1965 that is eligible to participate in federal college financial aid programs. Section 25A(g)(4) provides that amounts paid during the taxable year for enrollment during an academic period beginning within the first three months of the following taxable year are treated as amounts paid for an academic period beginning during the taxable year. Section 25A(g)(5) provides that no credit is allowed for any expenses for which a deduction is allowed under another provision of the Code.

    Final regulations under section 25A were published in the Federal Register (67 FR 78687) on December 26, 2002. Section 1.25A-2(d)(1) of these regulations defines “qualified tuition and related expenses” to mean tuition and fees required for the enrollment or attendance of a student for courses of instruction at an institution. Section 1.25A-2(d)(2)(i) provides that only fees required to be paid to the institution as a condition of the student's enrollment or attendance at the institution are treated as qualified tuition and related expenses for purposes of section 25A. Under this rule, fees for books, supplies, and equipment used in a course of study are required fees only if the fees must be paid to the institution for the enrollment or attendance of the student at the institution. See § 1.25A-2(d)(2)(ii). In addition, § 1.25A-5(e)(1) provides that an education tax credit is allowed only for payments of qualified tuition and related expenses for an academic period beginning in the same taxable year as the year the payment is made. Section 1.25A-5(e)(2) provides that qualified tuition and related expenses paid during one taxable year for an academic period beginning in the first three months of the taxable year following the taxable year in which the payment is made will be treated as paid for an academic period beginning in the same taxable year as the year the payment is made (prepayment rule).

    Section 1.25A-5(f) provides rules for refunds of qualified tuition and related expenses. If qualified tuition and related expenses are paid and a refund of these expenses is received in the same taxable year, qualified tuition and related expenses for the taxable year are reduced by the amount of the refund. Section 1.25A-5(f)(1). If a taxpayer receives a refund of qualified tuition and related expenses in the current taxable year (current year) that were paid in the prior taxable year (prior year) before the taxpayer files his/her federal income tax return for the prior year, the taxpayer reduces the qualified tuition and related expenses for the prior year by the refund amount. Section 1.25A-5(f)(2). However, if the taxpayer receives the refund after filing his/her federal income tax return for the prior year, the taxpayer must increase the tax imposed for the current year by the recapture amount. Section 1.25A-5(f)(3)(i). The recapture amount is calculated in the manner provided in § 1.25A-5(f)(3)(ii). Sections 1.25A-5(f)(4) and (f)(5) provide that refunds of loan proceeds and receipt of excludable educational assistance are treated as refunds for purposes of § 1.25A-5(f)(1), (2), and (3), as appropriate.

    In 2009, ARRA enacted section 25A(i), which expanded the Hope Scholarship Credit with the American Opportunity Tax Credit (AOTC) for taxable years beginning after 2008. The definition of “qualified tuition and related expenses” for purposes of the AOTC is broader than the definition of qualified tuition and related expenses for the Hope Scholarship Credit and the LLC because it includes expenses paid for course materials. See section 25A(i)(3).

    2. Section 222—Deduction for Qualified Expenses

    Section 431(a) of the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001, Public Law 107-16 (115 Stat. 38) added section 222, which generally allows a deduction for qualified tuition and related expenses paid by a taxpayer during the taxable year subject to certain dollar and income limitations. Section 222(b) provides that no deduction is allowed if the taxpayer claims an education tax credit for the student.

    3. Section 6050S—Information Reporting for Eligible Educational Institutions

    TRA '97 also added section 6050S to require eligible educational institutions to file information returns and to furnish written statements to assist taxpayers and the IRS in determining whether a taxpayer is eligible for an education tax credit under section 25A, as well as other education tax benefits. These returns and statements are made on Form 1098-T, “Tuition Statement.” Prior to the enactment of PATH, section 6050S(b)(2)(B)(i) permitted institutions to report either the aggregate amount of payments received or the aggregate amount billed for qualified tuition and related expenses during the calendar year for individuals enrolled for any academic period. Institutions also must report the aggregate amount of scholarships or grants received for an individual's costs of attendance that the institution administered and processed during the calendar year. See section 6050S(b)(2)(B)(ii). Section 6050S(b)(2)(B)(iii) requires that institutions must separately report adjustments (that is, refunds of payments or reductions in charges) made during the calendar year to qualified tuition and related expenses that were reported in a prior calendar year and that institutions also must separately report adjustments (that is, refunds or reductions) made during the calendar year to scholarships that were reported in a prior calendar year. Section 6050S(b)(2)(D) requires that the information return include other information as the Secretary may prescribe.

    In addition, sections 6050S(a)(2) and (a)(3) require any person engaged in a trade or business of making payments to any individual under an insurance agreement as reimbursements or refunds of qualified expenses (an insurer) or who receives from any individual $600 or more of interest during the calendar year on qualified education loans to file information returns and to furnish written information statements. Section 6050S(b)(2) provides that these information returns must contain the name, address, and TIN of any individual with respect to whom these payments were made or received, the aggregate amount of reimbursements or refunds (or similar amounts paid to such individuals during the calendar year by an insurer), the aggregate amount of interest received for the calendar year from the individual, and such other information as the Secretary may prescribe.

    Section 6050S(d) provides that every person required to make a return under section 6050S(a) must furnish a written statement to each individual whose name is set forth on the return showing the name, address, and phone number of the person required to make the return and the amounts described in section 6050S(b)(2)(B). For taxable years beginning after June 29, 2015, all of the information required by section 6050S(b)(2), not just the amounts, must be included on the written statement. The written statement must be furnished by January 31 of the year following the year for which the return is required to be made.

    Final regulations under section 6050S were published in the Federal Register (67 FR 77678) in the same Treasury Decision as the final regulations for section 25A on December 19, 2002. The section 6050S regulations provide exceptions to the reporting requirements for educational institutions for students who are nonresident aliens, for noncredit courses, for certain billing arrangements, and in cases where qualified tuition and related expenses are paid entirely with scholarships or grants. These regulations also set forth the specific information that institutions must report to the IRS, as well as information that the institution must include with the statement furnished to the student. These regulations also include requirements regarding the time and manner for soliciting the student's TIN.

    4. Sections 6721, 6722 and 6724—Information Reporting Penalties and Penalty Relief

    Section 6721 imposes a penalty on an eligible educational institution that fails to timely file correct information returns with the IRS. Section 6722 imposes a penalty on an educational institution that fails to timely furnish correct written statements to the student. Generally, the penalty under section 6721 and section 6722 is $100 per failure, with an annual maximum penalty of $1.5 million. The penalty is increased to $250 per failure and the annual maximum penalty is increased to $3 million for returns required to be filed and statements required to be made after December 31, 2015. However, section 6724(a) provides that the penalty under section 6721 or 6722 may be waived if it is shown that the failure was due to reasonable cause and not due to willful neglect.

    Section 301.6724-1(a)(2) provides that the penalty is waived for reasonable cause only if the filer establishes that: (1) Either there are significant mitigating factors with respect to the failure or that the failure arose from events beyond the filer's control and (2) the filer acted in a responsible manner both before and after the failure. In the case of a missing or incorrect TIN, § 301.6724-1(d)(2) provides that the filer acted in a responsible manner if the filer satisfies the solicitation requirements in § 301.6724-1(e) (regarding a missing TIN) or (f) (regarding an incorrect TIN).

    Section 1.6050S-1(e)(3) provides that the rules regarding reasonable cause under § 301.6724-1 do not apply in the case of failure to include a correct TIN on a Form 1098-T. Instead, § 1.6050S-1(e)(3) provides special rules for institutions to establish reasonable cause for a failure to include a correct TIN on Form 1098-T.

    Section 1.6050S-1(e)(3)(i) provides that reasonable cause for a failure to include a correct TIN on the Form 1098-T may be established if (1) the failure arose from events beyond the institution's control, such as a failure of the individual to furnish a correct TIN, and (2) the institution acted in a responsible manner before and after the failure. Section 1.6050S-1(e)(3)(ii) provides that if the institution does not have the student's correct TIN in its records, acting in a responsible manner means making a single solicitation for the TIN by December 31 of the calendar year for which the payment is made, the amount is billed, or a reimbursement is made. Section 1.6050S-1(e)(3)(iii) also provides for the manner by which an educational institution should request the individual's TIN. The solicitation must be done in writing and must clearly notify the individual that the law requires the individual to furnish a TIN so that it may be included on an information return filed by the institution. The solicitation may be made on Form W-9S, “Request for Student's or Borrower's Taxpayer Identification Number and Certification,” or the institution may develop its own form and incorporate it into other forms customarily used by the institution, such as financial aid forms. In the instance that an institution does not have a student's TIN in its records and the student does not provide the TIN in response to a solicitation described in § 1.6050S-1(e), the institution must file and furnish the Form 1098-T, leaving the space for the TIN blank.

    5. TPEA Amendments to Sections 25A, 222 and 6724

    Section 804(a) of TPEA amended section 25A by adding a new subparagraph (g)(8), which provides that, for taxable years beginning after June 29, 2015, except as provided by the Secretary, a taxpayer may not claim an education tax credit under section 25A unless the taxpayer receives a statement furnished by an eligible educational institution that contains all of the information required in section 6050S(d)(2) (that is, the recipient's copy of the Form 1098-T). Section 804(b) similarly amends section 222(d) to provide that, for taxable years beginning after June 29, 2015, except as provided by the Secretary, a taxpayer may not claim a deduction for qualified tuition and related expenses unless the taxpayer receives the recipient's copy of the Form 1098-T. For purposes of both the education tax credit and the deduction, a taxpayer who claims a student as a dependent will be treated as receiving the statement if the student receives the statement.

    Section 805 of TPEA amends section 6724 by adding a new subsection (f), which provides that no penalty will be imposed under section 6721 or 6722 against an eligible educational institution solely by reason of failing to include the individual's TIN on a Form 1098-T or related statement if the institution contemporaneously certifies under penalties of perjury in the form and manner prescribed by the Secretary that it has complied with the standards promulgated by the Secretary for obtaining the individual's TIN. The provision applies to returns required to be made and statements required to be furnished after December 31, 2015.

    6. PATH Amendments to Sections 25A, 222 and 6050S a. AOTC Permanent and Section 222 Extended

    Section 102(a) of PATH amends section 25A(i) to make the AOTC permanent. Section 153(a) of PATH amends section 222(e) to retroactively extend the deduction for qualified tuition and related expenses for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2014, and ending on or before December 31, 2016.

    b. Amendments to Section 25A

    Section 206(a)(2) of PATH amends section 25A(i) to provide that the AOTC is not allowed if the student's TIN and the TIN of the taxpayer claiming the credit is issued after the due date for filing the return for the taxable year. Pursuant to section 206(b)(1), this amendment is effective for returns (including an amended return) filed after December 18, 2015. Section 206(b)(2) of PATH provides, however, that this amendment does not apply to any return (other than an amendment to any return) for a taxable year that includes the date of enactment of PATH (December 18, 2015) if the return is filed on or before the due date for such return.

    Section 211(a) of PATH amends section 25A(i) to provide that the AOTC is not allowed if the return does not include the employer identification number (EIN) of any institution to which the qualified tuition and related expenses were paid with respect to the student. This amendment is effective for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2015.

    c. Amendments to Section 6050S

    Section 211(b) of PATH amends section 6050S(b)(2) to require eligible educational institutions and insurers to report their EIN on the return and statement. This amendment is effective for expenses paid after December 31, 2015, for education furnished in academic periods beginning after such date.

    Section 212 of PATH amends section 6050S(b)(2)(B)(i) to eliminate the option for eligible educational institutions to report aggregate qualified tuition and related expenses billed for the calendar year. Accordingly, for expenses paid after December 31, 2015, for education furnished in academic periods beginning after such date, eligible educational institutions are required to report aggregate payments of qualified tuition and related expenses received during the calendar year.

    Explanation of Provisions 1. Changes To Implement TPEA and PATH a. Changes to Section 25A and Section 222

    Both TPEA and PATH add new requirements for claiming education tax benefits. Under TPEA, the student is required to receive a Form 1098-T in order to claim the LLC or the AOTC or claim the deduction under section 222. Under PATH, the ability to claim the AOTC is further limited. First, the taxpayer can claim the AOTC only if the taxpayer includes, on his/her return for which the credit is claimed, the EIN of any educational institution to which qualified tuition and related expenses are paid. Second, the taxpayer can claim the AOTC only if the TIN of the student and the TIN of the taxpayer, on the return for which the credit is claimed, are issued on or before the due date of the original return.

    i. Form 1098-T Requirement Under TPEA

    Form 1098-T assists taxpayers in determining whether they are eligible to claim education tax credits under section 25A or the deduction for qualified tuition and related expenses under section 222. However, before TPEA, there was no requirement that the taxpayer (or the taxpayer's dependent if the taxpayer's dependent is the student) receive a Form 1098-T to claim these tax benefits.

    Section 804 of TPEA changes the requirements for a taxpayer to claim education tax benefits under section 25A or section 222. For qualified tuition and related expenses paid during taxable years beginning after June 29, 2015, TPEA provides that, unless the Secretary provides otherwise, a taxpayer must receive a Form 1098-T to claim either a credit under section 25A or a deduction under section 222.

    The proposed regulations reflect these changes. Specifically, the proposed regulations add a new paragraph (f) to § 1.25A-1 to require that for taxable years beginning after June 29, 2015, unless an exception applies, no education tax credit is allowed unless the taxpayer (or the taxpayer's dependent) receives a Form 1098-T. However, the proposed regulations explain that the amount reported on the Form 1098-T may not reflect the total amount of qualified tuition and related expenses that the taxpayer has paid during the taxable year because certain expenses are not required to be reported on the Form 1098-T. For example, under § 1.25A-2(d)(3), expenses for course materials paid to a vendor other than an eligible educational institution are eligible for the AOTC. However, because these expenses are not paid to an eligible educational institution, these expenses are not required to be reported on a Form 1098-T. Accordingly, a taxpayer who meets the requirements in § 1.25A-1(f) regarding the Form 1098-T requirement to claim the credit and who can substantiate payment of qualified tuition and related expenses may include these unreported expenses in the computation of the amount of the education tax credit allowable for the taxable year even though the expenses are not reported on a Form 1098-T.

    Proposed § 1.25A-1(f)(2)(i) provides an exception to the Form 1098-T requirement in § 1.25A-1(f)(1) if the student has not received a Form 1098-T by the later of (a) January 31 of the taxable year following the taxable year to which the education credit relates or (b) the date the federal income tax return claiming the education tax credit is filed. This exception only applies if the taxpayer or taxpayer's dependent (i) has requested, in the manner prescribed in publications, forms and instructions, or published guidance, the eligible educational institution to furnish the Form 1098-T after January 31 of the year following the taxable year to which the education tax credit relates but on or before the date the return is filed claiming the education tax credit, and (ii) has cooperated fully with the eligible educational institution's efforts to obtain information necessary to furnish the statement. Proposed § 1.25A-1(f)(2)(ii) provides that the receipt of a Form 1098-T is not required if the reporting rules under section 6050S and related regulations provide that the eligible educational institution is exempt from providing a Form 1098-T to the student (for example, non-credit courses). Proposed § 1.25A-1(f)(2)(iii) also provides that the IRS may provide additional exceptions in published guidance of general applicability, see § 601.601(d)(2). The proposed regulations under § 1.25A-1(f) apply to education tax credits claimed for taxable years beginning after June 29, 2015.

    Until the proposed regulations under §§ 1.25A-1(f) and 1.6050S-1(a) are published in the Federal Register as final regulations, a taxpayer (or the taxpayer's dependent) (other than a non-resident alien) who does not receive a Form 1098-T because its institution is exempt from furnishing a Form 1098-T under current § 1.6050S-1(a)(2) may claim an education tax credit under section 25A(a) if the taxpayer (1) is otherwise qualified, (2) can demonstrate that the taxpayer (or the taxpayer's dependent) was enrolled at an eligible educational institution, and (3) can substantiate the payment of qualified tuition and related expenses. Section 804(b) of TPEA also amends section 222 to require a Form 1098-T to claim a deduction for qualified tuition and related expenses for taxable years beginning after June 29, 2015. Rules similar to those in proposed § 1.25A-1(f), including the exceptions, apply for purposes of section 222.

    ii. Identification Requirements for AOTC Under PATH

    Section 206(a)(2) of PATH amends section 25A(i) to provide that the AOTC is not allowed if the student's TIN or the TIN of the taxpayer claiming the credit is issued after the due date for filing the return for the taxable year. This amendment is generally effective for any return or amended return filed after December 18, 2015. The proposed regulations reflect this change. Specifically, the proposed regulations add new § 1.25A-1(e)(2)(i), which provides that, for any federal income tax return (including an amended return) filed after December 18, 2015, no AOTC is allowed unless the student's TIN and the taxpayer's TIN are issued on or before the due date (including an extension, if timely requested) for filing the return for that taxable year.

    Section 211 of PATH amends section 25A(i) to provide that the AOTC is not allowed unless the taxpayer's return includes the EIN of any institution to which the qualified tuition and related expenses were paid with respect to the student. The proposed regulations reflect this change by adding new § 1.25A-1(e)(2)(ii).

    b. Changes to Section 6050S Reporting To Conform With TPEA 1098-T Requirement i. Exceptions To Reporting Requirement and Clarifying Changes

    Currently, the regulations under section 6050S include exceptions to reporting. For instance, under § 1.6050S-1(a)(2)(i), institutions are not required to file a Form 1098-T with the IRS or provide a Form 1098-T to a nonresident alien, unless the individual requests a Form 1098-T. Under § 1.6050S-1(a)(2)(ii), institutions are not required to report information with respect to courses for which no academic credit is awarded. In addition, reporting is not required with respect to individuals whose qualified tuition and related expenses are paid entirely with scholarships under § 1.6050S-1(a)(2)(iii) or individuals whose qualified tuition and related expenses are paid under a formal billing arrangement under § 1.6050S-1(a)(2)(iv).

    The exceptions in §§ 1.6050S-1(a)(2)(i), (iii), and (iv) to reporting on Form 1098-T are inconsistent with the TPEA, which generally requires a student to receive a Form 1098-T from the educational institution to claim a section 25A education credit. With these exceptions, a significant number of taxpayers claiming the credit will not have a Form 1098-T, which would frustrate the explicit purpose of TPEA. Therefore, the proposed regulations remove these exceptions.

    Removal of the exceptions in §§ 1.6050S-1(a)(2)(i), (iii), and (iv) also assists students. Students to whom these exceptions apply are deprived of important information that they need to determine their eligibility for education tax credits. The Form 1098-T provides students with the amount of tuition paid (or billed for calendar year 2016 only), the amount of scholarships and grants that the institution administered and processed, and an indication of whether the student was enrolled at least a half time for an academic period. Students who do not receive a Form 1098-T cannot use the information that would be provided on the form to assist them in determining the proper amount of education credits they may claim. Further, removal of these exceptions will improve the IRS's ability to use the Form 1098-T to verify whether taxpayers should be allowed the education tax benefits that are claimed. In addition, removal of these exceptions would improve the IRS's ability to determine whether the institutions are complying with their reporting obligations.

    The proposed regulations would not remove the exception to reporting under § 1.6050S-1(a)(2)(ii) for courses for which no academic credit is awarded. Treasury and the IRS understand that in many cases fees for these courses are charged outside of the financial systems used for students who are taking courses for credit. In addition, given that non-credit courses would not be eligible for the AOTC (or Hope Credit) and would only be eligible for the LLC if the student is taking the course to acquire or improve job skills, reporting expenses paid for non-credit courses could cause confusion and unintended non-compliance.

    Treasury and the IRS believe that students benefit from receipt of the Form 1098-T because the information on the form assists the student in determining eligibility for education tax benefits that make higher education more affordable. Reporting that does not provide useful information to students and the IRS, however, unduly burdens institutions and the IRS and could confuse students about whether they are eligible to claim education tax benefits. Therefore, Treasury and the IRS are asking for comments regarding exceptions to the reporting under section 6050S. Specifically, comments are requested regarding the exception to reporting for students who are nonresident aliens, including how an institution determines that a student is a nonresident alien and experience administering the existing exception. Comments are also requested regarding whether the exception for noncredit courses should be retained, and if so, whether there should be any changes to the exception.

    The proposed regulations also revise the information that institutions are required to report on the Form 1098-T in an effort to provide more precise information for students to use when determining eligibility for and the amount of an education tax credit and for the IRS to use to verify compliance with the requirements for claiming the education tax credits. For instance, the current regulations under § 1.6050S-1(b)(2)(ii)(D) require that the Form 1098-T include an indication of whether amounts reported relate to an academic period that begins in the first three months of the next calendar year pursuant to the prepayment rule in § 1.25A-5(e)(2). The proposed regulations revise this section to include a requirement that the amount paid that relates to an academic period that begins in the first three months of the next calendar year be specifically stated on the Form 1098-T. This will assist the IRS in identifying credits claimed in two years for the same qualified tuition and related expenses.

    In addition, the proposed regulations add a new paragraph (I) to § 1.6050S-1(b)(2)(ii) to require the institution to indicate the number of months that a student was a full-time student during the calendar year. The proposed regulations also add to that paragraph a definition of what constitutes a month. This information will assist the IRS in determining whether a parent properly claimed the student as a dependent and, therefore, properly claimed the credit for the student's qualified tuition and related expenses. See § 1.25A-1(f) for rules relating to claiming the credit in the case of a dependent.

    The proposed regulations clarify § 1.6050S-1(b)(2)(v) regarding the rules for determining the amount of payments received for qualified tuition and related expenses. This clarification is intended to provide a uniform rule for all institutions to determine whether a payment received by an institution should be reported on a Form 1098-T as qualified tuition and related expenses in the current year. Under the proposed rule, payments received during a calendar year are treated first as payments of qualified tuition and related expenses up to the total amount billed by the institution for qualified tuition and related expenses for enrollment during the calendar year and then as payments of expenses other than qualified tuition and related expenses for enrollment during the calendar year. A similar rule applies in the case of payments received during the calendar year with respect to enrollment in an academic period beginning during the first three months of the next calendar year. In that case, the payments received by the institution with respect to the amount billed for enrollment in an academic period beginning during the first three months of the next calendar year are treated as payments of qualified tuition and related expenses for the calendar year in which the payments are received. Examples have been added to § 1.6050S-1(b)(2)(vii) to illustrate these rules. Treasury and the IRS request comments regarding these rules, including alternative approaches and recommendations for addressing other issues that should be covered by these rules.

    The proposed regulations also revise § 1.6050S-1(c)(1)(iii) regarding the instructions accompanying the Form 1098-T that the institution must furnish to students. The proposed regulations add a new paragraph (D) to § 1.6050S-1(c)(1)(iii) to require institutions to include a paragraph in the instructions informing students that they may be able to optimize their federal tax benefits by taking a portion of a scholarship or grant into income. This new paragraph will alert students about their ability to optimize their federal education tax benefits by allocating all or a portion of their scholarship or grant to pay the student's actual living expenses (if permitted by the terms of the scholarship or grant) by including such amounts in income on the student's tax return if the student is required to file a return. By including such amounts in income, the scholarship or grant is no longer tax free, and the student is not required to reduce qualified tuition and related expenses by the amount paid with the now taxable scholarship or grant. See section 25A(g)(2) and § 1.25A-5(c)(3) for rules regarding allocation of scholarships and grants between qualified tuition and related expenses and other expenses. Minor revisions have also been made to the other paragraphs required to be included in instructions, including addition of the name of the form (Form 1098-T) on which reporting occurs and specific identification of Publication 970, “Tax Benefits for Education,” as a resource for taxpayers.

    The proposed regulations also provide a definition of “administered and processed” for purposes of determining which scholarships and grants an institution is required to report on the Form 1098-T. The current regulations do not have a definition of this term, and the lack of a definition has resulted in uncertainty and inconsistent reporting. The proposed regulations resolve this by adding a definition of “administered and processed” to § 1.6050S-1(e)(1)(i). Under this definition, a scholarship or grant is administered and processed by an institution if the institution receives payment of an amount (whether by cash, check, or other means of payment) that the institution knows or reasonably should know, is a scholarship or grant, regardless of whether the institution is named as the payee or a co-payee of the amount and regardless of whether, in the case of a payment other than in cash, the student endorses the check or other means of payment for the benefit of the institution. Pell Grants are provided as an example of a scholarship or grant that is treated as administered and processed by an institution.

    ii. PATH Eliminates Option To Report Amount Billed

    These proposed regulations also implement the amendment to section 6050S(b)(2)(B)(i) under PATH, which eliminates the option for eligible educational institutions to report the aggregate amount billed for qualified tuition and related expenses for expenses paid after December 31, 2015, for education furnished in academic periods beginning after such date. Eligible educational institutions have informed the IRS that they cannot implement the necessary changes in technology to enable reporting of aggregate payments of qualified tuition and expenses for the first year in which the statutory amendment applies, calendar year 2016. Therefore, in Announcement 2016-17, I.R.B. 2016-20, the IRS stated that it will not impose penalties under section 6721 or 6722 against an eligible educational institution required to file 2016 Forms 1098-T solely because the institution reports the aggregate amount billed for qualified tuition and expenses rather than the aggregate payments of qualified tuition and related expenses received. Thus, for calendar year 2016, no penalties will be imposed if an educational institution fails to implement the PATH's amendment to section 6050S(b)(2)(B)(i) and continues to report the amount billed.

    The proposed regulations reflect the PATH amendment by eliminating the option to report the amount billed. These regulations are proposed to be effective on publication of final regulations in the Federal Register. In the interim, the limited penalty relief in Announcement 2016-17 will apply to allow educational institutions to report the amount billed for calendar year 2016.

    iii. No Change Required To Implement EIN Reporting Requirement

    Current regulations under § 1.6050S-1(b)(2)(ii)(A) require that the eligible educational institution report its name, address, and TIN on the Form 1098-T. Accordingly, the amendment to section 6050S(b)(2) by section 211(b) of PATH requiring eligible educational institution and insurers to report their EIN does not require a change to the regulations.

    c. Changes To Implement New Section 6724(f)

    Section 1.6050S-1(f)(4) of the proposed regulations reflects the enactment of section 6724(f) by section 805 of TPEA. Under section 6724(f), the IRS may not impose information reporting penalties under section 6721 and section 6722 against an eligible educational institution for failure to include a correct TIN on the Form 1098-T if the institution certifies compliance with IRS standards for soliciting TINs. Relief under section 6724(f) applies only to eligible educational institutions and does not apply to insurers required to file Forms 1098-T under section 6050S(a)(2).

    The IRS generally sends penalty notices to taxpayers who fail to file information returns when required or who file incorrect information returns. Filers seeking penalty relief based on reasonable cause must respond to the penalty notice with a statement explaining how the filer qualifies for relief. Under section 6724(f), however, no penalty under section 6721 or 6722 is imposed in the first instance if the educational institution contemporaneously makes a true and accurate certification under penalties of perjury in such form and manner as may be prescribed by the Secretary that it complied with the standards promulgated by the Secretary to obtain the student's TIN. Section 6724(f) is effective for returns required to be filed and statements required to be furnished after December 31, 2015.

    Standards for obtaining the student's TIN are set forth in § 1.6050S-1(e)(3)(ii) and (iii) of the existing regulations. These regulations are proposed to be redesignated as § 1.6050S-1(f)(3)(ii) and (iii). Under these standards, the institution does not have to solicit a student's TIN, but may use the TIN that it has in its records. If the institution does not have the student's correct TIN in its records, then it must solicit the TIN in the time and manner described in redesignated § 1.6050S-1(f). To implement section 6724(f), § 1.6050S-1(f)(4) of the proposed regulations has been added to provide that for returns required to be filed and statements required to be furnished after December 31, 2015, the IRS will not impose a penalty against an institution under section 6721 or 6722 for failure to include the student's correct TIN on the return or statement if the institution certifies to the IRS under penalties of perjury in the form and manner prescribed by the Secretary in publications, forms and instructions, or other published guidance at the time of filing of the return that the institution complied with the requirements in § 1.6050S-1(f)(3)(ii) and (iii). However, the proposed regulations make clear that the certification will not protect the institution from penalty if the IRS determines subsequently that the requirements of § 1.6050S-1(f)(3)(ii) and (iii) were not satisfied or if the failure to file correct information returns relates to something other than a failure to provide the correct TIN for the student. In addition, a cross-reference is proposed to be added to the regulations under section 6724 to alert taxpayers that the rules for penalty relief for eligible educational institutions with respect to reporting obligations under section 6050S are contained in § 1.6050S-1(f).

    d. Penalty Relief Under Section 6724(f) for Calendar Year 2015 Forms 1098-T

    Section 6724(f) requires the IRS to develop procedures enabling an eligible educational institution to avoid imposition of the section 6721 and section 6722 penalty for failure to include a student's correct TIN on the Form 1098-T by certifying under penalties of perjury at the time of filing or furnishing the form that the institution complied with the IRS standards for obtaining a student's TIN. In Announcement 2016-03, I.R.B. 2016-4, the IRS stated that it will not impose penalties under section 6721 or 6722 against an eligible educational institution required to file Forms 1098-T for calendar year 2015 solely because the student's TIN is missing or incorrect.

    2. Other Changes to Regulations Under Section 25A and Section 6050S

    The proposed regulations also update and clarify the regulations under section 25A. The proposed regulations update § 1.25A-2(d) to reflect the changes made by ARRA allowing students to claim the AOTC for expenses paid for course materials (such as books, supplies, and equipment) required for enrollment or attendance, whether or not the course materials are purchased from the institution. Prior to ARRA, the term “qualified tuition and related expenses” included tuition and fees, but did not include course materials, such as books, unless the cost of these materials was a fee that was required to be paid to the institution as a condition of attendance or enrollment. See section 25A(f)(1) and § 1.25A-2(d)(2)(ii).

    When Congress enacted the AOTC in 2009, it expanded the definition of qualified tuition and related expenses for purposes of the AOTC to include expenses paid for course materials. See H.R. Conf. Rep. 111-16, 111th Cong., 1st Sess. p. 525 (February 29, 2009). Course materials are qualified expenses only for the AOTC and not for the LLC. See Tax Increase Prevention Act of 2014 (Pub. L. 113-295, 128 Stat. 4010). The proposed regulations update § 1.25A-2(d) to provide that, for purposes of claiming the AOTC for tax years beginning after December 31, 2008, the definition of qualified tuition and related expenses includes not only tuition and fees required for enrollment or attendance at an eligible educational institution, but also expenses paid for course materials needed for enrollment or attendance at an eligible educational institution. Accordingly, after ARRA, for purposes of claiming the Hope Scholarship Credit and LLC, qualified tuition and related expenses continue to exclude the cost of books, supplies, and equipment if they can be purchased from any vendor. However, for purposes of claiming the AOTC, qualified tuition and related expenses includes the cost of course materials such as books, supplies and equipment that is needed for meaningful attendance or enrollment in a course of study, whether or not the materials are purchased from the institution. The proposed regulations provide an example that illustrates that for purposes of the AOTC qualified tuition and related expenses includes the cost of course material, including books, even if a taxpayer purchases these materials from a vendor other than the institution.

    In addition, the proposed regulations add a new section under section 6050S to eliminate uncertainty in the reporting requirements that may result from these proposed amendments to § 1.25A-2(d). Under proposed § 1.6050S-1(a)(2)(i), an institution is not required to report the amount paid or billed for books, supplies, and equipment unless the amount is a fee that must be paid to the eligible educational institution as a condition of enrollment or attendance under § 1.25A-2(d)(2)(ii).

    The proposed regulations also clarify the example in § 1.25A-5(e)(2)(ii) regarding the prepayment rule. Under § 1.25A-5(e)(2)(i), if qualified tuition and related expenses are paid during one taxable year for an academic period that begins during the first three months of the taxpayer's next taxable year (that is, in January, February, or March of the next taxable year for calendar year taxpayers), an education tax credit is allowed for the qualified tuition and related expenses only in the taxable year in which the taxpayer pays the expenses. The Treasury Department and the IRS are aware that there is some uncertainty regarding the application of the prepayment rule to amounts paid in the prior year and the current year for an academic period beginning during the current year. The proposed regulations clarify the proper treatment in this situation by expanding the Example in § 1.25A-5(e)(2)(ii) to illustrate that a student who pays part of a semester's tuition in Year 1, and the remainder in Year 2, may claim a credit for Year 1, for the portion of the tuition paid in December Year 1 and a separate credit for Year 2 for the portion of the tuition paid in February Year 2.

    The proposed regulations also clarify the rules under § 1.25A-5(f) regarding a refund of qualified tuition and related expenses received from an eligible educational institution. The current regulations do not address the situation where the taxpayer receives a refund in the current taxable year of qualified tuition and related expenses for an academic period beginning in the current taxable year for which payments were made during the prior taxable year under the prepayment rule and payments were made during the current taxable year. To address this situation, the proposed regulations provide that the taxpayer may allocate the refund in any proportion to reduce qualified tuition and related expenses paid in either taxable year, except that the amount of the refund allocated to a taxable year may not exceed the qualified tuition and related expenses paid in the taxable year for the academic period to which the refund relates. The sum of the amounts allocated to each taxable year cannot exceed the amount of the refund. The proposed regulations add an example to illustrate this rule.

    Proposed Effective and Applicability Dates

    These regulations are proposed to take effect when published in the Federal Register as final regulations.

    Statement of Availability of IRS Documents

    IRS published guidance cited in this preamble is published in the Internal Revenue Bulletin and is available from the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office, Washington, DC 20402, or by visiting the IRS Web site at http://www.irs.gov.

    Special Analyses

    Certain IRS regulations, including this one, are exempt from the requirements of Executive Order 12866, as supplemented and reaffirmed by Executive Order 13563. Therefore, a regulatory impact assessment is not required. It has also been determined that section 553(b) of the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. chapter 5) does not apply to these regulations.

    It is hereby certified that the collection of information in this notice of proposed rulemaking will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities within the meaning of section 601(6) of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. chapter 6). The type of small entities to which the regulations may apply are small eligible educational institutions (generally colleges and universities eligible to receive federal financial aid for education under the Higher Education Act of 1965). This certification is based on the fact that few, if any, new eligible educational institutions will be subject to reporting and the changes made by this notice of proposed rulemaking require little, if any, additional time for compliance by institutions currently subject to reporting requirements. The collection of information in this regulation implements the statute and should not require eligible educational institutions to collect information that is not already maintained by the institution. Eligible educational institutions have been subject to information reporting under section 6050S since 1998, and the obligations under the existing final regulations that are the foundation for these proposed regulations are already in place. Any additional information returns required to be filed under this notice of proposed rulemaking should result in few, if any, new eligible educational institutions being subject to reporting that were not already required to file Forms 1098-T. Only eligible educational institutions, not all educational institutions, are subject to these reporting rules. For this purpose, an eligible educational institution means an institution described in section 481 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1088) as in effect on the date of enactment (August 5, 1997), and which is eligible to participate in a program under title IV of such act (generally colleges and universities whose students are eligible to receive federal financial aid for higher education). See sections 25A(f)(2) and 6050S(e). Further, this notice of proposed rulemaking contains modifications that should simplify compliance and thereby reduce the time needed to comply with the information reporting obligations under section 6050S. Therefore, a Regulatory Flexibility Analysis under the Regulatory Flexibility Act is not required. Pursuant to section 7805(f) of the Code, this proposed regulation has been submitted to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration for comment on its impact on small businesses. The Internal Revenue Service invites the public to comment on this certification.

    Comments and Requests for a Public Hearing

    Before these proposed regulations are adopted as final regulations, consideration will be given to any comments that are submitted timely to the IRS as prescribed in this preamble under the DATES and ADDRESSES headings. The Treasury Department and the IRS request comments on all aspects of the proposed rules. All comments will be available at www.regulations.gov or upon request.

    A public hearing has been scheduled for November 30, 2016 at 10:00 a.m. in the IRS Auditorium, Internal Revenue Service Building, 1111 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20224. Due to building security procedures, visitors must enter at the Constitution Avenue entrance. In addition, all visitors must present photo identification to enter the building. Because of access restrictions, visitors will not be admitted beyond the immediate entrance area more than 30 minutes before the hearing starts. For information about having your name placed onto the building access list to attend the hearing, see the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this preamble.

    The rules of 26 CFR 601.601(a)(3) apply to the hearing. Persons who wish to present oral comments at the hearing must submit written or electronic comments by October 31, 2016 and an outline of the topics to be discussed and the time to be devoted to each topic (a signed original and eight (8) copies) by October 31, 2016. A period of 10 minutes will be allotted to each person for making comments. An agenda showing the scheduling of speakers will be prepared after the deadline for receiving outlines has passed. Copies of the agenda will be available free of charge at the hearing.

    Drafting Information

    The principal author of these proposed regulations is Gerald Semasek of the Office of Associate Chief Counsel (Procedure and Administration) for the proposed regulations under section 6050S and section 6724 and Sheldon Iskow of the Office of Associate Chief Counsel (Income Tax and Accounting) for the proposed regulations under section 25A.

    List of Subjects 26 CFR Part 1

    Income taxes, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    26 CFR Part 301

    Employment taxes, Estate taxes, Excise taxes, Gift taxes, Income taxes, Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Proposed Amendments to the Regulations

    Accordingly, 26 CFR parts 1 and 301 are proposed to be amended as follows:

    PART 1—INCOME TAXES Paragraph 1. The authority citation for part 1 continues to read in part as follows: Authority:

    26 U.S.C. 7805 * * *

    Par. 2. Section 1.25A-0 is amended by: 1. Revising the entry for § 1.25A-1(e)(1) introductory text. 2. Adding entries for § 1.25A-1(e)(1), (2), and (3). 3. Revising the entries for § 1.25A-1(f) introductory text and (f)(2). 4. Adding entries for § 1.25A-1(f)(3) and (4). 5. Revising the entries for § 1.25A-1(g) and (h). 6. Adding an entry for § 1.25A-1(i). 7. Revising the entries for §§ 1.25A-2(d)(3), (4), (5), and (6). 8. Adding entries for §§ 1.25A-2(d)(7) and (e). 9. Revising the entry for § 1.25A-2(f)(6). 10. Adding entries for §§ 1.25A-5(f)(7) and (g).

    The revisions and additions read as follows:

    § 1.25A-0 Table of Contents. § 1.25A-1 Calculation of Education Tax Credit and General Eligibility Requirements

    (e) Identification requirements.

    (1) In general.

    (2) Additional identification requirements for the American Opportunity Tax Credit.

    (i) TIN must be issued on or before the due date of the original return.

    (ii) Return must include the eligible educational institution's employer identification number (EIN).

    (3) Effective/applicability dates.

    (f) Statement requirement.

    (2) Exceptions.

    (3) Transition rule.

    (4) Effective/applicability date.

    (g) Claiming the credit in the case of a dependent.

    (h) Married taxpayers.

    (i) Nonresident alien taxpayers and dependents.

    § 1.25A-2 Definitions

    (d) * * *

    (3) Course materials for the American Opportunity Tax Credit for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2008.

    (4) Personal expenses.

    (5) Treatment of a comprehensive or bundled fee.

    (6) Hobby courses.

    (7) Examples.

    (e) Effective/applicability date.

    § 1.25A-5 Special Rules Relating to Characterization and Timing of Payments

    (f) * * *

    (6) Treatment of refunds where qualified tuition and related expenses paid in two taxable years for the same academic period.

    (7) Examples.

    (g) Effective/applicability date.

    Par. 3. Section 1.25A-1 is amended by: 1. Revising paragraph (e). 2. Redesignating paragraphs (f), (g), and (h) as paragraphs (g), (h), and (i), respectively. 3. Adding a new paragraph (f). 4. In newly redesignated paragraph (g)(2), removing the language “(f)” and adding “(g)” in its place.

    The revisions and additions read as follows:

    § 1.25A-1 Calculation of education tax credit and general eligibility requirements.

    (e) Identification requirements—(1) In general. No education tax credit is allowed unless a taxpayer includes on the federal income tax return claiming the credit the name and the taxpayer identification number (TIN) of the student for whom the credit is claimed. For rules relating to assessment for an omission of a correct taxpayer identification number, see section 6213(b) and (g)(2)(J).

    (2) Additional identification requirements for the American Opportunity Tax Credit (AOTC)—(i) TIN must be issued on or before the due date of the original return. For any federal income tax return (including an amended return) filed after December 18, 2015, no AOTC is allowed unless the TIN of the student and the TIN for the taxpayer claiming the credit are issued on or before the due date, or the extended due date if the extension request is timely filed, for filing the return for the taxable year for which the credit is claimed.

    (ii) Return must include the eligible educational institution's employer identification number (EIN). For taxable years beginning after December 31, 2015, no AOTC is allowed unless the taxpayer includes the EIN of each eligible educational institution to which qualified tuition and related expenses were paid.

    (3) Applicability dates. (i) Except as provided in paragraphs (e)(3)(ii) and (iii) of this section, this paragraph (e) applies on or after December 26, 2002.

    (ii) Paragraph (e)(2)(i) of this section applies to federal income tax returns (including amended returns) filed after December 18, 2015.

    (iii) Paragraph (e)(2)(ii) of this section applies to taxable years beginning after December 31, 2015.

    (f) Statement requirement—(1) In general. Except as provided in paragraph (f)(2) of this section, for taxable years beginning after June 29, 2015, no education tax credit is allowed unless the taxpayer (or the taxpayer's dependent) receives a statement furnished by an eligible educational institution, as defined in § 1.25A-2(b), containing all of the information required under § 1.6050S-1(b)(2). The amount of qualified tuition and related expenses reported on the statement furnished by an eligible educational institution may not reflect the total amount of the qualified tuition and related expenses paid during the taxable year for which a taxpayer may claim an education tax credit. A taxpayer that substantiates payment of qualified tuition and related expenses that are not reported on Form 1098-T, “Tuition Statement”, may include those expenses in computing the amount of the education tax credit allowable for the taxable year.

    (2) Exceptions. Paragraph (f)(1) of this section does not apply—

    (i) If the taxpayer or the taxpayer's dependent:

    (A) Has not received such a statement from an eligible educational institution required to furnish such statement under section 6050S and the regulations thereunder as of January 31 of the year following the taxable year to which the education tax credit relates or the date the return is filed claiming the education tax credit, whichever is later;

    (B) Has requested, in the manner prescribed in forms, instructions, or in other published guidance, the eligible educational institution to furnish the Form 1098-T after January 31 of the year following the taxable year to which the education tax credit relates but on or before the date the return is filed claiming the education tax credit; and

    (C) Has cooperated fully with the eligible educational institution's efforts to obtain information necessary to furnish the statement;

    (ii) If the eligible educational institution is not required to furnish a statement to the student under section 6050S and the regulations thereunder; or

    (iii) As otherwise provided in published guidance of general applicability, see § 601.601(d)(2) of this chapter.

    (3) Applicability date. Paragraph (f) of this section applies to credits claimed for taxable years beginning after June 29, 2015.

    Par. 4. Section 1.25A-2 is amended by: 1. Revising paragraphs (d)(2)(i) and (ii). 2. In paragraph (d)(2)(iii), removing the language “(d)(3)” and adding “(d)(4)” in its place. 3. Redesignating paragraphs (d)(3), (4), (5), and (6) as paragraphs (d)(4), (5), (6), and (7), respectively. 4. Adding a new paragraph (d)(3). 5. In newly redesignated paragraph (d)(5), by removing the language “(d)(3)” and adding “(d)(4)” in its place. 6. In newly redesignated paragraph (d)(7), revising Example 2, redesignating Examples 3, 4, 5, and 6, as Examples 4, 5, 6, and 7, and adding a new Example 3. 7. Adding paragraph (e).

    The revisions and additions read as follows:

    § 1.25A-2 Definitions.

    (d) * * *

    (2) Required fees—(i) In general. Except as provided in paragraphs (d)(3) and (4) of this section, the test for determining whether any fee is a qualified tuition and related expense is whether the fee is required to be paid to the eligible educational institution as a condition of the student's enrollment or attendance at the institution.

    (ii) Books, supplies, and equipment. For taxable years beginning before January 1, 2009, for purposes of the Hope Scholarship Credit, and for taxable years beginning after December 31, 1997, for purposes of the Lifetime Learning Credit, qualified tuition and related expenses include fees for books, supplies, and equipment used in a course of study only if the fees must be paid to the eligible educational institution for the enrollment or attendance of the student at the institution. For taxable years beginning after December 31, 2008, see paragraph (d)(3) of this section for rules relating to books, supplies and equipment for purposes of the American Opportunity Tax Credit.

    (3) Course materials for the American Opportunity Tax Credit for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2008. For taxable years beginning after December 31, 2008, the term “qualified tuition and related expenses” for purposes of the American Opportunity Tax Credit under section 25A(i) includes the amount paid for course materials (such as books, supplies, and equipment) required for enrollment or attendance at an eligible educational institution. For this purpose, “required for enrollment or attendance” means that the course materials are needed for meaningful attendance or enrollment in a course of study, regardless of whether the course materials are purchased from the institution.

    (7) * * *

    Example 2.

    First-year students attending College W during 2008 are required to obtain books and other materials used in its mandatory first-year curriculum. The books and other reading materials are not required to be purchased from College W and may be borrowed from other students or purchased from off-campus bookstores, as well as from College W's bookstore. College W bills students for any books and materials purchased from College W's bookstore. The expenses paid for the first-year books and materials purchased at College W's bookstore are not qualified tuition and related expenses because under § 1.25A-2(d)(2)(ii) the books and materials are not required to be purchased from College W for enrollment or attendance at the institution. In addition, expenses paid for the first-year books and materials borrowed from other students or purchased from vendors other than College W's bookstore are also not qualified tuition and related expenses because under § 1.25A-2(d)(2)(ii) the books and materials are not required to be purchased from College W for enrollment or attendance at the institution.

    Example 3.

    Assume the same facts as Example 2, except that the books and materials are required for first-year students attending College W during 2009. Because the expenses are paid with respect to enrollment or attendance after 2008, § 1.25A-1(d)(3) applies rather than § 1.25A-1(d)(2)(ii), if the taxpayer claims the American Opportunity Tax Credit under section 25A(i). Under § 1.25A-1(d)(3), expenses for books and other course materials are qualified tuition and related expenses for purposes of the American Opportunity Tax Credit if they are needed for meaningful attendance in the student's course of study at College W. Accordingly, if the taxpayer claims the American Opportunity Tax Credit for 2009, the expenses paid for the first-year books and materials are qualified tuition and related expenses. However, if the taxpayer claims the Lifetime Learning Credit for 2009 under section 25A(c), § 1.25A-2(d)(2)(ii) applies rather than § 1.25A-1(d)(3). Accordingly, if the taxpayer claims the Lifetime Learning Credit, the expenses paid for the first-year books and materials purchased at College W's bookstore are not qualified tuition and related expenses because under § 1.25A-2(d)(2)(ii) the books and materials are not required to be purchased from College W for enrollment or attendance at the institution.

    (e) Applicability date. (1) Except as provided in paragraph (e)(2) of this section, this section applies on or after December 26, 2002.

    (2) Paragraphs (d)(2)(i), (d)(2)(ii), (d)(3), and Examples 2 and 3 of paragraph (d)(7) of this section apply to qualified tuition and related expenses paid, and education furnished in academic periods beginning, on or after the date of publication of the Treasury decision adopting these rules as final regulations in the Federal Register. However, taxpayers may apply paragraphs (d)(2)(i), (d)(2)(ii), (d)(3), and Examples 2 and 3 of paragraph (d)(7) of this section for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2008, for which the period of limitations on filing a claim for credit or refund under section 6511 has not expired.

    Par. 5. Section 1.25A-5 is amended by: 1. In paragraph (e)(2)(ii), revising the Example. 2. Redesignating paragraph (f)(6) as paragraph (f)(7). 3. Adding a new paragraph (f)(6). 4. In newly redesignated paragraph (f)(7), adding Example 4. 5. Adding paragraph (g).

    The revisions and additions read as follows:

    § 1.25A-5 Special rules relating to characterization and timing of payments.

    (e) * * *

    (2) * * *

    (ii) * * *

    Example.

    In December 2016, Taxpayer A, a calendar year taxpayer who is not a dependent of another taxpayer under section 151, receives a bill from College Z for $5,000 for qualified tuition and related expenses to attend College Z for the 2017 spring semester, which begins in January 2017. This is the first semester that Taxpayer A will attend College Z. On December 15, 2016, Taxpayer A pays College Z $1,000 in qualified tuition and related expenses for the 2017 spring semester. On February 15, 2017, Taxpayer A pays College Z the remaining $4,000 due for qualified tuition and related expenses for the 2017 spring semester. In August 2017, Taxpayer A receives a bill from College Z for $7,000 for qualified tuition and related expenses to attend College Z for the 2017 fall semester, which begins in September 2017. Taxpayer A pays the entire $7,000 on September 1, 2017. In December 2017, Taxpayer A receives a bill from College Z for $7,000 for qualified tuition and related expenses to attend for the 2018 spring semester. Taxpayer A pays $1,000 of the 2018 spring semester bill on December 15, 2017 and $6,000 of that bill in February 15, 2018. Taxpayer A does not enroll in an eligible educational institution for the 2018 fall semester or the 2019 spring semester. Taxpayer A may claim an education tax credit on Taxpayer A's 2016 Form 1040 with respect to the $1,000 taxpayer paid to College Z on December 15, 2016 for the 2017 spring semester. On Taxpayer A's 2017 Form 1040, Taxpayer A may claim an education credit with respect to the $12,000 Taxpayer A paid to College Z during 2017 ($4,000 paid on February 15, 2017 for the 2017 spring semester, $7,000 paid on September 1, 2017, for the 2017 fall semester, and $1,000 paid on December 15, 2017, for the 2018 spring semester). On Taxpayer A's 2018 Form 1040, Taxpayer A may claim an education credit with respect to the $6,000 taxpayer paid to College Z on February 15, 2018.

    (f) * * *

    (6) Treatment of refunds where qualified tuition and related expenses paid in two taxable years for the same academic period. If a taxpayer or someone other than the taxpayer—

    (i) Pays qualified tuition and related expenses in one taxable year (prior taxable year) for a student's enrollment or attendance at an eligible educational institution during an academic period beginning in the first three months of the taxpayer's next taxable year (subsequent taxable year);

    (ii) Pays qualified tuition and related expenses in the subsequent taxable year for the academic period beginning in the first three months of the subsequent taxable year; and

    (iii) Receives a refund of qualified tuition and related expenses during the subsequent taxable year for the academic period beginning in the first three months of the subsequent taxable year (including an amount treated as a refund under paragraph (f)(4) or (5) of this section), the taxpayer may allocate the refund in any proportion to qualified tuition and related expenses paid in the prior taxable year under paragraph (f)(2) or (3) of this section or the subsequent taxable year under paragraph (f)(1) of this section, except that the amount of the refund allocated to a taxable year may not exceed the qualified tuition and related expenses paid during the taxable year with respect to the academic period beginning in the subsequent taxable year. The sum of the amounts allocated to each taxable year cannot exceed the amount of the refund.

    (7) * * *

    Example 4.

    In December 2016, Taxpayer D, a calendar year taxpayer who is not a dependent of another taxpayer under section 151, receives a bill from University X for $2,000 for qualified tuition and related expenses to attend University X as a full-time student for the 2017 spring semester, which begins in January 2017. In December 2016, D pays $500 of qualified tuition and related expenses for the 2017 spring semester. In January 2017, D pays an additional $1,500 of qualified tuition and related expenses for the 2017 spring semester. Early in the 2017 spring semester, D withdraws from several courses and no longer qualifies as a full-time student. As a result of D's change in status from a full-time student to a part-time student, D receives a $750 refund from University X on February 16, 2017. D has no other qualified tuition and related expenses for 2017. Under paragraph (f)(6) of this section, D may allocate all, or a portion, of the $750 refund to reduce the $1,500 of qualified tuition and related expenses paid in 2017 or D may also allocate a portion of the $750 refund, up to $500, to reduce the qualified tuition and related expenses paid in 2016 and allocate the remainder of the refund to reduce the qualified tuition and related expenses paid in 2017.

    (g) Applicability date. (1) Except as provided in paragraph (g)(2) of this section, this section applies on or after December 26, 2002.

    (2) Paragraphs (e)(2)(ii), (f)(6), and Example 4 in paragraph (f)(7) of this section apply to qualified tuition and related expenses paid and education furnished in academic periods beginning on or after the date of publication of the Treasury decision adopting these rules as final regulations in the Federal Register. However, taxpayers may apply paragraphs (e)(2)(ii), (f)(6), and Example 4 in paragraph (f)(7) of this section in taxable years for which the limitation on filing a claim for credit or refund under section 6511 has not expired.

    Par. 6. Section 1.6050S-0 is amended by: 1. Revising the entry for § 1.6050S-1(a)(2)(i). 2. Removing the entries for § 1.6050S-1(a)(2)(iii) and (iv). 3. Revising the entries for § 1.6050S-1(b)(2) introductory text and (b)(2)(ii). 4. Revising the entry for § 1.6050S-1(b)(3) introductory text. 5. Removing the entries for § 1.6050S-1(b)(3)(iii), (iv) and (v). 6. Revising the entry for § 1.6050S-1(b)(4). 7. Removing the entry for § 1.6050S-1(b)(5). 8. Redesignating the entry for § 1.6050S-1(b)(6) as § 1.6050S-1(b)(5). 9. Adding entries for § 1.6050S-1(c)(1)(i), (ii) and (iii). 10. Removing the entry for § 1.6050S-1(c)(2)(ii). 11. Redesignating the entry for § 1.6050S-1(c)(2)(iii) as § 1.6050S-1(c)(2)(ii). 12. Redesignating the entries for § 1.6050S-1(e) and § 1.6050S-1(f) as § 1.6050S-1(f) and § 1.6050S-1(g), respectively. 13. Adding a new entry for § 1.6050S-1(e). 14. Revising the newly redesignated entry for § 1.6050S-1(f)(4). 15. Adding a new entry for § 1.6050S-1(f)(5).

    The revisions and additions to read as follows:

    § 1.6050S-0 Table of contents. § 1.6050S-1 Information reporting for qualified tuition and related expenses.

    (a) * * *

    (2) * * *

    (i) No reporting of amounts for books, supplies and equipment unless the amount is a fee required to be paid to the institution.

    (A) In general.

    (B) Examples.

    (b) * * *

    (2) Information reporting requirements for educational institutions for qualified tuition and related expenses.

    (ii) Information included on return.

    (A) Name, address and TIN of institution

    (B) Name address and TIN of individual enrolled at institution

    (C) Amount of payments of qualified tuition and related expenses

    (D) Indication of whether payments pertain to academic period commencing in first three months of following calendar year

    (E) Amount of scholarships or grants

    (F) Amount of reimbursements or refunds pertaining to expenses reported in prior year

    (G) Amount of reductions of scholarships or grants

    (H) Statement of whether individual enrolled for at least half of normal full-time work load

    (I) Number of months during which individual enrolled for normal full-time workload

    (J) Statement of individual's enrollment in graduate-level program

    (K) Any additional information required by Form 1098-T or instructions

    (3) Requirements for insurers.

    (4) Time and place for filing return.

    (i) In general.

    (ii) Extensions of time.

    (c) * * *

    (1) * * *

    (i) Required information.

    (ii) Legend identifying statement as important tax information.

    (iii) Instructions.

    (A) Statement of payments made or reimbursements or refunds made.

    (B) Statement regarding extent of individual's eligibility for credit under section 25A.

    (C) Statement regarding reduction in tax credit due to grant or scholarship.

    (D) Statement notifying individual of ability to allocate scholarship or grant.

    (E) Statement notifying individual of consequences of refunds, reimbursements. reductions in tuition charges or grants or scholarships for prior taxable year.

    (F) Statement informing individual of consequences of reimbursement or refund by institution or insurer.

    (G) Statement notifying individual to consult forms and publications of IRS.

    (H) Name, address and phone number of educational institution or insurer.

    (e) Definitions.

    (1) Administered and processed.

    (i) In general.

    (ii) Examples.

    (2) Cost of attendance.

    (f) * * *

    (4) No penalty imposed on eligible educational institutions that certify compliance with paragraph (f)(3) of this section at the time of filing the return.

    (5) Failure to furnish TIN.

    Par. 7. Section 1.6050S-1 is amended by: 1. Revising paragraph (a)(2)(i) and removing paragraphs (a)(2)(iii) and (iv). 2. Revising paragraphs (b)(1), (b)(2)(i), and (b)(2)(ii)(D), (E), (G) and (H). 3. Redesignating paragraphs (b)(2)(ii)(I) and (J) as paragraphs (b)(2)(ii)(J) and (K), respectively, and adding a new paragraph (b)(2)(ii)(I). 4. Revising newly redesignated paragraph (b)(2)(ii)(J). 5. Revising paragraphs (b)(2)(iv), (v), (vi) and Example 1, 2, 3, and 4 in paragraph (b)(2)(vii). 6. In paragraph (b)(2)(vii), adding Example 5 and 6. 7. Removing paragraph (b)(3) and redesignating paragraphs (b)(4), (5) and (6) as paragraphs (b)(3), (4) and (5), respectively. 8. Revising newly redesignated paragraph (b)(4)(i). 9. Removing newly redesignated paragraph (b)(4)(ii) and further redesignating paragraph (b)(4)(iii) as paragraph (b)(4)(ii). 10. Revising paragraphs (c)(1)(iii)(A), (B) and (C). 11. Redesignating paragraphs (c)(1)(iii)(D), (E), (F), and (G) as paragraphs (c)(1)(iii)(E), (F), (G), and (H), respectively. 12. Revising newly re-designated paragraphs (c)(1)(iii)(E), (F), (G), and (H). 13. Adding a new paragraph (c)(1)(iii)(D). 14. Revising paragraph (c)(2)(i). 15. Removing paragraph (c)(2)(ii) and redesignating paragraph (c)(2)(iii) as paragraph (c)(2)(ii). 16. Redesignating paragraphs (e) and (f) as paragraphs (f) and (g), respectively. 17. Adding a new paragraph (e). 18. In newly redesignated paragraph (f):

    i. Revising paragraph (f)(3)(ii).

    ii. In paragraph (f)(3)(iii), removing the language “(e)(3)(iii)” and adding “(f)(3)(iii)” in its place.

    iii. Further redesignating paragraph (f)(4) as paragraph (f)(5).

    iv. Adding new paragraph (f)(4).

    19. Revising newly redesignated paragraph (g).

    The revisions and additions read as follows:

    § 1.6050S-1 Information reporting for qualified tuition and related expenses.

    (a) * * *

    (2) * * *

    (i) No reporting of amounts for books, supplies and equipment unless the amount is a fee required to be paid to the institution—(A) In general. The information reporting requirements of this section do not apply to amounts paid for books, supplies, and equipment unless the amount is a fee that must be paid to the eligible educational institution as a condition of enrollment or attendance under § 1.25A-2(d)(2)(ii).

    (B) Examples. The following examples illustrates the rules of this paragraph (a)(2):

    Example 1.

    First-year students at College W are required to obtain books and other materials used in its mandatory first-year curriculum. The books and other materials are not required to be purchased from College W and may be borrowed from other students or purchased from off-campus bookstores, as well as from College W's bookstore. College W bills students for any books and materials purchased from College W's bookstore. Because the first-year books and materials may be purchased from any vendor, the amount is not a fee that must be paid to the eligible educational institution as a condition of enrollment or attendance and, therefore, is not subject to reporting under paragraph (a)(2)(i) of this section. No amount is reportable even if a first-year student pays College W for the required books and other materials purchased from College W's bookstore.

    Example 2.

    Assume the same facts as Example 1 of this paragraph (a)(2), except College W furnishes the books and other materials to each first-year student and the books may not be borrowed or purchased from other sources. College W charges a separate fee for books and materials to all first-year students for these items as part of the bill required to be paid to attend the institution. Under paragraph (a)(2)(i) of this section, because the amount is a fee that must be paid to the eligible educational institution as a condition of enrollment or attendance, the fee, if paid by or on behalf of the student, must be reported on the Form 1098-T as part of the qualified tuition and related expenses.

    (b) Requirement to file return—(1) In general. Eligible educational institutions must report the information described in paragraph (b)(2) of this section, which requires institutions to report, among other information, the amount of payments received during the calendar year for qualified tuition and related expenses. Institutions must report separately adjustments made during the calendar year that relate to payments received for qualified tuition and related expenses that were reported for a prior calendar year. For purposes of paragraph (b)(2) of this section, an adjustment made to payments received means a reimbursement or refund. Insurers must report the information described in paragraph (b)(3) of this section.

    (2) Information reporting requirements—(i) In general. Except as provided in paragraph (a)(2) of this section (regarding exceptions where no information reporting is required), an eligible educational institution must file an information return with the IRS on Form 1098-T, “Tuition Statement,” with respect to each individual enrolled (as determined in paragraph (d)(1) of this section) for an academic period beginning during the calendar year (including an academic period beginning during the first three months of the next calendar year) or during a prior calendar year and for whom a transaction described in paragraph (b)(2)(ii)(C), (E), (F), or (G) of this section is made during the calendar year. An eligible educational institution may use a substitute Form 1098-T if the substitute form complies with applicable revenue procedures relating to substitute forms (see § 601.601(d)(2) of this chapter).

    (ii) * * *

    (D) An indication by the institution whether any payments received for qualified tuition and related expenses reported for the calendar year relate to an academic period that begins during the first three months of the next calendar year and the amount of such payments;

    (E) The amount of any scholarships or grants for the payment of the individual's cost of attendance (as defined in paragraph (e)(2) of this section) that the institution administered and processed (as defined in paragraph (e)(1) of this section) during the calendar year;

    (G) The amount of any reductions to the amount of scholarships or grants for the payment of the individual's cost of attendance (as defined in paragraph (e)(2) of this section) that were reported by the eligible educational institution with respect to the individual for a prior calendar year;

    (H) A statement or other indication showing whether the individual was enrolled for at least half of the normal full-time work load for the course of study the individual is pursuing for at least one academic period that begins during the calendar year (see section 25A and the regulations thereunder for more information regarding workload requirements);

    (I) A statement or other indication showing the number of months (for this purpose, one day in a month is treated as an entire month) during the calendar year that the individual was enrolled for the normal full-time workload for the course of study the individual is pursuing at the institution;

    (J) A statement or other indication showing whether the individual was enrolled in a program leading to a graduate-level degree, graduate-level certificate, or other recognized graduate-level educational credential, unless the student is enrolled in both a graduate-level program and an undergraduate level program during the same calendar year at the same institution in which case no statement or indication is required; and

    (iv) Separate reporting of reimbursements or refunds of payments of qualified tuition and related expenses that were reported for a prior calendar year. An institution must separately report on Form 1098-T any reimbursements or refunds (as defined in paragraph (b)(2)(vi) of this section) made during the current calendar year that relate to payments of qualified tuition and related expenses that were reported by the institution for a prior calendar year. Such reimbursements or refunds are not netted against the payments received for qualified tuition and related expenses during the current calendar year.

    (v) Payments received for qualified tuition and related expenses determined. For purposes of determining the amount of payments received for qualified tuition and related expenses during a calendar year, payments received with respect to an individual during the calendar year from any source (except for any scholarship or grant that, by its terms, must be applied to expenses other than qualified tuition and related expenses, such as room and board) are treated first as payments of qualified tuition and related expenses up to the total amount billed by the institution for qualified tuition and related expenses for enrollment during the calendar year, and then as payments of expenses other than qualified tuition and related expenses for enrollment during the calendar year. Payments received with respect to an amount billed for enrollment during an academic period beginning in the first 3 months of the following calendar year in which the payment is made are treated as payment of qualified tuition and related expenses in the calendar year during which the payment is received by the institution. For purposes of this section, a payment includes any positive account balance (such as any reimbursement or refund credited to an individual's account) that an institution applies toward current charges.

    (vi) Reimbursements or refunds of payments for qualified tuition and related expenses determined. For purposes of determining the amount of reimbursements or refunds made of payments received for qualified tuition and related expenses, any reimbursement or refund made with respect to an individual during a calendar year (except for any refund of a scholarship or grant that, by its terms, was required to be applied to expenses other than qualified tuition and related expenses, such as room and board) is treated as a reimbursement or refund of payments for qualified tuition and related expenses up to the amount of any reduction in charges for qualified tuition and related expenses. For purposes of this section, a reimbursement or refund includes amounts that an institution credits to an individual's account, as well as amounts disbursed to, or on behalf of, the individual.

    (vii) * * *

    Example 1.

    (i) Student A enrolls in University X as a full-time student for the 2016 fall semester. In early August 2016, University X sends a bill to Student A for $16,000 for the 2016 fall semester breaking out the current charges as follows: $10,000 for qualified tuition and related expenses and $6,000 for room and board. In late August 2016, Student A pays $11,000 to University X, leaving a remaining balance to be paid of $5,000. In early September 2016, Student A drops to half-time enrollment for the 2016 fall semester but remains in on-campus housing. In late September 2016, University X credits $5,000 to Student A's account, reflecting a $5,000 reduction in the $10,000 charge for qualified tuition and related expenses as a result of dropping from full-time to half-time status. No other transactions occur with respect to Student A's account with University X. In late September 2016, University X applies the $5,000 credit toward Student A's current charges, eliminating any outstanding balance on Student A's account with University X.

    (ii) Under paragraph (b)(2)(v) of this section, the $11,000 payment is treated as a payment of qualified tuition and related expenses up to the $10,000 billed for qualified tuition and related expenses. Under paragraph (b)(2)(vi) of this section, the $5,000 credited to the student's account is treated as a reimbursement or refund of payments for qualified tuition and related expenses because there is a reduction in charges for qualified tuition and related expenses equal to the $5,000 credit due to Student A dropping to half-time for the 2016 fall semester. Under paragraph (b)(2)(iii) of this section, the $10,000 payment received for qualified tuition and related expenses during 2016 is reduced by the $5,000 reimbursement or refund of payments received for qualified tuition and related expenses during 2016. Therefore, University X is required to report $5,000 of payments received for qualified tuition and related expenses during 2016 on a 2016 Form 1098-T.

    Example 2.

    (i) The facts are the same as in Example 1 of this paragraph (b)(2)(vii), except that Student A pays the full $16,000 in late August 2016. In late September 2016, University X reduces the tuition charges by $5,000 and issues a $5,000 refund to Student A.

    (ii) Under paragraph (b)(2)(v) of this section, the $16,000 payment is treated as a payment of qualified tuition and related expenses up to the $10,000 billed for qualified tuition and related expenses. Under paragraph (b)(2)(vi) of this section, the $5,000 refund is treated as reimbursement or refund of payments for qualified tuition and related expenses because University X reduced the charges for qualified tuition and related expenses equal to the $5,000 refund disbursed to the student due to dropping to half-time for the 2016 fall semester. Under paragraph (b)(2)(iii) of this section, the $10,000 payment received for qualified tuition and related expenses during 2016 is reduced by the $5,000 reimbursement or refund of payments received for qualified tuition and related expenses during 2016. Therefore, University X is required to report $5,000 of payments received for qualified tuition and related expenses during 2016 on a 2016 Form 1098-T.

    Example 3.

    (i) The facts are the same as in Example 1 of this paragraph (b)(2)(vii), except that Student A is enrolled full-time, and, in early September 2016, Student A decides to live at home with her parents. In late September 2016, University X adjusts Student A's account to eliminate room and board charges and issues a $1,000 refund to Student A.

    (ii) Under paragraph (b)(2)(v) of this section, the $11,000 payment is treated as a payment of qualified tuition and related expenses up to the $10,000 billed for qualified tuition and related expenses. Under paragraph (b)(2)(vi) of this section, the $1,000 refund is not treated as reimbursement or refund of payments for qualified tuition and related expenses because University X has reduced room and board charges for the 2016 fall semester, rather than reducing charges for qualified tuition and related expenses for the 2016 fall semester. Therefore, under paragraph (b)(2)(iii) of this section, University X is required to report $10,000 of payments received for qualified tuition and related expenses during 2016 on a 2016 Form 1098-T.

    Example 4.

    (i) Student B enrolls in College Y as a full-time student for the 2017 spring semester. In early December 2016, College Y sends a bill to Student B for $16,000 for the 2017 spring semester breaking out current charges as follows: $10,000 for qualified tuition and related expenses and $6,000 for room and board. In late December 2016, College Y receives a payment of $16,000 from Student B. In mid-January 2017, after the 2017 spring semester classes begin, Student B drops to half-time enrollment. In mid-January 2017, College Y credits Student B's account with $5,000, reflecting a $5,000 reduction in charges for qualified tuition and related expenses, but does not issue a refund to Student B. Thereafter, Student B's account reflects a positive balance of $5,000 due to the credit and there is no other activity on Student B's account until early August when College Y sends a bill for $16,000 for the 2017 fall semester breaking out the current charges as follows: $10,000 for qualified tuition and related expenses and $6,000 for room and board. In early September 2017, College Y applies the $5,000 positive account balance (credit) toward Student B's $16,000 bill for the 2017 fall semester. In late September 2017, Student B pays $6,000 towards the charges for the 2017 fall semester.

    (ii) For calendar year 2016, under paragraph (b)(2)(v) of this section, $10,000 of the $16,000 payment received by College Y in December 2016 is treated as a payment of qualified tuition and related expenses. Therefore, College Y is required to report $10,000 of payments received for qualified tuition and related expenses during 2016 on a 2016 Form 1098-T. In addition, College Y is required to indicate that $10,000 of the payments reported on the 2016 Form 1098-T relate to an academic period that begins during the first three months of the next calendar year.

    (iii) Under paragraph (b)(2)(vi) of this section, the $5,000 credited to Student B's account in January 2017 is treated as a reimbursement or refund of qualified tuition and related expenses because there is a reduction in charges for qualified tuition and related expenses of $5,000 for the 2017 spring semester. Under paragraph (b)(2)(iv) of this section, however, this reduction is a reimbursement or refund of qualified tuition and related expenses made during 2017 and, therefore, must be separately reported on the 2017 Form 1098-T. The 2016 Form 1098-T reporting $10,000 of qualified tuition and related expenses for 2016 is unchanged.

    (iv) Under paragraph (b)(2)(v) of this section, the $5,000 positive account balance that is applied toward charges for the 2017 fall semester is treated as a payment made in 2017. Therefore, College Y received total payments of $11,000 during 2017 (the $5,000 credit plus the $6,000 payment). Under paragraph (b)(2)(v) of this section, the $11,000 of total payments made during 2017 are treated as a payment of qualified tuition and related expenses up to the $10,000 billed for qualified tuition and related expenses for the 2017 fall semester. Therefore, for 2017, College Y is required to report $10,000 of payments received for qualified tuition and related expenses during 2017 and a $5,000 refund of payments of qualified tuition and related expenses reported for 2016 on the 2017 Form 1098-T.

    Example 5.

    (i) Student C enrolls in College Z as a full-time student the 2016 fall semester and the 2017 spring semester. Student C was not enrolled in, and did not attend, any institution of higher education prior to the 2016 fall semester. In August 2016, College Z sends a bill to Student C for $11,000 for the 2016 fall semester. In December 2016, College Z sends a bill to Student C for $11,000 for the 2017 spring semesters. Qualified tuition and related expenses billed for each semester is $6,000 and room and board billed for each semester is $5,000. In September 2016, College Z receives a payment of $11,000 which is applied toward the amount billed for Student C's attendance during the 2016 fall semester. In December 2016, College Z receives a payment of $4,500 which is applied toward the amount billed for Student C's attendance during the 2017 spring semester. In February 2017, College Z receives a payment of $6,500, the remainder of the amount billed for enrollment during the 2017 spring semester.

    (ii) On the 2016 Form 1098-T, College Z reports the payment of $10,500 of qualified tuition and related expenses determined as follows: $6,000 for the payment received in September 2016 with respect to the amount billed for qualified tuition and related expenses for the 2016 fall semester and $4,500 for the payment received in December 2016 with respect to the amount billed for qualified tuition and related expenses for the 2017 spring semester. On the 2017 Form 1098-T, College Z reports the payment of $1,500 of qualified tuition and related expenses received in February 2017 with respect to the amount billed for qualified tuition and related expenses for the 2017 spring semester.

    Example 6.

    The facts are the same as Example 5 of this paragraph (b)(2)(vii) except in January 2017 College Z receives payment of $11,000 for the entire amount billed for the 2017 spring semester. On the 2016 Form 1098-T, College Z reports the payment of $6,000 for the payment received in September 2016 with respect to the amount billed for qualified tuition and related expenses for the 2016 fall semester. On the 2017 Form 1098-T, College Z reports the payment of $6,000 of qualified tuition and related expenses received in January 2017 with respect to the amount billed for qualified tuition and related expenses for the 2017 spring semester.

    (4) Time and place for filing return—(i) In general. Except as provided in paragraph (b)(4)(ii) of this section, Form 1098-T must be filed on or before February 28 (March 31 if filed electronically) of the year following the calendar year in which payments were received for qualified tuition or related expenses, or reimbursements, refunds, or reductions of such amounts were made. An institution or insurer must file Form 1098-T with the IRS according to the instructions for Form 1098-T.

    (c) * * *

    (1) * * *

    (iii) * * *

    (A) State that the statement reports total payments received by the institution for qualified tuition and related expenses during the calendar year, or the total reimbursements or refunds made by the insurer;

    (B) State that, under section 25A and the regulations thereunder, the taxpayer may claim an education tax credit only with respect to qualified tuition and related expenses actually paid during the calendar year; and that the taxpayer may not be able to claim an education tax credit with respect to the entire amount of payments received for qualified tuition and related expenses reported on the Form 1098-T for the calendar year;

    (C) State that the amount of any scholarships or grants reported on the Form 1098-T for the calendar year and other similar amounts not reported on the Form 1098-T (because they are not administered and processed by the eligible educational institution as defined in paragraph (e)(1) of this section) that are allocated by the student to pay qualified tuition and related expenses may reduce the amount of any allowable education tax credit for the taxable year;

    (D) State that even if the eligible educational institution applies scholarships or grants reported on the Form 1098-T for the calendar year to qualified tuition and related expenses, the student may, for tax purposes, be able to allocate all or a portion of the scholarships or grants to expenses other than qualified tuition and related expenses (and, therefore, forego having to reduce the amount of the education tax credit the student may claim) if the terms of the scholarship or grant permit it to be used for expenses other than qualified tuition and related expenses and the student includes the amount in income on his federal income tax return.

    (E) State that the amount of any reimbursements or refunds of payments received, or reductions in charges, for qualified tuition and related expenses, or any reductions to the amount of scholarships or grants, reported by the eligible educational institution with respect to the individual for a prior calendar year on Form 1098-T may affect the amount of any allowable education tax credit for the prior calendar year (and may result in an increase in tax liability for the year of the refund);

    (F) State that the amount of any reimbursements or refunds of qualified tuition and related expenses reported on a Form 1098-T by an eligible educational institution or insurer may reduce the amount of an allowable education tax credit for a taxable year (and may result in an increase in tax liability for the year of the refund);

    (G) State that the taxpayer should refer to relevant IRS forms and publications, such as Publication 970, “Tax Benefits for Education,” and should not refer to the institution or the insurer, for explanations relating to the eligibility requirements for, and calculation of, any allowable education tax credit; and

    (H) Include the name, address, and phone number of the information contact of the eligible educational institution or insurer that filed the Form 1098-T.

    (2) Time and manner for furnishing statement—(i) In general. Except as provided in paragraphs (c)(2)(ii) of this section, an institution or insurer must furnish the statement described in paragraph (c)(1) of this section to each individual for whom it is required to file a return, on or before January 31 of the year following the calendar year in which payments were received for qualified tuition and related expenses, or reimbursements, refunds or reductions of such amounts were made. If mailed, the statement must be sent to the individual's permanent address or the individual's temporary address if the institution or insurer does not know the individual's permanent address. If furnished electronically, the statement must be furnished in accordance with applicable regulations.

    (e) Definitions. The following definitions apply with respect to this section:

    (1) Administered and processed—(i) In general. A scholarship or grant is “administered and processed” by an eligible educational institution if the institution receives payment of an amount (whether by cash, check, or other means of payment) that the institution knows or reasonably should know, is a scholarship or grant, regardless of whether the institution is named payee or co-payee of such amount and regardless of whether, in the case of a payment other than in cash, the student endorses the check or other means of payment for the benefit of the institution. For instance, Pell Grants, described in the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1070), as amended, are administered and processed by an institution in all cases.

    (ii) Examples. The following examples illustrate the definition in this paragraph (e)(1):

    Example 1.

    University M received a Pell Grant on behalf of Student B, a student enrolled in a degree program at University M. University M provides all required notifications to and obtains all the necessary paperwork from Student B and applies the Pell Grant to Student B's account. Because University M received the Pell Grant and University M knows or should know that the Pell Grant is a scholarship or grant, under paragraph (e)(1)(i) of this section, the Pell Grant is administered and processed by University M.

    Example 2.

    University N receives a check from Organization Y made out to Student C. University N is not named as a payee on the check. The cover letter accompanying the check provides University N with sufficient information to reasonably know that the check represents payment of a scholarship that may be used to pay Student C's qualified tuition and related expenses. Under paragraph (e)(1)(i) of this section, the scholarship from Organization Y is administered and processed by University N. This is the case even though University N is not named on the check as a payee and regardless of whether Student C endorses the check over to University N.

    (2) Cost of attendance. The term “cost of attendance” has the same meaning as section 472 of the Higher Education Act of 1965, 20 U.S.C. 1087ll.

    (f) * * *

    (3) * * *

    (ii) Acting in a responsible manner. An institution or insurer must request the TIN of each individual for whom it is required to file a return if it does not already have a record of the individual's correct TIN. If the institution or insurer does not have a record of the individual's correct TIN, then it must solicit the TIN in the manner described in paragraph (f)(3)(iii) of this section on or before December 31 of each year during which it receives payments of qualified tuition and related expenses or makes reimbursements, refunds, or reductions of such amounts with respect to the individual. If an individual refuses to provide his or her TIN upon request, the institution or insurer must file the return and furnish the statement required by this section without the individual's TIN, but with all other required information. The specific solicitation requirements of paragraph (f)(3)(iii) of this section apply in lieu of the solicitation requirements of § 301.6724-1(e) and (f) of this chapter for the purpose of determining whether an institution or insurer acted in a responsible manner in attempting to obtain a correct TIN. An institution or insurer that complies with the requirements of this paragraph (f)(3) will be considered to have acted in a responsible manner within the meaning of § 301.6724-1(d) of this chapter with respect to any failure to include the correct TIN of an individual on a return or statement required by section 6050S and this section.

    (4) No penalty imposed on eligible educational institutions that certify compliance with paragraph (f)(3) of this section at the time of filing the return. In the case of returns required to be filed and statements required to be furnished after December 31, 2015, the IRS will not impose a penalty against an eligible educational institution under section 6721 or 6722 for failure to include the individual's correct TIN on the return or statement if the institution makes a true and accurate certification to the IRS under penalties of perjury (in the form and manner prescribed by the Secretary in publications, forms and instructions, or other published guidance) at the time of filing of the return that the institution complied with the requirements in paragraphs (f)(3)(ii) and (iii) of this section. Nothing in this paragraph (f)(4) prevents the IRS from imposing a penalty under section 6721or 6722 if after the IRS receives the certification described in this paragraph (f)(4) the IRS determines that the requirements of paragraph (f)(3) of this section are not satisfied or the failure is unrelated to an incorrect or missing TIN for the individual for whom the institution is required to file a return or statement.

    (g) Applicability date. The rules in this section apply to information returns required to be filed, and statements required to be furnished, after December 31, 2003, except that paragraphs (a)(2) (b)(1), (b)(2)(i), (b)(2)(ii)(D), (E), and (G) through (K), (b)(2)(iv) through (vii), (b)(4)(i) and (ii), (c)(1)(iii)(B) through (H), (e), and (f)(4) apply to information returns required to be filed, and statements required to be furnished, after the date of publication of the Treasury decision adopting these rules as final regulations in the Federal Register. For information returns required to be filed, and statements required to be furnished, on or before the date of publication of the Treasury decision adopting these rules as final regulations in the Federal Register, § 1.6050S-1 (as contained in 26 CFR part 1, revised April 2014) applies.

    PART 301—PROCEDURE AND ADMINISTRATION Par. 8. The authority citation for part 301 continues to read in part as follows: Authority:

    26 U.S.C. 7805. * * *

    Par. 9. Section 301.6724-1 is amended by adding a sentence at the end of paragraph (a)(1) to read as follows:
    § 301.6724-1 Reasonable cause.

    (a) * * *

    (1) * * * For waiver in the case of eligible educational institutions required to report information under section 6050S with respect to qualified tuition and related expenses, see § 1.6050S-1(f) of this chapter.

    John Dalrymple, Deputy Commissioner for Services and Enforcement.
    [FR Doc. 2016-18032 Filed 7-29-16; 11:15 am] BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Internal Revenue Service 26 CFR Parts 1 and 301 [REG-103058-16] RIN 1545-BN23 Information Reporting of Catastrophic Health Coverage and Other Issues Under Section 6055 AGENCY:

    Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury.

    ACTION:

    Notice of proposed rulemaking.

    SUMMARY:

    This document contains proposed regulations relating to information reporting of minimum essential coverage under section 6055 of the Internal Revenue Code (Code). Health insurance issuers, certain employers, and others that provide minimum essential coverage to individuals must report to the IRS information about the type and period of coverage and furnish related statements to covered individuals. These proposed regulations affect health insurance issuers, employers, governments, and other persons that provide minimum essential coverage to individuals.

    DATES:

    Written or electronic comments and requests for a public hearing must be received by October 3, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Send submissions to: CC:PA:LPD:PR (REG-103058-16), Room 5203, Internal Revenue Service, P.O. Box 7604, Ben Franklin Station, Washington, DC 20044. Submissions may be hand-delivered Monday through Friday between the hours of 8 a.m. and 4 p.m. to CC:PA:LPD:PR (REG-103058-16), Courier's Desk, Internal Revenue Service, 1111 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20224, or sent electronically via the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov (IRS REG-103058-16).

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Concerning the proposed regulations under section 6055, John B. Lovelace, (202) 317-7006; concerning the proposed regulations under section 6724, Hollie Marx, (202) 317-6844; concerning the submission of comments, Regina Johnson, (202) 317-6901 (not toll-free calls).

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Paperwork Reduction Act

    The collection of information contained in this notice of proposed rulemaking has been submitted to the Office of Management and Budget in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507(d)). Comments on the collection of information should be sent to the Office of Management and Budget, Attn: Desk Officer for the Department of the Treasury, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Washington, DC 20503, with copies to the Internal Revenue Service, Attn: IRS Reports Clearance Officer, SE:W:CAR:MP:T:T:SP, Washington, DC 20224. Comments on the collection of information should be received by October 3, 2016. Comments are specifically requested concerning:

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

    How the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected may be enhanced;

    How the burden of complying with the proposed collection of information may be minimized, including through the application of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and

    Estimates of capital or start-up costs and costs of operation, maintenance, and purchase of services to provide information.

    The collection of information in these proposed regulations is in § 1.6055-1. The collection of information will be used to determine whether an individual has minimum essential coverage under section 1501(b) of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (26 U.S.C. 5000A(f)). The collection of information is required to comply with the provisions of section 6055. The likely respondents are health insurers, self-insured employers or other sponsors of self-insured health plans, and governments that provide minimum essential coverage.

    The burden for the collection of information contained in these proposed regulations will be reflected in the burden on Form 1095-B, Health Coverage, or another form that the IRS designates, which will request the information in the proposed regulation.

    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a valid control number assigned by the Office of Management and Budget.

    Background

    Under section 5000A, individuals must for each month have minimum essential coverage, qualify for a health coverage exemption, or make an individual shared responsibility payment with their income tax returns. Section 6055 provides that all persons who provide minimum essential coverage to an individual must report certain information to the IRS that identifies covered individuals and the period of coverage, and must furnish a statement to the covered individuals containing the same information. The information reported under section 6055 allows individuals to establish, and the IRS to verify, that the individuals were covered by minimum essential coverage for months during the year.

    Information returns under section 6055 generally are filed using Form 1095-B. A separate and distinct health coverage-related reporting requirement under section 6056 requires that certain large employers report information on Form 1095-C, Employer-Provided Health Insurance Offer and Coverage. Self-insured employers required to file Form 1095-C use Part III of that form, rather than Form 1095-B, to report information required under section 6055 for individuals enrolled in the self-insured employer-sponsored coverage. These proposed regulations provide guidance under section 6055 only, which relates to Form 1095-B and Form 1095-C, Part III. These proposed regulations do not affect information reporting under section 6056 on Form 1095-C, Parts I and II.

    Under section 5000A(f)(1), various types of health plans and programs are minimum essential coverage, including: (1) Specified government-sponsored programs such as Medicare Part A, the Medicaid program under Title XIX of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1936 and following sections), the Children's Health Insurance Program under Title XXI of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1397aa and following sections) (CHIP), the TRICARE program under chapter 55 of Title 10, U.S.C., health care programs for veterans and other individuals under chapter 17 or 18 of Title 38 U.S.C., coverage for Peace Corps volunteers under 22 U.S.C. 2504(e), and coverage under the Nonappropriated Fund Health Benefits Program under section 349 of Public Law 103-337, (2) coverage under an eligible employer-sponsored plan, (3) coverage under a plan in the individual market (such as a qualified health plan offered through an Affordable Insurance Exchange (Exchange, also known as a Marketplace)), (4) coverage under a grandfathered health plan, and (5) other coverage recognized as minimum essential coverage by the Secretary of Health and Human Services, in coordination with the Secretary of the Treasury.

    Under section 5000A(f)(3) and § 1.5000A-2(g) of the Income Tax Regulations, coverage that consists solely of excepted benefits described in section 2791(c)(1), (c)(2), (c)(3), or (c)(4) of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 300gg-91(c)), and the regulations under that section, is not minimum essential coverage. Section 1.5000A-2(b)(2) lists government-sponsored programs that provide limited benefits and which are not minimum essential coverage.

    Under section 5000A(f)(4), an individual who is a bona fide resident of a United States possession for a month is treated as having minimum essential coverage for that month.

    Notice 2015-68, 2015-41 I.R.B. 547, provides guidance on various issues under section 6055. In Notice 2015-68, the Treasury Department and the IRS stated that they intend to propose regulations under section 6055 addressing certain of these issues and requested comments. Comments were requested about the application of the reasonable cause rules under section 6724 to section 6055 reporting, in particular as applied to taxpayer identification number (TIN) solicitation and reporting.

    Persons Required To Report

    Under § 1.6055-1(c)(1)(iii), the executive department or agency of the governmental unit that provides coverage under a government-sponsored program is the reporting entity for government-sponsored minimum essential coverage. Section 1.6055-1(c)(3)(i) specifically provides that the State agency that administers the Medicaid or CHIP program, respectively, must report government-sponsored coverage under section 6055. Notice 2015-68 provides that Medicaid and CHIP agencies in U.S. possessions or territories are not required to report Medicaid and CHIP coverage because an individual eligible for that coverage is generally a bona fide resident of the possession or territory who is deemed to have minimum essential coverage under section 5000A(f)(4) and, therefore, does not require reporting under section 6055 to verify compliance with section 5000A.

    In general, under § 1.6055-1(c)(1)(ii) the reporting entity for coverage under a self-insured group health plan is the plan sponsor. Section 1.6055-1(c)(2) provides rules for identifying which entity is the plan sponsor of a self-insured group health plan for purposes of section 6055. For this purpose, the employer is the plan sponsor of a self-insured group health plan established by a single employer (determined without aggregating related entities under section 414). If the plan or arrangement is established or maintained by more than one employer (including a Multiple Employer Welfare Arrangement (as defined in section 3(40) of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA)), and the plan is not a multiemployer plan (as defined in section 3(37) of ERISA), each participating employer is a plan sponsor with respect to that employer's employees. For a self-insured group health plan or arrangement that is a multiemployer plan, the plan sponsor is the association, committee, joint board of trustees, or other similar group of representatives of the parties who establish or maintain the plan. For a self-insured group health plan or arrangement maintained solely by an employee organization, the plan sponsor is the employee organization.

    The existing regulations at § 1.6055-1(d)(2) provide that no reporting is required for minimum essential coverage that provides benefits in addition or as a supplement to other coverage that is minimum essential coverage if the primary and supplemental coverage have the same plan sponsor or the coverage supplements government-sponsored minimum essential coverage. Notice 2015-68 explained that this rule had proven to be confusing, and, accordingly, the Treasury Department and the IRS intended to propose regulations providing that (1) if an individual is covered by multiple minimum essential coverage plans or programs provided by the same provider, reporting is only required for one of the plans or programs; and (2) reporting generally is not required for an individual's minimum essential coverage to the extent that the individual is eligible for that coverage only if the individual is also covered by other minimum essential coverage for which section 6055 reporting is required.

    Information Required To Be Reported

    Under section 6055(b) and § 1.6055-1(e)(1), providers of minimum essential coverage must report to the IRS (1) the name, address, and employer identification number (EIN) of the reporting entity required to file the return; (2) the name, address, and TIN, or date of birth if a TIN is not available, of the responsible individual (except that a reporting entity may, but is not required to, report the TIN of a responsible individual not enrolled in the coverage); (3) the name and TIN, or date of birth if a TIN is not available, of each individual who is covered under the policy or program; and (4) the months of coverage for each covered individual.1 Section 1.6055-1(b)(11) provides that the responsible individual includes a primary insured, employee, former employee, uniformed services sponsor, parent, or other related person named on an application who enrolls one or more individuals, including him or herself, in minimum essential coverage.

    1 The Affordable Care Act also added section 6056, which requires that applicable large employers file and furnish statements containing information related to offers of coverage, if any, made to each full-time employee. To complete these statements properly, employers must have each employee's TIN. In accordance with the requirements of a different Code section (section 3402(f)(2)(A)), employers should have already sought each employee's TIN in advance of the deadline for filing and furnishing statements required under section 6056. Therefore, the TIN solicitation rules in these proposed regulations only apply to information reporting under section 6055 (which in the case of an applicable large employer providing coverage under a self-insured plan, includes information reporting on Form 1095-C, Part III).

    In addition, under § 1.6055-1(e)(2), for coverage provided by a health insurance issuer through a group health plan, information returns must report (1) the name, address, and EIN of the employer maintaining the plan, and (2) any other information that the Secretary requires for administering the credit under section 45R (relating to the tax credit for employee health insurance expenses of small employers).

    A reporting entity that fails to comply with the filing and statement furnishing requirements of section 6055 may be subject to penalties for failure to file timely a correct information return (section 6721) or failure to furnish timely a correct statement (section 6722). See section 6724(d); see also § 1.6055-1(h)(1). These penalties may be waived if the failure is due to reasonable cause and is not due to willful neglect. See section 6724(a). In particular, under § 301.6724-1(a)(2) of the Procedure and Administration Regulations penalties are waived if a reporting entity demonstrates that it acted in a responsible manner and that the failure is due to significant mitigating factors or events beyond the reporting entity's control. For purposes of section 6055 reporting, if the information reported on a return is incomplete or incorrect as a result of a change in circumstances (such as a retroactive change in coverage), a failure to timely file or furnish a corrected document is a failure to file a correct return or furnish a correct statement under sections 6721 and 6722. See § 1.6055-1(h)(2).

    In general, under § 301.6724-1(e) a person will be treated as acting in a responsible manner if the person properly solicits a TIN but does not receive it. For this purpose, proper solicitation of a TIN involves an initial solicitation and two subsequent annual solicitations. In general, an initial solicitation is made when the relationship between the reporting entity and the taxpayer is established. If the reporting entity does not receive the TIN, the first annual solicitation is generally required by December 31 of the year in which the relationship with the taxpayer begins (January 31 of the following year if the relationship begins in December). Generally, if the TIN is still not provided, a second annual solicitation is required by December 31 of the following year. Similar rules applying to filers who file or furnish information reports with incorrect TINs are in § 301.6724-1(f).

    The preamble to the section 6055 regulations (T.D. 9660, 79 FR 13220) provides short-term relief from reporting penalties for 2015 coverage. Specifically, the IRS will not impose penalties under sections 6721 and 6722 on reporting entities that can show that they have made good faith efforts to comply with the information reporting requirements. This relief applies to incorrect or incomplete information, including TINs or dates of birth, reported on a return or statement.

    Explanation of Provisions and Summary of Comments 1. Reporting of Catastrophic Plans

    Under § 1.36B-5(a), Exchanges must report to the IRS information relating to qualified health plans in which individuals enroll through the Exchange. Under section 36B(c)(3)(A), the term qualified health plan has the same meaning as defined in section 1301 of the Affordable Care Act except that it does not include a catastrophic plan described in section 1302 of the Affordable Care Act. Thus, Exchanges are not required to report on catastrophic coverage. Section 1.6055-1(d) provides that health insurance issuers need not report on coverage in a qualified health plan in the individual market enrolled in through an Exchange, because that information is generally reported by Exchanges pursuant to § 1.36B-5. Thus, currently neither the Exchanges nor health insurance issuers are responsible for reporting coverage under a catastrophic plan.

    Effective administration of section 5000A generally requires reporting of all minimum essential coverage, including catastrophic plans in which individuals enroll through an Exchange. Accordingly, Notice 2015-68 indicated that the Treasury Department and the IRS intended to propose regulations under section 6055 to narrow the relief provided to issuers in § 1.6055-1(d) by requiring issuers of catastrophic plans to report catastrophic plan coverage on Form 1095-B, effective for coverage in 2016 and returns and statements filed and furnished in 2017. Consistent with Notice 2015-68, the proposed regulations include this requirement but, to allow reporting entities sufficient time to implement these reporting requirements, are proposed to be effective for coverage in 2017 and returns and statements filed and furnished in 2018.

    Notice 2015-68 indicated that health insurance issuers could voluntarily report on 2015 catastrophic coverage (on returns and statements filed and furnished in 2016) and were encouraged to do so. Notice 2015-68 further provided that an issuer that reports on 2015 catastrophic coverage will not be subject to penalties for these returns. Given the 2017 effective date for reporting of catastrophic coverage provided in these proposed regulations, health insurance issuers similarly may voluntarily report on 2016 catastrophic coverage (on returns and statements filed and furnished in 2017) and are encouraged to do so. An issuer that reports on 2016 catastrophic coverage will not be subject to penalties for these returns.

    2. Reporting of Coverage Under Basic Health Programs

    Section 1331 of the Affordable Care Act allows states to establish a Basic Health Program to provide an additional healthcare coverage option to certain individuals not eligible for Medicaid. See 42 CFR part 600. The Basic Health Program is designated as minimum essential coverage under 42 CFR 600.5.

    Section 5000A(f) does not identify the Basic Health Program as a government-sponsored program, but it closely resembles government-sponsored coverage such as Medicaid and CHIP. Accordingly, Notice 2015-68 indicated that the state agency that administers the Basic Health Program is the entity that must report that coverage under section 6055. Consistent with Notice 2015-68, these proposed regulations provide that the State agency administering coverage under the Basic Health Program is required to report that coverage under section 6055.

    3. Truncated TINs

    Section 6055(b) and § 1.6055-1(e) require that health insurance issuers and carriers reporting coverage under insured group health plans report information about the employer sponsoring the plan, including the employer's EIN, to the IRS. Section 6055(c) and § 1.6055-1(g) require that health insurance issuers and carriers reporting information to the IRS furnish a statement to a taxpayer providing information about the filer and the covered individuals. Section 301.6109-4(b)(1) provides that the TIN of a person other than the filer, including an EIN, may be truncated on statements furnished to recipients unless, among other reasons, such truncation is otherwise prohibited by statute or regulations. Thus, under § 1.6055-1(g)(3) of the existing regulations, a recipient's TIN may appear in the form of an IRS truncated taxpayer identification number (TTIN) on a statement furnished to the recipient. These proposed regulations amend the existing regulations to clarify that a TTIN is not an alternative identifying number; rather, it is one of the ways that a TIN may appear, subject to the rules in § 301.6109-4(b)(1).

    Existing regulations do not address whether health insurance issuers and carriers are permitted to truncate a sponsoring employer's EIN on statements furnished to taxpayers. Notice 2015-68 advised that the Treasury Department and the IRS intended to propose regulations to clarify that the EIN of the employer sponsoring the plan may be truncated to appear as an IRS TTIN on statements health insurance issuers and carriers furnish to taxpayers. Consistent with Notice 2015-68, the proposed regulations clarify that the EIN of the employer sponsoring the plan may be truncated to appear as an IRS TTIN on statements health insurance issuers and carriers furnish to taxpayers. Section 301.6109-4(b)(2)(ii) prohibits using TTINs if, among other things, a statute specifically requires the use of an EIN. While section 6055(b)(2)(A) requires that the information return filed with the IRS includes the employer's EIN, and section 6055(c)(1)(B) requires that the statement furnished to a taxpayer includes the information required to be shown on the information return with respect to such individual, the statute does not require that the full EIN appear on the statement furnished to taxpayers and the employer's EIN may be truncated to appear in the form of an IRS TTIN.

    4. Plans for Which Reporting Is Not Required

    Information reporting under section 6055(a) is generally required of every person who provides minimum essential coverage to an individual during the year. In certain instances where the reporting would be duplicative, the existing regulations allow the person who provides supplemental coverage to forgo information reporting. This supplemental coverage rule in § 1.6055-1(d)(2) was intended to eliminate duplicate reporting of an individual's minimum essential coverage under circumstances when there is reasonable certainty that the provider of the “primary” coverage will report. This rule has proven to be confusing.

    The Treasury Department and the IRS indicated in Notice 2015-68 that regulations would be proposed to replace the existing rules. Accordingly, the proposed regulations provide that (1) if an individual is covered by more than one minimum essential coverage plan or program provided by the same reporting entity, reporting is required for only one of the plans or programs; and (2) reporting is not required for an individual's minimum essential coverage to the extent that the individual is eligible for that coverage only if the individual is also covered by other minimum essential coverage for which section 6055 reporting is required. As in Notice 2015-68, the proposed regulations provide that the second rule applies to eligible employer-sponsored coverage only if the supplemental coverage is offered by the same employer that offered the eligible employer-sponsored coverage for which section 6055 reporting is required. These rules apply month by month and individual by individual.

    Thus, under the proposed regulations, applying the first rule, if for a month an individual is enrolled in a self-insured group health plan provided by an employer and also is enrolled in a self-insured health reimbursement arrangement (HRA) provided by the same employer, the reporting entity (the employer) is required to report only one type of coverage for that individual. If an employee is covered under both self-insured arrangements for some months of the year but retires or otherwise drops coverage under the non-HRA group health plan and is covered only under the HRA for other months, the employer must report coverage under the HRA for the months after the employee retires or drops the non-HRA coverage.

    Applying the second rule, reporting is not required for minimum essential coverage for a month if that coverage is offered only to individuals who are also covered by other minimum essential coverage, including Medicare, TRICARE, Medicaid, or certain employer-sponsored coverage, for which reporting is required. In these arrangements, the program for which reporting is required represents the primary coverage while the other minimum essential coverage is supplemental to the primary plan.

    Under the application of the second rule to eligible employer-sponsored coverage, if an employer offers both an insured group health plan and an HRA for which an employee is eligible if enrolled in the insured group health plan, and an employee enrolls in both, the employer is not required to report the employee's coverage under the HRA. However, if an employee is enrolled in his or her employer's HRA and in a spouse's non-HRA group health plan, the employee's employer is required to report for the HRA, and the employee's spouse's employer (or the health insurance issuer or carrier, if the plan is insured) is required to report for the non-HRA group health plan coverage. The proposed regulations clarify that, for purposes of this rule, an employer is treated as offering minimum essential coverage that is offered by another employer with whom the employer is treated as a single employer under section 414(b), (c), (m), or (o).

    Separately, Notice 2015-68 also stated that, because Medicaid and CHIP coverage provided by the governments of American Samoa, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, Guam, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands is generally made available only to individuals who are treated as having minimum essential coverage under section 5000A(f)(4) (and, therefore, do not need section 6055 reporting to verify minimum essential coverage), the Medicaid and CHIP agencies in those U.S. possessions or territories are not required to report that coverage under section 6055. Consistent with that rule, the proposed regulations provide that reporting under section 6055 is not required with respect to Medicaid and CHIP agencies in U.S. possessions or territories.

    5. TIN Solicitation

    Information reporting under section 6055 is subject to the penalty provisions of sections 6721 and 6722 for failure to file timely a correct information return or failure to furnish timely a correct statement to the individual. See § 1.6055-1(h). The penalties may be waived under section 6724(a) if the failure is due to reasonable cause and not due to willful neglect; that is, if a reporting entity demonstrates that it acted in a responsible manner and that the failure is due to significant mitigating factors or events beyond the reporting entity's control. See § 301.6724-1(a)(2). Under § 301.6724-1(e), in cases of a missing TIN, the reporting entity is treated as acting in a responsible manner in soliciting a TIN if the reporting entity makes (1) an initial solicitation when an account is opened or a relationship is established, (2) a first annual solicitation by December 31 of the year the account is opened (or January 31 of the following year if the account is opened in December), and (3) a second annual solicitation by December 31 of the year following the year in which the account is opened. Similar rules apply regarding incorrect TINs under § 301.6724-1(f). The rules in § 301.6724-1(e) and (f) were issued prior to the enactment of section 6055 and apply to most forms of information reporting.

    Comments received in response to the first notice of proposed rulemaking (REG-132455-11) under section 6055, published in the Federal Register (78 FR 54986) on September 9, 2013, raised concerns about the application of the TIN solicitation rules to section 6055 reporting. Accordingly, Notice 2015-68 provided that, pending the issuance of additional guidance, reporting entities will not be subject to penalties for failure to report a TIN if they comply with the requirements of § 301.6724-1(e) with the following modifications: (1) The initial solicitation is made at an individual's first enrollment or, if already enrolled on September 17, 2015, the next open season, (2) the second solicitation (the first annual solicitation) is made at a reasonable time thereafter, and (3) the third solicitation (the second annual solicitation) is made by December 31 of the year following the initial solicitation. Notice 2015-68 also requested comments on the application of the reasonable cause rules under section 6724 to section 6055 reporting.

    In response to the request for comments in Notice 2015-68, one commenter requested that the proposed regulations include detailed rules tailored to TIN solicitation for information returns required by section 6055. This commenter expressed concern that, because the current rules were designed primarily to apply to financial relationships, they are difficult to apply to section 6055 reporting, particularly the rules for demonstrating that the filer acted in a responsible manner as described in § 301.6724-1(e) and (f). The Treasury Department and the IRS agree with the commenter that some modification to the rules in § 301.6724-1(e) is warranted to account for the differences between information reporting under section 6055 and information reporting under other provisions of the Code. Accordingly, the Treasury Department and the IRS propose regulations to provide specific TIN solicitation rules for section 6055 reporting. Until final regulations are released, reporting entities may rely on these proposed rules and Notice 2015-68. The preamble below also includes some additional transition rules that apply to reporting entities in certain situations.

    Section 301.6724-1(e)(1)(i) provides that an initial TIN solicitation must occur when an account (which includes accounts, relationships, and other transactions) is opened. Section 301.6724-1(e) does not define the term “opened” for this purpose. Commenters requested clarification as to how the term “opened” should be interpreted for purposes of reporting under section 6055. In the context of financial accounts, an account is generally considered opened on the first day it is available for use by its owner. In most cases, this would be shortly after the application to open that account is received, and this day would be no earlier than the day the application was received. Health coverage does not work in the same way. In some cases, the first effective date of health coverage is before the day the application was received, making it impractical to solicit TINs before the coverage takes effect. In other cases, the effective date of coverage may be months after the day the application was received. To account for this different timing, the proposed regulations provide that, for purposes of section 6055 reporting, an account is considered “opened” on the date the filer receives a substantially complete application for new coverage or to add an individual to existing coverage. Accordingly, health coverage providers may generally satisfy the requirement for the initial solicitation by requesting enrollees' TINs as part of the application for coverage.

    To address differences in the way financial accounts and health coverage are opened, the proposed regulations also change the timing of the first annual solicitation (the second solicitation overall) with respect to missing TINs. Under § 301.6724-1(e)(1)(ii), a first annual solicitation must be made by December 31 of the year the account is opened (or by January 31 of the following calendar year if the account is opened in December). The timing of the first annual solicitation is dictated by the need to have accurate reporting of information to taxpayers and the IRS in preparation for the filing of an income tax return. Accounts, relationships, and other transactions may be opened or begun throughout the year, and may remain active indefinitely. It is beneficial to the IRS, filers, and taxpayers in the context of accounts, relationships, and other transactions to have a single deadline for the first annual solicitation at the end of the calendar year (or January if the account is opened in December).

    By contrast, health coverage is generally offered on an annual basis. While individuals may, depending on their circumstances, enroll in coverage at any point during the year, many covered individuals enroll in coverage during the open enrollment period, which is in advance of the beginning of the coverage year. The most common coverage year is the calendar year and many individuals enroll late each year for coverage the following year. For such individuals, requiring the first annual solicitation (the second solicitation overall) by December 31 of the year in which the application is received is earlier than is necessary (because reporting is not due until more than a year later) and coincides with the end of a plan year, which is already the busiest time of year for coverage providers. To address these considerations, the proposed regulations require that the first annual solicitation be made no later than seventy-five days after the date on which the account was “opened” (i.e., the day the filer received the substantially complete application for coverage), or, if the coverage is retroactive, no later than the seventy-fifth day after the determination of retroactive coverage is made. The deadline for the second annual solicitation (third solicitation overall) remains December 31 of the year following the year the account is opened as required by § 301.6724-1(e)(1)(iii).

    As noted above, taxpayers may rely on these proposed regulations and on Notice 2015-68 until final regulations are published. To provide additional relief and ensure that the requirements for the first annual and second annual solicitations may be satisfied with respect to individuals already enrolled in coverage, an additional rule is provided. Under this rule, if an individual was enrolled in coverage on any day before July 29, 2016, the account is considered opened on July 29, 2016. Accordingly, reporting entities have satisfied the requirement for the initial solicitation with respect to already enrolled individuals so long as they requested enrollee TINs either as part of the application for coverage or at any other point before July 29, 2016. The deadlines for the first and second annual solicitations are set by reference to the date the account is opened. Thus, the rule above that treats all accounts for individuals currently enrolled in coverage for which a TIN has not been provided as opened on July 29, 2016, provides additional time for the annual solicitations as well. Specifically, consistent with Notice 2015-68, the first annual solicitation should be made at a reasonable time after July 29, 2016. For this purpose, a reporting entity that makes the first annual solicitation within 75 days of the initial solicitation will be treated as having made the second solicitation within a reasonable time. Reporting entities that have not made the initial solicitation before July 29, 2016 should comply with the first annual solicitation requirement by making a solicitation within a reasonable time of July 29, 2016. Notice 2015-68 also provided that a reporting entity is deemed to have satisfied the initial, first annual, and second annual solicitations for an individual whose coverage was terminated prior to September 17, 2015, and taxpayers may continue to rely on this rule as well.

    Section 301.6724-1(e)(1)(v) provides that the initial and first annual solicitations relate to failures on returns filed for the year in which the account is opened (meaning that showing reasonable cause with respect to the year the account is opened generally requires making the initial and first annual solicitations in the year the account is opened). Because these proposed regulations provide that an account is considered opened for section 6055 purposes when a substantially complete application for that account is received, an account would, in some cases, be considered open in a year prior to the year for which coverage is actually effective and for which reporting is required. This would occur, for example, when a reporting entity receives an application during open enrollment for coverage effective as of the first day of the next coverage year. To ensure that reporting entities that make the initial solicitation and first annual solicitation are eligible for relief for the first year for which reporting is required, the proposed regulations provide that, for purposes of reporting under section 6055, the initial and first annual solicitations relate to failures on returns required to be filed for the year that includes the day that is the first effective date of coverage for a covered individual. Similarly, § 301.6724-1(e)(1)(v) provides that the second annual solicitation relates to failures on returns filed for the year immediately following the year in which the account is opened and succeeding calendar years (meaning that showing reasonable cause with respect to years after the account is opened generally requires making the second annual solicitation during the year following the year the account is opened). As with the initial and first annual solicitations, the existing rule under § 301.6724-1(e)(1)(v) could provide relief for the wrong year when combined with the proposed definition of account opening under section 6055. Accordingly, the proposed regulations provide that the second annual solicitation relates to failures on returns filed for the year immediately following the year to which the first annual solicitation relates, and succeeding calendar years.

    In contrast to missing TINs, the Treasury Department and the IRS do not recognize a similar need to modify the existing first annual solicitation rules for incorrect TINs in § 301.6724-1(f)(1)(ii). As with many other types of information reports, information reports of health coverage are generally filed after the end of the tax year, and thus, it is only after the tax year that a filer would generally receive notice of an incorrect TIN. Because the end of the tax year typically corresponds with the end of the coverage year, there is no reason to distinguish the timing of the correction of incorrect TINs for health coverage from all other types of accounts for which information reporting is required. Consequently, the proposed regulations do not alter the rules for incorrect TINs in § 301.6724-1(f)(1)(ii) and (iii) as applied to information reporting under section 6055. However, as with the rules regarding missing TINs under § 301.6724-1(e)(1)(ii), the rules regarding incorrect TINs in § 301.6724-1(f)(1)(i) make reference to the time an account is “opened.” Accordingly, the proposed regulations, which provides that for purposes of section 6055 reporting an account is considered “opened” at the time the filer receives an application for new coverage or to add an individual to existing coverage, also applies for purposes of the initial solicitation for incorrect TINs in § 301.6724-1(f)(1)(i).2

    2 A filer of the information return required under § 1.6055-1 may receive an error message from the IRS indicating that a TIN and name provided on the return do not match IRS records. An error message is neither a Notice 972CG, Notice of Proposed Civil Penalty, nor a requirement that the filer must solicit a TIN in response to the error message.

    a. Application of the TIN Solicitation Rules to “Responsible Individuals” and “Covered Individuals”

    A commenter requested clarification that the initial and annual solicitations of § 301.6724-1(e)(1)(i) and (ii) need be made only to the responsible individual for all individuals covered under a single policy. The commenter further suggested that TIN solicitations made to a responsible individual be treated as TIN solicitations made to all individuals named on the responsible individual's policy.

    Under § 1.6055-1(e)(1)(ii) and (iii), filers must report the TIN of each covered individual (who, under § 301.6721-1(g)(5), are also “payees”), and § 1.6055-1(g)(1) requires that the TIN of each covered individual be shown on statements furnished to the responsible individual. Current § 1.6055-1(g)(1) provides that, for purposes of the penalties under section 6722, the furnishing of a statement to the responsible individual is treated as the furnishing of a statement to a covered individual. This rule is intended to allow reporting entities to satisfy the section 6722 requirements for all covered individuals by furnishing the required statement only to the responsible individual. The Treasury Department and the IRS also intend for a similar rule to apply to the TIN solicitation rules under the section 6724 regulations. To clarify that this is how these rules apply, the proposed regulations expressly provide that TIN solicitations (both initial and annual) made to the responsible individual for a policy or plan are treated as TIN solicitations of every covered individual on the policy or plan for purposes of § 301.6724-1(e)(1) and (f)(1). The filer does not need to make separate solicitations from the responsible individual for each covered individual nor does it need to separately solicit the TINs of each covered individual by contacting each covered individual directly. However, we decline to adopt the commenter's suggestion that a TIN solicitation made to a responsible individual be treated as a TIN solicitation made to all individuals named on that responsible individual's policy at any time, including those individuals added to a policy after the TIN solicitations. When a new individual is added to a policy, the coverage provider establishes a relationship with that individual. The individual is new to the filer, and it is the filer's responsibility to solicit that individual's TIN. Accordingly, to qualify for the penalty waiver, filers must solicit TINs for each individual added to a policy under the procedures outlined in § 301.6724-1(e)(1)(i) and (f)(1)(i); however, any other individual for whom the filer already has a TIN or already has solicited a TIN the prescribed amount of times need not be solicited again regardless of what changes take place during the filer's coverage of that individual.

    b. Different Forms of TIN Solicitations

    A commenter to Notice 2015-68 requested that the provision of renewal applications to enrollees be permitted to satisfy the annual solicitation requirement for purposes of § 301.6724-1(e)(1)(ii) and (iii) and (f)(1)(ii) and (iii) if those renewal applications request TINs from covered individuals. Under current law, TIN requests may be made in a number of different formats. The provision of a renewal application that requests TINs for all covered individuals satisfies the annual solicitation provisions of § 301.6724-1(e)(1)(ii) and (iii) and (f)(1)(ii) and (iii) if it is sent by the deadline for those annual solicitations. Thus, no changes to the regulations are necessary for renewal applications to satisfy the annual solicitation requirement.

    The same commenter requested that the requirement in § 301.6724-1(e)(2)(i)(B) to provide the responsible individual with a Form W-9 should be eliminated. The commenter was concerned that this requirement imposes burdens on responsible individuals that make it less likely that they will respond to a TIN solicitation. Section 301.6724-1(e)(2)(i)(B) requires that an annual solicitation include a “Form W-9 or an acceptable substitute . . .” Thus, the existing regulations do not require that Form W-9 be sent. Filers are allowed to request TINs on an acceptable substitute for Form W-9, which includes a renewal application or other request for a TIN. Thus, this comment is not adopted.

    This commenter also requested that the requirement in § 301.6724-1(e)(2)(i)(C) that annual solicitations include a return envelope be eliminated, and, if not eliminated, that clarification be provided as to how this requirement applies to multiple TINs. Existing regulations include this requirement because individuals are more likely to comply with a TIN solicitation if that solicitation includes a return envelope. We see no reason that the requirement to include a return envelope, which exists for other information reporting provisions, should be removed for reporting under section 6055. Thus, the proposed regulations do not adopt this comment. However, filers may request more than one TIN at the same time and do not need to send separate envelopes with each request. For example, on a renewal application requesting the TINs for all covered individuals, filers need only provide one return envelope for that application or request.

    c. Solicitations by Employers

    A commenter requested that employers be permitted to make TIN solicitations on behalf of filers. The commenter offered that employers are frequently in a better position than coverage providers to request TINs from the employers' employees and the employees' dependents, and, for practical reasons, it would make sense to allow employers to step in the shoes of the coverage provider for purposes of making the solicitations under § 301.6724-1(e)(1) and (f)(1).

    Under existing regulations, actions taken by employers may satisfy the requirement for making an initial or annual TIN solicitation. Employers may, for example, provide their employees with applications for health coverage. If these applications request that the applicants provide TINs for all individuals to be covered, the coverage provider has made an initial solicitation for these individuals' TINs.

    The commenter further requested that a filer that arranges to have an employer take on responsibility for the TIN solicitations be treated as having met the penalty waiver requirements of § 301.6724-1(e)(1) and (f)(1). Under existing regulations, qualifying for a penalty waiver requires that the solicitations actually be made. To avoid creating a less stringent standard in cases where an employer is acting on the filer's behalf, the proposed regulations do not adopt the commenter's proposal.

    d. Electronic TIN Solicitations

    A commenter requested that filers be permitted to make annual TIN solicitations by electronic means if the responsible individual has consented to the receipt of information concerning his or her coverage in the same electronic format in which the annual solicitation is made. IRS Publication 1586, Reasonable Cause Regulations and Requirements for Missing and Incorrect Name/TINs (including instructions for reading CD/DVDs), provides that filers may establish an electronic system for payees (including covered individuals) to receive and respond to TIN solicitations, provided certain listed requirements are met. IRS Publication 1586 can be found at www.irs.gov/forms-pubs. Because filers are already able to solicit TINs electronically, it is unnecessary to address the commenter's recommendation for electronic TIN solicitations with these proposed regulations.

    Proposed Effective/Applicability Date

    These regulations are generally proposed to apply for taxable years ending after December 31, 2015, and may be relied on for calendar years ending after December 31, 2013.

    The only exception is the rules in section 1 of this preamble relating to reporting of coverage under catastrophic plans. Those rules are proposed to apply for calendar years beginning after December 31, 2016. Health insurance issuers may voluntarily report on 2015 and 2016 catastrophic coverage (on returns and statements filed and furnished in 2016 and 2017 respectively). An issuer that reports on 2015 and/or 2016 catastrophic coverage will not be subject to penalties for these returns.

    In addition, until these the proposed regulations are finalized, taxpayers may continue to rely on the rules provided in Notice 2015-68.

    Special Analyses

    Certain IRS regulations, including this one, are exempt from the requirements of Executive Order 12866, as supplemented and reaffirmed by Executive Order 13563. Therefore, a regulatory impact assessment is not required.

    It has also been determined that section 553(b) of the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. chapter 5) does not apply to these regulations.

    It is hereby certified that these regulations will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This certification is based on the fact that the information collection required under these regulations is imposed under section 6055. Consistent with the statute, the proposed regulations require a person that provides minimum essential coverage to an individual to file a return with the IRS reporting certain information and to furnish a statement to the responsible individual who enrolled an individual or family in the coverage. These regulations primarily provide the method of filing and furnishing returns and statements under section 6055. Moreover, the proposed regulations attempt to minimize the burden associated with this collection of information by limiting reporting to the information that the IRS will use to verify minimum essential coverage and administer tax credits.

    Based on these facts, a Regulatory Flexibility Analysis under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. chapter 6) is not required.

    Pursuant to section 7805(f), this notice of proposed rulemaking will be submitted to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration for comment on its impact on small business.

    Statement of Availability of IRS Documents

    IRS Revenue Procedures, Revenue Rulings notices, notices and other guidance cited in this preamble are published in the Internal Revenue Bulletin (or Cumulative Bulletin) and are available from the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC 20402, or by visiting the IRS Web site at http://www.irs.gov.

    Comments and Requests for Public Hearing

    Before these proposed regulations are adopted as final regulations, consideration will be given to any comments that are submitted timely to the IRS as prescribed in this preamble under the “ADDRESSES” heading. The Treasury Department and the IRS request comments on all aspects of the proposed rules. All comments will be available for public inspection at www.regulations.gov or upon request. A public hearing will be scheduled if requested in writing by any person that timely submits written comments. If a public hearing is scheduled, notice of the date, time, and place for the public hearing will be published in the Federal Register.

    Drafting Information

    The principal author of these proposed regulations is John B. Lovelace of the Office of Associate Chief Counsel (Income Tax and Accounting). However, other personnel from the IRS and the Treasury Department participated in the development of the regulations.

    List of Subjects 26 CFR Part 1

    Income taxes, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    26 CFR Part 301

    Employment taxes, Estate taxes, Excise taxes, Gift taxes, Income taxes, Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Proposed Amendments to the Regulations

    Accordingly, 26 CFR parts 1 and 301 are proposed to be amended as follows:

    PART 1—INCOME TAXES Paragraph 1. The authority citation for part 1 continues to read in part as follows: Authority:

    26 U.S.C. 7805 * * *

    Par. 2. Section 1.6055-1 is amended by: 1. Adding paragraphs (b)(13) and (14). 2. Redesignating paragraph (c)(1)(iv) as (c)(1)(v) and adding a new paragraph (c)(1)(iv). 3. Revising paragraphs (d)(1) and (2). 4. Redesignating paragraph (d)(3) as (d)(5) and adding a new paragraph (d)(3). 5. Adding paragraphs (d)(4) and (6). 6. Revising paragraph (g)(3). 7. Revising paragraph (h)(1). 8. Adding paragraph (h)(3). 9. Revising paragraph (j).

    The revisions and additions read as follows:

    § 1.6055-1 Information reporting for minimum essential coverage.

    (b) * * *

    (13) Catastrophic plan. The term catastrophic plan has the same meaning as in section 1302(e) of the Affordable Care Act (42 U.S.C. 18022(e)).

    (14) Basic health program. The term basic health program means a basic health program established under section 1331 of the Affordable Care Act (42 U.S.C. 18051).

    (c) * * *

    (1) * * *

    (iv) The state agency that administers a Basic Health Program;

    (d) Reporting not required—(1) Qualified health plans. Except for coverage under a catastrophic plan, a health insurance issuer is not required to file a return or furnish a report under this section for coverage in a qualified health plan in the individual market enrolled in through an Exchange.

    (2) Duplicative coverage. If an individual is covered for a month by more than one minimum essential coverage plan or program provided by the same reporting entity, reporting is required for only one of the plans or programs for that month.

    (3) Supplemental coverage. Reporting is not required for minimum essential coverage of an individual for a month if that individual is eligible for that coverage only if enrolled in other minimum essential coverage for which section 6055 reporting is required and is not waived under this paragraph (d)(3). This paragraph (d)(3) applies with respect to eligible employer-sponsored coverage only if the supplemental coverage is offered by the same employer that offered the eligible employer-sponsored coverage for which reporting is required. For this purpose, an employer is treated as offering minimum essential coverage offered by any other person that is a member of a controlled group of entities under section 414(b) or (c), an affiliated service group under section 414(m), or an entity in an arrangement described under section 414(o) of which the employer is also a member.

    (4) Certain coverage provided by Territories and Possessions. The agencies that administer Medicaid and the Children's Health Insurance Program in American Samoa, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, Guam, Puerto Rico, and the United States Virgin Islands are not required to report that coverage under section 6055.

    (6) Examples. The following examples illustrate the rules of this paragraph (d).

    Example 1.

    Upon being hired, Taxpayer A enrolls in a self-insured major medical group health plan and a health reimbursement arrangement (HRA), both offered by A's employer, V. Both the group health plan and the HRA are minimum essential coverage, and V is the reporting entity for both. Because V is the reporting entity for both the self-insured major medical group health plan and the HRA, under paragraph (d)(2) of this section V must report under paragraph (a) of this section for either its self-insured major medical group health plan or its HRA for A for the months in which A is enrolled in both plans.

    Example 2.

    Taxpayer B is enrolled in an insured employer-sponsored group health plan offered by B's employer, W. B is also covered by an HRA offered by W. Under the terms of the HRA, B is eligible for the HRA because B is enrolled in W's insured employer-sponsored group health plan. W's insured employer-sponsored group health plan is minimum essential coverage and, under paragraphs (a) and (c)(1)(i) of this section, the issuer of the insured employer-sponsored group health plan must report coverage under the plan. Therefore, for the months in which B is enrolled in both plans, under paragraph (d)(3) of this section, W does not need to report the HRA for B because the issuer is required to report on coverage for B in the insured employer-sponsored group health plan offered by W for those months.

    Example 3.

    Taxpayer C enrolls in a Medicare Savings Program administered by X, a state Medicaid agency, which provides financial assistance with Medicare Part A premiums. Only individuals enrolled in Medicare Part A are offered coverage in this Medicare Savings Program. Medicare Part A is government-sponsored minimum essential coverage and, under paragraphs (a) and (c)(1)(iii) of this section, Medicare must report coverage under the program. Therefore, under paragraph (d)(3) of this section, X does not need to report under paragraph (a) of this section for C's coverage under the Medicare Savings Program.

    Example 4.

    Taxpayer E obtains a Medicare supplemental insurance (Medigap) policy that provides financial assistance with costs not covered by Medicare Part A from Z, a health insurance issuer. Only individuals enrolled in Medicare Part A are offered coverage under this Medigap policy. Medicare Part A is minimum essential coverage and, under paragraphs (a) and (c)(1)(iii) of this section, Medicare is required to report E's coverage under Medicare Part A. Therefore, under paragraph (d)(3) of this section, Z does not need to report E's coverage under the Medigap policy.

    Example 5.

    Taxpayer F is covered by an HRA offered by F's employer, P. F is also enrolled in a non-HRA group health plan that is self-insured and sponsored by F's spouse's employer, Q. P and Q are not treated as one employer under section 414(b), (c), (m), or (o). Under the terms of the HRA, F is eligible for the HRA only because F is enrolled in a non-HRA group health plan, which in this case is the group health plan offered by Q. However, because the HRA and the non-HRA group health plan are offered by different employers, paragraph (d)(3) of this section does not apply. Accordingly, under paragraphs (a) and (c)(2)(i)(A) of this section, P must report F's enrollment in the HRA, and Q must report F's (and F's spouse's) enrollment in the non-HRA group health plan.

    (g) * * *

    (3) Form of the statement. A statement required under this paragraph (g) may be made either by furnishing to the responsible individual a copy of the return filed with the Internal Revenue Service or on a substitute statement. A substitute statement must include the information required to be shown on the return filed with the Internal Revenue Service and must comply with requirements in published guidance (see § 601.601(d)(2) of this chapter) relating to substitute statements. An individual's identifying number may be truncated to appear in the form of an IRS truncated taxpayer identification number (TTIN) on the statement furnished to the responsible individual. The identifying number of the employer may also be truncated to appear in the form of a TTIN on the statement furnished to the responsible individual. For provisions relating to the use of TTINs, see § 301.6109-4 of this chapter (Procedure and Administration Regulations).

    (h) * * * (1) In general. For provisions relating to the penalty for failure to file timely a correct information return required under section 6055, see section 6721 and the regulations under that section. For provisions relating to the penalty for failure to furnish timely a correct statement to responsible individuals required under section 6055, see section 6722 and the regulations under that section. See section 6724, and the regulations thereunder, and paragraph (h)(3) of this section for provisions relating to the waiver of penalties if a failure to file or furnish timely or accurately is due to reasonable cause and not due to willful neglect.

    (3) Application of section 6724 waiver of penalties to section 6055 reporting—(i) In general. Paragraphs (e) and (f) of § 301.6724-1 of this chapter, as modified by this paragraph (h)(3), apply to reasonable cause waivers of penalties under sections 6721 and 6722 for failure to file timely or accurate information returns or to furnish individual statements required to be filed or furnished under section 6055.

    (ii) Account opened. For purposes of section 6055 reporting and the solicitation rules contained in paragraphs (i), (ii), (iii), and (v) of § 301.6724-1(e)(1) of this chapter and paragraph (i) of § 301.6724-1(f)(1) of this chapter, an account is considered opened at the time the reporting entity receives a substantially complete application for coverage (including an application to add an individual to existing coverage) from or on behalf of an individual for whom the reporting entity does not already provide coverage.

    (iii) First annual solicitation deadline for missing TINs. In lieu of the deadline for the first annual solicitation contained in paragraph (ii) of § 301.6724-1(e)(1) of this chapter, the first annual solicitation must be made on or before the seventy-fifth day after the date on which an account is opened (or, in the case of retroactive coverage, the seventy-fifth day after the determination of retroactive coverage is made). The period from the date on which the reporting entity receives an application for coverage to the last day on which the first annual solicitation may be made is the first annual solicitation period.

    (iv) Failures to which a solicitation relates—(A) Missing TIN. For purposes of reporting under section 6055 and the solicitation rules contained in paragraph (1) of § 301.6724-1(e) of this chapter, the initial and first annual solicitations relate to failures on returns required to be filed for the year which includes the first effective date of coverage for a covered individual. The second annual solicitation relates to failures on returns filed for the year immediately following the year to which the first annual solicitation relates and for succeeding calendar years.

    (B) Incorrect TIN. For purposes of reporting under section 6055 and the solicitation rules contained in paragraph (i) of § 301.6724-1(f)(1) of this chapter, the initial solicitation relates to failures on returns required to be filed for the year which includes the first effective date of coverage for a covered individual.

    (v) Solicitations made to responsible individual. For purposes of reporting under section 6055 and the solicitation rules contained in § 301.6724-1(e) and (f) of this chapter, an initial or annual solicitation made to the responsible individual is treated as a solicitation made to a covered individual.

    (j) Applicability date—(1) Except as provided in paragraphs (j)(2) and (3) of this section, this section applies for calendar years ending after December 31, 2014.

    (2) Paragraphs (b)(14), (c)(1)(v), (d)(2) through (6), and (g)(3) of this section apply to calendar years ending after December 31, 2015. Paragraphs (d)(2), (d)(3), and (g)(3) of § 1.6055-1 as contained in 26 CFR part 1 edition revision as of April 1, 2016, apply to calendar years ending after December 31, 2014 and beginning before January 1, 2016.

    (3) Paragraphs (b)(13) and (d)(1) of this section apply to calendar years beginning after December 31, 2016. Paragraph (d)(1) of § 1.6055-1 as contained in 26 CFR part 1 edition revised as of April 1, 2016, applies to calendar years ending after December 31, 2015 and beginning before January 1, 2017.

    PART 301—PROCEDURE AND ADMINISTRATION Par. 3. The authority for part 301 continues to read in part as follows: Authority:

    26 U.S.C. 7805 * * *

    Par. 4. Section 301.6724-1 is amended by adding a sentence to the end of paragraph (e)(1)(vi)(A) to read as follows:
    § 301.6724-1 Reasonable cause.

    (e) * * *

    (1) * * *

    (vi) Exceptions and limitations. (A) * * * See § 1.6055-1(h)(3) of this chapter, which provides rules on the time, form, and manner in which a TIN must be provided for information returns required to be filed and individual statements required to be furnished under section 6055.

    John Dalrymple, Deputy Commissioner for Services and Enforcement.
    [FR Doc. 2016-18100 Filed 7-29-16; 11:15 am] BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Defense Acquisition Regulations System 48 CFR Parts 212, 246, and 252 [Docket DARS-2016-0014] RIN 0750-AI92 Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement: Amendments Related to Sources of Electronic Parts (DFARS Case 2016-D013) AGENCY:

    Defense Acquisition Regulations System, Department of Defense (DoD).

    ACTION:

    Proposed rule.

    SUMMARY:

    DoD is proposing to amend the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) to implement a section of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016 that makes contractors and subcontractors subject to approval (as well as review and audit) by appropriate DoD officials when identifying a contractor-approved supplier of electronic parts.

    DATES:

    Comments on the proposed rule should be submitted in writing to the address shown below on or before October 3, 2016, to be considered in the formation of a final rule.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit comments identified by DFARS Case 2016-D013, using any of the following methods:

    Regulations.gov: http://www.regulations.gov. Submit comments via the Federal eRulemaking portal by entering “DFARS Case 2016-D013” under the heading “Enter keyword or ID” and selecting “Search.” Select the link “Submit a Comment” that corresponds with “DFARS Case 2016-D013.” Follow the instructions provided at the “Submit a Comment” screen. Please include your name, company name (if any), and “DFARS Case 2016-D013” on your attached document.

    Email: [email protected] Include DFARS Case 2016-D013 in the subject line of the message.

    Fax: 571-372-6094.

    o Mail: Defense Acquisition Regulations System, Attn: Ms. Amy G. Williams, OUSD(AT&L)DPAP/DARS, Room 3B941, 3060 Defense Pentagon, Washington, DC 20301-3060.

    Comments received generally will be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided. To confirm receipt of your comment(s), please check www.regulations.gov, approximately two to three days after submission to verify posting (except allow 30 days for posting of comments submitted by mail).

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ms. Amy G. Williams, telephone 571-372-6106.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Background

    DoD is proposing to revise the DFARS to implement section 885(b) of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year (FY) 2016 (Pub. L. 114-92), which amends section 818(c)(3)(D)(iii) of the NDAA for FY 2012 (Pub. L. 112-81). Section 885(b) provides that contractors and subcontractors are subject to approval (as well as review and audit) by appropriate DoD officials when identifying a contractor-approved supplier of electronic parts.

    II. Discussion and Analysis

    This rule proposes to amend DFARS 212.301(f)(xix)(C), 246.870-0(a), and 252.246-7008(b) to cite to section 885(b) of the NDAA for FY 2016. In addition, the rule proposes to amend DFARS 246.870-2(a)(1)(ii)(C) and 252.246-7008(b)(2) to provide that contractor and subcontractor identification of contractor-approved suppliers of electronic parts is subject to review, audit, and approval by the contracting officer or a designee.

    III. Applicability to Contracts at or Below the Simplified Acquisition Threshold and for Commercial Items, Including Commercially Available Off-the-Shelf Items

    This rule does not add any new provisions or clauses to implement section 885(b) of the NDAA for FY 2016, which amends section 818 of the NDAA for FY 2012. It revises an existing clause 252.246-7008, which applies to acquisitions at or below the simplified acquisition threshold (SAT) and to contracts and subcontracts for the acquisition of commercial items (including commercially available off-the-shelf (COTS) items. A determination and findings was signed under DFARS Case 2014-D005 on May 26, 2016, by the Director, Defense Procurement and Acquisition Policy, to justify the application of section 818 of the NDAA for FY 2012 to acquisitions at or below the SAT and to contracts and subcontracts for the acquisition of commercial items (including COTS items).

    IV. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563

    Executive Orders (E.O.s) 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess all 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). E.O. 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting flexibility. This is not a significant regulatory action and, therefore, was not subject to review under section 6(b) of E.O. 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, dated September 30, 1993. This rule is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 804.

    V. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    DoD does not expect this proposed rule to have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities within the meaning of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601, et seq. However, an initial regulatory flexibility analysis has been performed and is summarized as follows:

    This proposed rule implements section 885(b) of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year (FY) 2016 (Pub. L. 114-92), which amended section 818 of the NDAA for FY 2012.

    The objective of this proposed rule is to provide to DoD the authority to approve contractor-approved suppliers of electronic parts, in accordance with section 885(b) of the NDAA for FY 2016.

    Based on data available in the Federal Procurement Data System for FY 2013 and 2014, DoD estimates that this rule will apply to approximately 65,357 small entities that have DoD prime contracts or subcontracts for: Electronic parts; end items, components, parts, or assemblies containing electronic parts; or services, if the contractor will supply electronic parts or components, parts, or assemblies containing electronic parts as part of the service.

    This proposed rule does not impose any reporting, recordkeeping, or other compliance requirements other than being subject to approval by DoD if the contractor or subcontractor identifies a contractor-approved supplier of electronic parts. However, the contractor may proceed with the acquisition of electronic parts from a contractor-approved supplier unless otherwise notified by DoD.

    The proposed rule does not duplicate, overlap, or conflict with any other Federal rules.

    DoD was unable to identify any significant alternatives that would reduce the economic impact on small entities and still fulfill the requirements of the statute.

    DoD invites comments from small business concerns and other interested parties on the expected impact of this rule on small entities.

    DoD will also consider comments from small entities concerning the existing regulations in subparts affected by this rule in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 610. Interested parties must submit such comments separately and should cite 5 U.S.C. 610 (DFARS Case 2016-D013), in correspondence.

    VI. Paperwork Reduction Act

    The rule does not contain any information collection requirements that require the approval of the Office of Management and Budget under the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. chapter 35).

    List of Subjects in 48 CFR Parts 212, 246, and 252

    Government procurement.

    Jennifer L. Hawes, Editor, Defense Acquisition Regulations System.

    Therefore, 48 CFR parts 212, 246, and 252 are proposed to be amended as follows:

    1. The authority citation for parts 212, 246, and 252 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    41 U.S.C. 1303 and 48 CFR chapter 1.

    PART 212—ACQUISITION OF COMMERCIAL ITEMS
    212.301 [Amended]
    2. In section 212.301, amend paragraph (f)(xix)(C) by removing “(Pub. L. 113-291)” and adding “(Pub. L. 113-291) and section 885 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016 (Pub. L. 114-92)” in its place. PART 246—QUALITY ASSURANCE
    246.870-0 [Amended]
    3. Amend section 246.870-0, by removing “(Pub. L. 113-291)” and adding “(Pub. L. 113-291) and section 885 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016 (Pub. L. 114-92)” in its place. 4. In section 246.870-2, revise paragraph (a)(1)(ii)(C) to read as follows:
    246.870-2 Policy.

    (a) * * *

    (1) * * *

    (ii) * * *

    (C) The selection of such contractor-approved suppliers is subject to review, audit, and approval by the contracting officer. The contractor may proceed with the acquisition of electronic parts from a contractor-approved supplier unless otherwise notified by DoD.

    PART 252—SOLICITATION PROVISIONS AND CONTRACT CLAUSES 5. Amend section 252.246-7008 by— a. Removing the clause date “(AUG 2016)” and adding “(DATE)” in its place; b. In paragraph (b) introductory text, by removing ““(Pub. L. 113-291)” and adding “(Pub. L. 113-291) and section 885 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016 (Pub. L. 114-92)” in its place; and c. Revising paragraph (b)(2)(iii).

    The revision reads as follows:

    252.246-7008 Sources of Electronic Parts.

    (b) * * *

    (2) * * *

    (iii) The Contractor's selection of such contractor-approved suppliers is subject to review, audit, and approval by the Contracting Officer. The Contractor may proceed with the acquisition of electronic parts from a contractor-approved supplier unless otherwise notified by DoD.

    [FR Doc. 2016-18194 Filed 8-1-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6820-ep-P
    81 148 Tuesday, August 2, 2016 Notices COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS Agenda and Notice of Public Meeting of the Delaware Advisory Committee AGENCY:

    Commission on Civil Rights.

    ACTION:

    Announcement of meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (Commission), and the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), that an orientation and planning meeting of the Delaware State Advisory Committee to the Commission (DE SAC) will convene at 1:00 p.m. (EDT) on Wednesday, August 31, 2016, by conference call. The purpose of the orientation meeting is to inform the newly appointed members about the rules of operation for the advisory committee. The purpose of the planning meeting is to discuss project planning, the selection of additional committee officers and plans for future meetings.

    Interested members of the public may listen to the discussion by calling the following toll-free conference call number: 1-877-874-1571 and conference call ID code: 4239535#. Please be advised that before placing them into the conference call, the conference call operator will ask callers to provide their names, their organizational affiliations (if any), and email addresses (so that callers may be notified of future meetings). Callers can expect to incur charges for calls they initiate over wireless lines, and the Commission will not refund any incurred charges. Callers will incur no charge for calls they initiate over land-line connections to the toll-free telephone number.

    Persons with hearing impairments may also follow the discussion by first calling the Federal Relay Service at 1-888-364-3109 and provide the operator with the conference call number: 1-877-874-1571 and conference call ID code: 4239535#.

    Members of the public are invited to submit written comments; the comments must be received in the regional office by September 30, 2016. Written comments may be mailed to the Eastern Regional Office, U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, 1331 Pennsylvania Avenue, Suite 1150, Washington, DC 20425, faxed to (202) 376-7548, or emailed to Evelyn Bohor at [email protected] Persons who desire additional information may contact the Eastern Regional Office at (202) 376-7533.

    Records and documents discussed during the meeting will be available for public viewing as they become available at: http://database.faca.gov/committee/committee.aspx?cid=240&aid=17FACA and clicking on the “Meeting Details” and “Documents” links. Records generated from this meeting may also be inspected and reproduced at the Eastern Regional Office, as they become available, both before and after the meeting. Persons interested in the work of this advisory committee are advised to go to the Commission's Web site, www.usccr.gov, or to contact the Eastern Regional Office at the above phone number, email or street address.

    Agenda Rollcall
    Ivy L. Davis, Director, Director, Eastern Regional Office and Designated Federal Official (DFO) Welcome and Introductions Lisa B. Goodman, Chair, Delaware State Advisory Committee (DE SAC) Orientation Meeting Ivy L. Davis, DFO Planning Meeting Lisa B. Goodman, Chair, DE SAC DATES:

    Wednesday, August 31, 2016 at 1:00 p.m. (EDT).

    ADDRESSES:

    The meeting will be held via teleconference.

    PUBLIC CALL INFORMATION:

    Conference call number: 1-877-874-1571; Conference Call ID code: 4239535#. TDD: Dial Federal Relay Service 1-800-977-8339 and give the operator the above conference call number and conference call ID Code.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ivy L. Davis, at [email protected] or by phone at 202-376-7533

    Dated: July 28, 2016. David Mussatt, Chief, Regional Programs Unit.
    [FR Doc. 2016-18263 Filed 8-1-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6335-01-P
    COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS Agenda and Notice of Public Meeting of the Connecticut Advisory Committee AGENCY:

    Commission on Civil Rights.

    ACTION:

    Announcement of meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (Commission), and the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) that an orientation and planning meeting of the Connecticut Advisory Committee to the Commission will convene at 12:00 p.m. (EDT) on Wednesday, August 10, 2016, at the ACLU, 330 Main Street, Hartford, CT 06106. The purpose of the orientation meeting is to inform the newly appointed Committee members about the rules of operation of federal advisory committees and to select additional officers, as determined by the Committee. The purpose of the planning meeting is to discuss potential topics that the Committee may wish to study.

    Persons who plan to attend the meeting and who require other accommodations, please contact Evelyn Bohor at [email protected] at the Rocky Mountain Regional Office at least ten (10) working days before the scheduled date of the meeting.

    Members of the public are invited to submit written comments; the comments must be received in the regional office by Monday, September 12, 2016. Written comments may be mailed to the Eastern Regional Office, U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, 1331 Pennsylvania Avenue, Suite 1150, Washington, DC 20425, faxed to (202) 376-7548, or emailed to Evelyn Bohor at [email protected] Persons who desire additional information may contact the Eastern Regional Office at (202) 376-7533.

    The activities of this advisory committee, including records and documents discussed during the meeting, will be available for public viewing, as they become available at:

    https://database.faca.gov/committee/meetings.aspx?cid=239. Records generated from this meeting may also be inspected and reproduced at the Eastern Regional Office, as they become available, both before and after the meeting. Persons interested in the work of this advisory committee are advised to go to the Commission's Web site, www.usccr.gov, or to contact the Eastern Regional Office at the above phone number, email or street address. AGENDA:

    Orientation and Administrative Matters Barbara de La Viez, Deputy Director, Eastern Regional Office and Designated Federal Official Discussion of Potential Civil Rights topics David J. McGuire, Chair Discussion of Potential Topics of Study CT State Advisory Committee DATES:

    Wednesday, August 10, 2016, at 12:00 p.m. (EDT).

    ADDRESSES:

    330 Main Street, Hartford, CT 06106.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ivy L. Davis at [email protected], or 202-376-7533.

    EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCE:

    Pursuant to 41 CFR 102-3.150, the notice for this meeting is given less than 15 calendar days prior to the meeting because of the exceptional circumstances of an administrative exceptional circumstance. Given the exceptional urgency of the events, the agency and advisory committee deem it important for the advisory committee to meet on the date given.

    Dated: July 27, 2016. David Mussatt, Chief, Regional Programs Unit.
    [FR Doc. 2016-18160 Filed 8-1-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6335-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Foreign-Trade Zones Board [B-49-2016] Foreign-Trade Zone (FTZ) 279—Terrebonne Parish, Louisiana; Notification of Proposed Production Activity; Thoma-Sea Marine Constructors, LLC, Subzone 279A (Shipbuilding), Houma and Lockport, Louisiana

    The Houma-Terrebonne Airport Commission, grantee of FTZ 279, submitted a notification of proposed production activity to the FTZ Board on behalf of Thoma-Sea Marine Constructors, LLC (Thoma-Sea), located in Houma and Lockport, Louisiana. The notification conforming to the requirements of the regulations of the FTZ Board (15 CFR 400.22) was received on July 27, 2016.

    Thoma-Sea already has authority for the construction and repair of oceangoing vessels within Subzone 279A. The current request would add a foreign status material/component to the scope of authority. Pursuant to 15 CFR 400.14(b), additional FTZ authority would be limited to the specific foreign-status material/component and specific finished product described in the submitted notification (as described below) and subsequently authorized by the FTZ Board.

    Production under FTZ procedures could exempt Thoma-Sea from customs duty payments on the foreign-status materials/components used in export production. On its domestic sales, Thoma-Sea would be able to choose the duty rate during customs entry procedures that applies to offshore supply ships and vessels (duty-free) for the foreign-status materials/components noted below and in the existing scope of authority. Customs duties also could possibly be deferred or reduced on foreign-status production equipment.

    The additional material/component sourced from abroad is: Tunnel thrusters (duty-free).

    Public comment is invited from interested parties. Submissions shall be addressed to the Board's Executive Secretary at the address below. The closing period for their receipt is September 12, 2016.

    A copy of the notification will be available for public inspection at the Office of the Executive Secretary, Foreign-Trade Zones Board, Room 21013, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230-0002, and in the “Reading Room” section of the Board's Web site, which is accessible via www.trade.gov/ftz.

    For further information, contact Elizabeth Whiteman at [email protected] or (202) 482-0473.

    Dated: July 27, 2016. Andrew McGilvray, Executive Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-18350 Filed 8-1-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [C-570-921] Lightweight Thermal Paper From the People's Republic of China: Notice of Rescission of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review AGENCY:

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

    SUMMARY:

    The Department is rescinding the administrative review of the countervailing duty order on lightweight thermal paper from the People's Republic of China. The period of review is January 1, 2014, through December 31, 2014.

    DATES:

    Effective August 2, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Sergio Balbontin at (202) 482-6478, AD/CVD Operations, Office I, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background

    On November 3, 2015, the Department of Commerce (Department) published a notice of opportunity to request an administrative review of the countervailing duty order on lightweight thermal paper (LWTP) from the People's Republic of China (PRC) for the period of review (POR) of January 1, 2014, through December 31, 2014.1 The Department received a timely-filed request from Appvion, Inc. (Appvion), in accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(b), for an administrative review.2 On February 9, 2016, the Department published a notice of initiation.3 On March 10, 2016, Jaan Huey Co., Ltd. (Jaan Huey), a company for which the Department initiated an administrative review, informed the Department that it would not participate in this administrative review.4 Subsequent to the Initiation Notice, the Department requested from U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) data for U.S. imports of subject merchandise during the POR for the companies for which an administrative review was requested.5 The CBP data demonstrated that there were no entries of subject merchandise exported by these companies during the POR.6 The Department solicited interested party comments,7 and we received no comments.

    1See Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Order, Finding, or Suspended Investigation; Opportunity To Request Administrative Review, 80 FR 67706 (November 3, 2015).

    2See letter from Appvion, “Lightweight Thermal Paper From The People's Republic Of China: Request For Administrative Review,” date November 30, 2015.

    3See Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews, 81 FR 6832 (February 9, 2016) (Initiation Notice).

    4See letter from Jaan Huey, “Notice of Non-Participation in CVD Review: Annual Countervailing Duty Administrative Review of Lightweight Thermal Paper From the People's Republic of China,” dated March 10, 2016.

    5See Memorandum, “Administrative Review of Certain Lightweight Thermal Paper from the People's Republic of China: Request for U.S. Customs and Border Protection Data,” dated April 19, 2016.

    6Id.

    7Id.

    Rescission of Review

    It is the Department's practice to rescind an administrative review of a countervailing duty order, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(3), when there are no reviewable entries of subject merchandise during the POR for which liquidation is suspended.8 Normally, upon completion of an administrative review, the suspended entries are liquidated at the countervailing duty assessment rate calculated for the review period. See 19 CFR 351.212(b)(l). Therefore, for an administrative review to be conducted, there must be a reviewable, suspended entry that the Department can order CBP to liquidate at the newly calculated countervailing duty assessment rate. Accordingly, in the absence of suspended entries of subject merchandise during the period of this administrative review (January 1, 2014, through December 31, 2014), we are now rescinding this administrative review of the countervailing duty order on LWTP from the PRC, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(3).

    8See, e.g., Certain Welded Carbon Steel Standard Pipe and Tube From Turkey: Notice of Final Rescission of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review, In Part, 77 FR 6542 (February 8, 2012).

    This notice is issued and published pursuant to section 751 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, and 19 CFR 351.213(d)(4).

    Dated: July 25, 2016. Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations.
    [FR Doc. 2016-18302 Filed 8-1-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-533-824] Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip from India: Preliminary Results and Partial Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2014-2015 AGENCY:

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

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Commerce (the Department) is conducting an administrative review of the antidumping duty (AD) order on polyethylene terephthalate film, sheet, and strip (PET Film) from India. The period of review (POR) is July 1, 2014, through June 30, 2015. The Department selected two respondents for individual review, Jindal Poly Films Limited of India (Jindal) and SRF Limited (SRF). The Department preliminarily determines that both Jindal and SRF made sales of subject merchandise at prices below normal value (NV) during the POR. The preliminary results are listed below in the section titled “Preliminary Results of Review.” If these preliminary results are adopted in the final results, the Department will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”) to assess antidumping duties on all appropriate entries of subject merchandise during the POR. Interested parties are invited to comment on these preliminary results.

    DATES:

    Effective August 2, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Alex Cipolla at (202) 482-4956; AD/CVD Operations, Office VII, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Scope of the Order

    The merchandise subject to the order is polyethylene terephthalate film, sheet, and strip. The PET Film subject to the order is currently classifiable under subheading 3920.62.00.90 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). The HTSUS subheading is provided for convenience and customs purposes. The written description is dispositive. A full description of the scope of the order is contained in the memorandum from Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, to Ronald K. Lorentzen, Acting Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, “Decision Memorandum for Preliminary Results and Partial Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review: Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip from India; 2014-2015” (Preliminary Decision Memorandum), which is dated concurrently with these preliminary results and hereby adopted by this notice.

    Partial Rescission of Administrative Review

    On April 1, 2015, the Department published in the Federal Register a notice of opportunity to request an administrative review of the AD order on PET Film from India.1 The Department received multiple timely requests for an administrative review of the AD order on PET Film from India and on September 2, 2015, in accordance with section 751(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (“the Act”), the Department initiated a review of nine companies in this proceeding.2 In response to timely filed withdrawal requests, we are rescinding this administrative review with respect to Ester, MTZ, Polyplex, Vacmet, and Uflex pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1).3 Accordingly, the companies subject to the instant review are: Jindal, SRF, Gaware, and Vacmet India, of which the Department has selected Jindal and SRF as the mandatory respondents.4

    1See Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Order, Finding, or Suspended Investigation; Opportunity To RequestAdministrative Review, 80 FR 37583 (July 1, 2015).

    2See Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews, 80 FR 53106 (September 2, 2015) (Initiation Notice). The nine companies were Ester Industries Limited (Ester), Garware Polyester Ltd. (Garware), Jindal, MTZ Polyesters Ltd. (MTZ), Polyplex Corporation Ltd. (Polyplex), SRF, Uflex Ltd. (Uflex), Vacmet, and Vacmet India.

    3 For Additional Information see The Preliminary Decision Memorandum at “Partial Rescission.”

    4See Respondent Selection Memorandum.

    Methodology

    The Department is conducting this review in accordance with section 751(a)(2) of the Act. Export price is calculated in accordance with section 772 of the Act. NV is calculated in accordance with section 773 of the Act.

    For a full description of the methodology underlying our conclusions, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum. A list of topics discussed in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum is attached as an Appendix to this notice.

    The Preliminary Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on file electronically via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (“ACCESS”). ACCESS is available to registered users at https://access.trade.gov/login.aspx and it 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 Preliminary Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly on the Internet at http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/. The signed Preliminary Decision Memorandum and the electronic versions of the Preliminary Decision Memorandum are identical in content.

    Companies Not Selected for Individual Review

    We preliminarily assign to those companies not selected for individual review the average of the rates calculated for Jindal and SRF in this review, in accordance with section 735(c)(5) of the Act. See the Preliminary Decision Memorandum.

    Preliminary Results of Review

    As a result of this review, we preliminarily determine the following weighted-average dumping margins for the period July 1, 2014, through June 30, 2015.

    Manufacturer/exporter Weighted-average margin
  • (percent)
  • Jindal Poly Films Limited 5 0.82 SRF Limited 0.56 Garware Polyester Ltd. 0.77 Vacmet India 0.77
    Disclosure and Public Comment

    The Department will disclose to interested parties the calculations performed in connection with these preliminary results within five days of the date of publication of this notice.6 Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.309(c), interested parties may submit cases briefs no later than 30 days after the date of publication of this notice.7 Rebuttal briefs, limited to issues raised in the case briefs, may be filed not later than five days after the date for filing case briefs.8 Parties who submit case briefs or rebuttal briefs in this proceeding are encouraged to submit with each argument: (1) A statement of the issue; (2) a brief summary of the argument; and (3) a table of authorities.9 Case and rebuttal briefs should be filed using ACCESS.10 In order to be properly filed, ACCESS must successfully receive an electronically-filed document in its entirety by 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time.

    5 The Initiation Notice lists the company as Jindal Poly Films Limited of India.

    6See 19 CFR 351.224(b).

    7See 19 CFR 351.309(c)(ii).

    8See 19 CFR 351.309(d).

    9See 19 CFR 351.309(c)(2) and (d)(2).

    10See 19 CFR 351.303.

    Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.310(c), interested parties who wish to request a hearing must submit a written request to the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, filed electronically via ACCESS, within 30 days after the date of publication of this notice.11 Requests should contain: (1) The party's name, address, and telephone number; (2) the number of participants; and (3) a list of issues to be discussed. Issues raised in the hearing will be limited to those raised in the respective case briefs.

    11See 19 CFR 351.310(c).

    The Department will issue the final results of this administrative review, including the results of its analysis of the issues raised in any written briefs, not later than 120 days after the date of publication of this notice, pursuant to section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act, unless that time is extended.

    Assessment Rates

    Upon completion of the administrative review, the Department shall determine, and CBP shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries in accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1). We will instruct CBP to liquidate entries of merchandise produced and/or exported by respondent companies. We intend to issue instructions to CBP 15 days after the date of publication of the final results of this review.

    For the individually examined respondents Jindal and SRF, if the weighted-average dumping margins are not zero or de minimis (i.e., less than 0.5 percent) in the final results of this review, we will calculate importer-specific (or customer-specific) ad valorem assessment rates on the basis of the ratio of the total amount of dumping calculated for the importer's examined sales and the total entered value of the sales in accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1).

    However, where the respondent did not report the entered value for its sales, we will calculate importer-specific (or customer-specific) per-unit duty assessment rates. Where the respondents' weighted-average dumping margin is zero or de minimis, or an importer-specific assessment rate is zero or de minimis, we will instruct CBP to liquidate the appropriate entries without regard to antidumping duties.

    For companies Ester, MTZ, Polyplex, Uflex, and Vacmet for which this review is rescinded, we will instruct CBP to assess antidumping duties 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)(1)(i).

    Cash Deposit Requirements

    The following deposit requirements will be effective for all shipments of PET Film from India entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication of the final results of this administrative review, as provided for by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) The cash deposit rate for the company under review will be the rate established in the final results of this review (except, if the rate is zero or de minimis, i.e., less than 0.5 percent, no cash deposit will be required); (2) for previously reviewed or investigated companies not listed above, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the company-specific rate published for the most recent period; (3) if the exporter is not a firm covered in this review, a prior review, or the less-than-fair-value investigation, but the manufacturer is, the cash deposit rate will be the rate established for the most recent period for the manufacturer of the merchandise; and (4) if neither the exporter nor the manufacturer is a firm covered in this or any previous review, the cash deposit rate will be the all others rate for this proceeding, 5.71 percent. These deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice.

    Notification to Interested Parties

    This notice also serves as a preliminary reminder to importers of their responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate regarding the reimbursement of antidumping duties and/or countervailing duties prior to liquidation of the relevant entries during this POR. Failure to comply with this requirement could result in the Secretary's presumption that reimbursement of antidumping duties and/or countervailing duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of doubled antidumping duties.

    We are issuing and publishing these results in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.213(h)(1) and 351.221(b)(4).

    Dated: July 27, 2016. Ronald K. Lorentzen, Acting Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. Appendix List of Topics Discussed in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum 1. Summary. 2. Background. 3. Partial Rescission. 4. Scope of the Order. 5. Comparisons to Normal Value. 6. Product Comparisons. 7. Date of Sale. 8. Export Price. 9. Normal Value. 10. Currency Conversion. 11. Companies Not Selected for Individual Review. 12. Recommendation.
    [FR Doc. 2016-18333 Filed 8-1-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Institute of Standards and Technology [Docket No. 160606494-6494-01] Request for Comments on Post-Quantum Cryptography Requirements and Evaluation Criteria AGENCY:

    National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), Commerce.

    ACTION:

    Notice; request for comments

    SUMMARY:

    The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) is requesting comments on a proposed process to solicit, evaluate, and standardize one or more quantum-resistant public-key cryptographic algorithms. Current algorithms are vulnerable to attacks from large-scale quantum computers. The purpose of this notice is to solicit comments on the draft minimum acceptability requirements, submission requirements, evaluation criteria, and evaluation process of candidate algorithms from the public, the cryptographic community, academic/research communities, manufacturers, voluntary standards organizations, and Federal, state, and local government organizations so that their needs can be considered in the process of developing new public-key cryptography standards. The draft requirements and evaluation criteria are available on the NIST Computer Security Resource Center Web site: http://www.nist.gov/pqcrypto.

    DATES:

    Comments must be received on or before September 16, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Comments may be sent electronically to [email protected] with “Comment on Post-Quantum Cryptography Requirements and Evaluation Criteria” in the subject line. Written comments may also be submitted by mail to Information Technology Laboratory, ATTN: Post-Quantum Cryptography Comments, National Institute of Standards and Technology, 100 Bureau Drive, Mail Stop 8930, Gaithersburg, MD 20899-8930.

    Comments received in response to this notice will be published electronically at http://www.nist.gov/pqcrypto, so commenters should not include information they do not wish to be posted (e.g., personal or confidential business information).

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Dr. Lily Chen, National Institute of Standards and Technology, 100 Bureau Drive, Mail Stop 8930, Gaithersburg, MD 20899-8930, email: [email protected], by telephone (301) 975-6974.

    Technical inquiries regarding the proposed draft acceptability requirements, submission requirements, or the evaluation criteria should be sent electronically to [email protected]

    A public email list-serve has been set up for announcements, as well as a forum to discuss the standardization effort being initiated by NIST. For directions on how to subscribe, please visit http://www.nist.gov/pqcrypto.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    In recent years, there has been a substantial amount of research on quantum computers—machines that exploit quantum mechanical phenomena to solve mathematical problems that are difficult or intractable for conventional computers. If large-scale quantum computers are ever built, they will compromise the security of many commonly used cryptographic algorithms. In particular, quantum computers would completely break many public-key cryptosystems, including those standardized in FIPS 186-4, Digital Signature Standard (http://dx.doi.org/10.6028/NIST.FIPS.186-4), SP 800-56A Revision 2, Recommendation for Pair-Wise Key Establishment Schemes Using Discrete Logarithm Cryptography (http://dx.doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-56Ar2), and SP 800-56B Revision 1, Recommendation for Pair-Wise Key-Establishment Schemes Using Integer Factorization Cryptography (http://dx.doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-56Br1).

    Due to this concern, many researchers have begun to investigate post-quantum cryptography (PQC) (also called quantum-resistant cryptography). The goal of this research is to develop cryptographic algorithms that would be secure against both quantum and classical computers. A significant effort will be required in order to develop, standardize, and deploy new post-quantum algorithms. In addition, this transition needs to take place well before any large-scale quantum computers are built, so that any information that is later compromised by quantum cryptanalysis is no longer sensitive when that compromise occurs.

    NIST has taken a number of steps in response to this potential threat. On April 2-3, 2015, NIST held a public workshop on Cybersecurity in a Post-Quantum World to solicit input on public-key cryptographic policy in the time of quantum computers. NIST also published NISTIR 8105, Report on Post-Quantum Cryptography (http://dx.doi.org/10.6028/NIST.IR.8105), in April 2016 which shares NIST's understanding of the status of quantum computing and post-quantum cryptography.

    As a result of study and public feedback, NIST has decided to develop additional public-key cryptographic algorithms through a public standardization process, similar to the development processes for the hash function SHA-3 and the Advanced Encryption Standard (AES). To begin the process, NIST has drafted a set of minimum acceptability requirements, submission requirements, and evaluation criteria for candidate algorithms. The draft document containing these requirements and criteria is available at the Web site: http://www.nist.gov/pqcrypto. NIST seeks comments on these draft minimum acceptability requirements, submission requirements, evaluation criteria, and the evaluation process, as well as suggestions for other criteria and for the relative importance of each individual criterion in the evaluation process. Since neither the submission requirements nor the evaluation criteria have been finalized, and may evolve over time as a result of the public comments that NIST receives, candidate algorithms should NOT be submitted at this time.

    Authority:

    In accordance with the Information Technology Management Reform Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-106) and the Federal Information Security Management Act of 2002 (Pub. L. 107-347), the Secretary of Commerce is authorized to approve FIPS. NIST activities to develop computer security standards to protect federal sensitive (unclassified) information systems are undertaken pursuant to specific responsibilities assigned to NIST by Section 20 of the National Institute of Standards and Technology Act (15 U.S.C. 278g-3), as amended.

    Dated: July 27, 2016. Kent Rochford, Associate Director for Laboratory Programs.
    [FR Doc. 2016-18150 Filed 8-1-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XE769 Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council (MAFMC); Public Meeting AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Notice of public meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    The Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council (Council) will hold a Webinar-based meeting of its River Herring and Shad (RH/S) Committee.

    DATES:

    The meeting will be held Monday, August 15, 2016, from 1 p.m. to 4:30 p.m.

    ADDRESSES:

    The meeting will be held via Webinar (http://mafmc.adobeconnect.com/rh-s-com-aug15-2016/) with a telephone audio connection (provided when connecting).

    Council address: Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council, 800 N. State St., Suite 201, Dover, DE 19901; telephone: (302) 674-2331.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Christopher M. Moore, Ph.D. Executive Director, Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council; telephone: (302) 526-5255. The Council's Web site, www.mafmc.org, also has details on the proposed agenda, Webinar access, and briefing materials.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Agenda

    In October 2016, the Council will consider whether to develop an Amendment that could add several species of river Herrings and Shads as Council-managed species. This RH/S Committee meeting will review a white paper and draft decision document related to the need for Council management of blueback Herring, Lewife, American Shad, and hickory Shad. Public comments will also be taken.

    Special Accommodations

    These meetings are physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aid should be directed to M. Jan Saunders, (302) 526-5251, at least 5 days prior to the meeting date.

    Authority:

    16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

    Dated: July 28, 2016. Tracey L. Thompson, Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2016-18217 Filed 8-1-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XE761 Atlantic Highly Migratory Species; Meeting of the Atlantic Highly Migratory Species Advisory Panel AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Notice of public meeting and webinar/conference call.

    SUMMARY:

    NMFS will hold a 2-day Atlantic Highly Migratory Species (HMS) Advisory Panel (AP) meeting in September 2016. The intent of the meeting is to consider options for the conservation and management of Atlantic HMS. The meeting is open to the public.

    DATES:

    The AP meeting and webinar will be held from 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. on both Wednesday and Thursday, September 7 and September 8, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    The meeting will be held at the Sheraton Silver Spring Hotel, 8777 Georgia Avenue, Silver Spring, MD 20910. The meeting presentations will also be available via WebEx webinar/conference call.

    On Wednesday, September 7, 2016, the conference call information is phone number 1-888-469-2188; Participant Code: 7954019; and the webinar event address is: https://noaaevents2.webex.com/noaaevents2/onstage/g.php?MTID=eec1bb32466dd8905125c5db01b539623; event password: NOAA.

    On Thursday, September 8, 2016, the conference call information is phone number 1-888-469-2188; Participant Code: 7954019; and the webinar event address is: https://noaaevents2.webex.com/noaaevents2/onstage/g.php?MTID=e9fcef19f3c43ce6255dfad07807a71f4; event password: NOAA.

    Participants are strongly encouraged to log/dial in 15 minutes prior to the meeting. NMFS will show the presentations via webinar and allow public comment during identified times on the agenda.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Peter Cooper or Margo Schulze-Haugen at (301) 427-8503.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq., as amended by the Sustainable Fisheries Act, Public Law 104-297, provided for the establishment of an AP to assist in the collection and evaluation of information relevant to the development of any Fishery Management Plan (FMP) or FMP amendment for Atlantic HMS. NMFS consults with and considers the comments and views of AP members when preparing and implementing FMPs or FMP amendments for Atlantic tunas, swordfish, billfish, and sharks.

    The AP has previously consulted with NMFS on: Amendment 1 to the Billfish FMP (April 1999); the HMS FMP (April 1999); Amendment 1 to the HMS FMP (December 2003); the Consolidated HMS FMP (October 2006); and Amendments 1, 2, 3, 4, 5a, 5b, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10 to the 2006 Consolidated HMS FMP (April and October 2008, February and September 2009, May and September 2010, April and September 2011, March and September 2012, January and September 2013, April and September 2014, March and September 2015, March 2016), among other things.

    The intent of this meeting is to consider alternatives for the conservation and management of all Atlantic tunas, swordfish, billfish, and shark fisheries. We anticipate discussing the results of the 2016 dusky shark stock assessment and the Amendment 5b timeline; Draft Amendment 10 on Essential Fish Habitat, including potential Habitat Areas of Particular Concern; implementation updates for Final Amendment 7 on bluefin tuna management; and progress updates on various other rulemakings, including archival tag requirements, blacknose and small coastal shark management; domestic implementation of recommendations from the 2015 meeting of the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas; and potential changes to limited access vessel upgrading requirements and Individual Bluefin Quota program inseason transfer criteria. We also anticipate discussing recreational topics regarding data collection and economic surveys, as well as progress updates regarding the exempted fishing permit request to conduct research in pelagic longline closed areas. Finally, we also intend to invite other NMFS offices to provide updates on their activities relevant to HMS fisheries.

    Additional information on the meeting and a copy of the draft agenda will be posted prior to the meeting at: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/hms/advisory_panels/hms_ap/meetings/ap_meetings.html.

    Special Accommodations

    This meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to Peter Cooper at (301) 427-8503 at least 7 days prior to the meeting.

    Dated: July 27, 2016. Emily H. Menashes, Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2016-18248 Filed 8-1-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XE768 Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council; Public Meeting AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Notice of a public meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    The Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council (Council) will hold a four-day meeting to consider actions affecting the Gulf of Mexico fisheries in the exclusive economic zone (EEZ).

    DATES:

    The meeting will begin at 8:30 a.m. on Monday, August 15, 2016, and end at 4:15 p.m. on Thursday, August 18, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    The meeting will be held at the Astor Crowne Plaza hotel, located at 739 Canal Street, New Orleans, LA; telephone: (504) 962-0500.

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

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Douglas Gregory, Executive Director, Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council; telephone: (813) 348-1630.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Agenda Monday, August 15, 2016; 8:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.

    The Gulf Council will begin with updates and presentations from administrative and management committees. The Administrative/Budget Committee will discuss the Final 2014 No-cost Extension Expenditures; review the Revised Budgets for 2017-2019; review and approve the Updated Regional Operating Agreement with National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS); hold a discussion regarding Scientific and Statistical Committee (SSC) members also being State Designees; discuss Council Committee Assignments; and review Administrative Handbook revisions. The Data Collection Management Committee will receive a presentation on National Fish and Wildlife Foundation's (NFWF) For-Hire Pilot Program; review modifications to the Generic Charter Vessel and Headboat Reporting Requirements, cost analysis of Commercial Electronic Reporting Program and Atlantic States' Coastal Cooperative Statistics Program Meeting Summary. The Joint Coral/Habitat Protection Management Committees will review a draft of the 5-year Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) review; receive a summary of the Joint Shrimp Advisory Panel (AP)/Coral SSC/AP meeting; review a letter regarding the Flower Garden Banks National Marine Sanctuary Draft Environmental Impact Statement; and hold a discussion on fishing regulations for the Flower Garden National Marine Sanctuary.

    There will be a CLOSED SESSION to discuss appointments for the Ad Hoc Private Recreational Advisory Panel from 4 p.m. to 5:30 p.m.

    Tuesday, August 16, 2016; 8:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.

    The Reef Fish Management Committee will review draft Amendment 36A—Commercial Individual Fishing Quota (IFQ) Modifications; Headboat Collaborative Project; draft Amendment 46—Modify Gray Triggerfish Rebuilding Plan; draft Amendment 42—Reef Fish Recreational Management for Headboat Survey Vessels; and, draft Amendment 41—Red Snapper Management for Federally Permitted Charter Vessels.

    Wednesday, August 17, 2016; 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m.

    The Reef Fish Management Committee will review an options paper for Amendment 44—Minimum Stock Size Threshold (MSST) for Reef Fish Stocks; discuss the carryover of unharvested Red Snapper allocations; and receive a summary on the Standing and Special Reef Fish SSC Report. The Mackerel Management Committee will review an options paper for Coastal Migratory Pelagics (CMP) Amendment 29—Allocation Sharing and Accountability Measures for Gulf King Mackerel.

    The Full Council will convene mid-morning (approximately 11:15 a.m.) with Call to Order, Announcements, presentation of the Law Enforcement Officer of the Year Award and Introductions. Induction of Council Members; Adoption of Agenda and Approval of Minutes; and review of Exempt Fishing Permit (EFPs) Applications, if any. After lunch (12 p.m. to 1:30 p.m.), the Council will receive a summary from the Artificial Reef Summit; Joint Law Enforcement Presentation; and NMFS-SERO Landing Summaries. The Council will receive public testimony from 2:15 p.m. to 5 p.m., on Agenda Testimony item: Flower Garden Banks National Marine Sanctuary Draft Environmental Impact Statement; and, hold an open public testimony period regarding any other fishery issues or concern. Anyone wishing to speak during public comment should sign in at the registration station located at the entrance to the meeting room.

    Thursday, August 18, 2016; 8:30 a.m. to 4:15 p.m.

    The Council will receive committee reports from the Administrative/Budget, Data Collection, Joint Coral/Habitat Protection, and Mackerel Management Committees. After lunch (11:30 a.m. to 1 p.m.), the Council will receive a committee report from the Reef Fish Management Committee; and, vote on Exempted Fishing Permit (EFP) applications, if any. The Council will receive updates from supporting agencies: South Atlantic Fishery Management Council; Gulf States Marine Fisheries Commission; U.S. Coast Guard; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; and, the Department of State.

    Lastly, the Council will discuss any Other Business items; and, hold an election for Chair and Vice Chair.

    Meeting Adjourns

    The timing and order in which agenda items are addressed may change as required to effectively address the issue. The latest version will be posted on the Council's file server, which can be accessed by going to the Council's Web site at http://www.gulfcouncil.org and clicking on FTP Server under Quick Links. For meeting materials, select the “Briefing Books/Briefing Book 2016-08” folder on Gulf Council file server. The username and password are both “gulfguest.” The meetings will be webcast over the internet. A link to the webcast will be available on the Council's Web site, at http://www.gulfcouncil.org.

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

    Special Accommodations

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

    Authority:

    16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

    Dated: July 28, 2016. Tracey L. Thompson, Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2016-18218 Filed 8-1-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Proposed Information Collection; Comment Request: Socioeconomics of Ocean Recreation Operations in the Monterey Bay, Greater Farallones and Cordell Bank National Marine Sanctuaries AGENCY:

    National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Commerce, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing information collections, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

    DATES:

    Written comments must be submitted on or before October 3, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Direct all written comments to Jennifer Jessup, Departmental Paperwork Clearance Officer, Department of Commerce, Room 6616, 14th and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230 (or via the Internet at [email protected]).

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Requests for additional information or copies of the information collection instrument and instructions should be directed to Dr. Danielle Schwarzmann 240-533-0705 [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Abstract

    This request is for a new information collection to benefit natural resource managers in Greater Farallones National Marine Sanctuary (GFNMS), Cordell Bank National Marine Sanctuary (CBNMS) and the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary (MBNMS). The National Ocean Service (NOS), Office of National Marine Sanctuaries (ONMS) proposes to collect information from wildlife watching operations to ascertain the market value of marine wildlife via the ocean recreational industry in the region that serves passengers aboard their vessels that take people out for non-consumptive recreation in and around the three sanctuaries.

    Up-to-date socioeconomic data is needed to support the conservation and management goals of GFNMS, CBNMS and MBNMS to strengthen and improve conservation of marine wildlife, including whales, pinnipeds, sea otters, and seabirds within the jurisdiction of the sanctuary and to satisfy legal mandates under the National Marine Sanctuaries Act (16 U.S.C. 1431 et seq), Endangered Species Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq), Marine Mammal Protection Act (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq), National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4321), Executive Order 12866 (EO 12866), and other pertinent statutes.

    GFNMS, CBNMS and MBNMS have identified a lack of baseline socioeconomic information on ocean recreation businesses. The information is not available to assess the possible economic benefits of marine wildlife protection to the local economy, or the potential impact on ocean recreation businesses. The type of data targeted for this collection; that is, information on costs and earnings from the marine wildlife watching industry, are only currently available for recreational and commercial fishing. Thus, current economic information on the importance of marine wildlife to the local tourism industry is required. We already have approval for the survey of for hire operations in MBNMS under OMB Control No. 0648-0726. The primary focus for this survey will be to gather data on the non-consumptive, market value of marine wildlife. Specifically, researchers will collect data to determine the contribution of marine wildlife watching operations to the economy in the regions.

    A second component of the proposed research is the survey of passengers of the for hire operations. The primary focus of this survey is to obtain demographic profiles of users, spending on wildlife viewing trips to estimate the economic impact/contribution to the local economy and the non-market economic value of the use and how those values change with changes in user and natural resource attributes. This information will be required for all three sanctuaries.

    II. Method of Collection

    For the for hire operations, a research team goes into the business to fill-out forms using records provided by the businesses and answers to questions in a face-to-face interview.

    For passengers aboard the operations vessels, respondents have a choice of either electronic or paper forms. Methods of submittal include email of electronic forms, and mail and facsimile transmission of paper forms.

    III. Data

    OMB Control Number: 0648-XXXX.

    Form Number: None.

    Type of Review: Regular submission (request for a new information collection).

    Affected Public: For profit organizations; individuals or households.

    For-Hire Operation Survey:

    Estimated Number of Respondents: 30.

    Estimated Time per Response: 2.5 hours per survey

    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 75 hours.

    Passenger Survey:

    Estimated Number of Respondents Survey: 3,000.

    Total Annual Burden Hours All Surveys: 2,120 hours.

    Estimated Total Annual Cost to Public: Other than burden hours there will be no cost to the public.

    IV. Request for Comments

    Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden (including hours and cost) of the proposed collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

    Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and/or included in the request for OMB approval of this information collection; they also will become a matter of public record.

    Dated: July 27, 2016. Sarah Brabson, NOAA PRA Clearance Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2016-18195 Filed 8-1-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-NK-P
    COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION Agency Information Collection Activities Under OMB Review AGENCY:

    Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, (PRA), this notice announces that the Information Collection Request (ICR) abstracted below has been forwarded to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and comment. The ICR describes the nature of the information collection and its expected costs and burden.

    DATES:

    Comments must be submitted on or before September 1, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Comments regarding the burden estimated or any other aspect of the information collection, including suggestions on reducing the burden, may be submitted directly to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) in OMB, within 30 days of the notice's publication, by email at [email protected] Please identify the comments by OMB Control No. 3038-0111. Please provide the Commission with a copy of all submitted comments at the address listed below. Please refer to OMB Reference No. 3038-0111, found on http://reginfo.gov. Comments may also be mailed to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, Attention: Desk Officer for the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, 725 17th Street NW., Washington, DC 20503; or through the Agency's Web site at http://comments.cftc.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments through the Web site.

    Comments may also be mailed to: Christopher Kirkpatrick, Secretary of the Commission, Commodity Futures Trading Commission, Three Lafayette Centre, 1155 21st Street NW., Washington, DC 20581 or by Hand Delivery/Courier at the same address.

    A copy of the supporting statements for the collection of information discussed above may be obtained by visiting http://RegInfo.gov. 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.

    For Further Information or a Copy Contact: Laura B. Badian, Assistant General Counsel, 202-418-5969, [email protected]; Paul Schlichting, Assistant General Counsel, 202-418-5884, [email protected]; or Herminio Castro, Counsel, (202) 418-6705, [email protected]; Office of the General Counsel, Commodity Futures Trading Commission, Three Lafayette Centre, 1155 21st Street NW., Washington, DC 20581. Please refer to OMB Control No. 3038-0111 in any correspondence.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Title: Margin Requirements for Uncleared Swaps for Swap Dealers and Major Swap Participants; Comparability Determinations with Margin Requirements, (OMB Control No. 3038-0111). This is a request for a revision of an information collection.

    Abstract: Section 731 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (“Dodd-Frank Act”),1 amended the Commodity Exchange Act (“CEA”), to add, as section 4s(e) thereof, provisions concerning the establishment of initial and variation margin requirements for swap dealers and major swap participants.2 Each swap dealer and major swap participant for which there is a Prudential Regulator, as defined in section 1a(39) of the CEA,3 must meet margin requirements established by the applicable Prudential Regulator, and each swap dealer and major swap participant for which there is no Prudential Regulator (collectively, “Covered Swap Entities” or “CSEs”) must comply with the Commission's margin requirements. With regard to the cross-border application of the swap provisions enacted by Title VII of the Dodd-Frank Act, section 2(i) of the CEA provides the Commission with express authority over activities outside the United States relating to swaps when certain conditions are met. Specifically, section 2(i) of the CEA provides that the provisions of the CEA relating to swaps enacted by Title VII of the Dodd-Frank Act (including Commission rules and regulations promulgated thereunder) shall not apply to activities outside the United States unless those activities (1) have a direct and significant connection with activities in, or effect on, commerce of the United States or (2) contravene such rules or regulations as the Commission may prescribe or promulgate as are necessary or appropriate to prevent the evasion of any provision of Title VII.4 Because margin requirements are critical to ensuring the safety and soundness of a CSE and the stability of the U.S. financial markets, the Commission believes that its margin rules should apply on a cross-border basis in a manner that effectively addresses risks to a CSE and the U.S. financial system.

    1 Pub. L. 111-203, 124 Stat. 1376 (2010).

    2 7 U.S.C. 6s(e).

    3 7 U.S.C. 1a(39).

    4 7 U.S.C. 2(i).

    On May 31, 2016, the Commission published a Final Rule addressing the cross-border application of its margin requirements for uncleared swaps of CSEs (with substituted compliance available in certain circumstances), except as to a narrow class of uncleared swaps between a non-U.S. CSE and a non-U.S. counterparty that fall within a limited exclusion (the “Exclusion”).5 As described below, the adopting release for the Final Rule contained a collection of information regarding requests for comparability determinations, which was previously included in the proposing release, and for which the Office of Management and Budget (“OMB”) assigned OMB control number 3038-0111, titled “Margin Requirements for Uncleared Swaps for Swap Dealers and Major Swap Participants; Comparability Determinations with Margin Requirements.” In addition, the adopting release included two additional information collections regarding non-segregation jurisdictions 6 and non-netting jurisdictions 7 that were not previously proposed. Accordingly, the Commission is requesting approval by OMB of the revised information collection under OMB Control Number 3038-0111.

    5 81 FR 34818 (May 31, 2016).

    6 As used in the adopting release, a “non-segregation jurisdiction” is a jurisdiction where inherent limitations in the legal or operational infrastructure of the foreign jurisdiction make it impracticable for the CSE and its counterparty to post initial margin pursuant to custodial arrangements that comply with the Commission's margin rules, as further described in section II.B.4.b of the adopting release.

    7 As used in the adopting release, a “non-netting jurisdiction” is a jurisdiction in which a CSE cannot conclude, with a well-founded basis, that the netting agreement with a counterparty in that foreign jurisdiction meets the definition of an “eligible master netting agreement” set forth in the Final Margin Rule, as described in section II.B.5.b of the adopting release.

    Section 23.160(d) of the Final Rule includes a special provision for non-netting jurisdictions. This provision allows CSEs that cannot conclude after sufficient legal review with a well-founded basis that the netting agreement with a counterparty in a foreign jurisdiction meets the definition of an “eligible master netting agreement” set forth in the Commission's final margin rule (“Final Margin Rule”) 8 to nevertheless net uncleared swaps in determining the amount of margin that they post, provided that certain conditions are met.9 In order to avail itself of this special provision, the CSE must treat the uncleared swaps covered by the agreement on a gross basis in determining the amount of initial and variation margin that it must collect, but may net those uncleared swaps in determining the amount of initial and variation margin it must post to the counterparty, in accordance with the netting provisions of the Final Margin Rule.10 A CSE that enters into uncleared swaps in “non-netting” jurisdictions in reliance on this provision must have policies and procedures ensuring that it is in compliance with the special provision's requirements, and maintain books and records properly documenting that all of the requirements of this exception are satisfied.11

    8See Margin Requirements for Uncleared Swaps for Swap Dealers and Major Swap Participants, 81 FR 636 (Jan. 6, 2016). The Final Margin Rule, which became effective April 1, 2016, is codified in part 23 of the Commission's regulations. See 17 CFR 23.150-159, 161.

    9 The Final Margin Rule permits offsets in relation to either initial margin or variation margin calculation when (among other things), the offsets related to swaps are subject to the same eligible master netting agreement. This ensures that CSEs can effectively foreclose on the margin in the event of a counterparty default, and avoids the risk that the administrator of an insolvent counterparty will “cherry-pick” from posted collateral to be returned.

    10 In the event that the special provision for non-segregation jurisdictions applies to a CSE, then the special provision for non-netting jurisdictions would not apply to the CSE even if the relevant jurisdiction is also a “non-netting jurisdiction.” In this circumstance, the CSE must collect the gross amount of initial margin in cash (but would not be required to post initial margin), and post and collect variation margin in cash in accordance with the requirements of the special provision for non-segregation jurisdictions, as discussed in section II.B.4.b.

    11See § 23.160(d) of the Final Rule.

    Section 23.160(e) of the Final Rule includes a special provision for non-segregation jurisdictions that allows non-U.S. CSEs that are Foreign Consolidated Subsidiaries (as defined in the Final Rule) and foreign branches of U.S. CSEs to engage in swaps in foreign jurisdictions where inherent limitations in the legal or operational infrastructure make it impracticable for the CSE and its counterparty to post collateral in compliance with the custodial arrangement requirements of the Commission's margin rules, subject to certain conditions. In order to rely on this special provision, a Foreign Consolidated Subsidiary or foreign branch of a U.S. CSE is required to satisfy all of the conditions of the rule, including that (1) inherent limitations in the legal or operational infrastructure of the foreign jurisdiction make it impracticable for the CSE and its counterparty to post any form of eligible initial margin collateral for the uncleared swap pursuant to custodial arrangements that comply with the Commission's margin rules; (2) foreign regulatory restrictions require the CSE to transact in uncleared swaps with the counterparty through an establishment within the foreign jurisdiction and do not permit the posting of collateral for the swap in compliance with the custodial arrangements of section 23.157 of the Final Margin Rule in the United States or a jurisdiction for which the Commission has issued a comparability determination under the Final Rule with respect to section 23.157; (3) the CSE's counterparty is not a U.S. person and is not a CSE, and the counterparty's obligations under the uncleared swap are not guaranteed by a U.S. person; 12 (4) the CSE collects initial margin in cash on a gross basis, and posts and collects variation margin in cash, for the uncleared swap in accordance with the Final Margin Rule; (5) for each broad risk category, as set out in section 23.154(b)(2)(v) of the Final Margin Rule, the total outstanding notional value of all uncleared swaps in that broad risk category, as to which the CSE is relying on section 23.160 (e), may not exceed 5 percent of the CSE's total outstanding notional value for all uncleared swaps in the same broad risk category; (6) the CSE has policies and procedures ensuring that it is in compliance with the requirements of this provision; and (7) the CSE maintains books and records properly documenting that all of the requirements of this provision are satisfied.13

    12 The Commission would expect the CSE's counterparty to be a local financial end user that is required to comply with the foreign jurisdiction's laws and that is prevented by regulatory restrictions in the foreign jurisdiction from posting collateral for the uncleared swap in the United States or a jurisdiction for which the Commission has issued a comparability determination under the Final Rule, even using an affiliate.

    13See 17 CFR 23.160(e).

    The new information collections covered by this notice require CSEs to have policies and procedures ensuring that they are in compliance with all of the requirements of the special provisions for non-netting jurisdictions and non-segregation provisions, respectively, and to maintain books and records properly documenting that all of the requirements of the special provisions for non-netting jurisdictions and non-segregation jurisdictions, respectively, are satisfied. Both information collections are necessary as a means for the Commission to be able to determine that CSEs relying on these special provisions are entitled to do so and are complying with the special provisions' requirements. Both information collections are also necessary to implement sections 4s(e) of the CEA, which mandates that the Commission adopt rules establishing minimum initial and variation margin requirements for CSEs on all swaps that are not cleared by a registered derivatives clearing organization, and section 2(i) of the CEA, which provides that the provisions of the CEA relating to swaps that were enacted by Title VII of the Dodd-Frank Act (including any rule prescribed or regulation promulgated thereunder) apply to activities outside the United States that have a direct and significant connection with activities in, or effect on, commerce of the United States.

    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. The Commission did not receive any comments on the 60-day Federal Register notice, 81 FR 34855, dated May 31, 2016.

    Burden StatementInformation Collection for Non-Netting Jurisdictions: The Commission estimates that approximately 54 CSEs may rely on section 23.160(d) of the Final Rule.14 Furthermore, the Commission estimates that these CSEs would incur an average of 10 annual burden hours to maintain books and records properly documenting that all of the requirements of this exception are satisfied (including policies and procedures ensuring that they are in compliance). Based upon the above, the estimated hour burden for collection is calculated as follows:

    14 Currently, there are approximately 106 swap entities provisionally registered with the Commission. The Commission estimates that of the approximately 106 swap entities that are provisionally registered, approximately 54 are CSEs that are subject to the Commission's margin rules as they are not subject to a Prudential Regulator. Because all of these CSEs are eligible to use the special provision for non-netting jurisdictions, the Commission estimates that 54 CSEs may rely on section 23.160(d) of the Final Rule.

    Estimated Number of Respondents per Year: 54.

    Estimated Burden Hours per Registrant: 10.

    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 540.

    Frequency of Collection: Once; As needed.

    Burden StatementInformation Collection for Non-Segregation Jurisdictions: The Commission currently estimates that there are between five and ten jurisdictions for which the first two conditions specified above for non-segregation jurisdictions are satisfied and where Foreign Consolidated Subsidiaries and foreign branches of U.S. CSEs that are subject to the Commission's margin rules may engage in swaps, or for purposes of the PRA estimate, an average of 7.5 non-segregation jurisdictions. The Commission estimates that approximately 12 Foreign Consolidated Subsidiaries and foreign branches of U.S. CSEs may rely on section 23.160(e) of the Final Rule in some or all of these jurisdiction(s). The Commission estimates that each Foreign Consolidated Subsidiary or foreign branch of a U.S. CSE relying on this provision would incur an average of 20 annual burden hours to maintain books and records properly documenting that all of the requirements of this provision are satisfied (including policies and procedures ensuring that they are in compliance) with respect to each jurisdiction as to which they rely on the special provision. Thus, based on the average of 7.5 non-segregation jurisdictions, the Commission estimates that each of the approximately 12 Foreign Consolidated Subsidiaries and foreign branches of U.S. CSEs that may rely on this provision will incur an estimated 150 average burden hours per year (i.e., 20 average burden hours per jurisdiction multiplied by 7.5). Based upon the above, the estimated hour burden for collection is calculated as follows:

    Estimated Number of Respondents per Year: 12.

    Estimated Burden Hours per Registrant: 150.

    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 1,800 hours.

    Frequency of Collection: Once; As needed.

    There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection.

    Authority:

    44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.

    Dated: July 27, 2016. Christopher J. Kirkpatrick, Secretary of the Commission.
    [FR Doc. 2016-18213 Filed 8-1-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6351-01-P
    COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION Agency Information Collection Activities Under OMB Review AGENCY:

    Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), this notice announces that the Information Collection Request (ICR) abstracted below has been forwarded to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and comment. The ICR describes the nature of the information collection and its expected costs and burden.

    DATES:

    Comments must be submitted on or before September 1, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Comments regarding the burden estimated or any other aspect of the information collection, including suggestions for reducing the burden, may be submitted directly to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) in OMB, within 30 days of the notice's publication, by email at [email protected] Please identify the comments by OMB Control No. 3038-0067. Please provide the Commission with a copy of all submitted comments at the address listed below. Please refer to OMB Reference No. 3038-0067, found on http://reginfo.gov. Comments may also be mailed to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, Attention: Desk Officer for the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, 725 17th Street NW., Washington, DC 20503 or through the Agency's Web site at http://comments.cftc.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments through the Web site.

    Comments may also be mailed to: Christopher Kirkpatrick, Secretary of the Commission, Commodity Futures Trading Commission, Three Lafayette Centre, 1155 21st Street NW., Washington, DC 20581 or by Hand Delivery/Courier at the same address.

    A copy of the supporting statements for the collection of information discussed above may be obtained by visiting http://RegInfo.gov. 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.

    For Further Information or a Copy Contact: Sue McDonough, Counsel, Office of General Counsel, Commodity Futures Trading Commission, (202) 418-5132; email: [email protected], and refer to OMB Control No. 3038-0067.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Title: Part 162 Subpart C—Identity Theft Rule (OMB Control No. 3038-0067). This is a request for extension of a currently approved information collection.

    Abstract: This collection of information is needed because under part 162 subpart C—Identify Theft, CFTC-regulated entities are required to develop and implement reasonable policies and procedures to identify, detect, and respond to relevant red flags (the Identity Theft Red Flags Rules) and, in the case of entities that issue credit or debit cards, to assess the validity of, and communicate with cardholders regarding, address changes. Section 162.30 includes the following information collection requirements for each CFTC-regulated entity that qualifies as a “financial institution” or “creditor” under part 162 subpart C and that offers or maintains covered accounts: (i) Creation and periodic updating of an identity theft prevention program (“Program”) that is approved by the board of directors, an appropriate committee thereof, or a designated senior management employee; (ii) periodic staff reporting to the board of directors on compliance with the Identity Theft Red Flags Rules and related guidelines; and (iii) training of staff to implement the Program. Section 162.32 includes the following information collection requirements for each CFTC-regulated entity that is a credit or debit card issuer: (i) Establishment of policies and procedures that assess the validity of a change of address notification if a request for an additional or replacement card on the account follows soon after the address change; and (ii) notification of a cardholder, before issuance of an additional or replacement card, at the previous address or through some other previously agreed-upon form of communication, or alternatively, assessment of the validity of the address change request through the entity's established policies and procedures. The Commission uses the collection of information to discharge its regulatory responsibilities to protect investors from the risks of identity theft.

    CFTC staff estimates of the hour burdens associated with section 162.30 include the one-time burden of complying with this section for newly-formed CFTC-regulated entities, as well as the ongoing costs of compliance for all CFTC-regulated entities. With respect to the one-time burden hours, staff estimates that each newly-formed financial institution or creditor would incur a burden of 2 hours to conduct an initial assessment of covered accounts. Staff estimates that approximately 572 CFTC-regulated financial institutions and creditors are newly formed each year, and the total estimated one-time burden to initially assess covered accounts is therefore 1,144 hours. Staff also estimates that each financial institution or creditor that maintains covered accounts would incur an additional initial burden of 29 hours to develop and obtain board approval of a Program and hours to train the staff of the financial institution or creditor. Staff estimates that approximately 47 1 CFTC-regulated financial institutions and creditors that maintain covered accounts are newly formed each year, and thus the total estimated one-time burden to develop and obtain board approval of a Program and train staff is 1,363 hours. Thus, the total initial estimated burden for all newly-formed CFTC-regulated entities is 2,507 hours (1,144 hours + 1,363 hours).

    1 Based on a review of new registrations typically filed with the CFTC each year, CFTC staff estimates that approximately 6 futures commission merchants (“FCMs”), 83 introducing brokers (“IBs”), 282 commodity trading advisors (“CTAs), and 198 commodity pool operators (“CPOs”) are newly formed each year, for a total of 572 entities. CFTC staff also has observed that approximately 50 percent of all CPOs are dually registered as CTAs. With respect to RFEDs, CFTC staff has observed that all entities registering as RFEDs also register as FCMs. Based on these observation, CFTC has determined that the total number of newly-formed financial institutions and creditors is 470 (569-99 CPOs that are also registered as CTAs). There were no newly registered RFEDs, SDs, or MSPs. Each of these 470 financial institutions or creditors would bear the initial one-time burden of compliance. Of the total 470 newly-formed entities, staff estimates that all of the FCMs are likely to carry covered accounts, 10 percent of CTAs and CPOs are likely to carry covered accounts, and none of the IBs are likely to carry covered accounts, for a total of 47 newly-formed financial institutions or creditors carrying covered accounts that would be required to conduct an initial one-time burden of compliance with subpart C of part 162.

    With respect to ongoing annual burden hours, CFTC staff estimates that each financial institution or creditor would incur a burden of 2 hours to periodically assess whether it offers or maintains covered accounts. Staff estimates that there are approximately 3,956 CFTC-regulated entities that are either financial institutions or creditors, and the total estimated annual burden to periodically assess covered accounts is therefore 7,912 hours. Staff also estimates that each financial institution or creditor that maintains covered accounts would incur an additional annual burden of 4 hours to prepare and present an annual report to the board and 2 hours to periodically review and update the Program. Staff estimates that there are approximately 47 CFTC-regulated entities that are financial institutions or creditors that offer or maintain covered accounts, and thus the total estimated additional annual burden for these entities is 282 hours. Thus, the total ongoing annual estimated burden for all CFTC-regulated entities is 8,194 hours (7912 hours + 282 hours).

    The collections of information required by section 162.32 will apply only to CFTC-regulated entities that issue credit or debit cards. CFTC staff understands that CFTC-regulated entities generally do not issue credit or debit cards, but instead may partner with other entities, such as banks, that issue cards on their behalf. These other entities, which are not regulated by the CFTC, are already subject to substantially similar change of address obligations pursuant to other federal regulators' identity theft red flags rules. Therefore, staff does not expect that any CFTC-regulated entities will be subject to the information collection requirements of section 163.32, and accordingly, staff estimates that there is no hour burden related to section 162.32 for CFTC-regulated entities.

    In total, CFTC staff estimates that the aggregate annual information collection burden of part 162 subpart C is 10,701 hours (2,507 hours + 8,194 hours). This estimate of burden hours is made solely for the purposes of the Paperwork Reduction Act and is not derived from a quantitative, comprehensive, or even representative survey or study of the burdens associated with Commission rules and forms. Compliance with part 162 subpart C, including compliance with the information collection requirements thereunder, is mandatory for each CFTC regulated entity that qualifies as a “financial institution” or “creditor” under part 162 subpart C (as discussed above, certain collections of information under part 162 subpart C are mandatory only for financial institutions or creditors that offer or maintain covered accounts).

    The Commission did not receive any comments on the 60-day Federal Register notice, 81 FR 35001, dated June 1, 2016.

    Estimated Number of Respondents: 4,622.

    Estimated Average Burden Hours per Respondent: 2.32.

    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 10,723.2

    2 This total annual burden hour reflects a slight increase in the estimated total annual burden hours to account for the average burden hours per respondent of 2.32 hours.

    Frequency of Collection: Once.

    There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection.

    Authority:

    44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.

    Dated: July 27, 2016. Christopher J. Kirkpatrick, Secretary of the Commission.
    [FR Doc. 2016-18212 Filed 8-1-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6351-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Paducah AGENCY:

    Department of Energy (DOE).

    ACTION:

    Notice of open meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice announces a meeting of the Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board (EM SSAB), Paducah. The Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 86 Stat. 770) requires that public notice of this meeting be announced in the Federal Register.

    DATES:

    Thursday, August 18, 2016, 6:00 p.m.

    ADDRESSES:

    Barkley Centre, 111 Memorial Drive, Paducah, Kentucky 42001.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Jennifer Woodard, Deputy Designated Federal Officer, Department of Energy Paducah Site Office, Post Office Box 1410, MS-103, Paducah, Kentucky 42001, (270) 441-6825.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Purpose of the Board: The purpose of the Board is to make recommendations to DOE-EM and site management in the areas of environmental restoration, waste management and related activities.

    Tentative Agenda:

    • Call to Order, Introductions, Review of Agenda • Administrative Issues • Public Comments (15 minutes) • Adjourn

    Breaks taken as appropriate.

    Public Participation: The EM SSAB, Paducah, welcomes the attendance of the public at its advisory committee meetings and will make every effort to accommodate persons with physical disabilities or special needs. If you require special accommodations due to a disability, please contact Jennifer Woodard as soon as possible in advance of the meeting at the telephone number listed above. Written statements may be filed with the Board either before or after the meeting. Individuals who wish to make oral statements pertaining to agenda items should contact Jennifer Woodard at the telephone number listed above. Requests must be received as soon as possible prior to the meeting and reasonable provision will be made to include the presentation in the agenda. The Deputy Designated Federal Officer is empowered to conduct the meeting in a fashion that will facilitate the orderly conduct of business. Individuals wishing to make public comments will be provided a maximum of five minutes to present their comments. The EM SSAB, Paducah, will hear public comments pertaining to its scope (clean-up standards and environmental restoration; waste management and disposition; stabilization and disposition of non-stockpile nuclear materials; excess facilities; future land use and long-term stewardship; risk assessment and management; and clean-up science and technology activities). Comments outside of the scope may be submitted via written statement as directed above.

    Minutes: Minutes will be available by writing or calling Jennifer Woodard at the address and phone number listed above. Minutes will also be available at the following Web site: http://www.pgdpcab.energy.gov/2016_meetings.htm.

    Issued at Washington, DC, on July 27, 2016. LaTanya R. Butler, Deputy Committee Management Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2016-18186 Filed 8-1-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology AGENCY:

    Office of Science, Department of Energy.

    ACTION:

    Notice of open teleconference.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice sets forth the schedule and summary agenda for a conference call of the President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST), and describes the functions of the Council. The Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 86 Stat. 770) requires that public notice of these meetings be announced in the Federal Register.

    DATES:

    August 15, 2016, 4:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    ADDRESSES:

    To receive the call-in information, attendees should register for the conference call on the PCAST Web site, http://www.whitehouse.gov/ostp/pcast no later than 1:00 p.m. (ET) on Friday, August 12, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Information regarding the meeting agenda, time, location, and how to register for the meeting is available on the PCAST Web site at: http://whitehouse.gov/ostp/pcast. Questions about the meeting should be directed to Ms. Jennifer Michael at [email protected], (202) 456-4444.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST) is an advisory group of the nation's leading scientists and engineers, appointed by the President to augment the science and technology advice available to him from inside the White House, cabinet departments, and other Federal agencies. See the Executive Order at http://www.whitehouse.gov/ostp/pcast. PCAST is consulted about and provides analyses and recommendations concerning a wide range of issues where understandings from the domains of science, technology, and innovation may bear on the policy choices before the President. PCAST is co-chaired by Dr. John P. Holdren, Assistant to the President for Science and Technology, and Director, Office of Science and Technology Policy, Executive Office of the President, The White House; and Dr. Eric S. Lander, President, Broad Institute of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Harvard.

    Type of Meeting: Open.

    Proposed Schedule and Agenda: The President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST) is scheduled to hold a public conference call on August 15, 2016 from 4:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Open Portion of Meeting: During this open meeting, PCAST is scheduled to vote on its biodefense and forensics studies. Additional information and the agenda, including any changes that arise, will be posted at the PCAST Web site at: http://whitehouse.gov/ostp/pcast.

    Public Comments: It is the policy of the PCAST to accept written public comments of any length, and to accommodate oral public comments whenever possible. The PCAST expects that public statements presented at its meetings will not be repetitive of previously submitted oral or written statements.

    The public comment period for this meeting will take place on August 15, 2016 at a time specified in the meeting agenda posted on the PCAST Web site at http://whitehouse.gov/ostp/pcast. This public comment period is designed only for substantive commentary on PCAST's work, not for business marketing purposes.

    Oral Comments: To be considered for the public speaker list at the meeting, interested parties should register to speak at http://whitehouse.gov/ostp/pcast, no later than 1:00 p.m. Eastern Time on August 12, 2016. Phone or email reservations will not be accepted. To accommodate as many speakers as possible, the time for public comments will be limited to two (2) minutes per person, with a total public comment period of up to 10 minutes. If more speakers register than there is space available on the agenda, PCAST will randomly select speakers from among those who applied. Those not selected to present oral comments may always file written comments with the committee.

    Written Comments: Although written comments are accepted continuously, written comments should be submitted to PCAST no later than 1:00 p.m. Eastern Time on August 12, 2016 so that the comments may be made available to the PCAST members prior to this meeting for their consideration. Information regarding how to submit comments and documents to PCAST is available at http://whitehouse.gov/ostp/pcast in the section entitled “Connect with PCAST.”

    Please note that because PCAST operates under the provisions of FACA, all public comments and/or presentations will be treated as public documents and will be made available for public inspection, including being posted on the PCAST Web site.

    Meeting Accommodations: Individuals requiring special accommodation to access this public meeting should contact Ms. Jennifer Michael at least ten business days prior to the meeting so that appropriate arrangements can be made.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on July 27, 2016. LaTanya R. Butler, Deputy Committee Management Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2016-18185 Filed 8-1-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Northern New Mexico AGENCY:

    Department of Energy.

    ACTION:

    Notice of open meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice announces a combined meeting of the Environmental Monitoring and Remediation Committee and Waste Management Committee of the Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board (EM SSAB), Northern New Mexico (known locally as the Northern New Mexico Citizens' Advisory Board [NNMCAB]). The Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 86 Stat. 770) requires that public notice of this meeting be announced in the Federal Register.

    DATES:

    Wednesday, August 24, 2016, 1:00 p.m.-4:00 p.m.

    ADDRESSES:

    NNMCAB Office, 94 Cities of Gold Road, Santa Fe, NM 87506.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Menice Santistevan, Northern New Mexico Citizens' Advisory Board, 94 Cities of Gold Road, Santa Fe, NM 87506. Phone (505) 995-0393; Fax (505) 989-1752 or Email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Purpose of the Board: The purpose of the Board is to make recommendations to DOE-EM and site management in the areas of environmental restoration, waste management, and related activities.

    Purpose of the Environmental Monitoring and Remediation Committee (EM&R): The EM&R Committee provides a citizens' perspective to NNMCAB on current and future environmental remediation activities resulting from historical Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) operations and, in particular, issues pertaining to groundwater, surface water and work required under the New Mexico Environment Department Order on Consent. The EM&R Committee will keep abreast of DOE-EM and site programs and plans. The committee will work with the NNMCAB to provide assistance in determining priorities and the best use of limited funds and time. Formal recommendations will be proposed when needed and, after consideration and approval by the full NNMCAB, may be sent to DOE-EM for action.

    Purpose of the Waste Management (WM) Committee: The WM Committee reviews policies, practices and procedures, existing and proposed, so as to provide recommendations, advice, suggestions and opinions to the NNMCAB regarding waste management operations at the Los Alamos site.

    Tentative Agenda:

    • Call to Order and Introductions • Approval of Agenda • Approval of Minutes from June 15, 2016 • Old Business o Discuss Topics for Future Recommendations o Requests for Future Presentations • New Business o Election of WM Committee Vice-Chair • Update from DOE • Presentation: Climate Change Effects in the Southwest • Public Comment Period • Adjourn

    Public Participation: The NNMCAB's Committees welcome the attendance of the public at their combined committee meeting and will make every effort to accommodate persons with physical disabilities or special needs. If you require special accommodations due to a disability, please contact Menice Santistevan at least seven days in advance of the meeting at the telephone number listed above. Written statements may be filed with the Committees either before or after the meeting. Individuals who wish to make oral statements pertaining to agenda items should contact Menice Santistevan at the address or telephone number listed above. Requests must be received five days prior to the meeting and reasonable provision will be made to include the presentation in the agenda. The Deputy Designated Federal Officer is empowered to conduct the meeting in a fashion that will facilitate the orderly conduct of business. Individuals wishing to make public comments will be provided a maximum of five minutes to present their comments.

    Minutes: Minutes will be available by writing or calling Menice Santistevan at the address or phone number listed above. Minutes and other Board documents are on the Internet at: http://energy.gov/em/nnmcab/northern-new-mexico-citizens-advisory-board.

    Issued at Washington, DC, on July 27, 2016. LaTanya R. Butler, Deputy Committee Management Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2016-18187 Filed 8-1-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6405-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Combined Notice of Filings #1

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER10-1852-014; ER10-1971-029; ER11-4462-020.

    Applicants: Florida Power & Light Company, NextEra Energy Power Marketing, LLC, NEPM II, LLC.

    Description: Notification of Change in Status of Florida Power & Light Company, et al.

    Filed Date: 7/26/16.

    Accession Number: 20160726-5173.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/16/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-1479-001.

    Applicants: Kentucky Utilities Company.

    Description: Compliance filing: Compliance Filing Brown Solar Depriciation Rates to be effective 6/9/2016.

    Filed Date: 7/27/16.

    Accession Number: 20160727-5058.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/17/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-2019-000.

    Applicants: Five Points Solar Park LLC.

    Description: Supplement to June 24, 2016 Five Points Solar Park LLC tariff filing.

    Filed Date: 7/21/16.

    Accession Number: 20160721-5123.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/1/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-2289-000.

    Applicants: Golden Fields Solar I, LLC.

    Description: Initial rate filing: Market-Based Rate Tariff to be effective 8/1/2016.

    Filed Date: 7/26/16.

    Accession Number: 20160726-5148.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/16/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-2290-000.

    Applicants: Spartan Renewable Energy, Inc.

    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Spartan Renewable Energy, Inc. Market-Based Rate Tariff to be effective 1/1/2017.

    Filed Date: 7/26/16.

    Accession Number: 20160726-5151.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/16/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-2291-000.

    Applicants: Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: Amendment to NCEMC NITSA SA No. 210 to be effective 7/1/2016.

    Filed Date: 7/27/16.

    Accession Number: 20160727-5031.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/17/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-2292-000.

    Applicants: Public Service Company of Colorado.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: PSCo-BkCoU-Trans Intercon Agrmt 0.0.0 Filing to be effective 9/26/2016.

    Filed Date: 7/27/16.

    Accession Number: 20160727-5060.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/17/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-2293-000.

    Applicants: Drift Sand Wind Project, LLC.

    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: MBR Tariff to be effective 9/1/2016.

    Filed Date: 7/27/16.

    Accession Number: 20160727-5069.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/17/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-2294-000.

    Applicants: Interstate Power and Light Company.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: Revised IPL Rate Schedule for Blackstart Resource Services to be effective 9/1/2016.

    Filed Date: 7/27/16.

    Accession Number: 20160727-5072.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/17/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-2295-000.

    Applicants: Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: Affected System Operating Agreement SA No. 481 to be effective 7/1/2016.

    Filed Date: 7/27/16.

    Accession Number: 20160727-5074.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/17/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-2296-000.

    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.

    Description: Compliance filing: 3127 Montana-Dakota Utilities Co. NITSA and NOA to be effective 10/1/2015.

    Filed Date: 7/27/16.

    Accession Number: 20160727-5104.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/17/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-2297-000.

    Applicants: Osborn Wind Energy, LLC.

    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Osborn Wind Energy, LLC Application for Market-Based Rates to be effective 10/1/2016.

    Filed Date: 7/27/16.

    Accession Number: 20160727-5105.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/17/16.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric securities filings:

    Docket Numbers: ES16-45-000.

    Applicants: Spring Canyon Interconnection LLC.

    Description: Application for Blanket Authorization to Issue Securities and Assume Liabilities of Spring Canyon Interconnection LLC.

    Filed Date: 7/20/16.

    Accession Number: 20160720-5166.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/10/16.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the links or querying the docket number.

    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the proceeding.

    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

    Dated: July 27, 2016. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-18284 Filed 8-1-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. ER16-2289-000] Golden Fields Solar I, LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding Golden Fields Solar I, LLC's application for market-based rate authority, with an accompanying rate tariff, noting that such application includes a request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of liability.

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the Applicant.

    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of liability, is August 16, 2016.

    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the intervention or protests.

    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 5 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.

    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the above list. They are also available for electronic review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive email notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please email [email protected] or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

    Dated: July 27, 2016. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-18285 Filed 8-1-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Combined Notice of Filings #1

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric corporate filings:

    Docket Numbers: EC16-157-000.

    Applicants: Alcoa Power Generating Inc., Cube Yadkin Generation LLC, Cube Yadkin Transmission LLC.

    Description: Joint Application for Authorization for Disposition and Consolidation of Jurisdictional Facilities and Acquisition of Existing Generation Facilities and Request for Expedited Action of Alcoa Power Generating Inc., et al.

    Filed Date: 7/26/16.

    Accession Number: 20160726-5036.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/16/16.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER10-1513-003.

    Applicants: Wolverine Power Supply Cooperative, Inc.

    Description: Notice of Change in Status and Request for Waiver of Wolverine Power Supply Cooperative, Inc.

    Filed Date: 7/25/16.

    Accession Number: 20160725-5244.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/15/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-2751-004.

    Applicants: Xcel Energy Southwest Transmission Company, LLC.

    Description: Compliance Filing of Xcel Energy Southwest Transmission Company, LLC.

    Filed Date: 7/25/16.

    Accession Number: 20160725-5235.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/15/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-2752-005.

    Applicants: Xcel Energy Transmission Development Company, LLC.

    Description: Compliance Filing of Xcel Energy Transmission Development Company, LLC.

    Filed Date: 7/25/16.

    Accession Number: 20160725-5234.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/15/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-1277-002; ER16-1293-002.

    Applicants: White Pine Solar, LLC, White Oak Solar, LLC.

    Description: Notice of Non-material Change in Status of White Pine Solar, LLC, et al.

    Filed Date: 7/25/16.

    Accession Number: 20160725-5245.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/15/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-1286-001.

    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.

    Description: Tariff Amendment: Response to Letter Requesting Additional Information in ER16-1286 and ER16-1314 to be effective 5/29/2016.

    Filed Date: 7/25/16.

    Accession Number: 20160725-5202.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/15/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-1314-001.

    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.

    Description: Tariff Amendment: Response to Letter Requesting Additional Information in ER16-1286 and ER16-1314 to be effective 3/1/2016.

    Filed Date: 7/25/16.

    Accession Number: 20160725-5203.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/15/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-2275-000.

    Applicants: Kingman Wind Energy I, LLC.

    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Kingman Wind Energy I, LLC Application for Market-Based Rates to be effective 10/1/2016.

    Filed Date: 7/25/16.

    Accession Number: 20160725-5197.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/15/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-2276-000.

    Applicants: Kingman Wind Energy II, LLC.

    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Kingman Wind Energy II, LLC Application for Market-Based Rates to be effective 10/1/2016.

    Filed Date: 7/25/16.

    Accession Number: 20160725-5198.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/15/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-2277-000.

    Applicants: Solar Star California XLI, LLC.

    Description: Initial rate filing: Market-Based Rate Tariff to be effective 8/1/2016.

    Filed Date: 7/25/16.

    Accession Number: 20160725-5201.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/15/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-2278-000.

    Applicants: Cube Yadkin Generation LLC.

    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: MBR Application to be effective 9/25/2016.

    Filed Date: 7/26/16.

    Accession Number: 20160726-5001.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/16/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-2279-000.

    Applicants: Southern California Edison Company.

    Description: Tariff Cancellation: Notices of Cancellation to GIA and Distrib Service Agmt with Ganna Halvorsen to be effective 9/25/2016.

    Filed Date: 7/26/16.

    Accession Number: 20160726-5004.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/16/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-2280-000.

    Applicants: Southern California Edison Company.

    Description: Section 205(d) Rate Filing: First Amended LGIA Valentine Solar, LLC for Avalon Hybrid Project to be effective 7/27/2016.

    Filed Date: 7/26/16.

    Accession Number: 20160726-5005.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/16/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-2281-000.

    Applicants: American Transmission Systems, Incorporated, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.

    Description: Section 205(d) Rate Filing: American Transmission Systems, Inc. Filing of Revised Service Agreement No. 4240 to be effective 9/15/2016.

    Filed Date: 7/26/16.

    Accession Number: 20160726-5052.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/16/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-2282-000.

    Applicants: Northern Indiana Public Service Company.

    Description: Section 205(d) Rate Filing: Supplement for Coonrod 69 kv Delivery Point to be effective 7/31/2016.

    Filed Date: 7/25/16.

    Accession Number: 20160725-5246.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/15/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-2283-000.

    Applicants: Genbright LLC.

    Description: Request for Limited Waiver of Genbright, LLC.

    Filed Date: 7/26/16.

    Accession Number: 20160726-5062.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/16/16.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the links or querying the docket number.

    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the proceeding.

    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

    Dated: July 26, 2016. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-18288 Filed 8-1-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Combined Notice of Filings #1

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric corporate filings:

    Docket Numbers: EC16-136-000.

    Applicants: Patua Acquisition Company, LLC, Patua Project, LLC.

    Description: Amendment to June 29, 2016 Application For Prospective Authorization Under Section 203 of the Federal Power Act of Patua Acquisition Company, LLC, et al.

    Filed Date: 7/15/16.

    Accession Number: 20160715-5156.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/25/16.

    Docket Numbers: EC16-153-000.

    Applicants: Antelope DSR 2, LLC.

    Description: Application for Authorization Under Section 203 of the Federal Power Act for the Disposition of Jurisdictional Facilities, Request for Expedited Consideration and Confidential Treatment of Antelope DSR 2, LLC.

    Filed Date: 7/20/16.

    Accession Number: 20160720-5073.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/10/16.

    Docket Numbers: EC16-154-000.

    Applicants: Western Antelope Dry Ranch LLC.

    Description: Application for Authorization Under Section 203 of the Federal Power Act for the Disposition of Jurisdictional Facilities, Request for Expedited Consideration and Confidential Treatment of Western Antelope Dry Ranch LLC.

    Filed Date: 7/20/16.

    Accession Number: 20160720-5112.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/10/16.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2265-011; ER12-21-020; ER11-2211-009; ER11-2209-009; ER11-2210-009; ER11-2207-009; ER11-2206-009; ER13-1150-007; ER13-1151-007; ER11-2855-020; ER14-1818-011; ER10-2260-007; ER10-2261-007; ER10-2338-013; ER10-2340-013; ER13-1991-008; ER13-1992-008; ER11-3727-015; ER10-2262-006; ER11-2062-020; ER11-2508-019; ER11-4307-020; ER12-1711-015; ER12-261-019; ER10-2264-007; ER10-1581-017; ER10-2354-009; ER11-2107-011; ER11-2108-011; ER10-2888-020; ER13-1803-011; ER13-1790-011; ER13-1746-012; ER12-1525-015; ER12-2019-013; ER10-2266-006; ER12-2398-014; ER11-3459-014; ER11-4308-020; ER11-2805-019; ER11-2856-020; ER13-2107-010; ER13-2020-010; ER13-2050-010; ER11-2857-020; ER10-2359-008; ER10-2381-008.

    Applicants: NRG Power Marketing LLC, Agua Caliente Solar, LLC, Alta Wind I, LLC, Alta Wind II, LLC, Alta Wind III, LLC, Alta Wind IV, LLC, Alta Wind V, LLC, Alta Wind X, LLC, Alta Wind XI, LLC, Avenal Park LLC, Boston Energy Trading and Marketing LLC, Cabrillo Power I LLC, Cabrillo Power II LLC, CP Power Sales Nineteen, L.L.C., CP Power Sales Twenty, L.L.C., Desert Sunlight 250, LLC, Desert Sunlight 300, LLC, El Segundo Energy Center LLC, El Segundo Power, LLC, Energy Plus Holdings LLC, GenOn Energy Management, LLC, Green Mountain Energy Company, High Plains Ranch II, LLC, Independence Energy Group LLC, Long Beach Generation LLC, Long Beach Peakers LLC, Midway-Sunset Cogeneration Company, North Community Turbines LLC, North Wind Turbines LLC, Norwalk Power LLC, NRG California South LP, NRG Delta LLC, NRG Marsh Landing LLC, NRG Solar Alpine LLC, NRG Solar Avra Valley LLC, NRG Solar Blythe LLC, NRG Solar Borrego I LLC, NRG Solar Roadrunner LLC, Reliant Energy Northeast LLC, RRI Energy Services, LLC, Sand Drag LLC, Solar Partners I, LLC, Solar Partners II, LLC, Solar Partners VIII, LLC, Sun City Project LLC, Sunrise Power Company, LLC, Walnut Creek Energy, LLC.

    Description: Supplement to June 30, 2016 Updated Market Power Analysis of the Southwest Region of NRG Power Marketing LLC, et al.

    Filed Date: 7/18/16.

    Accession Number: 20160718-5172.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/29/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-2952-005.

    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.

    Description: Report Filing: 2016-07-20_SSR Cost Allocation Refiling of Refund Report to be effective N/A.

    Filed Date: 7/20/16.

    Accession Number: 20160720-5080.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/10/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-994-002.

    Applicants: Pacific Gas and Electric Company.

    Description: Compliance filing: Compliance Filing to Revise Appendix A of the Western IA (SA 59) to be effective 4/1/2016.

    Filed Date: 7/20/16.

    Accession Number: 20160720-5072.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/10/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-2238-000.

    Applicants: Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc., Orange and Rockland Utilities, Inc., New York Independent System Operator, Inc.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: Con Edison and O&R Transco Agreements to be effective 5/27/2016.

    Filed Date: 7/19/16.

    Accession Number: 20160719-5106.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/9/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-2239-000.

    Applicants: California Independent System Operator Corporation.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: 2019-07-19 WAPA DTBAOA Agreement Amendment 1 to be effective 9/18/2016.

    Filed Date: 7/19/16.

    Accession Number: 20160719-5107.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/9/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-2240-000.

    Applicants: Rush Springs Wind Energy, LLC.

    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Rush Springs Wind Energy, LLC Application for Market-Based Rates to be effective 10/1/2016.

    Filed Date: 7/19/16.

    Accession Number: 20160719-5109.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/9/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-2241-000.

    Applicants: Ninnescah Wind Energy, LLC.

    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Ninnescah Wind Energy, LLC Application for Market-Based Rates to be effective 10/1/2016.

    Filed Date: 7/19/16.

    Accession Number: 20160719-5111.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/9/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-2242-000.

    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: 2016-07-20_SA 2928 ITCTransmission-Tuscola Wind III GIA (J301) to be effective 7/21/2016.

    Filed Date: 7/20/16.

    Accession Number: 20160720-5039.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/10/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-2243-000.

    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: 2016-07-20_SA 2929 ITCTransmission-Huron Wind GIA (J308) to be effective 7/21/2016.

    Filed Date: 7/20/16.

    Accession Number: 20160720-5045.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/10/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-2244-000.

    Applicants: Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: Amendment to PMPA NITSA SA No. 355 to be effective 7/1/2016.

    Filed Date: 7/20/16.

    Accession Number: 20160720-5058.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/10/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-2245-000.

    Applicants: Wabash Valley Power Association, Inc.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: Amendments to Rate Schedules—Boone REMC to be effective 9/20/2016.

    Filed Date: 7/20/16.

    Accession Number: 20160720-5082.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/10/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-2246-000.

    Applicants: Antelope DSR 1, LLC.

    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Antelope DSR 1, LLC SFA to be effective 8/1/2016.

    Filed Date: 7/20/16.

    Accession Number: 20160720-5111.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/10/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-2247-000.

    Applicants: Antelope DSR 2, LLC.

    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Antelope DSR 2, LLC SFA to be effective 8/1/2016.

    Filed Date: 7/20/16.

    Accession Number: 20160720-5114.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/10/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-2248-000.

    Applicants: Antelope DSR 3, LLC.

    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Antelope DSR 3, LLC SFA to be effective 8/1/2016.

    Filed Date: 7/20/16.

    Accession Number: 20160720-5115.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/10/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-2249-000.

    Applicants: Elevation Solar C LLC.

    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Elevation Solar C LLC SFA to be effective 8/1/2016.

    Filed Date: 7/20/16.

    Accession Number: 20160720-5116.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/10/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-2250-000.

    Applicants: Solverde 1, LLC.

    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Solverde 1, LLC SFA to be effective 8/1/2016.

    Filed Date: 7/20/16.

    Accession Number: 20160720-5117.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/10/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-2251-000.

    Applicants: Western Antelope Blue Sky Ranch B LLC.

    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Western Antelope Blue Sky Ranch B LLC SFA to be effective 8/1/2016.

    Filed Date: 7/20/16.

    Accession Number: 20160720-5118.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/10/16.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric securities filings:

    Docket Numbers: ES16-44-000.

    Applicants: ITC Midwest LLC.

    Description: Application Under Section 204 of the Federal Power Act of ITC Midwest LLC.

    Filed Date: 7/20/16.

    Accession Number: 20160720-5107.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/10/16.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the links or querying the docket number.

    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the proceeding.

    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

    Dated: July 20, 2016. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-18287 Filed 8-1-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Combined Notice of Filings #2

    Take notice that the Commission received the following exempt wholesale generator filings:

    Docket Numbers: EG16-130-000.

    Applicants: Cimarron Bend Wind Project I, LLC.

    Description: Cimarron Bend Wind Project I, LLC submits Notice of Self-Certification of Exempt Wholesale Generator Status.

    Filed Date: 7/26/16.

    Accession Number: 20160726-5120.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/16/16.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER15-1682-004.

    Applicants: TransCanyon DCR, LLC.

    Description: Compliance filing: Formula Rate Implementation Protocols Compliance Filing to be effective 7/6/2015.

    Filed Date: 7/26/16.

    Accession Number: 20160726-5079.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/16/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-200-003.

    Applicants: Duke Energy Indiana, LLC.

    Description: Compliance filing: Compliance Filing Reactive Settlement to be effective 1/1/2016.

    Filed Date: 7/26/16.

    Accession Number: 20160726-5095.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/16/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-2284-000.

    Applicants: DTE Electric Company.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: Revised Croswell Interconnection Agreement to be effective 9/1/2016.

    Filed Date: 7/26/16.

    Accession Number: 20160726-5075.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/16/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-2285-000.

    Applicants: Desert Wind Farm LLC.

    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Baseline new to be effective 9/24/2016.

    Filed Date: 7/26/16.

    Accession Number: 20160726-5091.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/16/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-2286-000.

    Applicants: Public Service Company of Colorado.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: PSCo-WAPA-TSGT-320-NOC Filing to be effective 9/25/2016.

    Filed Date: 7/26/16.

    Accession Number: 20160726-5101.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/16/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-2287-000.

    Applicants: Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation, New York Independent System Operator, Inc.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: SGIA 2293 between National Grid and Innovative/Colonie to be effective 4/29/2016.

    Filed Date: 7/26/16.

    Accession Number: 20160726-5131.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/16/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-2288-000.

    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: Service Agreement No. 4503, Queue Position AB1-166 to be effective 6/27/2016.

    Filed Date: 7/26/16

    Accession Number: 20160726-5145.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/16/16.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the links or querying the docket number.

    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the proceeding.

    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

    Dated: July 26, 2016. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-18282 Filed 8-1-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. ER16-2290-000] Spartan Renewable Energy, LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding Spartan Renewable Energy, LLC's application for market-based rate authority, with an accompanying rate tariff, noting that such application includes a request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of liability.

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the Applicant.

    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of liability, is August 16, 2016.

    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the intervention or protests.

    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 5 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.

    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the above list. They are also available for electronic review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive email notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please email [email protected] or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

    Dated: July 27, 2016. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-18286 Filed 8-1-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. RM98-1-000] Records Governing Off-the-Record Communications; Public Notice

    This constitutes notice, in accordance with 18 CFR 385.2201(b), of the receipt of prohibited and exempt off-the-record communications.

    Order No. 607 (64 FR 51222, September 22, 1999) requires Commission decisional employees, who make or receive a prohibited or exempt off-the-record communication relevant to the merits of a contested proceeding, to deliver to the Secretary of the Commission, a copy of the communication, if written, or a summary of the substance of any oral communication.

    Prohibited communications are included in a public, non-decisional file associated with, but not a part of, the decisional record of the proceeding. Unless the Commission determines that the prohibited communication and any responses thereto should become a part of the decisional record, the prohibited off-the-record communication will not be considered by the Commission in reaching its decision. Parties to a proceeding may seek the opportunity to respond to any facts or contentions made in a prohibited off-the-record communication, and may request that the Commission place the prohibited communication and responses thereto in the decisional record. The Commission will grant such a request only when it determines that fairness so requires. Any person identified below as having made a prohibited off-the-record communication shall serve the document on all parties listed on the official service list for the applicable proceeding in accordance with Rule 2010, 18 CFR 385.2010.

    Exempt off-the-record communications are included in the decisional record of the proceeding, unless the communication was with a cooperating agency as described by 40 CFR 1501.6, made under 18 CFR 385.2201(e)(1)(v).

    The following is a list of off-the-record communications recently received by the Secretary of the Commission. The communications listed are grouped by docket numbers in ascending order. These filings are available for electronic review at the Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov using the eLibrary link. Enter the docket number, excluding the last three digits, in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at [email protected] or toll free at (866) 208-3676, or for TTY, contact (202) 502-8659.

    Docket No. File date Presenter or requester Prohibited 1. CP15-117-000 7-18-2016 Transcontinental Gas Pipeline Company, LLC. 2. P-9690-000 7-18-2016 Private Citizen. 3. CP15-117-000 7-21-2016 Oglethrope Power Corporation. Exempt 1. P-2165-067 7-11-2016 U.S. House Representative Robert B. Aderholt. 2. CP15-558-000 7-11-2016 U.S. House Representative Matt Cartwright. 3. CP14-96-000 7-18-2016 State of New York Senator Daniel Squadron. 4. P-10810-000 7-18-2016 U.S. House Representative John Moolenaar. 5. CP15-514-000 7-19-2016 FERC Staff.1 6. P-13102-003 7-21-2016 FERC Staff.2 1 Memo dated July 18, 2016 forwarding letter from Teresa Spagna from U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 2 Telephone Memo dated July 20, 2016 reporting call with Nick Josten from Birch Power Company. Dated: July 26, 2016. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-18283 Filed 8-1-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [FRL-9950-14-OAR] Clean Air Act Advisory Committee (CAAAC): Notice of Meeting AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Notice of meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announces an upcoming public teleconference of the Clean Air Act Advisory Committee (CAAAC) to discuss draft recommendations from the Ports Initiative Workgroup of the Mobile Sources Technical Review Subcommittee (MSTRS). The EPA established the CAAAC on November 19, 1990, to provide independent advice and counsel to EPA on policy issues associated with implementation of the Clean Air Act of 1990. The Committee advises on economic, environmental, technical, scientific and enforcement policy issues.

    DATES:

    Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. App. 2 Section 10(a) (2), notice is hereby given that the CAAAC will hold a teleconference to discuss draft recommendations from the MSTRS Ports Initiative Workgroup on September 7, 2016 from 2:00 p.m. to 3:30 p.m. (Eastern Time).

    Inspection of Committee Documents: The committee agenda and any documents prepared for the meeting will be publicly available on the CAAAC Web site at http://www.epa.gov/oar/caaac/ prior to the meeting. Thereafter, these documents, together with CAAAC meeting minutes, will be available on the CAAAC Web site or by contacting the Office of Air and Radiation Docket and requesting information under docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2004-0075. The docket office can be reached by email at: [email protected] or FAX: 202-566-9744.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Any member of the public who wants further information concerning the CAAAC's public teleconference may contact Tamara Saltman at [email protected] or Sarah Froman at [email protected] of the Office of Air and Radiation, U.S. EPA. Additional information about this meeting, the CAAAC, and its subcommittees and workgroups can be found on the CAAAC Web site: http://www.epa.gov/oar/caaac/. For information on access or services for individuals with disabilities, please contact Lorraine Reddick at [email protected], preferably at least 10 days prior to the meeting to give EPA as much time as possible to process your request.

    Dated: July 19, 2016. Jim DeMocker, Interim Designated Federal Officer, Clean Air Act Advisory Committee, Office of Air and Radiation.
    [FR Doc. 2016-18329 Filed 8-1-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [FRL-9950-16-OARM] National Advisory Council for Environmental Policy and Technology AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Notice of Federal Advisory Committee teleconference.

    SUMMARY:

    Under the Federal Advisory Committee Act, Public Law 92463, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) gives notice of a public meeting of the National Advisory Council for Environmental Policy and Technology (NACEPT). NACEPT provides advice to the EPA Administrator on a broad range of environmental policy, technology, and management issues. NACEPT members represent academia, industry, non-governmental organizations, and state, local and tribal governments. The purpose of this meeting is for NACEPT to discuss draft recommendations regarding actions that EPA should take in response to technological and sociological developments in the area of citizen science. A copy of the meeting agenda will be posted at http://www2.epa.gov/faca/nacept.

    DATES:

    NACEPT will hold a public teleconference on August 22, 2016, from 12:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. (EDT).

    ADDRESS:

    The meeting will be held at the EPA Headquarters, William Jefferson Clinton Federal Building East, Room 1132, 1201 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20004.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Eugene Green, Designated Federal Officer, [email protected], (202) 564-2432, U.S. EPA, Office of Resources, Operations and Management; Federal Advisory Committee Management Division (MC1601M), 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20460.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Requests to make oral comments or to provide written comments to NACEPT should be sent to Eugene Green at [email protected] by August 15, 2016. The teleconference is open to the public, with limited seating available on a first-come, first-served basis. Members of the public wishing to participate in the teleconference should contact Eugene Green via email or calling (202) 564-2432 no later than August 15, 2016.

    MEETING ACCESS:

    Information regarding accessibility and/or accommodations for individuals with disabilities should be directed to Eugene Green at the email address or phone number listed above. To ensure adequate time for processing, please make requests for accommodations at least 10 days prior to the meeting.

    Dated: July 25, 2016. Eugene Green, Designated Federal Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2016-18342 Filed 8-1-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION [OMB 3060-0192] Information Collection Being Submitted for Review and Approval to the Office of Management and Budget AGENCY:

    Federal Communications Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice and request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, and as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), the Federal Communications Commission (FCC or 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 September 1, 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 Cathy Williams, FCC, via email [email protected] and to Cathy.Willia[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 Cathy Williams at (202) 418-2918. 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 No.: 3060-0192.

    Title: Section 87.103, Posting Station License.

    Form No.: N/A.

    Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection.

    Respondents: Business or other for-profit, not-for-profit institutions, and state, local and tribal government.

    Number of Respondents and Responses: 33,622 respondents, 33,622 responses.

    Estimated Time per Response: .25 hours.

    Frequency of Response: Recordkeeping requirement.

    Obligation to Respond: Required to obtain or retain benefits. The statutory authority for this collection is contained in 47 U.S.C. 303.

    Total Annual Burden: 8,406 hours.

    Annual Cost Burden: No cost.

    Privacy Act Impact Assessment: No impacts.

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

    Needs and Uses: Section 87.103 states the following: (a) Stations at fixed locations. The license or a photocopy must be posted or retained in the station's permanent records. (b) Aircraft radio stations. The license must be either posted in the aircraft or kept with the aircraft registration certificate. If a single authorization covers a fleet of aircraft, a copy of the license must be either posted in each aircraft or kept with each aircraft registration certificate. (c) Aeronautical mobile stations. The license must be retained as a permanent part of the station records.

    The recordkeeping requirement contained in Section 87.103 is necessary to demonstrate that all transmitters in the Aviation Service are properly licensed in accordance with the requirements of Section 301 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 301, No. 2020 of the International Radio Regulation, and Article 30 of the Convention on International Civil Aviation.

    Federal Communications Commission. Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, Office of the Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-18209 Filed 8-1-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
    FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION [NOTICE 2016-06] Disclosure of Certain Documents in Enforcement and Other Matters AGENCY:

    Federal Election Commission.

    ACTION:

    Statement of policy.

    SUMMARY:

    The Commission is adopting a policy with respect to placing certain documents on the public record in enforcement, administrative fines, and alternative dispute resolution cases, as well as administrative matters. The categories of records that will be included in the public record are described below.

    DATES:

    Effective on September 1, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Adav Noti, Acting Associate General Counsel, 999 E Street NW., Washington, DC 20463, 202-694-1650 or 1-800-424-9530.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The “confidentiality provision” of the Federal Election Campaign Act, 52 U.S.C. 30101 et seq. (FECA), provides that: “Any notification or investigation under [Section 30109] shall not be made public by the Commission . . . without the written consent of the person receiving such notification or the person with respect to whom such investigation is made.” 52 U.S.C. 30109(a)(12)(A). For approximately the first 25 years of its existence, the Commission viewed the confidentiality requirement as ending with the termination of a case. The Commission placed on its public record the documents that had been considered by the Commissioners in their determination of a case, minus those materials exempt from disclosure under the FECA or under the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 552 (FOIA). See 11 CFR 5.4(a)(4). In AFL-CIO v. FEC, 177 F. Supp. 2d 48 (D.D.C. 2001), the district court disagreed with the Commission's interpretation of the confidentiality provision and found that the protection of section 30109(a)(12)(A) does not lapse at the time the Commission terminates an investigation. 177 F. Supp. 2d at 56.

    Following that district court decision, the Commission placed on the public record only those documents that reflected the agency's “final determination” with respect to enforcement matters. Such disclosure is required under 52 U.S.C. 30109(a)(4)(B)(ii) and section (a)(2)(A) of the FOIA. In all cases, the final determination is evidenced by a certification of Commission vote. The Commission also continued to disclose documents that explained the basis for the final determination. Depending upon the nature of the case, those documents consisted of General Counsel's Reports (frequently in redacted form); Probable Cause to Believe Briefs; conciliation agreements; Statements of Reasons issued by one or more of the Commissioners; or, a combination of the foregoing. The district court indicated that the Commission was free to release these categories of documents. See 177 F. Supp. 2d at 54 n.11. In administrative fines cases, the Commission began placing on the public record only the Final Determination Recommendation and certification of vote on final determination. In alternative dispute resolution cases, the public record consisted of the certification of vote and the negotiated agreement.

    Although it affirmed the judgment of the district court in AFL-CIO, the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit differed with the lower court's restrictive interpretation of the confidentiality provision of 52 U.S.C. 30109(a)(12)(A). The Court of Appeals stated that: “the Commission may well be correct that . . . Congress merely intended to prevent disclosure of the fact that an investigation is pending,” and that: “deterring future violations and promoting Commission accountability may well justify releasing more information than the minimum disclosures required by section [30109](a).” See AFL-CIO v. FEC, 333 F.3d 168, 174, 179 (D.C. Cir. 2003). However, the Court of Appeals warned that, in releasing enforcement information to the public, the Commission must “attempt to avoid unnecessarily infringing on First Amendment interests where it regularly subpoenas materials of a `delicate nature . . . represent[ing] the very heart of the organism which the first amendment was intended to nurture and protect.' ” Id. at 179 (citation omitted). The decision suggested that, with respect to materials of this nature, a “balancing” of competing interests is required—on one hand, consideration of the Commission's interest in promoting its own accountability and in deterring future violations and, on the other, consideration of the respondent's interest in the privacy of association and belief guaranteed by the First Amendment. Noting that the Commission had failed to tailor its disclosure policy to avoid unnecessarily burdening the First Amendment rights of the political organizations it investigates, id. at 178, the Court found the agency's disclosure regulation at 11 CFR 5.4(a)(4) to be impermissible, id. at 179. In December 2003, the Commission issued an interim disclosure policy. See Statement of Policy Regarding Disclosure of Closed Enforcement or Related Files, 68 FR 70423 (Dec. 20, 2003) (“Interim Disclosure Policy”).

    The Commission is issuing this policy statement to identify several categories of documents integral to its decisionmaking process that will be disclosed upon termination of an enforcement matter, as well as documents integral to its administrative functions. This policy replaces the Interim Disclosure Policy as the Commission's permanent disclosure policy.

    The categories of documents that the Commission intends to disclose as a matter of regular practice either do not implicate the Court's concerns or, because they play a critical role in the resolution of a matter, the balance tilts decidedly in favor of public disclosure, even if the documents reveal some confidential information. In addition, the Commission will make certain other documents available on a case by case basis which will assist the public in understanding the record without intruding upon the associational interests of the respondents.

    Enforcement

    With respect to enforcement matters, the Commission will place the following categories of documents on the public record:

    1. Complaint (including supplements and amendments thereto);

    2. Internal agency referral where the Commission opens a Matter Under Review;

    3. Response (including supplements and amendments thereto) to complaint;

    4. General Counsel's Reports 1 (including supplements 2 thereto) that recommend dismissal, reason to believe, no reason to believe, no action at this time, probable cause to believe, no probable cause to believe, no further action, or acceptance of a conciliation agreement;

    1 This category of documents does not include General Counsel's Reports that have been withdrawn by the Office of the General Counsel. The Commission may, upon the affirmative vote of four or more Commissioners, place such documents on the public record on a case by case basis.

    2 Supplements are documents that contain new or additional substantive analysis from the Office of the General Counsel prepared for the Commission in connection with a specific pending Matter Under Review circulated through the Office of the Secretary for the consideration and deliberation of the Commission. Supplements do not include documents that solely transmit replacement pages to correct errors in circulated reports or memoranda.

    5. Notification of reason to believe findings;

    6. Factual and Legal Analyses identified as the subject of a vote in a Commission certification;

    7. Respondent's response to reason to believe findings;

    8. Briefs (General Counsel's Brief and Respondent's Brief);

    9. Statements of Reasons issued by one or more Commissioners;

    10. Conciliation Agreements;

    11. Evidence of payment of civil penalty or of disgorgement;

    12. Certifications of Commission votes;

    13. Attachments to complaints and attachments to responses to complaints;

    14. Memoranda and reports (including supplements 2 thereto) from the Office of the General Counsel prepared for the Commission in connection with a specific pending Matter Under Review circulated through the Office of the Secretary for the consideration and deliberation of the Commission;

    15. Complaint notification letters, and correspondence from respondents submitted in response to them;

    16. Notifications to respondents that were previously identified as “Unknown Respondents,” and correspondence from respondents submitted in response to them;

    17. Designations of counsel;

    18. Requests for extensions of time;

    19. Responses to requests for extensions of time;

    20. Tolling agreements; and

    21. Closeout letters.

    The Commission is placing the foregoing categories of documents on the public record in all matters it closes on or after September 1, 2016, regardless of the outcome. By doing so, the Commission complies with the requirements of 52 U.S.C. 30109(a)(4)(B)(ii) and 5 U.S.C. 552(a)(2)(A). Conciliation Agreements are placed on the public record pursuant to 52 U.S.C. 30109(a)(4)(B)(ii). On a case by case basis, the Commission may place on the public record other documents that edify public understanding of a closed matter.

    The Commission will place these documents on the public record as soon as practicable, and will endeavor to do so within 30 days of the date on which notifications are sent to complainant and respondent. See 11 CFR 111.20(a). In the event a Statement of Reasons is required, but has not been issued before the date proposed for the release of the remainder of the documents in a matter, those documents will be placed on the public record and the Statement of Reasons will be added to the file when issued.

    The Commission is not placing on the public record certain other materials from its investigative files, such as subpoenaed records, deposition transcripts, and other records produced in discovery, even if those evidentiary documents are referenced in, or attached to, documents specifically subject to release under this policy. The Commission also will not place the following categories of documents on the public record:

    1. Sua sponte submissions and accompanying attachments;

    2. External referrals from other agencies and law enforcement sources in which the Commission declines to open a Matter Under Review;

    3. Documents (other than notification letters) related to debt settlement plans and proposed administrative terminations in which the Commission does not approve the debt settlement plan or administrative termination.

    Administrative Fines

    With respect to administrative fines cases, the Commission will place the entire administrative file on the public record, which includes the following:

    1. Reason to Believe recommendation;

    2. Respondent's response;

    3. Reviewing Officer's memoranda to the Commission;

    4. Final Determination recommendation;

    5. Certifications of Commission votes;

    6. Statements of Reasons;

    7. Evidence of payment of fine; and

    8. Referral to Department of the Treasury.

    Alternative Dispute Resolution

    With respect to alternative dispute resolution (ADR) cases, the Commission will place the following categories of documents on the public record:

    1. Complaint or internal agency referral;

    2. Response to complaint;

    3. ADR Office's informational memorandum on assignment to the Commission;

    4. Notification to respondent that case has been assigned to ADR;

    5. Letter or Commitment Form from respondent participating in the ADR program;

    6. ADR Office recommendation as to settlement or dismissal;

    7. Certifications of Commission votes;

    8. Settlement agreement executed by the respondent and Commission; and

    9. Evidence of compliance with terms of settlement.

    When disclosing documents in administrative fines and alternative dispute resolution cases, the Commission will release publicly available records that are referenced in, or attached to, documents specifically subject to release under this policy.

    Administrative Functions

    The Commission will also place on the public record the following non-exclusive list of documents integral to its administrative functions:

    1. Statistics related to number of EPS dismissals by fiscal year and current quarter;

    2. Statistics related to number of cases opened and closed by fiscal year and current quarter, average number of days to close a matter, and total civil penalties assessed;

    3. Case closing processing statistics;

    4. Monthly reports from the Department of the Treasury of the balance available in the Presidential Election Campaign Fund;

    5. Yearly Long Term Budget Estimates for the Presidential Election Campaign Fund;

    6. Memoranda from the Office of the General Counsel prepared for the Commission in connection with debt settlement plans and proposed administrative terminations circulated through the Office of the Secretary for the consideration and deliberation of the Commission in which the Commission ultimately approves the debt settlement plan or administrative termination;

    7. Certifications of Commission votes in which the Commission approves a debt settlement plan or administrative termination;

    8. Service Contract Inventory Reports submitted by the Commission to the Office of Federal Procurement Policy pursuant to section 743 of Division C of the 2010 Consolidated Appropriations Act;

    9. Annual reports of activities performed by the agency that in the judgment of the agency head are not inherently governmental submitted by the Commission to the Office of Management and Budget pursuant to the Federal Activities Inventory Reform Act of 1998;

    10. Reports of official travel paid for by non-government sources made to the U.S. Office of Government Ethics pursuant to 31 U.S.C. 1353;

    11. Annual reports of the receipt and disposition of gifts and decorations tendered by foreign governments to federal employees, spouses, and dependents submitted by the Commission to the State Department pursuant to Public Law 95-105;

    12. Annual reports made by the Commission pursuant to Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Management Directive 715; and

    13. Annual reports on the agency's privacy management program submitted by the Commission to the Office of Management and Budget.

    With this policy, the Commission intends to provide guidance to outside counsel, the news media, and others seeking to understand the Commission's disposition of enforcement, administrative fines, and alternative dispute resolution cases and administrative functions. This will enhance their ability to assess particular matters in light of past decisions. This policy does not alter any existing regulation or policy requiring or permitting the Commission to redact documents, including those covered by this policy, to comply with the FECA, the principles set forth by the court of appeals in AFL-CIO, and the FOIA. In appropriate cases implicating the law enforcement privilege, an entire document may be withheld.

    Dated: July 25, 2016.

    On behalf of the Commission.

    Matthew S. Petersen, Chairman, Federal Election Commission.
    [FR Doc. 2016-18190 Filed 8-1-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6715-01-P
    FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM Change in Bank Control Notices; Acquisitions of Shares of a Bank or Bank Holding Company

    The notificants listed below have applied under the Change in Bank Control Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)) and § 225.41 of the Board's Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.41) to acquire shares of a bank or bank holding company. The factors that are considered in acting on the notices are set forth in paragraph 7 of the Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)(7)).

    The notices are available for immediate inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The notices also will be available for inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their views in writing to the Reserve Bank indicated for that notice or to the offices of the Board of Governors. Comments must be received not later than August 17, 2016.

    A. Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City (Dennis Denney, Assistant Vice President) 1 Memorial Drive, Kansas City, Missouri 64198-0001:

    1. Richard Michael Howard and Patricia A. Turner Howard, both of Gulf Shores, Alabama; as members of the Vision Bancshares, Inc. Shareholders Agreement to acquire shares of Vision Bancshares, Inc., parent of Vision Bank, N.A., both in Ada, Oklahoma.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, July 28, 2016. Michele T. Fennell, Assistant Secretary of the Board.
    [FR Doc. 2016-18243 Filed 8-1-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6210-01-P
    FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Holding Companies

    The companies listed in this notice have applied to the Board for approval, pursuant to the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 1841 et seq.) (BHC Act), Regulation Y (12 CFR part 225), and all other applicable statutes and regulations to become a bank holding company and/or to acquire the assets or the ownership of, control of, or the power to vote shares of a bank or bank holding company and all of the banks and nonbanking companies owned by the bank holding company, including the companies listed below.

    The applications listed below, as well as other related filings required by the Board, are available for immediate inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The applications will also be available for inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their views in writing on the standards enumerated in the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1842(c)). If the proposal also involves the acquisition of a nonbanking company, the review also includes whether the acquisition of the nonbanking company complies with the standards in section 4 of the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1843). Unless otherwise noted, nonbanking activities will be conducted throughout the United States.

    Unless otherwise noted, comments regarding each of these applications must be received at the Reserve Bank indicated or the offices of the Board of Governors not later than August 26, 2016.

    A. Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis (Jacquelyn K. Brunmeier, Assistant Vice President) 90 Hennepin Avenue, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55480-0291:

    1. Farmers & Merchants Agency, Inc., Pierz, Minnesota; to merge with Eden Valley Bancshares, Inc., and thereby indirectly acquire State Bank in Eden Valley, both in Eden Valley, Minnesota.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, July 28, 2016. Michele T. Fennell, Assistant Secretary of the Board.
    [FR Doc. 2016-18242 Filed 8-1-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6210-01-P
    GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION [Notice-CSE-2016-04; Docket No. 2016-0002; Sequence No. 18] Notice of the General Services Administration's Labor-Management Relations Council Meeting AGENCY:

    Office of Human Resources Management (OHRM), General Services Administration (GSA).

    ACTION:

    Notice of meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    The General Services Administration's Labor-Management Relations Council (GLMRC), a Federal Advisory Committee established in accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), 5 U.S.C., App., and Executive Order 13522, plans to hold a one and one-half day meeting that is open to the public.

    DATES:

    The meeting will be held on Tuesday, August 16, 2016 from 9:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Eastern Standard Time (EST), and reconvene Wednesday, August 17, 2016 from 9:30 a.m. to 12:00 noon, EST.

    ADDRESSES:

    On August 16, the meeting will be held in Room 2143, and the second day, August 17, the meeting will be held in Room 4046 of GSA's Headquarters Building located at 1800 F Street NW., Washington, DC 20405.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ms. Paula D. Lucak, GLMRC Designated Federal Officer (DFO), OHRM, General Services Administration, at telephone 202-739-1730, or email at [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background

    The GLMRC is a forum for managers and the exclusive national labor Union representatives of GSA employees: the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) and the National Federation of Federal Employees (NFFE). In this forum, managers and the Unions discuss Government operations to promote satisfactory labor relations and improve the productivity and effectiveness of GSA. The GLMRC serves as a complement to the existing collective bargaining process and allows managers and the Unions to collaborate in continuing to deliver the highest quality services to the public. The Council discusses workplace challenges and problems and recommends solutions that foster a more productive and cost-effective service to the taxpayer, through improving job satisfaction and employees' working conditions.

    Agenda

    The purpose of the meeting is for the GLMRC to build its collaborative labor-management relationship, discuss the Council's activities and direction ahead for the year, and to consider Agency initiatives. The topics to be discussed include Council metrics, employee engagement activities, and human resource initiative updates.

    Meeting Access

    This site is accessible to individuals with disabilities. In order to gain entry into the Federal building where the meeting is being held, public attendees who are Federal employees should bring their Federal employee identification cards. Members of the general public should bring their driver's license or another form of government-issued identification.

    Availability of Materials for the Meeting

    Please see the GLRMC Web site: http://www.gsa.gov/portal/content/225831 for any materials available in advance of the meeting, and for meeting minutes that will be made available after the meeting. Detailed meeting minutes will be posted within 90 days of the meeting.

    Procedures for Providing Public Comments

    The public is invited to submit written comments for the meeting until 5:00 p.m., EST, on the Monday prior to the meeting on August 15, 2016, by either of the following methods: Electronic or Paper Statements: Submit electronic statements to Ms. Paula Lucak, Designated Federal Officer, at [email protected]; or send paper statements in triplicate to Ms. Lucak at 1800 F Street NW., Suite 7003A, Washington, DC 20405. In general, public comments will be posted on the GLMRC Web site. All comments, including attachments and other supporting materials received, are part of the public record and subject to public disclosure.

    Any comments submitted in connection with the GLMRC meeting will be made available to the public under the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act.

    Dated: July 28, 2016. Renee Y. Jones, OHRM Director (Acting), Office of Human Resources Management, Office of HR Strategy and Services, Center for Talent Engagement, General Services Administration.
    [FR Doc. 2016-18340 Filed 8-1-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6820-34-P
    GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION [Notice-MA-2016-04; Docket No. 2016-0002, Sequence No. 17] Federal Travel Regulation (FTR); Reimbursement for Use of Transportation Network Companies While on Official Travel AGENCY:

    Office of Government-wide Policy (OGP), General Services Administration (GSA).

    ACTION:

    Notice of a bulletin.

    SUMMARY:

    The purpose of this notice is to inform agencies that FTR Bulletin 16-05, pertaining to the authorization of and reimbursement for use of Transportation Network Companies (TNCs) by Federal travelers on temporary duty, is now available online at www.gsa.gov/ftrbulletin.

    DATES:

    Effective: August 2, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ms. Jill Denning, Program Analyst, Office of Asset and Transportation Management (MA), OGP, GSA, at 202-208-7642 or via email at [email protected] Please cite FTR Bulletin 16-05.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    In recent years, a new kind of transportation service provider, known as Transportation Network Companies (TNCs), have begun operations across the United States and the world. TNCs connect paying passengers with drivers-for-hire via Web sites and mobile apps. TNCs are a form of special conveyance for purposes of the Federal Travel Regulation (FTR), and may be an efficient and cost effective alternative to taxis or rental cars. This bulletin provides guidance to agencies subject to FTR to clarify that they may authorize and reimburse employees for use of TNC for official business away from the employee's official station in accordance with internal agency policy and when permissible under local laws and ordinances. Pursuant to the authority of 5 U.S.C. 5702(a) this bulletin applies only to employees on temporary duty travel. FTR Bulletin 16-05 and all other FTR Bulletins can be found at www.gsa.gov/ftrbulletin.

    Dated: July 28, 2016. Troy Cribb, Associate Administrator, Office of Government-wide Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-18279 Filed 8-1-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6820-14-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2016-N-0001] Request for Nominations for Individuals and Consumer Organizations for Advisory Committees AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is requesting that any consumer organizations interested in participating in the selection of voting and/or nonvoting consumer representatives to serve on its advisory committees or panels notify FDA in writing. FDA is also requesting nominations for voting and/or nonvoting consumer representatives to serve on advisory committees and/or panels for which vacancies currently exist or are expected to occur in the near future. Nominees recommended to serve as a voting or nonvoting consumer representative may be self-nominated or may be nominated by a consumer organization. FDA seeks to include the views of women and men, members of all racial and ethnic groups, and individuals with and without disabilities on its advisory committees and, therefore, encourages nominations of appropriately qualified candidates from these groups.

    DATES:

    Any consumer organization interested in participating in the selection of an appropriate voting or nonvoting member to represent consumer interests on an FDA advisory committee or panel may send a letter or email stating that interest to FDA (see ADDRESSES) by September 1, 2016, for vacancies listed in this notice. Concurrently, nomination materials for prospective candidates should be sent to FDA (see ADDRESSES) by September 1, 2016. Nominations will be accepted for current vacancies and for those that will or may occur through January 31, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    All statements of interest from consumer organizations interested in participating in the selection process and consumer representative nominations should be submitted electronically to [email protected], by mail to Advisory Committee Oversight and Management Staff, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 32, Rm. 5103, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, or by FAX at: 301-847-8640.

    Consumer representative nominations should be submitted electronically by logging into the FDA Advisory Committee Membership Nomination Portal at: https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/FACTRSPortal/FACTRS/index.cfm, by mail to Advisory Committee Oversight and Management Staff, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 32, Rm. 5103, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, or by FAX at: 301-847-8640. Additional information about becoming a member on an FDA advisory committee can also be obtained by visiting FDA's Web site at: http://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/default.htm.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For questions relating to participation in the selection process: Kimberly Hamilton, Advisory Committee Oversight and Management Staff (ACOMS), Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 32, Rm. 5103, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 301-796-8220, email: [email protected]

    For questions relating to specific advisory committees or panels, contact the appropriate Contact Person listed in table 1 in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background

    FDA is requesting that any consumer organizations interested in participating in the selection of voting and/or nonvoting consumer representatives to serve on its advisory committees or panels notify FDA in writing (see table 1 for Contact Person).

    Table 1—Advisory Committee Contacts Contact person Committee/panel Bryan Emery, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 71, Rm. 6132, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, phone: 240-402-8054, email: [email protected] Blood Products Advisory Committee. Evella Washington, Center for Devices and Radiological Health, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 66, Rm. 1535, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, phone: 301-796-6683, email: [email protected] Ear, Nose and Throat Devices Panel. Cindy Hong, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 31, Rm. 2430, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, phone: 301-796-0889, email: [email protected] Gastrointestinal Drugs Advisory Committee. Jennifer Shepherd, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 31, Rm. 2434, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, phone: 301-796-4043, email: [email protected] Medical Imaging Advisory Committee. Sara Anderson, Center for Devices and Radiological Health, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 66, Rm. 1643, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, phone: 301-796-0889, email: [email protected] National Mammography Quality Assurance Advisory Committee. Moon Hee Choi, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 31, Rm. 2434, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, phone: 301-796-2894, email: [email protected] Peripheral & Central Nervous Systems Advisory Committee. Sujata Vijh, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 71, Rm. 6128, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, phone: 240-4020-7107, email: [email protected] Vaccine and Related Biologic Products Advisory Committee. Table 2—Committee Descriptions, Type of Consumer Representative Vacancy, and Approximate Date Needed Committee/panel/areas of expertise needed Type of vacancy Approximate date needed Blood Products Advisory Committee—Knowledgeable in the fields of clinical and administrative medicine, hematology, immunology, blood banking, surgery, internal medicine, biochemistry, engineering, biological and physical sciences, biotechnology, computer technology, statistics, epidemiology, sociology/ethics, and other related professions 1—Voting Immediately. Ear, Nose and Throat Devices Panel—Experts in otology, neurology, and audiology 1—Nonvoting Immediately. Gastrointestinal Drugs Advisory Committee—Knowledgeable in the fields of gastroenterology, endocrinology, surgery, clinical pharmacology, physiology, pathology, liver function, motility, esophagitis, and statistics 1—Voting Immediately. Medical Imaging Advisory Committee—Knowledgeable in the fields of nuclear medicine, radiology, epidemiology, statistics, and related specialties 1—Voting Immediately. National Mammography Quality Assurance Advisory Committee—Physician, practitioner, or other health professional whose clinical practice, research specialization, or professional expertise includes a significant focus on mammography 1—Nonvoting January 31, 2017. Peripheral and Central Nervous System Drugs Advisory Committee—Knowledgeable in the fields of neurology, neuropharmacology, neuropathology, otolaryngology, epidemiology or statistics, and related specialties 1—Voting January 31, 2017. Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee—Knowledgeable in the fields of immunology, molecular biology, rDNA, virology, bacteriology, epidemiology or biostatistics, allergy, preventive medicine, infectious diseases, pediatrics, microbiology, and biochemistry 1—Voting Immediately. II. Functions and General Description of the Committee Duties A. Blood Products Advisory Committee

    Reviews and evaluates available data concerning the safety, effectiveness, and appropriate use of blood products derived from blood and serum or biotechnology which are intended for use in the diagnosis, prevention, or treatment of human diseases as well as the safety, effectiveness, and labeling of the products, on clinical and laboratory studies involving such products, on the affirmation or revocation of biological product licenses, and on the quality and relevance of FDA's research program which provides the scientific support for regulating these products.

    B. Certain Panels of the Medical Devices Advisory Committee

    Reviews and evaluates data on the safety and effectiveness of marketed and investigational devices and makes recommendations for their regulation. With the exception of the Medical Devices Dispute Resolution Panel, each panel, according to its specialty area: (1) Advises on the classification or reclassification of devices into one of three regulatory categories; (2) advises on any possible risks to health associated with the use of devices; (3) advises on formulation of product development protocols; (4) reviews premarket approval applications for medical devices; (5) reviews guidelines and guidance documents; (6) recommends exemption of certain devices from the application of portions of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act; (7) advises on the necessity to ban a device; and (8) responds to requests from the Agency to review and make recommendations on specific issues or problems concerning the safety and effectiveness of devices. With the exception of the Medical Devices Dispute Resolution Panel, each panel, according to its specialty area, may also make appropriate recommendations to the Commissioner of Food and Drugs (the Commissioner) on issues relating to the design of clinical studies regarding the safety and effectiveness of marketed and investigational devices.

    The Dental Products Panel also functions at times as a dental drug panel. The functions of the dental drug panel are to evaluate and recommend whether various prescription drug products should be changed to over-the-counter status and to evaluate data and make recommendations concerning the approval of new dental drug products for human use.

    The Medical Devices Dispute Resolution Panel provides advice to the Commissioner on complex or contested scientific issues between FDA and medical device sponsors, applicants, or manufacturers relating to specific products, marketing applications, regulatory decisions and actions by FDA, and Agency guidance and policies. The Panel makes recommendations on issues that are lacking resolution, are highly complex in nature, or result from challenges to regular advisory panel proceedings or Agency decisions or actions.

    C. Gastrointestinal Drugs Advisory Committee

    Reviews and evaluates available data concerning the safety and effectiveness of marketed and investigational human drug products for use in the treatment of gastrointestinal diseases.

    D. Medical Imaging Advisory Committee

    Reviews and evaluates data concerning the safety and effectiveness of marketed and investigational human drug products for use in diagnostic and therapeutic procedures using radioactive pharmaceuticals and contrast media used in diagnostic radiology.

    E. National Mammography Quality Assurance Advisory Committee

    Advises the Agency on the following: (1) Development of appropriate quality standards and regulations for mammography facilities; (2) standards and regulations for bodies accrediting mammography facilities under this program; regulations with respect to sanctions; (3) procedures for monitoring compliance with standards; (4) establishing a mechanism to investigate consumer complaints; (5) reporting new developments concerning breast imaging which should be considered in the oversight of mammography facilities; (6) determining whether there exists a shortage of mammography facilities in rural and health professional shortage areas and determining the effects of personnel on access to the services of such facilities in such areas; (7) determining whether there will exist a sufficient number of medical physicists after October 1, 1999; and (8) determining the costs and benefits of compliance with these requirements.

    F. Peripheral and Central Nervous System Advisory Committee

    Reviews and evaluates data concerning the safety and effectiveness of marketed and investigational human drug products for use in the treatment of neurologic diseases.

    G. Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee

    Reviews and evaluates data concerning the safety, effectiveness, and appropriate use of vaccines and related biological products which are intended for use in the prevention, treatment, or diagnosis of human diseases, as well as considers the quality and relevance of FDA's research program which provides scientific support for the regulation of these products.

    III. Criteria for Members

    Persons nominated for membership as consumer representatives on committees or panels should meet the following criteria: (1) Demonstrate ties to consumer and community-based organizations, (2) be able to analyze technical data, (3) understand research design, (4) discuss benefits and risks, and (5) evaluate the safety and efficacy of products under review. The consumer representative should be able to represent the consumer perspective on issues and actions before the advisory committee; serve as a liaison between the committee and interested consumers, associations, coalitions, and consumer organizations; and facilitate dialogue with the advisory committees on scientific issues that affect consumers.

    IV. Selection Procedures

    Selection of members representing consumer interests is conducted through procedures that include the use of organizations representing the public interest and public advocacy groups. These organizations recommend nominees for the Agency's selection. Representatives from the consumer health branches of Federal, State, and local governments also may participate in the selection process. Any consumer organization interested in participating in the selection of an appropriate voting or nonvoting member to represent consumer interests should send a letter stating that interest to FDA (see ADDRESSES) within 30 days of publication of this document.

    Within the subsequent 30 days, FDA will compile a list of consumer organizations that will participate in the selection process and will forward to each such organization a ballot listing at least two qualified nominees selected by the Agency based on the nominations received, together with each nominee's current curriculum vitae or resume. Ballots are to be filled out and returned to FDA within 30 days. The nominee receiving the highest number of votes ordinarily will be selected to serve as the member representing consumer interests for that particular advisory committee or panel.

    V. Nomination Procedures

    Any interested person or organization may nominate one or more qualified persons to represent consumer interests on the Agency's advisory committees or panels. Self-nominations are also accepted. Nominations should include a cover letter and current curriculum vitae or resume for each nominee, including a current business and/or home address, telephone number, and email address if available, and a list of consumer or community-based organizations for which the candidate can demonstrate active participation.

    Nominations should also specify the advisory committee(s) or panel(s) for which the nominee is recommended. In addition, nominations should include confirmation that the nominee is aware of the nomination, unless self-nominated. FDA will ask potential candidates to provide detailed information concerning such matters as financial holdings, employment, and research grants and/or contracts to permit evaluation of possible sources of conflicts of interest. Members will be invited to serve for terms up to 4 years.

    FDA will review all nominations received within the specified timeframes and prepare a ballot containing the names of qualified nominees. Names not selected will remain on a list of eligible nominees and be reviewed periodically by FDA to determine continued interest. Upon selecting qualified nominees for the ballot, FDA will provide those consumer organizations that are participating in the selection process with the opportunity to vote on the listed nominees. Only organizations vote in the selection process. Persons who nominate themselves to serve as voting or nonvoting consumer representatives will not participate in the selection process.

    This notice is issued under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. app. 2) and 21 CFR part 14, relating to advisory committees.

    Dated: July 27, 2016. Janice M. Soreth, Acting Associate Commissioner, Special Medical Programs.
    [FR Doc. 2016-18216 Filed 8-1-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2016-D-2071] Determining Donor Eligibility for Autologous Donors of Blood and Blood Components Intended Solely for Autologous Use—Compliance Policy; Guidance for Industry; Availability AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice of availability.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or Agency or we) is announcing the availability of a document titled “Determining Donor Eligibility for Autologous Donors of Blood and Blood Components Intended Solely for Autologous Use—Compliance Policy; Guidance for Industry.” This guidance addresses the regulatory requirements for determining donor eligibility that apply to establishments that collect blood and blood components (blood establishments) intended solely for autologous use. On May 22, 2015, in order to better assure the safety of the nation's blood supply and to help protect donor health, FDA finalized its revision of the applicable requirements for blood establishments to test donors for infectious disease, and to determine that donors are eligible to donate and that donations are suitable for transfusion or further manufacture (“Requirements for Blood and Blood Components Intended for Transfusion or for Further Manufacturing Use” (donor eligibility rule)). The donor eligibility rule includes requirements related to current good manufacturing practice, donation testing, donor eligibility, and donation suitability. It became effective on May 23, 2016.

    FDA has developed this guidance in response to questions from blood establishments concerning the applicability of the donor eligibility rule to autologous donations. The guidance explains the conditions under which FDA does not intend to take regulatory action for a blood establishment's failure to comply with certain donor eligibility determination requirements in collecting blood and blood components intended solely for autologous use.

    DATES:

    The Agency is soliciting public comment, but is implementing this guidance immediately because the Agency has determined that prior public participation is not feasible or appropriate. Submit either electronic or written comments on Agency guidances at any time.

    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-2016-D-2071 for “Determining Donor Eligibility for Autologous Donors of Blood and Blood Components Intended Solely for Autologous Use—Compliance Policy; Guidance for Industry.” 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 guidance to the Office of Communication, Outreach and Development, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER), Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 71, Rm. 3128, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002. Send one self-addressed adhesive label to assist the office in processing your requests. The guidance may also be obtained by mail by calling CBER at 1-800-835-4709 or 240-402-8010. See the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for electronic access to the guidance document.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Jonathan McKnight, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 71, Rm. 7301, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 240-402-7911.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Background

    FDA is announcing the availability of a document entitled “Requirements for Determining Donor Eligibility for Autologous Donors of Blood and Blood Components Intended Solely for Autologous Use—Compliance Policy; Guidance for Industry.” We are implementing this guidance without prior public comment because we have determined that prior public participation is not feasible or appropriate (§ 10.115(g)(2)). Although this guidance document is immediately in effect, it remains subject to comment in accordance with FDA's good guidance practices regulation.

    This guidance addresses the regulatory requirements for determining donor eligibility that apply to blood establishments that collect blood and blood components intended solely for autologous use described in the final rule entitled, “Requirements for Blood and Blood Components Intended for Transfusion or for Further Manufacturing Use,” 80 FR 29842 (donor eligibility rule)) that became effective on May 23, 2016.

    A small proportion of collections of blood and blood components are intended for autologous transfusion. In those instances, the autologous donor presents with a physician's prescription for the collection of the donor's blood for the donor's own upcoming medical (e.g., surgical) procedure. If the donor ultimately does not need the blood, blood establishments may, in some instances, use these donations for allogeneic (i.e. intended for transfusion to a recipient other than the donor) transfusions. This is referred to as “cross-over.”

    Blood establishments have requested clarification on certain requirements of the donor eligibility rule and the applicability of certain sections of the donor eligibility rule to the collection of blood and blood components intended for autologous use. To address these questions, FDA has developed this guidance to clarify the Agency's policy with respect to the requirements for autologous donors of blood and blood components intended solely for autologous use, (i.e., not subject to cross-over). Specifically, the guidance describes FDA's policy with respect to the following: The requirements in 21 CFR 630.10 related to screening autologous donors for relevant transfusion-transmitted infections; the requirement in 21 CFR 630.15(a)(1)(ii) that the responsible physician examine the autologous donor to permit more frequent collections; and, the requirement in 21 CFR 630.20(a) that the responsible physician determine and document that the autologous donor's health permits the collection of blood and blood components intended for autologous use.

    Autologous donors have long been permitted to donate blood for their own use even if they do not meet certain donor eligibility criteria that apply to allogeneic donors because autologous donors are not exposed to new transfusion-transmitted infections in receiving their own blood. For example, FDA does not require testing of autologous donations for Relevant Transfusion-Transmitted Infection (RTTI) unless the donations are used for allogeneic transfusion or shipped to another establishment (21 CFR 610.40(d)). Consistent with this approach to testing autologous donations, FDA does not believe it is necessary to assess autologous donors for risks for RTTI as required in certain provisions in § 630.10 if the donation is intended solely for autologous use.

    Sections 630.15(a) and 630.20(a) describe conditions for which a responsible physician must examine and determine and document that the autologous donor's health permits a collection procedure. Autologous donors are under the care of the physician who prescribes the autologous donation. In light of the medical oversight provided by the autologous donor's physician, FDA believes blood establishments can appropriately protect autologous donors' health by following standard operating procedures that are approved by the responsible physician of the blood establishment and that define criteria for when the autologous donation may proceed and the conditions under which the responsible physician must be consulted.

    The guidance explains the conditions under which FDA does not intend to take regulatory action for a blood establishment's failure to comply with the donor eligibility determination requirements in collecting blood and blood components intended solely for autologous use.

    The guidance represents the current thinking of the FDA on this topic. It does not establish any rights for any person and is not binding on FDA or the public. You can use an alternative approach if it satisfies the requirements of the applicable statutes and regulations.

    II. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

    This guidance refers to previously approved collections of information found in FDA regulations. These collections of information are subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520). The collections of information in part 630 have been approved under OMB control number 0910-0795.

    III. Electronic Access

    Persons with access to the Internet may obtain the guidance at either http://www.fda.gov/BiologicsBloodVaccines/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/default.htm or http://www.regulations.gov.

    Dated: July 27, 2016. Leslie Kux, Associate Commissioner for Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-18183 Filed 8-1-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2016-P-0974] Determination That SAMSCA (Tolvaptan) Tablets, 60 Milligrams, Were Not Withdrawn From Sale for Reasons of Safety or Effectiveness AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or Agency) has determined that SAMSCA (tolvaptan) tablets, 60 milligrams (mg), were not withdrawn from sale for reasons of safety or effectiveness. This determination will allow FDA to approve abbreviated new drug applications (ANDAs) for tolvaptan tablets, 60 mg, if all other legal and regulatory requirements are met.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Christopher Koepke, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 51, Rm. 6214, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 240-402-3543.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    In 1984, Congress enacted the Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984 (Pub. L. 98-417) (the 1984 amendments), which authorized the approval of duplicate versions of drug products under an ANDA procedure. ANDA applicants must, with certain exceptions, show that the drug for which they are seeking approval contains the same active ingredient in the same strength and dosage form as the “listed drug,” which is a version of the drug that was previously approved. ANDA applicants do not have to repeat the extensive clinical testing otherwise necessary to gain approval of a new drug application (NDA).

    The 1984 amendments include what is now section 505(j)(7) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 355(j)(7)), which requires FDA to publish a list of all approved drugs. FDA publishes this list as part of the “Approved Drug Products With Therapeutic Equivalence Evaluations,” which is known generally as the “Orange Book.” Under FDA regulations, drugs are removed from the list if the Agency withdraws or suspends approval of the drug's NDA or ANDA for reasons of safety or effectiveness or if FDA determines that the listed drug was withdrawn from sale for reasons of safety or effectiveness (§ 314.162 (21 CFR 314.162)).

    A person may petition the Agency to determine, or the Agency may determine on its own initiative, whether a listed drug was withdrawn from sale for reasons of safety or effectiveness. This determination may be made at any time after the drug has been withdrawn from sale, but must be made prior to approving an ANDA that refers to the listed drug (§ 314.161). FDA may not approve an ANDA that does not refer to a listed drug.

    SAMSCA (tolvaptan) tablets, 60 mg, are the subject of NDA 22-275, held by Otsuka America Pharmaceutical, and initially approved on May 19, 2009. SAMSCA is indicated for the treatment of clinically significant hypervolemic and euvolemic hyponatremia (serum sodium <125 milliequivalents/liter or less marked hyponatremia that is symptomatic and has resisted correction with fluid restriction), including patients with heart failure and syndrome of inappropriate antidiuretic hormone (SIADH).

    Otsuka America Pharmaceutical has never marketed SAMSCA (tolvaptan) tablets, 60 mg. In previous instances (see, e.g., 72 FR 9763 (March 5, 2007), 61 FR 25497 (May 21, 1996)), the Agency has determined that, for purposes of §§ 314.161 and 314.162, never marketing an approved drug product is equivalent to withdrawing the drug from sale.

    Gordon Johnston Regulatory Consultants, LLC, submitted a citizen petition dated March 15, 2016 (Docket No. FDA-2016-P-0974), under 21 CFR 10.30, requesting that the Agency determine whether SAMSCA (tolvaptan) tablets, 60 mg, were withdrawn from sale for reasons of safety or effectiveness.

    After considering the citizen petition and reviewing Agency records and based on the information we have at this time, FDA has determined under § 314.161 that SAMSCA (tolvaptan) tablets, 60 mg, were not withdrawn for reasons of safety or effectiveness. The petitioner has identified no data or other information suggesting that SAMSCA (tolvaptan) tablets, 60 mg, were withdrawn for reasons of safety or effectiveness. We have carefully reviewed our files for records concerning the withdrawal of SAMSCA (tolvaptan) tablets, 60 mg, from sale. We have also independently evaluated relevant literature and data for possible postmarketing adverse events. We have reviewed the available evidence and determined that this drug product was not withdrawn from sale for reasons of safety or effectiveness.

    Accordingly, the Agency will continue to list SAMSCA (tolvaptan) tablets, 60 mg, in the “Discontinued Drug Product List” section of the Orange Book. The “Discontinued Drug Product List” delineates, among other items, drug products that have been discontinued from marketing for reasons other than safety or effectiveness. ANDAs that refer to SAMSCA (tolvaptan) tablets, 60 mg, may be approved by the Agency as long as they meet all other legal and regulatory requirements for the approval of ANDAs. If FDA determines that labeling for this drug product should be revised to meet current standards, the Agency will advise ANDA applicants to submit such labeling.

    Dated: July 27, 2016. Leslie Kux, Associate Commissioner for Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-18139 Filed 8-1-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Office of the Secretary Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2016-D-1605] Institutional Review Board Written Procedures: Guidance for Institutions and Institutional Review Boards; Draft Guidance; Availability AGENCY:

    The Office for Human Research Protections, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Health, Office of the Secretary, HHS, and the Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice of availability.

    SUMMARY:

    The Office for Human Research Protections (OHRP), Office of the Assistant Secretary for Health, and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) are announcing the availability of a draft guidance entitled “Institutional Review Board (IRB) Written Procedures: Guidance for Institutions and IRBs.” The purpose of this draft guidance is to assist IRB administrators, IRB chairpersons, and other institutional officials responsible for preparing and maintaining written procedures for IRBs. The draft guidance is intended for IRBs and institutions responsible for review and oversight of human subject research under the HHS or FDA regulations, or both.

    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 October 3, 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-2016-D-1605 for “Institutional Review Board (IRB) Written Procedures: Guidance for Institutions and IRBs.” 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 Division of Drug Information, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10001 New Hampshire Ave., Hillandale Building, 4th Floor, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002. 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:

    Janet Donnelly, Office of Good Clinical Practice, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 32, Rm. 5167, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 301-796-4187; or Irene Stith-Coleman, Office for Human Research Protections, 1101 Wootton Pkwy., Suite 200, Rockville, MD 20852, 240-453-6900.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background

    OHRP and FDA are announcing the availability of a draft guidance document entitled “Institutional Review Board (IRB) Written Procedures: Guidance for Institutions and IRBs.” This guidance is intended to assist IRB administrators, IRB chairpersons, and other institutional officials responsible for preparing and maintaining written procedures for IRBs.

    OHRP and FDA frequently receive requests for clarification regarding the scope and content of IRB written procedures. We recognize that procedures may vary among institutions and IRBs due to differences in the type of research studies reviewed by the IRB, institutional policy or administrative practices, number of IRBs at the institution, affiliation with an institution, and local and State laws and regulations. In order to provide guidance on the appropriate content of written procedures, while taking into account these variations, we created an IRB Written Procedures Checklist to assist IRBs in preparing and maintaining detailed written procedures suitable for their institutions. The IRB Written Procedures Checklist incorporates the HHS and FDA regulatory requirements for IRB written procedures and additional topics that we recommend including in written procedures. The draft guidance, when finalized, will supersede OHRP's July 1, 2011, “Guidance on Written IRB Procedures” and FDA's 1998 “Appendix H: A Self-Evaluation Checklist for IRBs,” (formerly part of FDA's Information Sheet Guidance for IRBs, Clinical Investigators, and Sponsors).

    To enhance human subject protection and reduce regulatory burden, OHRP and FDA have been actively working to harmonize the Agencies' regulatory requirements and guidance for human subject research. This guidance document was developed as a part of these efforts. OHRP and FDA believe that it will be most helpful to the regulated community to issue a joint guidance document that will clearly demonstrate the Agencies' harmonized approach to the topic of preparing and maintaining IRB written procedures.

    This draft guidance is being issued consistent with FDA's good guidance practices regulation (21 CFR 10.115). The draft guidance, when finalized, will represent OHRP's and FDA's current thinking on IRB written procedures. It does not establish any rights for any person and is not binding on OHRP, FDA, or the public. You can use an alternative approach if it satisfies the requirements of the applicable statutes and regulations.

    II. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

    This draft guidance refers to previously approved collections of information. 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 referenced in this guidance that are related to IRB recordkeeping requirements under 21 CFR 56.115, including the information collection activities in the provisions in 21 CFR 56.108(a)(1) and (b), have been approved under OMB control number 0910-0130. The collections of information referenced in this guidance that are related to IRB recordkeeping requirements under 45 CFR 46.115, including the information collection activities in the provisions in 45 CFR 46.103(b)(4) and (5) have been approved under OMB control number 0990-0260.

    III. Electronic Access

    Persons with access to the Internet may obtain the draft guidance at either http://www.fda.gov/ScienceResearch/SpecialTopics/RunningClinicalTrials/ProposedRegulationsandDraftGuidances/default.htm, http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/regulations-and-policy/requests-for-comments/index.html, or http://www.regulations.gov.

    Dated: July 27, 2016. Leslie Kux, Associate Commissioner for Policy, U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Dated: July 15, 2016. Karen B. DeSalvo, Acting Assistant Secretary for Health, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
    [FR Doc. 2016-18191 Filed 8-1-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Advisory Council on Alzheimer's Research, Care, and Services; Meeting AGENCY:

    Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice of meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice announces the public meeting of the Advisory Council on Alzheimer's Research, Care, and Services (Advisory Council). The Advisory Council on Alzheimer's Research, Care, and Services provides advice on how to prevent or reduce the burden of Alzheimer's disease and related dementias on people with the disease and their caregivers. The Advisory Council will hear from a number of CMS's HCIA awardees about their projects and their results. Additional presentations in the afternoon will include an overview of the 2016 Update to the National Plan, updates on progress towards a Care and Services Summit, and Federal workgroup updates.

    DATES:

    The meeting will be held on August 1, 2016 from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. EDT.

    ADDRESSES:

    The meeting will be held in Room 620/630, Building 35A (Porter Building) of the National Institutes of Health, 9000 Rockville Pike, Bethesda, Maryland 20892.

    Comments: Time is allocated in the afternoon on the agenda to hear public comments. The time for oral comments will be limited to two (2) minutes per individual. In lieu of oral comments, formal written comments may be submitted for the record to Rohini Khillan, ASPE, 200 Independence Avenue SW., Room 424E, Washington, DC 20201. All comments should be submitted to [email protected] for the record and to share with the Advisory Council by April 20, 2016. Those submitting comments should identify themselves and any relevant organizational affiliations.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Rohini Khillan (202) 690-5932, [email protected] Note: Seating may be limited. Those wishing to attend the meeting must send an email to [email protected] and put “August 1 Meeting Attendance” in the Subject line by Friday, July 22, 2016 so that their names may be put on a list of expected attendees and forwarded to the security officers the Humphrey Building. Any interested member of the public who is a non-U.S. citizen should include this information at the time of registration to ensure that the appropriate security procedure to gain entry to the building is carried out. Although the meeting is open to the public, procedures governing security and the entrance to federal buildings may change without notice. If you wish to make a public comment, you must note that within your email.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Notice of these meetings is given under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App. 2, section 10(a)(1) and (a)(2)). Topics of the Meeting: The Advisory Council will hear from a number of CMS's HCIA awardees about their projects and their results. Additional presentations in the afternoon will include an overview of the 2016 Update to the National Plan, updates on progress towards a Care and Services Summit, and federal workgroup updates.

    Procedure and Agenda: This meeting is open to the public. Please allow 45 minutes to go through security and walk to the meeting room. The meeting will also be webcast at www.hhs.gov/live.

    Authority:

    42 U.S.C. 11225; Section 2(e)(3) of the National Alzheimer's Project Act. The panel is governed by provisions of Public Law 92-463, as amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), which sets forth standards for the formation and use of advisory committees.

    Dated: July 8, 2016. Kathryn E. Martin, Acting Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation.
    [FR Doc. 2016-18273 Filed 8-1-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences; Notice of Meetings

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of meetings of the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences.

    The meetings will be open to the public as indicated below, with attendance limited to space available. Individuals who plan to attend and need special assistance, such as sign language interpretation or other reasonable accommodations, should notify the Contact Person listed below in advance of the meeting.

    The meetings will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and/or contract proposals 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 and/or contract proposals, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: Cures Acceleration Network Review Board.

    Date: September 15, 2016.

    Time: 8:30 a.m. to 2:30 p.m.

    Agenda: Report from the Institute Director.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Building 31, Conference Room 6, 31 Center Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892.

    Contact Person: Anna L. Ramsey-Ewing, Ph.D., Executive Secretary, National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, 1 Democracy Plaza, Room 1072, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-435-0809, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences Advisory Council.

    Date: September 15, 2016.

    Open: 8:30 a.m. to 2:30 p.m.

    Agenda: Report from the Institute Director and other staff.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Building 31, Conference Room 6, 31 Center Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892.

    Closed: 3:00 p.m. to 4:30 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Building 31, Conference Room 6, 31 Center Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892.

    Contact Person: Anna L. Ramsey-Ewing, Ph.D., Executive Secretary, National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, 1 Democracy Plaza, Room 1072, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-435-0809, [email protected].

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.859, Pharmacology, Physiology, and Biological Chemistry Research; 93.350, B—Cooperative Agreements; 93.859, Biomedical Research and Research Training, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: July 27, 2016. David Clary, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-18291 Filed 8-1-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health Proposed Collection; 60-day Comment Request; NCI's Center for Cancer Training Application Form for Graduate Student Recruitment Program (NCI) SUMMARY:

    In compliance with the requirement of Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, for opportunity for public comment on proposed data collection projects, the National Cancer Institute, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) will publish periodic summaries of proposed projects to be submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval.

    Written comments and/or suggestions from the public and affected agencies are invited to address one or more of the following points: (1) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the function of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) The accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) The quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

    To Submit Comments and for Further Information: To obtain a copy of the data collection plans and instruments, submit comments in writing, or request more information on the proposed project, contact: Dr. Ofelia Olivero, Chief Intramural Diversity Workforce Branch, Center for Cancer Training, NCI, 9609 2W108, Rockville, MD 20850 or call non-toll-free number (240)276-6890 or Email your request, including your address to: [email protected]. Formal requests for additional plans and instruments must be requested in writing.

    Comment Due Date: Comments regarding this information collection are best assured of having their full effect if received within 60 days of the date of this publication.

    Proposed Collection: NCI's Center for Cancer Training Application Form for Graduate Student Recruitment Program (CCT) (NCI), 0925-NEW—National Cancer Institute (NCI), National Institutes of Health (NIH).

    Need and Use of Information Collection: The Center for Cancer Training (CCT) is supporting NCI's goal of training cancer researchers for the 21st century. To support that goal, CCT created a Graduate Student Recruitment Program (GSRP) with the purpose of recruiting outstanding young scientists to postdoctoral positions at the NCI. The proposed information collection involves brief online applications completed by applicants to the full time and summer curriculum programs. This information is essential to the program to determine the eligibility and quality of potential selected individuals. The information is for internal use to make decisions about candidates invited to visit NCI and interview with scientist as potential postdoctoral trainees.

    OMB approval is requested for 3 years. There are no costs to respondents other than their time. The total estimated annualized burden hours are 225.

    Estimated Annualized Burden Hours Type of respondent Form Estimated number of
  • respondents
  • Estimated number of
  • responses
  • annually per
  • respondent
  • Estimated total annual burden hours Estimated total annual burden hours
    Student Applicants CCT Application 100 1 1 100 Professors Reference Recommendation Letters 300 1 25/60 125 Total 400 400 225
    Dated: July 27, 2016. Karla Bailey, Project Clearance Liaison, National Cancer Institute, NIH.
    [FR Doc. 2016-18294 Filed 8-1-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases; Notice of Closed Meetings

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following meetings.

    The meetings will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases Special Emphasis Panel; Contract Review.

    Date: August 16, 2016.

    Time: 10:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate contract proposals.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Two Democracy Plaza, 6707 Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: Michele L. Barnard, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Review Branch, DEA, NIDDK, National Institutes of Health, Room 7353, 6707 Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892-2542, (301) 594-8898, [email protected].

    This notice is being published less than 15 days prior to the meeting due to the timing limitations imposed by the review and funding cycle.

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases Special Emphasis Panel; Time-Sensitive.

    Date: August 18, 2016.

    Time: 10:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Two Democracy Plaza, 6707 Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: Michele L. Barnard, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Review Branch, DEA, NIDDK, National Institutes of Health, Room 7353, 6707 Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892-2542, (301) 594-8898, [email protected].

    This notice is being published less than 15 days prior to the meeting due to the timing limitations imposed by the review and funding cycle.

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases Special Emphasis Panel; NIDDK Program Project (P01).

    Date: September 1, 2016.

    Time: 11:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Two Democracy Plaza, 6707 Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: Jian Yang, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Review Branch, DEA, NIDDK, National Institutes of Health, Room 7111, 6707 Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892-5452, (301) 594-7799, [email protected].

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.847, Diabetes, Endocrinology and Metabolic Research; 93.848, Digestive Diseases and Nutrition Research; 93.849, Kidney Diseases, Urology and Hematology Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: July 27, 2016. David Clary, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-18293 Filed 8-1-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases; Notice of Meetings

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of meetings of the National Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases Advisory Council.

    The meetings will be open to the public as indicated below, with attendance limited to space available. Individuals who plan to attend and need special assistance, such as sign language interpretation or other reasonable accommodations, should notify the Contact Person listed below in advance of the meeting.

    The meetings will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases Advisory Council.

    Date: September 7, 2016.

    Open: 8:30 a.m. to 12:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To present the Director's Report and other scientific presentations.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Building 31, C Wing 6th Floor, Conference Center, Room 10, 31 Center Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892.

    Closed: 3:45 p.m. to 4:30 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Building 31, C Wing 6th Floor, Conference Center, Room 10, 31 Center Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892.

    Contact Person: Brent B. Stanfield, Ph.D., Director, Division of Extramural Activities, National Institutes of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, 6707 Democracy Blvd., Room 7323, MSC 5452, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 594-8843, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: National Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases Advisory Council; Digestive Diseases and Nutrition Subcommittee.

    Date:September 7, 2016.

    Open: 1:00 p.m. to 2:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review the Division's scientific and planning activities.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Building 31, C Wing 6th Floor, Conference Center, Room 6, 31 Center Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892.

    Closed: 2:15 p.m. to 3:30 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Building 31, C Wing 6th Floor, Conference Center, Room 6, 31 Center Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892.

    Contact Person: Brent B. Stanfield, Ph.D., Director, Division of Extramural Activities, National Institutes of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, 6707 Democracy Blvd. Room 7323, MSC 5452, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 594-8843, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: National Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases Advisory Council; Diabetes, Endocrinology and Metabolic Diseases Subcommittee.

    Date: September 7, 2016.

    Closed: 1:00 p.m. to 2:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Building 31, C Wing 6th Floor, Conference Center, Room 10, 31 Center Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892.

    Open: 2:00 p.m. to 3:30 p.m.

    Agenda: To review the Division's scientific and planning activities.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Building 31, C Wing 6th Floor, Conference Center, Room 10, 31 Center Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892.

    Contact Person: Brent B. Stanfield, Ph.D., Director, Division of Extramural Activities, National Institutes of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, 6707 Democracy Blvd., Room 7323, MSC 5452, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 594-8843, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: National Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases Advisory Council; Kidney, Urologic and Hematologic Diseases Subcommittee.

    Date: September 7, 2016.

    Open: 1:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review the Division's scientific and planning activities.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Building 31, C Wing, 6th Floor, Conference Center, Room 7, 31 Center Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892.

    Closed: 3:00 p.m. to 3:30 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Building 31, C Wing, 6th Floor, Conference Center, Room 7, 31 Center Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892.

    Contact Person: Brent B. Stanfield, Ph.D., Director, Division of Extramural Activities, National Institutes of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, 6707 Democracy Blvd., Room 7323, MSC 5452, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 594-8843, [email protected]

    Any interested person may file written comments with the committee by forwarding the statement to the Contact Person listed on this notice. The statement should include the name, address, telephone number and when applicable, the business or professional affiliation of the interested person.

    In the interest of security, NIH has instituted stringent procedures for entrance onto the NIH campus. All visitor vehicles, including taxicabs, hotel, and airport shuttles will be inspected before being allowed on campus. Visitors will be asked to show one form of identification (for example, a government-issued photo ID, driver's license, or passport) and to state the purpose of their visit.

    Information is also available on the Institute's/Center's home page: www.niddk.nih.gov/fund/divisions/DEA/Council/coundesc.htm., where an agenda and any additional information for the meeting will be posted when available.

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.847, Diabetes, Endocrinology and Metabolic Research; 93.848, Digestive Diseases and Nutrition Research; 93.849, Kidney Diseases, Urology and Hematology Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS) Dated: July 27, 2016. David Clary, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-18292 Filed 8-1-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Institute of General Medical Sciences; Notice of Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of a meeting of the National Advisory General Medical Sciences Council.

    The meeting will be open to the public as indicated below, with a short public comment period at the end. Attendance is limited by the space available. Individuals who plan to attend and need special assistance, such as sign language interpretation or other reasonable accommodations, should notify the Contact Person listed below in advance of the meeting. The open session will also be videocast and can be accessed from the NIH Videocasting and Podcasting Web site (http://videocast.nih.gov/).

    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Advisory General Medical Sciences Council.

    Date: September 15-16, 2016.

    Closed: September 15, 2016, 8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Natcher Building, Conference Rooms E1 & E2, 45 Center Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892.

    Open: September 16, 2016, 8:30 a.m. to 12:00 p.m.

    Agenda: For the discussion of program policies and issues; opening remarks; report of the Director, NIGMS; and other business of the Council.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Natcher Building, Conference Rooms E1 & E2, 45 Center Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892.

    Contact Person: Ann A. Hagan, Ph.D., Associate Director for Extramural Activities, NIGMS, NIH, DHHS, 45 Center Drive, Room 2AN24H, MSC6200, Bethesda, MD 20892-6200, (301) 594-4499, [email protected].

    Any interested person may file written comments with the committee by forwarding the statement to the Contact Person listed on this notice. The statement should include the name, address, telephone number and when applicable, the business or professional affiliation of the interested person.

    In the interest of security, NIH has instituted stringent procedures for entrance onto the NIH campus. All visitor vehicles, including taxicabs, hotel, and airport shuttles will be inspected before being allowed on campus. Visitors will be asked to show one form of identification (for example, a government-issued photo ID, driver's license, or passport) and to state the purpose of their visit.

    Information is also available on the Institute's/Center's home page: http://www.nigms.nih.gov/About/Council, where an agenda and any additional information for the meeting will be posted when available.

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.859, Biomedical Research and Research Training, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: July 26, 2016. Melanie J. Gray, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-18159 Filed 8-1-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Cancer Institute; Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2); 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 purpose of this meeting is to evaluate requests for preclinical development resources for potential new therapeutics for the treatment of cancer. The outcome of the evaluation will provide information to internal NCI committees that will decide whether NCI should support requests and make available contract resources for development of the potential therapeutic to improve the treatment of various forms of cancer. The research proposals and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the proposed research projects, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Cancer Institute Special Emphasis Panel; June 2016 Cycle 23 NExT SEP Committee Meeting.

    Date: August 25, 2016.

    Time: 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.

    Agenda: To evaluate the NCI Experimental Therapeutics Program Portfolio.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, 9000 Rockville Pike, Campus Building 31, Conference Room 6C10, Bethesda, MD 20892.

    Contact Persons: Barbara Mroczkowski, Ph.D., Executive Secretary, Discovery Experimental Therapeutics Program, National Cancer Institute, NIH 31 Center Drive, Room 3A44, Bethesda, MD 20817, (301) 496-4291, [email protected] Toby Hecht, Ph.D., Executive Secretary, Development Experimental Therapeutics Program, National Cancer Institute, NIH, 9609 Medical Center Drive, Room 3W110, Rockville, MD 20850, (240) 276-5683, [email protected] (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.392, Cancer Construction; 93.393, Cancer Cause and Prevention Research; 93.394, Cancer Detection and Diagnosis Research; 93.395, Cancer Treatment Research; 93.396, Cancer Biology Research; 93.397, Cancer Centers Support; 93.398, Cancer Research Manpower; 93.3, Cancer Control, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: July 27, 2016. Melanie J. Gray, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-18164 Filed 8-1-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Cancer Institute; Notice of Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(a) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of a meeting of the National Cancer Institute Council of Research Advocates.

    The meeting will be open to the public, with attendance limited to space available. Individuals who plan to attend and need special assistance, such as sign language interpretation or other reasonable accommodations, should notify the Contact Person listed below in advance of the meeting. The open session will be videocast and can be accessed from the NIH Videocasting and Podcasting Web site (http://videocast.nih.gov).

    Name of Committee: National Cancer Institute Council of Research Advocates.

    Date: September 26, 2016.

    Time: 9:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.

    Agenda: Cancer Moonshot Initiative—Blue Ribbon Panel Recommendations; NCI's Moonshot Implementation Plans and Strategies; Advocate Engagement in Advancing the Cancer Moonshot.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, 35 Convent Drive, Building 35, Conference Rooms 620/630, Bethesda, MD 20892.

    Contact Person: Amy Williams, NCI Office of Advocacy Relations, National Cancer Institute, NIH, 31 Center Drive, Building 31, Room 11A48, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-594-3194, [email protected]

    Any interested person may file written comments with the committee by forwarding the statement to the Contact Person listed on this notice. The statement should include the name, address, telephone number and when applicable, the business or professional affiliation of the interested person.

    In the interest of security, NIH has instituted stringent procedures for entrance onto the NIH campus. All visitor vehicles, including taxicabs, hotel, and airport shuttles will be inspected before being allowed on campus. Visitors will be asked to show one form of identification (for example, a government-issued photo ID, driver's license, or passport) and to state the purpose of their visit.

    Information is also available on the Institute's/Center's home page: NCRA: http://deainfo.nci.nih.gov/advisory/ncra/ncra.htm, where an agenda and any additional information for the meeting will be posted when available.

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.392, Cancer Construction; 93.393, Cancer Cause and Prevention Research; 93.394, Cancer Detection and Diagnosis Research; 93.395, Cancer Treatment Research; 93.396, Cancer Biology Research; 93.397, Cancer Centers Support; 93.398, Cancer Research Manpower; 93.399, Cancer Control, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: July 27, 2016. Melanie J. Gray, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-18163 Filed 8-1-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Institute on Aging; Notice of Closed Meetings

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following meetings.

    The meetings will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The contract proposals and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the contract proposals, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute on Aging Special Emphasis Panel; Healthy Aging.

    Date: August 26, 2016.

    Time: 2:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate contract proposals.

    Place: National Institute on Aging, Gateway Building, Suite 2W200, 7201 Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20892, (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: Alicja L. Markowska, Ph.D., DSC, Scientific Review Branch, National Institute on Aging, 7201 Wisconsin Avenue, Suite 2C212, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-496-9666, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: National Institute on Aging Special Emphasis Panel; Establishment of Multigenotypic Aged Rat Colony.

    Date: August 29, 2016.

    Time: 12:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate contract proposals.

    Place: National Institute on Aging, Gateway Building, Suite 2W200, 7201 Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20892, (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: Maurizio Grimaldi, MD, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, National Institute on Aging, National Institutes of Health, 7201 Wisconsin Avenue, Room 2C218, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-496-9374, [email protected]

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.866, Aging Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: July 26, 2016. Melanie J. Gray, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-18165 Filed 8-1-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Cancer Institute; Notice of Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(a) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of a meeting of the National Cancer Institute Council of Research Advocates.

    The meeting will be held as a teleconference call only and is open to the public to dial-in for participation. Individuals who plan to dial-in to the meeting and need special assistance or other reasonable accommodations in order to do so, should notify the Contact Person listed below in advance of the meeting.

    Name of Committee: National Cancer Institute Council of Research Advocates.

    Date: August 22, 2016.

    Time: 11:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m.

    Agenda: Update on the Vice President's Cancer Moonshot Initiative—Progress and Next Steps.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, 31 Center Drive, Building 31, Rooms 11A48, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Telephone Conference Call), 877-972-9420 Access Code: 1039054.

    Contact Person: Amy Williams NCI Office of Advocacy Relations National Cancer Institute, NIH 31 Center Drive Building 31, Room 11A48 Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-594-3194 [email protected]

    Any interested person may file written comments with the committee by forwarding the statement to the Contact Person listed on this notice. The statement should include the name, address, telephone number and when applicable, the business or professional affiliation of the interested person.

    Information is also available on the Institute's/Center's home page: http://deainfo.nci.nih.gov/advisory/ctac/ctac.htm, where an agenda and any additional information for the meeting will be posted when available.

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.392, Cancer Construction; 93.393, Cancer Cause and Prevention Research; 93.394, Cancer Detection and Diagnosis Research; 93.395, Cancer Treatment Research; 93.396, Cancer Biology Research; 93.397, Cancer Centers Support; 93.398, Cancer Research Manpower; 93.399, Cancer Control, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: July 27, 2016. Melanie J. Gray, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-18162 Filed 8-1-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Institute on Aging; Notice of Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of a meeting of the National Advisory Council on Aging.

    The meeting will be open to the public as indicated below, with attendance limited to space available. Individuals who plan to attend and need special assistance, such as sign language interpretation or other reasonable accommodations, should notify the Contact Person listed below in advance of the meeting.

    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Advisory Council on Aging.

    Date: September 27-28, 2016.

    Closed: September 27, 2016, 3:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Building 31, C Wing 6th Floor Conference Room 10, 9000 Rockville Pike, Bethesda, MD 20892.

    Open: September 28, 2016, 8:00 a.m. to 12:45 p.m.

    Agenda: Call to order and report from the Director; discussion of future meeting dates; consideration of minutes of last meeting; reports from Task Force on Minority Aging Research; Working Group on Program; Program Highlights

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Building 31, C Wing 6th Floor Conference Room 10, 9000 Rockville Pike, Bethesda, MD 20892.

    Contact Person: Robin Barr, Director, National Institute on Aging, Office of Extramural Activities, Gateway Building, 7201 Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20814, (301) 496-9322, [email protected]

    Any interested person may file written comments with the committee by forwarding the statement to the Contact Person listed on this notice. The statement should include the name, address, telephone number and when applicable, the business or professional affiliation of the interested person.

    In the interest of security, NIH has instituted stringent procedures for entrance onto the NIH campus. All visitor vehicles, including taxicabs, hotel, and airport shuttles will be inspected before being allowed on campus. Visitors will be asked to show one form of identification (for example, a government-issued photo ID, driver's license, or passport) and to state the purpose of their visit.

    Information is also available on the Institute's/Center's home page: www.nih.gov/nia/naca/, where an agenda and any additional information for the meeting will be posted when available.

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.866, Aging Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: July 26, 2016. Melanie J. Gray, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-18166 Filed 8-1-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT [Docket No. FR-5907-N-32] Federal Property Suitable as Facilities To Assist the Homeless AGENCY:

    Office of the Assistant Secretary for Community Planning and Development, HUD.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    This Notice identifies unutilized, underutilized, excess, and surplus Federal property reviewed by HUD for suitability for use to assist the homeless.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Juanita Perry, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 Seventh Street SW., Room 7266, Washington, DC 20410; telephone (202) 402-3970; TTY number for the hearing- and speech-impaired (202) 708-2565 (these telephone numbers are not toll-free), call the toll-free Title V information line at 800-927-7588 or send an email to [email protected].

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    In accordance with 24 CFR part 581 and section 501 of the Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 11411), as amended, HUD is publishing this Notice to identify Federal buildings and other real property that HUD has reviewed for suitability for use to assist the homeless. The properties were reviewed using information provided to HUD by Federal landholding agencies regarding unutilized and underutilized buildings and real property controlled by such agencies or by GSA regarding its inventory of excess or surplus Federal property. This Notice is also published in order to comply with the December 12, 1988 Court Order in National Coalition for the Homeless v. Veterans Administration, No. 88-2503-OG (D.D.C.).

    Properties reviewed are listed in this Notice according to the following categories: Suitable/available, suitable/unavailable, and suitable/to be excess, and unsuitable. The properties listed in the three suitable categories have been reviewed by the landholding agencies, and each agency has transmitted to HUD: (1) Its intention to make the property available for use to assist the homeless, (2) its intention to declare the property excess to the agency's needs, or (3) a statement of the reasons that the property cannot be declared excess or made available for use as facilities to assist the homeless.

    Properties listed as suitable/available will be available exclusively for homeless use for a period of 60 days from the date of this Notice. Where property is described as for “off-site use only” recipients of the property will be required to relocate the building to their own site at their own expense. Homeless assistance providers interested in any such property should send a written expression of interest to HHS, addressed to: Ms. Theresa M. Ritta, Chief Real Property Branch, the Department of Health and Human Services, Room 5B-17, Parklawn Building, 5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20857, (301) 443-2265 (This is not a toll-free number.) HHS will mail to the interested provider an application packet, which will include instructions for completing the application. In order to maximize the opportunity to utilize a suitable property, providers should submit their written expressions of interest as soon as possible. For complete details concerning the processing of applications, the reader is encouraged to refer to the interim rule governing this program, 24 CFR part 581.

    For properties listed as suitable/to be excess, that property may, if subsequently accepted as excess by GSA, be made available for use by the homeless in accordance with applicable law, subject to screening for other Federal use. At the appropriate time, HUD will publish the property in a Notice showing it as either suitable/available or suitable/unavailable.

    For properties listed as suitable/unavailable, the landholding agency has decided that the property cannot be declared excess or made available for use to assist the homeless, and the property will not be available.

    Properties listed as unsuitable will not be made available for any other purpose for 20 days from the date of this Notice. Homeless assistance providers interested in a review by HUD of the determination of unsuitability should call the toll free information line at 1-800-927-7588 for detailed instructions or write a letter to Ann Marie Oliva at the address listed at the beginning of this Notice. Included in the request for review should be the property address (including zip code), the date of publication in the Federal Register, the landholding agency, and the property number.

    For more information regarding particular properties identified in this Notice (i.e., acreage, floor plan, existing sanitary facilities, exact street address), providers should contact the appropriate landholding agencies at the following addresses: AGRICULTURE: Ms. Debra Kerr, Department of Agriculture, OPPM, Property Management Division, Agriculture South Building, 300 7th Street SW., Washington, DC 20024, (202) 720-8873; ENERGY: Mr. David Steinau, Department of Energy, Office of Asset Management (MA-50), 1000 Independence Ave. SW., Washington, DC 20585, (202) 287-1503; GSA: Mr. Flavio Peres, General Services Administration, Office of Real Property Utilization and Disposal, 1800 F Street NW., Room 7040 Washington, DC 20405, (202) 501-0084; INTERIOR: Mr. Michael Wright, Acquisition & Property Management, Department of the Interior, 3960 N. 56th Ave. #104, Hollywood, FL 33021; (443) 223-4639; NASA: Mr. William Brodt, National Aeronautics AND Space Administration, 300 E Street SW., Room 2P85, Washington, DC 20546, (202) 358-1117; NAVY: Mr. Steve Matteo, Department of the Navy, Asset Management Division, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Washington Navy Yard, 1330 Patterson Ave. SW., Suite 1000, Washington, DC 20374; (202) 685-9426 (These are not toll-free numbers).

    Dated: July 28, 2016. Brian P. Fitzmaurice, Director, Division of Community Assistance, Office of Special Needs Assistance Programs. Title V, Federal Surplus Property Program Federal Register Report for 08/05/2016 Suitable/Available Properties Building Alabama Material Pole Shed 11288 Horseshoe Rd. Daviston AL 36256 Landholding Agency: Interior Property Number: 61201630008 Status: Excess Comments: off-site removal only; 764 sq. ft.; 29+ months vacant; not built to any construction code; contamination; remediation needed; contact Interior for more information Tractor Pole Shed 11288 Horseshoe bend Rd Daviston AL 36256 Landholding Agency: Interior Property Number: 61201630010 Status: Excess Comments: off-site removal only; removal difficult due to size; not built to any construction code; contact Interior for more information California El Cariso Hot Shot Camp 1357 B3 El Cariso Hot Shot Barracks Trailer Lake Elsinore CA 92530 Landholding Agency: Agriculture Property Number: 15201630005 Status: Unutilized Directions: Gifford Pinchot Lane Hwy 74 to Long Canyton Rd.; off-site removal only; no future agency need; 1,335 sq. ft.; residential; 101+ months vacant; water restrictions; poor conditions; Comments: mold/bacterial growth in walls & floor cavities & insulation; extensive repairs to make it useable; several use limitations; contact Agriculture for more information New Mexico Cuba Leased Office Site 04B County Rd. 11 Cuba NM 87013 Landholding Agency: Agriculture Property Number: 15201630006 Status: Excess Comments: 560 sq. ft.; 18+ months vacant; interior finishes need replacement; needs repainting; modular stud wall bldg.; contact Agriculture for more information Texas Building 43 Office 620240B043; 2881 F& B Rd. College Station TX Landholding Agency: Agriculture Property Number: 15201630008 Status: Unutilized Directions: Off-site removal only; no future agency need Comments: 1,100 sq. ft.; office/cotton field research; 12+ months vacant; moderate conditions; minor repairs & painting; needs new HVAC; contact Agriculture for more details Washington USMC Reserve Center 1702 Tahoma Ave., Yakima WA 98902 Landholding Agency: GSA Property Number: 54201630004 Status: Excess GSA Number: 9-D-WA-1278AA Directions: Landholding Agency: USMC; Disposal Agency: GSA Comments: 4 Buildings & 1 Structure ranging from 270 to 20,000 sq. ft.; 48+ months vacant; sits on 4.64 acres; contact GSA for more information Unsuitable Properties Building Alabama Sign Shed 11288 Horseshoe bend Rd. Daviston AL 36256 Landholding Agency: Interior Property Number: 61201630009 Status: Excess Comments: documented deficiencies: structural integrity compromised; clear threat to physical safety Reasons: extensive deterioration 3 Buildings Marshall Space Flight Center MSFC AL 35812 Landholding Agency: NASA Property Number: 71201630006 Status: Underutilized Directions: 4558 (Structural Test Facility); 4567 (Pump & Boiler House); 4201 (Office Building) Comments: public access denied and no alternative method to gain access without comprising national security Reasons: Secured Area 4353 Imaging Services Marshall Space Flight Center MSFC AL 35812 Landholding Agency: NASA Property Number: 71201630007 Status: Underutilized Directions: Located on Digney Rd. Comments: public access denied and no alternative method to gain access without compromising national security Reasons: Secured Area Alabama 4728 Shop & Storage Building Marshall Space Flight Center MSFC AL 35812 Landholding Agency: NASA Property Number: 71201630008 Status: Underutilized Directions: Located on Rideout Rd. Comments: public access denied and no alternative method to gain access without compromising national security Reasons: Secured Area 4467 Lidar Facility Marshall Space Flight Center MSFC AL 35812 Landholding Agency: NASA Property Number: 71201630009 Status: Underutilized Comments: public access denied and no alternative method to gain access without compromising national security Reasons: Secured Area California Silverado Fire Station 1355 G Silverado Barracks Trailer Silverado CA 92676 Landholding Agency: Agriculture Property Number: 15201630009 Status: Unutilized Directions: 27172 Silverado Canyon Rd. Comments: documented deficiencies: severe rodent infestation; clear threat to physical safety Reasons: Extensive deterioration Kessler Springs Ranch Mobile Home (Building #303); 58274 Cima Rd. Cima CA 92323 Landholding Agency: Interior Property Number: 61201630006 Status: Excess Comments: documented deficiencies: structural integrity compromised; clear threat to physical safety Reasons: Extensive deterioration Florida Roberts House Loop Road Apts. Big Cypress National Preserve 34141, N 25 45 19.7, W 080 58 56.6 Ochopee FL 34141 Landholding Agency: Interior Property Number: 61201630002 Status: Unutilized Comments: roof & wall sections have collapsed; damaged caused by tropical storm & hurricane events; clear threat to physical safety; located within floodway which has not been corrected or contained Reasons: Floodway; Extensive deterioration Quarters 8 Big Cypress National Preserve 26777 Birdon Rd. Ochopee FL 34141 Landholding Agency: Interior Property Number: 61201630003 Status: Unutilized Comments: damage caused by tropical storm & hurricane events; no windows; therefore, rodent infestation; located within floodway which has not been correct or contained Reasons: Floodway; Extensive deterioration Quarters #8 Barn Big Cypress National Preserve 26777 Birdon Rd. Ochopee FL 34141 Landholding Agency: Interior Property Number: 61201630004 Status: Unutilized Comments: documented deficiencies: roof & wall sections collapsed; damaged caused by tropical storm & hurricane event; clear threat to safety; located within floodway which has not been corrected or contained Reasons: Extensive deterioration; Floodway Loop Road Building #31 Big Cypress Preserve Loop Rd. Ochopee FL 34141 Landholding Agency: Interior Property Number: 61201630005 Status: Unutilized Comments: roof & wall sections collapsed; damaged caused by tropical storm & hurricane events; clear threat to safety; located within floodway which has not been corrected or contained Reasons: Extensive deterioration; Floodway Loop Road Building #30 Loop Rd. Ochopee FL 34141 Landholding Agency: Interior Property Number: 61201630007 Status: Unutilized Directions: N 25 58 97, W 080 14 78 Comments: documented deficiencies: damaged caused by tropical storm & hurricane events; clear threat to safety; located w/in floodway where has not been corrected or contained Reasons: Floodway; Extensive deterioration Loop House Building #29 Loop Rd. Ochopee FL 34141 Landholding Agency: Interior Property Number: 61201630011 Status: Unutilized Directions: N 25 58 97, W 080 14 78 Comments: documented deficiencies: damaged caused by tropical storm & hurricane; clear threat to safety; located within floodway which has not been correct or contained Reasons: Floodway; Extensive deterioration Loop Road Building #31 Big Cypress National Preserve Loop Rd. Ochopee FL 34141 Landholding Agency: Interior Property Number: 61201630012 Status: Unutilized Comments: documented deficiencies: damaged caused by tropical storm & Hurricane events; threat to safety; located in floodway which has not been corrected or contained Reasons: Extensive deterioration; Floodway Yellow Water a Special Area of NAS Jacksonville Jasonville FL 32221 Landholding Agency: Navy Property Number: 77201630003 Status: Unutilized Directions: YW3064; YW3064LS; YW3067; YW3069; YW3072; YW3072LS; YW3073; YW3073LS Comments: documented deficiencies: severely damaged by vandals; car accident which caused substantial damage; fire set by arsonist; decay/overgrown w/vegetation; clear threat to physical safety Reasons: Extensive deterioration Guam 60 Housing Units 4 Puntan At Nimitz Hill Family Housing Area Nimitz Hill Housing GU Landholding Agency: Navy Property Number: 77201630006 Status: Excess Comments: public access denied and no alternative method to gain access without compromising national security Reasons: Secured Area Hawaii 4 Buildings Marine Corps Base Kaneohe HI 96863 Landholding Agency: Navy Property Number: 77201630004 Status: Excess Directions: 3094; 6029; 6073; 6074; located at the east end of Mokapu Rd. Comments: public access denied and no alternative method to gain access without compromising national security Reasons: Secured Area Hawaii 2 Buildings Marine Corps Base Kaneohe HI 96863 Landholding Agency: Navy Property Number: 77201630005 Status: Excess Directions: 850; 852; located north of the guard shack at Manana Family housing area adjacent to the exiting tennis courts Comments: public access denied and no alternative method to gain access without compromising national security Reasons: Secured Area Texas 72/1047/159 Boiler Building No. 2; Building 22F; Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center; 2101 NASA Parkway Houston TX 77058 Landholding Agency: NASA Property Number: 71201630010 Status: Unutilized Comments: public access denied and no alternative method to gain access w/out compromising national security Reasons: Secured Area 72/1047/129; Rectifier Building, Building 22A Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center Houston TX 77058 Landholding Agency: NASA Property Number: 71201630011 Status: Unutilized Directions: 2101 NASA Parkway Comments: public access denied and no alternative method to gain access w/out compromising national security Reasons: Secured Area 72/1047/131, Atmospheric Re-Entry Materials & Structures Evaluation Facility, Building 222 Houston TX 77058 Landholding Agency: NASA Property Number: 71201630012 Status: Unutilized Directions: 2101 NASA Parkway Comments: public access denied and no alternative method to gain access w/out compromising national security Reasons: Secured Area West Virginia Building 9 3610 Collins Ferry Rd. Morgantown WV 26507 Landholding Agency: Energy Property Number: 41201630002 Status: Excess Comments: public access denied and no alternative method to gain access without compromising national security Reasons: Secured Area
    [FR Doc. 2016-18289 Filed 8-1-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4210-67-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT [Docket No. FR-5913-N-15; OMB Collection No.: 2502-0555] 60-Day Notice of Proposed Information Collection: Request for Withdrawals From Replacements Reserves/Residual Receipts Funds AGENCY:

    Office of the Assistant Secretary for Housing, Federal Housing Commissioner, 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: October 3, 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: Colette Pollard, Reports Management Officer, QDAM, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street SW., Room 4176, Washington, DC 20410-5000; telephone 202-402-3400 (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:

    Harry Messner, Program Analyst, Program Administration Office: Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street SW., Washington, DC 20410; email [email protected] or telephone 202-402-2626. 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.

    A. Overview of Information Collection

    Title of Information Collection: Request for Withdrawals from Replacements Reserves/Residual Receipts Funds.

    OMB Approval Number: 2502-0555.

    Type of Request: Extension of currently approved collection.

    Form Number: HUD-9250.

    Description of the need for the information and proposed use: Project owners are required to submit this information and required supporting documentation when requesting a withdrawal for funds from the Reserves for Replacement and/or Residual Receipt Funds. HUD reviews this information to ensure that funds are withdrawn and used in accordance with regulatory and administrative policy.

    Respondents: Affected public.

    Estimated Number of Respondents: 28,412.

    Estimated Number of Responses: 7,671.

    Frequency of Response: Various.

    Average Hours per Response: 2.25.

    Total Estimated Burden: 17,260.

    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 27, 2016. Janet M. Golrick, Associate General Deputy Assistant Secretary for Housing-Associate Deputy Federal Housing Commissioner.
    [FR Doc. 2016-18349 Filed 8-1-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4210-67-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT [Docket No. FR-5916-N-12] 60-Day Notice of Proposed Information Collection;

    Assessing Public Housing Authorities (PHAs) Compliance with Insurance Requirements Under the Consolidated Annual Contributions Contract and Regulations

    AGENCY:

    Office of the Assistant Secretary for Public and Indian Housing, PIH, 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: October 3, 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: Colette Pollard, Reports Management Officer, QDAM, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street SW., Room 4176, Washington, DC 20410-5000; telephone 202-402-3400 (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:

    Arlette Mussington, Office of Policy, Programs and Legislative Initiatives, PIH, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street SW., (L'Enfant Plaza, Room 2206), Washington, DC 20410; telephone 202-402-4109, (this is not a toll-free number). Persons with hearing or speech impairments may access this number via TTY by calling the Federal Information Relay Service at (800) 877-8339. Copies of available documents submitted to OMB may be obtained from Ms. Mussington.

    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: Assessing Compliance with ACC and Regulatory Insurance Requirements.

    OMB Approval Number: Pending OMB Approval.

    Type of Request: New.

    Form Number: None.

    Description of the need for the information and proposed use: the information collected will be used to assess PHAs compliance with ACC and regulatory insurance requirements. PHAs are required to have appropriate property/casualty insurance coverage needed to protect Federal interest in PHA properties and operations.

    Respondents (i.e. affected public): PHAs.

    Estimated Number of Respondents: 300.

    Estimated Number of Responses: 300.

    Frequency of Response: Once (This is a one-time survey).

    Average Hours per Response: The expected average response time for the survey is 20 minutes. (Some of the questions have only binary responses: _Yes _No).

    Total Estimated Burdens: 100.

    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 22, 2016. Merrie Nichols-Dixon, Deputy Director, Office of Policy, Programs and Legislative Initiatives.
    [FR Doc. 2016-18296 Filed 8-1-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4210-67-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Land Management [LLCO956000 L14400000.BJ0000 16X] Notice of Filing of Plats of Survey; Colorado AGENCY:

    Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice of filing of plats of survey; Colorado

    SUMMARY:

    The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Colorado State Office is publishing this notice to inform the public of the intent to officially file the survey plats listed below and afford a proper period of time to protest this action prior to the plat filing. During this time, the plats will be available for review in the BLM Colorado State Office.

    DATES:

    Unless there are protests of this action, the filing of the plats described in this notice will happen on September 1, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    BLM Colorado State Office, Cadastral Survey, 2850 Youngfield Street, Lakewood, CO 80215-7093.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Randy Bloom, Chief Cadastral Surveyor for Colorado, (303) 239-3856.

    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 plat, in 2 sheets, and field notes of the dependent resurvey and survey in fractional Township 14 South, Range 98 West, Sixth Principal Meridian, Colorado, were accepted on June 30, 2016.

    The plat and field notes of the dependent resurvey and survey in Township 15 South, Range 71 West, Sixth Principal Meridian, Colorado, were accepted on July 5, 2016.

    The plat and field notes of the dependent resurvey in Township 2 North, Range 86 West, Sixth Principal Meridian, Colorado, were accepted on July 14, 2016.

    The plat and field notes of the dependent resurvey and survey in Township 47 North, Range 1 West, New Mexico Principal Meridian, Colorado, were accepted on March 7, 2016.

    The plat incorporating the field notes of the remonumentation of certain corners in Township 8 North, Range 71 West, Sixth Principal Meridian, Colorado, was accepted on July 21, 2016.

    Dale E. Vinton, Acting Chief Cadastral Surveyor for Colorado.
    [FR Doc. 2016-18276 Filed 8-1-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-JB-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Land Management [FY16.LLAZA00000.L17110000.DF0000.241A] Notice of Termination of Uinkaret Mountains Landscape Restoration Project Environmental Impact Statement, Arizona AGENCY:

    Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the proposed Uinkaret Mountains Landscape Restoration Project is no longer required and the process is hereby terminated. Pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as implemented by the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulations, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) on October 21, 2014, published a notice of intent (NOI) to prepare an EIS. The EIS would have analyzed proposed vegetation treatments in the Uinkaret Mountains Landscape Restoration Project area.

    DATES:

    Termination of the EIS process for the Uinkaret Mountains Landscape Restoration Project is effective immediately.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Richard Spotts, Planning and Environmental Coordinator, (435) 688-3207; [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The BLM's Arizona Strip District Office has determined it is appropriate to terminate the Uinkaret Mountains Landscape Restoration Project EIS and prepare an Environmental Assessment (EA) instead. The NOI to prepare an EIS was published in the Federal Register on October 21, 2014 (79 FR 62954) and announced the scoping period for the proposed project. The initial project proposal listed a variety of potential vegetative treatments, including manual, mechanical, chemical, wildfire management for resource benefit, prescribed fire, and seeding for the overall project area of approximately 128,535 acres, located on lands managed by the Arizona Strip Field Office and Grand Canyon Parashant National Monument, within the Arizona Strip District.

    Preliminary issues from internal and external public scoping include but are not limited to: Excessive fuel loading leading to increased wildfire risk; impacts from past management activities such as grazing and fire suppression; pinyon and juniper encroachment into sagebrush and ponderosa communities; soil erosion; and the need to treat decadent sagebrush stands.

    After careful consideration of preliminary issues, public scoping comments, and field-verification of existing resource conditions, BLM modified the proposed action to specific vegetation treatment units within the overall project area, of which 18,675 acres is proposed to receive manual, mechanical, seeding, erosion control, and chemical treatments and 38,713 acres are proposed to receive fire treatments. The proposed action and one other action alternative, which would implement only the fire treatments, were developed. Design features, applicable to all action alternatives, were also modified to include special resource protections to mitigate the environmental impacts, such as avoiding all known cultural resources following intensive surveys, treating areas when soils are not saturated to minimize soil compaction, ensuring mechanical treatment equipment is cleaned prior to use to minimize the spread of noxious weeds, avoiding old growth ponderosa stands, and designing treatments in irregular shapes to reduce visual contrast.

    The BLM evaluated the modified the proposed action, no action, and an alternative action, against the CEQ significance criteria (40 CFR 1508.27) and determined that the anticipated effects from the treatment methods are consistent with the preparation of an EA rather than an EIS.

    Thus, the BLM hereby terminates preparation of an EIS for the proposed Uinkaret Mountains Landscape Restoration Project. National Environmental Policy Act public involvement procedures will be adhered to in the development on the Uinkaret Mountains Landscape Restoration Project EA.

    Authority:

    40 CFR 1506.6, 40 CFR 1506.10

    Timothy J. Burke, District Manager.
    [FR Doc. 2016-18272 Filed 8-1-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-32-P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Drug Enforcement Administration Alaaeldin A. Babiker, M.D.; Decision and Order

    On January 21, 2015, the Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Diversion Control, Drug Enforcement Administration, issued an Order to Show Cause to Alaaeldin A. Babiker, M.D. (hereinafter, Registrant), of Yuma, Arizona. The Show Cause Order proposed the revocation of Registrant's DEA Certificate of Registration BB7566461, pursuant to which he is authorized to dispense controlled substances in schedules II through V as a practitioner, as well as the denial of any applications, on two grounds. GX 1, at 1.

    First, the Show Cause Order alleged that on October 4, 2014, the Arizona Medical Board issued Registrant an “Order for Decree of Censure, Probation, and Practice Restriction and Consent to the Same” which “restricted [him] from prescribing any controlled substances.” Id. The Show Cause Order thus alleged that because Registrant does not have authority to dispense controlled substances in Arizona, the State in which he is registered with DEA, his registration is subject to revocation. Id. (citing 21 U.S.C. 802(21), 823(f), 824(a)(3)).

    Second, based on various findings of fact and legal conclusions contained in the Board's Order, the Show Cause Order alleged that Registrant had committed acts which render his registration “inconsistent with the public interest” in that he “did not comply with applicable state law related to controlled substances.” Id. at 2 (citing 21 U.S.C. 823(f)(4)). More specifically, the Show Cause Order alleged that: (1) “[F]rom 2008 through 2012, [Registrant] issued controlled substance prescriptions to [his] wife”; and that (2) on December 8, 2012, he was “diagnosed with opioid dependence, Xanax abuse and Adderall abuse.” Id. Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-1401(27)(h) & (g)).

    The Show Cause Order then made multiple allegations regarding Registrant's prescribing of narcotics to patient B.S. These included that: (1) During the period he prescribed oxycodone to B.S., he “added morphine to the patient's medications” and also increased B.S.'s oxycodone prescriptions without explaining why he did so in B.S.'s chart; (2) he “did not treat [B.S.'s] chronic pain with additional evaluations or other therapeutic interventions”; and (3) that he “deviated from the standard of care by failing to address” lab results which suggested that B.S. was using marijuana as well as by failing to adequately document B.S.'s marijuana usage. Id. (citing Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-1401(27)(e) & (q)).

    Finally, the Show Cause Order notified Registrant of his right to request a hearing on the allegations or to submit a written statement of position while waiving his right to a hearing, the procedure for electing either option, and the consequence of failing to elect either option. GX 1, at 2-3 (citing 21 CFR 1301.43; id. § 1301.46).

    On January 29, 2015, a Special Agent went to an address in Yuma, Arizona which was identified as Registrant's address by a lawyer who had represented him before the Arizona Medical Board. According to the Special Agent, he arrived at the residence at 4:30 p.m. at which time he “encountered no persons at the residence” and there were “[n]o vehicles or indications of any persons at the residence during the time” he was present. GX 7, at 1. The Special Agent reported that he left a copy of the Show Cause Order “in the door jamb of the front door in plain sight.” Id. However, at this juncture, the Government undertook no other steps to effect service.

    Several months later, the Government submitted a Request for Final Agency Action contending that 30 days had passed since Registrant was served with the Show Cause Order and that neither he, nor anyone representing him, had requested a hearing or sent any correspondence to DEA. Request for Final Agency Action, at 7-8. On review by my Office, service was deemed to be inadequate and the Government was directed to re-serve Registrant with the Show Cause Order.

    On October 2, 2015, a Diversion Investigator mailed the Show Cause Order to Registrant at his residence address (as identified by his lawyer) by first class mail. GX 9, at 2 (Supplemental Declaration of DI). Thereafter, “[o]n or about January 20, 2016,” the DI mailed the Show Cause Order to Registrant by Certified Mail, Return Receipt Requested addressed to him at the same address as well as at two other reported addresses. Id. However, each of these mailings was returned unclaimed. Id. Subsequently, on April 6, 2016, the DI re-mailed the Show Cause Order to Registrant by regular First Class Mail to each of the three addresses. Id. According to the affidavit of a Legal Assistant with the Office of Chief Counsel, as of July 13, 2016, the Office of Administrative Law Judges had not received either a hearing request or a written statement of position from him.

    Based on the above, I find that the Government has satisfied its obligation under the Due Process Clause “to provide `notice reasonably calculated, under all the circumstances, to apprise interested parties of the pendency of the action and afford them an opportunity to present their objections.' ” Jones v. Flowers, 547 U.S. 220, 226 (2006) (quoting Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co., 339 U.S. 306, 314 (1950)). As more than 30 days have now passed since Registrant was served with the Show Cause Order and neither Registrant nor anyone representing him has either requested a hearing or submitted a written statement of position, I find that Registrant has waived his right to a hearing or to submit a written statement. I therefore issue this Decision and Order based on relevant evidence contained in the Investigative File. I make the following findings.

    Findings of Fact

    Registrant is the holder of DEA Certificate of Registration BB7566461, pursuant to which he is authorized to dispense controlled substances in schedules II through V, as a practitioner, at the registered address of 2140 W. 24th St., Suite A, Yuma, Arizona. GX 2. Registrant's registration does not expire until July 31, 2016. Id.

    Registrant also previously held a medical license issued by the Arizona Medical Board. GX 3, at 1. While as of the date on which the Show Cause Order was issued, Registrant still had a license, albeit one which was restricted to prohibit him from prescribing controlled substances, on March 17, 2016, Registrant entered into an Order For Surrender Of License And Consent To The Same with the Board, which the latter approved on April 7, 2016. GX 9, at 9,11.

    Therein, the Board found that pursuant to its October 3, 2014 Order for Decree of Censure, Probation, and Practice Restriction and Consent to the Same, Registrant was required to participate in the Board's Physician Health Program (PHP).1 Id. at 5. Pursuant to the Order, Registrant was required to “submit to random biological fluid, hair, or nail testing to ensure compliance with the PHP” and call in to a hotline “on a daily basis to determine if he [wa]s required to submit to a drug test.” Id. Registrant did not, however, call in “[f]rom February 3 through February 8, 2015,” and “completely ceased checking in with the hotline on February 12, 2015.” Id. Based on his noncompliance with the PHP and the Board's Order, on February 26, 2015, Registrant entered into an Interim Consent Agreement for Practice Restriction with the Board which barred him from practicing medicine in the State. Id. at 5-6.

    1 The October 2014 Order found that in December 2013, Registrant underwent a clinical evaluation and was diagnosed “with opioid dependence, alcohol abuse, Xanax abuse, and Adderall abuse.” GX 3, at 2-3. After Registrant completed inpatient and outpatient treatment, the Board determined that he could resume practicing, subject to probationary terms and restrictions, if he was “enrolled in the PHP for a five year term.” Id. at 3.

    In the October 3, 2014 Order, the Board also made various findings regarding Registrant's prescribing of controlled substances to both his wife and patient B.S. GX 3, at 1-2, 4-5. As to the former, the Board found that Registrant “had prescribed controlled substances to his wife on multiple occasions beginning in 2008” and that in an August 2013 “interview with Board staff, [he] said that he had only prescribed controlled substances to [her] a few times starting in 2012.” Id. at 1. The Board also found that Registrant only “began to maintain medical records for his wife in 20011” and “did not maintain complete records for” her. Id. at 2.

    As to his patient B.S., the Board found that Registrant first treated B.S. in April 2012, when the latter “requested prescriptions so he could continue with the same dosing of Alprazolam 1mg (TID), oxycodone 30mg 6/day, and oxycodone 15mg 6/day” and that Registrant kept B.S. on this regimen until September 2012, when he added morphine sulfate 30mg 2/day. Id. at 4. The Board found, however, that Registrant did not document an explanation in B.S.'s chart for adding the morphine. Id.

    The Board further found that in May 2013, Registrant prescribed “an additional 60 pills of oxycodone 30mg and an additional 60 pills of OxyContin 80mg for the month.” Id. at 4-5. While the Board found that “this was the only month in which the increase occurred, there [was] no explanation in the patient's chart to explain the change.” Id.

    The Board also found that Registrant conducted drug testing on B.S. several times during the course of treatment. While the Board found that B.S. properly tested positive for the medications he was prescribed, “he also tested positive for THC, suggesting marijuana usage.” Id. The Board further found that while the positive test for marijuana “was circled on one of the lab reports,” it was “not otherwise documented in the chart.” Id. (emphasis added).

    The Board then found that Registrant deviated from the standard of care in multiple ways. First, he deviated by failing to address B.S.'s positive test for marijuana. Id. Second, he deviated “by managing B.S.'s chronic pain with pain medications without additional evaluations or other therapeutic interventions.” Id. Third, he deviated “by dramatically increasing B.S.'s pain medication in May 2013,” and that “[a]s a result of the dramatic increase, B.S. could have suffered an accidental overdose.” Id. Finally, the Board found that Registrant “failed to maintain adequate, legible medical records.” Id. at 6.

    Based on these findings, the Board found that Registrant had engaged in multiple forms of unprofessional conduct. These included by: (1) “failing or refusing to maintain adequate records on a patient”; (2) “habitual intemperance in the use of alcohol or habitual substance abuse”; (3) “using controlled substances except if prescribed by another physician for use during a prescribed course of treatment”; (4) “prescribing or dispensing controlled substances to members of the physician's immediate family”; (5) engaging in “[a]ny conduct or practice that is or might be harmful or dangerous to the health of the patient or the public”; and (6) “making a false or misleading statement to the board.” Id. at 6 (citing Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-1401(27) (e), (f), (g), (h), (q), and (jj)).2

    2 In agreeing to the Order, Registrant waived “any rights to a hearing or judicial review in state or federal court on the matters alleged.” GX 3, at 13. He also agreed that “[t]his Order is a public record that will be publicly disseminated as a formal disciplinary action of the Board.” Id. at 14. Thus, as between Registrant and the Board, the Order was entitled to preclusive effect even though the issues were not litigated. See Chaney Building Co., v. City of Tuscon, 716 P.2d 28, 30 (Ariz. 1986) (en banc) (even where a judgment is entered by stipulation or consent, it “may be conclusive, with respect to one or more issues, if the parties have entered an agreement manifesting such intention”)(citing Restatement (Second) of Judgments § 27 comment e)). The Order nonetheless states that:

    [a]ll admissions made by [Registrant] are solely for final disposition of this matter and any subsequent related administrative proceedings or civil litigation involving the Board and [Registrant]. Therefore, said admissions by [Registrant] are not intended or made for any other use, such as in the context of another state or federal government regulatory agency proceeding, civil or criminal court proceeding, in the State of Arizona or any other state or federal court.

    GX 3, at 13.

    Notwithstanding this language, I give preclusive effect to the findings of the October 2014 Board Order. Notably, most of the findings discussed above do not appear to be based on admissions made by Registrant but on other evidence. See David A. Ruben, 78 FR 38363, 38366-66 n.7 (2013), pet. for review denied, Ruben v. DEA, 617 Fed. Appx. 837, 838-39 (Mem.) (9th Cir. 2015). To the extent any of these findings relied on Registrant's admissions, neither the Arizona Medical Board nor Registrant can dictate to an Agency of the United States what weight it can attach to the Order's findings. Cf. id. at 38365-67.

    Discussion Loss of State Authority

    Pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 824(a)(3), “[a] registration . . . to . . . dispense a controlled substance . . . may be suspended or revoked by the Attorney General 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.” This Agency has further held that notwithstanding that this provision grants the Agency authority to suspend or revoke a registration, other provisions of the Controlled Substances Act “make plain 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), pet. for rev. denied, Hooper v. Holder, 481 F. App'x 826 (4th Cir. 2012). See also Frederick Marsh Blanton, M.D., 43 FR 27616, 27617 (1978) (“State authorization to dispense or otherwise handle controlled substances is a prerequisite to the issuance and maintenance of a Federal controlled substances registration.”).

    These provisions include section 102(21), which 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,” 21 U.S.C. 802(21), as well as section 303(f), which directs that “[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). As the Supreme Court has explained, “[i]n the case of a physician, this scheme contemplates that he is authorized by the State to practice medicine and to dispense drugs in connection with his professional practice.” United States v. Moore, 423 U.S. 122, 140-41 (1975).

    Here, the evidence shows that Registrant has been without state authority since the Board's October 3, 2014 Order restricted his prescribing authority and the Board has since ordered Registrant to surrender his medical license. I therefore find that Registrant is without authority to dispense controlled substances in Arizona, the State in which he is registered. Because Registrant no longer meets the CSA's prerequisite for maintaining a practitioner's registration, I will order that his registration be revoked and that any pending application be denied.

    Public Interest Grounds

    Under the CSA, “[a] registration pursuant to section 823 of this title to manufacture, distribute, or dispense a controlled substance . . . may be suspended or revoked by the Attorney General upon a finding that the registrant . . . has committed such acts as would render his registration under section 823 of this title inconsistent with the public interest as determined under such section.” 21 U.S.C. 824(a)(4). The Act further provides that in determining “the public interest” with respect to a practitioner, the following factors are to be considered:

    (1) The recommendation of the appropriate State licensing board or professional disciplinary authority.

    (2) The [registrant's] experience in dispensing, or conducting research with respect to controlled substances.

    (3) The [registrant's] conviction record under Federal or State laws relating to the manufacture, distribution, or dispensing of controlled substances.

    (4) Compliance with applicable State, Federal, or local laws relating to controlled substances.

    (5) Such other conduct which may threaten the public health and safety.

    21 U.S.C. 823(f).

    “[T]hese factors are . . . considered in the disjunctive.” Robert A. Leslie, M.D., 68 FR 15227, 15230 (2003). It is well settled that I “may rely on any one or a combination of factors, and may give each factor the weight [I] deem appropriate in determining whether a registration should be revoked.” Id.; see also MacKay v. DEA, 664 F.3d 808, 816 (10th Cir. 2011); Volkman v. DEA, 567 F.3d 215, 222 (6th Cir. 2009); Hoxie v. DEA, 419 F.3d 477, 482 (6th Cir. 2005). Moreover, while I am required to consider each of the factors, I “need not make explicit findings as to each one.” MacKay, 664 F.3d at 816 (quoting Volkman, 567 F.3d at 222 (quoting Hoxie, 419 F.3d at 482)).3

    3 While I have considered all of the factors, the Government does not argue that any of the other factors are relevant in making the public interest determination in this matter. Be that as it may, “this is not a contest in which score is kept; the Agency is not required to mechanically count up the factors and determine how many favor the Government and how many favor the registrant. Rather, it is an inquiry which focuses on protecting the public interest; what matters is the seriousness of the registrant's misconduct.” Jayam Krishna-Iyer, 74 FR 459, 462 (2009). Accordingly, as the Tenth Circuit has recognized, findings under a single factor can support the revocation of a registration. See MacKay, 664 F.3d at 821.

    The Government has the burden of proving, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the requirements for revocation or suspension pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 824(a) are met. 21 CFR 1301.44(e). This is so even in a non-contested case.

    In this matter, the Government argues that the Board's findings of fact and conclusions of law are entitled to preclusive effect and establish that Registrant “violated applicable controlled substance state laws under” factor four of the public interest standard. Request for Final Agency Action, at 6 (citing 21 U.S.C. 823(f)(4)). I agree that Registrant failed to comply with state laws related to controlled substances as evidenced by the findings that he prescribed controlled substances to his wife, notwithstanding that under Arizona law, “[p]rescribing or dispensing controlled substances to members of the physician's immediate family” is “unprofessional conduct.” Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-1401(27)(h). Based on the plain language of this provision, I conclude that even though it is found in the State's medical practice act, it is a law “relating to controlled substances.” 21 U.S.C. 823(f)(4).

    The Board also found that Registrant has been diagnosed as dependent on opioids, and that he has abused both Xanax (alprazolam), a schedule IV benzodiazepine, and Adderall, (amphetamine and dextroamphetamine), a schedule II stimulant. See 21 CFR 1308. 14(c)(2); id. 1308.12 (d)(1). Based on these findings, the Board concluded that Registrant has committed “unprofessional conduct” by engaging in “habitual substance abuse” and “using controlled substances except if prescribed by another physician for use during a prescribed course of treatment.” Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-1301(27)(f) & (g). Here too, while these provisions are located in the State's medical practice act, the plain language of these provisions supports the conclusion that they are laws “relating to controlled substances.” 21 U.S.C. 823(f) (4).4

    4 While not cited by the Government, DEA has long held that a practitioner's self-abuse of a controlled substance is actionable under factor five as “[s]uch other conduct which may threaten public health and safety.” See Tony T. Bui, 75 FR 49979, 49989 (2010) (citing cases).

    The Board also made several findings that Registrant deviated from the standard of care when he prescribed narcotic controlled substances to B.S. and which are highly suggestive of a finding that he acted outside of the usual course of professional practice and lacked a legitimate medical purpose in prescribing to B.S. 21 CFR 1306.04(a). These include that he failed to address B.S.'s positive test for marijuana, that he did not perform additional evaluations or use therapeutic interventions other than prescribing controlled substances, that he dramatically increased B.S.'s pain medications and did not document an explanation for doing so, and that he failed to maintain adequate and legible medical records.

    The Board did not, however, find that Registrant engaged in “[p]rescribing, dispensing, or administering any controlled substance . . . for other than accepted therapeutic purposes,” Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-1401(27)(j), a standard similar to that of 21 CFR 1306.04(a). See GX 3, at 6; see also Kenneth Harold Bull, 78 FR 62666, 62674 (2013) (holding that physician's violation of a State's “injudicious prescribing” standard did not establish a violation of 21 CFR 1306.4(a) when the State also had a standard prohibiting “prescribing . . . or dispensing of narcotic, stimulant or hypnotic drugs for other than accepted therapeutic purposes” but did not find a violation). Instead, the Board found that he committed unprofessional conduct by engaging in “[a]ny conduct or practice that is or might be harmful or dangerous to the health of the patient or the public.” GX 3, at 6 (citing Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-1401(27)(q)).

    In its Request for Final Agency Action, the Government did not allege that the Board's findings with respect to B.S. supported a finding that Registrant violated 21 CFR 1306.04(a). Nor did it argue that the Board's findings establish reckless or negligent conduct in the handling of controlled substances, which is a basis to revoke a registration under Paul J. Caragine, 63 FR 51592, 51601 (1998).

    Moreover, the Government offers no argument as to why the Board's standard of “[a]ny conduct or practice that is or might be harmful or dangerous to the health of the patient or the public” is a law related to controlled substances under factor four. I therefore do not consider whether this provision falls within factor four. Nor do I consider the Board's findings with respect to B.S.

    The Board's conclusions of law that Registrant committed unprofessional conduct by prescribing controlled substances to his wife, as well as by engaging in habitual substance abuse and using controlled substances which were not prescribed to him by another physician in the course of treatment, support the conclusion that he has committed such acts as to render his registration “inconsistent with the public interest.” 21 U.S.C. 824(a)(4). These findings provide an additional and independent basis to revoke Registrant's registration.

    Order

    Pursuant to the authority vested in me by 21 U.S.C. 824(a) and 823(f), as well as 28 CFR 0.100(b), I order that DEA Certificate of Registration BB7566461 issued to Alaaeldin Babiker, M.D., be, and it hereby is, revoked. I further other that any application of Alaaeldin Babiker, M.D., to renew or modify this registration, or for any other registration, be, and it hereby is denied. This Order is effective immediately.5

    5 For the same reasons which led the Board to order Registrant to immediately surrender his state license, I conclude that this Order should be effective immediately. GX 9, at 9; see also 21 CFR 1316.67.

    Dated: July 22, 2016. Chuck Rosenberg, Acting Administrator.
    [FR Doc. 2016-18278 Filed 8-1-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-09-P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Notice of Lodging of Proposed Consent Decree Under the Clean Air Act

    On July 27, 2016, the Department of Justice lodged a proposed Consent Decree with the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee in the lawsuit entitled United States and Knox County, Tennessee, Ex Rel, Lynne Liddington, Director Of Air Quality Management For Knox County, Tennessee v. Cemex Inc., et al., Civil Action No. 3:16-cv-471.

    This case involves claims for alleged violations of the Prevention of Significant Deterioration (“PSD”) program of the Clean Air Act (“CAA”), CAA's Title V operating permit requirements, and related Tennessee and Texas state law requirements at Portland cement facilities in Knoxville, Tennessee and Odessa, Texas owned or operated by Cemex, Inc. or related corporate entities (collectively, “Cemex”). The complaint seeks injunctive relief for installation of control technology to reduce emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOX), civil penalties, and mitigation of past excess NOX emissions. The settlement resolves the liability at these facilities and also resolves similar potential liability at additional Cemex cement plants in New Braunfels, Texas, Louisville, Kentucky and Demopolis, Alabama, and requires Cemex to install pollution control equipment, agree to federally enforceable limits for NOX and SO2 emissions, pay $1,690,000 in civil penalties, and perform an environmental mitigation project.

    The publication of this notice opens a period for public comment on the Consent Decree. Comments should be addressed to the Assistant Attorney General, Environment and Natural Resources Division, and should refer to United States and Knox County, Tennessee, Ex Rel, Lynne Liddington, Director Of Air Quality Management For Knox County, Tennessee v. Cemex Inc., et al., D.J. Ref. No. 90-5-2-1-09716. All comments must be submitted no later than thirty (30) days after the publication date of this notice. Comments may be submitted either by email or by mail:

    To submit comments: Send them to: By e-mail [email protected]. By mail Assistant Attorney General, U.S. DOJ-ENRD, P.O. Box 7611, Washington, DC 20044-7611.

    During the public comment period, the Consent Decree may be examined and downloaded at this Justice Department Web site: https://www.justice.gov/enrd/consent-decrees. We will provide a paper copy of the Consent Decree upon written request and payment of reproduction costs. Please mail your request and payment to: Consent Decree Library, U.S. DOJ-ENRD, P.O. Box 7611, Washington, DC 20044-7611.

    Please enclose a check or money order for $13.50 (25 cents per page reproduction cost) payable to the United States Treasury.

    Henry Friedman, Assistant Section Chief, Environmental Enforcement Section, Environment and Natural Resources Division.
    [FR Doc. 2016-18161 Filed 8-1-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-15-P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Parole Commission Sunshine Act Meeting; Record of Vote of Meeting Closure (Pub. L. 94-409) (5 U.S.C. 552b)

    I, J. Patricia W. Smoot, of the United States Parole Commission, was present at a meeting of said Commission, which started at approximately 11:00 p.m., on Wednesday, July 27, 2016 at the U.S. Parole Commission, 90 K Street NE., Third Floor, Washington, DC 20530. The purpose of the meeting was to discuss six original jurisdiction cases pursuant to 28 CFR 2.27. Three Commissioners were present, constituting a quorum when the vote to close the meeting was submitted.

    Public announcement further describing the subject matter of the meeting and certifications of the General Counsel that this meeting may be closed by votes of the Commissioners present were submitted to the Commissioners prior to the conduct of any other business. Upon motion duly made, seconded, and carried, the following Commissioners voted that the meeting be closed: J. Patricia W. Smoot, Patricia Cushwa and Charles T. Massarone.

    IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I make this official record of the vote taken to close this meeting and authorize this record to be made available to the public.

    Dated: July 27, 2016. J. Patricia W. Smoot, Chairman, U.S. Parole Commission.
    [FR Doc. 2016-18450 Filed 7-29-16; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE 4410-31-P
    DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Office of the Secretary Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request; Sale of Securities To Reduce Indebtedness of Party in Interest, Prohibited Transaction Class Exemption 1980-83 ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Labor (DOL) will submit the Employee Benefits Security Administration (EBSA) sponsored information collection request (ICR) titled, “Sale of Securities to Reduce Indebtedness of Party in Interest, Prohibited Transaction Class Exemption 1980-83,” to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) on July 29, 2016, for review and approval for continued use, without change, in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. Public comments on the ICR are invited.

    DATES:

    The OMB will consider all written comments that agency receives on or before September 1, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    A copy of this ICR with applicable supporting documentation; including a description of the likely respondents, proposed frequency of response, and estimated total burden may be obtained free of charge from the RegInfo.gov Web site at http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAViewICR?ref_nbr=201607-1210-001 (this link will only become active on July 30, 2016) or by contacting Michel Smyth by telephone at 202-693-4129, TTY 202-693-8064, (these are not toll-free numbers) or by email at [email protected]

    Submit comments about this request by mail or courier to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attn: OMB Desk Officer for DOL-EBSA, Office of Management and Budget, Room 10235, 725 17th Street NW., Washington, DC 20503; by Fax: 202-395-5806 (this is not a toll-free number); or by email: [email protected] Commenters are encouraged, but not required, to send a courtesy copy of any comments by mail or courier to the U.S. Department of Labor-OASAM, Office of the Chief Information Officer, Attn: Departmental Information Compliance Management Program, Room N1301, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20210; or by email: [email protected]

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Contact Michel Smyth by telephone at 202-693-4129, TTY 202-693-8064, (these are not toll-free numbers) or by email at [email protected]

    Authority:

    44 U.S.C. 3507(a)(1)(D).

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This ICR seeks to extend PRA authority for the Sale of Securities to Reduce Indebtedness of Party in Interest, Prohibited Transaction Class Exemption 1980-83 (PTE 80-83) information collection. This PTE allows an employee benefit plan to purchase securities that may aid the issuer of the securities to reduce or retire indebtedness to a party in interest. Without the relief provided by the class exemption, Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) prohibited transaction provisions would bar a standard type of financial/business transaction between a financial service provider and an employee benefit plan. This exemption also provides relief from Internal Revenue Code section 4975 prohibited transaction provisions.

    In order to take advantage of the relief provided by this PTE, an employee benefit plan must comply with all applicable exemption conditions, including keeping records sufficient to establish that exemption conditions have been met for exemption-covered transactions. The records must be maintained for a period of at least six years from a covered transaction and must be made reasonably available for inspection upon request by specified interested persons—including plan fiduciaries, participants and beneficiaries, sponsoring employers, DOL and Internal Revenue Service representatives, and contributing employers. ERISA, section 408(a) authorizes this information collection. See 29 U.S.C. 1108(a).

    This information collection is subject to the PRA. A Federal agency generally cannot conduct or sponsor a collection of information, and the public is generally not required to respond to an information collection, unless it is approved by the OMB under the PRA and displays a currently valid OMB Control Number. In addition, notwithstanding any other provisions of law, no person shall generally be subject to penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information that does not display a valid Control Number. See 5 CFR 1320.5(a) and 1320.6. The DOL obtains OMB approval for this information collection under Control Number 1210-0064.

    OMB authorization for an ICR cannot be for more than three (3) years without renewal, and the DOL seeks to extend PRA authorization for this information collection for three (3) more years, without any change to existing requirements. The DOL notes that existing information collection requirements submitted to the OMB receive a month-to-month extension while they undergo review. For additional substantive information about this ICR, see the related notice published in the Federal Register on November 23, 2015 (80 FR 72990).

    Interested parties are encouraged to send comments to the OMB, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs at the address shown in the ADDRESSES section within thirty (30) days of publication of this notice in the Federal Register. In order to help ensure appropriate consideration, comments should mention OMB Control Number 1210-0064. The OMB is particularly interested in comments that:

    • Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;

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

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

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

    Agency: DOL-EBSA.

    Title of Collection: Sale of Securities to Reduce Indebtedness of Party in Interest, Prohibited Transaction Class Exemption 1980-83.

    OMB Control Number: 1210-0064.

    Affected Public: Private Sector—businesses or other for-profits.

    Total Estimated Number of Respondents: 25.

    Total Estimated Number of Responses: 25.

    Total Estimated Annual Time Burden: 15 hours.

    Total Estimated Annual Other Costs Burden: $0.

    Dated: July 27, 2016. Michel Smyth, Departmental Clearance Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2016-18189 Filed 8-1-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-29-P
    NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION Notice of Permit Applications Received Under the Antarctic Conservation Act of 1978 AGENCY:

    National Science Foundation

    ACTION:

    Notice of permit applications received under the Antarctic Conservation Act of 1978.

    SUMMARY:

    The National Science Foundation (NSF) is required to publish a notice of permit applications received to conduct activities regulated under the Antarctic Conservation Act of 1978. NSF has published regulations under the Antarctic Conservation Act at Title 45 Part 670 of the Code of Federal Regulations. This is the required notice of permit applications received.

    DATES:

    Interested parties are invited to submit written data, comments, or views with respect to this permit application by September 1, 2016. This application may be inspected by interested parties at the Permit Office, address below.

    ADDRESSES:

    Comments should be addressed to Permit Office, Room 755, Division of Polar Programs, National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, Virginia 22230.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Nature McGinn, ACA Permit Officer, at the above address or [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The National Science Foundation, as directed by the Antarctic Conservation Act of 1978 (Pub. L. 95-541), as amended by the Antarctic Science, Tourism and Conservation Act of 1996, has developed regulations for the establishment of a permit system for various activities in Antarctica and designation of certain animals and certain geographic areas a requiring special protection. The regulations establish such a permit system to designate Antarctic Specially Protected Areas.

    APPLICATION DETAILS:

    1. Applicant—Permit Application: 2017-007.

    Maris Wicks, 81 Electric Avenue #3, Somerville, MA 02144.

    Activity for Which Permit is Requested

    Enter Antarctic Specially Protected Area. The applicant is a participant in the Antarctic Artists & Writers program and plans to travel to Antarctica to gather information and images for an educational publication that will document the research supported through the U.S. Antarctic Program. The applicant is requesting access to Cape Royds, ASPA 121; Backdoor Bay, ASPA 157; and Arrival Heights, ASPA 122, in order to observe and interview scientists, document their work and environs, and make photographs and sketches. While in the penguin colony at Cape Royds, the applicant will only observe, photograph, and sketch the penguins such that no take or harmful interference will occur. The applicant will be accompanied by researchers while in the ASPAs. The results of this work is expected to be useful for outreach and education about Antarctica and the scientific research conducted there.

    Location

    Cape Royds, ASPA 121; Backdoor Bay, ASPA 157; Arrival Heights, ASPA 122.

    Dates

    November 1, 2016-January 15, 2017.

    Nadene G. Kennedy, Polar Coordination Specialist, Division of Polar Programs.
    [FR Doc. 2016-18281 Filed 8-1-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7555-01-P
    NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [NRC-2016-0001] Sunshine Act Meeting Notice DATE:

    August 1, 8, 15, 22, 29, September 5, 2016.

    PLACE:

    Commissioners' Conference Room, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland.

    STATUS:

    Public and closed.

    Week of August 1, 2016

    There are no meetings scheduled for the week of August 1, 2016.

    Week of August 8, 2016—Tentative

    There are no meetings scheduled for the week of August 8, 2016.

    Week of August 15, 2016—Tentative

    There are no meetings scheduled for the week of August 15, 2016.

    Week of August 22, 2016—Tentative

    There are no meetings scheduled for the week of August 22, 2016.

    Week of August 29, 2016—Tentative

    There are no meetings scheduled for the week of August 29, 2016.

    Week of September 5, 2016—Tentative

    There are no meetings scheduled for the week of September 5, 2016.

    The schedule for Commission meetings is subject to change on short notice. For more information or to verify the status of meetings, contact Denise McGovern at 301-415-0681 or via email at [email protected]

    The NRC Commission Meeting Schedule can be found on the Internet at: http://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/public-meetings/schedule.html.

    The NRC provides reasonable accommodation to individuals with disabilities where appropriate. If you need a reasonable accommodation to participate in these public meetings, or need this meeting notice or the transcript or other information from the public meetings in another format (e.g. braille, large print), please notify Kimberly Meyer, NRC Disability Program Manager, at 301-287-0739, by videophone at 240-428-3217, or by email at [email protected] Determinations on requests for reasonable accommodation will be made on a case-by-case basis.

    Members of the public may request to receive this information electronically. If you would like to be added to the distribution, please contact the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Office of the Secretary, Washington, DC 20555 (301-415-1969), or email [email protected] or [email protected]

    Dated: July 28, 2016. Denise L. McGovern, Policy Coordinator, Office of the Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-18312 Filed 7-29-16; 11:15 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
    NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [NRC-2016-0151] Biweekly Notice; Applications and Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses and Combined Licenses Involving No Significant Hazards Considerations AGENCY:

    Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

    ACTION:

    Biweekly notice.

    SUMMARY:

    Pursuant to Section 189a. (2) of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is publishing this regular biweekly notice. The Act requires the Commission to publish notice of any amendments issued, or proposed to be issued, and grants the Commission the authority to issue and make immediately effective any amendment to an operating license or combined license, as applicable, upon a determination by the Commission that such amendment involves no significant hazards consideration, notwithstanding the pendency before the Commission of a request for a hearing from any person.

    This biweekly notice includes all notices of amendments issued, or proposed to be issued from July 5, 2019, to July 19, 2016. The last biweekly notice was published on July 19, 2016 (81 FR 46958).

    DATES:

    Comments must be filed by September 1, 2016. A request for a hearing must be filed by October 3, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments by any of the following methods:

    Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2016-0151. Address questions about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher; telephone: 301-415-3463; email: [email protected] For technical questions, contact the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document.

    Mail comments to: Cindy Bladey, Office of Administration, Mail Stop: OWFN-12-H08, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001.

    For additional direction on obtaining information and submitting comments, see “Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments” in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Lynn Ronewicz, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington DC 20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-1927, email: [email protected]

    I. Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments A. Obtaining Information

    Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2016-0151, facility name, unit number(s), plant docket number, application date, and subject when contacting the NRC about the availability of information for this action. You may obtain publicly-available information related to this action by any of the following methods:

    Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2016-0151.

    NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS): You may obtain publicly-available documents online in the ADAMS Public Documents collection at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. To begin the search, select “ADAMS Public Documents” and then select “Begin Web-based ADAMS Search.” For problems with ADAMS, please contact the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR) reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by email to [email protected] The ADAMS accession number for each document referenced (if it is available in ADAMS) is provided the first time that it is mentioned in this document.

    NRC's PDR: You may examine and purchase copies of public documents at the NRC's PDR, Room O1-F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852.

    B. Submitting Comments

    Please include Docket ID NRC-2016-0151, facility name, unit number(s), plant docket number, application date, and subject in your comment submission.

    The NRC cautions you not to include identifying or contact information that you do not want to be publicly disclosed in your comment submission. The NRC will post all comment submissions at http://www.regulations.gov as well as enter the comment submissions into ADAMS. The NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to remove identifying or contact information.

    If you are requesting or aggregating comments from other persons for submission to the NRC, then you should inform those persons not to include identifying or contact information that they do not want to be publicly disclosed in their comment submission. Your request should state that the NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to remove such information before making the comment submissions available to the public or entering the comment into ADAMS.

    I. Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses and Combined Licenses and Proposed No Significant Hazards Consideration Determination

    The Commission has made a proposed determination that the following amendment requests involve no significant hazards consideration. Under the Commission's regulations in § 50.92 of title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), this means that operation of the facility in accordance with the proposed amendment would not (1) involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated, or (2) create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated; or (3) involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety. The basis for this proposed determination for each amendment request is shown below.

    The Commission is seeking public comments on this proposed determination. Any comments received within 30 days after the date of publication of this notice will be considered in making any final determination.

    Normally, the Commission will not issue the amendment until the expiration of 60 days after the date of publication of this notice. The Commission may issue the license amendment before expiration of the 60-day period provided that its final determination is that the amendment involves no significant hazards consideration. In addition, the Commission may issue the amendment prior to the expiration of the 30-day comment period if circumstances change during the 30-day comment period such that failure to act in a timely way would result, for example in derating or shutdown of the facility. If the Commission takes action prior to the expiration of either the comment period or the notice period, it will publish in the Federal Register a notice of issuance. If the Commission makes a final no significant hazards consideration determination, any hearing will take place after issuance. The Commission expects that the need to take this action will occur very infrequently.

    A. Opportunity To Request a Hearing and Petition for Leave To Intervene

    Within 60 days after the date of publication of this notice, any person(s) whose interest may be affected by this action may file a request for a hearing and a petition to intervene with respect to issuance of the amendment to the subject facility operating license or combined license. Requests for a hearing and a petition for leave to intervene shall be filed in accordance with the Commission's “Agency Rules of Practice and Procedure” in 10 CFR part 2. Interested person(s) should consult a current copy of 10 CFR 2.309, which is available at the NRC's PDR, located at One White Flint North, Room O1-F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland 20852. The NRC's regulations are accessible electronically from the NRC Library on the NRC's Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/cfr/. If a request for a hearing or petition for leave to intervene is filed within 60 days, the Commission or a presiding officer designated by the Commission or by the Chief Administrative Judge of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel, will rule on the request and/or petition; and the Secretary or the Chief Administrative Judge of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board will issue a notice of a hearing or an appropriate order.

    As required by 10 CFR 2.309, a petition for leave to intervene shall set forth with particularity the interest of the petitioner in the proceeding, and how that interest may be affected by the results of the proceeding. The petition should specifically explain the reasons why intervention should be permitted with particular reference to the following general requirements: (1) The name, address, and telephone number of the requestor or petitioner; (2) the nature of the requestor's/petitioner's right under the Act to be made a party to the proceeding; (3) the nature and extent of the requestor's/petitioner's property, financial, or other interest in the proceeding; and (4) the possible effect of any decision or order which may be entered in the proceeding on the requestor's/petitioner's interest. The petition must also set forth the specific contentions which the requestor/petitioner seeks to have litigated at the proceeding.

    Each contention must consist of a specific statement of the issue of law or fact to be raised or controverted. In addition, the requestor/petitioner shall provide a brief explanation of the bases for the contention and a concise statement of the alleged facts or expert opinion which support the contention and on which the requestor/petitioner intends to rely in proving the contention at the hearing. The requestor/petitioner must also provide references to those specific sources and documents of which the petitioner is aware and on which the requestor/petitioner intends to rely to establish those facts or expert opinion to support its position on this issue. The petition must include sufficient information to show that a genuine dispute exists with the applicant on a material issue of law or fact. Contentions shall be limited to matters within the scope of the amendment under consideration. The contention must be one which, if proven, would entitle the requestor/petitioner to relief. A requestor/petitioner who fails to satisfy these requirements with respect to at least one contention will not be permitted to participate as a party.

    Those permitted to intervene become parties to the proceeding, subject to any limitations in the order granting leave to intervene, and have the opportunity to participate fully in the conduct of the hearing with respect to resolution of that person's admitted contentions, including the opportunity to present evidence and to submit a cross-examination plan for cross-examination of witnesses, consistent with the NRC's regulations, policies and procedures.

    Petitions for leave to intervene must be filed no later than 60 days from the date of publication of this notice. Requests for hearing, petitions for leave to intervene, and motions for leave to file new or amended contentions that are filed after the 60-day deadline will not be entertained absent a determination by the presiding officer that the filing demonstrates good cause by satisfying the three factors in 10 CFR 2.309(c)(1)(i)-(iii). If a hearing is requested, and the Commission has not made a final determination on the issue of no significant hazards consideration, the Commission will make a final determination on the issue of no significant hazards consideration. The final determination will serve to decide when the hearing is held. If the final determination is that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration, the Commission may issue the amendment and make it immediately effective, notwithstanding the request for a hearing. Any hearing held would take place after issuance of the amendment. If the final determination is that the amendment request involves a significant hazards consideration, then any hearing held would take place before the issuance of any amendment unless the Commission finds an imminent danger to the health or safety of the public, in which case it will issue an appropriate order or rule under 10 CFR part 2.

    A State, local governmental body, Federally-recognized Indian Tribe, or agency thereof, may submit a petition to the Commission to participate as a party under 10 CFR 2.309(h)(1). The petition should state the nature and extent of the petitioner's interest in the proceeding. The petition should be submitted to the Commission by September 19, 2016. The petition must be filed in accordance with the filing instructions in the “Electronic Submissions (E-Filing)” section of this document, and should meet the requirements for petitions for leave to intervene set forth in this section, except that under 10 CFR 2.309(h)(2) a State, local governmental body, or Federally-recognized Indian Tribe, or agency thereof does not need to address the standing requirements in 10 CFR 2.309(d) if the facility is located within its boundaries. A State, local governmental body, Federally-recognized Indian Tribe, or agency thereof may also have the opportunity to participate under 10 CFR 2.315(c).

    If a hearing is granted, any person who does not wish, or is not qualified, to become a party to the proceeding may, in the discretion of the presiding officer, be permitted to make a limited appearance pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 2.315(a). A person making a limited appearance may make an oral or written statement of position on the issues, but may not otherwise participate in the proceeding. A limited appearance may be made at any session of the hearing or at any prehearing conference, subject to the limits and conditions as may be imposed by the presiding officer. Details regarding the opportunity to make a limited appearance will be provided by the presiding officer if such sessions are scheduled.

    B. Electronic Submissions (E-Filing)

    All documents filed in NRC adjudicatory proceedings, including a request for hearing, a petition for leave to intervene, any motion or other document filed in the proceeding prior to the submission of a request for hearing or petition to intervene, and documents filed by interested governmental entities participating under 10 CFR 2.315(c), must be filed in accordance with the NRC's E-Filing rule (72 FR 49139; August 28, 2007, as amended at 77 FR 46562, August 3, 2012). The E-Filing process requires participants to submit and serve all adjudicatory documents over the internet, or in some cases to mail copies on electronic storage media. Participants may not submit paper copies of their filings unless they seek an exemption in accordance with the procedures described below.

    To comply with the procedural requirements of E-Filing, at least 10 days prior to the filing deadline, the participant should contact the Office of the Secretary by email at [email protected], or by telephone at 301-415-1677, to request (1) a digital identification (ID) certificate, which allows the participant (or its counsel or representative) to digitally sign documents and access the E-Submittal server for any proceeding in which it is participating; and (2) advise the Secretary that the participant will be submitting a request or petition for hearing (even in instances in which the participant, or its counsel or representative, already holds an NRC-issued digital ID certificate). Based upon this information, the Secretary will establish an electronic docket for the hearing in this proceeding if the Secretary has not already established an electronic docket.

    Information about applying for a digital ID certificate is available on the NRC's public Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals/getting-started.html. System requirements for accessing the E-Submittal server are detailed in the NRC's “Guidance for Electronic Submission to the NRC,” which is available on the agency's public Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/electronic-sub-ref-mat.html. Participants may attempt to use other software not listed on the Web site, but should note that the NRC's E-Filing system does not support unlisted software, and the NRC Electronic Filing Help Desk will not be able to offer assistance in using unlisted software.

    If a participant is electronically submitting a document to the NRC in accordance with the E-Filing rule, the participant must file the document using the NRC's online, Web-based submission form.

    Once a participant has obtained a digital ID certificate and a docket has been created, the participant can then submit a request for hearing or petition for leave to intervene. Submissions should be in Portable Document Format (PDF) in accordance with NRC guidance available on the NRC's public Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/electronic-sub-ref-mat.html. A filing is considered complete at the time the documents are submitted through the NRC's E-Filing system. To be timely, an electronic filing must be submitted to the E-Fili