Federal Register Vol. 81, No.180,

Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 180 (September 16, 2016)

Page Range63671-64047
FR Document

81_FR_180
Current View
Page and SubjectPDF
81 FR 64045 - Continuation of the Exercise of Certain Authorities Under the Trading With the Enemy ActPDF
81 FR 63671 - To Modify Duty-Free Treatment Under the Generalized System of PreferencesPDF
81 FR 63808 - Sunshine Act MeetingPDF
81 FR 63673 - Termination of Emergency With Respect to the Situation in or in Relation to Côte d'IvoirePDF
81 FR 63759 - Sunshine Act MeetingPDF
81 FR 63790 - Notice of Realty Action: Application for Conveyance of Federally Owned Mineral Interests in Escambia County, FLPDF
81 FR 63837 - Avante Mezzanine Partners SBIC II, L.P.; Notice Seeking Exemption Under Section 312 of the Small Business Investment Act, Conflicts of InterestPDF
81 FR 63836 - Indiana Disaster #IN-00059PDF
81 FR 63852 - Sixteenth RTCA SC-209 Working Session and Plenary Session Joint With EUROCAE WG 49, WG 51, and RTCA SC-186PDF
81 FR 63732 - Approval of California Air Plan Revisions, South Coast Air Quality Management DistrictPDF
81 FR 63849 - Notice of Public Meeting in Preparation for the Sixty-Sixth Session of the International Maritime Organization Technical Cooperation CommitteePDF
81 FR 63810 - Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc., Indian Point Nuclear Generating Unit Nos. 2 and 3PDF
81 FR 63849 - Culturally Significant Objects Imported for Exhibition Determinations: “Word and Image: Martin Luther's Reformation” ExhibitionPDF
81 FR 63804 - Use of Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) Sand Resources for the Mississippi Coastal Improvements Program (MsCIP) Comprehensive Barrier Island Restoration in Hancock, Harrison, and Jackson Counties, MississippiPDF
81 FR 63849 - Culturally Significant Objects Imported for Exhibition Determinations: “The Rama Epic: Hero, Heroine, Ally, Foe” ExhibitionPDF
81 FR 63839 - Culturally Significant Objects Imported for Exhibition Determinations: “The Art of Alchemy” ExhibitionPDF
81 FR 63785 - 60-Day Notice of Proposed Information Collection: Multifamily Project Construction ChangePDF
81 FR 63784 - 60-Day Notice of Proposed Information Collection: Final Endorsement of Credit InstrumentPDF
81 FR 63710 - Ammonium Persulfate; Exemption From the Requirement of a TolerancePDF
81 FR 63694 - Visas: Diversity ImmigrantsPDF
81 FR 63781 - Agency Information Collection Activities: African Growth and Opportunity Act Certificate of OriginPDF
81 FR 63695 - TRICARE; Mental Health and Substance Use Disorder TreatmentPDF
81 FR 63759 - Environmental Impact Statements; Notice of AvailabilityPDF
81 FR 63714 - Implementing Public Safety Broadband Provisions of the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012PDF
81 FR 63786 - Federal Property Suitable as Facilities To Assist the HomelessPDF
81 FR 63839 - Notice of Information Collection Under OMB Emergency Review: Affidavit of Relationship (AOR) for Minors Who Are Nationals of El Salvador, Guatemala, or HondurasPDF
81 FR 63707 - Aspergillus flavus strains TC16F, TC35C, TC38B, and TC46G; Temporary Exemptions From the Requirement of a TolerancePDF
81 FR 63697 - Special Local Regulations; Ironman 70.3 Augusta Triathlon, Savannah RiverPDF
81 FR 63799 - Information Collection: General Oil and Gas and Sulphur and Production Requirements in the Outer Continental Shelf; Proposed Collection for OMB Review; Comment RequestPDF
81 FR 63840 - 60-Day Notice of Proposed Information Collection: Request for Advisory OpinionPDF
81 FR 63766 - Recommendations for Microbial Vectors Used for Gene Therapy; Guidance for Industry; AvailabilityPDF
81 FR 63774 - Coordinated Development of Antimicrobial Drugs and Antimicrobial Susceptibility Test DevicesPDF
81 FR 63791 - National Historic Landmarks Committee of the National Park System Advisory Board MeetingPDF
81 FR 63798 - Notice of Open Public Meetings for the National Park Service Alaska Region Subsistence Resource Commission ProgramPDF
81 FR 63796 - Notice of November 17-18, 2016, Meeting of the National Park System Advisory BoardPDF
81 FR 63767 - Clinical Investigator Training CoursePDF
81 FR 63764 - Qualification of Biomarker-Total Kidney Volume in Studies for Treatment of Autosomal Dominant Polycystic Kidney Disease; Guidance for Industry; AvailabilityPDF
81 FR 63770 - Determination of Regulatory Review Period for Purposes of Patent Extension; LUMASONPDF
81 FR 63773 - Determination of Regulatory Review Period for Purposes of Patent Extension; ENTYVIOPDF
81 FR 63771 - Determination of Regulatory Review Period for Purposes of Patent Extension; RESQCPR SYSTEMPDF
81 FR 63762 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Submission for OMB Review; Comment RequestPDF
81 FR 63768 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Unique Device Identification SystemPDF
81 FR 63775 - Waivers From the Requirement To Demonstrate Bioequivalence of Animal Drugs in Soluble Powder Oral Dosage Form Products and Type A Medicated Articles; Draft Revised Guidance for Industry; AvailabilityPDF
81 FR 63716 - Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Exchange of Flatfish in the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Management AreaPDF
81 FR 63776 - Menu Labeling Public Workshop; Public MeetingPDF
81 FR 63747 - Withdrawal of Notice of Intent To Prepare a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement for the Raritan Bay and Sandy Hook Bay, New Jersey Feasibility Report for Hurricane and Storm Damage Reduction Union Beach, New Jersey Final Feasibility ReportPDF
81 FR 63743 - New England Fishery Management Council; Public MeetingPDF
81 FR 63739 - Agenda and Notice of Public Meeting of the Maine Advisory CommitteePDF
81 FR 63743 - Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council; Public MeetingPDF
81 FR 63739 - Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council (MAFMC); Public MeetingsPDF
81 FR 63740 - Western Pacific Fishery Management Council; Public MeetingsPDF
81 FR 63759 - Notice of Open Meeting of the Advisory Committee of the Export-Import Bank of the United States (Ex-Im Bank)PDF
81 FR 63811 - Submission for Review: 3206-0208, Representative Payee Survey, RI 38-115PDF
81 FR 63735 - Pale Cyst Nematode; Update of Quarantined AreasPDF
81 FR 63735 - Notice of Availability of a Treatment Evaluation Document; Cold Treatment of Grapefruit From AustraliaPDF
81 FR 63784 - Advisory Committee on Family Residential CentersPDF
81 FR 63745 - Procurement List; DeletionsPDF
81 FR 63744 - Procurement List; Proposed DeletionsPDF
81 FR 63787 - Endangered Species; Receipt of Applications for PermitPDF
81 FR 63782 - Accreditation and Approval of Saybolt LP as a Commercial Gauger and LaboratoryPDF
81 FR 63747 - Record of Decision for the Remaining Balanced Vision Plan and Interior Drainage Plan Features Feasibility Report and Environmental Impact Statement, Dallas County, TXPDF
81 FR 63700 - Drawbridge Operation Regulation; South Branch of the Elizabeth River, Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway, Chesapeake, VAPDF
81 FR 63698 - Special Local Regulation; Ohio River, Madison, INPDF
81 FR 63738 - Nez Perce-Clearwater National Forests; Idaho; Johnson Bar Fire Salvage ProjectPDF
81 FR 63788 - Reinstate Agency Information Collection for the Johnson O'Malley Act RequirementsPDF
81 FR 63763 - Submission for OMB Review; Comment RequestPDF
81 FR 63793 - Notice of Inventory Completion: Tennessee Valley Authority, Knoxville, TNPDF
81 FR 63795 - Notice of Intent To Repatriate Cultural Items: Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission, Olympia, WAPDF
81 FR 63791 - Notice of Inventory Completion: Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission, Olympia, WAPDF
81 FR 63780 - Accreditation and Approval of Saybolt LP as a Commercial Gauger and LaboratoryPDF
81 FR 63750 - Agency Information Collection ExtensionPDF
81 FR 63808 - Intent To Renew the Bureau of Labor Statistics Technical Advisory CommitteePDF
81 FR 63806 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request; Securing Financial Obligations Under the Longshore and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act and its ExtensionsPDF
81 FR 63807 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request; Disability Employment Initiative EvaluationPDF
81 FR 63853 - Buy America Waiver NotificationPDF
81 FR 63783 - Accreditation and Approval of AmSpec Services, LLC, as a Commercial Gauger and LaboratoryPDF
81 FR 63782 - Accreditation and Approval of Amspec Services, LLC, as a Commercial Gauger And LaboratoryPDF
81 FR 63749 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Comment Request; Common Core of Data (CCD) School-Level Finance Survey (SLFS) 2016-2018PDF
81 FR 63854 - Buy America Waiver NotificationPDF
81 FR 63700 - Drawbridge Operation Regulation; James River, Isle of Wight and Newport News, VAPDF
81 FR 63858 - Corporate Senior Executive Management Office; Notice of Performance Review Board MembersPDF
81 FR 63806 - Cold-Rolled Steel Flat Products From Brazil, India, Korea, Russia, and the United Kingdom; DeterminationsPDF
81 FR 63805 - Certain Krill Oil Products and Krill Meal for Production of Krill Oil Products; Institution of InvestigationPDF
81 FR 63790 - Filing of Plats of Survey: Oregon/WashingtonPDF
81 FR 63789 - Notice of Public Meeting for the Steens Mountain Advisory CouncilPDF
81 FR 63728 - McCormick & Company, Inc.; Filing of Color Additive PetitionPDF
81 FR 63809 - Notice of Intent To Extend an Information CollectionPDF
81 FR 63850 - National Express LLC-Acquisition Of Control-New Dawn Transit, LlcPDF
81 FR 63760 - Granting of Request for Early Termination of the Waiting Period Under the Premerger Notification RulesPDF
81 FR 63695 - Special Local Regulation; Ohio River, Owensboro, KYPDF
81 FR 63728 - Security Zones; Port of Palm Beach, Port Everglades, Miami, and Key West, FloridaPDF
81 FR 63780 - CARA Act's Required Training of Nurse Practitioners and Physician AssistantsPDF
81 FR 63837 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Request and Comment RequestPDF
81 FR 63779 - National Cancer Institute; Notice of Closed MeetingsPDF
81 FR 63777 - National Cancer Institute; Notice of MeetingPDF
81 FR 63778 - Office of the Director, Notice of MeetingPDF
81 FR 63778 - National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders; Notice of Closed MeetingsPDF
81 FR 63778 - National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders; Notice of MeetingPDF
81 FR 63723 - Raisins Produced From Grapes Grown in California and Imported Raisins; Removal of LanguagePDF
81 FR 63756 - Alaska Electric Light & Power Company; Notice of Application Tendered for Filing With the Commission and Soliciting Study Requests and Establishing Procedural Schedule for Relicensing and a Deadline for Submission of Final AmendmentsPDF
81 FR 63754 - Notice of Commission Staff AttendancePDF
81 FR 63751 - Great Lakes Hydro America, LLC; Notice of Application Tendered for Filing With the Commission and Establishing Procedural Schedule for Licensing and Deadline for Submission of Final AmendmentsPDF
81 FR 63752 - Notice of Commission Staff Attendance at MISO MeetingsPDF
81 FR 63753 - Notice of Institution of Section 206 Proceeding and Refund Effective DatePDF
81 FR 63756 - ITC Pipeline Company, LLC; Notice of Request for WaiverPDF
81 FR 63754 - Van Orden, Tracy; Notice of FilingPDF
81 FR 63756 - Coalition of MISO Transmission Customers v. Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.; Notice of ComplaintPDF
81 FR 63755 - Columbia Gas Transmission, LLC; Notice of Request Under Blanket AuthorizationPDF
81 FR 63754 - Dominion Carolina Gas Transmission, LLC; Notice of Revised Schedule for Environmental Review of the Transco to Charleston ProjectPDF
81 FR 63676 - Tart Cherries Grown in the States of Michigan, et al.; Revision of Optimum Supply Requirements and Establishment of Inventory Release ProceduresPDF
81 FR 63831 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; ICE Clear Credit LLC; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change To Provide for the Clearance of Additional Credit Default Swap ContractsPDF
81 FR 63811 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE MKT LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend Rule 67-Equities To Modify Certain Data Collection Requirements of the Regulation NMS Plan To Implement a Tick Size Pilot ProgramPDF
81 FR 63815 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend Rule 4770PDF
81 FR 63833 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; NASDAQ PHLX LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend Rule 3317PDF
81 FR 63818 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend Rule 7.46 To Modify Certain Data Collection Requirements of the Regulation NMS Plan To Implement a Tick Size Pilot ProgramPDF
81 FR 63825 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend Rule 67 To Modify Certain Data Collection Requirements of the Regulation NMS Plan To Implement a Tick Size Pilot ProgramPDF
81 FR 63821 - Self Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Stock Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend Article 20, Rule 13(b) To Modify Certain Data Collection Requirements of the Regulation NMS Plan To Implement a Tick Size Pilot ProgramPDF
81 FR 63828 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; NASDAQ BX, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend Rule 4770PDF
81 FR 63718 - Walnuts Grown in California; Increased Assessment RatePDF
81 FR 63679 - Pistachios Grown in California, Arizona, and New Mexico; Decreased Assessment RatePDF
81 FR 63721 - Walnuts Grown in California; Proposed Amendment to Marketing OrderPDF
81 FR 63675 - Amendment to the Definition of “Condition” and Prerequisite Requirement for Shell Eggs Eligible for Grading and Certification Stated in the Regulations Governing the Voluntary Grading of Shell EggsPDF
81 FR 63748 - National Advisory Council on Indian Education; Announcement of an Open Public MeetingPDF
81 FR 63736 - Notice of Intent To Request New Information CollectionPDF
81 FR 63746 - Proposed Information Collection; Comment RequestPDF
81 FR 63747 - Reopening and Extension of the Application Deadline Date for the Fiscal Year 2016 Competition; Promise Neighborhoods ProgramPDF
81 FR 63738 - Submission for OMB Review; Comment RequestPDF
81 FR 63704 - Air Plan Approval; SC Infrastructure Requirements for the 2010 1-Hour NO2PDF
81 FR 63705 - Air Plan Approval/Disapproval; MS Infrastructure Requirements for the 2010 NO2PDF
81 FR 63701 - Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Maryland; Control of Volatile Organic Compounds Emissions From Fiberglass Boat Manufacturing Materials; Withdrawal of Direct Final RulePDF
81 FR 63701 - Air Plan Approval; Alabama: Volatile Organic CompoundsPDF
81 FR 63758 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Information Collection for Importation of On-Highway Vehicles and Motorcycles and Nonroad Engines, Vehicles, and Equipment; EPA ICR Number 2583.01, OMB Control Number 2060-NEWPDF
81 FR 63734 - Air Plan Approval; Alabama: Volatile Organic CompoundsPDF
81 FR 63841 - Registration for the Diversity Immigrant (DV-2018) Visa ProgramPDF
81 FR 63803 - Gulf of Mexico (GOM) Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) Central Planning Area (CPA) Oil and Gas Lease Sale 247; MMAA104000PDF
81 FR 63804 - Notice of Availability of the Proposed Notice of Sale for the Central Gulf of Mexico Planning Area Outer Continental Shelf Oil and Gas Lease Sale 247; MMAA104000PDF
81 FR 63855 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Request for Comments; Renewal of an Information Collection(s): U.S. Department of Transportation, Individual Complaint of Employment Discrimination FormPDF
81 FR 63725 - Airworthiness Directives; Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd. AirplanesPDF
81 FR 63691 - Airworthiness Directives; Airbus AirplanesPDF
81 FR 63688 - Airworthiness Directives; Dassault Aviation AirplanesPDF
81 FR 63853 - Notice of Opportunity for Public Comment for Land Exchange at New Bedford Airport in New Bedford, MAPDF
81 FR 63852 - Notice of Opportunity for Public Comment on Land Use Change From Aeronautical to Non-Aeronautical Use at Hanscom Field in Bedford, MAPDF
81 FR 63853 - Commercial Space Transportation Advisory Committee-Open MeetingPDF
81 FR 63856 - Privacy Act of 1974; Systems of RecordsPDF
81 FR 63682 - Regulatory Capital Rules: The Federal Reserve Board's Framework for Implementing the U.S. Basel III Countercyclical Capital BufferPDF
81 FR 63859 - Medicare and Medicaid Programs; Emergency Preparedness Requirements for Medicare and Medicaid Participating Providers and SuppliersPDF

Issue

81 180 Friday, September 16, 2016 Contents Agricultural Marketing Agricultural Marketing Service RULES Decreased Assessment Rates: Pistachios Grown in California, Arizona, and New Mexico, 63679-63682 2016-22248 Free and Restricted Percentages for the 2015-16 Crop Year for Tart Cherries: Tart Cherries Grown in the States of Michigan, et al., 63676-63679 2016-22258 Voluntary Grading of Shell Eggs: Definition of Condition and Prerequisite Requirement for Shell Eggs Eligible for Grading and Certification; Amendments, 63675-63676 2016-22246 PROPOSED RULES Assessment Rates: Walnuts Grown in California, 63718-63721 2016-22249 Marketing Orders: Raisins Produced from Grapes Grown in California and Imported Raisins, 63723-63725 2016-22270 Walnuts Grown in California, 63721-63723 2016-22247 Agriculture Agriculture Department See

Agricultural Marketing Service

See

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

See

Economic Research Service

See

Forest Service

See

Rural Housing Service

Animal Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service NOTICES Quarantined Areas Pale Cyst Nematode, 63735 2016-22328 Treatment Evaluation Document; Cold Treatment of Grapefruit from Australia, 63735-63736 2016-22327 Centers Medicare Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services RULES Medicare and Medicaid Programs: Emergency Preparedness Requirements for Medicare and Medicaid Participating Providers and Suppliers, 63860-64044 2016-21404 NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 63762-63763 2016-22342 Children Children and Families Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 63763-63764 2016-22316 Civil Rights Civil Rights Commission NOTICES Meetings: Maine State Advisory Committee, 63739 2016-22334 Coast Guard Coast Guard RULES Drawbridge Operations: James River, Isle of Wight and Newport News, VA, 63700-63701 2016-22300 South Branch of the Elizabeth River, Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway, Chesapeake, VA, 63700 2016-22320 Special Local Regulations: Ironman 70.3 Augusta Triathlon, Savannah River, 63697-63698 2016-22356 Ohio River, Madison, IN, 63698-63700 2016-22319 Ohio River, Owensboro, KY, 63695-63697 2016-22281 PROPOSED RULES Security Zones: Port of Palm Beach, Port Everglades, Miami, and Key West, FL, 63728-63732 2016-22280 Commerce Commerce Department See

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

Committee for Purchase Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled NOTICES Procurement List; Additions and Deletions, 63744-63746 2016-22324 2016-22325 Corporation Corporation for National and Community Service NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 63746 2016-22243 Defense Department Defense Department See

Engineers Corps

RULES TRICARE: Mental Health and Substance Use Disorder Treatment, 63695 2016-22363
Economic Research Economic Research Service NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 63736-63738 2016-22244 Education Department Education Department NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Common Core of Data School-Level Finance Survey 2016-2018, 63749-63750 2016-22302 Application Deadline for Fiscal Year 2016: Promise Neighborhoods Program, 63747-63748 2016-22242 Meetings: National Advisory Council on Indian Education, 63748-63749 2016-22245 Energy Department Energy Department See

Energy Information Administration

See

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Energy Information Energy Information Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 63750-63751 2016-22310 Engineers Engineers Corps NOTICES Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc.: Raritan Bay and Sandy Hook Bay, NJ Feasibility Report for Hurricane and Storm Damage Reduction Union Beach, NJ Final Feasibility Report; Withdrawal, 63747 2016-22336 Remaining Balanced Vision Plan and Interior Drainage Plan Features Feasibility Report; Dallas County, TX, 63747 2016-22321 Environmental Protection Environmental Protection Agency RULES Air Quality State Implementation Plans; Approvals and Promulgations: Alabama: Volatile Organic Compounds, 63701-63703 2016-22221 Maryland; Control of Volatile Organic Compounds Emissions from Fiberglass Boat Manufacturing Materials; Withdrawal, 63701 2016-22225 Mississippi; Infrastructure Requirements for the 2010 NO2 NAAQS, 63705-63707 2016-22226 South Carolina; Infrastructure Requirements for the 2010 1-hour NO2 NAAQS, 63704-63705 2016-22239 Pesticide Tolerances; Exemptions: Ammonium Persulfate, 63710-63714 2016-22366 Aspergillus flavus strains TC16F, TC35C, TC38B, TC46G, 63707-63710 2016-22357 PROPOSED RULES Air Quality State Implementation Plans; Approvals and Promulgations: Alabama: Volatile Organic Compounds, 63734 2016-22218 California Air Plan Revisions, South Coast Air Quality Management District, 63732-63734 2016-22388 NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Information Collection for Importation of On-highway Vehicles and Motorcycles and Nonroad Engines, Vehicles, and Equipment, 63758-63759 2016-22219 Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc., 63759 2016-22362 Export Import Export-Import Bank NOTICES Meetings: Advisory Committee, 63759 2016-22330 Federal Aviation Federal Aviation Administration RULES Airworthiness Directives: Airbus Airplanes, 63691-63694 2016-22178 Dassault Aviation Airplanes, 63688-63691 2016-22177 PROPOSED RULES Airworthiness Directives: Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd. Airplanes, 63725-63728 2016-22182 NOTICES Land Exchanges: New Bedford Airport, New Bedford, MA, 63853 2016-22138 Land Use Changes: Hanscom Field, Bedford, MA, 63852 2016-22137 Meetings: Commercial Space Transportation Advisory Committee, 63853 2016-22136 RTCA SC-209 Working Session and Plenary Session Joint with EUROCAE WG 49, WG 51, and RTCA SC-186, 63852-63853 2016-22405 Federal Communications Federal Communications Commission RULES Implementing Public Safety Broadband Provisions of the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012, 63714-63716 2016-22361 Federal Deposit Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 63759-63760 2016-22436 Federal Energy Federal Energy Regulatory Commission NOTICES Applications: Alaska Electric Light and Power Co., 63756-63758 2016-22268 Great Lakes Hydro America, LLC, 63751-63752 2016-22266 Complaints: Coalition of MISO Transmission Customersv. Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc., 63756 2016-22261 Environmental Assessments; Availability, etc.: Dominion Carolina Gas Transmission, LLC, Transco to Charleston Project, 63754 2016-22259 Filings: Tracy Van Orden, 63754 2016-22262 Refund Effective Dates: Monongahela Power Co., Potomac Edison Co., West Penn Power Co., etc., 63753-63754 2016-22264 Requests for Waivers: ITC Pipeline Company, LLC, 63756 2016-22263 Requests under Blanket Authorizations: Columbia Gas Transmission, LLC, 63755 2016-22260 Staff Attendances, 63752-63755 2016-22265 2016-22267 Federal Highway Federal Highway Administration NOTICES Buy America Waivers, 63853-63855 2016-22301 2016-22305 Federal Reserve Federal Reserve System RULES Policy Statements: Framework for Implementing the U.S. Basel III Countercyclical Capital Buffer, 63682-63688 2016-21970 Federal Trade Federal Trade Commission NOTICES Early Terminations of Waiting Periods under the Premerger Notification Rules, 63760-63762 2016-22282 Fish Fish and Wildlife Service NOTICES Endangered Species Permit Applications, 63787-63788 2016-22323 Food and Drug Food and Drug Administration PROPOSED RULES Color Additive Petitions: McCormick and Company, Inc., 63728 2016-22289 NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Unique Device Identification System, 63768-63770 2016-22340 Clinical Investigator Training Course, 63767-63768 2016-22348 Guidance: Qualification of Biomarker--Total Kidney Volume in Studies for Treatment of Autosomal Dominant Polycystic Kidney Disease, 63764-63766 2016-22347 Recommendations for Microbial Vectors Used for Gene Therapy, 63766-63767 2016-22353 Waivers from the Requirement to Demonstrate Bioequivalence of Animal Drugs in Soluble Powder Oral Dosage Form Products and Type A Medicated Articles, 63775-63776 2016-22339 Meetings: Coordinated Development of Antimicrobial Drugs and Antimicrobial Susceptibility Test Devices: Public Workshop, 63774-63775 2016-22352 Menu Labeling Public Workshop, 63776-63777 2016-22337 Patent Extension Regulatory Review Periods: ENTYVIO, 63773-63774 2016-22344 LUMASON, 63770-63771 2016-22345 RESQCPR System, 63771-63773 2016-22343 Forest Forest Service NOTICES Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc.: Johnson Bar Fire Salvage Project, Nez Perce-Clearwater National Forests, ID, 63738 2016-22318 Health and Human Health and Human Services Department See

Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services

See

Children and Families Administration

See

Food and Drug Administration

See

National Institutes of Health

See

Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration

Homeland Homeland Security Department See

Coast Guard

See

U.S. Customs and Border Protection

See

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement

Housing Housing and Urban Development Department NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Final Endorsement of Credit Instrument, 63784-63785 2016-22369 Multifamily Project Construction Change, 63785 2016-22370 Federal Properties Suitable as Facilities to Assist the Homeless, 63786-63787 2016-22359 Indian Affairs Indian Affairs Bureau NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Johnson O'Malley Act Requirements, 63788-63789 2016-22317 Interior Interior Department See

Fish and Wildlife Service

See

Indian Affairs Bureau

See

Land Management Bureau

See

National Park Service

See

Ocean Energy Management Bureau

International Trade Com International Trade Commission NOTICES Investigations; Determinations, Modifications, and Rulings, etc.: Certain Krill Oil Products and Krill Meal for Production of Krill Oil Products, 63805-63806 2016-22296 Cold-Rolled Steel Flat Products from Brazil, India, Korea, Russia, and the United Kingdom, 63806 2016-22297 Labor Department Labor Department See

Labor Statistics Bureau

NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Disability Employment Initiative Evaluation, 63807-63808 2016-22307 Securing Financial Obligations under the Longshore and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act and its Extensions, 63806-63807 2016-22308
Labor Statistics Labor Statistics Bureau NOTICES Charter Renewals: Technical Advisory Committee, 63808 2016-22309 Land Land Management Bureau NOTICES Meetings: Steens Mountain Advisory Council, 63789-63790 2016-22292 Plats of Survey: Oregon/Washington, 63790 2016-22295 Realty Actions: Escambia County, FL: Application for Conveyance of Federally Owned Mineral Interests, 63790-63791 2016-22415 Legal Legal Services Corporation NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 63808-63809 2016-22489 National Institute National Institutes of Health NOTICES Meetings: National Cancer Institute, 63777-63780 2016-22274 2016-22275 National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders, 2016-22271 63778-63779 2016-22272 Office of the Director, 63778 2016-22273 National Oceanic National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RULES Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska: Exchange of Flatfish in the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Management Area, 63716-63717 2016-22338 NOTICES Meetings: Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council, 63743-63744 2016-22333 Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council, 63739-63740 2016-22332 New England Fishery Management Council, 63743 2016-22335 Western Pacific Fishery Management Council, 63740-63743 2016-22331 National Park National Park Service NOTICES Inventory Completions: Tennessee Valley Authority, Knoxville, TN, 63793-63795 2016-22315 Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission, Olympia, WA, 63791-63793 2016-22313 Meetings: National Historic Landmarks Committee of the National Park System Advisory Board, 63791 2016-22351 National Park Service Alaska Region Subsistence Resource Commission Program, 63798-63799 2016-22350 National Park System Advisory Board, 63796-63797 2016-22349 Repatriation of Cultural Items: Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission, Olympia, WA, 63795-63796 2016-22314 National Science National Science Foundation NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 63809-63810 2016-22285 Nuclear Regulatory Nuclear Regulatory Commission NOTICES Petitions: Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc., Indian Point Nuclear Generating Unit Nos. 2 and 3, 63810-63811 2016-22380 Ocean Energy Management Ocean Energy Management Bureau NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: General Oil and Gas and Sulphur and Production Requirements in Outer Continental Shelf, 63799-63803 2016-22355 Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc.: Gulf of Mexico Outer Continental Shelf Central Planning Area Oil and Gas Lease Sale 247, 63803-63804 2016-22212 Outer Continental Shelf, Sand Resources for the Mississippi Coastal Improvements Program Comprehensive Barrier Island Restoration in Hancock, Harrison, and Jackson Counties, Mississippi, 63804-63805 2016-22377 Oil and Gas Lease Sales: Central Gulf of Mexico Planning Area Outer Continental Shelf, 247, 63804 2016-22211 Personnel Personnel Management Office NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Representative Payee Survey, 63811 2016-22329 Presidential Documents Presidential Documents PROCLAMATIONS Trade: Generalized System of Preferences Duty-Free Treatment; Modifications (Proc. 9492), 63671-63672 2016-22507 EXECUTIVE ORDERS Cote d'Ivoire; Termination of Emergency (EO 13739), 63673-63674 2016-22454 ADMINISTRATIVE ORDERS Trading With the Enemy Act; Continuation of Certain Authorities (Presidential Determination No. 2016-11 of September 13, 2016), 64045-64047 2016-22555 Rural Housing Service Rural Housing Service NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 63738-63739 2016-22241 Securities Securities and Exchange Commission NOTICES Self-Regulatory Organizations; Proposed Rule Changes: Chicago Stock Exchange, Inc., 63821-63825 2016-22251 ICE Clear Credit LLC, 63831-63833 2016-22257 NASDAQ BX, Inc., 63828-63831 2016-22250 NASDAQ PHLX LLC, 63833-63836 2016-22254 New York Stock Exchange, LLC, 63825-63828 2016-22252 NYSE Arca, Inc., 63818-63821 2016-22253 NYSE MKT LLC, 63811-63815 2016-22256 The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC, 63815-63818 2016-22255 Small Business Small Business Administration NOTICES Conflicts of Interest Exemptions: Avante Mezzanine Partners SBIC II, L.P, 63837 2016-22414 Disaster Declarations: Indiana, 63836-63837 2016-22409 Social Social Security Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 63837-63839 2016-22277 State Department State Department RULES Visas: Diversity Immigrants, 63694-63695 2016-22365 NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 63840-63841 2016-22354 Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Affidavit of Relationship for Minors who are Nationals of El Salvador, Guatemala, or Honduras, 63839-63840 2016-22358 Culturally Significant Objects Imported for Exhibition: The Art of Alchemy, 63839 2016-22371 The Rama Epic: Hero, Heroine, Ally, Foe, 63849 2016-22372 Word and Image: Martin Luther's Reformation, 63849 2016-22378 Meetings: Preparation for International Maritime Organization Technical Cooperation Committee, 63849-63850 2016-22381 Registration for the Diversity Immigrant Visa Program, 63841-63849 2016-22217 Substance Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration NOTICES Meetings: CARA Act Required Training of Nurse Practitioners and Physician Assistants, 63780 2016-22279 Surface Transportation Surface Transportation Board NOTICES Control Acquisitions: National Express, LLC; New Dawn Transit, LLC., 63850-63852 2016-22283 Transportation Department Transportation Department See

Federal Aviation Administration

See

Federal Highway Administration

NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Individual Complaint of Employment Discrimination Form, 63855-63856 2016-22190
Treasury Treasury Department NOTICES Privacy Act; Systems of Records, 63856-63858 2016-22069 Customs U.S. Customs and Border Protection NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: African Growth and Opportunity Act Certificate of Origin, 63781 2016-22364 Commercial Gaugers and Laboratories; Accreditations and Approvals: AmSpec Services, LLC, 2016-22303 63782-63784 2016-22304 Saybolt LP, 2016-22322 63780-63783 2016-22311 Immigration U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement NOTICES Meetings: Advisory Committee on Family Residential Centers, 63784 2016-22326 Veteran Affairs Veterans Affairs Department NOTICES Performance Review Board Members, 63858 2016-22298 Separate Parts In This Issue Part II Health and Human Services Department, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, 63860-64044 2016-21404 Part III Presidential Documents, 64045-64047 2016-22555 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 electronic mailing list, go to https://public.govdelivery.com/accounts/USGPOOFR/subscriber/new, enter your e-mail address, then follow the instructions to join, leave, or manage your subscription.

81 180 Friday, September 16, 2016 Rules and Regulations DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Agricultural Marketing Service 7 CFR Part 56 [Doc. No. AMS-LPS-15-0044] Amendment to the Definition of “Condition” and Prerequisite Requirement for Shell Eggs Eligible for Grading and Certification Stated in the Regulations Governing the Voluntary Grading of Shell Eggs AGENCY:

Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA.

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

The Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) will amend the Regulations Governing the Voluntary Grading of Shell Eggs to clarify the definition of “condition” and revise the prerequisite requirement for shell eggs eligible for voluntary USDA grading and certification.

DATES:

This final rule is effective September 16, 2016.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

David Bowden, Chief, Standardization Branch, Quality Assessment Division; Livestock, Poultry, and Seed Program, Agricultural Marketing Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture; 1400 Independence Avenue SW.; Room 3932-S, STOP 0258; Washington, DC 20250, by facsimile to (202) 690-2746; or via email to [email protected]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

Section 203(c) of the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946 (AMA) (7 U.S.C. 1621-1627) directs and authorizes the Secretary of Agriculture “to develop and improve standards of quality, condition, quantity, grade and packaging, and recommend and demonstrate such standards in order to encourage uniformity and consistency in commercial practices.” The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) is committed to carrying out this authority in a manner that facilitates the marketing of agricultural products while maintaining the integrity of the USDA grademark. Shell egg grading is a voluntary program provided under AMA and offered on a fee-for-service basis. It is designed to assist in the orderly marketing of shell eggs by providing the official certification of egg quality, size, condition, and other factors.

This amendment is in accordance with recommendations stated in the 2012 Audit Report, USDA Controls Over Shell Egg Inspections, issued by the USDA Office of Inspector General (OIG). In that report, OIG stated the regulatory definition of “condition” for shell eggs was confusing as it relates to quality and food safety. OIG also stated the integrity of the USDA grademark for quality was not adequately protected from adulterated shell eggs.

AMS will revise the definition of “condition” to remove any food safety implications resulting from the use of the term “wholesomeness” and clarify that AMS' role in grading and certification of shell eggs is solely for a quality determination. The revised definition will remove the term “wholesomeness” and state that “condition” is a characteristic detected by a sensory examination. The presence of microorganisms, specifically Salmonella Enteritidis (SE) or other pathogens, in the content of an egg cannot be detected during such an examination. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the USDA Food Safety and Inspection Service not AMS, maintain jurisdiction for food safety related issues associated with shell eggs.

AMS will also revise the prerequisite requirement of shell eggs eligible for USDA grading and certification. The revision will prohibit the use of SE-adulterated or recalled shell eggs from being presented to USDA for grading and certification. This action protects the integrity of the USDA grademark for quality and is consistent with current AMS policy implemented subsequent to the referenced 2012 OIG audit.

Comments

A proposed rule to amend the definition of “condition” and prerequisite requirements for shell eggs eligible for grading and certification stated in the Regulations Governing the Voluntary Grading of Shell Eggs was published in the Federal Register (81 FR 23188) on April 20, 2016. Comments on the proposed rule were solicited from interested parties until June 20, 2016. One comment was received from a representative of an egg farmer's organization. The comment received was in support of amending the definition of “condition” and the prerequisite requirements for shell eggs eligible for grading and certification. No changes were made to the proposed rule based on the comment received.

Executive Order 12866, 13175 and 13563

USDA is issuing this final rule in conformance with Executive Orders 12866, 13175 and 13563. This rule has been reviewed under Executive Orders 12866, 13175 and 13563. The rule has determined to be not significant for the purposes of Executive Order 12866 and, therefore, has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget. The rule does not promote policies with tribal implications. Consistent with the requirements of Executive Order 13563, the public has had the opportunity to review and comment on the rule; and, the rule also incorporates existing AMS policy on shell eggs eligible for USDA grading and certification.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

In accordance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601-602, AMS has performed an initial regulatory flexibility analysis regarding economic effects of this final rule on small entities.

AMS is amending the Regulations Governing the Voluntary Grading of Shell Eggs, 7 CFR part 56, to revise the definition of the term “condition” to clarify that it relates solely to a quality determination and not food safety. The current regulation definition for “condition” includes the term “wholesomeness” which denotes a food safety connotation. AMS' role in grading and certification of shell eggs is for a quality determination only. By removing any food safety related terms from the current definition of “condition,” AMS will remove confusion or misunderstanding over use of the term.

Since this change is a technical correction and editorial in nature, and will not result in a change to the way service is provided to our customers, AMS has determined it will not have a financial impact on small entities that utilize our services.

AMS will also revise the prerequisite requirement of shell eggs eligible for USDA grading and certification. The revision will prohibit the use of SE-adulterated shell eggs or recalled shell eggs from being presented to USDA for grading and certification.

The FDA prohibits the use of SE-adulterated shell eggs from being sold to consumers. When shell eggs are suspected of being adulterated with SE, the packing facility is obligated to test the shell eggs to assure only safe product is distributed to consumers. If shell eggs are found to be adulterated with SE, the FDA will issue a request to the packing facility to voluntarily recall the product, or will exercise its mandatory recall authority to return the product to the origin facility. The product must either be destroyed or reconditioned under FDA supervision.

Since SE-adulterated shell eggs or shell eggs that have been recalled are no longer eligible for distribution to consumers, but are either destroyed or reconditioned under the direction of the FDA, changing the AMS regulation will not have an impact on small entities since those shell eggs are deemed unfit for human consumption.

Executive Order 12988

This final rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform. When this final rule is adopted: (1) All State and local laws and regulations that are inconsistent with the rule will be preempted; (2) no retroactive effect will be given to this rule; and (3) administrative proceedings will not be required before parties may file suit in court challenging this rule.

Paperwork Reduction Act

In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), OMB has approved the information collection and recordkeeping requirements included in this final rule, and there are no new requirements. The assigned OMB control number is 0581-0128, as approved on July 8, 2014.

AMS is committed to compliance with the Government Paperwork Elimination Act, which requires government agencies in general to provide the public the option of submitting information or transacting business electronically to the maximum extent possible.

E-Government Act

AMS is committed to complying with the E-Government Act of 2002 to promote the use of the Internet and other information technologies to provide increased opportunities for citizen access to government information and services, and for other purposes.

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 56

Agriculture, Eggs and egg products, Food grades and standards, Food labeling, Food packaging, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Voluntary standards.

For the reasons set forth in the preamble, 7 CFR part 56 is amended as follows:

PART 56—VOLUNTARY GRADING OF SHELL EGGS 1. The authority citation for 7 CFR part 56 continues to read as follows: Authority:

7 U.S.C. 1621 et seq.

2. Amend § 56.1 by revising the definition of Condition to read as follows:
§ 56.1 Meaning of words and terms defined.

Condition means any characteristic detected by sensory examination (visual, touch, or odor), including the state of preservation, cleanliness, soundness, or fitness for human food that affects the marketing of the product.

3. Amend § 56.40 by revising paragraphs (c)(2) and (3) and adding paragraphs (c)(4) and (5) to read as follows:
§ 56.40 Grading requirements of shell eggs identified with grademarks.

(c) * * *

(2) Not possess any undesirable odors or flavors;

(3) Not have previously been shipped for retail sale;

(4) Not originate from a layer house environment determined positive for the presence of Salmonella Enteritidis (SE), unless the eggs from the layer house have been sampled and have tested negative for the presence of SE in the eggs; and

(5) Not originate from eggs testing positive for SE, or not have been subject to a product recall.

Dated: September 12, 2016. Elanor Starmer, Associate Administrator, Agricultural Marketing Service.
[FR Doc. 2016-22246 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-02-P
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Agricultural Marketing Service 7 CFR Part 930 [Doc. No. AMS-FV-15-0047; FV15-930-2 FR] Tart Cherries Grown in the States of Michigan, et al.; Revision of Optimum Supply Requirements and Establishment of Inventory Release Procedures AGENCY:

Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA.

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

This rule implements recommendations from the Cherry Industry Administrative Board (Board) to add inventory release procedures and revise optimum supply provisions under the marketing order for tart cherries grown in the States of Michigan, New York, Pennsylvania, Oregon, Utah, Washington, and Wisconsin (order). The Board locally administers the order and is comprised of growers and handlers operating within the area of production. This final rule establishes procedures for releasing inventory from reserves and increases the maximum carry-out volume available when calculating optimum supply from 20 million pounds to 100 million pounds. These changes provide clear procedures should an inventory release be necessary and provides more flexibility when calculating optimum supply.

DATES:

Effective September 19, 2016.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Jennie M. Varela, Marketing Specialist, or Christian D. Nissen, Regional Director, Southeast Marketing Field Office, Marketing Order and Agreement Division, Specialty Crops Program, AMS, USDA; Telephone: (863) 324-3375, Fax: (863) 291-8614, or Email: [email protected] or [email protected].

Small businesses may request information on complying with this regulation by contacting Richard Lower, Marketing Order and Agreement Division, Specialty Crops Program, AMS, USDA, 1400 Independence Avenue SW., STOP 0237, Washington, DC 20250-0237; Telephone: (202) 720-2491, Fax: (202) 720-8938, or Email: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

This final rule is issued under Marketing Order No. 930, as amended (7 CFR part 930), regulating the handling of tart cherries grown in the States of Michigan, New York, Pennsylvania, Oregon, Utah, Washington, and Wisconsin, hereinafter referred to as the “order.” The order is effective under the Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act of 1937, as amended (7 U.S.C. 601-674), hereinafter referred to as the “Act.”

The Department of Agriculture (USDA) is issuing this rule in conformance with Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and 13175.

This final rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform. This rule is not intended to have retroactive effect.

The Act provides that administrative proceedings must be exhausted before parties may file suit in court. Under section 608c(15)(A) of the Act, any handler subject to an order may file with USDA a petition stating that the order, any provision of the order, or any obligation imposed in connection with the order is not in accordance with law and request a modification of the order or to be exempted therefrom. A handler is afforded the opportunity for a hearing on the petition. After the hearing, USDA would rule on the petition. The Act provides that the district court of the United States in any district in which the handler is an inhabitant, or has his or her principal place of business, has jurisdiction to review USDA's ruling on the petition, provided an action is filed not later than 20 days after the date of the entry of the ruling.

This final rule adds inventory release procedures and revises the optimum supply and exemption provisions under the order. This rule establishes procedures for releasing inventory from reserves and increases the maximum carry-out volume available when calculating optimum supply from 20 million pounds to 100 million pounds. These changes provide clear procedures should an inventory release be necessary and provides more flexibility when calculating optimum supply. The Board voted to recommend these changes to the Secretary at its meeting on June 25, 2015.

Section 930.50 prescribes procedures for calculating an optimum supply based on sales history to determine free and restricted percentages under volume regulation. As part of the process, the Board is required to determine the volume of fruit they anticipate would be necessary to have on hand at the end of the crop year. The order refers to this volume as carry-out inventory. This section currently specifies, in part, that the Board can consider a carry-out inventory of up to 20 million pounds, or another amount with the approval of the Secretary. This rule amends Section 930.151 to increase the maximum carry-out volume available when calculating optimum supply from 20 million pounds to 100 million pounds.

Section 930.54 of the order governs the use or disposition of inventory reserve cherries. Under this authority, the Board can recommend to the Secretary that a portion or all of inventory reserve cherries be released if there is not sufficient fruit on the market to meet commercial demand. Sections 930.55 and 930.57 outline the provisions and requirements of the primary and secondary reserves, respectively. Further, no cherries in the secondary reserve may be released until all cherries in the primary reserve have been released. This rule creates section 930.154 to establish procedures for releasing inventory from reserves.

When volume regulation is in place, the restricted portion of the crop is either held in reserve by handlers or can be sold for exempt uses as authorized in the rules and regulations of the order. Reserves can be held over multiple crop years and are released when there is a shortfall in supply. While the Board maintains record of the volume in reserve, handlers maintain ownership of the reserve fruit.

All inventory reserves were released to meet demand following a crop disaster in 2012. The following year, the industry was still recovering and the Board did not recommend a volume regulation. When the Board recommended a volume regulation for the 2014-15 season to the Secretary, and cherries were again being added to the reserve, the Board established a committee to review the procedures for releasing restricted inventory from reserves. The committee recommended to the Board that the procedures as previously developed by the Board be maintained, and that any release should first come from inventory currently in the primary reserve and then from any cherries designated for reserve from the current season if necessary.

Under these procedures, once the additional volume needed for release is established, the release should be apportioned among handlers based on each handler's prior three-year average of volume handled as a percentage of the industry's three-year average. For example, if a handler handled five percent of the previous three years' production, and the Board recommended a release of 20 million pounds, that handler would be authorized to release one million pounds of established reserves (.05 X 20 million). If a handler receives a release larger than what they have in the primary reserve, the excess amount would be reapportioned to those handlers with remaining primary reserve. If the handler in the scenario above had only 750,000 pounds in the primary reserve, the remaining 250,000 pounds would be reallocated to those handlers who still have inventory in the primary reserve.

The committee that reviewed the procedures for releasing restricted inventory from the reserves recognized that inventory reserves can be accumulated over a period of years. Therefore, the committee agreed releases should be based on the average amount handled during the three previous crop years, rather than using a year-to-year basis. The existing release procedures were crafted by the Board through a series of actions in past years and meetings. However, the procedures were not codified in the rules and regulations under the order. This rule adds the inventory release procedures to the regulations.

This recommendation was also thought to be the most equitable way to conduct releases. One Board member believed the releases should come from the current year's reserves prior to releasing from existing reserves, and did not support the recommendation. However, the Board recognized that during the crop year, complete information on reserves and shipment data would not be available. Thus, the Board recommended codifying inventory release procedures as recommended by the committee. The Board supported the recommendation by a vote of 17-1. This rule adds a new Section 930.154 to the regulations to establish procedures for releasing inventory from reserves.

In addition to reviewing inventory release procedures, the Board discussed changes to some of its practices regarding calculation of optimum supply. Optimum supply is defined as the average free sales of the prior three years plus desirable carry-out inventory. Desirable carry-out is the amount of fruit needed by the industry to be carried into the succeeding crop year to meet marketing demand until the new crop is available. Desirable carry-out is set each year by the Board after considering market circumstances and needs. Section 930.50(a) currently specifies that desirable carry-out can range from 0 to a maximum of 20 million pounds, but also authorizes the Board to establish an alternative carry-out figure with the approval of the Secretary.

Since the promulgation of the order, the industry has seen new products and new segments emerge, such as dried tart cherries. As a result, at the end of a season there are multiple product lines that need to be supplied with tart cherries before the next harvest, which has impacted desirable carry-out. Desirable carry-out is the amount of fruit needed by the industry to be carried into the succeeding crop year to meet marketing demand until the new crop is available.

In 2014, the Board used its authority to recommend to the Secretary a carry-out volume above the order-prescribed 20 million pound maximum for the 2014-2015 crop year. At that time, the Board estimated it was necessary to have 50 million pounds available at the end of the crop year to fulfill the needs of the industry. In discussing volume regulation for the 2015-2016 crop year, the Board agreed an increased carry-out was again necessary and recommended to the Secretary a 55 million pound carry-out when calculating the optimum supply.

In order to facilitate future carry-out needs without engaging in annual rulemaking, the Board recommended permanently increasing the maximum carry-out to 100 million pounds. Some members considered the 100 million pound upper limit to be too high, and voted against the recommendation. However, this action only increases the available range for the carry-out value from 0 to 20 million pounds to 0 to 100 million. This change will provide the Board with additional flexibility when considering the carry-out, but in itself does not establish a carry-out amount. The Board will still discuss and recommend a desirable carry-out value that represents current industry needs each crop year. Consequently, the Board supported the recommendation by a vote of 12-5. This rule amends section 930.151 of the regulations to increase the maximum carry-out volume possible when calculating optimum supply from 20 million pounds to 100 million pounds.

Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

Pursuant to requirements set forth in the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601-612), the Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) has considered the economic impact of this action on small entities. Accordingly, AMS has prepared this final regulatory flexibility analysis.

The purpose of the RFA is to fit regulatory actions to the scale of businesses subject to such actions in order that small businesses will not be unduly or disproportionately burdened. Marketing orders issued pursuant to the Act, and rules issued thereunder, are unique in that they are brought about through group action of essentially small entities acting on their own behalf.

There are approximately 600 producers of tart cherries in the regulated area and approximately 40 handlers of tart cherries who are subject to regulation under the order. Small agricultural producers are defined by the Small Business Administration (SBA) as those having annual receipts of less than $750,000 and small agricultural service firms have been defined as those having annual receipts of less than $7,500,000 (13 CFR 121.201).

According to the National Agricultural Statistics Service and Board data, the average annual grower price for tart cherries during the 2014-15 crop year was $0.35 per pound, and total utilization was around 300 million pounds. Therefore, average receipts for tart cherry producers were around $175,800, well below the SBA threshold for small producers. In 2014, The Food Institute estimated an f.o.b. price of $0.96 per pound for frozen tart cherries, which make up the majority of processed tart cherries. Using this data, average annual handler receipts were about $6.9 million, which is also below the SBA threshold for small agricultural service firms. Assuming a normal distribution, the majority of producers and handlers of tart cherries may be classified as small entities.

This final rule creates § 930.154 of the rules and regulations, establishing procedures for release of inventory reserves. This final rule also revises § 930.151 to allow the Board to consider a carry-out of up to 100 million pounds when calculating optimum supply. These changes are intended to provide clear direction in the event an inventory release becomes necessary and allow the Board to be more responsive to tart cherry market demand. The authority for these actions is provided in §§ 930.50 and 930.54 of the order.

It is not anticipated that this action will impose additional costs on handlers or growers, regardless of size. The implemented changes are administrative in nature and intended to align the provisions of the order with current industry practices. The addition of rules and regulations regarding inventory releases is a codification of administrative procedures the Board has had in place for many years. The expanded carry-out upper limit will allow the Board additional flexibility in meeting market needs without additional rulemaking.

The benefits of this rule are not expected to be disproportionately greater or less for small handlers or producers than for larger entities.

The Board discussed alternatives to these changes to the order, including releasing reserves from the current crop year or releasing cherries in the order in which the fruit was put into reserve. A committee was established to review the reserve procedures, and it proposed using a three-year average percentage for each handler and releasing the previous crop years' reserves. The Board agreed that the committee's recommendation would be the most equitable solution. Regarding the carry-out limit, the Board considered not recommending a permanent change. However, the Board anticipates needing more than 20 million pounds of carry-out for the foreseeable future. A member suggested changing the motion to 80 million pounds, but that suggestion did not receive support. Thus, the suggested alternatives were rejected.

In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35), the order's information collection requirements have been previously approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and assigned OMB No. 0581-0177, (Tart Cherries Grown in the States of Michigan, New York, Pennsylvania, Oregon, Utah, Washington, and Wisconsin). No changes in those requirements as a result of this action are necessary. Should any changes become necessary, they would be submitted to OMB for approval.

Accordingly, this action will not impose any additional reporting or recordkeeping requirements on either small or large tart cherry handlers. As with all Federal marketing order programs, reports and forms are periodically reviewed to reduce information requirements and duplication by industry and public sector agencies.

As noted in the initial regulatory flexibility analysis, USDA has not identified any relevant Federal rules that duplicate, overlap or conflict with this final rule.

AMS is committed to complying with the E-Government Act to promote the use of the internet and other information technologies to provide increased opportunities for citizen access to Government information and services, and for other purposes.

The Board's meeting was widely publicized throughout the tart cherry industry and all interested persons were invited to attend and participate in Board deliberations on all issues. Like all Board meetings, the June 25, 2015, meeting was a public meeting and all entities, both large and small, were able to express views on these issues.

A proposed rule concerning this action was published in the Federal Register on June 15, 2016 (81 FR 38975). Copies of the rule were mailed or sent via facsimile to all Board members and tart cherry handlers. Finally, the rule was made available through the internet by USDA and the Office of the Federal Register. A 30-day comment period ending July 15, 2016, was provided to allow interested persons to respond to the proposal.

One comment was received during the comment period in response to the proposal. The commenter is an individual who supports the proposed action. The commenter described the proposed changes as positive for the industry. Accordingly, no changes will be made to the rule as proposed, based on the comment received.

A small business guide on complying with fruit, vegetable, and specialty crop marketing agreements and orders may be viewed at: http://www.ams.usda.gov/rules-regulations/moa/small-businesses. Any questions about the compliance guide should be sent to Richard Lower at the previously mentioned address in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

After consideration of all relevant matter presented, including the information and recommendation submitted by the Board and other available information, it is hereby found that this rule, as hereinafter set forth, will tend to effectuate the declared policy of the Act.

It is further found that good cause exists for not postponing the effective date of this rule until 30 days after publication in the Federal Register (5 U.S.C. 553) because handlers are already putting cherries into reserve. This action also needs to be in place before the Board meets in September to discuss establishing volume control, including determining an appropriate carry-out figure. Further, handlers are aware of this rule, which was recommended at a public meeting. Also, a 30-day comment period was provided for in the proposed rule.

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 930

Marketing agreements, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Tart cherries.

For the reasons set forth in the preamble, 7 CFR part 930 is amended as follows:

PART 930—TART CHERRIES GROWN IN THE STATES OF MICHIGAN, NEW YORK, PENNSYLVANIA, OREGON, UTAH, WASHINGTON, AND WISCONSIN 1. The authority citation for 7 CFR part 930 continues to read as follows: Authority:

7 U.S.C. 601-674.

2. In § 930.151: a. Designate the current paragraph as paragraph (a); and b. Add a new paragraph (b) to read as follows:
§ 930.151 Desirable carry-out inventory.

(a) * * *

(b) Beginning with the crop year starting July 1, 2016, for the purposes of determining an optimum supply volume, the Board may recommend a desirable carry-out inventory not to exceed 100 million pounds.

3. Section 930.154 is added to read as follows:
§ 930.154 Release of inventory reserve cherries.

(a) As provided in § 930.54, the Board may recommend a release of a portion or all of the primary and/or secondary reserve cherries. The total available reserves will be determined at the beginning of the crop year. The primary reserve as defined in §§ 930.55 and 930.150 must be depleted before the secondary reserve can be released. If a release is recommended, the recommended volume shall be apportioned to handlers on the basis of each handler's proportion of the total volume handled in the preceding three crop years.

(b) If a handler has less volume in reserve than is apportioned, the excess volume shall be reapportioned to those who still have volume in reserve until the total release is complete.

Dated: September 12, 2016. Elanor Starmer, Administrator, Agricultural Marketing Service.
[FR Doc. 2016-22258 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-02-P
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Agricultural Marketing Service 7 CFR Part 983 [Docket No. AMS-SC-16-0076 SC16-983-2 IR] Pistachios Grown in California, Arizona, and New Mexico; Decreased Assessment Rate AGENCY:

Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA.

ACTION:

Interim rule with request for comments.

SUMMARY:

This rule implements a recommendation from the Administrative Committee for Pistachios (Committee) for a decrease in the assessment rate established for the 2016-17 and subsequent production years from $0.0035 to $0.0010 per pound of assessed weight pistachios handled under the marketing order (order). The Committee locally administers the order and is comprised of producers and handlers of pistachios operating within the area of production. Assessments upon pistachio handlers are used by the Committee to fund reasonable and necessary expenses of the program. The production year begins September 1 and ends August 31. The assessment rate will remain in effect indefinitely unless modified, suspended, or terminated.

DATES:

Effective September 19, 2016; Comments received by November 15, 2016 will be considered prior to issuance of a final rule.

ADDRESSES:

Interested persons are invited to submit written comments concerning this rule. Comments must be sent to the Docket Clerk, Marketing Order and Agreement Division, Specialty Crops Program, AMS, USDA, 1400 Independence Avenue SW., STOP 0237, Washington, DC 20250-0237; Fax: (202) 720-8938; or Internet: http://www.regulations.gov. Comments should reference the docket number and the date and page number of this issue of the Federal Register and will be available for public inspection in the Office of the Docket Clerk during regular business hours, or can be viewed at: http://www.regulations.gov. All comments submitted in response to this rule will be included in the record and will be made available to the public. Please be advised that the identity of the individuals or entities submitting comments will be made public on the Internet at the address provided above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Peter R. Sommers, Marketing Specialist, or Jeffrey Smutny, Regional Director, California Marketing Field Office, Marketing Order and Agreement Division, Specialty Crops Program, AMS, USDA; Telephone: (559) 487-5901, Fax: (559) 487-5906, or Email: [email protected] or [email protected]

Small businesses may request information on complying with this regulation by contacting Richard Lower, Marketing Order and Agreement Division, Specialty Crops Program, AMS, USDA, 1400 Independence Avenue SW., STOP 0237, Washington, DC 20250-0237; Telephone: (202) 720-2491, Fax: (202) 720-8938, or Email: [email protected]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

This rule is issued under Marketing Agreement and Order No. 983, both as amended (7 CFR part 983), regulating the handling of pistachios grown in California, Arizona, and New Mexico, hereinafter referred to as the “order.” The order is effective under the Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act of 1937, as amended (7 U.S.C. 601-674), hereinafter referred to as the “Act.”

The Department of Agriculture (USDA) is issuing this rule in conformance with Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and 13175.

This rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform. Under the marketing order now in effect, California, Arizona, and New Mexico pistachio handlers are subject to assessments. Funds to administer the order are derived from such assessments. It is intended that the assessment rate as issued herein will be applicable to all assessable pistachios beginning September 1, 2016, and continue until amended, suspended, or terminated.

The Act provides that administrative proceedings must be exhausted before parties may file suit in court. Under section 608c(15)(A) of the Act, any handler subject to an order may file with USDA a petition stating that the order, any provision of the order, or any obligation imposed in connection with the order is not in accordance with law and request a modification of the order or to be exempted therefrom. Such handler is afforded the opportunity for a hearing on the petition. After the hearing, USDA would rule on the petition. The Act provides that the district court of the United States in any district in which the handler is an inhabitant, or has his or her principal place of business, has jurisdiction to review USDA's ruling on the petition, provided an action is filed not later than 20 days after the date of the entry of the ruling.

This rule decreases the assessment rate for the 2016-17 and subsequent production years from $0.0035 to $0.0010 per pound of assessed weight pistachios.

The California, Arizona, and New Mexico pistachio order provides authority for the Committee, with the approval of USDA, to formulate an annual budget of expenses and collect assessments from handlers to administer the program. The members of the Committee are producers and handlers of California, Arizona, and New Mexico pistachios. They are familiar with the Committee's needs and with the costs for goods and services in their local area and are thus in a position to formulate an appropriate budget and assessment rate. The assessment rate is formulated and discussed in a public meeting. Thus, all directly affected persons have an opportunity to participate and provide input.

For the 2015-16 and subsequent production years, the Committee recommended and USDA approved an assessment rate that would continue in effect from production year to production year unless modified, suspended, or terminated by USDA upon recommendation and information submitted by the Committee or other information available to USDA.

The Committee met on July 12, 2016, and unanimously recommended 2016-17 expenditures of $922,500, and an assessment rate of $0.0010 per pound of assessed weight pistachios. In comparison, last year's budgeted expenditures were $1,056,402, and the assessment rate was $0.0035 per pound of pistachios. The assessment rate of $0.0010 is $0.0025 lower than the rate currently in effect.

The major expenditures recommended by the Committee for the 2016-17 production year include $333,000 for salaries and benefits, $250,000 for research, and $19,500 for general and administrative expenses. Budgeted expenses for these items in the 2015-16 production year were $316,500, $560,000, and $19,500, respectively.

The assessment rate recommended by the Committee was derived by dividing anticipated expenses by expected shipments of California, Arizona, and New Mexico pistachios. Pistachio shipments for the production year are estimated at 750 million pounds which should provide $750,000 in assessment income. Income derived from handler assessments, along with interest income and funds from the Committee's authorized reserve, will be adequate to cover budgeted expenses. Funds in the reserve will be kept within the maximum limit permitted by the order, which is two production years' budgeted expenses.

The assessment rate established in this rule will continue in effect indefinitely unless modified, suspended, or terminated by USDA upon recommendation and information submitted by the Committee or other available information.

Although this assessment rate is effective for an indefinite period, the Committee will continue to meet prior to or during each production year to recommend a budget of expenses and consider recommendations for modification of the assessment rate. The dates and times of Committee meetings are available from the Committee or USDA. Committee meetings are open to the public and interested persons may express their views at these meetings. USDA will evaluate Committee recommendations and other available information to determine whether modification of the assessment rate is needed. Further rulemaking will be undertaken as necessary. The Committee's 2016-17 production year budget and those for subsequent production years will be reviewed and, as appropriate, approved by USDA.

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

Pursuant to requirements set forth in the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601-612), the Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) has considered the economic impact of this rule on small entities. Accordingly, AMS has prepared this initial regulatory flexibility analysis.

The purpose of the RFA is to fit regulatory actions to the scale of businesses subject to such actions in order that small businesses will not be unduly or disproportionately burdened. Marketing orders issued pursuant to the Act, and the rules issued thereunder, are unique in that they are brought about through group action of essentially small entities acting on their own behalf.

There are approximately 1,152 producers of pistachios in the production area and 19 handlers subject to regulation under the marketing order. The Small Business Administration defines small agricultural producers as those having annual receipts less than $750,000, and small agricultural service firms as those whose annual receipts are less than $7,500,000. (13 CFR 121.201)

Based on Committee data, it is estimated that about 53 percent of the handlers annually ship less than $7,500,000 worth of pistachios, and it is also estimated that 68 percent of the producers have annual receipts less than $750,000. Thus, the majority of handlers in the production area and more than two-thirds of the producers may be classified as small entities.

This rule decreases the assessment rate collected from handlers for the 2016-17 and subsequent production years from $0.0035 to $0.0010 per pound of pistachios handled. The Committee unanimously recommended 2016-17 expenditures of $922,500 and an assessment rate of $0.0010 per pound of assessed weight pistachios, which is $0.0025 lower than the 2015-16 rate currently in effect. The quantity of assessable pistachios for the 2016-17 production year is estimated at 750 million pounds. Thus, the $0.0010 rate should provide $750,000 in assessment income. Income derived from handler's assessments, along with interest and funds from the Committee's authorized reserve, should be adequate to cover expenses for the 2016-17 production year.

The major expenditures recommended by the Committee for the 2016-17 production year include $333,000 for salaries and benefits, $250,000 for research, and $19,500 for general and administrative expenses. Budgeted expenses for these items in the 2015-16 production year were $316,500, $560,000, and $19,500, respectively.

The assessment rate decrease is necessary to reduce expected income from an assessment rate set at $0.0035 per pound. The income from that assessment rate would result in the Committee's financial reserve being higher than is permitted under the order. The $0.0035 rate was established to provide sufficient income when the crop was expected to be approximately half of a normal crop. For these reasons, the Committee unanimously voted to decrease the assessment rate from $0.0035 to $0.0010. The income generated from the lower recommended rate combined with funds from the financial reserve should provide sufficient income to cover anticipated 2016-17 expenses and maintain the financial reserve within the limit specified under the marketing order.

Prior to arriving at this budget and assessment rate, the Committee considered information from various sources. Alternative expenditure levels were discussed, based upon the relative value of various activities to the pistachio industry. The Committee ultimately determined that the 2016-17 production year expenses of $922,500 were prudent, and the assessment income provided by the reduced rate and funds from the financial reserve would permit the committee to meet its expenses.

According to data from the National Agricultural Statistics Service, the season average producer price was $3.57 per pound of assessed weight pistachios in 2014 and $2.48 per pound in 2015. A review of historical and preliminary information pertaining to the upcoming production year indicates that the producer revenue for the 2016-17 production year could range between $1,860,000,000 and $2,677,500,000. Therefore, the estimated assessment revenue for the 2016-17 production year as a percentage of total producer revenue could range between 0.0004 and 0.00028 percent.

This action decreases the assessment obligation imposed on handlers. Assessments are applied uniformly on all handlers, and some of the costs may be passed on to producers. However, decreasing the assessment rate reduces the burden on handlers, and may reduce the burden on producers. In addition, the Committee meeting was widely publicized throughout the California, Arizona, and New Mexico pistachio industry, and all interested persons were invited to attend the meetings and encouraged to participate in Committee deliberations on all issues.

Like all Committee meetings, the July 12, 2016, meeting was a public meeting and all entities, both large and small, were able to express views on this issue. Industry members also discussed various assessment rates, potential crop size, and estimated expenses at this meeting. Finally, interested persons are invited to submit comments on this interim rule, including the regulatory and informational impacts of this action on small businesses.

In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35), the order's information collection requirements have been previously approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and assigned OMB No. 0581-0215, “Vegetable and Specialty Crop Marketing Orders.” No changes in those requirements as a result of this action are necessary. Should any changes become necessary, they would be submitted to OMB for approval.

This action imposes no additional reporting or recordkeeping requirements on either small or large California, Arizona, and New Mexico pistachio handlers. As with all Federal marketing order programs, reports and forms are periodically reviewed to reduce information requirements and duplication by industry and public sector agencies.

AMS is committed to complying with the E-Government Act, to promote the use of the internet and other information technologies, to provide increased opportunities for citizen access to Government information and services, and for other purposes.

USDA has not identified any relevant Federal rules that duplicate, overlap, or conflict with this rule.

A small business guide on complying with fruit, vegetable, and specialty crop marketing agreements and orders may be viewed at: http://www.ams.usda.gov/rules-regulations/moa/small-businesses. Any questions about the compliance guide should be sent to Richard Lower at the previously mentioned address in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

After consideration of all relevant material presented, including the information and recommendation submitted by the Committee and other available information, it is hereby found that this rule, as hereinafter set forth, will tend to effectuate the declared policy of the Act.

Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553, it is also found and determined upon good cause that it is impracticable, unnecessary, and contrary to the public interest to give preliminary notice prior to putting this rule into effect, and that good cause exists for not postponing the effective date of this rule until 30 days after publication in the Federal Register because: (1) The 2016-17 production year begins on September 1, 2016, and the order requires that the rate of assessment for each production year apply to all assessable pistachios handled during such production year; (2) the action decreases the assessment rate for assessable pistachios beginning with the 2016-17 production year; (3) handlers are aware of this action which was unanimously recommended by the Committee at a public meeting and is similar to other assessment rate actions issued in past years; and (4) this interim rule provides a 60-day comment period, and all comments timely received will be considered prior to finalization of this rule.

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 983

Pistachios, Marketing agreements, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

For the reasons set forth in the preamble, 7 CFR part 983 is amended as follows:

PART 983—PISTACHIOS GROWN IN CALIFORNIA, ARIZONA, AND NEW MEXICO 1. The authority citation for 7 CFR part 983 continues to read as follows: Authority:

7 U.S.C. 601-674.

2. Section 983.253 is revised to read as follows:
§ 983.253 Assessment rate.

On and after September 1, 2016, an assessment rate of $0.0010 per pound is established for California, Arizona, and New Mexico pistachios.

Dated: September 12, 2016. Elanor Starmer, Administrator, Agricultural Marketing Service.
[FR Doc. 2016-22248 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM 12 CFR Part 217 [Docket No. R-1529; RIN 7100 AE-43] Regulatory Capital Rules: The Federal Reserve Board's Framework for Implementing the U.S. Basel III Countercyclical Capital Buffer AGENCY:

Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.

ACTION:

Final policy statement.

SUMMARY:

The Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (Board) is adopting a final policy statement (Policy Statement) describing the framework that the Board will follow under its Regulation Q in setting the amount of the U.S. countercyclical capital buffer for advanced approaches bank holding companies, savings and loan holding companies, and state member banks.

DATES:

The Policy Statement is effective October 14, 2016.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

William Bassett, Deputy Associate Director, (202) 736-5644, or Rochelle Edge, Deputy Associate Director, (202) 452-2339, Division of Financial Stability; Sean Campbell, Associate Director, (202) 452-3760, Division of Banking Supervision and Regulation; Benjamin W. McDonough, Special Counsel, (202) 452-2036, Mark Buresh, Senior Attorney, (202) 452-5270, or Mary Watkins, Attorney, (202) 452-3722, Legal Division.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents I. Background II. Summary of Comments on the Proposal III. Policy Statement IV. Administrative Law Matters A. Use of Plain Language B. Paperwork Reduction Act Analysis C. Regulatory Flexibility Act Analysis I. Background

In December 2015, the Board invited public comment on a proposed policy statement describing the framework that the Board would use to set the amount of the U.S. countercyclical capital buffer (CCyB) under the Board's capital rules (Regulation Q).1 The CCyB is a macroprudential policy tool that the Board can increase during periods of rising vulnerabilities in the financial system and reduce when vulnerabilities recede or when the release of the CCyB would promote financial stability.2 The CCyB supplements the minimum capital requirements and other capital buffers included in Regulation Q, which themselves are designed to provide substantial resilience to unexpected losses created by normal fluctuations in economic and financial conditions.

1 12 CFR part 217. See also 81 FR 5661 (February 3, 2016).

2See 12 CFR 217.11(b). Implementation of the CCyB also helps respond to the provision in the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (Dodd-Frank Act) that the agencies “shall seek to make such [capital] requirements countercyclical, so that the amount of capital required to be maintained by a company increases in times of economic expansion and decreases in times of economic contraction, consistent with the safety and soundness of the company.” See 12 U.S.C. 1467a; 12 U.S.C. 1844; 12 U.S.C. 3907 (as amended by section 616 of the Dodd-Frank Act).

The proposed policy statement outlined the factors the Board would consider in setting the level of the CCyB, and the indicators it would monitor to help determine whether an adjustment to the CCyB is appropriate. The proposed policy statement also described the effects the Board will monitor in determining whether the CCyB is achieving the desired purposes of the CCyB.

The Board received two comments on the proposed policy statement. Commenters raised concerns about the process that the Board would follow in setting the CCyB pursuant to the policy statement, the potential economic impact of the CCyB, and the efficacy and appropriateness of the CCyB as a policy tool. Commenters also made various specific suggestions as to the indicators and standards that the Board should consider in determining whether to activate the CCyB.

After reviewing comments, the Board is revising the final Policy Statement to clarify the following key items: (1) That the Board expects that the CCyB will be activated when systemic vulnerabilities are meaningfully above normal and that the Board generally intends to increase the CCyB gradually, (2) that the Board expects to remove or reduce the CCyB when the conditions that led to its activation abate or lessen and when the release of CCyB capital would promote financial stability. The discussion in Sections II and IV below responds to comments on the proposal regarding the Board's process for setting the CCyB. In particular, as indicated below, the Board would seek comment on any proposed change to the CCyB amount and include a discussion of the reasons for the change.

II. Purpose of CCyB

The CCyB is designed to increase the resilience of large banking organizations when the Board sees an elevated risk of above-normal losses. Increasing the resilience of large banking organizations should, in turn, improve the resilience of the broader financial system. Above-normal losses often follow periods of rapid asset price appreciation or credit growth that are not well supported by underlying economic fundamentals. As stated in the proposed policy statement, the circumstances in which the Board would most likely use the CCyB as a supplemental, macroprudential tool to augment minimum capital requirements and other capital buffers would be to address circumstances when systemic vulnerabilities are somewhat above normal. By requiring institutions to hold a larger capital buffer during periods when systemic risk is increasing and reducing the buffer requirement as vulnerabilities diminish, the CCyB also has the potential to moderate fluctuations in the supply of credit over time.

The CCyB functions as an expansion of the Capital Conservation Buffer (CCB), which is applicable to all banking organizations subject to Regulation Q. To avoid limits on capital distributions and certain discretionary bonus payments,3 the CCB requires that a banking organization hold a buffer of common equity tier 1 capital that is at least 2.5 percent of the risk-weighted assets in addition to the minimum risk-based capital ratios. The CCB is divided into quartiles, each associated with increasingly stringent limitations on capital distributions and certain discretionary bonus payments as the firm's risk-based capital ratios approach regulatory minimums.4 The CCyB is an additional, countercyclical buffer that has the same limitations on dividends and capital distributions as the CCB.

3 12 CFR 217.11(b)(1)(i).

4 12 CFR 217.11(a).

The CCyB was introduced for large, internationally active banking organizations (advanced approaches institutions) in June 2013 as part of the revised regulatory capital rules issued by the Board in coordination with the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC).5 The Board's CCyB rule applies to bank holding companies, savings and loan holding companies, and state member banks subject to the advanced approaches capital rules (advanced approaches institutions).6 The advanced approaches capital rules generally apply to banking organizations with greater than $250 billion in total assets or $10 billion in on-balance-sheet foreign exposure and to any depository institution subsidiary of such banking organizations.7

5See 78 FR 62018 (October 11, 2013) (Board and OCC); 79 FR 20754 (April 14, 2014) (FDIC). The Board's Regulation Q applies generally to bank holding companies with more than $1 billion in total consolidated assets and savings and loan holding companies with more than $1 billion in total consolidated assets that are not substantially engaged in commercial or insurance underwriting activities. See 12 CFR 217.1(c)(1).

6 An advanced approaches institution is subject to the CCyB regardless of whether it has completed the parallel run process and received notification from its primary Federal supervisor pursuant to section 217.121(d) of Regulation Q.

7 12 CFR 217.100(b)(1).

Because the CCyB is intended to address elevated risks from activity that is not well supported by underlying economic fundamentals, the location of the activity and the economic conditions where the activity take place provide important context. Accordingly, the CCyB applies based on the location of private-sector credit exposures by national jurisdiction.8 Specifically, the applicable CCyB amount for a banking organization is equal to the weighted average of CCyB amounts established by the Board for the national jurisdictions where the banking organization has private-sector credit exposures.9 The CCyB amount applicable to a banking organization is weighted by jurisdiction according to the firm's risk-weighted private-sector credit exposures for a specific jurisdiction as a percentage of the firm's total risk-weighted private-sector credit exposures.10

8 12 CFR 217.11(b)(1). The Board may adjust the CCyB amount to reflect decisions made by foreign jurisdictions. See 12 CFR 217.11(b)(3).

9 12 CFR 217.11(b)(1).

10Id.

Regulation Q established the initial CCyB amount with respect to private-sector credit exposures located in the United States (U.S.-based credit exposures) at zero percent.11 The CCyB will not exceed 2.5 percent of risk-weighted assets. This cap on the CCyB will be phased in, with the maximum potential amount of the CCyB for U.S.-based credit exposures 0.625 percentage points in 2016, 1.25 percentage points in 2017, 1.875 percentage points in 2018, and 2.5 percentage points in 2019 and thereafter.12

11 The Board affirmed the CCyB amount at the current level of 0 percent contemporaneously with issuance of the proposed policy statement. See http://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/press/bcreg/20151221b.htm.

12 12 CFR 217.300(a)(2).

In order to provide banking organizations with sufficient time to adjust to any change in the CCyB, Regulation Q provides that a determination to increase the countercyclical capital buffer amount generally will be effective 12 months from the date of announcement. However, economic conditions may warrant an earlier or later effective date.13 For example, it may be appropriate for an increase in the countercyclical capital buffer amount to take effect 12 months from the date that the Board proposes the increase, rather than 12 months from the issuance of a final rule.

13 12 CFR 217.11(b)(2)(v)(A).

Regulation Q states that a decision by the Board to decrease the amount of the CCyB for U.S.-based credit exposures would become effective the day after the Board decides to decrease the CCyB or the earliest date permissible under applicable law or regulation, whichever is later.14 Moreover, the amount of the CCyB for U.S.-based credit exposures will return to 0 percent 12 months after the effective date of any CCyB adjustment, unless the Board announces a decision to maintain the current amount or adjust it again before the expiration of the 12-month period.15

14 12 CFR 217.11(b)(2)(v)(B).

15 12 CFR 217.11(b)(2)(vi).

The Board expects to make decisions about the appropriate level of the CCyB on U.S.-based credit exposures jointly with the OCC and FDIC. In addition, the Board expects that the CCyB amount for U.S.-based credit exposures would be the same for covered insured depository institutions as for covered depository institution holding companies. The CCyB is designed to take into account the broad macroeconomic and financial environment in which banking organizations function and the degree to which that environment impacts the resilience of advanced approaches institutions. Therefore, the Board's determination of the appropriate level of the CCyB for U.S.-based credit exposures would be most directly linked to the condition of the overall financial environment rather than the condition of any individual banking organization. However, the impact of the CCyB requirement on a particular banking organization will vary based on the organization's particular composition of private-sector credit exposures located across national jurisdictions.

III. Description of the Final Policy Statement

The final policy statement (Policy Statement) describes the framework that the Board would follow in setting the amount of the CCyB for U.S.-based credit exposures. The framework consists of a set of principles for translating assessments of financial system vulnerabilities that are regularly undertaken at the Board into the appropriate level of the CCyB. Those assessments are informed by a broad array of quantitative indicators of financial and economic performance and a set of empirical models. In addition, the framework includes a discussion of how the Board would assess whether the CCyB is the most appropriate policy instrument (among available policy instruments) to address the highlighted financial system vulnerabilities.

The Policy Statement is organized as follows. Section 1 provides background on the Policy Statement. Section 2 is an outline of the Policy Statement and describes its scope. Section 3 provides a broad description of the objectives of the CCyB, including a description of the ways in which the CCyB is expected to protect large banking organizations and the broader financial system. Section 4 provides a broad description of the factors that the Board considers in setting the CCyB, including specific financial system vulnerabilities and types of quantitative indicators of financial and economic performance, and outlines of empirical models the Board may use as inputs to that decision. Further, section 4 describes a set of principles that the Board expects to use for combining judgmental assessments with quantitative indicators to determine the appropriate level of the CCyB. Section 5 discusses how the Board will communicate the level of the CCyB and any changes to the CCyB. Section 6 describes how the Board plans to monitor the effects of the CCyB, including what indicators and effects will be monitored.

The Board has revised the Policy Statement to clarify that (1) the Board expects that the CCyB will be activated when systemic vulnerabilities are meaningfully above normal and the Board generally intends to increase the CCyB gradually, and (2) the Board expects to remove or reduce the CCyB when the conditions that led to its activation abate or lessen and when release of CCyB capital would promote financial stability. These changes were made to sections 1, 3, and 4. In addition, minor clarifying and technical edits were made throughout the Policy Statement.

IV. Changes To Address Comments on the Proposal

As noted, the Board received two comments regarding the proposed policy statement. Commenters expressed concerns about the process that the Board would follow in setting the CCyB pursuant to the Policy Statement, the potential economic impact of the CCyB, and the appropriate uses of the CCyB.

A. Comments Regarding the Board's Process for Setting the CCyB

Commenters expressed concern that the Board would apply the CCyB without completing the procedures required by the Administrative Procedure Act (APA).16 In particular, commenters argued that notice and comment rulemaking procedures should be used to increase the CCyB above zero, and for each future increase.

16 5 U.S.C. 551 et seq.

The Board's rule implementing the CCyB specifically provides that the Board will adjust the CCyB amount in accordance with applicable law.17 In accordance with this provision of its rules, the Board expects to set the level of the CCyB above zero through a public notice and comment rulemaking, or through an order issued in accordance with the APA that provides each affected institution with actual notice and an opportunity for comment. In setting the level of the CCyB above zero through a public rulemaking, the Board generally expects that the notice and comment period would be at least 30 days. The Policy Statement is intended to provide insight on the framework that the Board will use to determine the appropriate level of the CCyB, not to alter procedures necessary to increase the CCyB in the future.

17 12 CFR 217.11(b)(2)(ii).

A commenter suggested that the Board should commit to act jointly with the OCC and FDIC in any decision to activate the CCyB. Consistent with Regulation Q and the proposal, the Board expects that any decision to adjust the CCyB will be made jointly by the OCC, FDIC, and Board. However, the Board will make decisions regarding the appropriate amount of the CCyB for the firms that it supervises based on its judgment of the facts and circumstances presented.

A commenter argued that the Board generally should not reciprocate decisions by foreign jurisdictions regarding the level of the CCyB in such jurisdictions. If the Board did decide to incorporate CCyB decisions of foreign jurisdictions, the commenter argued that the Board should implement a de minimis threshold below which U.S. banking organizations would not have to recognize the CCyB established in the foreign jurisdiction. The Policy Statement describes the framework that the Board will follow in determining the CCyB for U.S. private-sector credit exposures. The Board will address separately CCyB adjustments made by foreign jurisdictions as needed.

B. Comments Regarding the Calibration of, Inputs Into, and Impact of the CCyB

A commenter argued that the CCyB should be increased only when credit growth was considered excessive, rather than when systemic vulnerabilities were somewhat above normal, as suggested by the proposal.

The CCyB is a macroprudential policy tool intended to strengthen banking organizations' resilience against the build-up of systemic vulnerabilities and reduce fluctuations in the supply of credit. As stated in the proposed policy statement, activation of the CCyB at a time when systemic vulnerabilities are somewhat above normal reflects the prophylactic and countercyclical goals of this tool as well as the process and 12-month phase-in period that generally applies before any activation of the CCyB amount would take effect. Moreover, activation of the CCyB at a time when systemic vulnerabilities are somewhat above normal rather than delaying until systemic vulnerabilities are excessive would allow gradual increases in the CCyB, which would provide additional flexibility (over and above the 12-month phase-in period) to banking organizations as they adjust to any increases. That is, activation of the CCyB at a time when systemic vulnerabilities are somewhat above normal would likely not be associated with an activation of the CCyB to the upper end of its possible range. Further, the Board considers “systemic vulnerabilities” to be the appropriate reference point because the CCyB could be an effective tool in addressing a variety of financial system vulnerabilities, not merely credit growth.

To further clarify when the Board would expect to increase the CCyB, the Policy Statement has been modified to state that the CCyB would be increased when systemic vulnerabilities are “meaningfully above normal.” For these purposes “meaningfully above normal” would reflect an assessment by the Board that financial system vulnerabilities were above normal and were either already at, or expected to build to, levels sufficient to generate material unexpected losses in the event of an unfavorable development in financial markets or the economy. The text in the policy statement has also been modified to clarify that systemic vulnerabilities being meaningfully above normal would correspond to the Board beginning to increase the CCyB above zero and to provide additional discussion of when and how the Board would deactivate or reduce the CCyB.

Commenters argued that the Board should conduct and release analyses of the economic impact and costs and benefits of the CCyB in connection with the proposed policy statement as well as with any decision to increase the level of the CCyB. Commenters contended that such analyses should take into account other existing prudential regulation, including other regulatory capital requirements, and consider whether alternative policy tools may be more effective for a particular situation. The commenters expressed concern that there could be material adverse economic consequences to activation of the CCyB. Similarly, one commenter argued that the Board should conduct a comprehensive analysis of the costs and benefits of regulatory capital requirements, including the CCyB, as well as prudential liquidity regulations and regulations established by other agencies.

Commenters also argued that the Board should provide additional detail regarding the data, models, and metrics that would inform a decision to activate the CCyB, as well as the standards that would be applied to determine the calibration of the CCyB. Additionally, commenters raised issues with certain of the indicators identified in the Policy Statement. For instance, a commenter cautioned that no academic consensus had been reached with regard to the usefulness of a credit-to-GDP ratio gap as an indicator of economic conditions.

The final Policy Statement provides additional information to the public regarding the framework that the Board will follow in setting the CCyB. The Policy Statement itself does not change either the CCyB or the capital requirements applicable to advanced approaches banking organizations. As described above, the Board generally would expect to provide notice to the public and seek comment on the proposed level of the CCyB as part of making any final determination to change the CCyB. Any proposed change in the level of the CCyB would include a discussion of the reasons for the proposed action as determined by the particular circumstances.

One commenter stated that the FFIEC 009 reporting form requires firms to report information that is not aligned with the information needed to determine the CCyB amount applicable to a firm and that the Board should amend the FFIEC 009 to align with CCyB in order to reduce burden. The Board may consider reporting for purposes of the CCyB at a later date.

The Board recognizes that no single data point or indicator can provide a comprehensive understanding of economic conditions or systemic vulnerabilities. The items for consideration listed in the Policy Statement are a non-exclusive list of quantitative and qualitative indicators that may inform the Board's assessment of economic conditions and determinations regarding the appropriate level of the CCyB. As explained in the proposed and final Policy Statement, some academic research has shown the credit-to-GDP ratio to be useful in identifying periods of financial excess followed by a period of crisis. However, the Board does not expect this indicator to be used in isolation. Furthermore, as noted, any proposal to increase the CCyB will include a discussion of the indicators informing the proposal, and will seek comment on the interpretation of these indicators. As noted above, the Board expects that the types of indicators and models considered will evolve over time, based on advances in research and the experience of the Board with this tool.

Commenters argued that the CCyB would not be effective in containing asset bubbles or excessive credit risks because these tend to occur within sectors as opposed to across the financial system equally. A commenter suggested that targeted guidance for particular sectors would likely be more effective at containing risks of this type than a broad based capital charge imposed by the CCyB.

Commenters also argued that the CCyB would not be effective in addressing many systemic vulnerabilities because it applies only to advanced approaches banking organizations, which, while significant, represent a relatively small percentage of the total provision of credit in the U.S. economy. A commenter contended that activation of the CCyB might exacerbate risk in the financial system by shifting lending activity away from large and closely regulated commercial banks and into the shadow banking system. In addition, a commenter argued that advanced approaches banking organizations were subject to significant capital, liquidity, and other prudential requirements such that they were likely to be resilient in the event of adverse economic conditions. As a result, the commenter argued, advanced approaches banking organizations were unlikely to be made materially more resilient as a result of imposition of the CCyB.

As reflected in the Policy Statement, the pace and magnitude of changes in the CCyB will depend on the underlying conditions in the financial sector and the economy, the desired effects of the proposed change in the CCyB, and consideration of whether the CCyB is the most appropriate of the Board's available policy instruments to address the financial system vulnerabilities. A natural corollary to this analysis would be consideration of whether the CCyB could be expected to increase other systemic vulnerabilities. The CCyB is one of several policy tools available to the Board. In determining whether or not to change the CCyB, the Board will consider whether the CCyB is the most appropriate of available policy tools, and whether the CCyB would be most effective if used in conjunction with other policy tools.

V. Administrative Law Matters A. Use of Plain Language

Section 722 of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (Pub. L. 106-102, 113 Stat. 1338, 1471, 12 U.S.C. 4809) requires the Federal banking agencies to use plain language in all proposed and final rules published after January 1, 2000. The Board received no comments on the use of plain language.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act Analysis

In accordance with the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3506), the Board has reviewed the Policy Statement to assess any information collections. There are no collections of information as defined by the Paperwork Reduction Act in the proposal.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act Analysis

The Board is providing a final regulatory flexibility analysis with respect to this Policy Statement. The Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq. (RFA), generally requires that an agency provide a regulatory flexibility analysis in connection with a final rulemaking.

The Board sought comment on whether the proposal would impose undue burdens on, or have unintended consequences for, small banking organizations. The Board received one comment on this aspect of the proposal, which argued that the Board's initial regulatory flexibility analysis was flawed in asserting that small banking organizations would not be affected by the proposal because of the broader impact that the CCyB could have on lending and economic growth in general.

This Policy Statement will be added as an appendix to Regulation Q to describe the framework that the Board will follow in setting the amount of the CCyB for U.S.-based credit exposures. The CCyB only applies to bank holding companies, savings and loan holding companies, and state member banks that are advanced approaches Board-regulated institutions for purposes of the Board's Regulation Q (advanced approaches banking organizations). The Regulatory Flexibility Act requires consideration only of the impact of the proposed rule on small entities that are subject to the requirements of the rule, as opposed to small entities indirectly affected by the rule through its impact on the national economy.18 Generally, advanced approaches banking organizations are those with total consolidated assets of $250 billion or more, that have total consolidated on-balance sheet foreign exposures of $10 billion or more, that have subsidiary depository institutions that are advanced approaches institutions, or that elect to use the advanced approaches framework.19 Under regulations issued by the Small Business Administration, a small entity includes a depository institution, bank holding company, or savings and loan holding company with assets of $550 million or less (small banking organizations).20 As of June 30, 2016, there were approximately 3,204 small bank holding companies, 157 small savings and loan holding companies, and 594 small state member banks. Banking organizations that are subject to the final rule therefore are expected to substantially exceed the $550 million asset threshold at which a banking entity would qualify as a small bank holding company. As a result, the final rule is not expected to apply directly to any small banking organizations for purposes of the RFA.

18See e.g., Aeronautical Repair Station Association v. Federal Aviation Administration, 494 F.3d 161, 174-178 (D.C. Cir. 2007).

19See 12 CFR 217.100.

20See 13 CFR 121.201. Effective July 14, 2014, the Small Business Administration revised the size standards for banking organizations to $550 million in assets from $500 million in assets. 79 FR 33647 (June 12, 2014). The Small Business Administration's June 12, 2014, interim final rule was adopted without change as a final rule by the Small Business Administration on January 12, 2016. 81 FR 3949 (January 25, 2016).

Therefore, there are no significant alternatives to the final rule that would have less economic impact on small bank holding companies. As discussed above, there are no projected reporting, recordkeeping, and other compliance requirements of the final rule. The Board does not believe that the final rule duplicates, overlaps, or conflicts with any other Federal rules. In light of the foregoing, the Board does not believe that the final rule would have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

In light of the foregoing, the Board does not believe that the final rule will have a significant impact on small entities.

List of Subjects in 12 CFR Part 217

Administrative practice and procedure, Banks, banking. Holding companies, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Securities.

Authority and Issuance

For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System amends 12 CFR part 217 as follows:

PART 217—CAPITAL ADEQUACY OF BANK HOLDING COMPANIES, SAVINGS AND LOAN HOLDING COMPANIES, AND STATE MEMBER BANKS (REGULATION Q) 1. The authority citation for part 217 continues to read as follows: Authority:

12 U.S.C. 248(a), 321-338a, 481-486, 1462a, 1467a, 1818, 1828, 1831n, 1831o, 1831p-l, 1831w, 1835, 1844(b), 1851, 3904, 3906-3909, 4808, 5365, 5368, 5371.

2. Appendix A to part 217 is added to read as follows: Appendix A to Part 217—The Federal Reserve Board's Framework for Implementing the Countercyclical Capital Buffer 1. Background

(a) In 2013, the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (Board) issued a final regulatory capital rule (Regulation Q) in coordination with the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) that strengthened risk-based and leverage capital requirements applicable to insured depository institutions and depository institution holding companies (banking organizations).1 Among those changes was the introduction of a countercyclical capital buffer (CCyB) for large, internationally active banking organizations.2

1See 12 CFR part 217; Federal Reserve Board Approves Final Rule To Help Ensure Banks Maintain Strong Capital Positions (July 2, 2013), available at http://www.federalreserve.gov; Agencies Adopt Supplementary Leverage Ratio Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (July 9, 2013), available at http://www.occ.gov; and FDIC Board Approves Basel III Interim Final Rule and Supplementary Leverage Ratio Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (July 9, 2013) available at https://www.fdic.gov.

2 12 CFR 217.11(b). The CCyB applies only to banking organizations subject to the advanced approaches capital rules, which generally apply to those banking organizations with greater than $250 billion in assets or more than $10 billion in on-balance-sheet foreign exposures. See 12 CFR 217.100(b). An advanced approaches institution is subject to the CCyB regardless of whether it has completed the parallel run process and received notification from its primary Federal supervisor. See 12 CFR 217.121(d).

(b) The CCyB is a supplemental, macroprudential policy tool that the Board can increase during periods of rising vulnerabilities in the financial system and reduce when vulnerabilities recede. It is designed to increase the resilience of large banking organizations when there is an elevated risk of above-normal losses. Increasing the resilience of large banking organizations will, in turn, improve the resilience of the broader financial system. Above-normal losses often follow periods of rapid asset price appreciation or credit growth that are not well supported by underlying economic fundamentals. The circumstances in which the Board would most likely begin to increase the CCyB above zero percent to augment minimum capital requirements and other capital buffers would be when systemic vulnerabilities are meaningfully above normal. By requiring large banking organizations to hold additional capital during those periods of excess and removing the requirement to hold additional capital when the vulnerabilities have diminished, the CCyB also is expected to moderate fluctuations in the supply of credit over time. Moderating the supply of credit may mitigate or prevent the conditions that contribute to above-normal losses, such as elevated asset prices and excessive leverage, and prevent or mitigate reductions in lending to creditworthy borrowers that can amplify an economic downturn. In this way, implementation of the CCyB also responds to the Dodd-Frank Act's requirement that the Board seek to make its capital requirements countercyclical.3

3 12 U.S.C. 1844(b), 1464a(g)(1), and 3907(a)(1) (codifying sections 616(a), (b), and (c) of the Dodd-Frank Act).

(c) Regulation Q established the initial CCyB amount with respect to private sector credit exposures located in the United States (U.S.-based credit exposures) at zero percent and provided that the maximum potential amount of the CCyB for credit exposures in the United States was 2.5 percent of risk-weighted assets.4 The Board expects to make decisions about the appropriate level of the CCyB for U.S.-based credit exposures jointly with the OCC and FDIC, and expects that the CCyB amount for U.S.-based credit exposures will be the same for covered depository institution holding companies and insured depository institutions. The CCyB is designed to take into account the macrofinancial environment in which banking organizations function and the degree to which that environment impacts the resilience of advanced approaches institutions. Therefore, the appropriate level of the CCyB for U.S.-based credit exposures is not closely linked to the characteristics of an individual institution. Rather, the impact of the CCyB on any single institution will depend on the particular composition of the private-sector credit exposures of the institution across national jurisdictions.

4 The CCyB is subject to a phase-in arrangement between 2016 and 2019. See 12 CFR 217.300(a)(2).

2. Overview and Scope of the Policy Statement

This Policy Statement describes the framework that the Board will follow in setting the amount of the CCyB for U.S.-based credit exposures. The framework consists of a set of principles for translating assessments of financial system vulnerabilities that are regularly undertaken by the Board into the appropriate level of the CCyB. Those assessments are informed by a broad array of quantitative indicators of financial and economic performance and a set of empirical models. In addition, the framework includes an assessment of whether the CCyB is the most appropriate policy instrument (among available policy instruments) to address the highlighted financial system vulnerabilities.

3. The Objectives of the CCyB

(a) The objectives of the CCyB are to strengthen banking organizations' resilience against the build-up of systemic vulnerabilities and reduce fluctuations in the supply of credit. The CCyB supplements the minimum capital requirements and the capital conservation buffer, which themselves are designed to provide substantial resilience to unexpected losses created by normal fluctuations in economic and financial conditions. The capital surcharge on global systemically important banking organizations adds an additional layer of defense for the largest and most systemically important institutions, whose financial distress can have outsized effects on the rest of the financial system and the real economy.5 However, periods of financial excesses, for example as reflected in episodes of rapid asset price appreciation or credit growth not well supported by underlying economic fundamentals, are often followed by above-normal losses that leave banking organizations and other financial institutions undercapitalized. Therefore, the Board would most likely begin to increase the CCyB above zero in those circumstances when systemic vulnerabilities become meaningfully above normal and progressively raise the CCyB level if vulnerabilities become more severe.

5See, Federal Reserve Board Approves Final Rule Requiring The Largest, Most Systemically Important U.S. Bank Holding Companies To Further Strengthen Their Capital Positions (July 20, 2015), available at http://www.federalreserve.gov.

(b) The CCyB is expected to help provide additional resilience for advanced approaches institutions, and by extension the broader financial system, against elevated vulnerabilities primarily in two ways. First, advanced approaches institutions will likely hold more capital to avoid limitations on capital distributions and discretionary bonus payments resulting from implementation of the CCyB. Strengthening their capital positions when financial conditions are accommodative would increase the capacity of advanced approaches institutions to absorb outsized losses during a future significant economic downturn or period of financial instability, thus making them more resilient.

(c) The second and related goal of the CCyB is to promote a more sustainable supply of credit over the economic cycle. During a credit cycle downturn, better-capitalized institutions have been shown to be more likely than weaker institutions to have continued access to funding. Better-capitalized institutions also are less likely to take actions that lead to broader financial-sector distress and its associated macroeconomic costs, such as large-scale sales of assets at prices below their fundamental value and sharp contractions in credit supply.6 Therefore, it is likely that as a result of the CCyB having been put into place during the preceding period of rapid credit creation, advanced approaches institutions would be better positioned to continue their important intermediary functions during a subsequent economic contraction. A timely and credible reduction in the CCyB requirement during a period of high credit losses could reinforce those beneficial effects of a higher base level of capital, because it would permit advanced approaches institutions either to realize loan losses promptly and remove them from their balance sheets or to expand their balance sheets, for example by continuing to lend to creditworthy borrowers.

6 For additional background on the relationship between financial distress and economic outcomes, see Carmen Reinhart and Kenneth Rogoff (2009), This Time is Different. Princeton University Press; Òscar Jordà & Moritz Schularick & Alan M Taylor (2011), “Financial Crises, Credit Booms, and External Imbalances: 140 Years of Lessons,” IMF Economic Review, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 59(2), pages 340-378; and Bank for International Settlements (2010), “Assessing the Long-Run Economic Impact of Higher Capital and Liquidity Requirements.”

(d) During a period of cyclically increasing vulnerabilities, advanced approaches institutions might react to an increase in the CCyB by raising lending standards, otherwise reducing their risk exposure, augmenting their capital, or some combination of those actions. They may choose to raise capital by taking actions that would increase net income, reducing capital distributions such as share repurchases or dividends, or issuing new equity. In this regard, an increase in the CCyB would not prevent advanced approaches institutions from maintaining their important role as credit intermediaries, but would reduce the likelihood that banking organizations with insufficient capital would foster unsustainable credit growth or engage in imprudent risk taking. The specific combination of adjustments and the relative size of each adjustment will depend in part on the initial capital positions of advanced approaches institutions, the cost of debt and equity financing, and the earnings opportunities presented by the economic situation at the time.7

7 For estimates of the size of certain adjustments, see Samuel G. Hanson, Anil K. Kashyap, and Jeremy C. Stein (2011), “A Macroprudential Approach to Financial Regulation,” Journal of Economic Perspectives 25(1), pp. 3-28; Skander J. Van den Heuvel (2008), “The Welfare Cost of Bank Capital Requirements.” Journal of Monetary Economics 55, pp. 298-320.

4. The Framework for Setting the U.S. CCyB

(a) The Board regularly monitors and assesses threats to financial stability by synthesizing information from a comprehensive set of financial-sector and macroeconomic indicators, supervisory information, surveys, and other interactions with market participants.8 In forming its view about the appropriate size of the U.S. CCyB, the Board will consider a number of financial system vulnerabilities, including but not limited to, asset valuation pressures and risk appetite, leverage in the nonfinancial sector, leverage in the financial sector, and maturity and liquidity transformation in the financial sector. The decision will reflect the implications of the assessment of overall financial system vulnerabilities as well as any concerns related to one or more classes of vulnerabilities. The specific combination of vulnerabilities is important because an adverse shock to one class of vulnerabilities could be more likely than another to exacerbate existing pressures in other parts of the economy or financial system.

8 Tobias Adrian, Daniel Covitz, and Nellie Liang (2014), “Financial Stability Monitoring.” Finance and Economics Discussion Series 2013-021. Washington: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/feds/2013/201321/201321pap.pdf.

(b) The Board intends to monitor a wide range of financial and macroeconomic quantitative indicators including, but not limited to, measures of relative credit and liquidity expansion or contraction, a variety of asset prices, funding spreads, credit condition surveys, indices based on credit default swap spreads, option implied volatilities, and measures of systemic risk.9 In addition, empirical models that translate a manageable set of quantitative indicators of financial and economic performance into potential settings for the CCyB, when used as part of a comprehensive judgmental assessment of all available information, can be a useful input to the Board's deliberations. Such models may include, but are not limited to, those that rely on small sets of indicators—such as the nonfinancial credit-to-GDP ratio, its growth rate, and combinations of the credit-to-GDP ratio with trends in the prices of residential and commercial real estate—which some academic research has shown to be useful in identifying periods of financial excess followed by a period of crisis on a cross-country basis.10 Such models may also include those that consider larger sets of indicators, which have the advantage of representing conditions in all key sectors of the economy, especially those specific to risk-taking, performance, and the financial condition of large banks.11

9See 12 CFR 217.11(b)(2)(iv).

10See, e.g., Jorda, Oscar, Moritz Schularick and Alan Taylor, 2013. “When Credit Bites Back: Leverage, Business Cycles and Crises,” Journal of Money, Credit, and Banking, 45(2), pp. 3-28, and Drehmann, Mathias, Claudio Borio, and Kostas Tsatsaronis, 2012. “Characterizing the Financial Cycle: Don't Lose Sight of the Medium Term!” BIS Working Papers 380, Bank for International Settlements. Jorda, Oscar, Moritz Schularick and Alan Taylor, 2015. “Leveraged Bubbles,” Center for Economic Policy Research Discussion Paper No. DP10781. BCBS (2010), “Guidance for National Authorities Operating the Countercyclical Capital Buffer,” BIS.

11See, e.g., Aikman, David, Michael T. Kiley, Seung Jung Lee, Michael G. Palumbo, and Missaka N. Warusawitharana (2015), “Mapping Heat in the U.S. Financial System,” Finance and Economics Discussion Series 2015-059. Washington: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, http://dx.doi.org/10.17016/FEDS.2015.059 (providing an example of the range of indicators used and type of analysis possible).

(c) However, no single indictor or fixed set of indicators can adequately capture all the vulnerabilities in the U.S. economy and financial system. Moreover, adjustments in the CCyB that were tightly linked to a specific model or set of models could be imprecise due to the relatively short period that some indicators are available, the limited number of past crises against which the models can be calibrated, and limited experience with the CCyB as a macroprudential tool. As a result, the types of indicators and models considered in assessments of the appropriate level of the CCyB are likely to change over time based on advances in research and the experience of the Board with this new macroprudential tool.

(d) The Board will determine the appropriate level of the CCyB for U.S.-based credit exposures based on its analysis of the above factors. Generally, a zero percent U.S. CCyB amount would reflect an assessment that U.S. economic and financial conditions are broadly consistent with a financial system in which levels of system-wide vulnerabilities are within or near their normal range of values. The Board could increase the CCyB as vulnerabilities build. A 2.5 percent CCyB amount for U.S.-based credit exposures, which is the maximum level under the Board's rule, would reflect an assessment that the U.S. financial sector is experiencing a period of significantly elevated or rapidly increasing system-wide vulnerabilities. Importantly, as a macroprudential policy tool, the CCyB will be activated and deactivated based on broad developments and trends in the U.S. financial system, rather than the activities of any individual banking organization.

(e) Similarly, the Board would remove or reduce the CCyB when the conditions that led to its activation abate or lessen. Additionally, the Board would remove or reduce the CCyB when release of CCyB capital would promote financial stability. Indeed, for the CCyB to be most effective, the CCyB should be deactivated or reduced in a timely manner. Deactivating the CCyB in a timely manner could, for example, promote the prompt realization of loan losses by advanced approaches institutions and the removal of such loans from their balance sheets and would reduce the likelihood that advanced approaches institutions would significantly pare their risk-weighted assets in order to maintain their capital ratios during a downturn.

(f) The pace and magnitude of changes in the CCyB will depend importantly on the underlying conditions in the financial sector and the economy as well as the desired effects of the proposed change in the CCyB. If vulnerabilities are rising gradually, then incremental increases in the level of the CCyB may be appropriate. Incremental increases would allow banks to augment their capital primarily through retained earnings and allow policymakers additional time to assess the effects of the policy change before making subsequent adjustments. However, if vulnerabilities in the financial system are building rapidly, then larger or more frequent adjustments may be necessary to increase loss-absorbing capacity sooner and potentially to mitigate the rise in vulnerabilities.

(g) The Board will also consider whether the CCyB is the most appropriate of its available policy instruments to address the financial system vulnerabilities highlighted by the framework's judgmental assessments and empirical models. The CCyB primarily is intended to address cyclical vulnerabilities, rather than structural vulnerabilities that do not vary significantly over time. Structural vulnerabilities are better addressed through targeted reforms or permanent increases in financial system resilience. Two central factors for the Board to consider are whether advanced approaches institutions are exposed—either directly or indirectly—to the vulnerabilities identified in the comprehensive judgmental assessment or by the quantitative indicators that suggest activation of the CCyB and whether advanced approaches institutions are contributing—either directly or indirectly—to these highlighted vulnerabilities.

(h) In setting the CCyB for advanced approaches institutions that it supervises, the Board plans to consult with the OCC and FDIC on their analyses of financial system vulnerabilities and on the extent to which advanced approaches banking organizations are either exposed to or contributing to these vulnerabilities.

5. Communication of the U.S. CCyB With the Public

(a) The Board expects to consider at least once per year the applicable level of the U.S. CCyB. The Board will review financial conditions regularly throughout the year and may adjust the CCyB more frequently as a result of those monitoring activities.

(b) Further, the Board will continue to communicate with the public in other formats regarding its assessment of U.S. financial stability, including financial system vulnerabilities. In the event that the Board considered that a change in the CCyB were appropriate, it would, in proposing the change, include a discussion of the reasons for the proposed action as determined by the particular circumstances. In addition, the Board's biannual Monetary Policy Report to Congress, usually published in February and July, will continue to contain a section that reports on developments pertaining to the stability of the U.S. financial system.12 That portion of the report will be an important vehicle for updating the public on how the Board's current assessment of financial system vulnerabilities bears on the setting of the CCyB.

12 For the most recent discussion in this format, see box titled “Developments Related to Financial Stability” in Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, Monetary Policy Report to Congress, June 2016, pp. 20-21.

6. Monitoring the Effects of the U.S. CCyB

(a) The effects of the U.S. CCyB ultimately will depend on the level at which it is set, the size and nature of any adjustments in the level, and the timeliness with which it is increased or decreased. The extent to which the CCyB may affect vulnerabilities in the broader financial system depends upon a complex set of interactions between required capital levels at the largest banking organizations and the economy and financial markets. In addition to the direct effects, the secondary economic effects could be amplified if financial markets extract a signal from the announcement of a change in the CCyB about subsequent actions that might be taken by the Board. Moreover, financial market participants might react by updating their expectations about future asset prices in specific markets or broader economic activity based on the concerns expressed by the regulators in communications announcing a policy change.

(b) The Board will monitor and analyze adjustments by banking organizations and other financial institutions to the CCyB: whether a change in the CCyB leads to observed changes in risk-based capital ratios at advanced approaches institutions, as well as whether those adjustments are achieved passively through retained earnings, or actively through changes in capital distributions or in risk-weighted assets. Other factors to be monitored include the extent to which loan growth and interest rate spreads on loans made by affected banking organizations change relative to loan growth and loan spreads at banking organizations that are not subject to the buffer. Another consideration in setting the CCyB and other macroprudential tools is the extent to which the adjustments by advanced approaches institutions to higher capital buffers lead to migration of credit market activity outside of those banking organizations, especially to the nonbank financial sector. Depending on the amount of migration, which institutions are affected by it, and the remaining exposures of advanced approaches institutions, those adjustments could cause the Board to favor either a higher or a lower value of the CCyB.

(c) The Board will also monitor information regarding the levels of and changes in the CCyB in other countries. The Basel Committee on Banking Supervision is expected to maintain this information for member countries in a publically available form on its Web site.13 Using that data in conjunction with supervisory and publicly available datasets, the Board will be able to draw not only upon the experience of the United States but also that of other countries to refine estimates of the effects of changes in the CCyB.

13 BIS, Countercyclical capital buffer (CCyB), www.bis.org/bcbs/ccyb/index.htm.

By order of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, September 8, 2016. Robert deV. Frierson, Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. 2016-21970 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6210-01-P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2016-6146; Directorate Identifier 2014-NM-120-AD; Amendment 39-18656; AD 2016-19-07] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Dassault Aviation Airplanes AGENCY:

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

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

We are superseding Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2008-19-08, for all Dassault Aviation Model Falcon 10 airplanes. AD 2008-19-08 required repetitive replacement of the flexible hoses installed in the wing (slat) anti-icing system with new hoses. This new AD requires reducing the life limit of these flexible hoses, which reduces the repetitive replacement intervals. This AD was prompted by additional reports of collapse of the flexible hoses installed in the slat anti-icing systems on airplanes equipped with new, improved hoses. We are issuing this AD to prevent collapse of the flexible hoses in the slat anti-icing system, which could lead to insufficient anti-icing capability and, if icing is encountered in this situation, could result in reduced controllability of the airplane.

DATES:

This AD is effective October 21, 2016.

The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of October 11, 2007 (72 FR 51161, September 6, 2007).

ADDRESSES:

For service information identified in this final rule, contact Dassault Falcon Jet Corporation, Teterboro Airport, P.O. Box 2000, South Hackensack, NJ 07606; telephone 201-440-6700; Internet http://www.dassaultfalcon.com. You may view this referenced service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 425-227-1221. It is also available on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-6146.

Examining the AD Docket

You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-6146; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The address for the Docket Office (telephone 800-647-5527) is Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR part 39 to supersede AD 2008-19-08, Amendment 39-15675 (73 FR 54492, September 22, 2008) (“AD 2008-19-08”). AD 2008-19-08 applied to all Dassault Aviation Model Falcon 10 airplanes. The NPRM published in the Federal Register on May 3, 2016 (81 FR 26495) (“the NPRM”). The NPRM was prompted by additional reports of collapse of the flexible hoses installed in the slat anti-icing systems on airplanes equipped with new, improved hoses. The NPRM proposed to continue to require repetitive replacement of the flexible hoses installed in the wing (slat) anti-icing system with new hoses. The NPRM also proposed to require reducing the life limit of these flexible hoses, which would reduce the repetitive replacement intervals. We are issuing this AD to prevent collapse of the flexible hoses in the slat anti-icing system, which could lead to insufficient anti-icing capability and, if icing is encountered in this situation, could result in reduced controllability of the airplane.

The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA Airworthiness Directive 2014-0104, dated May 7, 2014 (referred to after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or “the MCAI”), to correct an unsafe condition on all Dassault Aviation Model Falcon 10 airplanes. The MCAI states:

Occurrences were reported involving an in-service Falcon 10 aeroplane, where wing anti-ice hoses collapsed. The subsequent investigation revealed that the flexible hose, Part Number (P/N) FAL1005, collapsed because of an internal ply separation.

This condition, if not corrected, could lead to failure of the ice-protection system to remove ice accretion on the wing, possibly resulting in reduced control of the aeroplane.

To address this potential unsafe condition, EASA issued AD 2005-0020 and AD 2006-0114 [which correspond to AD 2008-19-08], respectively, imposing flight limitations and requiring replacement of the flexible hosesP/N FAL1005 with improved hoses P/N FAL1007.

Since those [EASA] ADs were issued, further occurrences were reported concerning aeroplanes with improved hoses, which led to the conclusion that the life limit of the flexible hose P/N FAL1007 must be reduced.

For the reasons above, this [EASA] AD retains the requirements of EASA AD 2006-0114, which is superseded; supersedes EASA AD 2005-0020; requires replacement of flexible hoses having P/N FAL 1000, P/N 1001, P/N FAL1005, or P/N FAL1005D, and reduces the life limit of the flexible hosesP/N 1007 [which would reduce the repetitive replacement intervals].

You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-6146. Comments

We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing this AD. We considered the comment received. The commenter, Catherine Corn, supported the NPRM.

Clarification to This AD

We have changed the “Definition of Serviceable Flexible Hose” specified in paragraph (j) of this AD from “350 flight hours or less” to “less than 350 flight hours” to clarify the intent of the flight hours for the life-limit of the flexible hose specified in paragraph (i) of this AD.

We have also revised paragraph (g) of this AD to clarify that accomplishing the replacement required by paragraph (i) of this AD terminates the replacements required by paragraph (g) of this AD.

Conclusion

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

• Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the NPRM for correcting the unsafe condition; and

• Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was already proposed in the NPRM.

Costs of Compliance

We estimate that this AD affects 124 airplanes of U.S. registry.

The actions that are required by AD 2008-19-08, and retained in this AD, take about 8 work-hours per product, at an average labor rate of $85 per work-hour. Required parts cost about $880. Based on these figures, the estimated cost of the actions that are required by AD 2008-19-08 is up to $1,560 per product, per replacement cycle.

We also estimate that it takes about 4 work-hours per product to comply with the new basic requirements of this AD. The average labor rate is $85 per work-hour. Required parts will cost about $936 per product. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of this AD on U.S. operators to be $158,224, or $1,276 per product.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

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

Regulatory Findings

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

For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:

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

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

3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska; and

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

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

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

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

§ 39.13 [Amended]
2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by removing Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2008-19-08, Amendment 39-15675 (73 FR 54492, September 22, 2008), and adding the following new AD: 2016-19-07 Dassault Aviation: Amendment 39-18656; Docket No. FAA-2016-6146; Directorate Identifier 2014-NM-120-AD. (a) Effective Date

This AD is effective October 21, 2016.

(b) Affected ADs

This AD replaces AD 2008-19-08, Amendment 39-15675 (73 FR 54492, September 22, 2008) (“AD 2008-19-08”).

(c) Applicability

This AD applies to all Dassault Aviation Model Falcon 10 airplanes, certificated in any category.

(d) Subject

Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 30, Ice and Rain Protection.

(e) Reason

This AD was prompted by reports of collapse of the flexible hoses installed in the slat anti-icing systems on airplanes equipped with new, improved hoses. We are issuing this AD to prevent collapse of the flexible hoses in the slat anti-icing system, which could lead to insufficient anti-icing capability and, if icing is encountered in this situation, could result in reduced controllability of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Retained Repetitive Hose Replacement, With Revised Compliance Language

This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (h) of AD 2008-19-08, with revised compliance language. As of October 27, 2008 (the effective date of AD 2008-19-08): Replace the flexible hoses installed in the slat anti-icing system with new hoses having part number (P/N) FAL1007, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Dassault Service Bulletin F10-313, Revision 1, dated May 10, 2006, within 700 flight hours since the last replacement or within 100 flight hours after October 27, 2008, whichever occurs later, and thereafter at intervals not to exceed 700 flight hours. Accomplishing the replacement required by paragraph (h) or (i) of this AD ends the repetitive replacements required by this paragraph.

(h) New Requirement of This AD: Hose Replacement for Certain Part Numbers

Within 65 days after the effective date of this AD: Replace any flexible hose having part number (P/N) FAL1000, P/N FAL1001, or P/N FAL1005D with a new, improved flexible hose having P/N FAL1007, using a method approved by the Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA; or the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA); or Dassault Aviation's EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA).

(i) Life-Limit for P/N FAL1007—Repetitive Replacements

At the later of the times specified in paragraphs (i)(1) and (i)(2) of this AD, replace any flexible hose having part number P/N FAL1007 with a serviceable flexible hose having P/N FAL1007, using a method approved by the Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA; or the EASA; or Dassault Aviation's EASA DOA. Thereafter, before the accumulation of 350 flight hours on any flexible hose having P/N FAL1007, replace the flexible hose with a serviceable flexible hose having P/N FAL1007.

(1) Before the accumulation of 350 flight hours on the flexible hose P/N FAL1007 since first installation on an airplane.

(2) At the earlier of the times specified in paragraphs (i)(2)(i) and (i)(2)(ii) of this AD.

(i) Within 200 flight hours after the effective date of this AD.

(ii) Before the accumulation of 700 flight hours on the flexible hose P/N FAL1007 since first installation on an airplane, or within 65 days after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later.

(j) Definition of Serviceable Flexible Hose

For the purpose of this AD, a serviceable flexible hose is a flexible hose having P/N FAL1007 that has accumulated less than 350 flight hours since first installation on an airplane.

(k) Parts Installation Limitation

After accomplishing the replacement required by paragraph (h) of this AD, no person may install a flexible hose in the slat anti-icing system on any airplane, unless that hose is a serviceable flexible hose having P/N FAL1007, and thereafter repetitive hose replacements are done as required by paragraph (i) of this AD.

(l) Other FAA AD Provisions

The following provisions also apply to this AD:

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

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

(m) Related Information

Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information (MCAI) EASA Airworthiness Directive 2014-0104, dated May 7, 2014, for related information. This MCAI may be found in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-6146.

(n) Material Incorporated by Reference

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

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

(3) The following service information was approved for IBR on October 11, 2007, (72 FR 51161, September 62, 2007).

(i) Dassault Service Bulletin F10-313, Revision 1, dated May 10, 2006.

(ii) Reserved.

(4) For service information identified in this AD, contact Dassault Falcon Jet Corporation, Teterboro Airport, P.O. Box 2000, South Hackensack, NJ 07606; telephone 201-440-6700; Internet http://www.dassaultfalcon.com.

(5) You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 425-227-1221.

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

Issued in Renton, Washington, on September 7, 2016. Michael Kaszycki, Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2016-22177 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2016-9108; Directorate Identifier 2016-NM-133-AD; Amendment 39-18655; AD 2016-19-06] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Airplanes AGENCY:

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION:

Final rule; request for comments.

SUMMARY:

We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain Airbus Model A330-200, Model A330-300, Model A340-200, and Model A340-300 series airplanes. This AD requires an inspection to determine the part number and serial number of certain escape slides on the left and right sides of the airplane, and replacement if necessary. This AD was prompted by a report indicating that the aspirator on certain escape slides might have been damaged because of incorrect packing during overhaul. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct damaged aspirators on escape slides. Failure of an aspirator to inflate an escape slide could prevent deployment of the escape slide during an emergency, possibly resulting in reduced evacuation capacity from the airplane and consequent injury to occupants.

DATES:

This AD becomes effective October 3, 2016.

The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of October 3, 2016.

We must receive comments on this AD by October 31, 2016.

ADDRESSES:

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

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

Fax: 202-493-2251.

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

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

For service information identified in this final rule, contact Airbus SAS, Airworthiness Office—EAL, 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96; fax +33 5 61 93 45 80; email [email protected]; Internet http://www.airbus.com. You may view this referenced service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 425-227-1221. It is also available on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-9108.

Examining the AD Docket

You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-9108; or in person at the Docket Operations office between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street address for the Docket Operations office (telephone 800-647-5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA Airworthiness Directive 2016-0137R1, dated July 21, 2016 (referred to after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or “the MCAI”), to correct an unsafe condition for certain Airbus Model A330-200 Freighter, Model A330-200, Model A330-300, Model A340-200, and Model A340-300 series airplanes. The MCAI states:

It has been reported that some door 3, Type 1, escape slides Part Number (P/N) 7A1509-series may have sustained damage to the slide aspirator, due to an incorrect packing during last overhaul. This damage affects the air inlet end of the slide aspirator by either permanently deforming the inlet, or leading to cracks in the supply line to the aspirator nozzle.

This condition, if not detected and corrected, could lead to failure of the slide aspirator to perform its intended function to inflate the evacuation slide, preventing slide deployment during an emergency, possibly resulting in reduced evacuation capacity from the aeroplane and consequent injury to occupants.

Prompted by these findings, Airbus issued Alert Operators Transmission (AOT) A25L009-16 to provide instructions to identify and replace the affected slides.

Consequently, EASA issued AD 2016-0137, requiring identification of the door 3, Type 1, slide installed on the aeroplane, and, depending on findings, the replacement of the slide with a serviceable part.

Since that [EASA] AD was issued, it was identified that affected slides cannot be installed on aeroplanes embodying optional Airbus mod 40161.

For the reason described above, this [EASA] AD is revised to reduce the Applicability, by excluding aeroplanes that have embodied Airbus mod 40161 in production.

You may examine the MCAI on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-9108. Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

Airbus has issued Alert Operators Transmission A25L009-16, dated July 7, 2016. The service information describes procedures for the identifying the part number and serial number of door 3, Type 1, escape slides and replacing the escape slides. This service information is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This AD

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

FAA's Determination of the Effective Date

An unsafe condition exists that requires the immediate adoption of this AD. The FAA has found that the risk to the flying public justifies waiving notice and comment prior to adoption of this rule because failure of an aspirator to inflate a door 3, Type 1, escape slide could prevent deployment of the escape slide during an emergency, possibly resulting in reduced evacuation capacity from the airplane and consequent injury to occupants. Therefore, we determined that notice and opportunity for public comment before issuing this AD are impracticable and that good cause exists for making this amendment effective in fewer than 30 days.

Comments Invited

This AD is a final rule that involves requirements affecting flight safety, and we did not precede it by notice and opportunity for public comment. We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or arguments about this AD. Send your comments to an address listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include “Docket No. FAA-2016-9108; Directorate Identifier 2016-NM-133-AD” at the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this AD. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this AD based on those comments.

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

Costs of Compliance

We estimate that this AD affects 104 airplanes of U.S. registry.

We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:

Estimated costs Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per
  • product
  • Cost on U.S.
  • operators
  • Inspection 1 work-hour × $85 per hour = $85 $0 $85 $8,840

    We estimate the following costs to do any necessary replacement that will be required based on the results of the inspection. We have no way of determining the number of airplanes that might need this replacement:

    On-Condition Costs Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per
  • product
  • Replacement 2 work-hours × $85 per hour = $170 $45,000 $45,170
    Authority for This Rulemaking

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

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

    Regulatory Findings

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

    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:

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

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

    3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska; and

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

    List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

    Adoption of the Amendment

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

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

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

    § 39.13 [Amended]
    2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): 2016-19-06 Airbus: Amendment 39-18655; Docket No. FAA-2016-9108; Directorate Identifier 2016-NM-133-AD. (a) Effective Date

    This AD becomes effective October 3, 2016.

    (b) Affected ADs

    None.

    (c) Applicability

    This AD applies to the Airbus airplanes, certificated in any category, identified in paragraphs (c)(1) through (c)(4) of this AD, all manufacturer serial numbers, except those that have embodied Airbus Modification 40161 in production.

    (1) Airbus Model A330-201, -202, -203, -223, and -243 airplanes.

    (2) Airbus Model A330-301, -302, -303, -321, -322, -323, -341, -342, and -343 airplanes.

    (3) Airbus Model A340-211, -212, and -213 airplanes.

    (4) Airbus Model A340-311, -312, and -313 airplanes.

    (d) Subject

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

    (e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by a report indicating that the aspirator on certain door 3, Type 1, escape slides might have been damaged because of incorrect packing during overhaul. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct damaged aspirators on door 3, Type 1, escape slides. Failure of an aspirator to inflate a door 3, Type 1, escape slide could prevent deployment of the escape slide during an emergency, possibly resulting in reduced evacuation capacity from the airplane and consequent injury to occupants.

    (f) Compliance

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

    (g) Inspection To Determine Part Number and Serial Number

    Within 30 days after the effective date of this AD: Do an inspection to determine the part number and serial number of the door 3, Type 1, escape slides on the left and right sides of the airplane, in accordance with the instructions of Airbus Alert Operators Transmission (AOT) A25L009-16, dated July 7, 2016. A review of airplane maintenance records is acceptable in lieu of this inspection if the part number and serial number of the door 3, Type 1, escape slides can be conclusively determined from that review.

    Note 1 to paragraph (g) of this AD:

    Airbus AOT A25L009-16, dated July 7, 2016, lists the corresponding airplane manufacturer serial numbers on which the affected slides (specified in table 1 to paragraphs (g), (i), and (j) of this AD) were re-installed after the last maintenance. That list of airplane manufacturer serial numbers is for information only because a potentially affected slide might have been removed from an airplane and later re-installed on another airplane.

    Table 1 to Paragraphs (g), (i), and (j) of This AD—Affected Slides Slide part No. Slide serial No. 7A1509-027 AD0918, AD0975, AD0979, AD1111, and AD1155. 7A1509-037 AD0488, AD0759, AD0942, AD0960, AD1025, AD1033, AD1034, AD1080, and AD1184. 7A1509-123 AD1231, AD1232, AD1450, AD1565, AD1730, AD1737, AD1805, AD1822, and AD1860. 7A1509-125 AD1769, AD1780, AD1781, AD1816, AD1834, AD1841, AD1862, AD1869, AD2066, AD2103, AD2104, AD2178, AD2223, AD2263, AD2279, AD2301, AD2407, AD2409, and AD2497. (h) Corrective Action

    If, during the inspection required by paragraph (g) of this AD, any door 3, Type 1, escape slide having a part number and a serial number identified in table 1 to paragraphs (g), (i), and (j) of this AD is found: At the applicable compliance time specified in paragraph (h)(1) or paragraph (h)(2) of this AD, replace each affected door 3, Type 1, escape slide with a serviceable escape slide, in accordance with the instructions of Airbus Alert Operators Transmission A25L009-16, dated July 7, 2016.

    (1) For affected slides on both the left and right sides of the airplane: Within 30 days after the effective date of this AD, after identification as required by paragraph (g) of this AD, replace at least one slide; and, within 10 months or 4,100 flight hours, whichever occurs first after the effective date of this AD, replace the second slide.

    (2) For one affected slide on either the left or right side of the airplane: Within 10 months or 4,100 flight hours, whichever occurs first after the effective date of this AD, replace the slide.

    (i) Serviceable Escape Slide

    For the purpose of this AD, a serviceable escape slide is a brand new escape slide or one that has a part number and serial number identified in table 1 to paragraphs (g), (i) and (j) of this AD and was overhauled after May 1, 2016.

    (j) Parts Installation Limitation

    As of the effective date of this AD, an affected slide having a part number and serial number identified in table 1 to paragraphs (g), (i), and (j) of this AD may be installed on any airplane at the door 3, Type 1, position, provided it can be positively determined that the slide was overhauled after May 1, 2016.

    (k) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:

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

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

    (l) Related Information

    Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information (MCAI) EASA Airworthiness Directive 2016-0137R1, dated July 21, 2016, for related information. You may examine the MCAI on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-9108.

    (m) Material Incorporated by Reference

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

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

    (i) Airbus Alert Operators Transmission A25L009-16, dated July 7, 2016.

    (ii) Reserved.

    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact Airbus SAS, Airworthiness Office—EAL, 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96; fax +33 5 61 93 45 80; email [email protected]; Internet http://www.airbus.com.

    (4) You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 425-227-1221.

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

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on September 6, 2016. Michael Kaszycki, Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22178 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF STATE 22 CFR Part 42 [Public Notice: 9700] RIN 1400-AD98 Visas: Diversity Immigrants AGENCY:

    State Department.

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    This final rule is promulgated to clarify that photographs submitted as part of a diversity visa lottery entry package must have been taken no more than six months before the date the entry is made and prohibit applicants from wearing eyeglasses in photographs.

    DATES:

    This rule is effective on October 17, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Andrea Lage, Legislation and Regulations Division, Visa Services, Bureau of Consular Affairs, Department of State, 600 19th St. NW., Washington, DC 20006, (202) 485-7585.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: What changes are in the amended rule?

    The Diversity Immigrant Visa Program is administered annually by the Department of State (“Department”). Section 203(c) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), 8 U.S.C. 1153(c), provides for a class of immigrants known as “diversity immigrants” from countries with historically low rates of immigration to the United States. From millions of applicants, certain individuals are selected through a randomized computer drawing (“selectees”) for consideration for one of the 50,000 available diversity visa numbers. These selectees are then given the opportunity to apply for a diversity immigrant visa or if present in the United States to apply for adjustment of status. To qualify for a visa, these “selectees” must meet certain requirements provided for at INA 203(c), 8 U.S.C. 1153(c), and 22 CFR 42.33.

    Previously, 22 CFR 42.33(b)(2) required that photographs submitted with the diversity visa petition to be “recent.” 22 CFR 42.33(b)(2)(vii) only prohibited the wearing of sunglasses and other paraphernalia in photographs. The Department is amending the rule by adding a new subparagraph at § 42.33(b)(2)(iv) to require that the photograph be taken no more than six months prior to the date of the submission, and amending the photograph requirement to prohibit eyeglasses. The Department is also making a minor change by replacing “electronic entry form” with “petition” in the opening sentence of § 42.33(b)(2) to be consistent with the other parts of § 42.33(b).

    Why is the Department promulgating this rule?

    The Department receives unauthorized entries for the diversity visa lottery each year, including entries submitted by criminal enterprises. Requiring a new photograph be submitted each year reduces the ability for a third party to submit entries without an applicant's knowledge. The added specificity also will support the Department's practice of automatically disqualifying any applications for which a duplicate photograph was submitted, which also reduces the possibility of fraud, including fraud committed by criminal enterprises.

    Regulatory Findings Administrative Procedure Act

    This regulation is exempt from the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) as it involves a foreign affairs function of the United States and, therefore, in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(a)(1), is exempt from the requirements of 5 U.S.C. 553. Since this rulemaking is exempt from section 553, the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 553(d) do not apply, and this rulemaking is effective immediately.

    Regulatory Flexibility Act/Executive Order 13272: Small Business

    Because this final rule is exempt from notice-and-comment rulemaking under 5 U.S.C. 553, it is exempt from the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 603 and 604). Nonetheless, consistent with the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 605(b)), the Department certifies that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

    Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (codified at 2 U.S.C. 1532) generally requires agencies to prepare a statement before proposing any rule that may result in an annual expenditure of $100 million or more by State, local, or tribal governments, or by the private sector. This rule will not result in any such expenditure, nor will it significantly or uniquely affect small governments.

    Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996

    This rule is not a major rule as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804. The Department is aware of no monetary effect on the U.S. economy that will result from this rulemaking.

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563

    The Department has reviewed this rule to ensure its consistency with the regulatory philosophy and principles set forth in Executive Order 12866, and has determined that the benefits of this regulation outweigh any cost. The Department has considered this rule in light of Executive Order 13563 and affirms that this regulation is consistent with the guidance therein. The Department does not consider this rule to be a significant rulemaking action.

    Executive Orders 12372 and 13132: Federalism

    This regulation will not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. The rule will not have federalism implications warranting the application of Executive Orders 12372 and 13132.

    Executive Order 12988: Civil Justice Reform

    The Department has reviewed the regulation in light of sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988 to eliminate ambiguity, minimize litigation, establish clear legal standards, and reduce burden.

    Executive Order 13175—Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments

    The Department has determined that this rulemaking will not have tribal implications, will not impose substantial direct compliance costs on Indian tribal governments, and will not pre-empt tribal law. Accordingly, the requirements of Section 5 of Executive Order 13175 do not apply to this rulemaking.

    Paperwork Reduction Act

    This rule does not impose any new information collection requirements under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35.

    List of Subjects in 22 CFR Part 42

    Immigration, Passports and visas.

    For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Department amends 22 CFR part 42 as follows:

    PART 42—VISAS: DOCUMENTATION OF IMMIGRANTS UNDER THE IMMIGRATION AND NATIONALITY ACT, AS AMENDED 1. The authority citation for part 42 is revised to read as follows: Authority:

    22 U.S.C. 2651a; 8 U.S.C. 1104; Pub. L. 105-277, 112 Stat. 2681-795 through 2681-801; 8 U.S.C. 1185 note (section 7209 of Pub. L. 108-458, as amended by section 546 of Pub. L. 109-295).

    2. Amend § 42.33 by: a. Revising the introductory text of paragraph (b)(2); b. Redesignating paragraphs (b)(2)(iv) through (viii) as paragraphs (b)(2)(v) through (ix), and adding a new paragraph (b)(2)(iv); and c. Revising redesignated paragraph (b)(2)(viii).

    The revisions and addition read as follows:

    § 42.33 Diversity immigrants.

    (b) * * *

    (2) Requirements for photographs. The petition will also require inclusion of a photograph of the petitioner and of his or her spouse and all unmarried children under the age of 21 years. The photographs must meet the following specifications:

    (iv) The image must have been taken no more than six months prior to the date of the petition submission.

    (viii) The person in the photograph must not wear eyeglasses, sunglasses, or other paraphernalia that obstruct the view of the face.

    Michele Thoren Bond, Assistant Secretary for Consular Affairs, Department of State.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22365 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4710-06-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Office of the Secretary 32 CFR Part 199 [DOD-2015-HA-0109] RIN 0720-AB65 TRICARE; Mental Health and Substance Use Disorder Treatment AGENCY:

    Office of the Secretary, Department of Defense (DoD).

    ACTION:

    Final rule; technical amendment.

    SUMMARY:

    On September 2, 2016, the Department of Defense published a final rule (81 FR 61068-61098) titled TRICARE; Mental Health and Substance Use Disorder Treatment. DoD is making a technical amendment due to the discovery of two errors. We noted in the preamble of the final rule that we had removed the requirements regarding capacity (30 percent) and length of time licensed and at full operational status (6 months) for substance use disorder rehabilitation facilities (SUDRFs). However, we did not remove the necessary sentence in the regulatory text.

    In a response to a public comment in the preamble of the final rule, we said that TRICARE will require opioid treatment programs (OTPs) to be licensed and operate in substantial compliance with state and federal regulations. However, we did not make the necessary change in the regulatory text. This technical amendment corrects those errors.

    DATES:

    This rule is effective on October 3, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ms. Patricia Toppings, 571-372-0485.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This technical amendment amends 32 CFR part 199 to read as set forth in the amendatory language in this final rule.

    List of Subjects in 32 CFR Part 199

    Claims, Dental health, Health care, Health insurance, Individuals with disabilities, Mental health, Mental health parity, Military personnel, Substance use disorder treatment.

    Accordingly, 32 CFR part 199 is amended as follows:

    PART 199—CIVILIAN HEALTH AND MEDICAL PROGRAM OF THE UNIFORMED SERVICES (CHAMPUS) 1. The authority citation for part 199 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    5 U.S.C. 301; 10 U.S.C. chapter 55.

    2. Amend § 199.6(b)(4)(xiv)(B) to remove “In addition, such a Participation Agreement may not be signed until an SUDRF has been licensed and operational for at least six months.” 3. Revise § 199.6(b)(4)(xix)(A)(2)(ii) to read as follows:
    § 199.6 TRICARE-authorized providers.

    (b) * * *

    (4) * * *

    (xix) * * *

    (A) * * *

    (2) * * *

    (ii) To qualify as a TRICARE authorized provider, OTPs are required to be licensed and operate in substantial compliance with state and federal regulations.

    Dated: September 13, 2016. Aaron Siegel, Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22363 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001-06-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 100 [Docket Number USCG-2016-0864] RIN 1625-AA08 Special Local Regulation; Ohio River, Owensboro, KY AGENCY:

    Coast Guard, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Temporary final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Coast Guard is establishing a special local regulation on the Ohio River from mile 755.0 to mile 759.0 in Owensboro, KY on September 30, 2016 through October 2, 2016. This special regulation is necessary to provide for the safety of life on these navigable waters near Owensboro, KY, during the Owensboro Air Show. This rulemaking prohibits transit into, through, and within the regulated area unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Ohio Valley or a designated representative.

    DATES:

    This rule is effective from 12 p.m. on September 30, 2016 through 4:30 p.m. on October 2, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-2016-0864 in the “SEARCH” box and click “SEARCH.” Click on Open Docket Folder on the line associated with this rule.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    If you have questions on this rule, call or email Petty Officer James Robinson, Sector Ohio Valley, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone 502-779-5347, 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 because the event is being held outside of the date and location currently contemplated in the publication. It is impracticable to publish an NPRM because we must establish this special local regulation by September 30, 2016.

    We are issuing this rule, and under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for making it effective less than 30 days after publication in the Federal Register. Delaying this rule would be unnecessary as this event is a recurring event and mariners familiar with this location on the Ohio River are aware that in mid to late September, a weekend event air show takes place. This year, the event will occur 01 weekend later than is currently published in the Federal Register. Furthermore, delaying this rule would be contrary to public interest of ensuring the safety of spectators and vessels during the event and immediate action is necessary to prevent possible loss of life and property. Broadcast Notices to Mariners (BNM) and information sharing with the waterway users will update mariners of the restrictions, requirements and enforcement times during this temporary situation.

    III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 33 U.S.C. 1233. The Captain of the Port Ohio Valley (COTP) has determined that potential hazards associated with the air show starting September 30, 2016 will be a safety concern for anyone within the regulated area. The purpose of this rule is to ensure safety of life on the navigable waters in the temporary regulated area before, during, and after the Owensboro Air Show.

    IV. Discussion of the Rule

    The Coast Guard will establish a special local regulation from September 30, 2016 through October 2, 2016. The special local regulation will cover all navigable waters from mile 755.0 to 759.0 on the Ohio River in the vicinity of Owensboro, KY. Transit into and through this area is prohibited from 12 p.m. to 3:30 p.m. on September 30, 2016, 12 p.m. to 4:30 p.m. on October 01, 2016, and 12 p.m. to 4:30 p.m. on October 2, 2016. The duration of the regulation is intended to protect participants, spectators, and other persons and vessels before, during, and after the scheduled air show. No vessel or person will be permitted to enter the special local regulation without obtaining permission from the COTP or a designated representative. Deviation requests will be considered and reviewed on a case-by-case basis. The COTP Ohio Valley may be contacted by telephone at 1-800-253-7475 or can be reached by VHF-FM channel 16. Public notifications will be made to the local maritime community prior to the event through the Local Notice to Mariners, and Broadcast Notice to Mariners.

    V. Regulatory Analyses

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

    A. Regulatory Planning and Review

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

    This regulatory action determination is based on the size, location, duration, and time-of-year of the special local regulation. The temporary special local regulation will only be in effect for less than five hours each day. The Coast Guard expects minimum adverse impact to mariners from the special local regulation's activation as the event has been advertised to the public. Also, mariners may request authorization from the COTP Ohio Valley or the designated representatives to transit the regulated area.

    B. Impact on Small Entities

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

    While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the regulated area may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section V. 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. 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.

    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, KY the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or more in any one year. Though this rule will not result in such expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble.

    F. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have determined that this action is one of a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This rule involves a special local regulation lasting less than five hours a day that will prohibit entry on all waters of the Ohio River, surface to bottom, extending from mile 755.0 to 759.0. It is categorically excluded from further review under paragraph 34(h) of Figure 2-1 of the Commandant Instruction. An environmental analysis checklist supporting this determination and a Categorical Exclusion Determination are available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES.

    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 100

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

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 CFR part 100 as follows:

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

    33 U.S.C. 1233.

    2. Add § 100.35T08-0864 to read as follows:
    § 100.35T08-0864 Special Local Regulation; Ohio River, Owensboro, KY.

    (a) Regulated area. All waters of the Ohio River beginning at mile marker 755.0 and ending at mile marker 759.0 in Owensboro, KY.

    (b) Period of enforcement. This rule will be enforceable from 12 p.m. to 3:30 p.m. on September 30, 2016, 12 p.m. to 4:30 p.m. on October 1, 2016, and 12 p.m. to 4:30 p.m. on October 2, 2016.

    (c) Special local regulations. (1) Persons or vessels desiring to enter into or passage through the zone must request permission from the COTP Ohio Valley or a designated representative. They may be contacted on VHF-FM radio channel 16 or phone at 1-800-253-7465.

    (2) The Coast Guard will patrol the regulated area under the direction of a designated Coast Guard Patrol Commander. The Patrol Commander may be contacted via VHF-FM radio channel 16 or by phone at 502-587-8633.

    (3) The Patrol Commander may terminate the event or the operation of any vessel at any time it is deemed necessary for the protection of life or property.

    (d) Informational broadcasts. The COTP Ohio Valley or a designated representative will inform the public through broadcast notices to mariners of the enforcement period for the regulated area as well as any changes in the planned schedule.

    Dated: September 12, 2016. M.B. Zamperini, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Ohio Valley.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22281 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 100 [Docket No. USCG-2016-0714] Special Local Regulations; Ironman 70.3 Augusta Triathlon, Savannah River AGENCY:

    Coast Guard, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice of enforcement of regulation.

    SUMMARY:

    The Coast Guard will enforce the Ironman 70.3 Augusta Triathlon, Savannah River, Special Local Regulation from 7 a.m. through 11 a.m. on September 25, 2016. This action is necessary to ensure safety of life on navigable waterways of the United States during this event. During the enforcement period, and in accordance with previously issued special local regulations, vessels may not enter, transit through, anchor in, remain within the designated area unless authorized by the Captain of the Port (COTP) Savannah or a designated representative.

    DATES:

    The regulation in 33 CFR 100.701, Table to § 100.71, Item (f)3 will be enforced from 7 a.m. through 11 a.m. on September 25, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    If you have questions about this notice of enforcement, call or email MST1 Cliffton Hendry, Marine Safety Unit Savannah Office of Waterways Management, Coast Guard; telephone 912-652-4353, extension 243, or email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Coast Guard will enforce the special local regulation for the Ironman 70.3 Augusta Triathlon, Savannah River, in 33 CFR 100.701 from 7 a.m. through 11 a.m. on September 25, 2016.

    This action is to provide enforcement action of the regulated area that will encompass portions of the navigable waterways. The location of the regulated area for this 1.2 mile long swim course, as stated in the latitude/longitude figures in 33 CFR 100.701, Table to § 100.701, Item (f)3, begins at the 5th Street Marina in Augusta, GA, and proceeds downriver to The Boathouse, 101 Riverfront Drive, Augusta, GA. Under the provisions of 33 CFR 100.701, all persons and vessels are prohibited from entering the regulated areas unless permission to enter has been granted by the COTP or designated representatives.

    This notice of enforcement is issued under authority of 33 CFR 100.701 and 5 U.S.C. 552 (a). The Coast Guard will provide notice of the regulated areas by Local Notice to Mariners, Broadcast Notice to Mariners, and on-scene designated representatives. If the COTP Savannah determines that the regulated area need not be enforced for the full duration stated in this publication, he or she may use a Broadcast Notice to Mariners to grant general permission to enter the regulated area.

    Dated: September 1, 2016. A.M. Beach, Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Savannah.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22356 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 100 [Docket Number USCG-2016-0717] RIN 1625-AA08 Special Local Regulation; Ohio River, Madison, IN AGENCY:

    Coast Guard, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Temporary final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Coast Guard is establishing a special local regulation for all waters of the Ohio River, surface to bottom, extending from Ohio River mile 557.5 to 558.5 in Madison, IN on September 17 and September 18, 2016. This action is necessary to provide for the safety of life on these navigable waters near Madison, IN during the high-speed boat race on September 17 and September 18, 2016. This regulation prohibits persons and vessels from being in the regulated area unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Ohio Valley or a designated representative.

    DATES:

    This rule is effective from 8 a.m. on September 17, 2016 to 6 p.m. September 18, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type [USCG-2016-0717] in the “SEARCH” box and click “SEARCH.” Click on Open Docket Folder on the line associated with this rule.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    If you have questions on this rule, call or email Petty Officer Joshua Herriott, Sector Ohio Valley, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone 502-779-5343, 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

    On February 03, 2016, the “5 to the 5” Vintage Hydros Organization notified the Coast Guard that it will be sponsoring a high-speed boat race from 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on September 17 and September 18, 2016. The race will take place at Ohio River mile 557.5 to 558.5 in the vicinity of Madison, IN. The Captain of the Port Ohio Valley (COTP) has determined that potential hazards associated with the high-speed regatta would be a safety concern for anyone within in the proposed regulated area.

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary rule without prior notice and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section 4(a) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those procedures are “impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.” Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) with respect to this rule because there is not time to complete the NPRM process due to unforeseen administrative delays. This event has been advertised to the local community and waterway users and it would be impracticable solicit public comment for this event because it must be in place on September 17 and September 18, 2016.

    We are issuing this rule, and under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for making it effective less than 30 days after publication in the Federal Register. This rule is necessary for the safety of life during high-speed boat races on this section of navigable waters. It would be impracticable to delay this rule to provide a full 30 days notice because the event is scheduled and has been advertised to the local community to take place on September 17 and September 18, 2016.

    III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 33 U.S.C. 1233. The Captain of the Port Ohio Valley (COTP) has deemed the potential hazards associated with the high-speed boat races to occur September 17 and September 18, 2016 will be a safety concern for anyone within the regulated area. The purpose of this rulemaking is to ensure the safety of vessels and spectators within the regulated area before, during, and after the scheduled event.

    IV. Discussion of the Rule

    As noted above, the Coast Guard will establish a special local regulation from 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on September 17 and September 18, 2016. The special local regulation will cover all navigable waters from mile 557.5 to 558.5 on the Ohio River in the vicinity of Madison, IN. The duration of the regulated area is intended to ensure the safety of vessels and these navigable waters before, during, and after the scheduled event. No vessel or person will be permitted to enter the special local regulation without obtaining permission from the COTP or a designated representative. Deviation requests will be considered and reviewed on a case-by-case basis. The COTP Ohio Valley may be contacted by telephone at 1-800-253-7475 or can be reached by VHF-FM channel 16. Public notifications will be made to the local maritime community prior to the event through the Local Notice to Mariners, and Broadcast Notice to Mariners.

    V. Regulatory Analyses

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

    A. Regulatory Planning and Review

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

    This regulatory action determination is based on the size, location, duration, and time-of-day of the regulated area. Vessel traffic will be able to safely transit through the affected area before and after the scheduled event. Moreover, the Coast Guard will issue Broadcast Notice to Mariners via VHF-FM marine channel 16 about the regulated area and the rule allows vessels to seek permission to enter the area.

    B. Impact on Small Entities

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

    While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the regulated area may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section V. 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. 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.

    E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

    F. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have determined that this action is one of a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This rule involves a special local regulation lasting from 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on September 17 and September 18, 2016. It is categorically excluded from further review under paragraph 34(h) of Figure 2-1 of the Commandant Instruction. An environmental analysis checklist supporting this determination and a Categorical Exclusion Determination are available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES.

    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 100

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

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 CFR part 100 as follows:

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

    33 U.S.C. 1233.

    2. Add § 100.35T08-0717 to read as follows:
    § 100.35T08-0717 Special Local Regulation; Ohio River, Mile 557.5 to 558.5, Madison, IN.

    (a) Location. All waters of the Ohio River beginning at mile marker 557.5 and ending at mile marker 558.5 in Madison, IN.

    (b) Period of enforcement. This rule will be enforceable from 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on September 17 and September 18, 2016.

    (c) Regulations. (1) In accordance with the general regulations in § 100.35, entry into this area is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Ohio Valley or a designated representative.

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

    Dated: September 12, 2016. M.B. Zamperini, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Ohio Valley.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22319 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 117 [Docket No. USCG-2016-0674] Drawbridge Operation Regulation; South Branch of the Elizabeth River, Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway, Chesapeake, VA AGENCY:

    Coast Guard, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice of deviation from drawbridge regulation.

    SUMMARY:

    The Coast Guard has issued a temporary deviation from the operating schedule that governs the Gilmerton (US13/460) Bridge across the South Branch of the Elizabeth River, mile 5.8, on the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway, at Chesapeake, VA. This deviation is necessary to avoid bridge failure and perform emergency bridge repairs. This deviation allows the bridge to remain in the closed-to-navigation position.

    DATES:

    This deviation is effective without actual notice from September 16, 2016 through 5 a.m. on September 19, 2016. For the purposes of enforcement, actual notice will be used from September 13, 2016 at 9 a.m., until September 16, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    The docket for this deviation, [USCG-2016-0674] 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 Mr. Hal R. Pitts, Bridge Administration Branch Fifth District, Coast Guard, telephone 757-398-6222, email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The City of Chesapeake, that owns and operates the Gilmerton (US13/460) Bridge, across the South Branch of the Elizabeth River, mile 5.8, on the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway, at Chesapeake, VA, has requested a temporary deviation from the current operating regulations to avoid bridge failure and perform emergency repairs to the bridge due to failure of operating mechanism components, requiring non-standard manual operation of the bridge until repair is completed. The bridge is a vertical lift draw bridge and has a vertical clearance in the closed position of 36 feet above mean high water. The vertical clearance of the bridge in the open-to-navigation position of 136 feet above mean high water will be reduced to approximately 110 feet above mean high water from 9 p.m. on September 16, 2016, through 5 a.m. on September 19, 2016.

    The current operating schedule is set out in 33 CFR 117.997(c). Under this temporary deviation, the bridge will remain in the closed-to-navigation position, except for scheduled openings at 9 a.m., noon, 3 p.m. and 7 p.m., Monday through Friday; and 9 a.m. and 3 p.m. on Saturday and Sunday. The scheduled openings at 9 a.m. and 3 p.m. on Saturday and Sunday, September 17, 2016, and September 18, 2016; and emergency openings from 9 p.m. on September 16, 2016, through 5 a.m. on September 19, 2016, will provide a reduced vertical clearance of approximately 110 feet above mean high water.

    The South Branch of the Elizabeth River is used by a variety of vessels including U.S. government and public vessels, commercial vessels, tug and barge traffic, and recreational vessels. The Coast Guard has carefully coordinated the restrictions with waterway users in publishing this temporary deviation.

    Vessels able to safely pass through the bridge in the closed position may do so at any time. On Saturday and Sunday, September 17, 2016, and September 18, 2016, vessels able to safely pass through the bridge in the closed position should contact the bridge tender to ensure safe passage through the bridge. There is no immediate alternate route for vessels unable to pass through the bridge in the closed position. The bridge will open on signal for emergency vessels, if at least one hour notice is given. 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 transit 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: September 13, 2016. Hal R. Pitts, Bridge Program Manager, Fifth Coast Guard District.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22320 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 117 [Docket No. USCG-2016-0866] Drawbridge Operation Regulation; James River, Isle of Wight and Newport News, VA AGENCY:

    Coast Guard, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice of deviation from drawbridge regulation.

    SUMMARY:

    The Coast Guard has issued a temporary deviation from the operating schedule that governs the James River Bridge (US17) across the James River, mile 5.0, at Isle of Wight and Newport News, VA. The deviation is necessary to perform bridge maintenance and repairs. This deviation allows the bridge to remain in the closed-to-navigation position.

    DATES:

    This deviation is effective from 5 a.m. on September 19, 2016, to 7 p.m. on October 16, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    The docket for this deviation, [USCG-2016-0866] 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 Mr. Hal R. Pitts, Bridge Administration Branch Fifth District, Coast Guard, telephone 757-398-6222, email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Virginia Department of Transportation, that owns and operates the James River Bridge (US17), across the James River, mile 5.0, at Isle of Wight and Newport News, VA, has requested a temporary deviation from the current operating regulations to perform repairs to the aerial electrical cable connecting the north tower to the south tower. The bridge is a vertical lift draw bridge and has a vertical clearance in the closed position of 60 feet above mean high water.

    The current operating schedule is open on signal as set out in 33 CFR 117.5. Under this temporary deviation, the bridge will remain in the closed-to-navigation position from 5 a.m. to 7 p.m. from September 19, 2016, through September 30, 2016; with alternate dates from October 1, 2016, through October 16, 2016. During this temporary deviation, the bridge will operate per 33 CFR 117.5 from 7 p.m. to 5 a.m.

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

    During closure periods a 55-foot by 150-foot crane barge will be positioned alongside the bridge at various locations within the main navigation span of the bridge with the centerline of the barge perpendicular to the bridge. Vessels able to safely pass through the bridge in the closed position with the crane barge positioned alongside the bridge may do so at anytime. Vessels planning to transit through the bridge in the closed position with the crane barge positioned alongside the bridge shall contact the bridge tender to request information concerning the position of the crane barge to ensure safe passage.

    Vessels able to safely pass through the bridge in the closed position that require the crane barge to clear the main navigation span of the bridge, may do so at noon, daily, if at least two hours advance notice is given to the bridge tender. The bridge will open on signal for vessels that require an opening of the bridge and are unable to transit through the bridge during non-closure times due to draft and/or daylight restrictions, if notice is provided by 5 p.m. the day before the required bridge opening. The bridge will not be able to open for emergencies and there is no immediate alternate route for vessels to pass. 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 transit 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: September 13, 2016. Hal R. Pitts, Bridge Program Manager, Fifth Coast Guard District.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22300 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R03-OAR-2016-0304; FRL-9952-47-Region 3] Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Maryland; Control of Volatile Organic Compounds Emissions From Fiberglass Boat Manufacturing Materials; Withdrawal of Direct Final Rule AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Withdrawal of direct final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    Due to the receipt of a comment, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is withdrawing the direct final rule published on August 1, 2016, to approve the State of Maryland's adoption of the requirements in EPA's control technique guidelines (CTG) for fiberglass boat manufacturing materials.

    DATES:

    The direct final rule published at 81 FR 50336 on August 1, 2016, is withdrawn effective September 16, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Gavin Huang, (215) 814-2042, or by email at [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    In the direct final rule published on August 1, 2016 (81 FR 50336), we stated that if we received comment by August 31, 2016, the rule would be withdrawn and not take effect. EPA received a comment before the August 31, 2016 deadline. EPA will address the comment received in a subsequent final action based upon the proposed action also published on August 1, 2016 (81 FR 50427). EPA will not institute a second comment period on this action.

    List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide, Incorporation by reference, Ozone, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: September 6, 2016. Shawn M. Garvin, Regional Administrator, Region III. Accordingly, the direct final rule which published in the Federal Register on August 1, 2016, at 81 FR 50336 is withdrawn as of September 16, 2016.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22225 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R04-OAR-2016-0473; FRL-9952-30-Region 4] Air Plan Approval; Alabama: Volatile Organic Compounds AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Direct final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving a portion of a revision to the Alabama State Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted by the Alabama Department of Environmental Management (ADEM) on May 8, 2013. The revision modifies the definition of “volatile organic compounds” (VOC). Specifically, the revision adds one compound to the list of those excluded from the VOC definition on the basis that this compound makes a negligible contribution to tropospheric ozone formation. This action is being taken pursuant to the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act).

    DATES:

    This direct final rule is effective November 15, 2016 without further notice, unless EPA receives adverse comment by October 17, 2016. If EPA receives such comments, it will publish a timely withdrawal of the direct final rule in the Federal Register and inform the public that the rule will not take effect.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R04-OAR-2016-0473 at http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. EPA will generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    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 or via electronic mail at [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Background

    Tropospheric ozone, commonly known as smog, occurs when VOC and nitrogen oxides (NOX) react in the atmosphere in the presence of sunlight. Because of the harmful health effects of ozone, EPA and state governments limit the amount of VOC and NOX that can be released into the atmosphere. VOC are those compounds of carbon (excluding carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, carbonic acid, metallic carbides or carbonates, and ammonium carbonate) that form ozone through atmospheric photochemical reactions. Compounds of carbon (or organic compounds) have different levels of reactivity; they do not react at the same speed or do not form ozone to the same extent.

    Section 302(s) of the CAA specifies that EPA has the authority to define the meaning of “VOC,” and hence what compounds shall be treated as VOC for regulatory purposes. It has been EPA's policy that compounds of carbon with negligible reactivity need not be regulated to reduce ozone and should be excluded from the regulatory definition of VOC. See 42 FR 35314 (July 8, 1977), 70 FR 54046 (September 13, 2005). EPA determines whether a given carbon compound has “negligible” reactivity by comparing the compound's reactivity to the reactivity of ethane. EPA lists these compounds in its regulations at 40 CFR 51.100(s) and excludes them from the definition of VOC. The chemicals on this list are often called “negligibly reactive.” EPA may periodically revise the list of negligibly reactive compounds to add or delete compounds.

    EPA issued a final rule approving the addition of trans-1,3,3,3-tetrafluropropene (also known as HFO-1234ze) to the list of those compounds excluded from the regulatory definition of VOC. See 77 FR 37610 (June 22, 2012). Alabama is updating its SIP to be consistent with that change to federal regulations.

    II. Analysis of State's Submittal

    On May 8, 2013, ADEM submitted a SIP revision 1 to EPA for review and approval. The revision modifies the definition of VOC found at Alabama Administrative Code section 335-3-1-.02(gggg). Specifically, the revision adds trans-1,3,3,3-tetrafluropropene (also known as HFO-1234ze) to the list of compounds excluded from the VOC definition on the basis that this compound makes a negligible contribution to tropospheric ozone formation.

    1 EPA will consider the other changes included in Alabama's May 8, 2013, SIP submittal, which relate to permitting, greenhouse gases, and transportation conformity, in a future rulemaking.

    This change is consistent with section 110 of the CAA and meets the regulatory requirements pertaining to SIPs. Pursuant to CAA section 110(l), the Administrator shall not approve a revision of a plan if the revision would interfere with any applicable requirement concerning attainment and reasonable further progress (as defined in CAA section 171), or any other applicable requirement of the Act. The revision to Rule 335-3-1-.02(gggg) is approvable under section 110(l) because it reflects changes to federal regulations based on findings that the aforementioned compound is negligibly reactive.

    III. Incorporation by Reference

    In this rule, EPA is finalizing regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, EPA is finalizing the incorporation by reference of Alabama Regulation section 335-3-1-.02 “Definitions,” effective November 24, 2015, which is the most up to date version of the definition of VOC.2 Therefore, this material has been approved by EPA for inclusion in the SIP, has been incorporated by reference by EPA into that plan, is fully federally enforceable under sections 110 and 113 of the CAA as of the effective date of the final rulemaking of EPA's approval, and will be incorporated by reference by the Director of the Federal Register in the next update to the SIP compilation.3 EPA has made, and will continue to make, these materials generally available through www.regulations.gov and/or at the EPA Region 4 Office (please contact the person identified in the “For Further Information Contact” section of this preamble for more information).

    2 Although the effective date of the rule change made in Alabama's May 8, 2013, SIP revision is May 28, 2013, the most recent version of Alabama's Rule 335-3-1-.02(gggg) which is approved into the federally-approved SIP is November 24, 2015. See 81 FR 49899 (July 29, 2016). The November 24, 2015, version of Alabama's Rule 335-3-1-.02(gggg) captures the changes the State made to this rule, effective May 28, 2013.

    3 62 FR 27968 (May 22, 1997).

    IV. Final Action

    Pursuant to section 110 of the CAA, EPA is approving the revision to the Alabama SIP changing the VOC definition. EPA has evaluated Alabama's May 8, 2013, submittal and has determined that it meets the applicable requirements of the CAA and EPA regulations and is consistent with EPA policy.

    EPA is publishing this rule without prior proposal because the Agency views this as a noncontroversial submittal and anticipates no adverse comments. However, in the proposed rules section of this Federal Register publication, EPA is publishing a separate document that will serve as the proposal to approve the SIP revision should adverse comments be filed. This rule will be effective November 15, 2016 without further notice unless the Agency receives adverse comments by October 17, 2016.

    If EPA receives such comments, then EPA will publish a document withdrawing the final rule and informing the public that the rule will not take effect. All public comments received will then be addressed in a subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule. EPA will not institute a second comment period. Parties interested in commenting should do so at this time. If no such comments are received, the public is advised that this rule will be effective on November 15, 2016 and no further action will be taken on the proposed rule.

    V. 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 November 15, 2016. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action. Parties with objections to this direct final rule are encouraged to file a comment in response to the parallel notice of proposed rulemaking for this action published in the proposed rules section of this Federal Register, rather than file an immediate petition for judicial review of this direct final rule, so that EPA can withdraw this direct final rule and address the comment in the proposed rulemaking. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. See section 307(b)(2).

    List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

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

    Dated: September 2, 2016. V. Anne Heard, Acting 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 B—Alabama 2. Section 52.50(c) is amended by revising the entry for “Section 335-3-1-.02” to read as follows:
    § 52.50 Identification of plan.

    (c) * * *

    EPA Approved Alabama Regulations State citation Title/subject State effective date EPA approval date Explanation Chapter 335-3-1—General Provisions *         *         *         *         *         *         * Section 335-3-1-.02 Definitions 11/24/2015 9/16/2016, [Insert Federal Register citation] *         *         *         *         *         *         *
    [FR Doc. 2016-22221 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R04-OAR-2015-0251; FRL-FRL-9952-28-Region 4] Air Plan Approval; SC Infrastructure Requirements for the 2010 1-Hour NO2 NAAQS AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency.

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking final action to approve portions of the State Implementation Plan (SIP) submission, submitted by the State of South Carolina, through the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control (SC DHEC) on April 30, 2014, to demonstrate that the State meets certain infrastructure requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) for the 2010 1-hour nitrogen dioxide (NO2) national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS). The CAA requires that each state adopt and submit a SIP for the implementation, maintenance and enforcement of each NAAQS promulgated by EPA, which is commonly referred to as an “infrastructure” SIP. SC DHEC certified that the South Carolina SIP contains provisions that ensure the 2010 NO2 NAAQS are implemented, enforced, and maintained in South Carolina. EPA has determined that South Carolina's SIP satisfies certain required infrastructure elements for the 2010 NO2 NAAQS.

    DATES:

    This rule will be effective October 17, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket Identification No. EPA-R04-OAR-2015-0251. All documents in the docket are listed on the www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the index, some information is not 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:

    Richard Wong, Air Regulatory Management Section, Air Planning and Implementation Branch, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, Region 4, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. The telephone number is (404) 562-8726. Mr. Richard Wong can also be reached via electronic mail at [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background and Overview

    On January 22, 2010, (published at 75 FR 6474, February 9, 2010), EPA promulgated a new 1-hour primary NAAQS for NO2 at a level of 100 parts per billion, based on a 3-year average of the 98th percentile of the yearly distribution of 1-hour daily maximum concentrations. Pursuant to section 110(a)(1) of the CAA, states are required to submit SIPs meeting the requirements of section 110(a)(2) within three years after promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS or within such shorter period as EPA may prescribe. Section 110(a)(2) requires states to address basic SIP elements such as requirements for monitoring, basic program requirements and legal authority that are designed to assure attainment and maintenance of the NAAQS. States were required to submit such SIPs for the 2010 NO2 NAAQS to EPA no later than January 22, 2013.

    In a proposed rulemaking published on June 27, 2016 (81 FR 41498), EPA proposed to approve South Carolina's 2010 1-hour NO2 NAAQS infrastructure SIP submission submitted on April 30, 2014, with the exception of the PSD permitting requirements for major sources of sections 110(a)(2)(C), prong 3 of D(i), and (J) and the interstate transport requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) and (II) (prongs 1, 2, and 4), for which EPA did not propose any action. On March 18, 2015 (80 FR 14019), EPA approved South Carolina's April 30, 2014, infrastructure SIP submission regarding the PSD permitting requirements for major sources of sections 110(a)(2)(C), prong 3 of D(i), and (J) for the 2010 1-hour NO2 NAAQS. Therefore, EPA is not taking any action today pertaining to sections 110(a)(2)(C), prong 3 of D(i) and (J). On August 22, 2016 (81 FR 56512) EPA conditionally approved South Carolina's April 30, 2014, infrastructure SIP submission regarding prong 4 of D(i) for the 2010 1-hour NO2 NAAQS. Therefore, EPA is not taking any action today pertaining to prong 4. With respect to the interstate transport requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) (prongs 1 and 2), EPA does not yet have a submission before the Agency for action. The details of South Carolina's submission and the rationale for EPA's action are explained in the proposed rulemaking. Comments on the proposed rulemaking were due on or before July 28, 2016. EPA received no adverse comments on the proposed action.

    II. Final Action

    With the exception of the PSD permitting requirements for major sources of sections 110(a)(2)(C), prong 3 of D(i), and (J) and the interstate transport requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) and (II) (prongs 1, 2, and 4), EPA is taking final action to approve South Carolina's infrastructure SIP submission for the 2010 1-hour NO2 NAAQS. EPA is taking final action to approve portions of South Carolina's infrastructure SIP submission for the 2010 1-hour NO2 NAAQS because it is consistent with section 110 of the CAA.

    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 (Public Law 104-4);

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

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

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

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

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

    In addition, this action for the state of South Carolina does not have Tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). The Catawba Indian Nation Reservation is located within the State of South Carolina. Pursuant to the Catawba Indian Claims Settlement Act, South Carolina statute 27-16-120, “all state and local environmental laws and regulations apply to the [Catawba Indian Nation] and Reservation and are fully enforceable by all relevant state and local agencies and authorities.” However, EPA has determined that this rule does not have substantial direct effects on an Indian Tribe because this action is not approving any specific rule, but rather approving that South Carolina's already approved SIP meets certain CAA requirements. EPA notes this action will not 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 November 15, 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 dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: September 2, 2016. V. Anne Heard, Acting 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 PP—South Carolina 2. In § 52.2120, the table in paragraph (e) is amended by adding the entry “110(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure Requirements for the 2010 1-hour NO2 NAAQS” at the end of the table to read as follows:
    § 52.2120 Identification of plan.

    (e) * * *

    Provision State
  • effective
  • date
  • EPA approval
  • date
  • Explanation
    *         *         *         *         *         *         * 110(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure Requirements for the 2010 1-hour NO2 NAAQS 04/30/2014 09/16/2016, [Insert Federal Register citation] With the exception of sections 110(a)(2)(C), prong 3 of D(i), and (J) and sections 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) and (II) (prongs 1, 2, and 4).
    [FR Doc. 2016-22239 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R04-OAR-2014-0751; FRL-9952-33-Region 4] Air Plan Approval/Disapproval; MS Infrastructure Requirements for the 2010 NO2 NAAQS AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking final action to approve in part, and disapprove in part, portions of the State Implementation Plan (SIP) submission, submitted by the State of Mississippi, through the Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) on February 28, 2013, to demonstrate that the State meets the infrastructure requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) for the 2010 1-hour nitrogen dioxide (NO2) national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS). The CAA requires that each state adopt and submit a SIP for the implementation, maintenance and enforcement of each NAAQS promulgated by EPA, which is commonly referred to as an “infrastructure” SIP. The MDEQ certified that the Mississippi SIP contains provisions that ensure the 2010 NO2 NAAQS are implemented, enforced, and maintained in Mississippi. With the exception of the state board majority requirements respecting significant portion of income, for which EPA is disapproving, EPA has determined portions of Mississippi's SIP submission, provided to EPA on February 28, 2013, satisfies certain required infrastructure elements for the 2010 1-hour NO2 NAAQS.

    DATES:

    This rule will be effective October 17, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket Identification No. EPA-R04-OAR-2014-0751. All documents in the docket are listed on the www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the index, some information is not 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:

    Richard Wong, Air Regulatory Management Section, Air Planning and Implementation Branch, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, Region 4, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. The telephone number is (404) 562-8726. Mr. Richard Wong can also be reached via electronic mail at [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background and Overview

    On January 22, 2010, (published at 75 FR 6474, February 9, 2010), EPA promulgated a new 1-hour primary NAAQS for NO2 at a level of 100 parts per billion (ppb), based on a 3-year average of the 98th percentile of the yearly distribution of 1-hour daily maximum concentrations. Pursuant to section 110(a)(1) of the CAA, states are required to submit SIPs meeting the requirements of section 110(a)(2) within three years after promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS or within such shorter period as EPA may prescribe. Section 110(a)(2) requires states to address basic SIP elements such as requirements for monitoring, basic program requirements and legal authority that are designed to assure attainment and maintenance of the NAAQS. States were required to submit such SIPs for the 2010 NO2 NAAQS to EPA no later than January 22, 2013.

    In a proposed rulemaking published on May 24, 2016, EPA proposed to approve Mississippi's 2010 1-hour NO2 NAAQS infrastructure SIP submission submitted on February 28, 2013, with the exception of the preconstruction PSD permitting requirements for major sources of sections 110(a)(2)(C), prong 3 of (D)(i), and (J), the interstate transport requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) and (II) (prongs 1, 2, and 4), and the state board majority requirements respecting significant portion of income of 110(a)(2)(E)(ii). On March 18, 2015 (80 FR 14019), EPA approved Mississippi's February 28, 2013, infrastructure SIP submission regarding the PSD permitting requirements for major sources of sections 110(a)(2)(C), prong 3 of D(i), and (J) for the 2010 1-hour NO2 NAAQS. Therefore, EPA is not taking any action today pertaining to sections 110(a)(2)(C), prong 3 of D(i), and (J). Additionally, on May 25, 2016, EPA took final action on prong 4 of D(i) element of Mississippi's February 28, 2013, SIP submission for the 2010 1-hour NO2 NAAQS and is not acting on this prong in this action. See 81 FR 33139. With respect to the interstate transport requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) (prongs 1 and 2), Mississippi provided a separate submission on July 14, 2016. EPA is considering action on Mississippi's submission related to 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) (prongs 1 and 2) through a separate action. The details of Mississippi's submission and the rationale for EPA's actions for this final rulemaking are explained in the May 24, 2016, proposed rulemaking. Comments on the proposed rulemaking were due on or before June 23, 2016. EPA received no adverse comments on the proposed action.

    II. Final Action

    With regard to the state board majority requirements respecting significant portion of income, EPA is finalizing a disapproval of Mississippi's February 28, 2013, infrastructure submission. Under section 179(a) of the CAA, final disapproval of a submittal that addresses a requirement of a CAA Part D Plan, or is required in response to a finding of substantial inadequacy as described in CAA section 110(k)(5) (SIP call), starts a sanctions clock. The portion of the submittal being disapproved in this notice (the portion addressing certain provisions of section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii)) was not submitted to meet requirements for Part D or a SIP call, and therefore, no sanctions will be triggered. However, this final action will trigger the requirement under section 110(c) that EPA promulgate a Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) no later than two years from the date of the disapproval unless the State corrects the deficiency, and EPA approves the plan or plan revision before EPA promulgates such FIP. With the exceptions described above, EPA is taking final action to approve Mississippi's infrastructure SIP submission for the 2010 1-hour NO2 NAAQS because these portions of the submission are consistent with section 110 of the CAA.

    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 (Public Law 104-4);

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

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

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

    • is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent with the 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 November 15, 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 dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: September 2, 2016. V. Anne Heard, Acting 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 Z—Mississippi 2. Section 52.1270(e), is amended by adding an entry for “110(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure Requirements for the 2010 1-hour NO2 National Ambient Air Quality Standard” at the end of the table to read as follows:
    § 52.1270 Identification of plan.

    (e) * * *

    EPA Approved Mississippi Non-Regulatory Provisions Name of
  • nonregulatory
  • SIP provision
  • Applicable
  • geographic or
  • nonattainment
  • area
  • State
  • submittal
  • date/
  • effective
  • date
  • EPA approval date Explanation
    *         *         *         *         *         *         * 110(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure Requirements for the 2010 1-hour NO2 National Ambient Air Quality Standard Mississippi 02/28/2013 09/16/2016, [Insert Federal Register citation] With the exception of sections: 110(a)(2)(C) and (J) concerning PSD permitting requirements; 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) and (II) (prongs 1 through 4) concerning interstate transport requirements and the state board majority requirements respecting significant portion of income of section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii).
    3. Section 52.1272 is amended by adding a paragraph (d) to read as follows:
    § 52.1272 Approval status.

    (d) Disapproval. Submittal from the State of Mississippi, through the Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) on February 28, 2013, to address the Clean Air Act section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) for the 2010 1-hour nitrogen dioxide (NO2) National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) concerning state board majority requirements respecting significant portion of income of section 128(a)(1). EPA is disapproving MDEQ's submittal with respect to section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) because a majority of board members may still derive a significant portion of income from persons subject to permits or enforcement orders issued by the Mississippi Boards, and therefore, its current SIP does not meet the section 128(a)(1) majority requirements respecting significant portion of income for the 2010 1-hour NO2 NAAQS.

    [FR Doc. 2016-22226 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 180 [EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0742; FRL-9951-44] Aspergillus flavus strains TC16F, TC35C, TC38B, and TC46G; Temporary Exemptions From the Requirement of a Tolerance AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    This regulation establishes temporary exemptions from the requirement of a tolerance for residues of Aspergillus flavus strains TC16F, TC35C, TC38B, and TC46G in or on the food and feed commodities of corn, field; corn, pop; and corn, sweet when used in accordance with the terms of Experimental Use Permit (EUP) No. 91163-EUP-1. Interregional Research Project Number 4 (IR-4) submitted a petition to EPA under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), requesting these temporary tolerance exemptions. This regulation eliminates the need under FFDCA to establish a maximum permissible level for residues of Aspergillus flavus strains TC16F, TC35C, TC38B, and TC46G when used under the terms of EUP No. 91163-EUP-1. The temporary tolerance exemptions expire on June 30, 2020.

    DATES:

    This regulation is effective September 16, 2016. Objections and requests for hearings must be received on or before November 15, 2016, and must be filed in accordance with the instructions provided in 40 CFR part 178 (see also Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION).

    ADDRESSES:

    The docket for this action, identified by docket identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0742, is available at http://www.regulations.gov or at the Office of Pesticide Programs Regulatory Public Docket (OPP Docket) in the Environmental Protection Agency Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the OPP Docket is (703) 305-5805. Please review the visitor instructions and additional information about the docket available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

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

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

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

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

    • Crop production (NAICS code 111).

    • Animal production (NAICS code 112).

    • Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).

    • Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).

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

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

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

    Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 U.S.C. 346a(g), any person may file an objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also request a hearing on those objections. You must file your objection or request a hearing on this regulation in accordance with the instructions provided in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0742 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 November 15, 2016. Addresses for mail and hand delivery of objections and hearing requests are provided in 40 CFR 178.25(b).

    In addition to filing an objection or hearing request with the Hearing Clerk as described in 40 CFR part 178, please submit a copy of the filing (excluding any Confidential Business Information (CBI)) for inclusion in the public docket. Information not marked confidential pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 may be disclosed publicly by EPA without prior notice. Submit the non-CBI copy of your objection or hearing request, identified by docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0742, by one of the following methods:

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

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

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

    II. Background

    In the Federal Register of February 9, 2016 (81 FR 6826) (FRL-9941-42), EPA issued a document pursuant to FFDCA section 408(d)(3), 21 U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a pesticide tolerance petition (PP 5E8397) by IR-4, Rutgers University, 500 College Rd. East, Suite 201W, Princeton, NJ 08540. The petition requested that 40 CFR part 180 be amended by establishing a temporary exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for residues of Aspergillus flavus strains TC16F, TC35C, TC38B, and TC46G in or on corn. That document referenced a summary of the petition prepared by the petitioner IR-4, which is available in the docket via http://www.regulations.gov. There were no comments received in response to the notice of filing.

    EPA changed the commodity name reflected in the tolerance exemption expression from “corn” to “food and feed commodities of corn, field; corn, pop; and corn, sweet” and changed “tolerance exemption” to “tolerance exemptions”. The reasons for these changes are explained in Unit III.C.

    III. Final Rule A. EPA's Safety Determination

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

    EPA evaluated the available toxicity and exposure data on Aspergillus flavus strains TC16F, TC35C, TC38B, and TC46G and considered its validity, completeness, and reliability, as well as the relationship of this information to human risk. A full explanation of the data upon which EPA relied and its risk assessment based on that data can be found within the August 18, 2016, document entitled “Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) Considerations for Aspergillus flavus strains TC16F, TC35C, TC38B, and TC46G.” This document, as well as other relevant information, is available in the docket for this action as described under ADDRESSES.

    Based upon its evaluation, EPA concludes that Aspergillus flavus strains TC16F, TC35C, TC38B, and TC46G are not toxic, not pathogenic, and not infective. Although there may be some exposure to residues when used on corn in accordance with the terms of EUP No. 91163-EUP-1, there is a lack of concern due to the lack of potential for adverse effects. EPA also determined that retention of the Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA) safety factor was not necessary as part of the qualitative assessment conducted for Aspergillus flavus strains TC16F, TC35C, TC38B, and TC46G.

    Based upon its evaluation, EPA concludes that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to the U.S. population, including infants and children, from aggregate exposure to residues of Aspergillus flavus strains TC16F, TC35C, TC38B, and TC46G. Therefore, temporary exemptions from the requirement of a tolerance are established for residues of Aspergillus flavus strains TC16F, TC35C, TC38B, and TC46G in or on the food and feed commodities of corn, field; corn, pop; and corn, sweet when used in accordance with the terms of EUP No. 91163-EUP-1.

    B. Analytical Enforcement Methodology

    An analytical method is not required for enforcement purposes for the reasons contained in the August 18, 2016, document entitled “Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) Considerations for Aspergillus flavus strains TC16F, TC35C, TC38B, and TC46G” and because EPA is establishing temporary exemptions from the requirement of a tolerance without any numerical limitation.

    C. Revisions to the Requested Tolerance Exemption

    Two modifications have been made to the requested tolerance exemption. EPA changed “corn” to “food and feed commodities of corn, field; corn, pop; and corn, sweet” to align with the Agency's food and feed commodity vocabulary. EPA also changed “tolerance exemption” to “tolerance exemptions” as four different active ingredients are covered with this action.

    IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

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

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

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

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

    V. 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: August 30, 2016. Jack Housenger, Director, Office of Pesticide Programs.

    Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:

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

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

    2. Add § 180.1338 to subpart D to read as follows:
    § 180.1338 Aspergillus flavus strains TC16F, TC35C, TC38B, and TC46G; temporary exemptions from the requirement of a tolerance.

    Temporary exemptions from the requirement of a tolerance are established for residues of Aspergillus flavus strains TC16F, TC35C, TC38B, and TC46G in or on the food and feed commodities of corn, field; corn, pop; and corn, sweet when used in accordance with the terms of Experimental Use Permit No. 91163-EUP-1. These temporary exemptions from the requirement of a tolerance expire on June 30, 2020.

    [FR Doc. 2016-22357 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 180 [EPA-HQ-OPP-2013-0237; FRL-9951-08] Ammonium Persulfate; Exemption From the Requirement of a Tolerance AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    This regulation establishes an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for residues of ammonium persulfate (CAS Reg. No.7727-54-0) when used as an inert ingredient (preservative) in pesticide formulations applied to growing crops and raw agricultural commodities after harvest, etc.) at a concentration not to exceed 0.05% by weight. Exponent, Inc., on behalf of Becker Underwood, Inc. submitted a petition to EPA under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), requesting establishment of an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance. This regulation eliminates the need to establish a maximum permissible level for residues of ammonium persulfate under the approved conditions.

    DATES:

    This regulation is effective September 16, 2016. Objections and requests for hearings must be received on or before November 15, 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-2013-0237, 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:

    Michael Goodis, 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 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-2013-0237 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 November 15, 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-2013-0237, 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. Petition for Exemption

    In the Federal Register of June 5, 2013 (78 FR 33785) (FRL-9386-2), EPA issued a document pursuant to FFDCA section 408, 21 U.S.C. 346a, announcing the filing of a pesticide petition (PP 2E8096) by Exponent, Inc., 1150 Connecticut Ave., Suite 1100, Washington, DC 20036, on behalf of Becker Underwood, Inc., 801 Dayton Avenue, Ames, IA 50010. The petition requested that 40 CFR 180.910 be amended by establishing an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for residues of ammonium persulfate (CAS Reg. No. 7727-54-0) when used as an inert ingredient (preservative) in pesticide formulations applied to growing crops or raw agricultural commodities after harvest at a concentration not to exceed 0.05% by weight in pesticide formulations. That document referenced a summary of the petition prepared by Exponent, Inc., the petitioner, which is available in the docket, http://www.regulations.gov. There were no comments received in response to the notice of filing.

    III. Inert Ingredient Definition

    Inert ingredients are all ingredients that are not active ingredients as defined in 40 CFR 153.125 and include, but are not limited to, the following types of ingredients (except when they have a pesticidal efficacy of their own): Solvents such as alcohols and hydrocarbons; surfactants such as polyoxyethylene polymers and fatty acids; carriers such as clay and diatomaceous earth; thickeners such as carrageenan and modified cellulose; wetting, spreading, and dispersing agents; propellants in aerosol dispensers; microencapsulating agents; and emulsifiers. The term “inert” is not intended to imply nontoxicity; the ingredient may or may not be chemically active. Generally, EPA has exempted inert ingredients from the requirement of a tolerance based on the low toxicity of the individual inert ingredients.

    IV. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety

    Section 408(c)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA allows EPA to establish an exemption from the requirement for a tolerance (the legal limit for a pesticide chemical residue in or on a food) only if EPA determines that the 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 . . . .”

    EPA establishes exemptions from the requirement of a tolerance only in those cases where it can be clearly demonstrated that the risks from aggregate exposure to pesticide chemical residues under reasonably foreseeable circumstances will pose no appreciable risks to human health. In order to determine the risks from aggregate exposure to pesticide inert ingredients, the Agency considers the toxicity of the inert in conjunction with possible exposure to residues of the inert ingredient through food, drinking water, and through other exposures that occur as a result of pesticide use in residential settings. If EPA is able to determine that a finite tolerance is not necessary to ensure that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result from aggregate exposure to the inert ingredient, an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance may be established.

    Consistent with FFDCA section 408(c)(2)(A), and the factors specified in FFDCA section 408(c)(2)(B), 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 ammonium persulfate including exposure resulting from the exemption established by this action. EPA's assessment of exposures and risks associated with ammonium persulfate follows.

    A. Toxicological Profile

    EPA has evaluated the available toxicity data and considered their 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. Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the adverse effects caused by ammonium persulfate as well as the no-observed-adverse-effect-level (NOAEL) and the lowest-observed-adverse-effect-level (LOAEL) from the toxicity studies

    The acute oral and dermal rat lethal dose (LD)50s are 495 milligram/kilogram body weight (mg/kg bw) and >2,000 mg/kg bw, respectively. The inhalation lethal concentration (LC)50 for ammonium persulfate in rats is >2,950 mg/cubic meter (m3). It is irritating to the eyes but not the skin. It is not a dermal sensitizer.

    Several subchronic studies were available for review for the sodium, potassium and ammonium salts of persulfate. In a 28 day oral (diet) toxicity study in rats, toxicity was manifested as decreased relative adrenal weight at 600 parts per million (ppm) (82 mg/kg/day). The NOAEL was 300 ppm; equal to 41 mg/kg/day. In a 3 months oral (diet) toxicity study in dogs, toxicity was not observed at doses up to 333 mg/kg/day, the highest dose tested. In a toxicity study in rats, ammonium persulfate was administered via inhalation for 13 weeks then allowed a 6-week recovery period. Toxicity was manifested as rales, increased respiratory rate, inflammation of the trachea and bronchi/bronchioles, decreased body weight, and increased lung weight at 25 mg/m3. The NOAEL was 10.3 mg/m3.

    The reproductive and developmental toxicity of ammonium persulfate has been tested in rats. Parental, offspring and reproduction toxicity was not observed at doses up to 250 mg/kg/day, the highest dose tested.

    Available mutagenicity and genotoxicity studies included the Ames test, gene mutation and chromosomal aberration assays. Ammonium persulfate produced negative results in all of these studies.

    Oral and inhalation studies of the carcinogenic and promoting potential of ammonium persulfate do not exist; however, the carcinogenic and promoting potential of ammonium persulfate was tested in a non-guideline study via the dermal route of exposure. In a tumor promotion study, mice were treated dermally with ammonium persulfate biweekly for 51 weeks. In another study, mice were treated topically with a solution of 200 mg/milliliter (mL) ammonium persulfate for 51 weeks. The incidence of tumors did not increase in either study.

    Neurotoxicity and immunotoxicity studies were not available for review. However, evidence of neurotoxicity and immunotoxicity of ammonium persulfate was not observed in the submitted studies.

    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.

    There was no hazard attributable to a single exposure seen in the toxicity database for ammonium persulfate. Therefore, ammonium persulfate is not expected to pose an acute risk.

    The NOAEL for ammonium persulfate was established at 300 ppm; equal to 41 mg/kg/day based on the 28-day repeat dose oral toxicity study in rats based on decreased relative adrenal weight at 600 ppm (82 mg/kg/day). The chronic risk assessment for ammonium persulfate is based on this endpoint and the chronic reference dose (cRfD) is 0.41 mg/kg/day. The additional Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA) uncertainty factor of 3X is applied for use of short-term study for a long-term risk assessment. EPA concluded that the uncertainty factor of 3X is adequate because the end point selected for the risk assessment is very conservative since no effects on absolute adrenal weight was observed; relative weight could be due to slight decrease in body weight; no other systemic toxicity was seen at this dose level and there were no systemic toxicity observed in a 90-day toxicity study in dogs which considered as long term study. Since the FQPA safety factor (SF) has been reduced to 3X, the cPAD is 0.14 mg/kg/day. The NOAEL for inhalation exposure has been established as 10.3 mg/m3 (3 mg/kg/day) based on reversible rales and respiratory rate increases in rats. For dermal exposures, the NOAEL for ammonium persulfate is based on the chronic oral NOAEL with an assumption of 100% dermal adsorption.

    C. Exposure Assessment

    1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary exposure to ammonium persulfate, EPA considered exposure under the proposed exemption from the requirement of a tolerance. EPA assessed dietary exposures from ammonium persulfate in food as follows:

    An acute dietary risk assessment was not conducted because no endpoint of concern following a single exposure was identified in the available studies. A chronic dietary exposure assessment was completed and performed using the Dietary Exposure Evaluation Model DEEM-FCIDTM, Version 3.16.which includes food consumption information from the U.S. Department of Agriculture's National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, “What We Eat In America”, (NHANES/WWEIA). This dietary survey was conducted from 2003 to 2008. In the absence of actual residue data, the inert ingredient evaluation is based on a highly conservative model that assumes that the residue level of the inert ingredient would be no higher than the highest established tolerance for an active ingredient on a given commodity. Implicit in this assumption is that there would be similar rates of degradation between the active and inert ingredient (if any) and that the concentration of inert ingredient in the scenarios leading to these highest of tolerances would be no higher than the concentration of the active ingredient. The model assumes 100 percent crop treated (PCT) for all crops and that every food eaten by a person each day has tolerance-level residues. A complete description of the general approach taken to assess inert ingredient risks in the absence of residue data is contained in the memorandum entitled “Alkyl Amines Polyalkoxylates (Cluster 4): Acute and Chronic Aggregate (Food and Drinking Water) Dietary Exposure and Risk Assessments for the Inerts” (D361707, S. Piper, 2/25/09) and can be found at http://www.regulations.gov in docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0738.

    2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. For the purpose of the screening level dietary risk assessment to support this request for an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for ammonium persulfate, a conservative drinking water concentration value of 100 parts per billion (ppb) based on screening level modeling was used to assess the contribution to drinking water for the chronic dietary risk assessments for parent compound. These values were directly entered into the dietary exposure model.

    3. From non-dietary exposure. The term “residential exposure” is used in this document to refer to non-occupational, non-dietary exposure (e.g., textiles (clothing and diapers), carpets, swimming pools, and hard surface disinfection on walls, floors, tables).

    While there are no current or proposed residential uses for ammonium persulfate, it is possible that ammonium persulfate may be used as an inert ingredient in pesticide products for which short-term and intermediate-term residential exposures may result. In the absence of specific residential exposure scenarios, risk estimates for residential exposures to ammonium persulfate can be modeled based on occupational exposure assessments. Occupational exposure assessments for ammonium persulfate for occupational mixer/loader/applicator exposure and occupational post-application exposure for comparable use scenarios (e.g., low pressure handwand turf application) with only baseline personal protective equipment result in MOEs of 10,000 or greater (i.e., exposures are not of concern). Given the larger treatment areas and higher concentrations used in these occupational use pesticide products than would be seen in residential uses, MOEs for residential use scenarios would exceed 1,000 or more and therefore there are no concerns for residential exposures to ammonium sulfate.

    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 ammonium persulfate to share a common mechanism of toxicity with any other substances, and ammonium persulfate does not appear to produce a toxic metabolite produced by other substances. For the purposes of this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has assumed that ammonium persulfate 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 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 is no evidence of increased susceptibility of infants and children following exposure to ammonium persulfate. In the reproductive and developmental toxicity study of ammonium persulfate in rats, parental, offspring and reproduction toxicity was not observed at doses up to 250 mg/kg/day, the highest dose tested.

    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 3X. That decision is based on the following findings:

    i. The toxicity database for ammonium persulfate is partially complete. The additional uncertainty FQPA factor of 3X is applied for use of short-term study for long term risk assessment.

    ii. There is no indication that ammonium persulfate 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 ammonium persulfate results in increased susceptibility in rats in utero or in young in the reproductive and developmental screening study.

    iv. There is no evidence of any triggers for immunotoxicity in the available database, therefore there is no need for an immunotoxicity study at this time or an additional UF factor to account for lack of an immunotoxicity study.

    v. 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 ammonium persulfate in drinking water. EPA used similarly conservative assumptions to assess postapplication exposure of children as well as incidental oral exposure of toddlers. These assessments will not underestimate the exposure and risks posed by ammonium persulfate.

    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. An acute aggregate risk assessment takes into account acute exposure estimates from dietary consumption of food and drinking water. No adverse effect resulting from a single oral exposure was identified and no acute dietary endpoint was selected. Therefore, ammonium persulfate is not expected to pose an acute risk.

    2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure assumptions described in this unit for chronic exposure, EPA has concluded that chronic exposure to ammonium persulfate from food and water will utilize <1% of the cPAD for children 1-2 years old, the population group receiving the greatest exposure.

    3. Short- and Intermediate-term risk. A short- & intermediate-term adverse effect was identified for ammonium persulfate. Short- and intermediate-term risk is assessed based on short- and intermediate-term residential exposure plus chronic dietary exposure. While there are no current or proposed residential uses for ammonium persulfate, it is possible that ammonium persulfate may be used as an inert ingredient in pesticide products for which short- and intermediate-term residential exposures may result. Margins of exposure (MOEs) for short- and intermediate-term residential use scenarios have been calculated and exceed 10,000 or more and therefore, since the level of concern is for MOEs of 300 or less, there are no concerns for residential exposures to ammonium persulfate.

    4. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. Based on the lack of evidence of mutagenicity and lack of evidence of tumors in the tumor promoting studies via dermal route, and lack of carcinogenicity for sulfates and ammonia (break down products), ammonium persulfate 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 ammonium persulfate residues.

    V. Other Considerations A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology

    Although EPA is establishing a limitation on the amount of ammonium persulfate that may be used in pesticide formulations, an analytical enforcement methodology is not necessary for this exemption from the requirement of tolerance. The limitation will be enforced through the pesticide registration process under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), 7 U.S.C. 136 et seq. EPA will not register any pesticide for sale or distribution for use on growing crops with concentrations of ammonium persulfate exceeding 0.05% by weight of the formulation.

    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 ammonium persulfate.

    VI. Conclusions

    Therefore, an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance is established under 40 CFR 180.910 for ammonium persulfate (CAS Reg. No. 7727-54-0) when used as an inert ingredient (preservative) in pesticide formulations applied to growing crops and raw agricultural commodities after harvest at a concentration not to exceed 0.05% by weight.

    VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

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

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

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

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

    VIII. 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: September 1, 2016. Daniel J. Rosenblatt, Acting Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.

    Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:

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

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

    2. In § 180.910, add alphabetically the following inert ingredient to the table to read as follows:
    § 180.910 Inert ingredients used pre- and post-harvest; exemptions from the requirement of a tolerance. Inert ingredients Limits Uses *         *         *         *         *         *         * Ammonium persulfate (CAS Reg.No. 7727-54-0) 0.05% Preservative *         *         *         *         *         *         *
    [FR Doc. 2016-22366 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 47 CFR Part 90 [PS Docket Nos. 12-94, 06-229, 06-150; FCC 16-117] Implementing Public Safety Broadband Provisions of the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012 AGENCY:

    Federal Communications Commission.

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    In this document, the Federal Communications Commission (Commission) addresses the 758-769/788-799 MHz band, which the Commission licensed to the First Responder Network Authority (FirstNet) on a nationwide basis pursuant to the provisions of the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012. We provide a mechanism to facilitate the relocation of the public safety narrowband incumbents currently operating on FirstNet's spectrum. We also affirmatively decline at this time to impose specific build-out requirements on FirstNet as a condition of renewal of its license.

    DATES:

    Effective October 17, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Roberto Mussenden, Policy and Licensing Division, Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau, (202) 418-1428.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This is a summary of the Commission's Report and Order in PS Docket No. 12-94, FCC 16-117, adopted on August 24, 2016 and released on August 25, 2016. The document is available for download at http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/. The complete text of this document is also available for inspection and copying during normal business hours in the FCC Reference Information Center, Portals II, 445 12th Street SW., Room CY-A257, Washington, DC 20554. To request materials in accessible formats for people with disabilities (Braille, large print, electronic files, audio format), send an email to [email protected] or call the Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau at 202-418-0530 (voice), 202-418-0432 (TTY).

    1. In 2013, the Commission's Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) sought comment on implementation of certain provisions of the Public Safety Spectrum Act, including how to relocate narrowband incumbents operating on the spectrum licensed to FirstNet, and how to address FirstNet's renewal expectations, including whether FirstNet should be subject to Commission-initiated build-out requirements.

    2. In the Report and Order, the Commission permits narrowband incumbents to remain on FirstNet's licensed spectrum until August 31, 2017, after which they will be required to vacate absent FirstNet's express consent to remain longer. In addition, the Commission prohibits continued operation by incumbents that have either previously discontinued operations or that are no longer in operation after the effective date of the Report and Order, and prohibits all narrowband incumbents from deploying additional facilities on FirstNet's licensed spectrum beyond those currently deployed as of the adoption date of the Report and Order. Accordingly, as of the adoption date of the Report and Order, the Commission terminates all authority to initiate new deployments pursuant to waivers previously granted by the Commission or Bureau, which had authorized deployment beyond the 2007 deadline.

    3. The Commission states specifies that under existing rules, any TV studio-transmitter links, TV relay stations, and TV translator relay stations operating on the FirstNet spectrum under Part 74, subpart G of the Commission's rules must cease operations within 120 days of receiving notice from FirstNet.

    4. The Commission concludes that there is no need or legal basis at this time for it to play a role in resolving disputes between FirstNet and incumbent licensees over relocation costs. The Commission also finds there is no need at this time to establish additional Commission rules to ensure rural coverage or any of the other requirements for renewal of FirstNet's license.

    Procedural Matters A. Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

    5. The Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis required by section 604 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 604, is included in Appendix D of the Report and Order.

    B. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 Analysis

    6. The Report and Order document does not contain new or modified information collection requirements subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), Public Law 104-13.

    Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

    7. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) was incorporated into the NPRM of this proceeding. The Commission sought written public comment on the IRFA. The RFA requires that an agency prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis for notice-and-comment rulemaking proceedings, unless the agency certifies that “the rule will not, if promulgated, have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.” The RFA generally defines “small entity” as having the same meaning as the terms “small business,” “small organization,” and “small governmental jurisdiction.” In addition, the term “small business” has the same meaning as the term “small business concern” under the Small Business Act. A “small business concern” is one which: (1) Is independently owned and operated; (2) is not dominant in its field of operation; and (3) satisfies any additional criteria established by the Small Business Administration (SBA). The present Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (FRFA) conforms to the RFA.

    A. Need for, and Objectives of, the Proposed Rules

    8. In the Report and Order, we regulate the transition of different classes of incumbents now occupying portions of the spectrum to be licensed to FirstNet. These actions are based on our established authority under the Communications Act to regulate use of the spectrum consistent with the public interest, convenience and necessity and our authority under the Public Safety Spectrum Act “to take all actions necessary to facilitate the transition” of the existing public safety broadband spectrum to FirstNet.

    B. Summary of Significant Issues Raised by Public Comments in Response to the IRFA

    9. There were no comments filed that specifically addressed the rules and policies proposed in the IRFA.

    C. Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities to Which the Rules Will Apply

    10. The RFA directs agencies to provide a description of and, where feasible, an estimate of the number of small entities that may be affected by the proposed rules, if adopted. The RFA generally defines the term “small entity” as having the same meaning as the terms “small business,” “small organization,” and “small governmental jurisdiction.” In addition, the term “small business” has the same meaning as the term “small business concern” under the Small Business Act. A small business concern is one which: (1) Is independently owned and operated; (2) is not dominant in its field of operation; and (3) satisfies any additional criteria established by the SBA.

    11. Small Businesses, Small Organizations, and Small Governmental Jurisdictions. Our action may, over time, affect small entities that are not easily categorized at present. We therefore describe here, at the outset, three comprehensive, statutory small entity size standards. First, nationwide, there are a total of approximately 27.5 million small businesses, according to the SBA. In addition, a “small organization” is generally “any not-for-profit enterprise which is independently owned and operated and is not dominant in its field.” Nationwide, as of 2007, there were approximately 1,621,315 small organizations. Finally, the term “small governmental jurisdiction” is defined generally as “governments of cities, towns, townships, villages, school districts, or special districts, with a population of less than fifty thousand.” Census Bureau data for 2011 indicate that there were 89,476 local governmental jurisdictions in the United States. We estimate that, of this total, as many as 88,506 entities may qualify as “small governmental jurisdictions.” Thus, we estimate that most governmental jurisdictions are small.

    12. Public Safety Radio Licensees. As a general matter, Public Safety Radio Licensees include police, fire, local government, forestry conservation, highway maintenance, and emergency medical services. For the purpose of determining whether a Public Safety Radio Licensee is a small business as defined by the SBA, we use the broad census category, Wireless Telecommunications Carriers (except Satellite). This definition provides that a small entity is any such entity employing no more than 1,500 persons. With respect to local governments, in particular, since many governmental entities comprise the licensees for these services, we include under public safety services the number of government entities affected. According to Commission records, there are a total of approximately 133,870 licenses within these services. There are 2,442 licenses in the 4.9 GHz band, based on an FCC Universal Licensing System search of May 23, 2012. We estimate that fewer than 2,442 public safety radio licensees hold these licenses because certain entities may have multiple licenses.

    13. Regional Planning Committees. Neither the Commission nor the SBA has developed a small business size standard specifically applicable to Regional Planning Committees (RPCs) and the National Regional Planning Council (NRPC). As described by the NRPC, “[t]he National Regional Planning Council (NRPC) is an advocacy body formed in 2007 that supports public safety communications spectrum management by Regional Planning Committees (RPC) in the 700 MHz and 800 MHz NPSPAC public safety spectrum as required by the Federal Communications Commission.” The NRPC states that “Regional Planning Committees consist of public safety volunteer spectrum planners and members that dedicate their time, in addition to the time spent in their regular positions, to coordinate spectrum efficiently and effectively for the purpose of making it available to public safety agency applicants in their respective region.” There are 54 formed RPCs and one unformed RPC. The Commission has not developed a small business size standard specifically applicable to RPCs and the NRPC. The SBA rules, however, contain a definition for Wireless Telecommunications Carriers (except Satellite) which encompasses business entities engaged in radiotelephone communications employing no more than 1,500 persons. Under this category and size standard, we estimate that all of the RPCs and the NRPC can be considered small.

    14. Radio and Television Broadcasting and Wireless Communications Equipment Manufacturing. The Census Bureau defines this category as follows: “This industry comprises establishments primarily engaged in manufacturing radio and television broadcast and wireless communications equipment. Examples of products made by these establishments are: Transmitting and receiving antennas, cable television equipment, GPS equipment, pagers, cellular phones, mobile communications equipment, and radio and television studio and broadcasting equipment.” The SBA has developed a small business size standard for Radio and Television Broadcasting and Wireless Communications Equipment Manufacturing, which is: All such firms having 750 or fewer employees. According to Census Bureau data for 2007, there were a total of 939 establishments in this category that operated for part or all of the entire year. According to Census bureau data for 2007, there were a total of 919 firms in this category that operated for the entire year. Of this total, 771 had fewer than 100 employees and 148 had more than 100 employees. Thus, under that size standard, the majority of firms can be considered small.

    D. Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping and Other Compliance Requirements

    15. Our actions will not require any reporting, recordkeeping or other compliance requirements.

    E. Steps Taken To Minimize Significant Economic Impact on Small Entities and Significant Alternatives Considered

    16. The RFA requires an agency to describe any significant alternatives that it has considered in reaching its approach, which may include the following four alternatives (among others): (1) The establishment of differing compliance or reporting requirements or timetables that take into account the resources available to small entities; (2) the clarification, consolidation, or simplification of compliance or reporting requirements under the rule for small entities; (3) the use of performance, rather than design, standards; and (4) an exemption from coverage of the rule, or any part thereof, for small entities.

    17. Nonetheless, we recognized there may arguably be a significant number of small entities currently operating in FirstNet's spectrum that would need relocation. Thus, one mechanism the Commission considered to minimize the economic burden on incumbent operators was to consider whether FirstNet or some third party source could fund relocation, thereby relieving any incumbent small entities of this potentially substantial economic burden. It also evaluated whether FirstNet could accommodate incumbent narrowband operations within a portion of its licensed spectrum, either indefinitely or on a transitional basis.

    F. Federal Rules That May Duplicate, Overlap, or Conflict With the Proposed Rules

    18. None.

    G. Report to Congress

    19. The Commission will not send a copy of this Report and Order to Congress and the Government Accountability Office pursuant to the Congressional Review Act, see 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A), because the Commission did not adopt any rules of particular applicability.

    Ordering Clauses

    20. Accordingly, it is ordered that, pursuant to sections 1, 4(i), 4(j), 301, 303, and 316 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i), 154(j), 301, 303, 316, as well as Title VI of the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012, Public Law 112-96, 126 Stat. 156, the Report and Order is hereby adopted.

    Federal Communications Commission. Gloria J. Miles, Federal Register Liaison Officer, Office of the Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22361 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 50 CFR Part 679 [Docket No. 150916863-6211-02] RIN 0648-XE878 Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Exchange of Flatfish in the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Management Area AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Temporary rule; reallocation.

    SUMMARY:

    NMFS is exchanging allocations of Amendment 80 cooperative quota (CQ) for Amendment 80 acceptable biological catch (ABC) reserves. This action is necessary to allow the 2016 total allowable catch of flathead sole, rock sole, and yellowfin sole in the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands management area to be harvested.

    DATES:

    Effective September 16, 2016, through December 31, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Steve Whitney, 907-586-7228.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    NMFS manages the groundfish fishery in the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands management area (BSAI) according to the Fishery Management Plan for Groundfish of the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Management Area (FMP) prepared by the North Pacific Fishery Management Council under authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act. Regulations governing fishing by U.S. vessels in accordance with the FMP appear at subpart H of 50 CFR part 600 and 50 CFR part 679.

    The 2016 flathead sole, rock sole, and yellowfin sole Amendment 80 allocations of the total allowable catch (TAC) specified in the BSAI are 13,753 metric tons (mt), 44,990 mt, and 110,113 mt as established by the final 2016 and 2017 harvest specifications for groundfish in the BSAI (81 FR 14773, March 18, 2016). The 2016 flathead sole, rock sole, and yellowfin sole Amendment 80 ABC reserves are 40,408 mt, 92,872 mt, and 60,456 mt as established by the final 2016 and 2017 harvest specifications for groundfish in the BSAI (81 FR 14773, March 18, 2016).

    The Alaska Seafood cooperative has requested that NMFS exchange 3,900 mt of flathead sole and 1,025 mt of rock sole Amendment 80 allocations of the TAC for 4,925 mt of yellowfin sole Amendment 80 ABC reserves under § 679.91(i). Therefore, in accordance with § 679.91(i), NMFS exchanges 3,900 mt of flathead sole and 1,025 mt of rock sole Amendment 80 allocations of the TAC for 4,925 mt of yellowfin sole Amendment 80 ABC reserves in the BSAI. This action also decreases and increases the TACs and Amendment 80 ABC reserves by the corresponding amounts. Tables 11 and 13 of the final 2016 and 2017 harvest specifications for groundfish in the BSAI (81 FR 14773, March 18, 2016) and as revised (81 FR 62833, September 13, 2016) are further revised as follows:

    Table 11—Final 2016 Community Development Quota (CDQ) Reserves, Incidental Catch Amounts (ICAS), and Amendment 80 Allocations of the Aleutian Islands Pacific Ocean Perch, and BSAI Flathead Sole, Rock Sole, and Yellowfin Sole Tacs [Amounts are in metric tons] Sector Pacific ocean perch Eastern
  • Aleutian
  • District
  • Central
  • Aleutian
  • District
  • Western
  • Aleutian
  • District
  • Flathead sole BSAI Rock sole BSAI Yellowfin sole BSAI
    TAC 7,900 7,000 9,000 16,685 55,425 149,990 CDQ 845 749 963 1,832 5,460 16,473 ICA 200 75 10 5,000 6,000 3,500 BSAI trawl limited access 685 618 161 0 0 14,979 Amendment 80 6,169 5,558 7,866 9,853 43,965 115,038 Alaska Groundfish Cooperative 3,271 2,947 4,171 1,411 11,129 43,748 Alaska Seafood Cooperative 2,898 2,611 3,695 8,442 32,836 71,290 Note: Sector apportionments may not total precisely due to rounding.
    Table 13—Final 2016 and 2017 ABC Surplus, Community Development Quota (CDQ) ABC Reserves, and Amendment 80 ABC Reserves in the BSAI for Flathead Sole, Rock Sole, and Yellowfin Sole [Amounts are in metric tons] Sector 2016 Flathead sole 2016 Rock sole 2016 Yellowfin sole 2017 Flathead sole 2017 Rock sole 2017 Yellowfin sole ABC 66,250 161,100 211,700 64,580 145,000 203,500 TAC 16,685 55,425 149,990 21,000 57,100 144,000 ABC surplus 49,565 105,675 61,710 43,580 87,900 59,500 ABC reserve 49,565 105,675 61,710 43,580 87,900 59,500 CDQ ABC reserve 5,257 11,778 6,179 4,663 9,405 6,367 Amendment 80 ABC reserve 44,308 93,897 55,531 38,917 78,495 53,134 Alaska Groundfish Cooperative for 2016 1 4,145 22,974 24,019 n/a n/a n/a Alaska Seafood Cooperative for 2016 1 40,163 70,923 31,512 n/a n/a n/a 1 The 2017 allocations for Amendment 80 species between Amendment 80 cooperatives and the Amendment 80 limited access sector will not be known until eligible participants apply for participation in the program by November 1, 2016. Classification

    This action responds to the best available information recently obtained from the fishery. The Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, NOAA (AA), finds good cause to waive the requirement to provide prior notice and opportunity for public comment pursuant to the authority set forth at 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B) as such requirement is impracticable and contrary to the public interest. This requirement is impracticable and contrary to the public interest as it would prevent NMFS from responding to the most recent fisheries data in a timely fashion and would delay the flatfish exchange by the Alaska Seafood cooperative the BSAI. Since these fisheries are currently open, it is important to immediately inform the industry as to the revised allocations. Immediate notification is necessary to allow for the orderly conduct and efficient operation of this fishery, to allow the industry to plan for the fishing season, and to avoid potential disruption to the fishing fleet as well as processors. NMFS was unable to publish a notice providing time for public comment because the most recent, relevant data only became available as of September 7, 2016.

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

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

    Authority:

    16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

    Dated: September 13, 2016. Emily H. Menashes, Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22338 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    81 180 Friday, September 16, 2016 Proposed Rules DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Agricultural Marketing Service 7 CFR Part 984 [Doc. No. AMS-SC-16-0062; SC16-984-2 PR] Walnuts Grown in California; Increased Assessment Rate AGENCY:

    Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA.

    ACTION:

    Proposed rule.

    SUMMARY:

    This proposed rule would implement a recommendation from the California Walnut Board (Board) to increase the assessment rate established for the 2016-17 and subsequent marketing years from $0.0379 to $0.0465 per kernelweight pound of assessable walnuts. The Board locally administers the marketing order and is comprised of growers and handlers of walnuts operating within the area of production. Assessments upon walnut handlers are used by the Board to fund reasonable and necessary expenses of the program. The marketing year begins September 1 and ends August 31. The assessment rate would remain in effect indefinitely unless modified, suspended, or terminated.

    DATES:

    Comments must be received by October 17, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Interested persons are invited to submit written comments concerning this proposed rule. Comments must be sent to the Docket Clerk, Marketing Order and Agreement Division, Specialty Crops Program, AMS, USDA, 1400 Independence Avenue SW., STOP 0237, Washington, DC 20250-0237; Fax: (202) 720-8938; or Internet: http://www.regulations.gov. Comments should reference the document number and the date and page number of this issue of the Federal Register and will be available for public inspection in the Office of the Docket Clerk during regular business hours, or can be viewed at: http://www.regulations.gov. All comments submitted in response to this proposed rule will be included in the record and will be made available to the public. Please be advised that the identity of the individuals or entities submitting the comments will be made public on the internet at the address provided above.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Terry Vawter, Senior Marketing Specialist, or Jeffrey Smutny, Regional Director, California Marketing Field Office, Marketing Order and Agreement Division, Specialty Crops Program, AMS, USDA; Telephone: (559) 487-5901, Fax: (559) 487-5906, or Email: [email protected] or [email protected]

    Small businesses may request information on complying with this regulation by contacting Richard Lower, Marketing Order and Agreement Division, Specialty Crops Program, AMS, USDA, 1400 Independence Avenue SW., STOP 0237, Washington, DC 20250-0237; Telephone: (202) 720-2491, Fax: (202) 720-8938, or Email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This proposed rule is issued under Marketing Order No. 984, as amended (7 CFR part 984), regulating the handling of walnuts grown in California, hereinafter referred to as the “order.” The order is effective under the Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act of 1937, as amended (7 U.S.C. 601-674), hereinafter referred to as the “Act.”

    The Department of Agriculture (USDA) is issuing this proposed rule in conformance with Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and 13175.

    This proposed rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform. Under the order now in effect, California walnut handlers are subject to assessments. Funds to administer the order are derived from such assessments. It is intended that the assessment rate as proposed herein would be applicable to all assessable walnuts beginning on September 1, 2016, and continue until amended, suspended, or terminated.

    The Act provides that administrative proceedings must be exhausted before parties may file suit in court. Under section 608c(15)(A) of the Act, any handler subject to an order may file with USDA a petition stating that the order, any provision of the order, or any obligation imposed in connection with the order is not in accordance with law and request a modification of the order or to be exempted therefrom. Such handler is afforded the opportunity for a hearing on the petition. After the hearing, USDA would rule on the petition. The Act provides that the district court of the United States in any district in which the handler is an inhabitant, or has his or her principal place of business, has jurisdiction to review USDA's ruling on the petition, provided an action is filed not later than 20 days after the date of the entry of the ruling.

    This proposed rule would increase the assessment rate for the 2016-17 and subsequent marketing years from $0.0379 to $0.0465 per kernelweight pound of assessable walnuts.

    The order provides authority for the Board, with the approval of USDA, to formulate an annual budget of expenses and collect assessments from handlers to administer the program. All members of the Board, but one, are growers and handlers of California walnuts. They are familiar with the Board's needs and with the costs for goods and services in their local area and are thus in a position to formulate an appropriate budget and assessment rate. The assessment rate is formulated and discussed in a public meeting. Thus, all directly affected persons have an opportunity to participate and provide input.

    For the 2015-16 and subsequent marketing years, the Board recommended, and USDA approved, an assessment rate of $0.0379 per kernelweight pound of assessable walnuts that would continue in effect from year to year unless modified, suspended, or terminated by USDA upon recommendation and information submitted by the Board or other information available to USDA.

    The Board met on June 9, 2016, and unanimously recommended 2016-17 expenditures of $23,143,050 and an assessment rate of $0.0465 per kernelweight pound of assessable walnuts. In comparison, last year's budgeted expenditures were $22,668,980. The assessment rate of $0.0465 is $0.0086 per pound higher than the rate currently in effect. The quantity of assessable walnuts for the 2016-17 marketing year is estimated at 553,000 tons inshell or 497,700,000 kernelweight pounds, which is the five-year average of walnut production. At the recommended higher assessment rate of $0.0465 per kernelweight pound, the Board should collect approximately $23,143,050 in assessment income, making income and expenses equal. The Board estimates it will begin the 2016-17 marketing year with $9,827,284 in their monetary reserve, which is well within the requirements of the order.

    The Board noted that sales of California walnuts in the domestic market have been declining in recent years, and embarked upon an enhanced market development and promotion program that would reverse the trend. Noting that making such a commitment for a single year would likely not result in long-term gains, they voted to continue such market development and promotion programs yet another year. Thus, they are maintaining their programs at a level near that of the 2015-16 marketing year.

    In addition, personnel changes will result in an overlap of duties and expenses, as some positions will be added so that experience and continuity can be maintained in spite of staff retirements. Thus, employee costs are expected to be higher this marketing year. Added to that, the implementation of the Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA) may result in added costs to the industry, and in some cases, to the Board as well. For that reason, the Grades and Standards Committee and the Research Committee requested increased budgets.

    The following table compares major budget expenditures recommended by the Board for the 2015-16 and 2016-17 marketing years:

    Budget expense categories 2015-16 2016-17 Employee Expenses $ 1,846,500 $ 2,292,000 Travel/Board Expenses/Annual Audit 191,000 206,000 Office Expenses 254,000 262,000 Controlled Purchases 10,000 10,000 Crop Acreage Survey 100,000 0 Crop Estimate 130,000 130,000 Production Research Director 94,500 175,000 Production Research 1,700,000 1,800,000 Sustainability Project 75,000 75,000 Grades and Standards Research 600,000 800,000 Domestic Market Development 18,478,440 18,398,040 Reserve for Contingency 32,790 59,010

    The assessment rate recommended by the Board was derived by dividing anticipated assessment revenue needed by estimated shipments of California walnuts certified as merchantable. The 553,000 ton (inshell) estimate for merchantable shipments is an average of shipments during three prior years. Pursuant to § 984.51(b) of the order, this figure is converted to a merchantable kernelweight basis using a factor of 0.45 (553,000 tons × 2,000 pounds per ton × 0.45), which yields 497,700,000 kernelweight pounds. At $0.0465 per pound, the new assessment rate should generate $23,143,050 in assessment income, which is equal to estimated expenses.

    Section 984.69 of the order authorizes the Board to carry over excess funds into subsequent marketing years as a reserve, provided that funds already in the reserve do not exceed approximately two years' budgeted expenses. Current reserve funds total $9,827,284 and are well within that requirement.

    The proposed assessment rate would continue in effect indefinitely unless modified, suspended, or terminated by USDA upon recommendation and information submitted by the Board or other available information.

    Although this assessment rate would be effective for an indefinite period, the Board would continue to meet prior to or during each marketing year to recommend a budget of expenses and consider recommendations for modification of the assessment rate. The dates and times of Board meetings are available from the Board or USDA. Board meetings are open to the public and interested persons may express their views at these meetings. USDA would evaluate Board recommendations and other available information to determine whether modification of the assessment rate is needed. Further rulemaking would be undertaken as necessary. The Board's 2016-17 budget and those for subsequent marketing years would be reviewed, and, as appropriate, approved by USDA.

    Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

    Pursuant to requirements set forth in the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601-612), the Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) has considered the economic impact of this proposed rule on small entities. Accordingly, AMS has prepared this initial regulatory flexibility analysis.

    The purpose of the RFA is to fit regulatory actions to the scale of businesses subject to such actions in order that small businesses will not be unduly or disproportionately burdened. Marketing orders issued pursuant to the Act, and the rules issued thereunder, are unique in that they are brought about through group action of essentially small entities acting on their own behalf.

    There are approximately 5,700 growers of California walnuts in the production area and approximately 90 handlers subject to regulation under the order. The Small Business Administration (SBA) defines small agricultural businesses (13 CFR 121.201) as those having annual receipts of less than $750,000, and small agricultural service firms are defined as those having annual receipts of less than $7,500,000.

    According to USDA's National Agricultural Statistics Service's (NASS's) 2012 Census of Agriculture, approximately 86 percent of California's walnut farms were smaller than 100 acres. Further, NASS reports that the average yield for 2014 was 1.97 tons per acre, and the average price received for 2014 was $3,230 per ton.

    A 100-acre farm with an average yield of 1.97 tons per acre would therefore have been expected to produce about 197 tons of walnuts during 2014-15 marketing year. At $3,230 per ton, that farm's production would have had an approximate value of $636,310. Since Census of Agriculture information indicates that the majority of California's walnut farms are smaller than 100 acres, it could be concluded that the majority of the growers had receipts of less than $636,310 in 2014-15, which is well below the SBA threshold of $750,000. Thus, the majority of California's walnut growers would be considered small growers according to SBA's definition.

    According to information supplied by the Board, approximately two-thirds of California's walnut handlers shipped merchantable walnuts valued under $7,500,000 during the 2014-15 marketing year, and would, therefore, be considered small businesses according to the SBA definition.

    This proposed rule would increase the assessment rate and collected from handlers for the 2016-17 and subsequent marketing years from $0.0379 to $0.0465 per kernelweight pound of assessable walnuts. The Board unanimously recommended 2016-17 expenditures of $23,143,050 and an assessment rate of $0.0465 per kernelweight pound of assessable walnuts. The proposed assessment rate of $0.0465 is $0.0086 higher than the 2015-16 rate. The quantity of assessable walnuts for the 2016-17 marketing year is estimated at 553,000 tons inshell weight, or 497,700,000 kernelweight pounds. Thus, the $0.0465 rate should provide $23,143,050 in assessment income.

    The increased assessment rate is due to continuing domestic marketing and promotion programs, as well as to increased personnel and committee expenses. The Board believes that California walnut sales can be improved in the domestic market through continued promotional activities. In addition, the Grades and Standards and Research Committees have asked for additional funds in case the implementation of FSMA requires new methods or processes for growing, harvesting, and shipping walnuts.

    The major expenses for the 2016-17 marketing year include: $2,292,000 for employee expenses; $206,000 for travel, board expenses, and annual audit expenses; $262,000 for office expenses; $10,000 for controlled purchases; $0 for the crop acreage survey; $130,000 for the crop estimate; $175,000 for the salary of the Production Research Director; $1,800,000 for production research; $75,000 for sustainability; $800,000 for grades and standards research; $18,398,040 for domestic market development projects; and $59,010 for the contingency reserve.

    By comparison, the major expenses for the 2015-16 marketing year include: $1,846,500 for employee expenses; $191,000 for travel, board expenses, and annual audit expenses; $254,000 for office expenses; $10,000 for controlled purchases; $100,000 for the crop acreage survey; $130,000 for the crop estimate; $94,500 for the salary of the Production Research Director; $1,700,000 for production research; $75,000 for sustainability; $600,000 for grades and standards research; $18,478,440 for domestic market development projects; and $32,790 for the contingency reserve.

    The Board reviewed and unanimously recommended 2016-17 expenditures of $23,143,050. Prior to arriving at this budget, the Board considered a recommendation from the Budget and Personnel Committee (committee), which also reviewed the proposed budget. The committee debated the relative value of the increased assessment rate, given the focus on domestic promotion programs. They also considered information from various other committees, who deliberated and formulated their own budgets of expenses and made their recommendations to the committee. Those committees include the Market Development, Production Research, and Grades and Standards Committees.

    The Budget and Personnel Committee considered alternative expenditure levels, such as reducing the proposed budgets recommended by the other committees, and changing the funding for domestic marketing projects, as well as not increasing the assessment rate. The committee ultimately decided that the proposed expenditures and assessment rate were reasonable and necessary to assist in improving domestic sales, maintaining staff continuity, and preparing for potential FSMA mandates. Thus, the committee unanimously agreed to recommend the proposed budget to the Board.

    The assessment rate of $0.0465 per kernelweight pound of assessable walnuts was derived by dividing anticipated assessment revenue needed by expected shipments of California walnuts certified as merchantable. Merchantable shipments for the year are estimated at 497,700,000 pounds. It was determined that $23,143,050 in assessment income was needed, and assessment income would equal expenses of $23,143,050.

    Unexpended funds may be retained in a financial reserve, provided that funds in the financial reserve do not exceed approximately two years' budgeted expenses.

    According to NASS, the season average grower prices for the years 2013 and 2014 were $3,710 and $3,230 per ton, respectively. These prices provide a range within which the 2016-17 season average price could fall. Dividing these average grower prices by 2,000 pounds per ton provides an inshell price per pound range of $1.62 to $1.86. Dividing these inshell per pound prices by the 0.45 conversion factor (inshell to kernelweight) established in the order yields a 2016-17 price range estimate of $3.60 to $4.13 per kernelweight pound of assessable walnuts.

    To calculate the percentage of grower revenue represented by the assessment rate, the assessment rate of $0.0465 per kernelweight pound is divided by the low and high estimates of the price range. The estimated assessment revenue for the 2016-17 marketing year as a percentage of total grower revenue will thus likely range between 1.13 and 1.29 percent.

    This action would increase the assessment obligation imposed on handlers. While assessments impose some additional costs on handlers, the costs are minimal and uniform on all handlers. However, these costs would be offset by the benefits derived by the operation of the marketing order. In addition, the Board's meeting was widely publicized throughout the California walnut industry, and all interested persons were invited to attend the meeting and encouraged to participate in Board deliberations on all issues. Like all Board meetings, the June 9, 2016, meeting was a public meeting and all entities, both large and small, were free to express views on this issue. Finally, interested persons are invited to submit comments on this proposed rule, including the regulatory and informational impacts of this action on small businesses.

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35), the order's information collection requirements have been previously approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and assigned OMB No. 0581-0178 (Walnuts Grown in California). No changes in those requirements as a result of this action are necessary. Should any changes become necessary, they would be submitted to OMB for approval.

    This proposed rule would impose no additional reporting or recordkeeping requirements on either small or large California walnut handlers. As with all Federal marketing order programs, reports and forms are periodically reviewed to reduce information requirements and duplication by industry and public sector agencies.

    AMS is committed to complying with the E-Government Act, to promote the use of the Internet and other information technologies to provide increased opportunities for citizen access to Government information and services, and for other purposes.

    USDA has not identified any relevant Federal rules that duplicate, overlap, or conflict with this action.

    A small business guide on complying with fruit, vegetable, and specialty crop marketing agreements and orders may be viewed at: http://www.ams.usda.gov/rules-regulations/moa/small-businesses. Any questions about the compliance guide should be sent to Richard Lower at the previously mentioned address in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

    A 30-day comment period is provided to allow interested persons to respond to this proposed rule. Thirty days is deemed appropriate because: (1) The 2016-17 marketing year begins on September 1, 2016, and the marketing order requires that the rate of assessment for each marketing year apply to all assessable walnuts handled during the year; and (2) handlers are aware of this action, which was unanimously recommended by the Board at a public meeting and is similar to other assessment rate actions issued in past years.

    List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 984

    Marketing agreements, Nuts, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Walnuts.

    For the reasons set forth in the preamble, 7 CFR part 984 is proposed to be amended as follows:

    PART 984—WALNUTS GROWN IN CALIFORNIA 1. The authority citation for 7 CFR part 984 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    7 U.S.C. 601-674.

    2. Section 984.347 is revised to read as follows:
    § 984.347 Assessment rate.

    On and after September 1, 2016, an assessment rate of $0.0465 per kernel weight pound is established for California merchantable walnuts.

    Dated: September 12, 2016. Elanor Starmer, Administrator, Agricultural Marketing Service.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22249 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-02-P
    DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Agricultural Marketing Service 7 CFR Part 984 [Doc. No. AMS-SC-16-0053, SC-16-984-1 PR] Walnuts Grown in California; Proposed Amendment to Marketing Order AGENCY:

    Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA.

    ACTION:

    Proposed rule.

    SUMMARY:

    This proposed rule invites public comments on a proposed amendment to Marketing Order No. 984, which regulates the handling of walnuts grown in California. The California Walnut Board (Board), which is responsible for the local administration of the order and is comprised of walnut producers and handlers operating within the production area, recommended an amendment that would authorize the Board to borrow from a commercial lending institution to fund operations and marketing/research expenses. Allowing the Committee to utilize this customary business practice would provide flexibility for the Board while increasing its effectiveness.

    DATES:

    Comments must be received by November 15, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Interested persons are invited to submit written comments concerning this rule. Comments must be sent to the Docket Clerk, Marketing Order and Agreement Division, Specialty Crops Program, AMS, USDA, 1400 Independence Avenue SW., STOP 0237, Washington, DC 20250-0237; Fax: (202) 720-8938; or Internet: http://www.regulations.gov. Comments should reference the document number and the date and page number of this issue of the Federal Register and will be available for public inspection in the Office of the Docket Clerk during regular business hours, or can be viewed at: http://www.regulations.gov. All comments submitted in response to this proposal will be included in the record and will be made available to the public. Please be advised that the identity of the individuals or entities submitting the comments will be made public on the internet at the address provided above.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Geronimo Quinones, Marketing Specialist, or Michelle P. Sharrow, Rulemaking Branch Chief, Marketing Order and Agreement Division, Specialty Crops Program, AMS, USDA; 1400 Independence Avenue SW., Stop 0237, Washington, DC 20250-0237; Telephone: (202) 720-2491, Fax: (202) 720-8938, or Email: [email protected] or [email protected]

    Small businesses may request information on complying with this regulation by contacting Antoinette Carter, Marketing Order and Agreement Division, Specialty Crops Program, AMS, USDA, 1400 Independence Avenue SW., STOP 0237, Washington, DC 20250-0237; Telephone: (202) 720-2491, Fax: (202) 720-8938, or Email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This proposal is issued under Marketing Order No. 984, as amended (7 CFR part 984), regulating the handling of walnuts grown in California, hereinafter referred to as the “order.” The order is effective under the Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act of 1937, as amended (7 U.S.C. 601-674), hereinafter referred to as the “Act.”

    The Department of Agriculture (USDA) is issuing this rule in conformance with Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and 13175.

    This proposal has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform. This rule is not intended to have retroactive effect.

    The Act provides that administrative proceedings must be exhausted before parties may file suit in court. Under section 608c(15)(A) of the Act, any handler subject to an order may file with USDA a petition stating that the order, any provision of the order, or any obligation imposed in connection with the order is not in accordance with law and request a modification of the order or to be exempted therefrom. Such handler is afforded the opportunity for a hearing on the petition. After the hearing, USDA would rule on the petition. The Act provides that the district court of the United States in any district in which the handler is an inhabitant, or has his or her principal place of business, has jurisdiction to review USDA's ruling on the petition, provided an action is filed not later than 20 days after the date of the entry of the ruling.

    Section 1504 of the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 (2008 Farm Bill) (Pub. L. 110-246) amended section 18c(17) of the Act, which in turn required the addition of supplemental rules of practice to 7 CFR part 900 (73 FR 49307; August 21, 2008). The additional supplemental rules of practice authorize the use of informal rulemaking (5 U.S.C. 553) to amend Federal fruit, vegetable, and nut marketing agreements and orders. USDA may use informal rulemaking to amend marketing orders based on the nature and complexity of the proposed amendments, the potential regulatory and economic impacts on affected entities, and any other relevant matters.

    AMS has considered these factors and has determined that the amendment proposal is not unduly complex and the nature of the proposed amendment is appropriate for utilizing the informal rulemaking process to amend the order. A discussion of the potential regulatory and economic impacts on affected entities is discussed later in the “Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis” section of this rule.

    The proposed amendment was unanimously recommended by the Board following deliberations at a public meeting held on February 19, 2016. Currently, the order does not allow the Board to borrow funds from a commercial lending institution. Allowing the Board to utilize this customary business practice would help to improve administration of the order by providing it with the means for ensuring continuity of operations when its obligations are greater than available assessment revenue and reserve funds.

    Proposal—Borrowing From a Commercial Lending Institution

    Section 984.69 of the order, Assessments, authorizes the Board to collect assessments from handlers to administer the program.

    This proposal would provide the Board with authority to borrow from a commercial lending institution during times of cash shortages. In the past, the Board has utilized reserve funds collected through handler assessments, to help finance the advertising/marketing program. However, due to the increased size of the domestic advertising program; relying on reserve funds as a means to meet obligations would make the program unsustainable in the long term. History shows, the most costly part of the program runs during the first six months of the marketing year and those expenditures must be paid by mid-year. Since the payments must be made before all assessment fees are invoiced and collected, a cash shortage may occur during the year. Authorizing the Board to borrow from a commercial lending institution would help manage and sustain the program during times of low income while also ensuring continuity of operations.

    Therefore, for the reasons stated above, it is proposed that § 984.69, Assessments, be amended by adding a new paragraph that would provide the Board with authority to borrow from a commercial lending institution when no other funding is available.

    Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

    Pursuant to the requirements set forth in the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601-612), the Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) has considered the economic impact of this action on small entities. Accordingly, AMS has prepared this initial regulatory flexibility analysis.

    The purpose of the RFA is to fit regulatory actions to the scale of businesses subject to such actions in order that small businesses will not be unduly or disproportionately burdened. Marketing orders issued pursuant to the Act, and rules issued thereunder, are unique in that they are brought about through group action of essentially small entities acting on their own behalf.

    There are approximately 5,700 growers of California walnuts in the production area and approximately 90 handlers subject to regulation under the marketing order. The Small Business Administration (SBA) defines small agricultural producers as those having annual receipts of less than $750,000, and small agricultural service firms are defined as those having annual receipts of less than $7,500,000. (13 CFR 121.201)

    According to USDA's National Agricultural Statistics Service's (NASS's) 2012 Census of Agriculture, approximately 86 percent of California's walnut farms were smaller than 100 acres. Further, NASS reports that the average yield for 2014 was 1.97 tons per acre, and the average price received for 2014 was $3,230 per ton.

    A 100-acre farm with an average yield of 1.97 tons per acre would therefore have been expected to produce about 197 tons of walnuts during 2014-15 marketing year. At $3,230 per ton, that farm's production would have had an approximate value of $636,310. Since Census of Agriculture information indicates that the majority of California's walnut farms are smaller than 100 acres, it could be concluded that the majority of the growers had receipts of less than $636,310 in 2014-15, which is well below the SBA threshold of $750,000. Thus, the majority of California's walnut growers would be considered small growers according to SBA's definition.

    According to information supplied by the Board, approximately two-thirds of California's walnut handlers shipped merchantable walnuts valued under $7,500,000 during the 2014-15 marketing year; and would, therefore, be considered small handlers according to the SBA definition.

    The proposed rule would authorize the Board to borrow from commercial lending institutions. This would help to ensure continuity in operations.

    The Board reviewed and identified the most costly portion of its domestic advertising program. That portion of the program operates during the first six months of the Board's marketing year and costs must be paid by mid-year. Since assessment revenues are collected throughout the marketing year, not enough is on hand when these large payments are due. In the past, the Board has used reserve funds to help pay for marketing and advertising expenses. However, due to the increased size of the advertising program, the Board cannot rely on reserve funds to cover the costs. Based on this fact, the Board believes the program could become unsustainable in the long term.

    While this action could result in a temporary increase in handler assessment costs, these increases would be small and uniform on all handlers and proportional to the size of their businesses. These costs are expected to be offset by the benefits derived from a sustained marketing and advertising program. Additionally, these costs would help to ensure that the Board has sufficient funds to meet its financial obligations. Such stability is expected to allow the Board to conduct a program that would benefit all entities, regardless of size. California walnut producers should see an improved business environment and a more sustainable business model because of the improved business efficiency.

    Alternatives were considered to this proposal, including making no change at this time. However, the Board believes it would be beneficial to have the means and funds necessary to effectively administer the program.

    Paperwork Reduction Act

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35), the order's information collection requirements have been previously approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and assigned OMB No. 0581-0178, “Vegetable and Specialty Crops.” No changes in those requirements as a result of this action are necessary. Should any changes become necessary, they would be submitted to OMB for approval.

    This proposed rule would impose no additional reporting or recordkeeping requirements on either small or large California walnut handlers. As with all Federal marketing order programs, reports and forms are periodically reviewed to reduce information requirements and duplication by industry and public sector agencies.

    The Board's meeting was widely publicized throughout the California walnut production area. All interested persons were invited to attend the meeting and encouraged to participate in Board deliberations on this issue. Like all Board meetings, the February 19, 2016, meeting was public, and all entities, both large and small, were encouraged to express their views on the proposal.

    Finally, interested persons are invited to submit comments on the proposed amendment to the order, including comments on the regulatory and informational impacts of this action on small businesses.

    Following analysis of any comments received on the proposed amendment, AMS will evaluate all available information and determine whether to proceed. If appropriate, a proposed rule and referendum order would be issued, and producers would be provided the opportunity to vote for or against the proposed amendment. Information about the referendum, including dates and voter eligibility requirements, would be published in a future issue of the Federal Register. A final rule would then be issued to effectuate the amendment if favored by producers participating in the referendum.

    AMS is committed to complying with the E-Government Act to promote the use of the internet and other information technologies, to provide increased opportunities for citizen access to Government information and services, and for other purposes.

    USDA has not identified any relevant Federal rules that duplicate, overlap, or conflict with this action. A small business guide on complying with fruit, vegetable, and specialty crop marketing agreements and orders may be viewed at: http://www.ams.usda.gov/MarketingOrdersSmallBusinessGuide. Any questions about the compliance guide should be sent to Antoinette Carter at the previously mentioned address in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

    General Findings

    The findings hereinafter set forth are supplementary to the findings and determinations which were previously made in connection with the issuance of the marketing order; and all said previous findings and determinations are hereby ratified and affirmed, except insofar as such findings and determinations may be in conflict with the findings and determinations set forth herein.

    1. The marketing order as hereby proposed to be amended, and all of the terms and conditions thereof, would tend to effectuate the declared policy of the Act;

    2. The marketing order as hereby proposed to be amended regulates the handling of walnuts grown in California and is applicable only to persons in the respective classes of commercial and industrial activity specified in the marketing order;

    3. The marketing order as hereby proposed to be amended is limited in application to the smallest regional production area which is practicable, consistent with carrying out the declared policy of the Act, and the issuance of several orders applicable to subdivisions of the production area would not effectively carry out the declared policy of the Act;

    4. The marketing order as hereby proposed to be amended prescribes, insofar as practicable, such different terms applicable to different parts of the production area as are necessary to give due recognition to the differences in the production and marketing of walnuts produced or packed in the production area; and

    5. All handling of walnuts produced or packed in the production area as defined in the marketing order is in the current of interstate or foreign commerce or directly burdens, obstructs, or affects such commerce.

    A 60-day comment period is provided to allow interested persons to respond to the proposal. Any comments received on the amendment proposed in this rule will be analyzed, and if AMS determines to proceed based on all the information presented, a producer referendum would be conducted to determine producer support for the proposed amendment. If appropriate, a final rule would then be issued to effectuate the amendment favored by producers participating in the referendum.

    List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 984

    Marketing agreements, Nuts, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Walnuts.

    For the reasons set forth in the preamble, 7 CFR part 984 is proposed to be amended as follows:

    PART 984—WALNUTS GROWN IN CALIFORNIA 1. The authority citation for 7 CFR part 984 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    7 U.S.C. 601-674.

    2. Amend § 984.69 by redesignating paragraph (d) as (e) and adding a new paragraph (d) to read as follows:
    § 984.69 Assessments.

    (d) To provide funds for the administration of the provisions of this part during the part of a fiscal period when neither sufficient operating reserve funds nor sufficient revenue from assessments on the current season's certifications are available, the Board may accept payment of assessments in advance or may borrow money from a commercial lending institution for such purposes.

    Dated: September 12, 2016. Elanor Starmer, Administrator, Agricultural Marketing Service.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22247 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-02-P
    DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Agricultural Marketing Service 7 CFR Parts 989 and 999 [Doc. No. AMS-SC-16-0065; SC16-989-2 PR] Raisins Produced From Grapes Grown in California and Imported Raisins; Removal of Language AGENCY:

    Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA.

    ACTION:

    Proposed rule.

    SUMMARY:

    This proposed rule invites comments on a recommendation by the Raisin Administrative Committee (Committee) to the remove the term “midget” from the minimum grade standards of the California raisin marketing order (order). The marketing order regulates the handling of raisins produced from grapes grown in California, and is administered locally by the Committee. Recently, the U.S. Standards for Grades of Processed Raisins (standards) were amended to remove the word “midget.” The proposed change would make the marketing order consistent with the amended standards. Furthermore, this rule would make a corresponding change to the raisin import regulation as required by the Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act of 1937, as amended, when changes are made to the size, grade, maturity, or quality requirements of the order.

    DATES:

    Comments must be received by October 17, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Interested persons are invited to submit written comments concerning this proposal. Comments must be sent to the Docket Clerk, Marketing Order and Agreement Division, Specialty Crops Program, AMS, USDA, 1400 Independence Avenue SW., STOP 0237, Washington, DC 20250-0237; Fax: (202) 720-8938; or Internet: http://www.regulations.gov. All comments should reference the docket number and the date and page number of this issue of the Federal Register and will be made available for public inspection in the Office of the Docket Clerk during regular business hours, or can be viewed on the Internet at: http://www.regulations.gov. All comments submitted in response to this proposal will be included in the record and will be made available to the public. Please be advised that the identity of the individuals or entities submitting the comments will be made public on the internet at the address provided above.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Maria Stobbe, Marketing Specialist, or Jeffery Smutny, Regional Director, California Marketing Field Office, Marketing Order and Agreement Division, Specialty Crops Program, AMS, USDA; Telephone: (559) 487-5901, Fax: (559) 487-5906, or Email: [email protected] or [email protected]

    Small businesses may request information on complying with this regulation by contacting Richard Lower, Marketing Order and Agreement Division, Specialty Crops Program, AMS, USDA, 1400 Independence Avenue SW., STOP 0237, Washington, DC 20250-0237; Telephone: (202) 720-2491, Fax: (202) 720-8938, or Email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This proposal is issued under Marketing Agreement and Marketing Order No. 989, both as amended (7 CFR part 989), regulating the handling of raisins produced from grapes grown in California, hereinafter referred to as the “order.” The order is effective under the Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act of 1937, as amended (7 U.S.C. 601-674), hereinafter referred to as the “Act.”

    This proposed rule is also issued under section 8e of the Act, which provides that whenever certain specified commodities, including raisins, are regulated under a Federal marketing order, imports of these commodities into the United States are prohibited unless they meet the same or comparable grade, size, quality, or maturity requirements as those in effect for the domestically-produced commodities.

    The Department of Agriculture (USDA) is issuing this proposed rule in conformance with Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and 13175.

    This proposed rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform. This proposed rule is not intended to have retroactive effect.

    The Act provides that administrative proceedings must be exhausted before parties may file suit in court. Under section 608c(15)(A) of the Act, any handler subject to an order may file with USDA a petition stating that the order, any provision of the order, or any obligation imposed in connection with the order is not in accordance with law and request a modification of the order or to be exempted therefrom. A handler is afforded the opportunity for a hearing on the petition. After the hearing, USDA would rule on the petition. The Act provides that the district court of the United States in any district in which the handler is an inhabitant, or has his or her principal place of business, has jurisdiction to review USDA's ruling on the petition, provided an action is filed not later than 20 days after the date of the entry of the ruling.

    There are no administrative procedures which must be exhausted prior to any judicial challenge to the provisions of import regulations issued under section 8e of the Act.

    This proposal invites comments on the removal of the term “midget” from § 989.702(a) of the order and § 999.300(b)(1) of the import regulations. This action would make the order and the import regulations consistent with the recent change to the standards.

    The Committee unanimously recommended that the term “midget” be removed from the order at a meeting on June 26, 2014. At a subsequent meeting on August 14, 2014, the committee also unanimously recommended that the word “midget” be removed from the standards. As required under the Act, the import regulations must be consistent with the changes to the order. In this instance, the order must be consistent with changes to the standards.

    Paragraph (a) of § 989.702 of the order specifies minimum grade standards for packed Natural (sun-dried) Seedless (NS) raisins, requiring that small (midget)-sized raisins shall meet U.S. Grade C tolerances with respect to pieces of stem, and underdeveloped and substandard raisins. The word “midget” is redundant to the term “small,” and its removal is insignificant.

    Pursuant to the recommendation of the Committee and consistent with the recent amendment of the standards, the word “midget” is proposed to be removed from the order language.

    The Committee's recommendation to delete the word “midget” from the order and the standards necessitates a corresponding change to the import requirements.

    Under the raisin import regulations, in paragraph (b)(1) of § 999.300, raisins imported into the United States are required to meet the same or comparable grade, size, quality, or maturity requirements as those in effect for the domestically-produced commodities, when such commodities are regulated under an order. With the removal of the word “midget” from both the standards and the order, removal of “midget” is required under the import regulations.

    Removal of the word “midget” should not impact the application of the order or the import regulations, since the word “midget” is redundant and appears in parentheses after the word “small.” Thus, removing the word “midget” has no effect on interpretation of the order or the import regulations; and, therefore, has no effect on raisin importers.

    The final rule removing the word “midget” from the standards was published in the Federal Register on June 23, 2016 (81 FR 40779). Thus, this proposal would make the order and the import regulations consistent with the standards, as recently revised.

    Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

    Pursuant to requirements set forth in the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), the Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) has considered the economic impact of this action on small entities. Accordingly, AMS has prepared this initial regulatory flexibility analysis.

    The purpose of the RFA is to fit regulatory actions to the scale of businesses subject to such actions in order that small businesses will not be unduly or disproportionately burdened. Marketing orders issued pursuant to the Act, and rules issued thereunder, are unique in that they are brought about through group action of essentially small entities acting on their own behalf.

    There are approximately 3,000 California raisin producers and 24 handlers subject to regulation under the marketing order. The Small Business Administration defines small agricultural producers as those having annual receipts less than $750,000, and defines small agricultural service firms, such as handlers and importers, as those whose annual receipts are less than $7,500,000. (13 CFR 121.201.)

    Based on shipment data and other information provided by the Committee, most producers and approximately 13 handlers of California raisins may be classified as small entities. This action should not have any impact on handlers' or growers' benefits or costs.

    There are approximately 52 raisins importers. This action should not have any impact on importers' costs.

    This proposal would remove the word “midget” from the order regulations in § 989.702(a) and from the import regulations in § 999.300(b)(1), bringing the order and the import regulations into conformance with the recent amendment to the standards.

    AMS is committed to complying with the E-Government Act, to promote the use of the Internet and other information technologies to provide increased opportunities for citizen access to Government information and services, and for other purposes.

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35), the order's information collection requirements have been previously approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and assigned OMB No. 0581-0178, “Vegetable and Specialty Crops.” No changes in those requirements as a result of this action are necessary. Should any changes become necessary, they would be submitted to OMB for approval.

    This proposed rule would not impose any additional reporting or recordkeeping requirements on either large or small raisin handlers or on raisin importers. As with all Federal marketing order programs, reports and forms are periodically reviewed to reduce information requirements and duplication by industry and public sector agencies. In addition, USDA has not identified any relevant Federal rules that duplicate, overlap or conflict with this proposal.

    Further, the Committee's meetings were widely publicized throughout the California raisin industry and all interested persons were invited to attend the meetings and encouraged to participate in Committee deliberations on all issues. Like all Committee meetings, the June 26, 2014, and August 14, 2014, meetings were public meetings and all entities, both large and small, were encouraged to express their views on this issue. Finally, interested persons are invited to submit comments on this proposed rule, including the regulatory and informational impacts of this action on small businesses.

    A small business guide on complying with fruit, vegetable, and specialty crop marketing agreements and orders may be viewed at: www.ams.usda.gov/MarketingOrdersSmallBusinessGuide. Any questions about the compliance guide should be sent to Richard Lower at the previously-mentioned address in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

    A 30-day comment period is provided to allow interested persons to respond to this proposal. Thirty days is deemed appropriate because: (1) This proposed rule should be implemented as soon as possible since the standards have already been amended; (2) the Committee discussed this change at two public meetings, and unanimously recommended it; and (3) the proposed change is insignificant and should not impact handlers or importers. All written comments received during the comment period will be considered before a final determination is made on this matter.

    List of Subjects 7 CFR Part 989

    Grape, Marketing agreements, Raisins, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    7 CFR Part 999

    Dates, Filberts, Food grades and standards, Imports, Nuts, Prunes, Raisins, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Walnuts.

    For the reasons set forth in the preamble, 7 CFR parts 989 and 999 are proposed to be amended as follows:

    PART 989—RAISINS PRODUCED FROM GRAPES GROWN IN CALIFORNIA 1. The authority citation for 7 CFR part 989 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    7 U.S.C. 601-674.

    § 989.702 Minimum grade standards for packed raisins.
    2. Paragraph (a) of § 989.702 is amended by removing the word “midget.” PART 999—SPECIALTY CROPS; IMPORT REGULATIONS 3. The authority citation for 7 CFR part 999 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    7 U.S.C. 601-674.

    4. Paragraph (b)(1) of § 999.300 is amended by removing the word “midget.” Dated: September 12, 2016. Elanor Starmer, Administrator, Agricultural Marketing Service.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22270 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2016-9139; Directorate Identifier 2016-CE-023-AD] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd. Airplanes AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

    SUMMARY:

    We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd. Models MU-2B-10, MU-2B-15, MU-2B-20, MU-2B-25, MU-2B-26, MU-2B-26A, MU-2B-30, MU-2B-35, MU-2B-36, MU-2B-36A, MU-2B-40, and MU-2B-60 airplanes. This proposed AD results from mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI) originated by an aviation authority of another country to identify and correct an unsafe condition on an aviation product. The MCAI describes the unsafe condition as reports of cracks found in the wing spacer plates. We are issuing this proposed AD to require actions to detect and correct cracks in the wing spacer plates, which could result in reduced structural integrity of the wings and loss of control.

    DATES:

    We must receive comments on this proposed AD by October 31, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may send comments by any of the following methods:

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

    Fax: (202) 493-2251.

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

    Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations,M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

    For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact Mitsubishi Heavy Industries America, Inc., c/o Turbine Aircraft Services, Inc., 4550 Jimmy Doolittle Drive, Addison, Texas 75001; telephone: (972) 248-3108, ext. 209; fax: (972) 248-3321; Internet: http://mu-2aircraft.com. You may review this referenced service information at the FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Kansas City, Missouri 64106. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call (816) 329-4148.

    Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-9139; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street address for the Docket Office (telephone (800) 647-5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Andrew McAnaul, Aerospace Engineer, FAA, ASW-143 (c/o San Antonio MIDO), 10100 Reunion Place, Suite 650, San Antonio, Texas 78216; phone: (210) 308-3365; fax: (210) 308-3370; email: [email protected].

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include “Docket No. FAA-2016-9139; Directorate Identifier 2016-CE-023-AD” at the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this proposed AD because of those comments.

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

    Discussion

    The Japan Civil Aviation Bureau (JCAB), which is the aviation authority for Japan, has issued AD No. TCD-8783-2016, dated June 28, 2016 (referred to after this as “the MCAI”), to correct an unsafe condition for certain Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd. (MHI) Models MU-2B-20, MU-2B-25, MU-2B-26, MU-2B-30, MU-2B-35, and MU-2B-36, airplanes. You may examine the MCAI on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating it in Docket No. FAA-2016-9139.

    As part of the MHI MU-2B aging aircraft program, one-piece and three-piece main wings were subjected to detailed teardown inspections, and cracks were found in the wing spacer plates attached to the forward lower spar area at wing station 580. It was determined that the cracks resulted from fatigue caused by flight loads.

    Japan is the State of Design for MHI Models MU-2B-20, MU-2B-25, MU-2B-26, MU-2B-30, MU-2B-35, and MU-2B-36 airplanes, which the MCAI AD applies to, and the United States is the State of Design for MHI Models MU-2B-26A, MU-2B-36A, MU-2B-40, and MU-2B-60 airplanes.

    Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd. has issued MU-2 Service Bulletin No. 245, dated April 21, 2016, and MU-2 Service Bulletin No. 107/57-005, dated May 3, 2016. These service bulletins describe procedures for doing a fluorescent penetrant inspection of the wing spacer plates for cracks and replacing cracked wing spacer plates with an improved part. This service information is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section of this NPRM.

    FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD

    The Models MU-2B-20, MU-2B-25, MU-2B-26, MU-2B-30, MU-2B-35, and MU-2B-36 airplanes have been approved by the aviation authority of another country, and are approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to our bilateral agreement with this State of Design Authority, they have notified us of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and service information referenced above. We are proposing this AD because we evaluated all information and determined the unsafe condition exists and is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same type design.

    The procedures described in this proposed AD meet the FAA's expectations for flight with known cracks described in Chapter 6 in FAA Advisory Circular (AC) 23-13A Fatigue, Fail-Safe and Damage Tolerance Evaluation of Metallic Structure for Normal, Utility, Acrobatic, and Commuter Category Airplanes.

    In addition, we are including the Models MU-2B-26A, MU-2B-36A, MU-2B-40, and MU-2B-60 airplanes for which the United States is the State of Design and the unsafe condition exists and is likely to exist or develop in other products of the same type design.

    The Models MU-2B-10 and MU-2B-15 are not included in Japan Civil Aviation Bureau (JCAB) AD No. TCD-8783-2016, dated June 28, 2016, or any of the service bulletins referenced in this proposed AD. The FAA does not believe there are any of these airplanes currently in operation, but are including them as a part of this proposed AD.

    Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD will affect 209 products of U.S. registry. We also estimate that it would take about 8 work-hours per product to comply with the fluorescent penetrant inspection requirement of this proposed AD. The average labor rate is $85 per work-hour.

    Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of the fluorescent penetrant inspection requirement of this proposed AD on U.S. operators to be $142,120, or $680 per product.

    In addition, we estimate the following to do any necessary follow-on actions:

    It would take about 200 work-hours and require parts costing $500, for a cost of $17,500, per product to replace a cracked wing spacer plate on one side of the airplane.

    It would take about 250 work-hours and require parts costing $1,000, for a cost of $22,250, per product to replace a cracked wing spacer plate on both sides of the airplane.

    We have no way of determining the number of products that may need this action.

    Authority for This Rulemaking

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

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

    Regulatory Findings

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

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

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

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

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

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

    List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

    The Proposed Amendment

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

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

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

    § 39.13 [Amended]
    2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding the following new AD: Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd.: Docket No. FAA-2016-9139; Directorate Identifier 2016-CE-023-AD. (a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by October 31, 2016.

    (b) Affected ADs

    None.

    (c) Applicability

    This AD applies to the following Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd. (MHI) models airplanes that are certificated in any category:

    (1) MU-2B-10 and MU-2B-15: Serial Numbers (S/Ns) 101 and 103 through 120.

    Note 1 to paragraph (c)(1) of this AD:

    The Models MU-2B-10 and MU-2B-15 are not included in Japan Civil Aviation Bureau (JCAB) AD No. TCD-8783-2016, dated June 28, 2016, or any of the service bulletins referenced in this AD. The FAA does not believe there are any of these airplanes currently in operation, but are including them as a part of this AD.

    (2) MU-2B-20, MU-2B-25, and MU-2B-26: S/Ns 102 and 121 through 347, except 313 and 321;

    (3) MU-2B-25, MU-2B-26, MU-2B-26A, and MU-2B-40: S/Ns 313SA, 321SA, and 348SA through 459SA;

    (4) MU-2B-30, MU-2B-35, and MU-2B-36: S/Ns 502 through 696, except 652 and 661; and

    (5) MU-2B-36A and MU-2B-60 airplanes: S/Ns 661SA, and 697SA through 1569SA.

    (d) Subject

    Air Transport Association of America (ATA) Code 57: Wings.

    (e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI) originated by an aviation authority of another country to identify and correct an unsafe condition on an aviation product. The MCAI describes the unsafe condition as reports of cracks found in the wing spacer plates. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct cracks in the wing spacer plates, which could result in reduced structural integrity of the wings and loss of control.

    (f) Compliance

    Comply with paragraphs (g)(1) through (3) of this AD using the following service bulletins within the compliance times specified below, unless already done. The Models MU-2B-10 and MU-2B-15 currently do not have service bulletins associated with them. The FAA does not believe any of these airplanes are currently in operation. If they do become operational, an alternative method of compliance must be obtained to comply with this AD.

    (1) For Models MU-2B-20, MU-2B-25, and MU-2B-26: S/Ns 102 and 121 through 347, except 313 and 321, and MU-2B-30, MU-2B-35, and MU-2B-36: S/Ns 502 through 696, except 652 and 661: Use Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd. (MHI) MU-2 Service Bulletin No. 245, dated April 21, 2016.

    (2) Models MU-2B-25, MU-2B-26, MU-2B-26A, and MU-2B-40: S/Ns 313SA, 321SA, and 348SA through 459SA, and MU-2B-36A and MU-2B-60 airplanes: S/Ns 661SA, and 697SA through 1569SA: Use MHI MU-2 Service Bulletin No. 107/57-005, dated May 3, 2016.

    (g) Actions

    (1) Do an initial fluorescent penetrant inspection of the wing spacer plates at whichever of the following compliance times that occurs later, and repetitively inspect thereafter at intervals not to exceed 2,000 hours time-in-service (TIS). Do the inspections following the Instructions section of the service bulletins identified in paragraph (f) of this AD, including all subparagraphs, as applicable.

    (i) At or before accumulating 7,500 hours TIS; or

    (ii) Within the next 200 hours TIS after the effective date of this AD or within the next 12 months after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs first.

    (2) During any inspection required in paragraph (g)(1) of this AD, including all subparagraphs, if any crack is found that is 0.6-inch or more in length, before further flight after the inspection in which the crack is found, replace the cracked wing spacer plate with an improved wing spacer plate, part number (P/N) 017A-11102-13 or 017A-11102-14. Do the replacement following the Instructions section of the service bulletins identified in paragraph (f) of this AD, including all subparagraphs, as applicable. Installing the improved wing spacer plates terminates the repetitive inspections required in paragraph (g)(1) of this AD.

    (3) During any inspection required in paragraph (g)(1) of this AD, including all subparagraphs, if any crack is found that is less than 0.6-inch in length, repetitively fluorescent penetrant inspect for crack growth every 600 hours TIS after the inspection in which the crack was found. Do the inspections following the Instructions section of the service bulletins identified in paragraph (f) of this AD, including all subparagraphs, as applicable. If it is found during any required inspection that the crack has grown to0.6-inch in length or more, before further flight, replace the wing spacer plate as specified in paragraph (g)(2) of this AD.

    (4) Installing improved wing spacer plates, part number (P/N) 017A-11102-13 or 017A-11102-14, terminates the repetitive inspections required in paragraph (g)(1) of this AD. You may install the improved wing spacer plates at any time to terminate the repetitive inspection requirement of this AD.

    (h) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:

    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, Standards Office, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to ATTN: Andrew McAnaul, Aerospace Engineer, FAA, ASW-143 (c/o San Antonio MIDO), 10100 Reunion Place, Suite 650, San Antonio, Texas 78216; phone: (210) 308-3365; fax: (210) 308-3370; email: [email protected]. Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC applies, notify your appropriate principal inspector (PI) in the FAA Flight Standards District Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local FSDO.

    (2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement in this AD to obtain corrective actions from a manufacturer or other source, use these actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority (or their delegated agent). You are required to assure the product is airworthy before it is returned to service.

    (i) Related Information

    Refer to MCAI JCAB AD No. TCD-8783-2016, dated June 28, 2016, for related information. You may examine the MCAI on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-9139. For service information related to this AD, contact Mitsubishi Heavy Industries America, Inc., c/o Turbine Aircraft Services, Inc., 4550 Jimmy Doolittle Drive, Addison, Texas 75001; telephone: (972) 248-3108, ext. 209; fax: (972) 248-3321; Internet: http://mu-2aircraft.com. Youmay review this referenced service information at the FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Kansas City, Missouri 64106. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call (816) 329-4148.

    Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on September 8, 2016. Pat Mullen, Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22182 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration 21 CFR Part 73 [Docket No. FDA-2016-C-2570] McCormick & Company, Inc.; Filing of Color Additive Petition AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice of petition.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or we) is announcing that we have filed a petition, submitted by McCormick & Company, Inc., proposing that the color additive regulations be amended to provide for the safe use of spirulina extract to color shell eggs at levels consistent with good manufacturing practice.

    DATES:

    The color additive petition was filed on August 24, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Celeste Johnston, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition (HFS-265), Food and Drug Administration, 5001 Campus Dr., College Park, MD 20740-3835, 240-402-1282.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Under section 721(d)(1) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 379e(d)(1)), we are giving notice that we have filed a color additive petition (CAP 6C0306), submitted by McCormick & Company, Inc., c/o Exponent, 1150 Connecticut Ave. NW., Suite 1100, Washington, DC 20036. The petition proposes to amend the color additive regulations in § 73.530 (21 CFR 73.530) Spirulina extract to provide for the safe use of spirulina extract prepared by a water extraction and filtration of the dried biomass of Arthrospira platensis to color shell eggs.

    We have determined under 21 CFR 25.32(r) that this action is of a type that does not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. Therefore, neither an environmental assessment nor an environmental impact statement is required.

    Dated: September 13, 2016. Dennis M. Keefe, Director, Office of Food Additive Safety, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22289 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 165 [Docket Number USCG-2016-0327] RIN 1625-AA87 Security Zones; Port of Palm Beach, Port Everglades, Miami, and Key West, Florida AGENCY:

    Coast Guard, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice of proposed rulemaking.

    SUMMARY:

    The Coast Guard proposes to update and modify security zones in the Port of Palm Beach, Port Everglades, Port of Miami, and the Port of Key West, Florida. The revisions create a new section for the Sector Key West security zones that previously were annotated as belonging to Sector Miami; clarify when the Port Everglades fixed security zones will be in effect; modify and lengthen a portion of the Port Everglades fixed security zone; and update language and definitions throughout the regulation. The proposed amendments are largely administrative in nature, but the clarification of terms and geographic application of security zones between Sector Key West and Sector Miami ports will allow for more effective implementation of these regulations to protect the public and ports from potential subversive acts.

    DATES:

    Comments and related material must be received by the Coast Guard on or before November 15, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-2016-0327 using the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. See the “Public Participation and Request for Comments” portion of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for further instructions on submitting comments.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    If you have questions about this proposed rulemaking, call or email Lieutenant Ruth Sadowitz, Sector Miami Waterways Management Division, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone (305) 535-4307, email [email protected]; or BMC Jason Herbert, Sector Key West Waterways Management Division, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone (305) 292-8772, 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 Pub. L. Public Law §  Section U.S.C. United States Code II. Background, Purpose, and Legal Basis

    On January 23, 2003, Captain of the Port Miami published a final rule entitled “Security Zones; Port of Palm Beach, Port Everglades, Port of Miami, and Port of Key West, Florida” in the Federal Register (68 FR 3189) to protect the public, ports, and waterways of the United States against potential subversive acts. Since the implementation of that rule, Sector Key West was delegated separate Captain of the Port authority (69 FR 47168) and the demands of commercial vessels in Sector Miami ports call for amendments to the standing security zone regulations.

    The purpose of these proposed amendments is to protect the public and Ports from potential subversive acts. The amendments establish separate regulatory authority for Sector Key West, clarify when the Port Everglades fixed security zones will be in effect, modify and lengthen a portion of one of the Port Everglades fixed security zones, and update language throughout the regulation.

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

    III. Discussion of Proposed Rule

    The fixed security zone from Mid-Port to North-Port (Pier 7 to the northern-most section of the Port) including all waters westward at Port Everglades would be an established permanent fixed security zone that will be in effect at all times. Berthing from Pier 7 to North-Port Port Everglades regularly serves passenger vessels, vessels carrying cargoes of particular hazards, and vessels carrying liquefied hazardous gas. This permanent fixed security zone, which parallels the Intracoastal Waterway, would not limit persons or vessels from using the main entrance channel (Bar Cut) or from using the Intracoastal Waterway. This zone also would not restrict persons and vessels authorized to be in the zone from maneuvering around the berths within Port Everglades between Mid-Port and North-Port. This amendment clarifies that all persons and vessels not authorized to be in the zone shall remain out of the zone in order to protect the public and Port from potential subversive acts.

    The fixed security zone that runs from Mid-Port south to Berth 29, just south of the John U. Lloyd launching ramps, along Port Everglades and the Intracoastal Waterway, would decrease in size to encompass only the waters westward of the Intracoastal Waterway extending to and including the pier face of Port Everglades. The fixed security zone would also lengthen southward from Berth 29, just south of the John U. Lloyd launching ramps to the northern tip of the Dania Cut-Off Canal. Persons and vessels would be allowed to operate along the Intracoastal Waterway, as they are now; however, persons and vessels would not be authorized to enter the security zone westward of the Intracoastal Waterway between Mid-Port and the northern tip of the Dania Cut-Off Canal without authorization. When a passenger vessel, vessel carrying cargoes of particular hazards, or vessel carrying liquefied hazardous gas moors along this section of Port Everglades, vessels transiting along the Intracoastal Waterway would be required to transit eastward of law enforcement vessels. This extension is needed to provide continuous protection for the public and Port because Port Everglades has expanded the entrance of the Dania Cut-Off Canal and its operations south over the years.

    The term “cruise ship tenders” would be removed from the entire regulation because cruise ship tenders no longer provide security zone assistance.

    The term “cruise ship” would be removed and “passenger vessels” will be redefined. Also, a “vessel carrying cargoes of particular hazards” and a “vessel carrying liquefied hazardous gas” will be defined.

    As discussed above, since the implementation of Sector Miami security zones in 2003, Sector Key West was delegated its own Captain of the Port authority. Therefore, a separate section would be implemented by this proposed regulation to establish the security zone authority for Sector Key West.

    These amendments are necessary for administrative reasons as noted above and to protect the public and Ports from potential subversive acts.

    IV. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this proposed rule after considering numerous statutes and Executive Orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses based on a number of these statutes 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 NPRM has not been designated a “significant regulatory action,” under Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, the NPRM has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget.

    The economic impact of this proposed updates and modifications to the rule is not significant for the following reasons: (1) Persons and vessels would still be able to operate in waters surrounding the proposed security zones; (2) the permanent fixed security zone encompassing Port Everglades from Mid-Port to North-Port is within the natural boundaries of the Port and is limited in size; (3) notification of the security zones will be made to the local maritime community via posted signs and Broadcast Notice to Mariners when applicable; and (4) persons and vessels may operate within the security zone if authorized by Captain of the Port of Miami or a designated representative.

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

    The proposed amendments may affect the following entities, some of which may be small entities: People and the owners or operators of vessels intending to transit or remain within the security zone(s) when they are in effect. For reasons discussed in the Regulatory Planning and Review section above, these proposed amendments would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

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

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

    C. Collection of Information

    This proposed rule would 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 proposed 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 proposed rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, because it would not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. If you believe this proposed 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 proposed rule would not result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble.

    F. Environment

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Department of Homeland Security Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have made a preliminary determination that this action is one of a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This proposed rule involves amending security zones and lengthening part of a security zone. Normally such actions are categorically excluded from further review under paragraph 34(g) of Figure 2-1 of Commandant Instruction M16475.lD. We seek any comments or information that may lead to the discovery of a significant environmental impact from this proposed 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.

    V. Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We view public participation as essential to effective rulemaking, and will consider all comments and material received during the comment period. Your comment can help shape the outcome of this rulemaking. If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this rulemaking, indicate the specific section of this document to which each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or recommendation.

    We encourage you to submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. If your material cannot be submitted using http://www.regulations.gov, contact the person in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document for alternate instructions.

    We accept anonymous comments. All comments received will be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov and will include any personal information you have provided. For more about privacy and the docket, you may review a Privacy Act notice regarding the Federal Docket Management System in the March 24, 2005, issue of the Federal Register (70 FR 15086).

    Documents mentioned in this NPRM as being available in the docket, and all public comments, will be in our online docket at http://www.regulations.gov and can be viewed by following that Web site's instructions. Additionally, if you go to the online docket and sign up for email alerts, you will be notified when comments are posted or a final rule is published.

    List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

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

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

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

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

    PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS 2. Add § 165.760 to read as follows:
    § 165.760 Security Zones; Port of Palm Beach, Port Everglades, and Port of Miami, Florida.

    (a) Definition. (1) As used in this section, passenger vessel is a vessel greater than 100 feet in length and over 100 gross tons that is authorized to carry more than 12 passengers for hire making voyages lasting more than 24 hours, except for a ferry.

    (2) As used in this section, a vessel carrying cargoes of particular hazard is defined in 33 CFR part 126 and a vessel carrying liquefied hazardous gas is defined in 33 CFR part 127.

    (b) Location. The following areas are security zones. All coordinates are North American Datum 1983.

    (1) Fixed and moving security zones around vessels in the Port of Palm Beach, Port Everglades, and Port of Miami Florida. Moving security zones are established 100 yards around all passenger vessels, vessels carrying cargoes of particular hazard, or vessels carrying liquefied hazardous gas (LHG) during transits entering or departing the Port of Palm Beach, Port Everglades, or Port of Miami. These moving security zones are activated when the subject vessel passes: Lake Worth Lighted Buoy LW at approximate position 26°46.3′ N., 80°00.6′ W. when entering the Port of Palm Beach; Port Everglades Lighted Buoy PE at approximate position 26°05.5′ N., 080°04.8′ W. when entering Port Everglades; and Miami Lighted Buoy M at approximate position 25°46.1′ N., 080°05.0′ W. when entering Port of Miami. These moving security zones remain active whenever a passenger vessel, vessels carrying cargoes of particular hazard, or vessels carrying LHG is underway westward of the above mentioned buoys. Fixed security zones are established 100 yards around all passenger vessels, vessels carrying cargoes of particular hazard, or vessels carrying LHG, while the vessel is moored in the Port of Palm Beach, Port Everglades, or Port of Miami, Florida. Persons and vessels may pass within 100 yards of a moored passenger vessel, vessel carrying cargoes of particular hazard, or vessel carrying LHG that is moored within or alongside a federal channel as long as the passage occurs outside of the on scene law enforcement vessel. Persons and vessels shall pass north of the on scene law enforcement vessel when north of the Port of Miami, north of the on scene law enforcement vessel when south of the Port of Miami, and east of the on scene law enforcement vessel in Port Everglades.

    (2) Fixed security zone in Port of Miami, Florida. A fixed security zone encompasses all waters between Watson Park and Star Island from the MacArthur Causeway south to the Port of Miami. The western boundary is formed by an imaginary line from points 25°46.763′ N., 080°10.877′ W., northwest to 25°46.774′ N., 080°10.904′ W, northeast to 25°46.885′ N., 080°10.845′ W., and extending northeast ending at Watson Island at 25°47.001′ N., 080°10.670′ W. The eastern boundary is formed by an imaginary line approximately 100 yards west of the Fisher Island Ferry terminal, in approximate position 25°46.330′ N., 080°09.120′ W., extending southwest across the Main Channel to Port of Miami, at 25°46.247′ N., 080°09.191′ W. The fixed security zone is in effect when two or more passenger vessels, vessels carrying cargoes of particular hazard, or vessels carrying LHG, enter or moor within this zone.

    (i) When the security zone is in effect, persons and vessels shall not enter or transit the security zone along the Miami Main Channel unless authorized by Captain of the Port of Miami or a designated representative.

    (ii) Persons and vessels may transit the Miami Main Channel when only one passenger vessel, one vessel carrying cargoes of particular hazard, or one vessel carrying LHG is berthed.

    (iii) Law enforcement vessels can be contacted on VHF Marine Band Radio, Channel 16 (156.8 MHz).

    (3) Fixed security zones in Port Everglades. A fixed security zone encompasses Mid-Port to North-Port in Port Everglades and includes all waters west of an imaginary line starting at the southernmost point 26°05.410′ N., 080°06.960′ W., on the northern tip of berth 22, to the northernmost point 26°05.982′ N., 080°07.153′ W., near the west side of the 17th Street Bridge. An additional fixed security zone encompasses the waters west of the Intracoastal Waterway to the pier face of Port Everglades from Mid-Port south to the northern tip of the Dania Cut-Off Canal and includes the waters westward of the line connecting the following points to the pier face of Port Everglades: Starting at 26°05.411′ N., 080°06.960′ W., on the northern tip of Berth 23 at Mid-Port, to a point directly east along the Intracoastal Waterway, 26°05.411′ N., 080°06.920′ W., then southeast along the Intracoastal Waterway to 26°05.242′ N., 080°06.859′ W., then southeast along the Intracoastal Waterway to 26°05.157′ N., 080°06.846′ W., then southwest along the Intracoastal Waterway to 26°03.906′ N., 080°06.874′ W., and then west to the Port Everglades pier face just north of the Dania Cut-Off Canal at 26°03.906′ N., 080°06.922′ W.

    (i) Persons and vessels may transit the Intracoastal Waterway; however, persons and vessels are not authorized to enter the fixed security zone westward of the Intracoastal Waterway without authorization from Captain of the Port Miami or a designated representative. On occasion, a passenger vessel, vessel carrying cargoes of particular hazard, or vessel carrying LHG may moor and encroach into the Intracoastal Waterway. When this occurs, persons and vessels shall transit the Intracoastal Waterway east of the on scene law enforcement vessel.

    (ii) Periodically, vessels may be required to temporarily hold their positions while large commercial traffic operates in this area. Vessels near the security zone must follow the orders of the Captain of the Port or the designated representative.

    (iii) Law enforcement vessels can be contacted on VHF Marine Band Radio, Channel 16 (156.8 MHz).

    (c) Regulations. (1) Prior to commencing any movement, the person directing the movement of a passenger vessel, a vessel carrying cargoes of particular hazard, or a vessel carrying liquefied hazardous gas, is encouraged to make a security broadcast on VHF Marine Band Radio, Channel 13 (156.65 MHz) to advise mariners of the moving security zone activation and intended transit.

    (2) In accordance with the general regulations § 165.33 of this part, entry into these zones is prohibited except as authorized by the Captain of the Port Miami or a designated representative. Vessels such as pilot boats, tug boats, and contracted security vessels may assist the Coast Guard Captain of the Port by monitoring these zones strictly to advise mariners of the restrictions. The Captain of the Port will notify the public of the security zone via signs or by Marine Safety Radio Broadcasts on VHF Marine Band Radio, Channel 16 (156.8 MHz) when applicable.

    (3) Persons and vessels desiring to enter or transit the fixed or moving security zones may contact the Captain of the Port Miami at (305) 535-4472 or on VHF Marine Band Radio, Channel 16 (156.8 MHz) to seek permission to transit the area. If permission is granted, all persons and vessels must comply with the instructions of the Captain of the Port or the designated representative.

    (4) The Captain of the Port Miami may waive any of the requirements of this subpart for any vessel upon finding that the vessel or class of vessel, operational conditions, or other circumstances are such that application of this subpart is unnecessary or impractical for the purpose of port security, safety, or environmental safety.

    3. Revise § 165.761 to read as follows:
    § 165.761 Security Zones; Port of Key West, Florida.

    (a) Definition. (1) As used in this section, passenger vessel is a vessel greater than 100 feet in length and over 100 gross tons that is authorized to carry more than 12 passengers for hire making voyages lasting more than 24 hours, except for a ferry.

    (2) As used in this section, a vessel carrying cargoes of particular hazard is defined in 33 CFR part 126 and a vessel carrying liquefied hazardous gas is defined in 33 CFR part 127.

    (b) Location. Fixed and moving security zones around vessels in the Port of Key West, Florida. A moving security zones is established 100 yards around all passenger vessels, vessels carrying cargoes of particular hazard, or vessels carrying liquefied hazardous gas (LHG) during transits entering or departing the Port of Key West, Florida. A moving security zone is activated when the subject vessel passes Key West Lighted Buoy KW, at approximate position 24°27.7′ N., 081°48.1′ W. This moving security zone remains active whenever a passenger vessel, vessels carrying cargoes of particular hazard, or vessels carrying LHG is underway westward of the above mentioned buoys. Fixed security zones are established 100 yards around all passenger vessels, vessels carrying cargoes of particular hazard, or vessels carrying LHG, while the vessel is moored in the Port of Key West, Florida.

    (c) Regulations. (1) Prior to commencing any movement, the person directing the movement of a passenger vessel, a vessel carrying cargoes of particular hazard, or a vessel carrying LHG, is encouraged to make a security broadcast on VHF Marine Band Radio, Channel 13 (156.65 MHz) to advise mariners of the moving security zone activation and intended transit.

    (2) In accordance with the general regulations § 165.33 of this part, entry into these zones is prohibited except as authorized by the Captain of the Port Key West or a designated representative. Vessels such as pilot boats, tug boats, and contracted security vessels may assist the Coast Guard Captain of the Port by monitoring these zones and advising mariners of the restrictions. The Captain of the Port will notify the public of the security zone via signs or by Marine Safety Radio Broadcasts on VHF Marine Band Radio, Channel 16 (156.8 MHz) when applicable.

    (3) Persons and vessels desiring to enter or transit the fixed or moving security zones may contact the Captain of the Port Key West at (305) 292-8727 or on VHF Marine Band Radio, Channel 16 (156.8 MHz) to seek permission to transit the area. If permission is granted, all persons and vessels must comply with the instructions of the Captain of the Port or the designated representative.

    (4) The Captain of the Port Key West may waive any of the requirements of this subpart for any vessel upon finding that the vessel or class of vessel, operational conditions, or other circumstances are such that application of this subpart is unnecessary or impractical for the purpose of port security, safety, or environmental safety.

    Dated: September 12, 2016. A.J. Gould, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Acting Commander, Seventh Coast Guard District.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22280 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R09-OAR-2016-0444; FRL-9952-48-Region 9] Approval of California Air Plan Revisions, South Coast Air Quality Management District AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Proposed rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve revisions to the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) portion of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions concern emissions of oxides of nitrogen (NOX) from ovens, dryers, dehydrators, heaters, kilns, calciners, furnaces, crematories, incinerators, heated pots, cookers, roasters, smokers, fryers, closed and open heated tanks and evaporators, distillation units, afterburners, degassing units, vapor incinerators, catalytic or thermal oxidizers, soil and water remediation units, and other combustion equipment. We are proposing to approve local rules to regulate these emission sources under the Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act). We are taking comments on this proposal and plan to follow with a final action.

    DATES:

    Any comments must arrive by October 17, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R09-OAR-2016-0444 at http://www.regulations.gov, or via email to Andrew Steckel, Rulemaking Office Chief at [email protected] For comments submitted at Regulations.gov, follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be removed or edited from Regulations.gov. For either manner of submission, the EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e. on the Web, cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional submission methods, please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Nicole Law, EPA Region IX, (415) 947-4126, [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

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

    Table of Contents I. The State's Submittal A. What rules did the State submit? B. Are there other versions of these rules? C. What is the purpose of the submitted rules and rule revisions? II. The EPA's Evaluation and Action A. How is the EPA evaluating the rules? B. Do the rules meet the evaluation criteria? C. EPA Recommendations to Further Improve the Rules D. Public Comment and Proposed Action III. Incorporation by Reference IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews I. The State's Submittal A. What rules did the State submit?

    Table 1 lists the rules addressed by this action with the dates that they were adopted by the local air agency and submitted by the California Air Resources Board (CARB).

    Table 1—Submitted Rules Local agency Rule # Rule title Adopted/amended Submitted SCAQMD 1147 NOX Reductions from Miscellaneous Sources 09/09/2011 02/06/2013 SCAQMD 1153.1 Emissions of Oxides of Nitrogen from Commercial Food Ovens 09/07/2014 04/07/2015

    On April 9, 2013 and April 30, 2015, the EPA determined that the submittals for SCAQMD Rule 1147 and SCAQMD Rule 1153.1 met the completeness criteria in 40 CFR part 51 Appendix V, which must be met before formal EPA review.

    B. Are there other versions of these rules?

    There are no previous versions of Rule 1153.1. We approved an earlier version of Rule 1147 into the SIP on August 4, 2010 (75 FR 46845).

    C. What is the purpose of the submitted rules and rule revisions?

    NOX helps produce ground-level ozone, smog and PM, which harm human health and the environment. Section 110(a) of the CAA requires States to submit regulations that control NOX emissions. The revisions made to SCAQMD Rule 1147 are administrative amendments that delay compliance dates. SCAQMD Rule 1153.1 is a new rule that carves out the category of commercial food ovens from Rule 1147. Rule 1153.1 delays compliance and contains different NOX emission limits than were required under rule 1147. The EPA's technical support documents (TSDs) have more information about these rules.

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

    SIP rules must be enforceable (see CAA section 110(a)(2)), must not interfere with applicable requirements concerning attainment and reasonable further progress or other CAA requirements (see CAA section 110(l)), and must not modify certain SIP control requirements in nonattainment areas without ensuring equivalent or greater emissions reductions (see CAA section 193).

    Generally, SIP rules must require Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) for each major source of NOX in ozone nonattainment areas classified as moderate or above (see CAA sections 182(b)(2) and 182(f)). The SCAQMD regulates an ozone nonattainment area classified as extreme for the 1-hour ozone standard, the 8-hour 1997 ozone standard, and the 8-hour 2008 ozone standard (40 CFR 81.305). Therefore, these rules must implement RACT. Additionally, SIP rules must implement Best Available Control Measures (BACM), including Best Available Control Technology (BACT), in serious PM2.5 nonattainment areas (see CAA section 189(b)(1)(B)). The SCAQMD regulates a PM2.5 nonattainment area classified as serious for the 2006 24-hr PM2.5 standard. (40 CFR 81.305.) Therefore, although these rules must implement BACM and BACT, the BACM and BACT evaluation is generally performed in context of a broader plan and is not part of this rule evaluation.

    Guidance and policy documents that we use to evaluate enforceability, revision/relaxation and rule stringency requirements for the applicable criteria pollutants include the following:

    1. “State Implementation Plans; General Preamble for the Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990,” 57 FR 13498 (April 16, 1992); 57 FR 18070 (April 28, 1992). 2. “Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and Deviations,” EPA, May 25, 1988 (the Bluebook, revised January 11, 1990). 3. “Guidance Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule Deficiencies,” EPA Region 9, August 21, 2001 (the Little Bluebook). 4. “State Implementation Plans; Nitrogen Oxides Supplement to the General Preamble; Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 Implementation of Title I; Proposed Rule,” (the NOX Supplement), 57 FR 55620, November 25, 1992. 5. “NOX Emissions from Industrial/Commercial/Institutional (ICI) Boilers,” EPA, March 1994, (EPA-453/R-94-022, March 1994). 6. “Determination of Reasonably Available Control Technology and Best Available Retrofit Control Technology for Industrial, Institutional, and Commercial Boilers, Steam Generators, and Process Heaters,” CARB, July 18, 1991. B. Do the rules meet the evaluation criteria?

    We believe these rules are consistent with CAA requirements and relevant guidance regarding enforceability, RACT and SIP revisions. SCAQMD previously adopted stringent future-effective emission limits that had not been widely implemented for all affected sources. SCAQMD intended to encourage wider adoption of low-emitting technology, but understood that some sources might not be able to comply on schedule for these and similar future-effective limits in other rules. As a result, SCAQMD did not take credit for (“set aside”) some emission reductions in certain attainment demonstrations. SCAQMD subsequently determined that some sources cannot comply with Rules 1147 and 1153.1 on schedule despite reasonable efforts and therefore delayed certain compliance dates. We do not believe that these changes impact the 2015 impracticability demonstration for the 2006 NAAQS for PM2.5, the 2022 attainment demonstration for 1-hour ozone, or the 2023 attainment demonstration for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard because the forgone emission reductions are less than a one ton per day set aside by SCAQMD in their 2014 inventory used to model attainment and beyond 2020 there are no emissions forgone due to the rule amendments. The TSDs have more information on our evaluation.

    C. EPA Recommendations to Further Improve the Rules

    The TSDs describe additional rule revisions that we recommend for the next time the local agency modifies the rules but are not currently the basis for rule disapproval.

    D. Public Comment and Proposed Action

    As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the Act, the EPA proposes to fully approve the submitted rules because we believe they fulfill all relevant requirements. We will accept comments from the public on this proposal until October 17, 2016. If we take final action to approve the submitted rules, our final action will incorporate these rules into the federally enforceable SIP.

    III. Incorporation by Reference

    In this rule, the EPA is proposing to include in a final EPA rule regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is proposing to incorporate by reference the SCAQMD rules described in Table 1 of this preamble. The EPA has made, and will continue to make, these materials available through www.regulations.gov and at the EPA Region IX Office (please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this preamble for more information).

    IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    • Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to address disproportionate human health or environmental effects with practical, appropriate, 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). List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

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

    Authority:

    42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    Dated: August 24, 2016. Alexis Strauss, Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22388 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R04-OAR-2016-0473; FRL-9952-29-Region 4] Air Plan Approval; Alabama: Volatile Organic Compounds AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Proposed rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a portion of a revision to the Alabama State Implementation Plan submitted by the Alabama Department of Environmental Management on May 8, 2013. The revision modifies the definition of “volatile organic compounds” (VOC). Specifically, the revision adds one compound to the list of those excluded from the VOC definition on the basis that this compound makes a negligible contribution to tropospheric ozone formation. This action is being taken pursuant to the Clean Air Act.

    DATES:

    Written comments must be received on or before October 17, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R04-OAR-2016-0473 at http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. EPA will generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    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 or via electronic mail at [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    In the Rules and Regulations section of this Federal Register, EPA is approving the State's implementation plan revision as a direct final rule without prior proposal because the Agency views this as a noncontroversial submittal and anticipates no adverse comments. A detailed rationale for the approval is set forth in the direct final rule. If no adverse comments are received in response to this rule, no further activity is contemplated. If EPA receives adverse comments, the direct final rule will be withdrawn and all public comments received will be addressed in a subsequent final rule based on this proposed rule. EPA will not institute a second comment period on this document. Any parties interested in commenting on this document should do so at this time.

    Dated: September 2, 2016. V. Anne Heard, Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22218 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    81 180 Friday, September 16, 2016 Notices DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service [Docket No. APHIS-2016-0047] Pale Cyst Nematode; Update of Quarantined Areas AGENCY:

    Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    We are advising the public that we have made changes to the areas in the State of Idaho that are quarantined to prevent the spread of pale cyst nematode. The description of the quarantined area has been updated several times since the last notice was published on September 8, 2010.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Mr. Jonathan M. Jones, National Program Manager, Emergency and Domestic Programs, PPQ, 4700 River Road, Unit 160, Riverdale, MD 20737; (301) 851-2128.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The pale cyst nematode (PCN, Globodera pallida) is a major pest of potato crops in cool-temperature areas. Other solanaceous hosts include tomatoes, eggplants, peppers, tomatillos, and some weeds. The PCN is thought to have originated in Peru and is now widely distributed in many potato-growing regions of the world. PCN infestations may be expressed as patches of poor growth. Affected potato plants may exhibit yellowing, wilting, or death of foliage. Even with only minor symptoms on the foliage, potato tuber size can be affected. Unmanaged infestations can cause potato yield loss ranging from 20 to 70 percent. The spread of this pest in the United States could result in a loss of domestic or foreign markets for U.S. potatoes and other commodities.

    In 7 CFR part 301, the PCN quarantine regulations (§§ 301.86 through 301.86-9, referred to below as the regulations) set out procedures for determining the areas quarantined for PCN and impose restrictions on the interstate movement of regulated articles from quarantined areas.

    Section 301.86-3 of the regulations sets out the procedures for determining the areas quarantined for PCN. Paragraph (a) of § 301.86-3 states that, in accordance with the criteria listed in § 301.86-3(c), the Administrator will designate as a quarantined area each field that has been found to be infested with PCN, each field that has been found to be associated with an infested field, and any area that the Administrator considers necessary to quarantine because of its inseparability for quarantine enforcement purposes from infested or associated fields.

    Paragraph (d) provides for the removal of fields from quarantine. An infested field will be removed from quarantine when a protocol approved by the Administrator as sufficient to support the removal of infested fields from quarantine has been completed and the field has been found to be free of PCN. An associated field will be removed from quarantine when the field has been found to be free of PCN according to a protocol approved by the Administrator as sufficient to support removal of associated fields from quarantine. Any area other than infested or associated fields that has been quarantined by the Administrator because of its inseparability for quarantine enforcement purposes from infested or associated fields will be removed from quarantine when the relevant infested or associated fields are removed from quarantine.

    Paragraph (a) of § 301.86-3 further provides that the Administrator will publish a description of the quarantined area on the Plant Protection and Quarantine (PPQ) Web site. The description of the quarantined area will include the date the description was last updated and a description of the changes that have been made to the quarantined area. The description of the quarantined area may also be obtained by request from any local office of PPQ; local offices are listed in telephone directories. Finally, paragraph (a) establishes that, after a change is made to the quarantined area, we will publish a notice in the Federal Register informing the public that the change has occurred and describing the change to the quarantined area.

    Therefore, we are publishing this notice to inform the public of changes to the PCN quarantined areas in Bonneville and Bingham Counties in the State of Idaho. The changes are as follows:

    • In 2011, we added 15,044 acres and removed 667 acres, resulting in 14,641 acres regulated, of which 1,467 acres were infested;

    • In 2012, we added 4,356 acres and removed 5,363 acres, resulting in 14,740 acres regulated, of which 1,915 acres were infested;

    • In 2013, we added 688 acres and removed 4,651 acres, resulting in 10,774 acres regulated, of which 2,300 acres were infested;

    • In 2014, we added 1,315 acres and removed 2,094 acres, resulting in 7,734 acres regulated of which 2,897 acres were infested; and

    • In 2015, we added 2,586 acres and removed 321 acres, resulting in 9,999 acres regulated, of which 2,897 acres were infested.

    The current map of the quarantined area can be viewed on the PPQ Web site at http://www.aphis.usda.gov/plant_health/plant_pest_info/potato/pcn.shtml.

    Authority:

    7 U.S.C. 7701-7772 and 7781-7786; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 371.3.

    Done in Washington, DC, this 12th day of September 2016. Kevin Shea, Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22328 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-34-P
    DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service [Docket No. APHIS-2016-0049] Notice of Availability of a Treatment Evaluation Document; Cold Treatment of Grapefruit From Australia AGENCY:

    Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA.

    ACTION:

    Notice of availability and request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    We are advising the public that we have determined that it is warranted to amend cold treatment schedule T107-d-3 in the Plant Protection and Quarantine Treatment Manual to extend the applicability of the treatment to grapefruit from Australia. We have prepared a treatment evaluation document that describes the amended treatment schedule and explains why we have determined that it is effective at neutralizing certain target pests. We are making this treatment evaluation document available to the public for review and comment.

    DATES:

    We will consider all comments that we receive on or before November 15, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments by either of the following methods:

    Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2016-0049.

    Postal Mail/Commercial Delivery: Send your comment to Docket No. APHIS-2016-0049, Regulatory Analysis and Development, PPD, APHIS, Station 3A-03.8, 4700 River Road, Unit 118, Riverdale, MD 20737-1238.

    Supporting documents and any comments we receive on this docket may be viewed at http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2016-0049 or in our reading room, which is located in room 1141 of the USDA South Building, 14th Street and Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC. Normal reading room hours are 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, except holidays. To be sure someone is there to help you, please call (202) 799-7039 before coming.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ms. Dorothy C. Wayson, Senior Regulatory Policy Specialist, Imports, Regulations and Manuals, PPQ, APHIS, 4700 River Road, Unit 133, Riverdale, MD 20737-1231; (301) 851-2036.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The regulations in 7 CFR chapter III are intended, among other things, to prevent the introduction or dissemination of plant pests and noxious weeds into or within the United States. Under the regulations, certain plants, fruits, vegetables, and other articles must be treated before they may be moved into the United States or interstate. The phytosanitary treatments regulations contained in 7 CFR part 305 (referred to below as the regulations) set out standards for treatments required in 7 CFR parts 301, 318, and 319 for fruits, vegetables, and other articles.

    In § 305.2, paragraph (b) states that approved treatment schedules are set out in the Plant Protection and Quarantine (PPQ) Treatment Manual.1 Section 305.3 sets out the processes for adding, revising, or removing treatment schedules in the PPQ Treatment Manual. In that section, paragraph (a) sets out the normal process for adding, revising, or removing treatment schedules.

    1 The PPQ Treatment Manual is available at http://www.aphis.usda.gov/import_export/plants/manuals/index.shtml or by contacting the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Plant Protection and Quarantine, Manuals Unit, 92 Thomas Johnson Drive, Suite 200, Frederick, MD 21702.

    Currently, grapefruit is authorized for importation from Australia into the United States if it was produced in fruit fly free areas in Riverina, Riverland, or Sunraysia, or if the fruit has been subjected to cold treatment to mitigate the risks from Mediterranean fruit fly (Medfly, Ceratitis capitata (Wiedemann)) and Queensland fruit fly (Bactrocera tryoni (Froggatt)).

    The cold treatment currently used, T107-d, requires fruit to be subject to refrigeration at or below 2.22 °C for up to 22 days with no option to treat at 3 °C. We are proposing to amend the treatment schedule T107-d-3 to add grapefruit to the schedule. With this change, exporters would have the option to have grapefruit cold-treated at up to 3 °C for no more than 14 days to meet U.S. entry requirements.

    In March 2011, APHIS approved cold treatment at or below 3 °C for lemons, oranges, tangerines, and tangors from Australia to meet U.S. entry requirements.

    PPQ's Center for Plant Health Science and Technology (CPHST) reviewed a research study conducted in New South Wales for Queensland fruit fly in grapefruit.

    After the review, CPHST found that during the most tolerant stage testing (small scale), no insects were found alive after 10 days at either 2 °C or 3 °C and that the most tolerant life stage was determined to be the larval stage, first instar. Additionally, in the confirmatory stage testing (large scale), no insects were found alive after 14 days at either 2 °C or 3 °C.

    We believe, therefore, that it is appropriate to amend T107-d-3 to add grapefruit from Australia.

    The reasons for this change to the treatment manual are described in detail in the treatment evaluation document (TED) we have prepared to support this action. The TED may be viewed on the Regulations.gov Web site or in our reading room (see ADDRESSES above for instructions for accessing Regulations.gov and information on the location and hours of the reading room). You may also request paper copies of the TED by calling or writing to the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. Please refer to the subject of the TED when requesting copies.

    After reviewing the comments we receive, we will announce our decision regarding the revised treatment schedule described in the TED in a subsequent notice, in accordance with paragraph (a)(2) of § 305.3. If we do not receive any comments, or the comments we receive do not change our determination that the proposed changes are effective, we will affirm these changes to the PPQ Treatment Manual and make available a new version of the PPQ Treatment Manual reflecting these changes. If we receive comments that cause us to determine that the changes described in this notice are not appropriate, we will issue another notice informing the public of our determination.

    Authority:

    7 U.S.C. 7701-7772 and 7781-7786; 21 U.S.C. 136 and 136a; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 371.3.

    Done in Washington, DC, this 12th day of September 2016. Kevin Shea, Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22327 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-34-P
    DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Economic Research Service Notice of Intent To Request New Information Collection AGENCY:

    Economic Research Service, USDA.

    ACTION:

    Notice and request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 and Office of Management and Budget (OMB) implementing regulations, the U.S. Department of Agriculture Economic Research Service (ERS) invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on a proposed new information collection for a study of “Risk Preferences and Demand for Crop Insurance and Cover Crop Programs.”

    DATES:

    Written comments on this notice must be received on or before November 15, 2016 to be assured of consideration.

    ADDRESSES:

    Address all comments concerning this notice to Stephanie Rosch, Market and Trade Economics Division, Economic Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1400 Independence Ave. SW., Mail Stop 1800, Washington, DC 20250-0002. Submit electronic comments to [email protected].

    All written comments will be open for public inspection at the office of the Economic Research Service during regular business hours (8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday) at 355 E St. SW., Room 5-149B, Washington, DC 20024-3221.

    All responses to this notice will be summarized and included in the request for Office of Management and Budget approval. All comments and replies will be a matter of public record. Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For further information contact Stephanie Rosch at the mailing address in the preamble. Tel. 202-694-5049.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Title: Risk Preferences and Demand for Crop Insurance and Cover Crop Programs.

    OMB Number: To be assigned by OMB.

    Expiration Date: Three years from approval date.

    Type of Request: New information collection.

    Abstract: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-12) and OMB regulations at 5 CFR part 1320 (60 FR 44978, August 29, 1995), this notice announces USDA Economic Research Services' intention to request approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for a new data collection effort. This data collection will use an experiment with university students to (1) characterize the relationship between cover crop usage and crop insurance purchases, and (2) explore how this relationship depends on individuals' risk preferences and demographic characteristics. Outputs from the proposed experiment will be used to inform future risk management experiments with farmer participants.

    Commodity support programs, including crop insurance, and programs to promote use of cover crops all significantly alter the farm revenue risk profile for the farmers who adopt them. Whether farmers will choose to adopt insurance and/or soil conversation programs depends on the individual risks faced by each farmer, which can vary across different regions, crops, and time periods, as well as how farmers assess the costs of the risks that they face. ERS currently models the demand for commodity support programs, federal crop insurance, and cover crop promotion programs as part of multiple research objectives. These economic models rely on traditional theories of farmer decision-making under risk, and over-predict participation rates for all crop insurance and cover crop programs.

    The information to be collected in this proposed initiative is necessary to test alternate theories of decision-making under risk. This research is difficult to conduct without experiments and relying only on observational or administrative data due to the variety of U.S. farms and production practices, the variety and complexity of real-world programs, and the limited variation in premium subsidies across the U.S. farming population. By using experiments, we will be able identify alternate theories of decision-making under risk that provide more accurate predictions of crop insurance enrollments for student subjects. We plan to use these experiments to develop future follow-on experiments with farmer subjects—the results of which will be used to update existing ERS models to provide better estimates of the impact of subsidies on key subpopulations such as producers with marginal lands and producers of high value crops.

    This experiment will be conducted with student subjects from the University of Rhode Island. Participation will be voluntary, and subjects will be recruited using email communications and classroom solicitations. During each session, subjects will perform three simple tasks involving risky decisions and complete a brief demographic questionnaire. Sessions will be conducted at the Department of Environmental and Natural Resource Economics' Policy Simulation Laboratory (SimLab) at the University of Rhode Island. All experimental tasks will conducted using SimLab computers and custom-designed software.

    Each session will last for a maximum of 90 minutes. Subjects will receive a show-up fee of $10 as is consistent with standard practice at SimLab. They will receive this payment even if they decline to participate in the experiment. In addition to the show-up fee, subjects will receive compensation based on the decisions they make during the course of the experiment. We expect to pay subjects, on average, between $20-25 per person, including the show-up fee. In designing our experimental procedures and payment levels, we took into consideration academic standards, statistical power considerations, budgetary limitations, and discussions between OMB and ERS regarding this and other approved experimental research.

    Authority:

    These data will be collected under the legal authority of 7 U.S.C. 2204(a).

    ERS intends to protect respondent information under the Privacy Act of 1974 and 7 U.S.C. 2276. ERS has decided not to invoke the Confidential Information Protection and Statistical Efficiency Act of 2002 (CIPSEA). The complexity and cost necessary to invoke CIPSEA is not justified given the nature of the collection; the collection will be conducted by the University of Rhode Island and hosted in non-government owned computer systems, where CIPSEA compliance cannot be assured.

    Affected Public: All respondents will be students at the University of Rhode Island.

    Estimated Number of Respondents and Respondent Burden: Public reporting burden for this information collection of information is estimated to be 861 hours. We anticipate 750 burden hours will be needed to complete the experiment (500 subjects total, 1.5 hours per subject) and 111 burden hours for subject recruitment (2000 potential subjects, 2-5 minutes per potential subject).

    Copies of this information collection can be obtained from Stephanie Rosch at the address in the preamble.

    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 will have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the Agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Comments should be sent to the address in the preamble. All responses to this notice will be summarized and included in the request for OMB approval. All comments will also become a matter of public record.

    Date: September 6, 2016. Mary Bohman, Administrator, Economic Research Service.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22244 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-18-P
    DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE U.S. Forest Service Nez Perce-Clearwater National Forests; Idaho; Johnson Bar Fire Salvage Project AGENCY:

    Forest Service, USDA.

    ACTION:

    Notice of Intent (NOI) to prepare a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) for the Johnson Bar Fire Salvage Project.

    SUMMARY:

    The U.S. Forest Service is giving notice of its intent to prepare a SEIS for the Johnson Bar Fire Salvage Project on the Nez Perce-Clearwater National Forests, Moose Creek Ranger District, Idaho. A complaint was filed on 11 March 2016 against the February 2016 Johnson Bar Salvage Record of Decision (ROD) and a Preliminary Injunction was granted by the United States District Court for the State of Idaho on 12 May 2016. This SEIS will provide additional analysis in response to the Preliminary Injunction.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Sheila D. Lehman, NEPA Planner/Interdisciplinary Team Leader, (208) 935-4256.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The U.S. Forest Service is announcing its intent to prepare a SEIS for the Johnson Bar Fire Salvage Project. The SEIS will supplement the analysis from the Johnson Bar Fire Salvage EIS by providing an updated analysis of the environmental effects. The Johnson Bar Fire Salvage Final EIS evaluated the potential effects of four alternatives, which included the No Action, Proposed Action, and two additional alternatives. The units possessing viable harvest potential will be carried forward for analysis in this SEIS.

    The Nez Perce-Clearwater Forest Supervisor will issue a new ROD after evaluating the SEIS and public comments. An objection period for the new ROD will be provided, consistent with 36 CFR part 218.

    Authority: This NOI is being published pursuant to regulations (40 CFR 1508.22) implementing the procedural provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969, as amended (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.).

    Scoping: A NOI published on 24 October 2014 initiated the scoping period for the Johnson Bar Salvage project. A legal notice advertising the start of a 30-day scoping period was advertised in the Lewiston, Idaho Lewiston Tribune on 29 October 2014. In accordance with 40 CFR 1502.9(c)(4), there will be no scoping conducted for this SEIS. The scope of the Final Johnson Bar Fire Salvage EIS and the Preliminary Injunction decision by the District Court of the Ninth Circuit establish the scope for this SEIS.

    The SEIS will be advertised for public comment as required by 40 CFR 1503.1. The Draft SEIS will be announced for public review and comment in the Federal Register, on the Nez Perce-Clearwater National Forests' project Web site (http://data.ecosystem- management.org/nepaweb/nepa_project_exp.php?project=45214), and in the Lewiston, Idaho Lewiston Tribune, as well as other local media.

    Responsible Official and Lead Agency

    The USDA Forest Service is the lead agency for this proposal. The Nez Perce—Clearwater Forest Supervisor is the responsible official.

    Decision to Be Made is whether to adopt the proposed action, in whole or in part, or another alternative; and what mitigation measures and management requirements will be implemented.

    Dated: September 7, 2016. Cheryl F. Probert, Forest Supervisor.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22318 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3411-15-P
    DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Rural Housing Service Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request September 12, 2016.

    The Department of Agriculture has submitted the following information collection requirement(s) to OMB for review and clearance under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. Comments are requested regarding (1) whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of burden including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

    Comments regarding this information collection received by October 17, 2016 will be considered. Written comments should be addressed to: Desk Officer for Agriculture, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget (OMB), New Executive Office Building, 725 17th Street NW., Washington, DC 20502. Commenters are encouraged to submit their comments to OMB via email to: [email protected] or fax (202) 395-5806 and to Departmental Clearance Office, USDA, OCIO, Mail Stop 7602, Washington, DC 20250-7602. Copies of the submission(s) may be obtained by calling (202) 720-8958.

    An agency may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless the collection of information displays a currently valid OMB control number and the agency informs potential persons who are to respond to the collection of information that such persons are not required to respond to the collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

    Rural Housing Service

    Title: 7 CFR 1956-C, Debt Settlement—Community and Business Programs.

    OMB Control Number: 0575-0124.

    Summary of Collection: The Community and Direct Business Programs loans and grants are authorized by the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act. Rural Housing Service (RHS) is a credit agency for agricultural and rural development for the United States Department of Agriculture and offers supervised credit to develop, improve and operate family farms, modest housing, essential community facilities, and business and industry across rural America. 7 CFR 1956-C, Debt Settlement—Community and Business Programs provides policies and procedures as well as a mechanism for debt settlement in connection with Community Facilities loans and grants, direct Business and Industry loans, Indian Tribal Land Acquisition loans and Irrigation and Drainage. The debt settlement program provides the delinquent client with an equitable tool for the compromise, adjustment, cancellation, or charge-off of a debt owed to the Agency.

    Need and Use of the Information: The field offices will collect information from applicants, borrowers, consultants, lenders, and attorneys to determine eligibility, financial capacity and derive an equitable resolution. This information collected is similar to that required by a commercial lender in similar circumstances. Failure to collect the information could result in improper servicing of these loans.

    Description of Respondents: Not for profit institutions; Business or other for-profit; State, Local or Tribal Government.

    Number of Respondents: 35.

    Frequency of Responses: Reporting: On occasion.

    Total Burden Hours: 1,041.

    Charlene Parker, Departmental Information Collection Clearance Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22241 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-XV-P
    COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS Agenda and Notice of Public Meeting of the Maine Advisory Committee AGENCY:

    Commission on Civil Rights.

    ACTION:

    Announcement of monthly planning meetings.

    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 a planning meeting of the Maine State Advisory Committee to the Commission will convene by conference call at 1:30 p.m. (EST) a planning meeting on the following dates: Tuesday, October 18, 2016; Tuesday, November 15, 2016; Tuesday, December 20, 2016; Tuesday, January, 17, 2017 and Tuesday, February 21, 2017. The purpose of each planning meeting is to discuss project planning as the Committee moves to selecting a topic as its civil rights project and once the project is selected to continue working on the project. The Committee may also select additional officers, as necessary.

    DATES:

    The following dates: Tuesday, October 18, 2016; Tuesday, November 15, 2016; Tuesday, December 20, 2016; Tuesday, January, 17, 2017 and Tuesday, February 21, 2017. Each meeting starts at 1:30 p.m. (EST).

    Public Call-in Information: Conference call number: 1-888-670-2260 and conference call ID: 3837382.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ivy L. Davis, at [email protected] or by phone at 202-376-7533.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Interested members of the public may listen to the discussion by calling the following toll-free conference call number: 1-888-670-2260 and conference call ID: 3837382. 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 herein.

    Persons with hearing impairments may also follow the discussion by first calling the Federal Relay Service at 1-888-364-3109 and providing the operator with the toll-free conference call number: 1-888-670-2260 and conference call ID: 3837382.

    Members of the public are invited to submit written comments; the comments must be received in the regional office approximately 30 days after each scheduled meeting. 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 https://database.faca.gov/committee/meetings.aspx?cid=252; click 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 meetings. 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 I. Welcome Rollcall II. Planning Meeting Discuss project planning. III. Other Business IV. Adjournment Dated: September 13, 2016. David Mussatt, Chief, Regional Programs Unit.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22334 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XE884 Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council (MAFMC); Public Meetings AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Notice of public meetings.

    SUMMARY:

    The Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council (Council) will hold public meetings of the Council and its Committees.

    DATES:

    The meetings will be held Tuesday, October 4, 2016 through Thursday, October 6, 2016. For agenda details, see SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.

    ADDRESSES:

    The meeting will be held at: Stockton Seaview Hotel, 401 South New York Road, Galloway, NJ 08205, telephone: (609) 652-1800.

    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 meeting location, proposed agenda, webinar listen-in access, and briefing materials.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The following items are on the agenda, though agenda items may be addressed out of order (changes will be noted on the Council's Web site when possible).

    Tuesday, October 4, 2016 Executive Committee

    Review 2016 and proposed 2017 implementation plans.

    River Herring and Shad (RH/S) Committee

    Review updated decision document and develop Committee recommendations on whether to develop an amendment to add RH/S as Council-managed stocks.

    Wednesday, October 5, 2016 Blueline Tilefish Framework—Meeting 1

    Review background materials and approve range of alternatives.

    Law Enforcement Reports

    Reports will be received from the NOAA Office of Law Enforcement and the U.S. Coast Guard.

    Spiny Dogfish Specifications

    Review previously set 2017 specifications and consider any modifications if necessary.

    New Jersey Special Management Zone (SMZ) Consideration

    Review Monitoring Team Report for SMZ designation of 13 NJ artificial reefs.

    River Herring and Shad Stocks in the Fishery

    Review Committee recommendations and decide whether to develop an amendment to add RH/S as Council-managed stocks.

    Council Communication and Outreach Plan

    Review and discuss draft Communication and Outreach Plan

    Thursday, October 6, 2016 Draft Environmental Assessment for Amendment 10 the Highly Migratory Species (HMS) FMP

    Presentation of Amendment 10 HMS FMP by Jennifer Cudney of HMS, NMFS Southeast Fisheries Science Center (SEFSC) for Council review and comment.

    Business Session

    Organization Reports; Liaison Reports; Executive Director's Report; Science Report; Committee Reports; and Continuing and New Business.

    Although non-emergency issues not contained in this agenda may come before this group for discussion, in accordance with the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act), those issues may not be the subject of formal action during these meetings. Actions will be restricted to those issues specifically identified in this notice and any issues arising after publication of this notice that require emergency action under Section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, provided the public has been notified of the Council's intent to take final action to address the emergency.

    Special Accommodations

    These meetings are physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aid should be directed to M. Jan Saunders, (302) 526-5251, at least 5 days prior to the meeting date.

    Dated: September 13, 2016. Jeffrey N. Lonergan, Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22332 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XE873 Western Pacific Fishery Management Council; Public Meetings AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Notice of public meetings.

    SUMMARY:

    The Western Pacific Fishery Management Council (Council) will hold its 124th Scientific and Statistical Committee (SSC) meeting, Fishing Industry Advisory Committee and its 168th Council meeting to take actions on fishery management issues in the Western Pacific Region.

    DATES:

    The meetings will be held between October 4 and October 14. For specific dates, times and agendas, see SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.

    ADDRESSES:

    The 124th SSC will be held at the Council office, 1164 Bishop Street, Suite 1400, Honolulu, HI 96813, telephone: (808) 522-8220. The Fishing Industry Advisory Committee meeting will be held via teleconference, 1(888)482-3560; pass code 522-8220. The Council's Pelagic and International Standing Committee and Executive and Budget Standing Committee will also be held at the Council Office, 1164 Bishop Street, Suite 1400, Honolulu, HI, telephone: (808) 522-8220. The 168th Council meeting will be held at the Laniakea YWCA, Fuller Hall, 1040 Richards St., Honolulu, HI, telephone: (808) 538-7061. A Fishers Forum will be held at the Ala Moana Hotel, Garden Lanai room, 410 Atkinson Dr., Honolulu, HI 96814, telephone: (808) 955-4811.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Kitty M. Simonds, Executive Director, phone: (808) 522-8220.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The 124th SSC meeting will be held between 8:30 a.m. and 5 p.m. on October 4-6, 2016. The Fishing Industry Advisory Committee will be held between 4:00 p.m. and 6 p.m. (Hawaii Standard Time) on October 4, 2016. The Pelagic and International Standing Committee will be held between 9 a.m. and 12 noon on October 11, 2016. The Executive and Budget Standing Committee will be held on October 11, 2016 from 3 p.m. to 5 p.m. The first day of the 168th Council meeting will be on October 12, 2016, held from 8:30 a.m. to 11 a.m. The second and third days of the 168th Council meeting will be October 13-14, 2016, held from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. On October 12, 2016, the Council will host a Fishers Forum between 6 p.m. and 9 p.m. at the Ala Moana Hotel, Garden Lanai Room. In addition to the agenda items listed here, the Council and its advisory bodies will hear recommendations from Council advisors. An opportunity to submit public comment will be provided throughout the agendas. The order in which agenda items are addressed may change and will be announced in advance at the Council meeting. The meetings will run as late as necessary to complete scheduled business. Background documents will be available from, and written comments should be sent to, Kitty M. Simonds, Executive Director; Western Pacific Fishery Management Council, 1164 Bishop Street, Suite 1400, Honolulu, HI 96813, phone: (808) 522-8220 or fax: (808) 522-8226.

    Agenda for 124th SSC Meeting Tuesday, October 4, 2016, 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. 1. Introductions 2. Approval of Draft Agenda and Assignment of Rapporteurs 3. Status of the 123rd SSC Meeting Recommendations 4. Report from the Pacific Islands Fisheries Science Center Director 5. Insular Fisheries A. Updates on the Hawaii Marine Recreational Fisheries Survey (HMRFS) data collection improvement project B. Updates on the State of Hawaii research and monitoring efforts C. Updates on The Nature Conservancy research and monitoring efforts D. Analysis of Hawaii Management Unit Species (MUS) catch for possible ecosystem component classification E. Productivity-Susceptibility Analysis and data-poor assessments F. Biomass and spatial distribution of Selar crumenopthalmus from aerial surveys in Oahu G. Public Comment H. SSC Discussion and Recommendations Plenary Speaker: Reflections on the Impact of Large Ocean Marine Protected Areas, Ray Hilborn 6. Program Planning A. Expansion of NWHI Monument 1. Update 2. Economic impact of lost exclusive economic zone fishing grounds B. Development of an integrated assessment model for data poor stocks C. Marine Recreational Information Program (MRIP) Strategic Planning D. Council Coral Reef Conservation Program FY 17-19 project proposals E. Report on International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) World Conservation Congress F. Public Comment G. SSC Discussion and Recommendations Wednesday, October 5, 2016, 8:30 a.m.-5 p.m. 7. Pelagic Fisheries A. Report on the Pelagic Stock Assessment and Fishery Evaluation (SAFE) report development B. Hawaii & American Samoa Longline Fisheries Reports C. Report on American Samoa Large Vessel Prohibited Area (LVPA) and fisheries statistics D. Western and Central Pacific Ocean (WCPO) Spatial Longline Bigeye Analysis E. Report on WCPO and Eastern Pacific Ocean (EPO) Bigeye Tuna Limits F. Factors resulting in recent increased Hawaii longline fishery bigeye CPUE G. 2017 United States (U.S.) Participating Territory Bigeye Tuna Limits (Action Item) H. Impact of Effort Limit Area for Purse Seine (ELAPS) on America Samoa Economy I. International Fisheries 1. Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission (WCPFC) Science Committee 2. WCPFC Northern Committee 3. WCPFC Technical and Compliance Committee 4. Permanent Advisory Committee to U.S. Delegation to WCPFC 5. Continuation of 90th Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission (IATTC) Plenary J. Meta-regression analyses for shark catch rates K. The Nature Conservancy Indo-Pacific Tuna Program L. Public Comment M. SSC Discussion and Recommendations 8. Protected Species A. Hawaii Longline False Killer Whale Project Updates 1. Depredation mitigation device project 2. Acoustic monitoring of false killer whale depredation B. Reconsultation of the Hawaii Deep-set longline fishery C. Rare Events Bycatch Workshop Update D. Updates on Endangered Species Act (ESA) and Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) Actions 1. Humpback Whale Listing Final Rule 2. False Killer Whale Take Reduction Team 3. Insular False Killer Whale Recovery Planning 4. Other Actions E. Public Comment F. SSC Discussion and Recommendations Thursday, October 6, 2016, 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. 9. Other Business A. 125th SSC Meeting 10. Summary of SSC Recommendations to the Council Agenda for the Fishing Industry Advisory Committee Friday, October 7, 2016, 4 p.m. to 6 p.m. 1. Introduction and Welcome 2. Approval of Agenda 3. 2017 U.S. Participating Territory Bigeye Tuna Limit 4. Impacts of Effort Limit Area for Purse Seine (ELAPS) 5. Report on American Samoa Large Vessel Prohibited Area (LVPA) and fisheries statistics 6. Report on the Permanent Advisory Committee to U.S. Delegation to Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission 7. Seafood Traceability and Illegal, Unregulated and Unreported Fisheries 8. Public Comment 9. Discussion and Recommendations Agenda for the Pelagic and International Standing Committee Tuesday, October 11, 2016, 9 a.m. to 12 Noon 1. Addressing the Associated Press (AP) article on foreign crew in the Hawaii longline fleet 2. WCPO Spatial Longline Bigeye Analysis 3. Report on WCPO and EPO Bigeye Tuna Limits 4. 2017 U.S. Participating Territory Bigeye Tuna Limits (Action Item) 5. American Samoa LVPA exemption and recent fisheries statistics 6. International Fisheries Meetings A. WCPFC Science Committee B. WCPFC Northern Committee C. WCPFC Technical and Compliance Committee D. Permanent Advisory Committee to U.S. Delegation to WCPFC E. Continuation of 90th IATTC Plenary 7. Advisory Group Report and Recommendations A. Advisory Panel B. Fishing Industry Advisory Committee C. Scientific & Statistical Committee 8. Standing Committee Recommendations 9. Public Comment 10. Committee Discussion and Recommendations Agenda for the Executive and Budget Standing Committee Tuesday, October 11, 2016, 3 p.m. to 5 p.m. 1. Administrative Report 2. Financial Report 3. Expansion of NWHI Monument (Action Item) A. Recommendations on implementing fishing provisions of the Papahanaumokuakea Monument expansion proclamation B. Economic impact of lost EEZ fishing grounds 4. Addressing the AP article on foreign crew in the Hawaii longline fleet 5. Sustainable Hawaii Initiative 6. Regional Operating Agreement Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) Appendix 7. Meetings and Workshops 8. Council Family Changes 9. Other Issues 10. Public Comment 11. Committee Discussion and Recommendations Agenda for the 168th Council Meeting Wednesday, October 12, 2016, 8:30 a.m. to 11 a.m. 1. Welcome and Introductions 2. Oath of Office 3. Approval of the 168th Agenda 4. Approval of the 166th & 167th Meeting Minutes 5. Executive Director's Report 6. Agency Reports A. National Marine Fisheries Service 1. Pacific Islands Regional Office 2. Pacific Islands Fisheries Science Center B. NOAA Office of General Counsel, Pacific Islands Section C. U.S. State Department D. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service E. Enforcement 1. U.S. Coast Guard 2. NOAA Office of Law Enforcement 3. NOAA Office of General Counsel, Enforcement Section F. Other Items G. Public Comment H. Council Discussion and Action 6 p.m.-9 p.m., Fishers Forum, Ala Moana Hotel, Garden Lanai Room, Honolulu Thursday, October 13, 2016, 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. 7. Pelagic & International Fisheries A. Addressing the AP article on foreign crew in the Hawaii longline fleet B. Report on the Pelagic SAFE report development C. Hawaii & American Samoa Longline Fisheries Reports D. WCPO Spatial Longline Bigeye Analysis E. Report on WCPO and EPO Bigeye Tuna Limits F. 2017 U.S. Participating Territory Bigeye Tuna Limits (Action Item) G. Impacts of ELAPS on American Samoa economy H. American Samoa LVPA exemption and recent fisheries statistics I. Update on Hawaii longline Electronic Reporting/Video Monitoring J. International Fisheries Meetings 1. WCPFC Science Committee 2. WCPFC Northern Committee 3. WCPFC Technical and Compliance Committee 4. Permanent Advisory Committee to U.S. Delegation to WCPFC 5. Continuation of IATTC 90th Plenary K. Advisory Group Report and Recommendations 1. Advisory Panel 2. Fishing Industry Advisory Committee 3. Scientific & Statistical Committee L. Standing Committee Recommendations M. Public Hearing N. Council Discussion and Action 8. Program Planning and Research A. Expansion of NWHI Monument (Action Item) 1. Recommendations on implementing fishing provisions of the Papahanaumokuakea Monument expansion proclamation 2. Economic impact of lost exclusive economic zone fishing grounds B. MRIP Strategic Planning Workshop update C. Council Coral Reef Conservation Program FY 17-19 project proposals D. Updates on Marine National Monuments 1. National Marine Fisheries Service 2. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service E. Report on IUCN World Conservation Congress F. Status of Aquaculture Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement G. Regional, National and International Outreach & Education H. Advisory Group Report and Recommendations 1. Advisory Panel 2. Social Science Planning Committee 3. Scientific & Statistical Committee I. Public Hearing J. Council Discussion and Action 9. Protected Species A. Hawaii Longline False Killer Whale Project Updates 1. Depredation mitigation device project 2. Acoustic monitoring of false killer whale depredation B. Re-consultation of the Hawaii Deep-set longline fishery C. Rare Events Bycatch Workshop Update D. Status of Marine Mammal Scientific Review Group Membership E. Updates on ESA and Marine Mammal Protection Act Actions 1. Humpback Whale Listing Final Rule 2. False Killer Whale Take Reduction Team 3. Insular False Killer Whale Recovery Planning 4. Other Actions F. Advisory Group Report and Recommendations 1. Advisory Panel 2. Scientific & Statistical Committee G. Public Comment H. Council Discussion and Action Friday, October 14, 2016, 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. 10. Hawaii Archipelago & PRIA A. Moku Pepa B. Legislative Report C. Enforcement Issues D. Community Issues 1. Promise to Paeaina 2. Status of the Ohai Community Development Program (CDP) application E. Report on IUCN and the Sustainable Hawaii Initiative F. Analysis of Hawaii MUS catch for possible ecosystem component classification G. Report on the Main Hawaiian Islands Deep-7 Bottomfish workshops H. Updates on the HMRFS data collection improvement project I. Update on State of Hawaii Research and Monitoring J. Biomass and spatial distribution of Selar crumenopthalmus from aerial surveys in Oahu K. Education and Outreach Initiatives L. Advisory Group Report and Recommendations 1. Advisory Panel 2. Scientific & Statistical Committee M. Public Comment N. Council Discussion and Action 11. American Samoa Archipelago A. Motu Lipoti B. Fono Report C. Enforcement Issues D. Community Activities and Issues 1. Report on Pacific Island Regional Planning Body initiatives E. Education and Outreach F. Advisory Group Reports and Recommendations 1. Advisory Panel 2. Scientific & Statistical Committee G. Public Comment H. Council Discussion and Action 12. Mariana Archipelago A. Guam 1. Isla Informe 2. Legislative Report 3. Enforcement Issues 4. Community Activities and Issues a. Report on Yigo Community Planning b. Report on sea cucumber regulations c. Status of the Guam Fisheries Council d. Military Expansion Issues e. Report on Guam Coral Reef Fisheries Mapping 5. Education and Outreach Initiatives B. Commonwealth of Northern Mariana Islands 1. Arongol Falú 2. Legislative Report 3. Enforcement Issues 4. Community Activities and Issues a. Report on Northern Islands Community Planning b. Military Expansion Issues 5. Education and Outreach Initiatives C. Marianas Trench Marine National Monument Mapping Application D. Advisory Group Reports and Recommendations 1. Advisory Panel 2. Scientific & Statistical Committee E. Public Comment F. Council Discussion and Action 13. Administrative Matters A. Council Member and Staff Annual Training on Standards of Conduct B. Financial Reports C. Administrative Reports D. Update on information inquiries and responses E. Regional Operating Agreement—Essential Fish Habitat Appendix F. Council Family Changes G. Meetings and Workshops H. Other Business I. Standing Committee Recommendations J. Public Comment K. Council Discussion and Action 14. Election of Officers 15. Other Business

    Non-emergency issues not contained in this agenda may come before the Council for discussion and formal Council action during its 168th meeting. However, Council action on regulatory issues will be restricted to those issues specifically listed in this document and any regulatory issue arising after publication of this document that requires emergency action under section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, provided the public has been notified of the Council's intent to take action to address the emergency.

    Special Accommodations

    These meetings are physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to Kitty M. Simonds, (808) 522-8220 (voice) or (808) 522-8226 (fax), at least 5 days prior to the meeting date.

    Authority:

    16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

    Dated: September 13, 2016. Jeffrey N. Lonergan, Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22331 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XE886 New England Fishery Management Council; Public Meeting AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Notice; public meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    The New England Fishery Management Council (Council) is scheduling a public meeting of its Groundfish Committee to consider actions affecting New England fisheries in the exclusive economic zone (EEZ). Recommendations from this group will be brought to the full Council for formal consideration and action, if appropriate.

    DATES:

    This meeting will be held on Monday, October 3, 2016 at 9:30 a.m.

    ADDRESSES:

    The meeting will be held at the Hilton Garden Inn Boston Logan Airport, 100 Boardman Street, Boston, MA 02128; phone: (617) 567-6789; fax: (617) 561-0798.

    Council address: New England Fishery Management Council, 50 Water Street, Mill 2, Newburyport, MA 01950.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Thomas A. Nies, Executive Director, New England Fishery Management Council; telephone: (978) 465-0492.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Agenda

    The Committee will discuss Framework Adjustment 56 specifications, management measures, and draft alternatives and make recommendations to the Council. They will receive a progress report from the Plan Development Team on the white paper on monitoring strategies and develop recommendations to the Council. The Committee will also discuss possible groundfish priorities for 2017 and develop final recommendations to the Council. Other business will be discussed as necessary.

    Although non-emergency issues not contained in this agenda may come before this group for discussion, those issues may not be the subject of formal action during these meetings. Action will be restricted to those issues specifically 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 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 Thomas A. Nies, Executive Director, at (978) 465-0492, at least 5 days prior to the meeting date.

    Authority:

    16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

    Dated: September 13, 2016. Jeffrey N. Lonergan, Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22335 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0649-XE885 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 will hold a meeting of its Reef Fish Advisory Panel (AP).

    DATES:

    The meeting will convene on Tuesday, October 4, 2016, from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. and Wednesday, October 5, 2016, from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m. EDT.

    ADDRESSES:

    The meeting will take place at the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council Office, 2203 N. Lois Avenue, Suite 1100, Tampa, FL 33607; telephone: (813) 348-1630.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Dr. Carrie Simmons, Deputy Director, Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council; [email protected]; telephone: (813) 348-1630.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Agenda

    The Chairman will start the meeting with introductions and adoption of agenda. The AP will review and approve the minutes of two previous meetings held September 16-17, 2015 and April 1, 2016, respectively. The AP will review and discuss the Draft Proposed Fishing Regulations for Flower Garden Banks National Marine Sanctuary Expansion and a Draft Scoping Document to Evaluate Recommended Coral Areas as Habitat Areas of Particular Concern (HAPCs). The AP will review and comment on Reef Fish Amendment 36A Commercial IFQ Modifications; Reef Fish Amendment 46 Gray Triggerfish Rebuilding Plan; a Draft Framework Action to Modify Mutton Snapper Annual Catch Limits and Management Measures including an Action to Modify the Commercial Gag Minimum Size Limit. The AP will also hear a presentation on the results of the Vermilion Snapper Stock Assessment and Scientific and Statistical Committee Recommendations. The AP will review and comment on Draft Options to Modify Vermilion Snapper ACLs and Maximum Sustainable Yield Proxies. The AP will also receive a presentation on the Goliath Grouper Assessment and Scientific and Statistic Committee Recommendations. The AP will review and provide recommendations on Modifications to Charter Vessel and Headboat Reporting Requirements and have a discussion on the Carryover of any Underharvested Red Snapper Annual Catch Limit to the Following Season. Under Other Business, the AP will discuss and potentially make recommendations on a Recreational and Commercial Allocation Exchange to the Council.

    —Meeting Adjourns—

    The Agenda is subject to change, and the latest version along with other meeting materials will be posted on the Council's file server. To access the file server, the URL is https://public.gulfcouncil.org:5001/webman/index.cgi, or go to the Council's Web site and click on the FTP link in the lower left of the Council Web site (http://www.gulfcouncil.org). The username and password are both “gulfguest”. Click on the “Library Folder”, then scroll down to “Reef Fish AP 10-2016”.

    The meeting will be webcast over the internet. A link to the webcast will be available on the Council's Web site, http://www.gulfcouncil.org.

    Although other non-emergency issues not on the agenda may come before the AP for discussion, in accordance with the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, those issues may not be the subject of formal action during this meeting. Actions of the AP will be restricted to those issues specifically identified in the agenda and any issues arising after publication of this notice that require emergency action under section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, provided the public has been notified of the Council's intent to take 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 at the Gulf Council Office (see ADDRESSES), at least 5 working days prior to the meeting.

    Dated: September 13, 2016. Jeffrey N. Lonergan, Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22333 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    COMMITTEE FOR PURCHASE FROM PEOPLE WHO ARE BLIND OR SEVERELY DISABLED Procurement List; Proposed Deletions AGENCY:

    Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled.

    ACTION:

    Proposed deletions from the Procurement List.

    SUMMARY:

    The Committee is proposing to delete products and services from the Procurement List that was previously furnished by nonprofit agencies employing persons who are blind or have other severe disabilities.

    Comments Must Be Received on or Before: 10/16/2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled, 1401 S. Clark Street, Suite 715, Arlington, Virginia 22202-4149.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION OR TO SUBMIT COMMENTS CONTACT:

    Barry S. Lineback, Telephone: (703) 603-7740, Fax: (703) 603-0655, or email [email protected].

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This notice is published pursuant to 41 U.S.C. 8503(a)(2) and 41 CFR 51-2.3. Its purpose is to provide interested persons an opportunity to submit comments on the proposed actions.

    Deletions

    The following products and services are proposed for deletion from the Procurement List:

    Products NSN(s)—Product Name(s): 7510-00-NIB-0432—Business Card Case, Fold-Up, Rosewood Mandatory Source(s) of Supply: Tarrant County Association for the Blind, Fort Worth, TX Contracting Activity: General Services Administration, New York, NY NSN(s)—Product Name(s): MR 10468—Set, Saver, Salad MR 10674—Funnel, Collapsible MR 10635—Serving Platter, Heavy Duty, Raised Surface, Fall Themed, White MR 10627—Garden Seed Packets, Assorted, 4PK MR 10623—Container, Frozen Waffle, Expandable MR 10618—Stickers, Easter Themed, Assorted, 200ct MR 10626—Poster Book, Coloring, Assorted, 36 x 42 MR 10609—Bowl, Insulated Thermal, Toddler, 8oz MR 380—Set, Baking Cups and Picks, Holiday, 24PC MR 382—Duct Tape, Holiday Themed, Assorted Colors Mandatory Source(s) of Supply: Winston-Salem Industries for the Blind, Inc., Winston-Salem, NC Contracting Activity: Defense Commissary Agency NSN(s)—Product Name(s): MR 1120—Bag, Storage, Vacuum Sealed, 6PG MR 365—Serving Set, Stand and Bowl, Halloween Themed, 16oz MR 371—Serving Set, Stand and Bowl, Holiday Themed, 16oz MR 1146—Serving Set, Stand and Bowl, 16oz MR 349—Containers, Storage, 6PG MR 370—Serving Bowl, Holiday, Plastic 7Qt MR 373—Chip and Dip Bowl, Holiday, Plastic MR 301—Silicone Spatula MR 355—Set, Serving Set, Party Travelling MR 1183—Set, Mixing Bowl, Melamine, 4PC MR 1159—Set, Bakeware, Cake Pop MR 383—Server, Beverage, w Spout, 1.25G Mandatory Source(s) of Supply: Industries for the Blind, Inc., West Allis, WI Contracting Activity: Defense Commissary Agency NSN(s)—Product Name(s): 6515-00-NIB-0770—Gloves, Surgical, Powder-free, OR Classic, White, Size 8″ 6515-00-NIB-0771—Gloves, Surgical, Powder-free, OR Classic, White, Size 8.5″ 6515-00-NIB-0772—Gloves, Surgical, Powder-free, OR Classic, White, Size 9″ 6515-00-NIB-0773—Gloves, Surgical, Powder free, Sensicare Ortho, White, Size 5.5″ 6515-00-NIB-0765—Gloves, Surgical, Powder-free, OR Classic, White, Size 5.5″ 6515-00-NIB-0766—Gloves, Surgical, Powder-free, OR Classic, White, Size 6″ 6515-00-NIB-0767—Gloves, Surgical, Powder-free, OR Classic, White, Size 6.5″ 6515-00-NIB-0768—Gloves, Surgical, Powder-free, OR Classic, White, Size 7″ 6515-00-NIB-0769—Gloves, Surgical, Powder-free, OR Classic, White, Size 7.5″ 6515-00-NIB-0680—Gloves, Surgical, Powder-free, Derma Prene, Isotouch Hydrasoft, Green, Size 8.5″ 6515-00-NIB-0681—Gloves, Surgical, Powder-free, Derma Prene, Isotouch Hydrasoft, Green, Size 9″ 6515-00-NIB-0674—Gloves, Surgical, Powder-free, Derma Prene, Isotouch Hydrasoft, Green, Size 5.5″ 6515-00-NIB-0675—Gloves, Surgical, Powder-free, Derma Prene, Isotouch Hydrasoft, Green, Size 6″ 6515-00-NIB-0676—Gloves, Surgical, Powder-free, Derma Prene, Isotouch Hydrasoft, Green, Size 6.5″ 6515-00-NIB-0677—Gloves, Surgical, Powder-free, Derma Prene, Isotouch Hydrasoft, Green, Size 7″ 6515-00-NIB-0678—Gloves, Surgical, Powder-free, Derma Prene, Isotouch Hydrasoft, Green, Size 7.5″ 6515-00-NIB-0679—Gloves, Surgical, Powder-free, Derma Prene, Isotouch Hydrasoft, Green, Size 8″ Mandatory Source(s) of Supply: Bosma Industries for the Blind, Inc., Indianapolis, IN Contracting Activity: Strategic Acquisition Center, Fredericksburg, VA NSN(s)—Product Name(s): 6515-00-NIB-8015—Gloves, Exam, Nitrile, Latex-Free, Powder-Free, W/Inner Aloe coating, 5.5 mil (palm), Green, x-Small Mandatory Source(s) of Supply: Bosma Industries for the Blind, Inc., Indianapolis, IN Contracting Activity: Department of Veterans Affairs NSN(s)—Product Name(s): 7220-00-NIB-0143—Safety-Walk, Tapes & Treads—310 Black Medium Resilient Mandatory Source(s) of Supply: Louisiana Association for the Blind, Shreveport, LA Contracting Activity: General Services Administration, New York, NY NSN(s)—Product Name(s): 8030-01-596-4258—Lubricant, 5-in-1 Penetrating Multipurpose oil, Biobased, Aerosol, 11 oz. net Mandatory Source(s) of Supply: The Lighthouse for the Blind, St. Louis, MO Contracting Activity: Defense Logistics Agency Troop Support NSN(s)—Product Name(s): 6515-00-NIB-0531—Glove Powder Free, aloetouch micro 6515-00-NIB-0532—Glove Powder Free, aloetouch micro 6515-00-NIB-0533—Glove Powder Free, aloetouch micro 6515-00-NIB-0534—Glove Powder Free, aloetouch micro 6515-00-NIB-0535—Glove Powder Free, aloetouch micro 6515-00-NIB-0536—Glove Powder Free, aloetouch micro 6515-00-NIB-0537—Glove Powder Free, aloetouch micro 6515-00-NIB-0538—Glove Powder Free, aloetouch micro 6515-00-NIB-0481—Glove Powdered, Perry Orthopaedic 6515-00-NIB-0482—Glove Powdered, Perry Orthopaedic 6515-00-NIB-0483—Glove Powdered, Perry Orthopaedic 6515-00-NIB-0477—Glove Powdered, Perry Orthopaedic 6515-00-NIB-0478—Glove Powdered, Perry Orthopaedic 6515-00-NIB-0479—Glove Powdered, Perry Orthopaedic 6515-00-NIB-0461—Glove Powdered, Original Perry Style 42 6515-00-NIB-0462—Glove Powdered, Original Perry Style 42 6515-00-NIB-0463—Glove Powdered, Original Perry Style 42 6515-00-NIB-0464—Glove Powdered, Original Perry Style 42 6515-00-NIB-0465—Glove Powdered, Original Perry Style 42 6515-00-NIB-0466—Glove Powdered, Original Perry Style 42 6515-00-NIB-0467—Glove Powdered, Original Perry Style 42 6515-00-NIB-0468—Glove Powdered, Original Perry Style 42 6515-00-NIB-0208—Glove, Surgeon, Biogel Neotech, Size 5.5 6515-00-NIB-0209—Glove, Surgeon, Biogel Neotech, Size 6.0 6515-00-NIB-0210—Glove, Surgeon, Biogel Neotech, Size 6.5 6515-00-NIB-0211—Glove, Surgeon, Biogel Neotech, Size 7.0 6515-00-NIB-0212—Glove, Surgeon, Biogel Neotech, Size 7.5 6515-00-NIB-0213—Glove, Surgeon, Biogel Neotech, Size 8.0 6515-00-NIB-0214—Glove, Surgeon, Biogel Neotech, Size 8.5 6515-00-NIB-0215—Glove, Surgeon, Biogel Neotech, Size 9.0 6515-00-NIB-0192—Glove, Surgeon, Biogel Orthopaedic, Size 5.5 Mandatory Source(s) of Supply: Bosma Industries for the Blind, Inc., Indianapolis, IN Contracting Activity: Department of Veterans Affairs Services Service Type: Temp. Admin/General Support Service Mandatory for: National Institute of Health, 31 Center Dr., Bethesda, MD Mandatory Source(s) of Supply: Columbia Lighthouse for the Blind, Washington, DC Contracting Activity: Dept of Health and Human Services Service Type: Medical Transcription Service Mandatory for: Corpus Christi Naval Air Station: Naval Hospital, 10651 E Street, Bldg H-100, Corpus Christi, TX U.S. Naval Hospital, 3600 Rivers Ave., North Charleston, SC Mandatory Source(s) of Supply: Lighthouse for the Blind of Houston, Houston, TX Contracting Activity: DOD/Department of the Navy Service Type: Administrative/General Support Service Mandatory for: GSA, Southwest Supply Center, 819 Taylor Street, Fort Worth, TX Mandatory Source(s) of Supply: Lighthouse for the Blind of Houston, Houston, TX West Texas Lighthouse for the Blind, San Angelo, TX South Texas Lighthouse for the Blind, Corpus Christi, TX Contracting Activity: General Services Administration, FPDS Agency Coordinator Barry S. Lineback, Director, Business Operations.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22324 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6353-01-P
    COMMITTEE FOR PURCHASE FROM PEOPLE WHO ARE BLIND OR SEVERELY DISABLED Procurement List; Deletions AGENCY:

    Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled.

    ACTION:

    Deletions from the Procurement List.

    SUMMARY:

    This action deletes products from the Procurement List previously furnished by nonprofit agencies employing persons who are blind or have other severe disabilities.

    DATES:

    Effective Date: 10/16/2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled, 1401 S. Clark Street, Suite 715, Arlington, Virginia 22202-4149.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Barry S. Lineback, Telephone: (703) 603-7740, Fax: (703) 603-0655, or email [email protected].

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Deletions

    On 8/12/2016 (81 FR 53466), the Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled published notice of proposed deletions from the Procurement List.

    After consideration of the relevant matter presented, the Committee has determined that the products listed below are no longer suitable for procurement by the Federal Government under 41 U.S.C. 8501-8506 and 41 CFR 51-2.4.

    Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification

    I certify that the following action will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. The major factors considered for this certification were:

    1. The action will not result in additional reporting, recordkeeping or other compliance requirements for small entities.

    2. The action may result in authorizing small entities to furnish the products to the Government.

    3. There are no known regulatory alternatives which would accomplish the objectives of the Javits-Wagner-O'Day Act (41 U.S.C. 8501-8506) in connection with the products deleted from the Procurement List.

    End of Certification

    Accordingly, the following products are deleted from the Procurement List:

    Products NSN(s)—Product Name(s): 2540-01-071-2051—Cover, Cushion Assembly Mandatory Source(s) of Supply: Pioneer Vocational/Industrial Services, Inc., Danville, KY Contracting Activity: Defense Logistics Agency Land and Maritime NSN(s)—Product Name(s): 7530-01-071-9792—Paper, Bond, Dual Purpose, Opaque Buff, 8.5″ x 11″ 7530-01-148-1766—Paper, Xerographic, Dual Purpose, Buff, 8.5″ x 11″ Mandatory Source(s) of Supply: Louisiana Association for the Blind, Shreveport, LA Contracting Activity: General Services Administration, New York, NY NSN(s)—Product Name(s): 6540-01-131-7919—Case, Spectacles Mandatory Source(s) of Supply: Dallas Lighthouse for the Blind, Inc., Dallas, TX Contracting Activity: Defense Logistics Agency Troop Support Barry S. Lineback, Director, Business Operations.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22325 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6353-01-P
    CORPORATION FOR NATIONAL AND COMMUNITY SERVICE Proposed Information Collection; Comment Request AGENCY:

    Corporation for National and Community Service.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Corporation for National and Community Service (CNCS), as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, conducts a pre-clearance consultation program to provide the general public and federal agencies with an opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing collections of information in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA95) (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)). This program helps to ensure that requested data can be provided in the desired format, reporting burden (time and financial resources) is minimized, collection instruments are clearly understood, and the impact of collection requirement on respondents can be properly assessed.

    Currently, CNCS is soliciting comments concerning the data elements and questions that will be collected on its Grantee Progress Report (GPR) for the following grant programs: AmeriCorps State and National operating grants, AmeriCorps State and National planning grants, School Turnaround AmeriCorps grants, Volunteer Generation Fund grants, Commission Investment Funds grants, and State Commission Support grants. All grantees of these programs are required to complete a full annual GPR and an abbreviated mid-year GPR six months prior to the annual GPR. Grantees also complete an abbreviated final GPR, which is identical to the mid-year GPR, at the end of their overall grant period. The GPR provides information for CNCS staff to monitor grantee progress and to respond to requests from Congress and other stakeholders.

    Copies of the information collection request can be obtained by contacting the office listed in the ADDRESSES section of this notice.

    DATES:

    Written comments must be submitted to the individual and office listed in the ADDRESSES section by November 15, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments, identified by the title of the information collection activity, by any of the following methods:

    (1) By mail sent to: Corporation for National and Community Service, AmeriCorps State and National, Attention Carla Ganiel, Senior Program and Project Specialist, Room 3221D, 250 E Street SW., Washington, DC 20024.

    (2) By hand delivery or by courier to the CNCS mailroom at Room 4300 at the mail address given in paragraph (1) above, between 9:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. Eastern Time, Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

    (3) Electronically through www.regulations.gov.

    Individuals who use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TTY-TDD) may call 1-800-833-3722 between 8:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. Eastern Time, Monday through Friday.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Carla Ganiel, 202-606-6773, or by email at [email protected].

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    CNCS is particularly interested in comments that:

    • Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of CNCS, including whether the information will have practical utility;

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

    • 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 expected to respond, including the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology (e.g., permitting electronic submissions of responses).

    Background

    Currently, all grantees of the AmeriCorps State and National, School Turnaround AmeriCorps, the Volunteer Generation Fund, and Commission Support programs complete the annual GPR, mid-year GPR, and final GPR, which provide information for CNCS staff to monitor grantee progress and to respond to requests from Congress and other stakeholders. The information is collected electronically through the eGrants system.

    Current Action

    CNCS seeks to renew the current information collection for programs which currently complete the GPR, and expand the use of the GPR to include two additional grant programs, the Commission Investment Funds and AmeriCorps State and National Planning Grants. CNCS has revised its GPRs to ensure consistency and reduce duplication across these grant programs. The information collection will otherwise be used in the same manner as the existing GPR. CNCS also seeks to continue using the current application until the revised GPR information collection is approved by OMB. The current GPR information collections are due to expire as follows: AmeriCorps State and National expires January 31, 2017; School Turnaround AmeriCorps expires March 31, 2017; Volunteer Generation Fund expires November 30, 2017; Commission Support Grant expires December 31, 2017.

    Type of Review: New.

    Agency: Corporation for National and Community Service.

    Title: Grantee Progress Report.

    OMB Number: TBD.

    Agency Number: None.

    Affected Public: Grantees who receive grants in the following programs: AmeriCorps State and National, School Turnaround AmeriCorps, Volunteer Generation Fund, Commission Support, Commission Investment Funds, AmeriCorps State and National Planning Grants.

    Total Respondents: 672 responses.

    Frequency: Semi-annual.

    Average Time per Response: 8 hours.

    Estimated Total Burden Hours: 5,376.

    Total Burden Cost (capital/startup): None.

    Total Burden Cost (operating/maintenance): None.

    Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and/or included in the request for Office of Management and Budget approval of the information collection request; they will also become a matter of public record.

    Dated: September 12, 2016. Bill Basl, Director, AmeriCorps State and National.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22243 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6050-28-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Department of the Army, U. S. Army Corps of Engineers Withdrawal of Notice of Intent To Prepare a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement for the Raritan Bay and Sandy Hook Bay, New Jersey Feasibility Report for Hurricane and Storm Damage Reduction Union Beach, New Jersey Final Feasibility Report AGENCY:

    Department of the Army, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, DoD.

    ACTION:

    Notice of Intent; Withdrawal.

    SUMMARY:

    The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, New York District (NY District), is withdrawing its intent to prepare a Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) for the Study. The Notice of Intent to prepare the SEIS was published in the Friday, January 24, 2014, issue of the Federal Register (79 FR 4155).

    ADDRESSES:

    U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, New York District, Planning Division, Environmental Analysis Branch, 26 Federal Plaza, Room 2151, New York, NY 10278-0090.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Matthew Voisine, Project Biologist, at [email protected] or 917.790.8718.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, NY District published a notice of intent to prepare a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement in the January 24, 2014 issue of the Federal Register (FR Doc. 2014-01443 ). Since that time, resource agency involvement through meetings, changes in plan formulation, and re-evaluation of the project have reduced the magnitude and extent of proposed flood risk management measures and associated environmental impacts to the point that an SEIS is no longer necessary. A Supplemental Environmental Assessment will be prepared and circulated for review by agencies and the public. The NY District invites participation and consultation of agencies and individuals that have special expertise, legal jurisdiction, or interest in the preparation of the draft environmental assessment. Comments received, including the names and addresses of those who comment, will be considered part of the public record for this proposal. As a result of the process, if it is determined that the project may have significant impacts, the EIS process will be reinitiated and a NOI published.

    Peter Weppler, Chief, Environmental Analysis Branch.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22336 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3720-58-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers Record of Decision for the Remaining Balanced Vision Plan and Interior Drainage Plan Features Feasibility Report and Environmental Impact Statement, Dallas County, TX AGENCY:

    Department of the Army, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, DoD.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), Fort Worth District, is issuing this notice to advise Federal, state, and local governmental agencies and the public that USACE has signed a Record of Decision (ROD) for the Remaining Balanced Vision Plan (BVP) and Interior Drainage Plan (IDP) Features Feasibility Report and Final Environmental Impact Statement, in Dallas County, TX. This ROD was rendered to declare that a USACE action, a Section 408 Permission for the City of Dallas to alter the Dallas Floodway, is in the public interest.

    DATES:

    The USACE Fort Worth District Commander, Colonel Calvin C. Hudson II, signed the ROD and Section 408 Permission on July 28, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Regional Planning and Environmental Center, CESWF-PEC-CC (Attn: Mr. Jason Story), P.O. Box 17300, Room 3A12, Fort Worth, TX 76102-0300.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Jason Story, Environmental Resources Specialist, Regional Planning and Environmental Center. Email address: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The City of Dallas has requested permission to construct the Dallas Floodway Project remaining BVP and IDP features in Dallas County, TX. These remaining BVP and IDP features will constitute an alteration of the existing Dallas Floodway, a USACE federally authorized civil works project that requires Title 33 United States Code, Section 408 (Section 408) compliance. The proposed alterations within the Dallas Floodway consist of ecosystem restoration, recreation, and interior drainage improvements. These alterations were analyzed in the Final Feasibility Report and disclosed in the Final Environmental Impact Statement dated December 2014, for the Dallas Floodway Project. This ROD addresses the USACE Section 408 Permission.

    Douglas C. Sims, Chief, Environmental Compliance Branch, Regional Planning and Environmental Center.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22321 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3720-58-P
    DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION [Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number: 84.215N] Reopening and Extension of the Application Deadline Date for the Fiscal Year 2016 Competition; Promise Neighborhoods Program AGENCY:

    Office of Innovation and Improvement, Department of Education.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Assistant Deputy Secretary for Innovation and Improvement reopens the competition and extends the deadline date for transmittal of applications for new awards for fiscal year (FY) 2016 under the Promise Neighborhoods program. The Assistant Deputy Secretary takes this action to allow more time for the preparation and submission of applications by prospective eligible applicants. We are reopening the competition and extending the application deadline date, from September 6, 2016 to September 16, 2016, for all applicants, due to the impact of severe weather-related issues across the country.

    DATES:

    Deadline for Transmittal of Applications: September 16, 2016.

    Deadline for Intergovernmental Review: November 15, 2016.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    On July 8, 2016, we published in the Federal Register (81 FR 44741) a notice inviting applications (NIA) for new awards for FY 2016 for the Promise Neighborhoods competition. On August 31, 2016, we published in the Federal Register a notice extending the deadline for transmittal of applications to allow certain eligible applicants affected by the flooding in Louisiana additional time to prepare and transmit their applications. At this time, we are reopening the Promise Neighborhoods competition and extending the deadline for transmittal of applications to allow all eligible applicants more time to prepare and submit their applications due to severe weather-related issues across the country.

    Eligibility: The reopening of the competition and extension of the application deadline date in this notice applies to all applicants under the Promise Neighborhoods program.

    In accordance with the application notice, an eligible organization for the Promise Neighborhoods program—

    (1) Is representative of the geographic area proposed to be served;

    (2) Is one of the following:

    (a) A nonprofit organization that meets the definition of a nonprofit under 34 CFR 77.1(c), which may include a faith-based nonprofit organization.

    (b) An institution of higher education as defined by section 101(a) of the Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended.

    (c) An Indian tribe as defined in the NIA;

    (3) Currently provides at least one of the solutions from the applicant's proposed continuum of solutions in the geographic area proposed to be served; and

    (4) Operates or proposes to work with and involve in carrying out its proposed project, in coordination with the school's LEA, at least one public elementary or secondary school located within the identified geographic area that the grant will serve.

    Note:

    Except for the deadline date, all information in the application notice for this competition remains the same.

    Program Authority: Fund for the Improvement of Education, title V, part D, subpart 1, sections 5411 through 5413 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, as amended by the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (20 U.S.C. 7243-7243b).

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Adrienne Hawkins, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., Room 4W256, Washington, DC 20202. Telephone: (202) 453-5638. Email address: [email protected]

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

    Accessible Format: Individuals with disabilities can obtain this document and a copy of the application package in an accessible format (e.g., braille, large print, audiotape, or compact disc) on request to the program contact persons listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT in this notice.

    Electronic Access to This Document: The official version of this document is the document published in the Federal Register. Free Internet access to the official edition of the Federal Register and the Code of Federal Regulations is available via the Federal Digital System at: www.thefederalregister.org/fdsys. At this site you can view this document, as well as all other documents of this Department published in the Federal Register, in text or Portable Document Format (PDF). To use PDF you must have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available free at the site.

    You may also access documents of the Department published in the Federal Register by using the article search feature at: www.federalregister.gov. Specifically, through the advanced search feature at this site, you can limit your search to documents published by the Department.

    Dated: September 12, 2016. Nadya Chinoy Dabby, Assistant Deputy Secretary for Innovation and Improvement.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22242 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4000-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION National Advisory Council on Indian Education; Announcement of an Open Public Meeting AGENCY:

    National Advisory Council on Indian Education (NACIE), Department of Education.

    ACTION:

    Announcement of an open public meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice sets forth the schedule of an upcoming public meeting conducted by the National Advisory Council on Indian Education (NACIE). Notice of the meeting is required by Section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act and is intended to notify the public of its opportunity to attend.

    DATES:

    The NACIE meeting will be held on September 28-29, 2016, 8:30 a.m.-4:00 p.m. each day, Eastern Daylight Saving Time. The meeting will be held at the Residence Inn by Marriott located at 333 E Street SW., Washington, DC 20024. Phone 202-484-8280.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Tina Hunter, Designated Federal Official, Office of Elementary and Secondary Education, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20202. Telephone: 202-205-8527. Fax: 202-205-0310.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    NACIE's Statutory Authority and Function: NACIE is authorized by Section 7471 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA), as amended by the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA). NACIE is governed by the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), 5 U.S.C. App. 2, which sets forth requirements for the formation and use of advisory committees. NACIE is established within the U.S. Department of Education (Department) to advise the Secretary of Education (Secretary) on the funding and administration (including the development of regulations and administrative policies and practices) of any program over which the Secretary has jurisdiction and that includes Indian children or adults as participants or that may benefit Indian children or adults, including any program established under Title VI, Part A of the ESEA. NACIE makes recommendations to the Secretary for filling the position of Director of Indian Education whenever a vacancy occurs. NACIE submits to the Congress, not later than June 30 of each year, a report on the activities of NACIE that includes recommendations NACIE considers appropriate for the improvement of Federal education programs that include Indian children or adults as participants or that may benefit Indian children or adults, and recommendations concerning the funding of any such program.

    Meeting Agenda: The purpose of the meeting is to convene NACIE to conduct the following committee business: (1) Compile information to be included in the 2016 letter to the Secretary; (2) Receive an overview from Department staff regarding Department programs and their impact on Indian children and adults; and (3) Conduct discussions and begin work on the development of a report of accomplishments by NACIE.

    Submission of written public comments: Due to the full agenda on both meeting days, there will not be a public comment period at the meeting. However, if you wish to submit written comments related to the NACIE, all written comments must be received by September 21, 2016 at: [email protected]. Please include in the subject line “NACIE Written Comments”. The email must include the name(s), title, organization/affiliation, mailing address, email address, and telephone number, of the person(s) making the comment. Comments should be submitted as a Microsoft Word document or in a medium compatible with Microsoft Word (not a PDF file) that is attached to an electronic mail message (email) or provided in the body of an email message. Please do not send material directly to the NACIE members.

    Access to Records of the Meeting: The Department will post the official report of the meeting on the Office of Elementary and Secondary Education (OESE) Web site at: http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oese/index.html?src=oc 21 days after the meeting. Pursuant to the FACA, the public may also inspect the materials at the Office of Indian Education, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20202, Monday-Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Eastern Daylight Saving Time or by emailing [email protected] or by calling Terrie Nelson on (202) 401-0424 to schedule an appointment.

    Reasonable Accommodations: The meeting is accessible to individuals with disabilities. If you will need an auxiliary aid or service to participate in the meeting (e.g., interpreting service, assistive listening device, or materials in an alternate format), notify Brandon Dent on (202) 453-6450 no later than September 21, 2016. Although we will attempt to meet a request received after request due date, we may not be able to make available the requested auxiliary aid or service because of insufficient time to make arrangements.

    Electronic Access to this Document: The official version of this document is the document published in the Federal Register. Free Internet access to the official edition of the Federal Register and the Code of Federal Regulations is available via the Federal Digital System at: www.thefederalregister.org/fdsys. At this site you can view this document, as well as all other documents of this Department published in the Federal Register, in text or Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF). To use PDF, you must have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available free at the site.

    You may also access documents of the Department published in the Federal Register by using the article search feature at: www.federalregister.gov. Specifically, through the advanced search feature at this site, you can limit your search to documents published by the Department.

    Ann Whalen, Delegated the authority to perform the functions and duties of Assistant Secretary for Elementary and Secondary Education.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22245 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4000-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION [Docket No.: ED-2016-ICCD-0101] Agency Information Collection Activities; Comment Request; Common Core of Data (CCD) School-Level Finance Survey (SLFS) 2016-2018 AGENCY:

    National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), Department of Education (ED).

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. chapter 3501 et seq.), ED is proposing a new information collection.

    DATES:

    Interested persons are invited to submit comments on or before November 15, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    To access and review all the documents related to the information collection listed in this notice, please use http://www.regulations.gov by searching the Docket ID number ED-2016-ICCD-0101. Comments submitted in response to this notice should be submitted electronically through the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov by selecting the Docket ID number or via postal mail, commercial delivery, or hand delivery. Please note that comments submitted by fax or email and those submitted after the comment period will not be accepted. Written requests for information or comments submitted by postal mail or delivery should be addressed to the Director of the Information Collection Clearance Division, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., LBJ, Room 2E-347, Washington, DC 20202-4537.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For specific questions related to collection activities, please contact NCES Information Collections at [email protected].

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Department of Education (ED), in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)), provides the general public and Federal agencies with an opportunity to comment on proposed, revised, and continuing collections of information. This helps the Department assess the impact of its information collection requirements and minimize the public's reporting burden. It also helps the public understand the Department's information collection requirements and provide the requested data in the desired format. ED is soliciting comments on the proposed information collection request (ICR) that is described below. The Department of Education is especially interested in public comment addressing the following issues: (1) Is this collection necessary to the proper functions of the Department; (2) will this information be processed and used in a timely manner; (3) is the estimate of burden accurate; (4) how might the Department enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (5) how might the Department minimize the burden of this collection on the respondents, including through the use of information technology. Please note that written comments received in response to this notice will be considered public records.

    Title of Collection: Common Core of Data (CCD) School-Level Finance Survey (SLFS) 2016-2018.

    OMB Control Number: 1850—NEW.

    Type of Review: A new information collection.

    Respondents/Affected Public: State, Local, and Tribal Governments.

    Total Estimated Number of Annual Responses: 306.

    Total Estimated Number of Annual Burden Hours: 4,938.

    Abstract: In response to a growing demand, the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), within the U.S. Department of Education, has developed and conducted a pilot, in 2015 and 2016 (OMB #1850-0803), of a new collection of finance data at the school level. The School-Level Finance Survey (SLFS) centrally collects school-level finance data form state education agencies (SEAs), and is an extension of two existing collections conducted by NCES, in collaboration with the U.S. Census Bureau, the School District Finance Survey (F-33) and the state-level National Public Education Financial Survey (NPEFS). The Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) signed into law on December 10, 2015, requires SEAs and local agencies to produce report cards for the 2017-18 school year that include per-pupil actual personnel and nonpersonnel expenditures of Federal, State, and local funds, disaggregated by source of funds, for each local educational agency (LEA) and each school in the State for the preceding fiscal year. SLFS collects 30 expenditure items, 12 of which are “personnel” and 18 “nonpersonnel” expenditures. The SLFS data items and definitions are consistent with those in the NPEFS and F-33 surveys. The first year of the pilot SLFS data collection (for fiscal year FY 2014) commenced on May 7, 2015, with 12 SEAs participating, and the second year of data collection (for FY 2015) commenced on April 4, 2016, with 19 SEAs participating. This request is to annually collect national SLFS data in 2017 through 2019, covering FY 2016 through 2018, and corresponding to school years 2015/16 through 2017/18.

    Dated: September 13, 2016. Kate Mullan, Acting Director, Information Collection Clearance Division, Office of the Chief Privacy Officer, Office of Management.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22302 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4000-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Energy Information Administration Agency Information Collection Extension AGENCY:

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), Department of Energy.

    ACTION:

    Agency information collection activities: Information collection extension with change, comment request.

    SUMMARY:

    The EIA, pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, intends to submit an information collection request for the Coal Markets Reporting System, OMB Control Number 1905-0167, with the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). EIA is soliciting comments on the proposed revisions and requests a three-year extension to Forms:

    EIA-3 “Quarterly Survey of Non-Electric Sector Coal Data” EIA-7A “Annual Survey of Coal Production and Preparation” EIA-8A “Annual Survey of Coal Stocks and Coal Exports”

    No changes are proposed for Forms:

    EIA-6 “Emergency Coal Supply Survey (Standby)” EIA-20 “Emergency Weekly Coal Monitoring Survey for Coal Burning Power Producers (Standby)”

    The EIA proposes to make moderate changes to questions, response options, and instructions to Forms EIA-3, EIA-7A, and EIA-8A and requests an extension to Forms EIA-6 and EIA-20 with no substantive changes. EIA is proposing to require submission of Form EIA-3 and EIA-8A through the U.S. Energy Information Administration Data xChange Portal and will eliminate unsecured reporting modes. The Data xChange Portal:

    • Serves as a single point of entry for authorized users to respond to EIA surveys, access EIA data, and build customized reports.

    • Provides expanded communication methods to include phone and email contact information of centralized data collection team

    • Uses security protocols to protect the information against unauthorized access during transmission.

    • Requires data submission through an online web form, eliminating unsecured reporting methods.

    DATES:

    Comments must be filed by November 15, 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, please advise the EIA-7A Survey Manager at EIA of your intention to make a submission as soon as possible. The Survey Manager may be contacted by email at [email protected] or by telephone at 202-586-4866.

    ADDRESSES:

    Written comments should be sent to: Attn: JenAlyse Arena, EIA-7A Survey Manager, U.S. Energy Information Administration, EI-24, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Requests for additional information or copies of any forms and instructions should be directed to Ms. JenAlyse Arena at the contact information listed above. The proposed forms and instructions are available on the Internet at: http://www.eia.gov/survey/changes/coal/2016/.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This information collection request contains:

    (1) OMB No. 1905-0167;

    (2) Information Collection Request Title: Coal Markets Reporting System. The survey forms:

    EIA-3 “Quarterly Survey of Non-Electric Sector Coal Data” EIA-7A “Annual Survey of Coal Production and Preparation” EIA-8A “Annual Survey of Coal Stocks and Coal Exports” EIA-6 “Emergency Coal Supply Survey (Standby)” EIA-20 “Emergency Weekly Coal Monitoring Survey for Coal Burning Power Producers (Standby)”

    (3) Type of Request: Three-year extension with changes;

    (4) Purpose:The Federal Energy Administration Act of 1974 (15 U.S.C. 761 et seq.) and the DOE Organization Act (42 U.S.C. 7101 et seq.) require the EIA to carry out a centralized, comprehensive, and unified energy information program. This program collects, evaluates, assembles, analyzes, and disseminates information on energy resource reserves, production, demand, technology, and related economic and statistical information. This information is used to assess the adequacy of energy resources to meet near and longer term domestic demands and to promote sound policymaking, efficient markets, and public understanding of energy and its interaction with the economy and the environment.

    The EIA, as part of its effort to comply with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq.), provides the general public and other Federal agencies with opportunities to comment on collections of energy information conducted by, or in conjunction with, the EIA. Also, the EIA will later seek approval for this collection from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under Section 3507(a) of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

    EIA surveys are conducted to collect coal market data. The data elements include production, consumption, receipts, stocks, sales, and prices. Information pertaining to the quality of the coal is also collected. Aggregates of this collection are used to support public policy analyses of the coal industry, economic modeling, forecasting, coal supply and demand studies, and in guiding research and development programs. EIA publications, including the Monthly Energy Review, Quarterly Coal Report, Quarterly Coal Distribution Report, Annual Coal Report, and Annual Coal Distribution Report, each contain data collected through the coal production and consumption surveys listed above.

    In addition, the EIA uses the data in short-term and long-term models such as the Short-Term Integrated Forecasting System (STIFS) and the National Energy Modeling System (NEMS) Coal Market Module. The forecast data also appear in the Short-Term Energy Outlook and the Annual Energy Outlook publications.

    Please refer to the proposed forms and instructions for more information about the purpose, who must report, when to report, where to submit, elements to be reported, detailed instructions, provisions for confidentiality, and uses of the information.

    (4a) Proposed Changes: EIA will be requesting a three-year extension of approval for all its coal surveys with the following changes:

    Form EIA-3: Quarterly Survey of Non-Electric Sector Coal Data

    • Change the title of the survey to “Quarterly Survey of Industrial, Commercial, & Institutional Coal Users”

    • In Part 2, Question 6, revise reporting for co-fired sites to allow reporting of more than one additional fuel source.

    • In Part 3, Question 2, remove Adjustments to total cost of coal received during the reporting cycle.

    • In Part 5, Questions 2-3, revise coking plant disposition categories and include distinction between domestic and export sales of coke and breeze to gather more accurate data on each type of sale.

    • In Part 8, Question 2, revise coal refining plant disposition categories to allow for accurate accounting of refined coal.

    EIA proposes adding the following questions to Form EIA-3:

    • In Part 2, Question 2, add the question: “Does this site operate a coke oven”? This question will be used to identify active U.S. coking plants within manufacturing sites.

    • In Part 3, Question 3A, add the question “Please provide the contact information for your broker.” Contact information will be used to help maintain the EIA-8A frame, eliminate duplicative reporting on Form EIA-7A and reduce burden between Forms EIA-8A and EIA-7A.

    Form EIA-7A: Annual Survey of Coal Production and Preparation

    • In Part 5, question 7, revise reporting categories of coal mine sales to simplify question wording while adding export categories to include open market export sales, captive market export sales, and broker export sales. The new categories will provide more accurate information on coal exports by type of sale and seller by eliminating potential double-counting of export coal sales on Form EIA-8A. It will improve EIAs assessments on production trends and coal supply by basin. It will also facilitate EIA's comparison of coal supply by basin with export data collected by the U.S. Census Bureau.

    EIA proposes adding the following questions to Form EIA-7A:

    • In Part 3, Question 5A, add the question “What is the average depth of the mine below the surface?” This question will assist with data discrepancies of coalbed data reported by comparing coalbeds mined with U.S. Geological Survey data.

    • In Part 5, delete question 2 “With the existing equipment in place, what is the maximum amount of coal that this mining operation can produce during the reporting year?” and add “With the existing equipment in place, what is the annual operating capacity of this mine?” This is a rewording to the current question requesting annual operating/producing capacity. By comparing actual production compared to operating capacity, EIA can assess if mines are producing at maximum capacity and can use this as an indicator of market conditions affecting coal supply.

    • In Part 5, delete question 5 “As of December 31st of the reporting year, what is the estimated tonnage representing the amount of coal identified in the reserve that is technologically and economically feasible to extract?” and add “As of December 31st of the reporting year, what is the estimated amount of coal in the reserve that is feasible (economically/technologically) to extract? This rewording of the current question requesting recoverable coal reserves helps clarify to respondents to report the amount of coal that can be recovered from the coal reserve in place.

    Form EIA-8A: Annual Survey of Coal Stocks and Coal Exports

    • In Part 2, Question 2, revise list of locations where U.S. produced coal stocks are located to include “IT—In Transit”

    • In Part 3, Question 2, add new field requesting port of export and destination country for export sales to gather more detailed export data and assist in cross-survey comparison with the EIA-7A and coal trade data collected by the U.S. Census Bureau to quantify and eliminate double-counting of export coal sales.

    Standby Forms EIA-6: Emergency Coal Supply Survey (Standby) and EIA-20: Emergency Weekly Coal Monitoring Survey for Coal Burning Power Producers (Standby)

    • No substantive changes will be made to these forms.

    Request for Comments: As a potential respondent to the request for information, review the proposed changes mentioned above, the survey forms and instructions, and please advise the following:

    • Is the proposed collection of information necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency and does the information have practical utility?

    • What actions could be taken to help ensure and maximize the quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity of the information to be collected?

    • Are the instructions and definitions clear and sufficient? If not, which instructions need clarification?

    • Can the information be submitted by the respondent by the due date?

    • Can information be submitted using the proposed collection method?

    (5) Estimated Number of Survey Respondents: 2,429.

    • EIA-3 will consist of 432 respondents

    • EIA-7A will consist of 848 respondents

    • EIA-8A will consist of 48 respondents

    • EIA-6 (standby) will consist of 610 respondents

    • EIA-20 (standby) will consist of 491 respondents

    (6) Annual Estimated Number of Responses: 3,725.

    (7) Annual Estimated Number of Burden Hours: 5,515.

    (8) Annual Estimated Reporting and Recordkeeping Cost Burden: Additional costs to respondents are not anticipated beyond costs associated with response burden hours. The information is maintained in the normal course of business. The cost of the burden hours is estimated to be $397,190 (5,515 burden hours times $72.02 per hour). Other than the cost of burden hours, EIA estimates that there are no additional costs for generating, maintaining and providing the information.

    Statutory Authority:

    Section 13(b) of the Federal Energy Administration Act of 1974, Pub. L. 93-275, codified at 15 U.S.C. 772(b), and the DOE Organization Act of 1977, Pub. L. 95-91, codified at 42 U.S.C. 7101 et seq.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on September 9, 2016. Renee Miller, Acting Director, Office of Survey Development and Statistical Integration, U.S. Energy Information Administration.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22310 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Project No. 2520-076] Great Lakes Hydro America, LLC; Notice of Application Tendered for Filing With the Commission and Establishing Procedural Schedule for Licensing and Deadline for Submission of Final Amendments

    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection.

    a. Type of Application: New Major License.

    b. Project No.: 2520-076.

    c. Date Filed: August 31, 2016.

    d. Applicant: Great Lakes Hydro America, LLC (Great Lakes Hydro).

    e. Name of Project: Mattaceunk Hydroelectric Project.

    f. Location: The existing project is located on the Penobscot River in Aroostook and Penobscot Counties, Maine. The project does not affect federal lands.

    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791(a)-825(r).

    h. Applicant Contact: Kevin Bernier, Senior Compliance Specialist, Great Lakes Hydro America, LLC, 1024 Central Street, Millinocket, Maine 04462; Telephone (207) 723-4341, x118.

    i. FERC Contact: Adam Peer, (202) 502-8449 or [email protected].

    j. This application is not ready for environmental analysis at this time.

    k. The Project Description: The existing Mattaceunk Hydroelectric Project consists of: (1) A 1,060-foot-long, 45-foot-high dam (Weldon Dam) with a crest elevation of 236.0 feet (USGS datum), and includes (i) a 110-foot-long earthen embankment extending to the left abutment; (ii) a combined intake and powerhouse structure; (iii) an upstream fish ladder; (iv) a 10-foot-wide log sluice structure, controlled by an 8-foot-high vertical slide gate; (v) a 90-foot-long, 19-foot-high gated spillway with a single roller gate; (vi) a 657.5-foot-long, 70-foot high concrete gravity overflow spillway with 4-foot-high flashboards to create a maximum flashboard crest elevation of 240.0 feet; and (vii) a retaining wall at the right abutment; (2) a 1,664-acre reservoir with a total storage capacity of 20,981 acre-feet at a normal pool elevation of 240.00 feet (USGS datum); (3) a 142-foot-long, 99-foot-wide powerhouse (Weldon Station) integral to the dam containing two Kaplan turbines rated at 5,479 kilowatt (kW) and two fixed-blade propeller turbines rated at 5,489 kW, each driving a 6,000 kilovolt-ampere (kVA), 4,800 kW vertical synchronous generator for an authorized installed capacity of 19.2 megawatts (MW); (4) a downstream fishway; (5) an outdoor substation adjacent to the powerhouse; (6) a 9-mile-long, 34.5-kilovolt (kV) transmission line within a 120-foot-wide right of way; and (7) appurtenant facilities. The project generates about 123,332 megawatt-hours (MWh) annually.

    The Mattaceunk Project is operated with minimal fluctuations of the reservoir surface elevation. Flexibility on reservoir elevations is required to provide for safe installation of the project's flashboards and to allow an adequate margin for wave action, debris loads, or sudden pool increases that might cause flashboard failure. The existing license requires a reservoir surface elevation no lower than 1.0 foot below the dam crest elevation of 236.0 feet when the 4-foot-high flashboards are not in use, and no lower than 2.0 feet below the top of flashboard elevation of 240.0 feet when the 4-foot-high flashboards are in use. The existing license also requires a year-round continuous minimum flow of 1,674 cubic feet per second (cfs) or inflow, whichever is less, and a daily average minimum flow of 2,392 cfs from July 1 through September 30 and 2,000 cfs from October 1 through June 30, unless inflow is less than the stated daily average minimum flows (in which case outflow from the project must equal the inflow to the project). Great Lakes Hydro proposes to: (1) Install a seasonal upstream eel ramp; (2) install an upstream passage structure for American shad, alewife, and blueback herring; (3) install trashracks having 1-inch clear spacing to the full depth of the turbine intakes during the fish passage season; and (4) improve the recreation facility at the downstream angler access area.

    l. Locations of the Application: A copy of the application is available for 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], (866) 208-3676 (toll free), or (202) 502-8659 (TTY). A copy is also available for inspection and reproduction at the address in item (h) above.

    m. You may also register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to be notified via email of new filings and issuances related to this or other pending projects. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support.

    n. Procedural Schedule: The application will be processed according to the following preliminary Hydro Licensing Schedule. Revisions to the schedule may be made as appropriate.

    Milestone Target date Notice of Acceptance/Notice of Ready for Environmental Analysis October 2016. Filing of recommendations, preliminary terms and conditions, and fishway prescriptions December 2016. Commission issues Draft Environmental Assessment (EA) June 2017. Comments on Draft EA July 2017. Modified terms and conditions September 2017. Commission issues Final EA December 2017.

    o. Final amendments to the application must be filed with the Commission no later than 30 days from the issuance date of the notice of ready for environmental analysis.

    Dated: September 8, 2016. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22266 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Notice of Commission Staff Attendance at MISO Meetings

    The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) hereby gives notice that Commission staff may attend the following MISO-related meetings:

    • Advisory Committee ○ September 14, 10:15 a.m.-3 p.m., St. Paul Hotel, 350 Market Street, St. Paul, MN • Board of Directors Audit & Finance Committee ○ September 14, 3:45 p.m.-5 p.m., St. Paul Hotel, 350 Market Street, St. Paul, MN • Board of Directors ○ September 15, 8:30 a.m.-12 noon, St. Paul Hotel, 350 Market Street, St. Paul, MN • Board of Directors Markets Committee ○ September 13, 9 a.m.-12 noon, St. Paul Hotel, 350 Market Street, St. Paul, MN • Board of Directors Corporate Governance and Strategic Planning Committee ○ September 13, 11:15 a.m.-1 p.m., St. Paul Hotel, 350 Market Street, St. Paul, MN

    Unless otherwise noted all of the meetings above will be held at either:

    Carmel, MISO Headquarters, 701 City Center Drive, 720 City Center Drive, and Carmel, IN 46032. Little Rock, 1700 Centerview Drive, Little Rock, AR. Eagan, 2985 Ames Crossing Rd., Eagan, MN. Metarie, 3850 N. Causeway Blvd., Suite 442 Metairie, LA. Further information and dial in instructions may be found at www.misoenergy.org. All times are Local Prevailing Time.

    The above-referenced meetings are open to the public.

    The discussions at each of the meetings described above may address matters at issue in the following proceedings:

    Docket No. ER11-4081, Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc. Docket No. ER12-678, Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc. Docket No. ER12-2302, Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc. Docket No. ER13-187, Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc. Docket No. ER13-186, Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc. Docket No. ER13-101, Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc. Docket No. ER13-89, MidAmerican Energy Company Docket No. ER12-1266, Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc. Docket No. ER12-1265, Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc. Docket No. ER13-1924, Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc. Docket No. ER13-1943, Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc. Docket No. ER13-1944, Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc. Docket No. ER13-1945, Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc. Docket No. EL13-88, Northern Indiana Public Service Corp. v Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc., et al. Docket No. EL14-12, ABATE et al. v Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc., et al. Docket No. AD12-16, Capacity Deliverability across the MISO/PJM Seam Docket No. AD14-3, Coordination of Energy and Capacity across the MISO/PJM Seam Docket No. ER13-1938, Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc. Docket No. ER14-1736, Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc. Docket No. ER14-2445, Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc. Docket No. ER15-133, Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc. Docket No. ER15-530, Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc. Docket No. ER15-767, Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc. Docket No. ER15-945, Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc. Docket No. ER09-1431, Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc. Docket No. ER11-2275, Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc. Docket No. ER11-3279, Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc. Docket No. ER12-1194, Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc. Docket No. ER15-1210, Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc. Docket No. ER13-1938, Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc. Docket No. ER14-649, Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc. Docket No. ER14-2952, Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc. Docket No. ER14-2605, Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc. Docket No. ER14-1210, Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc. Docket No. ER15-943, Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc. Docket No. ER16-469, Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc. Docket No. ER15-2657, Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc. Docket No. ER16-533, Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc. Docket No. ER16-534, Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc. Docket No. ER16-675, Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc. Docket No. EL15-70, Public Citizen, Inc v. Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc. Docket No. EL15-71, People of the State of Illinois v. Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc. Docket No. EL15-72, Southwestern Electric Cooperative, Inc. v. Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc. Docket No. EL15-82, Illinois Industrial Energy Consumers v. Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc. Docket No. ER16-696, Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc. Docket No. ER16-770, Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc. Docket No. ER16-833, Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc. Docket No. ER16-56, Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc. Docket No. ER16-1039, Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc. Docket No. ER16-1096, Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc. Docket No. EL16-112, Coalition of MISO Transmission Customers v. Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.

    For more information, contact Patrick Clarey, Office of Energy Markets Regulation, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission at (317) 249-5937 or [email protected], or Christopher Miller, Office of Energy Markets Regulation, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission at (317) 249-5936 or [email protected]

    Dated: September 8, 2016. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22265 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. EL16-71-000] Notice of Institution of Section 206 Proceeding and Refund Effective Date Monongahela Power Company Potomac Edison Company West Penn Power Company AEP Indiana Michigan Transmission Company, Inc. AEP Kentucky Transmission Company, Inc. AEP Ohio Transmission Company, Inc. AEP West Virginia Transmission Company, Inc. Appalachian Power Company Indiana Michigan Power Company Kentucky Power Company Kingsport Power Company Ohio Power Company Wheeling Power Company Commonwealth Edison Company Commonwealth Edison Company of Indiana, Inc. Dayton Power and Light Company Virginia Electric and Power Company Public Service Electric and Gas Company PECO Energy Company PPL Electric Utilities Corporation Baltimore Gas and Electric Company Jersey Central Power & Light Company Metropolitan Edison Company Pennsylvania Electric Company Potomac Electric Power Company Atlantic City Electric Company Delmarva Power & Light Company UGI Utilities Inc. Allegheny Electric Cooperative, Inc. CED Rock Springs, LLC Old Dominion Electric Cooperative Rockland Electric Company Duquesne Light Company Neptune Regional Transmission System, LLC Trans-Allegheny Interstate Line Company Linden VFT, LLC American Transmission Systems, Incorporated City of Cleveland, Department of Public Utilities, Division of Cleveland Public Power Duke Energy Ohio, Inc. Duke Energy Kentucky, Inc. City of Hamilton, OH Hudson Transmission Partners, LLC East Kentucky Power Cooperative, Inc. City of Rochelle ITC Interconnection LLC PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.

    On August 26, 2016, the Commission issued an order in Docket No. EL16-71-000, pursuant to section 206 of the Federal Power Act (FPA), 16 U.S.C. 824e (2012), instituting an investigation into whether the PJM Transmission Owners are complying with their Order No. 890 obligations. Monongahela Power Company et al., 156 FERC ¶ 61,134 (2016).

    The refund effective date in Docket No. EL16-71-000, established pursuant to section 206(b) of the FPA, will be the date of publication of this notice in the Federal Register.

    Any interested person desiring to be heard in Docket No. EL16-71-000 must file a notice of intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate, with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rule 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.214, within 21 days of the date of issuance of the order.

    Dated: September 8, 2016. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22264 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket Nos. CP16-98-000; PF15-29-000] Dominion Carolina Gas Transmission, LLC; Notice of Revised Schedule for Environmental Review of the Transco to Charleston Project

    This notice identifies the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission staff's revised schedule for the completion of the Environmental Assessment (EA) for Dominion Carolina Gas Transmission, LLC's Transco to Charleston Project. The previous Notice of Schedule, issued on July 25, 2016, identified September 19, 2016 as the EA issuance date. However, Dominion Carolina Gas Transmission, LLC filed a supplement on August 22, 2016 which identified several route adjustments and workspace modifications. As a result, staff has revised the schedule for issuance of the EA.

    Schedule for Environmental Review

    Issuance of EA: October 19, 2016.

    90-day Federal Authorization Decision Deadline: January 17, 2017.

    If a schedule change becomes necessary, additional notice will be provided so that the relevant agencies are kept informed of the project's progress.

    Additional Information

    In order to receive notification of the issuance of the EA and to keep track of all formal issuances and submittals in specific dockets, the Commission offers a free service called eSubscription (www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp).

    Dated: September 8, 2016. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22259 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. ID-7993-000] Van Orden, Tracy; Notice of Filing

    Take notice that on September 7, 2016, Tracy Van Orden filed an application for authorization to hold interlocking positions, pursuant to section 305(b) of the Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 825d(b), and Part 45 of the Regulations of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission), 18 CFR Part 45.

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. On or before the comment date, it is not necessary to serve motions to intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.

    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the “eFiling” link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 5 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.

    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the “eLibrary” link and is 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.

    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on September 28, 2016.

    Dated: September 8, 2016. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22262 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Notice of Commission Staff Attendance

    The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) hereby gives notice that members of the Commission's staff may attend the following meetings related to the transmission planning activities of the PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. (PJM):

    PJM Planning Committee September 15, 2016, 9:30 a.m.-12:00 p.m. (EST) PJM Transmission Expansion Advisory Committee September 15, 2016, 11:00 a.m.-3:00 p.m. (EST)

    The above-referenced meetings will be held at:

    PJM Conference and Training Center, PJM Interconnection, 2750 Monroe Boulevard, Audubon, PA 19403.

    The above-referenced meetings are open to stakeholders. Further information may be found at www.pjm.com.

    The discussions at the meetings described above may address matters at issue in the following proceedings:

    Docket No. ER16-453, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. and Northeast Transmission Development, LLC. Docket No. ER16-736, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. Docket No. ER14-972, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. Docket No. ER14-1485, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. Docket Nos. ER13-1944, et al., PJM Interconnection, L.L.C., et al. Docket No. ER15-1344, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. Docket No. ER15-1387, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. and Potomac Electric Power Company Docket No. ER15-2562, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. Docket No. ER15-2563, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. Docket No. EL15-18, Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc. v. PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. Docket No. EL15-41, Essential Power Rock Springs, L.L.C., et al. v. PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. Docket No. ER15-2114, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. and Transource West Virginia, L.L.C. Docket No. EL15-79, TransSource, L.L.C. v. PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. Docket No. EL15-95, Delaware Public Service Commission, et al., v. PJM Interconnection, L.L.C., et al. Docket No. EL15-67, Linden VFT, L.L.C. v. PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. Docket No. EL05-121, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. Docket No. ER13-198, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. Docket No. ER16-1335, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. Docket No. ER16-1232, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. Docket No. ER16-1499, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. Docket No. ER16-1807, First Energy Solutions Corp. Docket No. EL16-96, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. Docket No. EL16-71, Monongahela Power Company et al. Docket No. ER16-2518, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. Docket No. ER16-2539, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. Docket No. ER16-2401, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. Docket No. EL16-109-000, Virginia Electric and Power Company v. PJM Interconnection L.L.C.

    For more information, contact the following:

    Jonathan Fernandez, Office of Energy Market Regulation, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, (202) 502-6604, [email protected]. Alina Halay, Office of Energy Market Regulation, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, (202) 502-6474, [email protected] Dated: September 7, 2016. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22267 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. CP16-497-000] Columbia Gas Transmission, LLC; Notice of Request Under Blanket Authorization

    Take notice that on August 29, 2016, Columbia Gas Transmission, LLC (Columbia), 5151 San Felipe, Suite 2500, Houston, Texas 77056, filed in Docket No. CP16-497-000, a prior notice request pursuant to sections 157.205, 157.213, and 157.216 of the Commission's regulations under the Natural Gas Act (NGA). Columbia seeks authorization to: (i) Convert a storage well in Wayne County, Ohio from injection/withdrawal status to observation status and abandon its associated pipeline and appurtenances, and (ii) plug and abandon two storage wells, and their associated appurtenances, located in Ashland, and Vinton Counties, Ohio, respectively. Columbia proposes to perform these activities under its blanket certificate issued in Docket No. CP83-76-000, all as more fully set forth in the application which is on file with the Commission and open to public inspection.

    The filing may be viewed on the web at http://www.ferc.gov using the “eLibrary” link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, contact FERC at [email protected] or call toll-free, (886) 208-3676 or TYY, (202) 502-8659.

    Any questions regarding this application should be directed to William A. Sala, Jr., Senior Counsel, Columbia Gas Transmission, LLC, 5151 San Felipe, Suite 2500, Houston, Texas 77056, or by calling (713) 386-3743 (telephone), or (713) 386-3755 (fax) [email protected]

    Any person or the Commission's Staff may, within 60 days after the issuance of the instant notice by the Commission, file pursuant to Rule 214 of the Commission's Procedural Rules (18 CFR 385.214) a motion to intervene or notice of intervention and, pursuant to section 157.205 of the Commission's Regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.205) a protest to the request. If no protest is filed within the time allowed therefore, the proposed activity shall be deemed to be authorized effective the day after the time allowed for protest. If a protest is filed and not withdrawn within 30 days after the time allowed for filing a protest, the instant request shall be treated as an application for authorization pursuant to section 7 of the NGA.

    Pursuant to section 157.9 of the Commission's rules, 18 CFR 157.9, within 90 days of this Notice the Commission staff will either: Complete its environmental assessment (EA) and place it into the Commission's public record (eLibrary) for this proceeding, or issue a Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review. If a Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review is issued, it will indicate, among other milestones, the anticipated date for the Commission staff's issuance of the final environmental impact statement (FEIS) or EA for this proposal. The filing of the EA in the Commission's public record for this proceeding or the issuance of a Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review will serve to notify federal and state agencies of the timing for the completion of all necessary reviews, and the subsequent need to complete all federal authorizations within 90 days of the date of issuance of the Commission staff's FEIS or EA.

    Persons who wish to comment only on the environmental review of this project should submit an original and two copies of their comments to the Secretary of the Commission. Environmental commenters will be placed on the Commission's environmental mailing list, will receive copies of the environmental documents, and will be notified of meetings associated with the Commission's environmental review process. Environmental commenters will not be required to serve copies of filed documents on all other parties. However, the non-party commenters will not receive copies of all documents filed by other parties or issued by the Commission (except for the mailing of environmental documents issued by the Commission) and will not have the right to seek court review of the Commission's final order.

    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments, protests, and interventions via the Internet in lieu of paper. See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site (www.ferc.gov) under the “e-Filing” link. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 5 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.

    Dated: September 8, 2016. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22260 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. OR16-20-000] ITC Pipeline Company, LLC; Notice of Request for Waiver

    Take notice that on July 14, 2016, pursuant to Rule 207(a)(5) of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission), ITC Pipeline Company, LLC (“ITC Pipeline”) requests waiver of the portion of 18 CFR 342.4(c)(2016), that would require ITC Pipeline to submit a verified statement in support of (1) the incentive rates (“Incentive Rates”) agreed to by ITC Pipeline's current shippers, as opposed to its prospective shippers who will begin shipping once ITC Pipeline goes into service, and (2) any changes to the Incentive Rates that ITC Pipeline makes in a subsequent tariff filing with the Commission provided such changes are made in accordance with the written terms of the applicable dedication agreement described in the transmittal letter of ITC Pipeline's initial rules and rates tariff filed concurrently therewith.

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214 (2014)) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the Petitioner.

    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the “eFiling” link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 5 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.

    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the “eLibrary” link and is available for review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an “eSubscription” link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive email notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please email [email protected], or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on September 23, 2016.

    Dated: September 8, 2016. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22263 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. EL16-112-000] Coalition of MISO Transmission Customers v. Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.; Notice of Complaint

    Take notice that on September 8, 2016, pursuant to sections 206, 306, and 309 of the Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 824e, 825e, and 825h (2012), and Rule 206 of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission) Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.206 (2014), the Coalition of MISO Transmission Customers (Complainant) filed a formal complaint against Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc. (MISO or Respondent) alleging that Respondent's calculation of the export limit for the 2016-2017 Planning Resource Auction from the MISO South region to the MISO Midwest region was unjust and unreasonable, all as more fully explained in the complaint.

    Complainant states that copies of the complaint were served on the contacts for Respondent listed on the Commission's list of Corporate Officials.

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. The Respondent's answer and all interventions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. The Respondent's answer, motions to intervene, and protests must be served on the Complainant.

    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the “eFiling” link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 5 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.

    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the “eLibrary” link and is available for review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an “eSubscription” link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive email notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please email [email protected], or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on September 28, 2016.

    Dated: September 8, 2016. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22261 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Project No. 2307-078] Alaska Electric Light & Power Company; Notice of Application Tendered for Filing With the Commission and Soliciting Study Requests and Establishing Procedural Schedule for Relicensing and a Deadline for Submission of Final Amendments

    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection.

    a. Type of Application: Major Subsequent License.

    b. Project No.: 2307-078.

    c. Date filed: August 31, 2016.

    d. Applicant: Alaska Electric Light and Power Company.

    e. Name of Project: Salmon and Annex Creek Hydroelectric Project.

    f. Location: On Salmon Creek and Annex Creek in the City and Borough of Juneau, Alaska. The project occupies about 648.45 acres of federal lands located in the Tongass National Forest administered by the United States Forest Service and operates under an existing license issued in 1988.

    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act 16 U.S.C. 791(a)-825(r).

    h. Applicant Contact: Christy Yearous, Project Manager, Alaska Electric Light & Power Company, 5601 Tongsard Ct., Juneau, AK 99801-7201; (907) 780-2222.

    i. FERC Contact: Suzanne Novak at (202) 502-6665, [email protected]

    j. Cooperating agencies: Federal, state, local, and tribal agencies with jurisdiction and/or special expertise with respect to environmental issues that wish to cooperate in the preparation of the environmental document should follow the instructions for filing such requests described in item l below. Cooperating agencies should note the Commission's policy that agencies that cooperate in the preparation of the environmental document cannot also intervene. See, 94 FERC ¶ 61,076 (2001).

    k. Pursuant to section 4.32(b)(7) of 18 CFR of the Commission's regulations, if any resource agency, Indian Tribe, or person believes that an additional scientific study should be conducted in order to form an adequate factual basis for a complete analysis of the application on its merit, the resource agency, Indian Tribe, or person must file a request for a study with the Commission not later than 60 days from the date of filing of the application, and serve a copy of the request on the applicant.

    l. Deadline for filing additional study requests and requests for cooperating agency status: October 31, 2016.

    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file requests for cooperating agency status using the Commission's eFiling system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at [email protected], (866) 208-3676 (toll free), or (202) 502-8659 (TTY). In lieu of electronic filing, please send a paper copy to: Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426. The first page of any filing should include docket number P-2307-078.

    m. The application is not ready for environmental analysis at this time.

    n. The proposed Salmon and Annex Creek Project consists of two developments, one on Salmon Creek and one on Annex Creek.

    The Salmon Creek development consists of the following existing facilities: (1) The 165-acre Salmon Creek reservoir impounded by a 648-foot-long, 168-foot-high dam, with ten 5-foot-wide spillway bays; (2) a 1,500-foot-long segment of a canal used to periodically divert water from tributary streams into Salmon Creek Reservoir; (3) a 10-foot-wide, 11-foot-high intake structure with trashracks at the base of the dam; (4) a 3-foot-diameter conduit that conveys flows from the dam to the project valvehouse located immediately downstream; (5) the project valvehouse containing two penstocks: (i) An 11,030-foot-long, 3.5-foot-diameter penstock that narrows to a 2.5-foot-diameter immediately before entering the Lower Powerhouse, and (ii) a 4,290-foot-long, 3.3- to-2.5-foot-diameter penstock that conveys flows to the decommissioned Upper Powerhouse; (6) the 57-foot-long, 44-foot-wide, 32-foot-high, Lower Powerhouse, which contains a 6.9-megawatt (MW) impulse turbine; (7) an approximately 250-foot-long tailrace that flows underneath Egan Drive and empties into a pond adjacent to the Douglas Island Pink and Chum, Inc., hatchery; and (8) appurtenant facilities.

    The Annex Creek development consists of the following existing facilities: (1) The 264-acre Upper Annex Lake, impounded by a 118-foot-long, 20-foot-high dam with a 57-foot-wide spillway that discharges flows in excess of those needed for generation into the Lower Annex Lake; (2) a small timber saddle dam, 61 feet long and 6 feet high, located just west of the main dam; (3) the natural 27-acre Lower Annex Lake; (4) a lake tap intake on Upper Annex Lake; (5) a 1,433-foot-long power tunnel that narrows from 8 feet wide and 8 feet high at the intake to a 6.5-foot-diameter tunnel at the project valvehouse; (6) the project valvehouse containing the penstock intake; (7) the 7,097-foot-long, 3.5-foot-diameter penstock that narrows to a 2.8-foot-diameter before it bifurcates at the powerhouse to provide flows to two impulse turbine units with a total installed capacity of 3.675 MW; (8) the 67-foot-long, 48-foot-wide, 40-foot-high, powerhouse; (9) a tailrace that discharges flows over a weir into Taku Inlet; (10) a 12.5-mile-long, 23-kilovolt (kV) transmission line that conveys power to the Thane substation; and (11) appurtenant facilities.

    The project currently operates to provide base load generation with an estimated annual output of 53.8 gigawatt-hours. No changes to project operation or facilities are proposed.

    o. A copy of the application is available for 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, contact FERC Online Support. A copy is also available for inspection and reproduction at the address in item h above.

    You may also register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to be notified via email of new filings and issuances related to this or other pending projects. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support.

    p. Procedural schedule: The application will be processed according to the following preliminary Hydro Licensing Schedule. Revisions to the schedule will be made as appropriate.

    Issue Notice of Acceptance November 2016. Issue Scoping Document 1 December 2016. Comments on Scoping Document 1 January 2017. Issue Scoping Document 2 March 2017. Issue Notice Ready for Environmental Analysis March 2017. Filing of Comments, Terms and Conditions, Recommendations and Prescriptions June 2017. Applicant's reply comments August 2017. Commission issues Environmental Assessment (EA) November 2017. Comments on draft EA December 2017.

    Final amendments to the application must be filed with the Commission no later than 30 days from the issuance date of the notice of ready for environmental analysis.

    Dated: September 9, 2016. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22268 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [EPA-HQ-OAR-2016-0094-1138; FRL-9952-38-OAR] Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Information Collection for Importation of On-Highway Vehicles and Motorcycles and Nonroad Engines, Vehicles, and Equipment; EPA ICR Number 2583.01, OMB Control Number 2060—NEW AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), this document announces that EPA is planning to submit an Information Collection Request (ICR) for the information requirements for importation of on-highway vehicles and motorcycles and nonroad engines, vehicles, and equipment to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). This new ICR is the consolidation of two individual ICRS that are currently approved by OMB. EPA currently has an approved collection that covers the information requirements for importation of on-highway vehicles which expires on October 31, 2016 (OMB Control Number 2060-0095, ICR Number 0010.14). EPA also has an approved collection for information requirements for importation of nonroad engines and recreational vehicles (OMB Control Number 2060-0320, ICR Number 1723.07), which expires February 28, 2017. Before submitting this new ICR to OMB for review and approval, EPA is soliciting comments on the proposed information collection as described below.

    DATES:

    Comments must be submitted on or before November 15, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments referencing Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2016-0094 online using www.regulations.gov (our preferred method), by email to [email protected] or by mail to: EPA Docket Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Mailcode 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460.

    EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Holly Pugliese, Compliance Division, Office of Transportation and Air Quality, Environmental Protection Agency, 2000 Traverwood, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 48105; telephone number: 734-214-4288; fax number: 734-214-4869; email address: [email protected].

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Supporting documents which explain in detail the information that the EPA will be collecting are available in the public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at www.regulations.gov or in person at the EPA Docket Center, WJC West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC. The telephone number for the Docket Center is 202-566-1744. For additional information about EPA's public docket, visit http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

    Pursuant to section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA, EPA is soliciting comments and information to enable it to: (i) 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; (ii) 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; (iii) enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (iv) 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. EPA will consider the comments received and amend the ICR as appropriate. The final ICR package will then be submitted to OMB for review and approval. At that time, EPA will issue another Federal Register notice to announce the submission of the ICR to OMB and the opportunity to submit additional comments to OMB.

    Abstract: This ICR will consolidate two separate ICRs that currently individually cover EPA Declaration Forms 3520-1, 3520-21, and 3520-8. EPA Declaration Form 3520-1 is used by importers of on-highway vehicles and motorcycles and EPA Declaration Form 3520-21 is used by importers of nonroad vehicles, engines and equipment to help facilitate importation of products at U.S. Borders. Each form identifies the regulated category of engine or vehicle and the regulatory provisions under which the importation is taking place. In addition, this ICR covers the burden of EPA Form 3520-8 which is used to request final importation clearance for Independent Commercial Importers (ICIs) of on-highway vehicles who are required to bring the on-highway vehicles into compliance and provide test results. This form is currently covered by OMB 2060-0095. EPA is consolidating these two ICRS due to the effort being undertaken by the U.S. Customs and Border Protection to require electronic filing for all importers. Over the last several years, CBP has been developing the Automated Commercial Environment (ACE) for electronic filing. By the end of 2016, ACE will become the primary system the trade community and other importers will use to report imports and exports. Through ACE as the single window, manual processes will be streamlined and automated, and paper submissions (e.g. fillable PDFs) will essentially be eliminated. However, EPA will continue to maintain the forms on our Web site in fillable PDF format.

    EPA does not collect the forms, but rather makes them available to importers and CBP to facilitate entry of goods at the port. EPA may ask for them upon request to assist CPB and/or EPA enforcement personnel for any given import for which there are questions or issues. The forms are primarily used by CBP at the time of importation to assist CBP in making determination if entry should be allowed. CBP regulations require that the forms be submitted as applicable at the time of entry; see 19 CFR 12.73 and 12.74.

    Form Numbers: 3520-1, 3520-21, 3520-8.

    Frequency of response: Once per entry. (One form per shipment may be used.)

    Respondents/affected entities: Information collected is from individual importers, or companies who import and/or manufacture on-highway vehicles and nonroad engines, vehicles, and equipment.

    Respondent's obligation to respond: Required for any importer to legally import nonroad vehicles or engines into the U.S.

    Estimated number of respondents: 14,810.

    Total estimated burden: 13,985 hours (per year). Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.03(b).

    Total estimated cost: $513,633 (per year), includes $48,064 annualized capital or operation & maintenance costs.

    Changes in Estimates: EPA is establishing new burden estimates as we combine the burden estimates for the two separate ICRs that currently cover the forms.

    Dated: September 8, 2016. Byron J. Bunker, Director, Compliance Division, Office of Transportation and Air Quality.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22219 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ER-FRL-9029-1] Environmental Impact Statements; Notice of Availability

    Responsible Agency: Office of Federal Activities, General Information (202) 564-7146 or http://www.epa.gov/nepa.

    Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact Statements (EISs) Filed 09/05/2016 Through 09/09/2016 Pursuant to 40 CFR 1506.9.

    Notice: Section 309(a) of the Clean Air Act requires that EPA make public its comments on EISs issued by other Federal agencies. EPA's comment letters on EISs are available at: http://www.epa.gov/compliance/nepa/eisdata.html.

    EIS No. 20160206, Final, AFS, CA, Los Padres Tamarisk Removal, Review Period Ends: 10/26/2016, Contact: Kyle Kinports 805-961-5710. EIS No. 20160207, Final, USACE, NY, South Shore of Staten Island Coastal Storm Risk Management, Review Period Ends: 10/17/2016, Contact: Catherine J. Alcoba 917-790-8216. EIS No. 20160208, Final Supplement, BOEM, LA, Gulf of Mexico OCS Oil and Gas Lease Sale: 2017 Central Planning Area Lease Sale 247 Review Period Ends: 10/17/2016, Contact: Gary Goeke 504-736ndash;3233. EIS No. 20160209, Draft, DOC, AZ, Programmatic—West Region of the Nationwide Public Safety Broadband Network, Comment Period Ends: 11/15/2016, Contact: Genevieve Walker 571-665-6134. EIS No. 20160210, Final, USFS, CA Lassen National Forest Over-Snow Vehicle (OSV) Use Designation, Review Period Ends: 10/17/2016, Contact: Christopher O'Brien 530-262-6698. Amended Notices EIS No. 20160176, Draft, USACE, NY, Fire Island Inlet to Montauk Point, New York Combined Beach Erosion Control and Hurricane Protection Project, Comment Period Ends: 10/19/2016, Contact: Robert Smith 917-790-8729.

    Revision to FR Notice published 07/29/2016; extending comment period from 09/29/2016 to 10/19/2016.

    Dated: September 13, 2016. Dawn Roberts, Management Analyst, NEPA Compliance Division, Office of Federal Activities.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22362 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    EXPORT-IMPORT BANK OF THE UNITED STATES Notice of Open Meeting of the Advisory Committee of the Export-Import Bank of the United States (Ex-Im Bank) SUMMARY:

    The Advisory Committee was established by Public Law 98-181, November 30, 1983, to advise the Export-Import Bank on its programs and to provide comments for inclusion in the report on competitiveness of the Export-Import Bank of the United States to Congress.

    TIME AND PLACE:

    Wednesday, September 28, 2016 from 11:00 a.m.-3:00 p.m.. A break for lunch will be at the expense of the attendee. Security processing will be necessary for reentry into the building. The meeting will be held at EXIM Bank in the Main Conference Room—11th floor, 811 Vermont Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20571.

    AGENDA:

    Discussion will focus on the Advisory Committee's final recommendations for EXIM Bank staff based on the Committee's work during this fiscal year. The Advisory Committee will also hear from external speakers and EXIM Bank officials.

    PUBLIC PARTICIPATION:

    The meeting will be open to public participation, and 10 minutes will be set aside for oral questions or comments. Members of the public may also file written statement(s) before or after the meeting. If you plan to attend, a photo ID must be presented at the guard's desk as part of the clearance process into the building, you may contact Tia Pitt at [email protected] to be placed on an attendee list. If any person wishes auxiliary aids (such as a sign language interpreter) or other special accommodations, please email Tia Pitt at [email protected] prior to September 21, 2016.

    MEMBERS OF THE PRESS:

    For members of the Press planning to attend the meeting, a photo ID must be presented at the guard's desk as part of the clearance process into the building please email Tia Pitt at [email protected] to be placed on an attendee list.

    FURTHER INFORMATION:

    For further information, contact Tia Pitt, 811 Vermont Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20571, at [email protected]

    Bonita Jones-McNeil, Program Analyst, Agency Clearance Officer, Office of the Chief Information Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22330 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6690-01-P
    FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION Sunshine Act Meeting

    Pursuant to the provisions of the “Government in the Sunshine Act” (5 U.S.C. 552b), notice is hereby given that the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation's Board of Directors will meet in open session at 3:30 p.m. on Tuesday, September 20, 2016, to consider the following matters:

    SUMMARY AGENDA:

    No substantive discussion of the following items is anticipated. These matters will be resolved with a single vote unless a member of the Board of Directors requests that an item be moved to the discussion agenda.

    Disposition of minutes of previous Board of Directors' Meetings.

    Memorandum and resolution re: Notice of Proposed Rulemaking: Establishing Restrictions on Qualified Financial Contracts of Certain FDIC-Supervised Institutions; Revisions to the Definition of Qualifying Master Netting Agreement and Related Definitions.

    Memorandum and resolution re: Regulatory Capital Rules, Liquidity Coverage Ratio; Revisions to the Definition of Qualifying Master Netting Agreement and Related Definitions.

    Memorandum and resolution re: Designated Reserve Ratio for 2017.

    Summary reports, status reports, reports of the Office of Inspector General, and reports of actions taken pursuant to authority delegated by the Board of Directors.

    DISCUSSION AGENDA:

    Update of Projected Deposit Insurance Fund Losses, Income, and Reserve Ratios for the Restoration Plan.

    The meeting will be held in the Board Room located on the sixth floor of the FDIC Building located at 550 17th Street NW., Washington, DC.

    This Board meeting will be Webcast live via the Internet and subsequently made available on-demand approximately one week after the event. Visit http://fdic.windrosemedia.com to view the event.

    If you need any technical assistance, please visit our Video Help page at: https://www.fdic.gov/video.html.

    The FDIC will provide attendees with auxiliary aids (e.g., sign language interpretation) required for this meeting. Those attendees needing such assistance should call 703-562-2404 (Voice) or 703-649-4354 (Video Phone) to make necessary arrangements.

    Requests for further information concerning the meeting may be directed to Mr. Robert E. Feldman, Executive Secretary of the Corporation, at 202-898-7043.

    Dated: September 13, 2016. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. Robert E. Feldman, Executive Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22436 Filed 9-14-16; 11:15 am] BILLING CODE 6714-01-P
    FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION Granting of Request for Early Termination of the Waiting Period Under the Premerger Notification Rules

    Section 7A of the Clayton Act, 15 U.S.C. 18a, as added by Title II of the Hart-Scott-Rodino Antitrust Improvements Act of 1976, requires persons contemplating certain mergers or acquisitions to give the Federal Trade Commission and the Assistant Attorney General advance notice and to wait designated periods before consummation of such plans. Section 7A(b)(2) of the Act permits the agencies, in individual cases, to terminate this waiting period prior to its expiration and requires that notice of this action be published in the Federal Register.

    The following transactions were granted early termination—on the dates indicated—of the waiting period provided by law and the premerger notification rules. The listing for each transaction includes the transaction number and the parties to the transaction. The grants were made by the Federal Trade Commission and the Assistant Attorney General for the Antitrust Division of the Department of Justice. Neither agency intends to take any action with respect to these proposed acquisitions during the applicable waiting period.

    Early Terminations Granted [August 1, 2016 thru August 31, 2016] 08/01/2016 20161409 G Elliott International Limited; LifeLock, Inc.; Elliott International Limited. 20161410 G Elliott Associates, L.P.; LifeLock, Inc.; Elliott Associates, L.P. 20161463 G Wolseley plc; Michael Butler; Wolseley plc. 20161482 G Flextronics International Ltd.; Bose 2010 Special Purpose Trust; Flextronics International Ltd. 20161507 G Lions Gate Entertainment Corp.; Starz; Lions Gate Entertainment Corp. 08/02/2016 20161414 G LSF9 Cypress LP; Superior Plus Corp.; LSF9 Cypress LP. 20161485 G VGD Buyer, LLC; Frank Fertitta III; VGD Buyer, LLC. 20161486 G VGD Buyer, LLC; Lorenzo Fertitta; VGD Buyer, LLC. 20161499 G Wirecard AG; Citigroup Inc.; Wirecard AG. 20161514 G Unilever N.V.; Dollar Shave Club, Inc.; Unilever N.V. 08/03/2016 20161441 G Nippon Paper Industries Co., Ltd.; Weyerhaeuser Co.; Nippon Paper Industries Co., Ltd. 08/04/2016 20161240 G International Paper Company; Weyerhaeuser Company; International Paper Company. 20161371 G Chamly Aspen Trust; Axiall Corporation; Chamly Aspen Trust. 20161511 G ISQ Global Infrastructure Fund, L.P.; Alcoa Inc.; ISQ Global Infrastructure Fund, L.P. 08/08/2016 20151767 G Konecranes Plc; Terex Corporation; Konecranes Plc. 20161037 G Experian plc; Investcorp CSID Holdings, LLC; Experian plc. 20161451 G Terex Corporation; Konecranes Plc; Terex Corporation. 20161508 G Evolent Health, Inc.; Valence Health, Inc.; Evolent Health, Inc. 20161523 G Headwaters Incorporated; William E. Robinson, Jr.; Headwaters Incorporated. 20161525 G Triangle Private Investments, LLC; Polycom, Inc.; Triangle Private Investments, LLC. 20161526 G Fidelity National Financial, Inc.; CINC Superior Holdings LLC; Fidelity National Financial, Inc. 20161527 G EQT Midstream Partners, LP; EQT Corporation; EQT Midstream Partners, LP. 20161530 G Halmont Properties Corporation; Energy Future Holdings Corp.; Halmont Properties Corporation. 20161531 G Brookfield Capital Partners Fund III LP; Energy Future Holdings Corp.; Brookfield Capital Partners Fund III LP. 20161532 G North Haven Infrastructure Partners II AIV-I L.P.; Randall Broda; North Haven Infrastructure Partners II AIV-I L.P. 20161536 G AP VIII Aspen Holdings, L.P.; Outerwall Inc.; AP VIII Aspen Holdings, L.P. 20161540 G AF IV Energy AIV B1, L.P.; Clayton Williams Energy, Inc.; AF IV Energy AIV B1, L.P. 20161551 G Refresco Group N.V.; The Jerry Whitlock Living Trust; Refresco Group N.V. 08/09/2016 20161462 G KKR Element Aggregator L.P.; Eagle Topco LP; KKR Element Aggregator L.P. 20161476 G Abrams Capital Partners II, L.P.; NorthStar Asset Management Group Inc.; Abrams Capital Partners II, L.P. 20161524 G SAF-Holland S.A.; Haldex AB; SAF-Holland S.A. 20161537 G Co-Investor 3 L.L.C.; NextEra Energy, Inc.; Co-Investor 3 L.L.C. 08/10/2016 20161488 G U.S. Silica Holdings, Inc.; New Birmingham, Inc.; U.S. Silica Holdings, Inc. 20161515 G Susanne Klatten; Ovivo Inc.; Susanne Klatten. 08/11/2016 20160865 G Intercontinental Exchange, Inc.; McGraw Hill Financial, Inc.; Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. 08/12/2016 20161492 G Santen Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd.; InnFocus Inc.; Santen Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. 20161521 G Avast Holding B.V.; AVG Technologies N.V.; Avast Holding B.V. 20161544 G Hainan Cihang Charitable Foundation; Marilyn Carlson Nelson 1998 GST Exempt Family Trust; Hainan Cihang Charitable Foundation. 20161545 G Hainan Cihang Charitable Foundation; Barbara Carlson Gage 1998 GST Exempt Family Trust; Hainan Cihang Charitable Foundation. 20161553 G SAS Rue La Boetie; Infra Foch Topco SAS; SAS Rue La Boetie. 20161555 G salesforce.com, inc.; Quip, Inc.; salesforce.com, inc. 20161559 G The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.; Navico Holding AS; The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. 20161560 G Altor Holding AB; Navico Holding AS; Altor Holding AB. 20161561 G Bret Taylor; salesforce.com, inc.; Bret Taylor. 20161562 G Klondex Mines Ltd.; Waterton Precious Metals Fund II Cayman, LP; Klondex Mines Ltd. 20161564 G TA XI L.P.; Robert D. and Gwendolyn A. Tyler; TA XI L.P. 20161566 G G-III Apparel Group, Ltd.; Bernard Arnault; G-III Apparel Group, Ltd. 20161570 G Platinum Equity Capital Partners III, L.P.; Fabcon Companies, LLC; Platinum Equity Capital Partners III, L.P. 20161573 G KIA IX (Snow) Investor, L.P.; Phyllis R. Cretors; KIA IX (Snow) Investor, L.P. 20161575 G Revelstoke Capital Partners Fund I, L.P.; Shore Capital Partners Fund IV, L.P.; Revelstoke Capital Partners Fund I, L.P. 20161581 G Compass Diversified Holdings; TA X L.P.; Compass Diversified Holdings. 08/15/2016 20161337 G SLP IV Castle Feeder I, L.P.; Talent Holdings, LLC; SLP IV Castle Feeder I, L.P. 20161517 G Gryphon Partners IV, L.P.; Carousel Capital Partners IV, L.P.; Gryphon Partners IV, L.P. 20161535 G Nestle S.A.; Roche Holding Ltd.; Nestle S.A. 20161552 G The Kroger Co.; ACP Investment Fund, L.P.; The Kroger Co. 20161556 G EnCap Flatrock Midstream Fund II, L.P.; NGP Natural Resources X, L.P.; EnCap Flatrock Midstream Fund II, L.P. 20161557 G Providence Equity Partners VI-A L.P.; Providence Equity Partners VI L.P.; Providence Equity Partners VI-A L.P. 20161567 G U.S. Silica Holdings, Inc.; Sandy Creek Capital, LLC; U.S. Silica Holdings, Inc. 20161568 G LeverageSource, L.P.; Energy Future Holdings Corp.; LeverageSource, L.P. 20161572 G Q Super Holdings, Inc.; Roark Capital Partners II, LP; Q Super Holdings, Inc. 08/16/2016 20161502 G NewCo; 2003 TIL Settlement; NewCo. 20161578 G Jaguar Holding Company I; STG IV, L.P.; Jaguar Holding Company I. 08/17/2016 20161467 G Agrium Inc.; Cargill, Incorporated; Agrium Inc. 08/19/2016 20161580 G Yong Wang; Toronto Oak Trust; Yong Wang. 20161590 G Myriad Genetics, Inc.; Assurex Health, Inc.; Myriad Genetics, Inc. 20161592 G ABRY Partners VIII, L.P.; American International Group, Inc.; ABRY Partners VIII, L.P. 20161595 G Dentsu Inc.; Merkle Group Inc.; Dentsu Inc. 20161598 G Nissha Printing Co., Ltd.; WestView Capital Partners II, L.P.; Nissha Printing Co., Ltd. 20161618 G AP VIII Eagle LM5 Holdings, L.P.; Constellis Holdings, LLC; AP VIII Eagle LM5 Holdings, L.P. 08/22/2016 20161604 G Carlyle Partners VI, L.P.; Damien Lamendola; Carlyle Partners VI, L.P. 08/23/2016 20161516 G Smith & Wesson Holding Corporation; Crimson Trace Holdings, LLC; Smith & Wesson Holding Corporation. 20161574 G OCP Trust; EPIQ Systems, Inc.; OCP Trust. 20161576 G Harvest Partners VII, L.P.; OCP Trust; Harvest Partners VII, L.P. 20161603 G Bridge Growth Partners, LP; Spectrum Equity Investors VI, L.P.; Bridge Growth Partners, LP. 08/24/2016 20161605 G PFS Holdings LLC; Big Bear Holdings Corp.; PFS Holdings LLC. 20161616 G Tesla Motors, Inc.; SolarCity Corporation; Tesla Motors, Inc. 08/25/2016 20161577 G ScanSource, Inc.; Intelisys Communications, Inc.; ScanSource, Inc. 08/26/2016 20161479 G Henkel AG & Co. KGaA; Spotless Group Holding LLC; Henkel AG & Co. KGaA. 20161609 G The Scotts Miracle-Gro Company; Treg C. Bradley; The Scotts Miracle-Gro Company. 20161613 G NRG Energy, Inc.; SunEdison, Inc.; NRG Energy, Inc. 20161614 G Steinhoff International Holdings N.V.; Mattress Firm Holding Corporation; Steinhoff International Holdings N.V. 20161622 G Luigi Agrati; Monomoy Capital Partners II, L.P.; Luigi Agrati. 20161629 G Hi-Crush Partners LP; Hi-Crush Proppants LLC; Hi-Crush Partners LP. 20161633 G KKR North America Fund XI, L.P.; Calabrio, Inc.; KKR North America Fund XI, L.P. 20161636 G FR XIII Foxtrot AIV, L.P.; Applied-Cleveland Holding Company, LLC; FR XIII Foxtrot AIV, L.P. 20161647 G Investor AB; Audax Private Equity Fund III, L.P.; Investor AB. 20161648 G Fortune Brands Home & Security, Inc.; Rohl, LLC; Fortune Brands Home & Security, Inc. 20161652 G Aurora Equity Partners V L.P.; Solaray, LLC; Aurora Equity Partners V L.P. 20161659 G Randstad Holding nv; Monster Worldwide, Inc.; Randstad Holding nv. 20161661 G EQT VII (No. 1) Limited Partnership; Press Ganey Holdings, Inc.; EQT VII (No. 1) Limited Partnership. 08/30/2016 20161588 G Partners Group Access 871 L.P.; SMS-THL Holdings I, Inc.; Partners Group Access 871 L.P. 20161627 G CenterOak Equity Fund I, L.P.; Levine Leichtman Capital Partners III, L.P.; CenterOak Equity Fund I, L.P. 20161634 G KBR, Inc.; Honeywell International Inc.; KBR, Inc. 08/31/2016 20161571 G E*Trade Financial Corporation; General Atlantic Partners 96, L.P.; E*Trade Financial Corporation. 20161630 G Warburg Pincus Private Equity XI, L.P.; Avalara, Inc.; Warburg Pincus Private Equity XI, L.P. 20161641 G CCMP Capital Investors III, L.P.; Jerry Newman Carr; CCMP Capital Investors III, L.P. 20161643 G CCMP Capital Investors III, L.P.; William Henry Carr; CCMP Capital Investors III, L.P.

    For Further Information Contact:

    Theresa Kingsberry, Program Support Specialist, Federal Trade Commission Premerger Notification Office Bureau of Competition, Room CC-5301, Washington, DC 20024, (202) 326-3100.

    By direction of the Commission.

    Donald S. Clark, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22282 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6750-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services [Document Identifiers: CMS-10527] Agency Information Collection Activities: Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request AGENCY:

    Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, Department of Health and Human Services.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) is announcing an opportunity for the public to comment on CMS' intention to collect information from the public. Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), federal agencies are required to publish notice in the Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information, including each proposed extension or reinstatement of an existing collection of information, and to allow a second opportunity for public comment on the notice. Interested persons are invited to send comments regarding the burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including any of the following subjects: The necessity and utility of the proposed information collection for the proper performance of the agency's functions; the accuracy of the estimated burden; ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology to minimize the information collection burden.

    DATES:

    Comments on the collection(s) of information must be received by the OMB desk officer by October 17, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    When commenting on the proposed information collections, please reference the document identifier or OMB control number. To be assured consideration, comments and recommendations must be received by the OMB desk officer via one of the following transmissions: OMB, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attention: CMS Desk Officer, Fax Number: (202) 395-5806 OR, Email: [email protected]

    To obtain copies of a supporting statement and any related forms for the proposed collection(s) summarized in this notice, you may make your request using one of following:

    1. Access CMS' Web site address at http://www.cms.hhs.gov/PaperworkReductionActof1995.

    2. Email your request, including your address, phone number, OMB number, and CMS document identifier, to [email protected]

    3. Call the Reports Clearance Office at (410) 786-1326.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Reports Clearance Office at (410) 786-1326.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), federal agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for each collection of information they conduct or sponsor. The term “collection of information” is defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR 1320.3(c) and includes agency requests or requirements that members of the public submit reports, keep records, or provide information to a third party. Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)) requires federal agencies to publish a 30-day notice in the Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information, including each proposed extension or reinstatement of an existing collection of information, before submitting the collection to OMB for approval. To comply with this requirement, CMS is publishing this notice that summarizes the following proposed collection(s) of information for public comment:

    1. Type of Information Collection Request: Revision of a currently approved collection; Title of Information Collection: Annual Eligibility Redetermination, Product Discontinuation and Renewal Notices; Use: Section 1411(f)(1)(B) of the Affordable Care Act directs the Secretary of Health and Human Services (the Secretary) to establish procedures to redetermine the eligibility of individuals on a periodic basis in appropriate circumstances. Section 1321(a) of the Affordable Care Act provides authority for the Secretary to establish standards and regulations to implement the statutory requirements related to Exchanges, QHPs and other components of title I of the Affordable Care Act. Under section 2703 of the PHS Act, as added by the Affordable Care Act, and former section 2712 and section 2741 of the PHS Act, enacted by the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, health insurance issuers in the group and individual markets must guarantee the renewability of coverage unless an exception applies. The final rule “Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act; Annual Eligibility Redeterminations for Exchange Participation and Insurance Affordability Programs; Health Insurance Issuer Standards Under the Affordable Care Act, Including Standards Related to Exchanges” (79 FR 52994), provides that an Exchange may choose to conduct the annual redetermination process for a plan year (1) in accordance with the existing procedures described in 45 CFR 155.335; (2) in accordance with procedures described in guidance issued by the Secretary for the coverage year; or (3) using an alternative proposed by the Exchange and approved by the Secretary. The guidance document “Guidance on Annual Redeterminations and Re-enrollment for Marketplace Coverage for 2017” contains the procedures that the Secretary is specifying for the 2017 coverage year, as noted in (2) above. These procedures will be adopted by the Federally-facilitated Exchange. The final rule also amends the requirements for product renewal and re-enrollment (or non-renewal) notices to be sent by Qualified Health Plan (QHP) issuers in the Exchanges and specifies content for these notices. The accompanying guidance document “Updated Federal Standard Notices of Product Discontinuation and Renewal” provides standard notices for product discontinuation and renewal to be sent by issuers of individual market QHPs and issuers in the individual market. Issuers in the small group market may use the draft Federal standard small group notices released in the June 26, 2014 bulletin “Draft Standard Notices When Discontinuing or Renewing a Product in the Small Group or Individual Market”, or any forms of the notice otherwise permitted by applicable laws and regulations. States that are enforcing the guaranteed renewability provisions of the Affordable Care Act may develop their own standard notices for product discontinuances, renewals, or both, provided the State-developed notices are at least as protective as the Federal standard notices. Form Number: CMS-10527 (OMB control number 0938-1254); Frequency: Annually; Affected Public: Private Sector, State Governments; Number of Respondents: 2,945; Total Annual Responses: 12,224; Total Annual Hours: 149,186. (For policy questions regarding this collection contact Russell Tipps at 301-492-4371).

    Dated: September 13, 2016. William N. Parham, III, Director, Paperwork Reduction Staff, Office of Strategic Operations and Regulatory Affairs.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22342 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4120-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Administration for Children and Families Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

    Title: Personal Responsibility Education Program (PREP) Performance Measures and Adult Preparation Subjects (PMAPS) Studies—Data Collection Related to the Performance Measures Study.

    OMB No.: New Collection.

    Description: The Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation (HHS/ACF/OPRE) and the Family and Youth Services Bureau (HHS/ACF/ACYF/FYSB) in the Administration for Children and Families (ACF) propose a data collection activity as part of the Personal Responsibility Education Program (PREP) Performance Measures and Adult Preparation Subjects (PMAPS) Studies. The goals of the PMAPS studies are to collect, analyze, and report on performance measure data for PREP programs and to develop and test Adult Preparation Subjects (APS) conceptual models.

    The PMAPS studies consist of two components: The “Performance Measures Study,” and the “Adult Preparation Subjects Study.” This notice is specific to data collection activities for the Performance Measures Study only. The Performance Measures Study component includes collection and analysis of performance measure data from State PREP (SPREP), Tribal PREP (TPREP), Competitive PREP (CPREP), and Personal Responsibility Education Innovative Strategies (PREIS) grantees. Data will be used to determine if PREP and PREIS grantees are meeting performance benchmarks related to the program's mission and priorities.

    Respondents: Performance measurement data collection instruments will be administered to individuals representing SPREP, TPREP, CPREP, and PREIS grantees, their subawardees, and program participants.

    Annual Burden Estimates Instrument Total
  • number of
  • respondents
  • Annual
  • number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • responses per
  • respondent
  • Average burden hours per
  • response
  • Annual
  • burden
  • hours
  • Entry Survey 414,747 138,249 1 0.13333 18,433 Exit Survey 331,797 110,599 1 0.25 27,650 Core measures 16,000 5,333 3 0.08 1,280 Performance Measures Data Report Form (grantees) 279 93 2 18 for S/T; 14 for CPREP and PREIS 3,076 Performance Measures Data Report Form (sub-awardees) 1,248 416 2 14 for S/T; 12 for CPREP 11,472 Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours 61,911

    Additional Information: Copies of the proposed collection may be obtained by writing to the Administration for Children and Families, Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation, 330 C Street SW., Washington, DC 20201, Attn: OPRE Reports Clearance Officer. All requests should be identified by the title of the information collection. Email address: [email protected]

    OMB Comment: OMB is required to make a decision concerning the collection of information between 30 and 60 days after publication of this document in the Federal Register. Therefore, a comment is best assured of having its full effect if OMB receives it within 30 days of publication. Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collection should be sent directly to the following: Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project. Email: [email protected]. Attn: Desk Officer for the Administration for Children and Families.

    Naomi Goldstein, ACF/OPRE Certifying Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22316 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4184-37-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2015-D-2843] Qualification of Biomarker—Total Kidney Volume in Studies for Treatment of Autosomal Dominant Polycystic Kidney Disease; Guidance for Industry; Availability AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice of availability.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or Agency) is announcing the availability of a guidance for industry entitled “Qualification of Biomarker—Total Kidney Volume in Studies for Treatment of Autosomal Dominant Polycystic Kidney Disease.” This guidance provides a qualified context of use (COU) for total kidney volume (TKV), measured at baseline, to be used as a prognostic enrichment biomarker to select patients with autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease (ADPKD) at high risk for a “progressive decline” in renal function, defined as a confirmed 30 percent decline in the patient's estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), for inclusion in interventional clinical trials. This guidance also describes the experimental conditions and constraints for which this biomarker is qualified through the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER) Biomarker Qualification Program. This biomarker can be used by drug developers for the qualified COU in submissions of investigational new drug applications (INDs), new drug applications (NDAs), and biologics license applications (BLAs)without the relevant CDER review group reconsidering and reconfirming the suitability of the biomarker.

    DATES:

    Submit either electronic or written comments on Agency guidances at any time.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comment as follows:

    Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:

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

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

    Written/Paper Submissions

    Submit written/paper submissions as follows:

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

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

    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket No. FDA-2015-D-2843 for “Qualification of Biomarker—Total Kidney Volume in Studies for Treatment of Autosomal Dominant Polycystic Kidney Disease; Availability.” 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 this 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 guidance document.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Marianne Noone, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 21, Rm. 4528, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 301-796-2600.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background

    FDA is announcing the availability of a guidance for industry entitled “Qualification of Biomarker—Total Kidney Volume in Studies for Treatment of Autosomal Dominant Polycystic Kidney Disease.” In the Federal Register of January 7, 2014 (79 FR 831), FDA announced the availability of a guidance for industry entitled “Qualification Process for Drug Development Tools” that described the process that would be used to qualify Drug Development Tools (DDTs) and to make new DDT qualification recommendations available on FDA's Web site at http://www.fda.gov/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/default.htm. The qualification recommendations in the current guidance were developed using the process described in that 2014 guidance, and the current guidance is an attachment to that 2014 guidance.

    In the Federal Register of August 17, 2015 (80 FR 49244), FDA announced the availability of a draft guidance entitled “Qualification of Biomarker—Total Kidney Volume in Studies for Treatment of Autosomal Dominant Polycystic Kidney Disease.” The Agency did not receive any comments on that draft guidance during the public comment period. The current guidance finalizes that draft guidance.

    This guidance provides recommendations for the use of TKV, measured at baseline, as a prognostic enrichment biomarker to select patients with ADPKD at high risk for a “progressive decline” in renal function, defined as a confirmed 30 percent decline in the patient's eGFR, for inclusion in interventional clinical trials. This biomarker may be used in combination with the patient's age and baseline eGFR as an enrichment factor in these interventional clinical trials. Specifically, this guidance provides the COU for which this biomarker is qualified through the CDER Biomarker Qualification Program. “Biomarker qualification” is a conclusion that within the stated COU, the biomarker can be relied upon to have a specific interpretation and application in drug development and regulatory review. This biomarker can be used by drug developers for the qualified COU in submission of INDs, NDAs, and BLAs without the relevant CDER review group reconsidering and reconfirming the suitability of the biomarker. After a biomarker is qualified for the specific COU, its qualification is not limited to a single, specific drug development program. Making the qualification recommendations widely known and available for use by drug developers will contribute to drug innovation, thus supporting public health.

    Innovative and improved DDTs can help streamline the drug development process, improve the chances for clinical trial success, and yield more information about a treatment and/or disease. DDTs include, but are not limited to, biomarkers, clinical outcome assessments and animal models under the animal rule. Refer to DDTs Qualification Programs at http://www.fda.gov/Drugs/DevelopmentApprovalProcess/DrugDevelopmentToolsQualificationProgram/default.htm for additional information.

    CDER has initiated this formal qualification process to work with developers of these biomarker DDTs to guide them as they refine and evaluate DDTs for use in the regulatory context. Once qualified, biomarker DDTs will be publicly available for use in any drug development program for the qualified COU. As described in the January 2014 guidance, biomarker DDTs should be developed and reviewed using this process.

    This guidance is being issued consistent with FDA's good guidance practices regulation (21 CFR 10.115). The guidance represents the current thinking of FDA on the use of TKV, measured at baseline, as a prognostic enrichment biomarker to select patients with ADPKD at high risk for a “progressive decline” in renal function, defined as a confirmed 30 percent decline in the patient's eGFR, for inclusion in interventional clinical trials. This biomarker may be used in combination with the patient's age and baseline eGFR as an enrichment factor in these interventional clinical trials. This guidance 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. The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

    This guidance contains an information collection that is 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 information collection has been approved under the OMB control numbers 0910-0001 and 0910-0014. The information requested in this guidance is currently submitted to FDA to support medical product effectiveness (see 21 CFR 312.30, 21 CFR 314.50(d)(5), and 21 CFR 314.126(b)(6)).

    III. Electronic Access

    Persons with access to the Internet may obtain the document at either http://www.fda.gov/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/default.htm or http://www.regulations.gov.

    Dated: September 12, 2016. Leslie Kux, Associate Commissioner for Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22347 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2015-D-3399] Recommendations for Microbial Vectors Used for Gene Therapy; Guidance for Industry; Availability AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice of availability.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or Agency) is announcing the availability of a document entitled “Recommendations for Microbial Vectors Used for Gene Therapy; Guidance for Industry.” The guidance document provides investigational new drug application (IND) sponsors, with recommendations concerning IND submissions for microbial vectors used for gene therapy (MVGTs) in early phase clinical trials. The guidance focuses on the chemistry, manufacturing, and control (CMC) information that sponsors should submit in an IND for MVGTs and provides an overview of preclinical and clinical considerations for these products. The guidance announced in this notice finalizes the draft guidance of the same title dated October 2015 and supplements the guidance entitled “Guidance for FDA Reviewers and Sponsors: Content and Review of Chemistry, Manufacturing, and Control (CMC) Information for Human Gene Therapy Investigational New Drug Applications (INDs),” dated April 2008.

    DATES:

    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-2015-D-3399 for “Recommendations for Microbial Vectors Used for Gene Therapy; 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:

    Tami Belouin, 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 “Recommendations for Microbial Vectors Used for Gene Therapy; Guidance for Industry.” The guidance provides IND sponsors, with recommendations concerning IND submissions for microbial vectors used for MVGTs in early phase clinical trials. The guidance focuses on the CMC information that sponsors should submit in an IND for MVGTs and provides an overview of preclinical and clinical considerations for these products.

    In the Federal Register of October 14, 2015 (80 FR 61822), FDA announced the availability of the draft guidance of the same title dated October 2015. FDA received one comment on the draft guidance and that comment was considered as the guidance was finalized. Minor editorial changes were made in response to the comment to improve clarity. The guidance announced in this notice finalizes the draft guidance dated October 2015 and supplements the guidance entitled “Guidance for FDA Reviewers and Sponsors: Content and Review of Chemistry, Manufacturing, and Control (CMC) Information for Human Gene Therapy Investigational New Drug Applications (INDs),” dated April 2008.

    This guidance is being issued consistent with FDA's good guidance practices regulation (21 CFR 10.115). The guidance represents the current thinking of FDA on recommendations for MVGTs. 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 21 CFR parts 211 and 610 have been approved under OMB control number 0910-0139 and in 21 CFR part 312 under OMB control number 0910-0014.

    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: September 12, 2016. Leslie Kux, Associate Commissioner for Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22353 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2013-N-1214] Clinical Investigator Training Course AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA), in collaboration with the University of Maryland Center of Excellence in Regulatory Science and Innovation (M-CERSI), is announcing a 3-day training course for clinical investigators on the scientific, ethical, and regulatory aspects of clinical trials for medical products. This training course is intended to provide clinical investigators, such as clinicians, nurses, pharmacists, and other health care providers involved in conducting clinical trials, with expertise in the design, conduct, and analysis of clinical trials; to improve the quality of clinical trials; and to enhance the safety of trial participants. Senior FDA staff, along with other experts, will present on issues critical for successful conduct of clinical research.

    DATES:

    The training course will be held on November 7, 2016, from 8:20 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. (registration begins at 7:30 a.m.); on November 8, 2016, from 8:30 a.m. to 4:45 p.m.; and on November 9, 2016, from 8:30 a.m. to 3:30 p.m.

    ADDRESSES:

    The course will be held at the Silver Spring Civic Building at Veterans Plaza, One Veterans Place, Silver Spring, MD 20910. GPS device address: 8525 Fenton St., Silver Spring, MD 20910. For additional information, please refer to http://www.silverspringdowntown.com/go/silver-spring-civic-building-and-veterans-plaza. (FDA has verified the Web address, but FDA is not responsible for subsequent changes to the Web site after this document publishes in the Federal Register.)

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Nicole Silva, Office of Medical Policy, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 51, Rm. 6323, Silver Spring, MD 20993, 301-796-3419, [email protected].

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background

    Clinical trial investigators play a critical role in the development of medical products. They bear the responsibility for ensuring the safe and ethical treatment of study subjects and for acquiring adequate and reliable data to support regulatory decisions. This course is intended to train clinical investigators in all elements of clinical trials, including the preclinical and clinical information needed to support the investigational use of medical products; the statistical design of trials; and scientific, regulatory, and ethical considerations related to conduct of clinical trials. The course lecturers will include a diverse representation of senior FDA staff and other experts, enabling communication on issues critical for successful conduct of clinical research.

    II. Description of the Training Course A. Purpose

    The training course is designed to provide clinical investigators with an overview of the following information:

    • The essential toxicological, pharmacological, and manufacturing data to support investigational use in humans;

    • Fundamental issues in the design and conduct of clinical trials;

    • Statistical and analytic considerations in the interpretation of trial data;

    • Appropriate safety evaluation during studies; and

    • The ethical considerations and regulatory requirements for clinical trials.

    In addition, the course aims to:

    • Foster a cadre of clinical investigators with knowledge, experience, and commitment to investigational medicine;

    • Promote communication between clinical investigators and FDA;

    • Enhance investigators' understanding of FDA's role in experimental medicine;

    • Improve the quality of clinical trial data; and

    • Enhance protection of subjects in clinical trials.

    B. Agenda

    The course will be conducted over 3 days and will be presented mainly by senior FDA staff with other lecturers presenting on selected topics. The agenda is available at http://www.fda.gov/Training/ClinicalInvestigatorTrainingCourse/default.htm.

    C. Target Audience

    The course is targeted toward clinicians, nurses, pharmacists and other health care professionals responsible for, or involved in, the conduct and/or design of clinical trials.

    Registration: There is no registration fee to attend this in-person training course; however, seats are limited and registration will be on a first-come, first-served basis. To register, you need to complete the registration online by October 28, 2016, at http://www.fda.gov/Training/ClinicalInvestigatorTrainingCourse/default.htm. Upon completion of registration, you will receive an email that confirms your registration. There will be no onsite registration or remote access for this training.

    Accommodations: Attendees are responsible for their own hotel accommodations. If you need special accommodations due to a disability, please contact Nicole Silva (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT) at least 7 days in advance. Persons attending the course are advised that FDA is not responsible for providing access to electrical outlets.

    Dated: September 8, 2016. Leslie Kux, Associate Commissioner for Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22348 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2016-D-1853] Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Unique Device Identification System AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing an opportunity for public comment on the proposed collection of certain information by the Agency. Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (the PRA), Federal Agencies are required to publish notice in the Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information, including each proposed extension of an existing collection of information, and to allow 60 days for public comment in response to the notice. This notice solicits comments on information collection associated with the Unique Device Identification System.

    DATES:

    Submit either electronic or written comments on the collection of information by November 15, 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-1853 for “Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Unique Device Identification System.” Received comments will be placed in the docket and, except for those submitted as “Confidential Submissions,” publicly viewable at http://www.regulations.gov or at the Division of Dockets Management between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.

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

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

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    FDA PRA Staff, Office of Operations, Food and Drug Administration, Three White Flint North 10A-12M, 11601 Landsdown St., North Bethesda, MD 20852, [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Under the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), Federal Agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for each collection of information they conduct or sponsor. “Collection of information” is defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR 1320.3(c) and includes Agency requests or requirements that members of the public submit reports, keep records, or provide information to a third party. Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)) requires Federal Agencies to provide a 60-day notice in the Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information, including each proposed extension of an existing collection of information, before submitting the collection to OMB for approval. To comply with this requirement, FDA is publishing notice of the proposed collection of information set forth in this document.

    With respect to the following collection of information, FDA invites comments on these topics: (1) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of FDA's functions, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of FDA's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques, when appropriate, and other forms of information technology.

    Unique Device Identification System—21 CFR Parts 16, 801, 803, 806, 810, 814, 820, 821, 822 and 830—OMB Control Number 0910-0720—Extension

    In accordance with the collection of information entitled “Unique Device Identification System (UDI),” medical device labelers, unless excepted, are required to design and use medical device labels and device packages that bear a UDI, present dates on labels in a particular format, and submit data concerning each version or model of a device to the Global Unique Device Identification Database (GUDID) no later than the date the label of the device must bear a UDI. Once a device becomes subject to UDI requirements, respondents will be required to update the information reported whenever the information changes.

    The recordkeeping, reporting, and third-party disclosure requirements referenced in this document are imposed on any person who causes a label to be applied to a device, or who causes the label to be modified, with the intent that the device will be commercially distributed without any subsequent replacement or modification of the label. In most instances, the labeler would be the device manufacturer, but other types of labelers include a specification developer, a single-use device reprocessor, a convenience kit assembler, a repackager, or a relabeler. Respondents may also include any private organization that applies for accreditation by FDA as an issuing agency.

    FDA has identified the following requirements as having burdens that must be accounted for under the PRA; the burdens associated with these requirements are summarized in the table that follows:

    Section 801.18 requires that whenever a labeler of a medical device includes an expiration date, a date of manufacture, or any other date intended to be brought to the attention of the user of the device, the labeler must present the date on the label in a format that meets the requirements of this section.

    Section 801.20 requires every medical device label and package to bear a UDI.

    Under § 801.35, any labeler of a device that is not required to bear a UDI on its label may include a UDI on the label of that device and utilize the GUDID.

    Under § 801.45, any device that has to be labeled with a UDI also has to bear a permanent marking providing the UDI on the device itself if the device is intended for more than one use and intended to be reprocessed before each use.

    Section 801.50 requires stand-alone software to comply with specific labeling requirements that identify the software.

    Section 801.55 authorizes additional, case-by-case, labeling exceptions and alternatives to standard UDI labeling requirements.

    If a labeler relabels or modifies a label of a device that is required to bear a UDI, under § 830.60 it has to keep a record showing the relationship of the original device identifier to the new device identifier.

    Section 830.110 requires an applicant seeking initial FDA accreditation as a UDI-issuing agency to furnish FDA an application containing certain information, materials, and supporting documentation.

    Under § 830.120, an FDA-accredited issuing agency is required to disclose information concerning its system for the assignment of UDIs; maintain a list of labelers that use its system for the assignment of UDIs, and provide FDA a copy of such list; and upon request, provide FDA with information concerning a labeler that is employing the issuing agency's system for assignment of UDIs.

    Sections 830.310 and 830.320 require the labeler to provide certain information to the GUDID concerning the labeler and each version or model of a device required to be labeled with a UDI, unless the labeler obtains a waiver.

    Section 830.360 requires each labeler to retain records showing all UDIs used to identify devices that must be labeled with a UDI and the particular version or model associated with each device identifier, until 3 years after it ceases to market a version or model of a device.

    Respondents who are required to submit data to the Agency under certain other approved information collections (listed below) are required to include UDI data elements for the device that is the subject of such information collection. Addition of the UDI data elements is included in this burden estimate for the conforming amendments in the following 21 CFR parts:

    • Part 803—Medical Device Reporting (OMB control number 0910-0437) • Part 806—Medical Devices; Reports of Corrections and Removals (OMB control number 0910-0359) • Part 814—Premarket Approval of Medical Devices (OMB control number 0910-0231) • Part 820—Quality System Regulation (OMB control number 0910-0073) • Part 821—Medical Device Tracking Requirements (OMB control number 0910-0442) • Part 822—Postmarket Surveillance (OMB control number 0910-0449)

    FDA estimates the burden of this collection of information as follows:

    Table 1—Estimated Annual Burden 1 Number of
  • respondents 2
  • Number of
  • responses per
  • respondent 3
  • Total annual responses 4 Average
  • burden per response
  • (in hours) 5
  • Total hours 6
    Reporting 6,199 51 316,149 0.023 [1 minute] 7,271 Recordkeeping 5,987 51 305,337 0.989 [59 minutes] 301,978 Third-Party Disclosure 5,987 51 305,337 0.885 [53 minutes] 270,223 1 There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of information. 2 Maximum No. of Respondents for any regulatory requirement within each category. Individual regulatory requirements within the category may involve fewer respondents. 3 Maximum No. of Responses for any regulatory requirement within each category. Individual regulatory requirements within the category may involve fewer responses. 4 Maximum Total Annual Responses for any regulatory requirement within each category. Individual regulatory requirements within the category may involve fewer total annual responses. 5 Rounded to three decimals. Total Hours reflects a more precise, non-rounded Average Burden per Response. An approximate (non-rounded) conversion to minutes is shown in square brackets. 6 Total Hours is based on a more precise Burden per Response than the rounded value shown in this table.
    Dated: September 12, 2016. Leslie Kux, Associate Commissioner for Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22340 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2014-E-2372] Determination of Regulatory Review Period for Purposes of Patent Extension; LUMASON AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has determined the regulatory review period for LUMASON and is publishing this notice of that determination as required by law. FDA has made the determination because of the submission of an application to the Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), Department of Commerce, for the extension of a patent which claims that human drug product.

    DATES:

    Anyone with knowledge that any of the dates as published (in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section) are incorrect may submit either electronic or written comments and ask for a redetermination by November 15, 2016. Furthermore, any interested person may petition FDA for a determination regarding whether the applicant for extension acted with due diligence during the regulatory review period by March 15, 2017. See “Petitions” in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for more information.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments as follows:

    Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:

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

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

    Written/Paper Submissions

    Submit written/paper submissions as follows:

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

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

    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket No. FDA-2014-E-2372 for “Determination of Regulatory Review Period for Purposes of Patent Extension; LUMASON.” Received comments will be placed in the docket and, except for those submitted as “Confidential Submissions,” publicly viewable at http://www.regulations.gov or at the Division of Dockets Management between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.

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

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

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Beverly Friedman, Office of Regulatory Policy, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 51, Rm. 6250, Silver Spring, MD 20993, 301-796-3600.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Background

    The Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984 (Pub. L. 98-417) and the Generic Animal Drug and Patent Term Restoration Act (Pub. L. 100-670) generally provide that a patent may be extended for a period of up to 5 years so long as the patented item (human drug product, animal drug product, medical device, food additive, or color additive) was subject to regulatory review by FDA before the item was marketed. Under these acts, a product's regulatory review period forms the basis for determining the amount of extension an applicant may receive.

    A regulatory review period consists of two periods of time: A testing phase and an approval phase. For human drug products, the testing phase begins when the exemption to permit the clinical investigations of the drug becomes effective and runs until the approval phase begins. The approval phase starts with the initial submission of an application to market the human drug product and continues until FDA grants permission to market the drug product. Although only a portion of a regulatory review period may count toward the actual amount of extension that the Director of USPTO may award (for example, half the testing phase must be subtracted as well as any time that may have occurred before the patent was issued), FDA's determination of the length of a regulatory review period for a human drug product will include all of the testing phase and approval phase as specified in 35 U.S.C. 156(g)(1)(B).

    FDA has approved for marketing the human drug product, LUMASON (sulfur hexafluoride microbubbles). LUMASON is an ultrasound contrast agent indicated for use in patients with suboptimal echocardiograms to opacify the left ventricular chamber and to improve the delineation of the left ventricular endocardial border. Subsequent to this approval, the USPTO received a patent term restoration application for LUMASON (U.S. Patent No. 5,686,060) from Bracco Suisse SA, and the USPTO requested FDA's assistance in determining this patent's eligibility for patent term restoration. In a letter dated October 22, 2015, FDA advised the USPTO that this human drug product had undergone a regulatory review period and that the approval of LUMASON represented the first permitted commercial marketing or use of the product. Thereafter, the USPTO requested that FDA determine the product's regulatory review period.

    II. Determination of Regulatory Review Period

    FDA has determined that the applicable regulatory review period for LUMASON is 7,199 days. Of this time, 6,174 days occurred during the testing phase of the regulatory review period, while 1,025 days occurred during the approval phase. These periods of time were derived from the following dates:

    1. The date an exemption under section 505(i) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the FD&C Act) (21 U.S.C. 355(i)) became effective: January 26, 1995. The applicant claims December 23, 1994, as the date the investigational new drug application (IND) became effective. However, FDA records indicate that the IND effective date was January 26, 1995, which was 30 days after FDA receipt of the IND.

    2. The date the application was initially submitted with respect to the human drug product under section 505(b) of the FD&C Act: December 21, 2011. The applicant claims December 20, 2011, as the date the NDA for LUMASON was initially submitted. However, FDA records indicate that NDA 203684 was submitted on December 21, 2011.

    3. The date the application was approved: October 10, 2014. FDA has verified the applicant's claim that NDA 203684 was approved on October 10, 2014.

    This determination of the regulatory review period establishes the maximum potential length of a patent extension. However, the USPTO applies several statutory limitations in its calculations of the actual period for patent extension. In its application for patent extension, this applicant seeks 5 years of patent term extension.

    III. Petitions

    Anyone with knowledge that any of the dates as published are incorrect may submit either electronic or written comments and ask for a redetermination (see DATES). Furthermore, any interested person may petition FDA for a determination regarding whether the applicant for extension acted with due diligence during the regulatory review period. To meet its burden, the petition must be timely (see DATES) and contain sufficient facts to merit an FDA investigation. (See H. Rept. 857, part 1, 98th Cong., 2d sess., pp. 41-42, 1984.) Petitions should be in the format specified in 21 CFR 10.30.

    Submit petitions electronically to http://www.regulations.gov at Docket No. FDA-2013-S-0610. Submit written petitions (two copies are required) to the Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

    Dated: September 12, 2016. Leslie Kux, Associate Commissioner for Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22345 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2015-E-2084] Determination of Regulatory Review Period for Purposes of Patent Extension; RESQCPR SYSTEM AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has determined the regulatory review period for RESQCPR SYSTEM and is publishing this notice of that determination as required by law. FDA has made the determination because of the submission of an application to the Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), Department of Commerce, for the extension of a patent which claims that medical device.

    DATES:

    Anyone with knowledge that any of the dates as published (see the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section) are incorrect may submit either electronic or written comments and ask for a redetermination by November 15, 2016. Furthermore, any interested person may petition FDA for a determination regarding whether the applicant for extension acted with due diligence during the regulatory review period by March 15, 2017. See “Petitions” in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for more information.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments as follows:

    Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:

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

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

    Written/Paper Submissions

    Submit written/paper submissions as follows:

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

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

    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket No. FDA-2015-E-2084 for “Determination of Regulatory Review Period for Purposes of Patent Extension; RESQCPR SYSTEM.” Received comments will be placed in the docket and, except for those submitted as “Confidential Submissions,” publicly viewable at http://www.regulations.gov or at the Division of Dockets Management between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.

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

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

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Beverly Friedman, Office of Regulatory Policy, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 51, Rm. 6250, Silver Spring, MD 20993, 301-796-3600.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background

    The Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984 (Pub. L. 98-417) and the Generic Animal Drug and Patent Term Restoration Act (Pub. L. 100-670) generally provide that a patent may be extended for a period of up to 5 years so long as the patented item (human drug product, animal drug product, medical device, food additive, or color additive) was subject to regulatory review by FDA before the item was marketed. Under these acts, a product's regulatory review period forms the basis for determining the amount of extension an applicant may receive.

    A regulatory review period consists of two periods of time: A testing phase and an approval phase. For medical devices, the testing phase begins with a clinical investigation of the device and runs until the approval phase begins. The approval phase starts with the initial submission of an application to market the device and continues until permission to market the device is granted. Although only a portion of a regulatory review period may count toward the actual amount of extension that the Director of USPTO may award (half the testing phase must be subtracted as well as any time that may have occurred before the patent was issued), FDA's determination of the length of a regulatory review period for a medical device will include all of the testing phase and approval phase as specified in 35 U.S.C. 156(g)(3)(B).

    FDA has approved for marketing the medical device RESQCPR SYSTEM. RESQCPR SYSTEM is indicated for use as a CPR adjunct to improve the likelihood of survival in adult patients with non-traumatic cardiac arrest. Subsequent to this approval, the USPTO received a patent term restoration application for RESQCPR SYSTEM (U.S. Patent No. 5,454,779) from University of California and Advanced Circulatory Systems, Inc., and the USPTO requested FDA's assistance in determining this patent's eligibility for patent term restoration. In a letter dated October 15, 2015, FDA advised the USPTO that this medical device had undergone a regulatory review period and that the approval of RESQCPR SYSTEM represented the first permitted commercial marketing or use of the product. Thereafter, the USPTO requested that FDA determine the product's regulatory review period.

    II. Determination of Regulatory Review Period

    FDA has determined that the applicable regulatory review period for RESQCPR SYSTEM is 3,608 days. Of this time, 2,247 days occurred during the testing phase of the regulatory review period, while 1,361 days occurred during the approval phase. These periods of time were derived from the following dates:

    1. The date an exemption under section 520(g) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the FD&C Act) (21 U.S.C. 360j(g)) involving this device became effective: April 21, 2005. The applicant claims that the investigational device exemption (IDE) required under section 520(g) of the FD&C Act for human tests to begin became effective on October 3, 2005. However, FDA records indicate that the IDE was determined substantially complete for clinical studies to have begun on April 21, 2005, which represents the IDE effective date.

    2. The date an application was initially submitted with respect to the device under section 515 of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 360e): June 15, 2011. FDA has verified the applicant's claim that the premarket approval application (PMA) for RESQCPR SYSTEM (PMA P110024) was initially submitted June 15, 2011.

    3. The date the application was approved: March 6, 2015. FDA has verified the applicant's claim that PMA P110024 was approved on March 6, 2015.

    This determination of the regulatory review period establishes the maximum potential length of a patent extension. However, the USPTO applies several statutory limitations in its calculations of the actual period for patent extension. In its application for patent extension, this applicant seeks 5 years of patent term extension.

    III. Petitions

    Anyone with knowledge that any of the dates as published are incorrect may submit either electronic or written comments and ask for a redetermination (see DATES). Furthermore, any interested person may petition FDA for a determination regarding whether the applicant for extension acted with due diligence during the regulatory review period. To meet its burden, the petition must be timely (see DATES) and contain sufficient facts to merit an FDA investigation. (See H. Rept. 857, part 1, 98th Cong., 2d sess., pp. 41-42, 1984.) Petitions should be in the format specified in 21 CFR 10.30.

    Submit petitions electronically to http://www.regulations.gov at Docket No. FDA-2013-S-0610. Submit written petitions (two copies are required) to the Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

    Dated: September 12, 2016. Leslie Kux, Associate Commissioner for Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22343 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2014-E-2354] Determination of Regulatory Review Period for Purposes of Patent Extension; ENTYVIO AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has determined the regulatory review period for ENTYVIO and is publishing this notice of that determination as required by law. FDA has made the determination because of the submission of an application to the Director of the U.S. Patents and Trademarks Office (USPTO), Department of Commerce, for the extension of a patent which claims that human biological product.

    DATES:

    Anyone with knowledge that any of the dates as published (see the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section) are incorrect may submit either electronic or written comments and ask for a redetermination by November 15, 2016. Furthermore, any interested person may petition FDA for a determination regarding whether the applicant for extension acted with due diligence during the regulatory review period by March 15, 2017. See “Petitions” in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for more information.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments as follows:

    Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:

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

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

    Written/Paper Submissions

    Submit written/paper submissions as follows:

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

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

    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket No. FDA-2014-E-2354.

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

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

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

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Beverly Friedman, Office of Regulatory Policy, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 51, Rm. 6250, Silver Spring, MD 20993, 301-796-3600.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Background

    The Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984 (Pub. L. 98-417) and the Generic Animal Drug and Patent Term Restoration Act (Pub. L. 100-670) generally provide that a patent may be extended for a period of up to 5 years so long as the patented item (human drug product, animal drug product, medical device, food additive, or color additive) was subject to regulatory review by FDA before the item was marketed. Under these acts, a product's regulatory review period forms the basis for determining the amount of extension an applicant may receive.

    A regulatory review period consists of two periods of time: A testing phase and an approval phase. For human biological products, the testing phase begins when the exemption to permit the clinical investigations of the biological becomes effective and runs until the approval phase begins. The approval phase starts with the initial submission of an application to market the human biological product and continues until FDA grants permission to market the biological product. Although only a portion of a regulatory review period may count toward the actual amount of extension that the Director of Patents and Trademarks may award (for example, half the testing phase must be subtracted as well as any time that may have occurred before the patent was issued), FDA's determination of the length of a regulatory review period for a human biological product will include all of the testing phase and approval phase as specified in 35 U.S.C. 156(g)(1)(B).

    FDA has approved for marketing the human biologic product, ENTYVIO (vedolizumab). ENTYVIO is indicated for adult ulcerative colitis and adult Crohn's disease. Subsequent to this approval, the USPTO received a patent term restoration application for ENTYVIO (U.S. Patent No. 7,147,851) from Millenium Pharmaceuticals, Inc., and the USPTO requested FDA's assistance in determining this patent's eligibility for patent term restoration. In a letter dated January 6, 2016, FDA advised the USPTO that this human biological product had undergone a regulatory review period and that the approval of ENTYVIO represented the first permitted commercial marketing or use of the product. Thereafter, the USPTO requested that FDA determine the product's regulatory review period.

    II. Determination of Regulatory Review Period

    FDA has determined that the applicable regulatory review period for ENTYVIO is 5,066 days. Of this time, 4,731 days occurred during the testing phase of the regulatory review period, while 335 days occurred during the approval phase. These periods of time were derived from the following dates:

    1. The date an exemption under section 505(i) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 355(i)) became effective: July 8, 2000. The applicant claims August 18, 2000, as the date the investigational new drug application (IND) became effective. However, FDA records indicate that the IND effective date was July 8, 2000, which was 30 days after FDA receipt of the IND.

    2. The date the application was initially submitted with respect to the human biological product under section 351 of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 262): June 20, 2013. FDA has verified the applicant's claim that the biologics license application (BLA) for ENTYVIO (BLA 125476) was initially submitted on June 20, 2013.

    3. The date the application was approved: May 20, 2014. FDA has verified the applicant's claim that BLA 125476 was approved on May 20, 2014.

    This determination of the regulatory review period establishes the maximum potential length of a patent extension. However, the USPTO applies several statutory limitations in its calculations of the actual period for patent extension. In its application for patent extension, this applicant seeks 1,526 days of patent term extension.

    III. Petitions

    Anyone with knowledge that any of the dates as published are incorrect may submit either electronic or written comments and ask for a redetermination (see DATES). Furthermore, any interested person may petition FDA for a determination regarding whether the applicant for extension acted with due diligence during the regulatory review period. To meet its burden, the petition must be timely (see DATES) and contain sufficient facts to merit an FDA investigation. (See H. Rept. 857, part 1, 98th Cong., 2d sess., pp. 41-42, 1984.) Petitions should be in the format specified in 21 CFR 10.30.

    Submit petitions electronically to http://www.regulations.gov, Docket No. FDA-2013-S-0610. Submit written petitions (two copies are required) to the Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

    Dated: September 12, 2016. Leslie Kux, Associate Commissioner for Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22344 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2016-N-0001] Coordinated Development of Antimicrobial Drugs and Antimicrobial Susceptibility Test Devices AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice of public workshop.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or Agency) is announcing a public workshop regarding “Coordinated Development of Antimicrobial Drugs and Antimicrobial Susceptibility Test Devices (ASTs).” This public workshop is intended to facilitate discussion between drug sponsors and device manufacturers who are planning to develop new antimicrobial drugs or ASTs and who wish to coordinate development of these products, such that the AST device could be cleared either at the time of new drug approval or shortly thereafter. The input from this public workshop will also help in developing topics for future discussion.

    DATES:

    Dates and Times: The public workshop will be held on September 29, 2016, from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. See the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for registration information.

    ADDRESSES:

    Location: The public workshop will be held at the Sheraton Silver Spring Hotel, 8777 Georgia Ave., Silver Spring, MD 20910. The hotel's phone number is 301-589-0800.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Contact Persons: Lori Benner and/or Jessica Barnes, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 22, Rm. 6221, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 301-796-1300.

    Registration: Registration is free for the public workshop. Interested parties are encouraged to register early. Seating will be available on a first-come, first-served basis. To register electronically, email your registration information (including name, title, firm name, address, telephone number, and fax number) to [email protected] Persons without access to the Internet can call 301-796-1300 to register.

    If you need special accommodations due to a disability, please contact Jessica Barnes or Lori Benner (see Contact Persons above) at least 7 days in advance.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    FDA is announcing a public workshop pertaining to the coordinated development of antimicrobial drugs and ASTs. Discussions will focus on assisting drug sponsors and device manufacturers who are planning to develop new antimicrobial drugs or ASTs and who seek to coordinate development of these products.

    The goals of the workshop are to: (1) Outline the regulatory considerations for submitting separate applications to the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research and the Center for Devices and Radiological Health for antimicrobial drugs and ASTs, respectively; (2) identify the challenges related to obtaining data supporting the clearance of an AST device coincident with or soon after antimicrobial drug approval; and (3) discuss ideas for addressing these challenges.

    The Agency encourages individuals, industry, device manufacturers, health care professionals, researchers, public health organizations and other interested persons to attend this public workshop. Workshop updates will be made available on the internet at http://www.fda.gov/Drugs/NewsEvents/ucm512519.htm.

    Transcripts: Please be advised that as soon as a transcript is available, it will be accessible at http://www.regulations.gov. It may be viewed at the Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD. A transcript will also be available either in hardcopy or on CD-ROM, after submission of a Freedom of Information request. The Freedom of Information office address is available on the Agency's Web site at http://www.fda.gov. Transcripts will also be available on the Internet at http://www.fda.gov/Drugs/NewsEvents/ucm512519.htm approximately 45 days after the workshop.

    Dated: September 9, 2016. Leslie Kux, Associate Commissioner for Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22352 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2004-D-0045] Waivers From the Requirement To Demonstrate Bioequivalence of Animal Drugs in Soluble Powder Oral Dosage Form Products and Type A Medicated Articles; Draft Revised Guidance for Industry; Availability AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice of availability.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or Agency) is announcing the availability of a draft revised guidance for industry (GFI) #171 entitled “Waivers from the Requirement to Demonstrate Bioequivalence of Animal Drugs in Soluble Powder Oral Dosage Form Products and Type A Medicated Articles.” This draft revised guidance document describes how the Center for Veterinary Medicine (CVM) intends to evaluate requests for waiving the requirement for submitting data demonstrating the bioequivalence of animal drugs in soluble powder oral dosage form products and Type A medicated articles. It expands upon CVM's Bioequivalence Guidance,1 particularly the section on Criteria for Waiver of In Vivo Bioequivalence Study. This guidance is applicable to generic investigational new animal drug (JINAD) files and abbreviated new animal drug applications (ANADAs). Although the recommendations in this guidance reference generic drug applications, the general principles described may also be applicable to new animal drug applications (NADAs), investigational new animal drug (INAD) files, and supplemental NADAs.

    1 CVM Guidance for Industry #35, “Bioequivalence Guidance,” November 8, 2006 (see page 7): http://www.fda.gov/downloads/AnimalVeterinary/GuidanceComplianceEnforcement/GuidanceforIndustry/UCM052363.pdf.

    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 revised guidance before it begins work on the final version of the guidance, submit either electronic or written comments on the draft revised guidance by November 15, 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-2004-D-0045 for “Waivers from the Requirement to Demonstrate Bioequivalence of Animal Drugs in Soluble Powder Oral Dosage Form Products and Type A Medicated Articles.” 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 Policy and Regulations Staff (HFV-6), Center for Veterinary Medicine, Food and Drug Administration, 7519 Standish Pl., Rockville, MD 20855. Send one self-addressed adhesive label to assist that office in processing your requests. See the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for electronic access to the draft revised guidance document.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Charli Long, Center for Veterinary Medicine (HFV-170), Food and Drug Administration, 7500 Standish Pl., Rockville, MD 20855, 240-402-0850, [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background

    FDA is announcing the availability of a draft revised guidance for industry #171 entitled “Waivers from the Requirement to Demonstrate Bioequivalence of Animal Drugs in Soluble Powder Oral Dosage Form Products and Type A Medicated Articles.” This draft revised guidance document describes how the Center for Veterinary Medicine (CVM) intends to evaluate requests for waiving the requirement for submitting data demonstrating the bioequivalence of animal drugs in soluble powder oral dosage form products and Type A medicated articles. It expands upon CVM's Bioequivalence Guidance,2 particularly the section on Criteria for Waiver of In Vivo Bioequivalence Study. This draft revised guidance document is intended to provide clarification of the scientific basis for concepts and recommendations conveyed in the original guidance. In addition, the table containing estimated gastric volumes for each of the various animal species has been revised. However, applicants may propose an alternative gastric volume value for a particular species when using the dosage adjusted approach. No new concepts have been introduced in this draft revised guidance and its scope has not been modified.

    2 CVM Guidance for Industry #35, “Bioequivalence Guidance,” November 8, 2006 (see page 7): http://www.fda.gov/downloads/AnimalVeterinary/GuidanceComplianceEnforcement/GuidanceforIndustry/UCM052363.pdf.

    II. Significance of Guidance

    This level 1 draft revised guidance is being issued consistent with FDA's good guidance practices regulation (21 CFR 10.115). The draft revised guidance, when finalized, will represent the current thinking of FDA on “Waivers from the Requirement to Demonstrate Bioequivalence of Animal Drugs in Soluble Powder Oral Dosage Form Products and Type A Medicated Articles.” It does not establish any rights for any person and is not binding on FDA or the public. You can use an alternative approach if it satisfies the requirements of the applicable statutes and regulations.

    III. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

    This draft revised guidance refers to previously approved collections of information that 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 referred to in the guidance entitled “Waivers from the Requirement to Demonstrate Bioequivalence of Animal Drugs in Soluble Powder Oral Dosage Form Products and Type A Medicated Articles” have been approved under OMB control number 0910-0575.

    IV. Electronic Access

    Persons with access to the Internet may obtain the draft revised guidance at either http://www.fda.gov/AnimalVeterinary/GuidanceComplianceEnforcement/GuidanceforIndustry/default.htm or http://www.regulations.gov.

    Dated: September 9, 2016. Leslie Kux, Associate Commissioner for Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22339 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2016-N-0001] Menu Labeling Public Workshop; Public Meeting AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice of public meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or we) is announcing a third public meeting to discuss menu labeling requirements. We announced the first two public meetings in a separate Federal Register notice earlier this year. The purpose of the public meetings is to help the regulated industry comply with the requirements of the menu labeling final rule.

    DATES:

    See “How to Participate in the Public Meeting” in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document for dates, times, and addresses of the public meeting, closing date for advance registration, requesting special accommodations due to disability, and other information.

    ADDRESSES:

    See “How to Participate in the Public Meeting” in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For questions about registering for this meeting or for special accommodations due to disability, contact Cindy de Sales, The Event Planning Group, 8720 Georgia Ave., Suite 801, Silver Spring, MD 20910, 240-316-3207, FAX: 240-652-6002, email: [email protected]

    For general questions about the public meeting, contact Loretta A. Carey, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition (HFS-820), Food and Drug Administration, 5001 Campus Dr., College Park, MD 20740, 240-402-2371.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background

    In the Federal Register of December 1, 2014 (79 FR 71156), we published a final rule on nutrition labeling of standard menu items in restaurants and similar retail food establishments; the rule is codified at Title 21 of the Code of Federal Regulations, section 101.11. The final rule implements section 403(q)(5)(H) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the FD&C Act) (21 U.S.C. 343(q)(5)(H)), which, in general, requires that restaurants and similar retail food establishments that are part of a chain with 20 or more locations, doing business under the same name, and offering for sale substantially the same menu items, provide calorie information for standard menu items (including food on display and self-service food); provide, upon request, additional written nutrition information for standard menu items; and comply with other requirements described in section 403(q)(5)(H) of the FD&C Act.

    On December 18, 2015, the President signed the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2016 (Pub. L. 114-113). Section 747 of the Consolidated Appropriations Act states that none of the funds made available under the Consolidated Appropriations Act may be used to implement, administer, or enforce the final rule entitled “Food Labeling; Nutrition Labeling of Standard Menu Items in Restaurants and Similar Retail Food Establishments” until 1 year after the date of publication of a Level 1 guidance with respect to nutrition labeling of standard menu items in restaurants and similar retail food establishments.

    In the Federal Register of May 5, 2016 (81 FR 27067), we announced the availability of the guidance for industry entitled “A Labeling Guide for Restaurants and Retail Establishments Selling Away-From-Home Foods—Part II (Menu Labeling Requirements in Accordance with 21 CFR 101.11).” The guidance uses a question and answer format and is intended to help restaurants and similar retail food establishments covered by the final rule comply with the nutrition labeling requirements of the final rule. In accordance with the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2016, enforcement of the final rule will commence May 5, 2017.

    We have made education of the menu labeling requirements a high priority, and this is our third menu labeling workshop to educate interested members of the public, especially the regulated industry, about the menu labeling requirements. We announced the first two public meetings in a separate Federal Register notice on June 15, 2016 (81 FR 39056). Interested persons can continue to submit general questions to [email protected]

    II. Purpose and Format of the Public Meeting

    The purpose of this public meeting is to help the regulated industry comply with the requirements of the menu labeling final rule. On the morning of day one of the meeting, we will give a slide presentation on the menu labeling requirements. (Please note the slide presentation will only be presented on day one.) The afternoon of day one and all of day two will consist of consultation sessions with FDA staff where individual companies (limited to two members per company) may discuss their specific questions and concerns. Each consultation session is limited to 15 minutes to help ensure that enough time is available to accommodate each company that requests a consultation. We recommend that participants in the consultation session prepare their questions in advance due to the limited time available.

    III. How To Participate in the Public Meeting

    We encourage all persons who wish to attend the meeting to register in advance of the meeting and to indicate whether they are requesting a consultation session. There is no fee to register for the public meeting, and registration will be on a first-come, first-served basis. Early registration is recommended to facilitate planning of the consultation sessions and because seating is limited. We encourage you to use electronic registration if possible (see the address in table 1).

    Table 1 provides information on participation in the public meeting.

    Table 1—Information on Menu Labeling Meeting Activity Date Electronic address Address Public meeting November 16 and 17, 2016, 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m Holiday Inn Hotel & Suites Oakland Airport, 77 Hegenberger Rd., Oakland, CA 94621. Advance registration by November 9, 2016 http://www.cvent.com/d/zfq6sm We encourage you to use electronic registration if possible.1 Request special accommodations due to a disability by November 9, 2016 See FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. 1 You may also register via mail, fax, or email. Please include your name, title, firm name, address, and phone and fax numbers in your registration information and send to: Cindy de Sales, The Event Planning Group, 8720 Georgia Ave., Suite 801, Silver Spring, MD 20910, 240-316-3207, FAX: 240-652-6002, email: [email protected] IV. Transcripts

    Transcripts of the workshop will not be prepared.

    Dated: September 13, 2016. Leslie Kux, Associate Commissioner for Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22337 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-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 virtual meeting of the Frederick National Laboratory Advisory Committee to the National Cancer Institute.

    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 meeting will also be videocast and can be accessed from the NIH Videocasting and Podcasting Web site (http://videocast.nih.gov/).

    Name of Committee: Frederick National Laboratory Advisory Committee to the National Cancer Institute.

    Date: October 21, 2016.

    Time: 2:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m.

    Agenda: Report from the FNLAC RAS Workgroup.

    Place: National Cancer Institute Shady Grove, 9609 Medical Center Drive, Room TE406, Rockville, MD 20850, (Virtual Meeting).

    Contact Person: Peter L. Wirth, Ph.D., Executive Secretary, Division of Extramural Activities, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, 9609 Medical Center Drive, Room 7W514, Bethesda, MD 20892, 240-276-6434, [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, NCI Shady Grove has instituted stringent procedures for entrance into the NCI Shady Grove building. 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://deainfo.nci.nih.gov/advisory/fac/fac.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: September 12, 2016. Melanie J. Gray, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22274 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health Office of the Director, 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 NIH Clinical Center Research Hospital Board.

    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 portions of the meeting devoted to the identification and evaluation of specific candidates for consideration for leadership positions in the Clinical Center will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in section 552b(c)(9)(B) and 552b(c)(6), title 5 U.S.C., as amended. Premature disclosure of potential candidates and their qualifications, as well as the discussions by the committee, could significantly frustrate NIH's ability to recruit these individuals and the consideration of personnel qualifications, performance, and the competence of individuals as candidates would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: NIH Clinical Center Research Hospital Board.

    Date: October 21, 2016.

    Open: 9:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m.

    Agenda: Welcome and NIH Director's Overview, Clinical Center Patient and Worker Safety Metrics, Clinical Center Outreach and Engagement, and Update on Aseptic Preparation Facilities.

    Place: Conference Room 6C6, Building 31, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892.

    Closed: 3:15 p.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: Identification of Candidates for Leadership Roles.

    Place: Conference Room 6C6, Building 31, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892.

    Contact Person: Gretchen Wood, Staff Assistant, National Institutes of Health, Office of the Director, One Center Drive, Building 1, Room 126, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-496-4272, [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.

    Dated: September 12, 2016. Anna Snouffer, Deputy Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22273 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders; 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 Board of Scientific Counselors, NIDCD.

    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 as indicated below in accordance with the provisions set forth in section 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended for the review, discussion, and evaluation of individual intramural programs and projects conducted by the National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders, including consideration of personnel qualifications and performance, and the competence of individual investigators, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: Board of Scientific Counselors, NIDCD.

    Date: October 24, 2016.

    Open: 8:00 a.m. to 8:15 a.m.

    Agenda: Reports from the institute staff.

    Place: National Institutes of Health; Porter Neuroscience Research Center, Room 610, Building 35A Convent Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892.

    Closed: 8:20 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate personal qualifications and performance, and competence of individual investigators.

    Place: National Institutes of Health; Porter Neuroscience Research Center, Room 610, Building 35A Convent Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892.

    Contact Person: Andrew J. Griffith, MD, Ph.D., Director, Division of Intramural Research, National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders, 35A Convent Drive, GF 103, Rockville, MD 20892, 301-496-1960, [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.nidcd.nih.gov/about/groups/bsc/, where an agenda and any additional information for the meeting will be posted when available.

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.173, Biological Research Related to Deafness and Communicative Disorders, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: September 12, 2016. Sylvia L. Neal, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22271 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders; Notice of Closed Meetings

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following meetings.

    The meetings will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders Special Emphasis Panel; U01 Review.

    Date: October 11, 2016.

    Time: 2:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Neuroscience Center, 6001 Executive Boulevard, Rockville, MD 20852, (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: Kausik Ray, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders, National Institutes of Health, Rockville, MD 20850, 301-402-3587, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders Special Emphasis Panel; NIDCD Translating Basic Hearing and Balance Research into Clinical Tools.

    Date: October 12, 2016.

    Time: 12:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Neuroscience Center, 6001 Executive Boulevard, Rockville, MD 20852, (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: Katherine Shim, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Division of Extramural Activities, NIH/NIDCD, 6001 Executive Blvd., Room 8351, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-496-8683, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders Special Emphasis Panel; Chemosensory Fellowship Review.

    Date: October 13, 2016.

    Time: 11:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health Neuroscience Center, 6001 Executive Boulevard, Rockville, MD 20852, (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: Shiguang Yang, DVM, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Division of Extramural Activities, NIDCD, NIH, 6001 Executive Blvd., Room 8349, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-496-8683, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders Special Emphasis Panel; Hearing and Balance Fellowships Review.

    Date: October 18, 2016.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Bethesda North Marriott Hotel & Conference Center, 5701 Marinelli Road, Bethesda, MD 20852.

    Contact Person: Sheo Singh, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Scientific Review Branch, Division of Extramural Activities, 6001 Executive Blvd., Room 8351, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-496-8683, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders Special Emphasis Panel; Translational Grant Review.

    Date: October 19, 2016.

    Time: 1:00 p.m. to 2:30 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health Neuroscience Center, 6001 Executive Boulevard, Rockville, MD 20852, (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: Sheo Singh, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Scientific Review Branch, Division of Extramural Activities, 6001 Executive Blvd., Room 8351, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-496-8683, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders Special Emphasis Panel; VSL Fellowships Review.

    Date: October 24, 2016.

    Time: 12:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Neuroscience Center, 6001 Executive Boulevard, Rockville, MD 20852, (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: Katherine Shim, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Division of Extramural Activities, NIH/NIDCD, 6001 Executive Blvd., Room 8351, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-496-8683, [email protected]

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.173, Biological Research Related to Deafness and Communicative Disorders, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: September 12, 2016. Sylvia L. Neal, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22272 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Cancer Institute; Notice of Closed 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 Cancer Institute Special Emphasis Panel; Proteogenomic Translational Research Centers.

    Date: October 25, 2016.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Hyatt Regency Bethesda, One Bethesda Metro Center, 7400 Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20814.

    Contact Person: Jeffrey E. DeClue, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Research Technology and Contract Review Branch, Division of Extramural Activities, National Cancer Institute, NIH, 9609 Medical Center Drive, 7W238, Bethesda, MD 20892-9750, 240-276-6371, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: National Cancer Institute Special Emphasis Panel; Physical Sciences-Oncology Projects (U01).

    Date: October 27, 2016.

    Time: 10:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Cancer Institute, Shady Grove, 9609 Medical Center Drive, Room 7E032/034, Rockville, MD 20850 (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: Scott A. Chen, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Division of Extramural Activities, National Cancer Institute, NIH, 9609 Medical Center Drive, 7W604, Rockville, MD 20850, 240-276-6038, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: National Cancer Institute Special Emphasis Panel; NCI Provocative Question #5.

    Date: November 2, 2016.

    Time: 12:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Shady Grove, 9609 Medical Center Drive, Room 7W104, Rockville, MD 20850 (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: Eun Ah Cho, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Special Review Branch, Division of Extramural Activities, National Cancer Institute, NIH, 9609 Medical Center Drive, 7W104, Bethesda, MD 20892-9750, 240-276-6342, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: National Cancer Institute Special Emphasis Panel; NCI Provocative Question #12

    Date: November 8, 2016.

    Time: 1:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Cancer Institute, Shady Grove, 9609 Medical Center Drive, Room 7W030, Rockville, MD 20850 (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: Jennifer C. Schiltz, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Special Review Branch, Division of Extramural Activities, National Cancer Institute, NIH, 9609 Medical Center Drive, 7W634, Rockville, MD 20850, 240-276-5864, [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; 93.399, Cancer Control, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: September 12, 2016. Melanie J. Gray, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22275 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration CARA Act's Required Training of Nurse Practitioners and Physician Assistants AGENCY:

    Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, United States Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

    ACTION:

    Notice of public meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    The Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) announces that it will hold a public meeting on October 1, 2016, to discuss the training requirements for nurse practitioners (NPs) and physician assistants (PAs) that have been stipulated in the Comprehensive Addiction and Recovery Act (CARA). The session will be held in Newark, NJ.

    DATES:

    The meeting will be held on October 1, 2016, from 9:00 to 11:00 a.m.

    ADDRESSES:

    In Person: The meeting will be held at the Newark Liberty International Airport Marriott, 1 Hotel Rd, Newark, NJ 07114.

    By Phone: Phone Number: 888-942-9687, Passcode: 5093420.

    By Internet: URL: https://www.mymeetings.com/emeet/rsvp/index.jsp?customHeader=mymeetings&Conference_ID=1063134&passcode=5093420, Conference number: 1063134, Passcode: 5093420.

    SAMHSA will post additional logistical information on how to participate in person, by phone, or on the Web at: http://caralisteningsession.eventbrite.com in advance of the listening session.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For additional information concerning the meeting, please contact: Dr. Mitra Ahadpour, Director, Division of Pharmacological Therapies, Center for Substance Abuse Treatment, SAMHSA, (240) 276-2134 or [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background

    On July 22, 2016 CARA was signed into law by President Obama. The new law authorizes dispensing privileges of covered medications in office-based settings by NPs and PAs for five years (until October 1, 2021). At this meeting, SAMHSA will be seeking input on how to best implement the requirements that all NPs and PAs must have twenty-four hours of training before obtaining a waiver to prescribe covered medications. The meeting will include the organizations listed in statute and is also open to the public. Specifically, SAMHSA is seeking input on existing training programs that may meet the statutory requirements for training and within the twenty-four hours of training, the number of hours that NPs and PAs should complete on each topic listed in the CARA Act (Pub. L. 114-198).

    The agenda will include:

    —Welcome and introductions —Review of CARA Training Requirements —Discussion about Training Requirements Carlos Castillo, Committee Management Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22279 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4162-20-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY U.S. Customs and Border Protection Accreditation and Approval of Saybolt LP as a Commercial Gauger and Laboratory AGENCY:

    U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security.

    ACTION:

    Notice of accreditation and approval of Saybolt LP as a commercial gauger and laboratory.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to CBP regulations, that Saybolt LP has been approved to gauge petroleum and certain petroleum products and accredited to test petroleum and certain petroleum products for customs purposes for the next three years as of June 14, 2016.

    DATES:

    The accreditation and approval of Saybolt LP as commercial gauger and laboratory became effective on June 14, 2016. The next triennial inspection date will be scheduled for June 2019.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Approved Gauger and Accredited Laboratories Manager, Laboratories and Scientific Services Directorate, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Suite 1500N, Washington, DC 20229, tel. 202-344-1060.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Notice is hereby given pursuant to 19 CFR 151.12 and 19 CFR 151.13, that Saybolt LP, 2610 Federal Highway, Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33316, has been approved to gauge petroleum and certain petroleum products and accredited to test petroleum and certain petroleum products for customs purposes, in accordance with the provisions of 19 CFR 151.12 and 19 CFR 151.13. Saybolt LP is approved for the following gauging procedures for petroleum and certain petroleum products from the American Petroleum Institute (API):

    API chapters Title 3 Tank Gauging. 7 Temperature Determination. 8 Sampling. 9 Density Determinations. 12 Calculations.

    Saybolt LP is accredited for the following laboratory analysis procedures and methods for petroleum and certain petroleum products set forth by the U.S. Customs and Border Protection Laboratory Methods (CBPL) and American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM):

    CBPL No. ASTM Title 27-06 D473 Standard Test Method for Sediment in Crude Oils and Fuel Oils by the Extraction Method. 27-08 D86 Standard Test Method for Distillation of Petroleum Products. 27-13 D4294 Standard Test Method for Sulfur in Petroleum and Petroleum Products by Energy-Dispersive X-ray Fluorescence Spectrometry. 27-53 D2709 Standard Test Method for Water and Sediment in Middle Distillate Fuels by Centrifuge.

    Anyone wishing to employ this entity to conduct laboratory analyses and gauger services should request and receive written assurances from the entity that it is accredited or approved by the U.S. Customs and Border Protection to conduct the specific test or gauger service requested. Alternatively, inquiries regarding the specific test or gauger service this entity is accredited or approved to perform may be directed to the U.S. Customs and Border Protection by calling (202) 344-1060. The inquiry may also be sent to [email protected] Please reference the Web site listed below for a complete listing of CBP approved gaugers and accredited laboratories. http://www.cbp.gov/about/labs-scientific/commercial-gaugers-and-laboratories.

    Dated: September 12, 2016. Ira S. Reese, Executive Director, Laboratories and Scientific Services Directorate.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22311 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-14-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY U.S. Customs and Border Protection [1651-0082] Agency Information Collection Activities: African Growth and Opportunity Act Certificate of Origin AGENCY:

    U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security.

    ACTION:

    30-Day notice and request for comments; Extension of an existing collection of information.

    SUMMARY:

    U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) of the Department of Homeland Security will be submitting the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act: African Growth and Opportunity Act Certificate of Origin (AGOA). CBP is proposing that this information collection be extended with a change to the burden hours. There is no change to the information collected. This document is published to obtain comments from the public and affected agencies.

    DATES:

    Written comments should be received on or before October 17, 2016 to be assured of consideration.

    ADDRESSES:

    Interested persons are invited to submit written comments on this proposed information collection to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget. Comments should be addressed to the OMB Desk Officer for Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security, and sent via electronic mail to [email protected] or faxed to (202) 395-5806.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Requests for additional information should be directed to Paperwork Reduction Act Officer, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Regulations and Rulings, Office of Trade, 90 K Street, NE., 10th Floor, Washington, DC 20229-1177, or via email ([email protected]). Please note contact information provided here is solely for questions regarding this notice. Individuals seeking information about other CBP programs please contact the CBP National Customer Service Center at 877-227-5511, (TTY) 1-800-877-8339, or CBP Web site at https://www.cbp.gov/. For additional help: https://help.cbp.gov/app/home/search/1.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This proposed information collection was previously published in the Federal Register (81 FR 28096) on May 9, 2016, allowing for a 60-day comment period. This notice allows for an additional 30 days for public comments. This process is conducted in accordance with 5 CFR 1320.10. CBP invites the general public and other Federal agencies to comment on proposed and/or continuing information collections pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507). The comments should address: (a) Whether the 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 estimates of the burden of the collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; (d) ways to minimize the burden, including the use of automated collection techniques or the use of other forms of information technology; and (e) the annual costs to respondents or record keepers from the collection of information (total capital/startup costs and operations and maintenance costs). The comments that are submitted will be summarized and included in the CBP request for OMB approval. All comments will become a matter of public record. In this document, CBP is soliciting comments concerning the following information collection:

    Title: African Growth and Opportunity Act Certificate of Origin.

    OMB Number: 1651-0082.

    Form Number: None.

    Abstract: The African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA) was adopted by the United States with the enactment of the Trade and Development Act of 2000 (PL.106-200). The objectives of AGOA are (1) to provide for extension of duty-free treatment under the Generalized System of Preferences (GSP) to import sensitive articles normally excluded from GSP duty treatment, and (2) to provide for the entry of specific textile and apparel articles free of duty and free of any quantitative limits from the countries of sub-Saharan Africa.

    For preferential treatment under AGOA, the exporter is required to prepare a certificate of origin and provide it to the importer. The certificate of origin includes information such as contact information for the importer, exporter and producer; the basis for which preferential treatment is claimed; and a description of the imported merchandise. The importers are required to have the certificate in their possession at the time of the claim, and to provide it to Customs and Border Protection (CBP) upon request. The collection of this information is provided for in 19 CFR 10.214, 10.215, and 10.216.

    Instructions for complying with this regulation are posted on CBP.gov Web site at: http://www.cbp.gov/trade/priority-issues.

    Action: CBP proposes to extend the expiration date of this information collection without change to the estimated burden hours or the information collected.

    Type of Review: Extension (with change to burden hours).

    Affected Public: Businesses.

    Estimated Number of Respondents: 12.

    Estimated Number of Annual Responses per Respondent: 2.

    Estimated Number of Total Annual Responses: 24.

    Estimated Time per Response: 20 minutes.

    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 8.16.

    Dated: September 13, 2016. Seth Renkema, Branch Chief, Economic Impact Analysis Branch, U.S. Customs and Border Protection.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22364 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-14-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY U.S. Customs and Border Protection Accreditation and Approval of Amspec Services, LLC, as a Commercial Gauger And Laboratory AGENCY:

    U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security.

    ACTION:

    Notice of accreditation and approval of AmSpec Services, LLC, as a commercial gauger and laboratory.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to CBP regulations, that AmSpec Services, LLC, has been approved to gauge petroleum and certain petroleum products and accredited to test petroleum and certain petroleum products for customs purposes for the next three years as of February 17, 2016.

    DATES:

    The accreditation and approval of AmSpec Services, LLC, as commercial gauger and laboratory became effective on February 17, 2016. The next triennial inspection date will be scheduled for February 2019.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Approved Gauger and Accredited Laboratories Manager, Laboratories and Scientific Services Directorate, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Suite 1500N, Washington, DC 20229, tel. 202-344-1060.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Notice is hereby given pursuant to 19 CFR 151.12 and 19 CFR 151.13, that AmSpec Services, LLC, 1203 East Highway 30, Gonzales, LA 70737, has been approved to gauge petroleum and certain petroleum products and accredited to test petroleum and certain petroleum products for customs purposes, in accordance with the provisions of 19 CFR 151.12 and 19 CFR 151.13. AmSpec Services, LLC is approved for the following gauging procedures for petroleum and certain petroleum products from the American Petroleum Institute (API):

    API chapters Title 3 Tank Gauging. 7 Temperature Determination. 8 Sampling. 11 Physical Properties. 12 Calculations. 17 Maritime Measurement.

    AmSpec Services, LLC is accredited for the following laboratory analysis procedures and methods for petroleum and certain petroleum products set forth by the U.S. Customs and Border Protection Laboratory Methods (CBPL) and American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM):

    CBPL No. ASTM Title 27-01 D287 Standard Test Method for API Gravity of crude Petroleum and Petroleum Products. 27-03 D4006 Standard Test Method for Water in Crude Oil by Distillation. 27-05 D4928 Standard Test Method for Water in Crude Oils by Coulometric Karl Fischer Titration. 27-06 D473 Standard Test Method for Sediment in Crude Oils and Fuel Oils by the Extraction Method. 27-11 D445 Standard Test Method for Kinematic Viscosity of Transparent and Opaque Liquids. 27-13 D4294 Standard Test Method for Sulfur in Petroleum and Petroleum Products by Energy-Dispersive X-ray Fluorescence Spectrometry. 27-54 D1796 Standard Test Method for Water and Sediment in Fuel Oils by the Centrifuge Method.

    Anyone wishing to employ this entity to conduct laboratory analyses and gauger services should request and receive written assurances from the entity that it is accredited or approved by the U.S. Customs and Border Protection to conduct the specific test or gauger service requested. Alternatively, inquiries regarding the specific test or gauger service this entity is accredited or approved to perform may be directed to the U.S. Customs and Border Protection by calling (202) 344-1060. The inquiry may also be sent to [email protected] Please reference the Web site listed below for a complete listing of CBP approved gaugers and accredited laboratories. http://www.cbp.gov/about/labs-scientific/commercial-gaugers-and-laboratories.

    Dated: September 12, 2016. Ira S. Reese, Executive Director, Laboratories and Scientific Services Directorate.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22303 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-14-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY U.S. Customs and Border Protection Accreditation and Approval of Saybolt LP as a Commercial Gauger and Laboratory AGENCY:

    U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security.

    ACTION:

    Notice of accreditation and approval of Saybolt LP as a commercial gauger and laboratory.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to CBP regulations, that Saybolt LP has been approved to gauge petroleum and certain petroleum products and accredited to test petroleum and certain petroleum products for customs purposes for the next three years as of March 16, 2016.

    DATES:

    The accreditation and approval of Saybolt LP as commercial gauger and laboratory became effective on March 16, 2016. The next triennial inspection date will be scheduled for March 2019.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Approved Gauger and Accredited Laboratories Manager, Laboratories and Scientific Services Directorate, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Suite 1500N, Washington, DC 20229, tel. 202-344-1060.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Notice is hereby given pursuant to 19 CFR 151.12 and 19 CFR 151.13, that Saybolt LP, 1123 Highway 43, Saraland, AL 36571, has been approved to gauge petroleum and certain petroleum products and accredited to test petroleum and certain petroleum products for customs purposes, in accordance with the provisions of 19 CFR 151.12 and 19 CFR 151.13. Saybolt LP is approved for the following gauging procedures for petroleum and certain petroleum products from the American Petroleum Institute (API):

    API chapters Title 3 Tank Gauging. 7 Temperature Determination. 8 Sampling. 11 Physical Properties. Saybolt LP is accredited for the following laboratory analysis procedures and methods for petroleum and certain petroleum products set forth by the U.S. Customs and Border Protection Laboratory Methods (CBPL) and American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM): CBPL No. ASTM Title 27-01 D287 Standard Test Method for API Gravity of crude Petroleum and Petroleum Products. 27-02 D1298 Standard Test Method for Density, Relative Density (Specific Gravity), or API Gravity of Crude Petroleum and Liquid Petroleum Products by Hydrometer Method. 27-03 D4006 Standard Test Method for Water in Crude Oil by Distillation. 27-04 D95 Standard Test Method for Water in Petroleum Products and Bituminous Materials by Distillation. 27-05 D4928 Standard Test Method for Water in Crude Oils by Coulometric Karl Fischer Titration. 27-06 D473 Standard Test Method for Sediment in Crude Oils and Fuel Oils by the Extraction Method. 27-08 D86 Standard Test Method for Distillation of Petroleum Products. 27-11 D445 Standard Test Method for Kinematic Viscosity of Transparent and Opaque Liquids. 27-13 D4294 Standard Test Method for Sulfur in Petroleum and Petroleum Products by Energy-Dispersive X-ray Fluorescence Spectrometry. 27-48 D4052 Standard Test Method for Density and Relative Density of Liquids by Digital Density Meter. 27-50 D93 Standard Test Methods for Flash-Point by Pensky-Martens Closed Cup Tester. 27-58 D5191 Standard Test Method For Vapor Pressure of Petroleum Products.

    Anyone wishing to employ this entity to conduct laboratory analyses and gauger services should request and receive written assurances from the entity that it is accredited or approved by the U.S. Customs and Border Protection to conduct the specific test or gauger service requested. Alternatively, inquiries regarding the specific test or gauger service this entity is accredited or approved to perform may be directed to the U.S. Customs and Border Protection by calling (202) 344-1060. The inquiry may also be sent to [email protected] Please reference the Web site listed below for a complete listing of CBP approved gaugers and accredited laboratories. http://www.cbp.gov/about/labs-scientific/commercial-gaugers-and-laboratories.

    Dated: September 12, 2016. Ira S. Reese, Executive Director, Laboratories and Scientific Services Directorate.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22322 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-14-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY U.S. Customs and Border Protection Accreditation and Approval of AmSpec Services, LLC, as a Commercial Gauger and Laboratory AGENCY:

    U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security.

    ACTION:

    Notice of accreditation and approval of AmSpec Services, LLC, as a commercial gauger and laboratory.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to CBP regulations, that AmSpec Services, LLC, has been approved to gauge petroleum and certain petroleum products and accredited to test petroleum and certain petroleum products for customs purposes for the next three years as of April 6, 2016.

    DATES:

    The accreditation and approval of AmSpec Services, LLC, as commercial gauger and laboratory became effective on April 6, 2016. The next triennial inspection date will be scheduled for April 2019.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Approved Gauger and Accredited Laboratories Manager, Laboratories and Scientific Services Directorate, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Suite 1500N, Washington, DC 20229, tel. 202-344-1060.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Notice is hereby given pursuant to 19 CFR 151.12 and 19 CFR 151.13, that AmSpec Services, LLC, 2310 Hwy 69N, Nederland, TX 77627, has been approved to gauge petroleum and certain petroleum products and accredited to test petroleum and certain petroleum products for customs purposes, in accordance with the provisions of 19 CFR 151.12 and 19 CFR 151.13. AmSpec Services, LLC is approved for the following gauging procedures for petroleum and certain petroleum products from the American Petroleum Institute (API):

    API chapters Title 3 Tank Gauging. 7 Temperature Determination. 8 Sampling. 12 Calculations. 17 Maritime Measurement.

    AmSpec Services, LLC is accredited for the following laboratory analysis procedures and methods for petroleum and certain petroleum products set forth by the U.S. Customs and Border Protection Laboratory Methods (CBPL) and American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM):

    CBPL No. ASTM Title 27-01 D287 Standard Test Method for API Gravity of crude Petroleum and Petroleum Products. 27-05 D4928 Standard Test Method for Water in Crude Oils by Coulometric Karl Fischer Titration. 27-06 D473 Standard Test Method for Sediment in Crude Oils and Fuel Oils by the Extraction Method. 27-13 D4294 Standard Test Method for Sulfur in Petroleum and Petroleum Products by Energy-Dispersive X-ray Fluorescence Spectrometry.

    Anyone wishing to employ this entity to conduct laboratory analyses and gauger services should request and receive written assurances from the entity that it is accredited or approved by the U.S. Customs and Border Protection to conduct the specific test or gauger service requested. Alternatively, inquiries regarding the specific test or gauger service this entity is accredited or approved to perform may be directed to the U.S. Customs and Border Protection by calling (202) 344-1060. The inquiry may also be sent to [email protected]. Please reference the Web site listed below for a complete listing of CBP approved gaugers and accredited laboratories. http://www.cbp.gov/about/labs-scientific/commercial-gaugers-and-laboratories.

    Dated: September 12, 2016. Ira S. Reese, Executive Director, Laboratories and Scientific Services Directorate.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22304 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-14-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement [Docket No. ICEB-2016-0001] Advisory Committee on Family Residential Centers AGENCY:

    Immigration and Customs Enforcement, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice of Federal Advisory Committee meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    The U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Advisory Committee on Family Residential Centers (ACFRC) will meet in Washington, DC to discuss ACFRC subcommittee reports and vote on potential recommendations. This meeting will be open to the public. Due to limited seating, individuals who wish to attend the meeting in person are required to register online at www.ice.gov/acfrc.

    DATES:

    The ICE Advisory Committee on Family Residential Centers will meet on Friday, October 7, 2016, from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Please note that these meetings may conclude early if the Committee has completed all business.

    ADDRESSES:

    The meeting will be held in the Julie Myers Conference Center at ICE Headquarters, 500 12th St. SW., Washington, DC 20536.

    For information on facilities, services for individuals with disabilities, or to request special assistance at the meeting, contact Mr. John Amaya, Designated Federal Officer, at [email protected]

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Mr. John Amaya, Designated Federal Officer for the Advisory Committee on Family Residential Centers, at [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Notice of this meeting is given under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) (Title 5, United States Code (U.S.C.), Appendix). Under the Secretary of DHS's authority in Title 6, U.S.C., Section 451, this Committee is established in accordance with and operates under the provisions of the FACA. The Committee provides advice and recommendations to the Secretary of DHS through the Assistant Secretary of ICE on matters concerning ICE's family residential centers related to education, language services, detention management, medical treatment, and access to counsel.

    Written statements may be submitted to the ACFRC Designated Federal Officer (DFO) (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). Statements should be no longer than two type-written pages and address the following details: The issue, discussion, and recommended course of action. Additional information, including the agenda and electronic registration details, is available on the ACFRC Web site at www.ice.gov/acfrc.

    Meeting Agenda

    The agenda for the Advisory Committee on Family Residential Centers meeting is as follows:

    Friday, October 7, 2016 (1) Welcome and Opening Remarks (2) Discussion of Subcommittee on Medical and Mental Health Report (3) Public Comment (4) Discussion of Subcommittee on Education (5) Public Comment (6) Lunch (7) Discussion of Subcommittee on Access to Counsel and Language Access Report (8) Public Comment (9) Committee Votes on Potential Recommendations (10) Closing Remarks (11) Adjourn

    The meeting agenda, Committee tasking, and all meeting documentation will be made available online at: www.ice.gov/acfrc. Alternatively, you may contact Mr. John Amaya as noted in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section above.

    During public oral comment periods, speakers are requested to limit their comments to 2 minutes. Please note that the public comment period may end before the time indicated, following the last call for comments.

    Dated: September 13, 2016. Molly Stubbs, Supervisory Regulations Specialist, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22326 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-28-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT [Docket No. FR-5913-N-25] 60-Day Notice of Proposed Information Collection: Final Endorsement of Credit Instrument 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: November 15, 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:

    Daniel J. Sullivan, Acting Director, Office of Multifamily Productions, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street SW., Washington, DC 20410; email [email protected] or telephone 202-402-6130. 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. Collette 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: Final Endorsement of Credit Instrument.

    OMB Approval Number: 2502-0016.

    Type of Request: Extension of currently approved collection.

    Form Number: HUD-92023.

    Description of the need for the information and proposed use: The information collected on the Final Endorsement of Credit Instrument form is used to request final endorsement by HUD of the credit instrument. The mortgage/lender submits information to indicate the schedule of advances made on the project and the final advances to be disbursed immediately upon final endorsement.

    Respondents (i.e. affected public): Business or other for-profit, Not-for-profit institutions, contractors, mortgagors/borrowers, and mortgagees/lenders.

    Estimated Number of Respondents: 1,472.

    Frequency of Response: 1.

    Average Hours per Response: 1.

    Total Estimated Burden: 1,472.

    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: August 31, 2016. Genger Charles, Senior Policy Advisor for Housing.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22369 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4210-67-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT [Docket No. FR-5913-N-24] 60-Day Notice of Proposed Information Collection: Multifamily Project Construction Change 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: November 15, 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:

    Daniel J. Sullivan, Acting Director, Office Multifamily Productions, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street SW., Washington, DC 20410; email [email protected] or telephone 202-402-6130. (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. Collette 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: Multifamily Request for Construction Change.

    OMB Approval Number: 2502-0011.

    Type of Request: Extension of currently approved collection.

    Form Number: HUD-92437, HUD-92441, HUD-92442, HUD-92442-A, HUD-92442-CA, HUD-92442-A-CA.

    Description of the need for the information and proposed use: The information collected on the Multifamily Request for Construction Change form provides HUD with information from contractors, mortgagors/borrowers, and mortgagees/lenders for construction of multifamily projects and to obtain approval of changes in previously approved contract drawings and/or specifications.

    Respondents (i.e. affected public): Business or other for-profit, Not-for-profit institutions, contractors, mortgagors/borrowers, and mortgagees/lenders.

    Estimated Number of Respondents: 854.

    Estimated Number of Responses: 854.

    Frequency of Response: 1.

    Average Hours per Response: 3.

    Total Estimated Burden: 2,562.

    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: August 31, 2016. Genger Charles, Senior Policy Advisor for Housing.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22370 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4210-67-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT [Docket No. FR-5907-N-38] 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 12-07, 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 or send an email to [email protected] 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 (e.g., acreage, floor plan, condition of property, 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; AIR FORCE: Mr. Robert E. Moriarty, P.E., AFCEC/CI, 2261 Hughes Avenue, Ste. 155, JBSA Lackland TX 78236-9853, (315) 225-7384; COE: Ms. Brenda Johnson-Turner, HQUSACE/CEMP-CR, 441 G Street NW., Washington, DC 20314, (202) 761-7238; NAVY: Ms. Nikki Hunt, 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: September 12, 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 09/16/2016 Suitable/Available Properties Building Kentucky Buckhorn Lake Project, KY 804 Buckhorn Dam Road Buckhorn KY 41721 Landholding Agency: COE Property Number: 31201630020 Status: Excess Directions: BUCKLK-32543, Structure 01C02 Bathhouse Facilities Comments: Off-site removal only; 25+ yrs. old; 500 sq. ft.; toilets; contaminated with human waste; remediation required; contact COE for more information. New Jersey 2 Buildings New Jersey Ave. Joint Base MDL NJ 08640 Landholding Agency: Air Force Property Number: 18201630008 Status: Unutilized Directions: 5882 (120 sq. ft.) & 5884 (196 sq. ft.) Comments: Off-site removal only; 50+ yrs. old; sq. ft. listed above; storage; poor condition; contact AF for more information. North Carolina Radio Building (13209) 1070 Massey Branch Road Robbinsville NC 28771 Landholding Agency: Agriculture Property Number: 15201630019 Status: Excess Comments: 34+ yrs. old; 53 sq. ft.; repeater/microwave building; roof needs replacing; contact USDA for more information. Land Illinois Outer Marker & Bldg. 262 South East of Mascoutah off Highbanks Road Mascoutah IL 62258 Landholding Agency: Air Force Property Number: 18201630013 Status: Unutilized Comments: 62+ yrs. old; 333 sq. ft.; unusable, beyond repair; asbestos walls; sits on .87 acres of land; requires easement for roads to access property; contact AF for more information. Unsuitable Properties Building Colorado Building 1606, Fire Crash House; 560 S. Silver Creek Street Buckley AFB CO 80011 Landholding Agency: Air Force Property Number: 18201630012 Status: Unutilized Comments: Public access denied and no alternative method to gain access without compromising national security; property located within an airport runway clear zone or military airfield. Reasons: Within airport runway clear zone; Secured Area Hawaii Former MCCS Exchange Space/ Bldg. 4, MCBH, Camp Smith Marine Corps Base Hawaii Camp Smith HI 96861 Landholding Agency: Navy Property Number: 77201630024 Status: Excess Comments: Public access denied and no alternative method to gain access without compromising national security. Reasons: Secured Area Illinois Building 434 434 Hangar Road Scott AFB IL 62225 Landholding Agency: Air Force Property Number: 18201630015 Status: Unutilized Comments: Public access denied and no alternative method to gain access without compromising national security; property located within an airport runway clear zone or military airfield. Reasons: Within airport runway clear zone; Secured Area Kentucky Rough River Lake Project, KY 14957 Falls of Rough/ Cave Creek Recreation Area Rough River Lake KY Landholding Agency: COE Property Number: 31201630018 Status: Excess Directions: Located within floodway which has not been corrected or contained Comments: Documented deficiencies: cinder block waste holding tanks significantly deteriorated which is causing massive leaking and cannot be replaced; clear threat to physical safety. Reasons: Floodway; Extensive deterioration New Mexico 2 Buildings 208 W. Octagon Street Cannon AFB NM 88103 Landholding Agency: Air Force Property Number: 18201630010 Status: Underutilized Directions: Transient Lodging 1818 & 1819 Comments: Public access denied and no alternative method to gain access without compromising national security. Reasons: Secured Area Range Support Building 3121 5000 Sundale Valley Road Cannon AFB NM 88103 Landholding Agency: Air Force Property Number: 18201630014 Status: Underutilized Comments: Public access denied and no alternative method to gain access without compromising national security. Reasons: Secured Area Virginia Building 101C, Lafayette River Annex 6405 Hampton Blvd. Norfolk VA 23551 Landholding Agency: Navy Property Number: 77201630025 Status: Excess Comments: Public access denied and no alternative method to gain access without compromising national security. Reasons: Secured Area Wyoming 3 Buildings FE Warren AFB WY FE Warren AFB WY WY 82005 Landholding Agency: Air Force Property Number: 18201630009 Status: Unutilized Directions: GHZG S-1, GHXX P-1, GHZTT-1 Comments: Public access denied and no alternative method to gain access without compromising national security. Reasons: Secured Area
    [FR Doc. 2016-22359 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4210-67-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service [Docket No. FWS-HQ-IA-2016-0120; FXIA16710900000-156-FF09A30000] Endangered Species; Receipt of Applications for Permit AGENCY:

    Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice of receipt of applications for permit.

    SUMMARY:

    We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, invite the public to comment on the following applications to conduct certain activities with endangered species. With some exceptions, the Endangered Species Act (ESA) prohibits activities with listed species unless Federal authorization is acquired that allows such activities.

    DATES:

    We must receive comments or requests for documents on or before October 17, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submitting Comments: You may submit comments by one of the following methods:

    Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments on Docket No. FWS-HQ-IA-2016-0120.

    U.S. mail or hand-delivery: Public Comments Processing, Attn: Docket No. FWS-HQ-IA-2016-0120; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Headquarters, MS: BPHC; 5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041-3803.

    When submitting comments, please indicate the name of the applicant and the PRT# you are commenting on. We will post all comments on http://www.regulations.gov. This generally means that we will post any personal information you provide us (see the Public Comments section below for more information).

    Viewing Comments: Comments and materials we receive will be available for public inspection on http://www.regulations.gov, or by appointment, between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays, at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Division of Management Authority, 5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041-3803; telephone 703-358-2095.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Brenda Tapia, 703-358-2104 (telephone); 703-358-2281 (fax); [email protected] (email).

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Public Comment Procedures A. How do I request copies of applications or comment on submitted applications?

    Send your request for copies of applications or comments and materials concerning any of the applications to the contact listed under ADDRESSES. Please include the Federal Register notice publication date, the PRT-number, and the name of the applicant in your request or submission. We will not consider requests or comments sent to an email or address not listed under ADDRESSES. If you provide an email address in your request for copies of applications, we will attempt to respond to your request electronically.

    Please make your requests or comments as specific as possible. Please confine your comments to issues for which we seek comments in this notice, and explain the basis for your comments. Include sufficient information with your comments to allow us to authenticate any scientific or commercial data you include.

    The comments and recommendations that will be most useful and likely to influence agency decisions are: (1) Those supported by quantitative information or studies; and (2) Those that include citations to, and analyses of, the applicable laws and regulations. We will not consider or include in our administrative record comments we receive after the close of the comment period (see DATES) or comments delivered to an address other than those listed above (see ADDRESSES).

    B. May I review comments submitted by others?

    Comments, including names and street addresses of respondents, will be available for public review at the street address listed under ADDRESSES. The public may review documents and other information applicants have sent in support of the application unless our allowing viewing would violate the Privacy Act or Freedom of Information Act. Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment—including your personal identifying information—may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.

    II. Background

    To help us carry out our conservation responsibilities for affected species, and in consideration of section 10(a)(1)(A) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), along with Executive Order 13576, “Delivering an Efficient, Effective, and Accountable Government,” and the President's Memorandum for the Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies of January 21, 2009—Transparency and Open Government (74 FR 4685; January 26, 2009), which call on all Federal agencies to promote openness and transparency in Government by disclosing information to the public, we invite public comment on these permit applications before final action is taken.

    III. Permit Applications Endangered Species Applicant: University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC; PRT-93065B

    On August 18, 2016, we published a Federal Register notice inviting the public to comment on an application for a permit to conduct scientific research on biological samples from olive ridley sea turtle (Lepidochelys olivacea), however the species should have been identified as Kemp's ridley sea turtle (Lepidochelys kempii) (81 FR 55224). We are now reopening the comment period to allow the public the opportunity to review this new information. This notification covers activities to be conducted by the applicant over a 1-year period.

    Sandy Thomas, Egg Harbor Township, NJ; PRT-93219B

    The applicant requests a captive-bred wildlife registration under 50 CFR 17.21(g) for the following species to enhance species propagation or survival: Blue-throated macaw (Ara glaucogularis), Golden parakeet (Guarouba guarouba), Red-fronted macaw (Ara rubrogenys), and Citron-crested cockatoo (Cacatua sulphurea citrinocristata). This notification covers activities to be conducted by the applicant over a 5-year period.

    Applicant: Harvard University, Museum of Comparative Zoology, Cambridge, MA; PRT-090287

    The applicant requests renewal of their permit to export and reimport nonliving museum specimens of endangered and threatened species previously accessioned into the applicant's collection for scientific research. This notification covers activities to be conducted by the applicant over a 5-year period.

    Multiple Applicants

    The following applicants each request a permit to import the sport-hunted trophy of one male bontebok (Damaliscus pygargus pygargus) culled from a captive herd maintained under the management program of the Republic of South Africa, for the purpose of enhancement of the survival of the species.

    Applicant: Scott Rider, Charleston, SC; PRT-02924C Applicant: Harrison Swain, Beaumont, TX; PRT-01844C Applicant: Walter Maximuck, Stockton, NJ; PRT-04172C Applicant: Mychal Murray, Houston, TX; PRT-02406C Brenda Tapia, Program Analyst/Data Administrator, Branch of Permits, Division of Management Authority.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22323 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4333-15-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Indian Affairs [167A2100DD.AADD001000.A0E501010.999900] Reinstate Agency Information Collection for the Johnson O'Malley Act Requirements AGENCY:

    Bureau of Indian Affairs, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Reinstate information collection and request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Bureau of Indian Education is seeking comments and will ask the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for approval to reinstate the collection of information, Johnson O'Malley Act Requirements, 25 CFR 273, previously authorized by OMB Control Number 1076-0096.

    DATES:

    Submit comments on or before November 15, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments on the information collection to Ms. Juanita Mendoza, Program Analyst, Bureau of Indian Education, U.S. Department of the Interior, 1849 C Street NW., MS: #4656 MIB, Washington, DC 20240; or email to: [email protected] Please mention that your comments concern the Johnson O'Malley Act Requirements, OMB Control Number 1076-0096.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    To request a copy of the information collection request, any explanatory information, and related material, see the contact information provided in the ADDRESSES section above.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Abstract

    This information collection was authorized for several years under OMB Control Number 1076-0096. In 2005, the information collection was discontinued. However, the Bureau of Indian Education (BIE) would like to reinstate this collection of information for the reasons described below.

    The Johnson O'Malley Act (JOM), 25 U.S.C. 455-457, authorizes the BIE to enter into contracts for the purpose of financially assisting those efforts designed to meet the specialized and unique educational needs of eligible Indian students enrolled in public schools and previously private schools. The JOM programs offered to American Indian and Alaska Native students vary and may include such programs as culture, language, academics, and dropout prevention. These include programs supplemental to the regular school program and school operational support, where such support is necessary to maintain established State educational standards.

    The information allows the BIE to obtain the information necessary to determine applicant eligibility, evaluate applicant education plans, and review annual reports submitted by States, school districts, Indian corporations, and Tribal organizations who apply for and enter into contracts for the JOM Program. For purposes of this information collection, only State, school district, Indian corporations, and Tribal organizations are required to submit an application to determine eligibility to receive JOM Program funds. Federally recognized Tribes who wish to participate in the JOM Program are able to apply for funding under the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act Programs, 25 CFR 900, OMB Control Number 1076-0136.

    The regulations at 25 CFR 273, Johnson O'Malley Act, implement the Act. The information collected is subject to the system of records notice “Native American Student Information System, BIA-22” referenced as 73 FR 40605 dated July 15, 2008. The burden hours for this new collection of information are reflected in the Estimated Total Annual Hour Burden in this notice.

    II. Request for Comments

    The BIE requests your comments on this collection concerning: (a) The necessity of this information collection for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (b) The accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden (hours and cost) of the collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (c) Ways we could enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) Ways we could minimize the burden of the collection of the information on the respondents.

    Please note that an agency may not conduct or sponsor, and an individual need not respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a valid OMB Control Number.

    It is our policy to make all comments available to the public for review at the location listed in the ADDRESSES section. Before including your address, phone number, email address or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment—including your personal identifying information—may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.

    III. Data

    OMB Control Number: 1076-0096.

    Title: Johnson O'Malley Act Requirements, 25 CFR 273.

    Brief Description of Collection: Submission of this information allows a State, school district, Indian Corporation, or Tribal organization to enter into a contract with BIE for JOM program funds to financially assist efforts designed to meet the specialized and unique education needs of eligible Indian students enrolled in public schools and previously private schools.

    Type of Review: Reinstatement.

    Respondents: State, school district, Indian Corporations, and Tribal organizations.

    Number of Respondents: 800 per year.

    Estimated Number of Responses: 800 per year.

    Estimated Time per Response: 5 hours.

    Frequency of Response: Annually.

    Obligation To Respond: A response if required to obtain or maintain a benefit.

    Estimated Total Annual Hour Burden: 4,000 hours.

    Estimated Total Annual Non-Hour Dollar Cost: $0.

    Elizabeth K. Appel, Director, Office of Regulatory Affairs and Collaborative Action—Indian Affairs.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22317 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4337-15-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Land Management [LLORB00000.L17110000.PH0000.LXSSH1060000.16XL1109AF; HAG 16-0221] Notice of Public Meeting for the Steens Mountain Advisory Council AGENCY:

    Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice of public meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Federal Land Policy and Management Act and the Federal Advisory Committee Act of 1972, and the U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management (BLM), the Steens Mountain Advisory Council (SMAC) will meet as indicated below:

    DATES:

    Thursday, September 29, 2016 from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., and Friday, September 30, 2016 from 8:30 a.m. to 2 p.m., at the BLM's Burns District Office, 28910 Hwy 20 W, in Hines, Oregon. Daily sessions may end early if all business items are accomplished ahead of schedule, or go longer if discussions warrant more time.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Tara Thissell, Public Affairs Specialist, BLM Burns District Office, 28910 Highway 20 West, Hines, Oregon 97738, (541) 573-4519, or email [email protected]. Persons who use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1(800) 877-8339 to contact the above individual during normal business hours. The FIRS is available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, to leave a message or question with the above individual. You will receive a reply during normal business hours.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The SMAC was initiated August 14, 2001, pursuant to the Steens Mountain Cooperative Management and Protection Act of 2000 (Pub. L. 106-399). The SMAC provides representative counsel and advice to the BLM regarding new and unique approaches to management of the land within the bounds of the Steens Mountain Cooperative Management and Protection Area, recommends cooperative programs and incentives for landscape management that meet human needs, and advises the BLM on maintenance and improvement of the ecological and economic integrity of the area. Agenda items for the September 29 and 30 session include: Discussions regarding the Steens Mountain No Livestock Grazing Area Fencing and Inholder Access Envionmental Assessments; the Steens Mountain Running Camp Special Recreation Use Permit; and public access in the Pike Creek Canyon Area; updates from the Andrews/Steens Resource Area Field Manager and the Recreation, Wildfire and Wild Horse and Burro Program; and regular business items such as approving the previous meeting's minutes, member round-table, and planning the next meeting's agenda. Any other matters that may reasonably come before the SMAC may also be addressed. Public comment periods are available each day. Unless otherwise approved by the SMAC Chair, the public comment period will last no longer than 30 minutes, and each speaker may address the SMAC for a maximum of five minutes. The public is welcome to attend all sessions.

    Rhonda Karges, Andrews/Steens Resource Area Field Manager.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22292 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-33-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Land Management [LLOR957000-L14400000-BJ0000-16XL1109AF; HAG 16-0222] Filing of Plats of Survey: Oregon/Washington AGENCY:

    Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The plats of survey of the following described lands are scheduled to be officially filed in the Bureau of Land Management, Oregon State Office, Portland, Oregon, 30 days from the date of this publication.

    Willamette Meridian Oregon T. 34 S., R. 2 E., accepted August 23, 2016 Washington T. 20 N., R. 4 E., accepted August 23, 2016 T. 21 N., R. 3 W., accepted August 23, 2016 T. 15 N., R. 26 E., accepted September 2, 2016
    ADDRESSES:

    A copy of the plats may be obtained from the Public Room at the Bureau of Land Management, Oregon State Office, 1220 SW 3rd Avenue, Portland, Oregon 97204, upon required payment.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Kyle Hensley, (503) 808-6124, Branch of Geographic Sciences, Bureau of Land Management, 1220 SW 3rd Avenue, Portland, Oregon 97204. Persons who use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8339 to contact the above individual during normal business hours. The FIRS is available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, to leave a message or question with the above individual. You will receive a reply during normal business hours.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    A person or party who wishes to protest against this survey must file a written notice with the Oregon State Director, Bureau of Land Management, stating that they wish to protest. A statement of reasons for a protest may be filed with the notice of protest and must be filed with the Oregon State Director within thirty days after the protest is filed. If a protest against the survey is received prior to the date of official filing, the filing will be stayed pending consideration of the protest. A plat will not be officially filed until the day after all protests have been dismissed or otherwise resolved. Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personally identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment—including your personally identifying information—may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold your personally identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.

    Mary J.M. Hartel, Chief Cadastral Surveyor of Oregon/Washington.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22295 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-33-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Land Management [LLES964000.L54100000.FR0000] Notice of Realty Action: Application for Conveyance of Federally Owned Mineral Interests in Escambia County, FL AGENCY:

    Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice of realty action.

    SUMMARY:

    The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) is processing an application under the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of October 21, 1976 (FLPMA) to convey the undivided mineral interest owned by the United States in 70 acres located in Escambia County, Florida, to the surface owner, Airway Development, LLC. Publication of this notice temporarily segregates the federally owned mineral interests in the land covered by the application from all forms of appropriation under the public land laws, including the mining laws, for up to 2 years while the BLM processes the application.

    DATES:

    Interested persons may submit written comments to the BLM at the address listed below. Comments must be received no later than October 31, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Bureau of Land Management, Eastern States State Office, 20 M Street SE., Suite 950, Washington, DC 20003. Detailed information concerning this action is available for review at this address.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Frankie Morgan, Land Law Examiner, by telephone at 202-912-7738 or by email at [email protected] Persons who use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at1-800-877-8339 to contact the above individuals during normal business hours. The FIRS is available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, to leave a message or question for the above individuals. You will receive a reply during normal business hours.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Airway Development, LLC, the surface owner, has applied to purchase federally owned mineral interests located in Escambia County, Florida, described as follows:

    The South 1155′ of the Southwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter and the South 1155′ of the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter, all lying in Section 12, Township 1 South, Range 30 West, Escambia County, Florida.

    The area described contains 70.00 acres.

    Under certain conditions, Section 209(b) of FLPMA authorizes conveyance of the federally owned mineral interests in land to the current or prospective surface owner. As required under Section 209(3)(i) of FLPMA, the applicant deposited a sum of money determined sufficient to cover administrative costs including, but not limited to, the cost for the Mineral Potential Report. The objective of Section 209 is to allow consolidation of the surface and mineral interests when either one of the following conditions exist: (1) There are no known mineral values in the land; or (2) where continued Federal ownership of the mineral interests interferes with or precludes appropriate non-mineral development and such development is a more beneficial use of the land than mineral development. Airway Development, LLC, filed an application for the conveyance of federally owned mineral interests in the above-described tract of land. Subject to valid existing rights, on September 16, 2016 the federally owned mineral interests in the lands described above are hereby segregated from all forms of appropriation under the public land laws, including the mining laws, while the application is being processed to determine if either one of the two specified conditions exists and, if so, to otherwise comply with the procedural requirements of 43 CFR part 2720. The segregation shall terminate upon: (1) Issuance of a patent or other document of conveyance as to such mineral interests; (2) final rejection of the application; or (3) on September 17, 2018, whichever occurs first. Please submit all comments in writing to the individuals at the address listed above.

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

    Authority:

    43 CFR 2720.1-1(b).

    Karen Mouritsen, State Director.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22415 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-GJ-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR National Park Service [NPS-WASO-NRNHL-21643; PPWOCRADP2, PCU00RP14.R50000] National Historic Landmarks Committee of the National Park System Advisory Board Meeting AGENCY:

    National Park Service, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice of meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given in accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. Appendix 1-16), and Part 65 of title 36 of the Code of Federal Regulations, that a meeting of the National Historic Landmarks Committee of the National Park System Advisory Board will be held beginning at 10:00 a.m. on October 18, 2016, at the Charles Sumner School Museum and Archives. The meeting will continue beginning at 9:30 a.m. on October 19, 2016.

    DATES:

    The meeting will be held on Tuesday, October 18, 2016, from 10:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.; and Wednesday, October 19, 2016, from 9:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. (EASTERN).

    LOCATION:

    The Charles Sumner School Museum and Archives, 3rd Floor, The Richard L. Hurlbut Memorial Hall, 1201 17th Street NW., Washington, DC 20036.

    Agenda: The National Park System Advisory Board and its National Historic Landmarks Committee may consider the following nominations:

    ALASKA Matanuska Colony Historic District, Palmer Walrus Island Archeological District, Dillingham Census Area ARIZONA Painted Desert Community Complex, Petrified Forest National Park, Apache County CALIFORNIA Our Lady of Guadalupe Mission Chapel, San Jose DELAWARE George Read II House, New Castle INDIANA West Union Bridge, Parke County NEBRASKA Omaha Union Station, Omaha NEW YORK Davis-Ferris Organ, Village of Round Lake Franklin D. Roosevelt Library, Hyde Park NORTH CAROLINA Pauli Murray Family Home, Durham NORTH DAKOTA Biesterfeldt Site, Ransom County OHIO Eldean Bridge, Miami County May 4, 1970, Kent State Shootings Site, Kent PENNSYLVANIA W. A. Young and Sons Foundry And Machine Shop, Rices Landing

    Proposed Amendments to Existing Designations:

    LOUISIANA Maison Olivier, St. Martinville (name change and updated documentation) NEW YORK Hamilton Grange, New York (updated documentation) VIRGINIA Ball's Bluff Battlefield Historic District, Leesburg (updated documentation and boundary change) Virginia State Capitol, Richmond (name change and updated documentation)
    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Patricia Henry, Historian, National Historic Landmarks Program, National Park Service, 1849 C Street NW., Washington, DC 20240, telephone (202) 354-2216, or email: [email protected].

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The purpose of the meeting of the National Historic Landmarks Committee of the National Park System Advisory Board is to evaluate nominations of historic properties in order to advise the National Park System Advisory Board of the qualifications of each property being proposed for National Historic Landmark designation, and to make recommendations regarding the possible designation of those properties as National Historic Landmarks to the National Park System Advisory Board at their meeting on November 17-18, 2016, in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. The Committee also makes recommendations to the National Park System Advisory Board regarding amendments to existing designations and proposals for withdrawal of designation. The members of the National Historic Landmarks Committee are:

    Dr. Stephen Pitti, Chair Dr. James M. Allan Dr. Cary Carson Dr. Yong Chen Mr. Douglas Harris Ms. Mary Hopkins Mr. Luis Hoyos, AIA Dr. Sarah A. Leavitt Dr. Barbara J. Mills Dr. Michael E. Stevens Dr. Amber Wiley Dr. David Young

    The meeting will be open to the public. Pursuant to 36 CFR part 65, any member of the public may file, for consideration by the National Historic Landmarks Committee of the National Park System Advisory Board, written comments concerning the National Historic Landmarks nominations, amendments to existing designations, or proposals for withdrawal of designation.

    Comments should be submitted to J. Paul Loether, Chief, National Historic Landmarks Program and National Register of Historic Places, National Park Service, 1849 C Street NW., Washington, DC 20240, email: Paul_[email protected]

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

    Alma Ripps, Chief, Office of Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22351 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-EE-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR National Park Service [NPS-WASO-NAGPRA-21817; PPWOCRADN0-PCU00RP14.R50000] Notice of Inventory Completion: Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission, Olympia, WA AGENCY:

    National Park Service, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission [hereafter State Parks], has completed an inventory of human remains and associated funerary objects, in consultation with the appropriate Indian tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations, and has determined that there is a cultural affiliation between the human remains and associated funerary objects and present-day Indian tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations. Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains and associated funerary objects should submit a written request to the State Parks. If no additional requestors come forward, transfer of control of the human remains and associated funerary objects to the lineal descendants, Indian tribes, or Native Hawaiian organizations stated in this notice may proceed.

    DATES:

    Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains and associated funerary objects should submit a written request with information in support of the request to the State Parks at the address in this notice by October 17, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Alicia Woods, Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission, P.O. Box 42650, Olympia, WA 98504-2650, telephone (360) 902-0939, email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Notice is here given in accordance with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), 25 U.S.C. 3003, of the completion of an inventory of human remains and associated funerary objects under the control of the State Parks. The human remains and associated funerary objects were removed from Cama Beach State Park, Island County, WA.

    This notice is published as part of the National Park Service's administrative responsibilities under NAGPRA, 25 U.S.C. 3003(d)(3). The determinations in this notice are the sole responsibility of the museum, institution, or Federal agency that has control of the Native American human remains. The National Park Service is not responsible for the determinations in this notice.

    Consultation

    A detailed assessment of the human remains was made by the State Parks professional staff in consultation with representatives of the Stillaguamish Tribe of Indians of Washington (previously listed as the Stillaguamish Tribe of Washington); Swinomish Indian Tribal Community (previously listed as the Swinomish Indians of the Swinomish Reservation of Washington); Tulalip Tribes of Washington (previously listed as the Tulalip Tribes of the Tulalip Reservation of Washington); and Upper Skagit Indian Tribe.

    History and Description of the Remains

    Between 2004 and 2006, human remains representing, at minimum, three individuals were removed from the Cama Beach Shell Midden Site on Camano Island in Island County, WA. No known individuals were identified. The 483 associated funerary objects are 170 lots of unmodified shell, 1 perforated shell, 124 lots of unmodified bone, 8 modified bone objects, 73 lots of fire modified rock, 13 stone tools, 1 modified wood object, 3 lots of ochre, 42 lots of charcoal, 30 lots of bulk material, 16 historic objects, and 2 lots of botanical material.

    Between 2002 and 2006, State Parks contracted Cascadia Archaeology to survey and subsequently perform excavation and data recovery of site 45-IS-2 for the purposes of upgrading sewer and utility lines. Historically the site is a 1930s-1980s fishing and vacation resort with cabins for visitors and housing for owners and management. During excavation and data recovery it was determined the site's prehistoric use was as a seasonal Native American fishing site. During the survey and excavation phases of the project four burials were discovered. The burials were left in-situ and avoided per the request of tribal representatives in consultation with State Parks' staff on-site. The human remains and funerary objects listed in this notice were identified as human in the lab during the analysis phase between 2005 and 2008.

    Camano Island is located in Puget Sound between Whidbey Island and mainland Washington State; the Cama Beach Shell Midden site is on the western shores of the island. Saratoga Passage is a waterway between the two islands. Along Saratoga Passage, the shores of both islands are rich in prehistoric Native American seasonal resources sites.

    Historical and anthropological sources indicate that the Kikiallus, Swinomish, Lower Skagit and Stillaguamish peoples occupied, and had village sites in, the Penn Cove area of Whidbey Island and on the northwestern shore of Camano Island. The Snohomish people (a predecessor group to, and represented by, the present-day Tulalip Tribes of Washington) had a permanent village at the southernmost end of the island.

    Through kinship ties and alliances, and by invitation, the Kikiallus, Upper Skagit, Lower Skagit, Snohomish, Stillaguamish, and Swinomish peoples utilized the waterways, resource grounds, and the beaches of Camano and Whidbey Islands. These peoples shared the same language, and maintained similar economic traditions, social and ceremonial customs, as well as trade and defense alliances.

    State Parks staff has determined these human remains and associated funerary objects to be culturally affiliated with the Stillaguamish Tribe of Indians of Washington (previously listed as the Stillaguamish Tribe of Washington); the Swinomish Indian Tribal Community (previously listed as the Swinomish Indians of the Swinomish Reservation of Washington); the Tulalip Tribes of Washington (previously listed as the Tulalip Tribes of the Tulalip Reservation of Washington); and the Upper Skagit Indian Tribe.

    Determinations Made by the Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission

    Officials of the Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission have determined that:

    • Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(9), the human remains described in this notice represent the physical remains of, at minimum, three individuals of Native American ancestry.

    • Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(3)(A), the 483 objects described in this notice are reasonably believed to have been placed with or near individual human remains at the time of death or later as part of the death rite or ceremony.

    • Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(2), there is a relationship of shared group identity that can be reasonably traced between the Native American human remains and the Stillaguamish Tribe of Indians of Washington (previously listed as the Stillaguamish Tribe of Washington); Swinomish Indian Tribal Community (previously listed as the Swinomish Indians of the Swinomish Reservation of Washington); Tulalip Tribes of Washington (previously listed as the Tulalip Tribes of the Tulalip Reservation of Washington); and Upper Skagit Indian Tribe, Washington.

    Additional Requestors and Disposition

    Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains and associated funerary objects should submit a written request with information in support of the request to Alicia Woods, Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission, P.O. Box 42650, Olympia, WA 98504-2650, telephone (360) 902-0939, email [email protected], by October 17, 2016. After that date, if no additional requestors have come forward, transfer of control of the human remains and associated funerary objects to the Stillaguamish Tribe of Indians of Washington (previously listed as the Stillaguamish Tribe of Washington); the Swinomish Indian Tribal Community (previously listed as the Swinomish Indians of the Swinomish Reservation of Washington); the Tulalip Tribes of Washington (previously listed as the Tulalip Tribes of the Tulalip Reservation of Washington); and the Upper Skagit Indian Tribe may proceed.

    The State Parks is responsible for notifying the Stillaguamish Tribe of Indians of Washington (previously listed as the Stillaguamish Tribe of Washington); the Swinomish Indian Tribal Community (previously listed as the Swinomish Indians of the Swinomish Reservation of Washington); the Tulalip Tribes of Washington (previously listed as the Tulalip Tribes of the Tulalip Reservation of Washington); and the Upper Skagit Indian Tribe that this notice has been published.

    Dated: August 23, 2016. Melanie O'Brien, Manager, National NAGPRA Program.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22313 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4312-50-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR National Park Service [NPS-WASO-NAGPRA-21820; PPWOCRADN0-PCU00RP14.R50000] Notice of Inventory Completion: Tennessee Valley Authority, Knoxville, TN AGENCY:

    National Park Service, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) has completed an inventory of human remains and associated funerary objects in consultation with the appropriate federally recognized Indian tribes, and has determined that a cultural affiliation between the human remains and associated funerary objects and any present-day federally recognized Indian tribes cannot be reasonably traced. Representatives of any federally recognized Indian tribe not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains and associated funerary objects should submit a written request to TVA. If no additional requestors come forward, transfer of control of the human remains and associated funerary objects to the federally recognized Indian tribe stated in this notice may proceed.

    DATES:

    Representatives of any federally recognized Indian tribe not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains and associated funerary objects should submit a written request with information in support of the request to TVA at the address in this notice by October 17, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Dr. Thomas O. Maher, TVA, 400 West Summit Hill Drive, WT11D, Knoxville TN 37902-1401, telephone (865) 632-7458, email [email protected].

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Notice is here given in accordance with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), 25 U.S.C. 3003, of the completion of an inventory of human remains and associated funerary objects under the control of TVA. The human remains and associated funerary objects were removed from archeological sites in Jackson and Marshall Counties, AL.

    This notice is published as part of the National Park Service's administrative responsibilities under NAGPRA, 25 U.S.C. 3003(d)(3) and 43 CFR 10.11(d). The determinations in this notice are the sole responsibility of the museum, institution, or Federal agency that has control of the Native American human remains and associated funerary objects. The National Park Service is not responsible for the determinations in this notice.

    Consultation

    A detailed assessment of the human remains and associated funerary objects was made by TVA professional staff in consultation with the University of Alabama and representatives of the Alabama-Coushatta Tribe of Texas (previously listed as the Alabama-Coushatta Tribes of Texas); Alabama-Quassarte Tribal Town; Cherokee Nation; Coushatta Tribe of Louisiana; Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians; Eastern Shawnee Tribe of Oklahoma; Poarch Band of Creeks (previously listed as the Poarch Band of Creek Indians of Alabama); The Chickasaw Nation; The Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma; The Muscogee (Creek) Nation; Thlopthlocco Tribal Town; and the United Keetoowah Band of Cherokee Indians in Oklahoma.

    History and Description of the Remains

    The sites listed in this notice were excavated as part of TVA's Guntersville Reservoir project by the Alabama Museum of Natural History (AMNH) at the University of Alabama, using labor and funds provided by the Works Progress Administration. Details regarding these excavations and sites may be found in a report, An Archaeological Survey of Guntersville Basin on the Tennessee River in Northern Alabama, by William S. Webb and Charles G. Wilder. The human remains and associated funerary objects listed in this notice have been in the physical custody of the AMNH at the University of Alabama since excavation but are under the control of TVA.

    From January to April 1939, human remains representing, at minimum, 30 individuals were removed from the Crow Creek Island site, 1JA155, in Jackson County, AL. Excavations commenced after TVA acquired this land on June 30, 1938. Excavations revealed multiple occupations including Middle Woodland (Copena phase), Late Woodland (Flint River phase), and Mississippian (Crow Creek phase). The human remains include adults, juveniles, and infants of both sexes. No known individuals were identified. The 50 associated funerary objects include 48 shell beads, 1 shell ear plug, and 1 ground stone steatite bowl.

    From October 1938 to January 1939, human remains representing, at minimum, 44 individuals were removed from the Sublet Ferry site, 1JA102, three miles southeast of Hollywood in Jackson County, AL. Excavation commenced after TVA acquired a permit for archeological exploration on June 11, 1938. This land was subsequently purchased on October 17, 1938. Excavations revealed this to be a shell midden overlying a dark midden soil. Both Woodland and Mississippian occupations were identified. The human remains include adults, juveniles, and children of both sexes. No known individuals were identified. The 27 associated funerary objects include 24 shell barrel beads, 1 Hamilton projectile point, 1 bone pin, and 1 bone awl.

    From June 11 to 23, 1938, human remains representing, at minimum, six individuals were removed from the Langston site, 1JA9, in Jackson County, AL. Excavation commenced after TVA had purchased the land encompassing it on December 30, 1936. The site, eight miles southeast of Scottsboro, AL, was composed of a mound (designated 1JA9a) and a village. These brief excavations focused on the low mound. Artifacts from the mound and surrounding village indicate both a Woodland and Mississippian occupation. The human remains include adults, juveniles, and an infant of indeterminate sex. No known individuals were identified. The 22 associated funerary objects are fragments of a copper ornament associated with one of these individuals.

    From November 21 to 29, 1938, human remains representing, at minimum, two individuals were removed from site 1MS106, 11 miles northeast of the city of Guntersville in Marshall County, AL. Excavation commenced after TVA purchased the land on April 21, 1937. Little is known about this site except a one paragraph reference to the excavation in a progress report which indicates it was a rapid exploration that recovered three burials. Further, ceramics from this site indicate occupations during both the Woodland and Mississippian periods. The culturally unidentifiable human remains are of two adult males. No known individuals were identified. No associated funerary objects are present.

    From December 10, 1936, to February 2, 1937, human remains representing, at minimum, four individuals were removed from the Cartright site, 1MS109, 11 miles northeast of the city of Guntersville in Marshall County, AL. Excavation commenced shortly before TVA purchased the land on April 21, 1937. Evidence at the surface indicated that this site was 50 x 60 feet with four underlying strata. Ceramics from this site indicate occupations during both the Woodland and Mississippian periods. The human remains are of one child of indeterminate sex and three adults, two of which are female. No known individuals were identified. No associated funerary objects are present.

    From October 25 to December 7, 1938, human remains representing, at minimum, four individuals were removed from the Stephenson site, 1MS111, 11 miles northeast of the city of Guntersville in Marshall County, AL. Excavation commenced after TVA purchased the land on April 21, 1937. Limited excavation in the village area revealed three underlying strata. Steatite stone vessel sherds in the lowest strata indicate a Late Archaic occupation. Further, ceramics from the upper strata of this site indicate occupations during both the Late Woodland and Mississippian periods. The human remains are of one child of indeterminate sex and three adults, two of which are female. No known individuals were identified. No associated funerary objects are present.

    From June 1938 to May 1939, human remains representing, at minimum, 261 individuals were removed from the Columbus City Landing site, 1MS91, 9 miles northeast of the city of Guntersville in Marshall County, AL. Excavation commenced after TVA purchased the land on March 8, 1937. There were excavations in both the village (Unit I) and adjacent mounds (Unit II). Artifacts recovered from this excavation revealed that the primary occupations were during the Middle Woodland (A.D. 100-500), Mississippian (A.D. 1200-1500), and historic periods. The human remains include adults, juveniles, children, and infants of both sexes. No known individuals were identified. The 214 associated funerary objects include 7 glass beads; 1 biface; 4 bone bodkins; 3 bone pins; 2 copper bangles; 1 Hilabee Schist celt; 15 pieces of clay (unfired); 4 clay foot rests; 2 clay head rests; 1 copper axe head; 2 copper coil earbobs; 7 copper ear spools; 2 copper reel gorgets; 51 galena nodules; 1 ground hematite; 62 Long Branch Fabric Marked sherds; 1 Mississippi Plain sherd disk fragment; 1 Mud Creek projectile point or knife; 24 Mulberry Creek Plain sherds; 2 projectile points or knives; 1 red ochre; 6 rolled copper tubular beads; 2 shell beads; 2 shell ear bobs; 1 shell gorget; 3 tempered clay samples; 1 wood fragment; 1 shell fragment; 2 unmodified hematite fragments; 1 yellow clay sample and 1 yellow pigment.

    TVA determined that cultural affiliation between human remains and associated funerary objects and any present day federally recognized tribes cannot be reasonably traced. Accordingly, these items are culturally unidentifiable and TVA intends to transfer control of these items pursuant to 43 CFR 10.11(c).

    At the time of the excavation and removal of these human remains and associated funerary objects, the land from which the remains and objects were removed was not the tribal land of any federally recognized Indian tribe. On March 10, 2016, TVA consulted with all federally recognized Indian tribes who are recognized as aboriginal to the area from which these Native American human remains and associated funerary objects were removed. These tribes are the Cherokee Nation, Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians, and United Keetoowah Band of Cherokee Indians in Oklahoma. None of these Indian tribes agreed to accept control of the human remains and associated funerary objects. After further consultation with the parties that were a part of this overall consultation, TVA has decided to transfer control of the human remains and associated funerary objects to the Alabama-Coushatta Tribe of Texas, the Alabama-Quassarte Tribal Town, the Coushatta Tribe of Louisiana, and the Muscogee (Creek) Nation.

    Determinations Made by the Tennessee Valley Authority

    Officials of TVA have determined that:

    • Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(9), the human remains described in this notice represent the physical remains of 351 individuals of Native American ancestry.

    • Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(3)(A), the 313 objects described in this notice are reasonably believed to have been placed with or near individual human remains at the time of death or later as part of the death rite or ceremony.

    • Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(2), a relationship of shared group identity cannot be reasonably traced between the Native American human remains and associated funerary objects and any present-day Indian tribe.

    • Pursuant to 43 CFR 10.11(c)(1)(i), at the time of excavation of the human remains and associated funerary objects, the land from which the cultural items were removed was not the tribal land of any federally recognized Indian tribe.

    • Pursuant to 43 CFR 10.11(c)(1)(ii), the following tribes are aboriginal to the area from which the cultural items were excavated: Cherokee Nation, Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians, and the United Keetoowah Band of Cherokee Indians in Oklahoma. None of these tribes agreed to accept control of the human remains or associated funerary objects.

    • Pursuant to 43 CFR 10.11(c)(2)(i), TVA has decided to transfer control of the culturally unidentifiable human remains to the Alabama-Coushatta Tribe of Texas, the Alabama-Quassarte Tribal Town, the Coushatta Tribe of Louisiana, and the Muscogee (Creek) Nation.

    • Pursuant to 43 CFR 10.11(c)(4), TVA has decided to transfer control of the culturally unidentifiable associated funerary objects to the Alabama-Coushatta Tribe of Texas, the Alabama-Quassarte Tribal Town, the Coushatta Tribe of Louisiana, and the Muscogee (Creek) Nation.

    Additional Requestors and Disposition

    Representatives of any federally recognized Indian tribe not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains and associated funerary objects should submit a written request with information in support of the request to Dr. Thomas O. Maher, TVA, 400 West Summit Hill Drive, WT11D, Knoxville, TN 37902-1401, telephone (865) 632-7458, email [email protected], by October 17, 2016. After that date, if no additional requestors have come forward, transfer of control of the human remains and associated funerary objects to the Alabama-Coushatta Tribe of Texas, the Alabama-Quassarte Tribal Town, the Coushatta Tribe of Louisiana, and the Muscogee (Creek) Nation may proceed.

    TVA is responsible for notifying the Alabama-Coushatta Tribe of Texas (previously listed as the Alabama-Coushatta Tribes of Texas); Alabama-Quassarte Tribal Town; Cherokee Nation; Coushatta Tribe of Louisiana; Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians; Eastern Shawnee Tribe of Oklahoma; Poarch Band of Creeks (previously listed as the Poarch Band of Creek Indians of Alabama); The Chickasaw Nation; The Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma; The Muscogee (Creek) Nation; Thlopthlocco Tribal Town; and the United Keetoowah Band of Cherokee Indians in Oklahoma that this notice has been published.

    Dated: August 23, 2016. Melanie O'Brien, Manager, National NAGPRA Program.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22315 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4312-50-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR National Park Service [NPS-WASO-NAGPRA-21818; PPWOCRADN0-PCU00RP14.R50000] Notice of Intent To Repatriate Cultural Items: Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission, Olympia, WA AGENCY:

    National Park Service, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission (hereafter State Parks), in consultation with the appropriate Indian tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations, has determined that the cultural items listed in this notice meet the definition of sacred objects. Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to claim these cultural items should submit a written request to the State Parks. If no additional claimants come forward, transfer of control of the cultural items to the lineal descendants, Indian tribes, or Native Hawaiian organizations stated in this notice may proceed.

    DATES:

    Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to claim these cultural items should submit a written request with information in support of the claim to the State Parks at the address in this notice by October 17, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Alicia Woods, Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission, P.O. Box 42650, Olympia, WA 98504-2650, telephone (360) 902-0939, email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Notice is here given in accordance with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), 25 U.S.C. 3005, of the intent to repatriate cultural items under the control of the State Parks that meet the definition of sacred objects under 25 U.S.C. 3001.

    This notice is published as part of the National Park Service's administrative responsibilities under NAGPRA, 25 U.S.C. 3003(d)(3). The determinations in this notice are the sole responsibility of the museum, institution, or Federal agency that has control of the Native American cultural items. The National Park Service is not responsible for the determinations in this notice.

    History and Description of the Cultural Items

    Between 2004 and 2006, six sacred objects were removed from the Cama Beach Shell Midden (45-IS-2) in Island County, WA. State Parks contracted Cascadia Archaeology to perform excavation and data recovery of site 45-IS-2 for the purposes of upgrading sewer and utility lines. Historically the site is a 1930s-1980s fishing and vacation resort, with cabins for visitors and housing for owners and management, most of which still stand. During excavation and data recovery it was determined the site's prehistoric use was as a seasonal Native American fishing site. Both prehistoric and historic material was recovered from the site. Among the material were 3 complete and 3 fragmentary, culturally modified (perforated) Weathervane scallop shells.

    According to research, the scallop shells were incorporated into a rattle that would have been one of the cleansing devices used by a dancer in a ceremony of ritual purification during times of change or crisis. The rattles were passed down through families. The rattles are also known to have been used in cleansing ceremonies by shamans. Once identified, the objects remained in Cascadia Archaeology's custody until the overall collection of site material was transferred to the State Parks in 2009.

    Camano Island is located in Puget Sound between Whidbey Island and mainland Washington State; the Cama Beach Shell Midden site is on the western shores of the island. Saratoga Passage is a waterway between the two islands. Along Saratoga Passage, the shores of both islands are rich in prehistoric Native American seasonal resources sites.

    Historical and anthropological sources indicate that the Kikiallus, Swinomish, Lower Skagit and Stillaguamish peoples occupied and had village sites in the Penn Cove area of Whidbey Island and on the northwestern shore of Camano Island. The Snohomish people (a predecessor group to, and represented by, the Tulalip Tribes of Washington) had a permanent village at the southernmost end of the island.

    Through kinship ties and alliances and by invitation the Kikiallus, Upper Skagit, Lower Skagit, Snohomish, Stillaguamish, Snohomish, and Swinomish peoples utilized the waterways, resource grounds, and the beaches of Camano and Whidbey Islands. These peoples shared the same language, and maintained similar economic traditions, social and ceremonial customs, as well as trade and defense alliances.

    Based on historical and anthropological sources, State Parks staff has determined these sacred objects are culturally affiliated with the Stillaguamish Tribe of Indians of Washington (previously listed as the Stillaguamish Tribe of Washington); the Swinomish Indian Tribal Community (previously listed as the Swinomish Indians of the Swinomish Reservation of Washington); the Tulalip Tribes of Washington (previously listed as the Tulalip Tribes of the Tulalip Reservation, Washington); and the Upper Skagit Indian Tribe.

    Determinations Made by the Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission

    Officials of the State Parks have determined that:

    • Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(3)(C), the 6 cultural items described above are specific ceremonial objects needed by traditional Native American religious leaders for the practice of traditional Native American religions by their present-day adherents.

    • Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(2), there is a relationship of shared group identity that can be reasonably traced between the sacred objects and the Stillaguamish Tribe of Indians of Washington (previously listed as the Stillaguamish Tribe of Washington); the Swinomish Indian Tribal Community (previously listed as the Swinomish Indians of the Swinomish Reservation of Washington); the Tulalip Tribes of Washington (previously listed as the Tulalip Tribes of the Tulalip Reservation, Washington); and the Upper Skagit Indian Tribe.

    Additional Requestors and Disposition

    Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to claim these cultural items should submit a written request with information in support of the claim to Alicia Woods, Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission, PO Box 42650, Olympia, WA 98504-2650, telephone (360) 902-0939, email [email protected], by October 17, 2016. After that date, if no additional claimants have come forward, transfer of control of the sacred objects to the Stillaguamish Tribe of Indians of Washington (previously listed as the Stillaguamish Tribe of Washington); the Swinomish Indian Tribal Community (previously listed as the Swinomish Indians of the Swinomish Reservation of Washington); the Tulalip Tribes of Washington (previously listed as the Tulalip Tribes of the Tulalip Reservation, Washington); and the Upper Skagit Indian Tribe, may proceed.

    The State Parks is responsible for notifying the Stillaguamish Tribe of Indians of Washington (previously listed as the Stillaguamish Tribe of Washington); the Swinomish Indian Tribal Community (previously listed as the Swinomish Indians of the Swinomish Reservation of Washington); the Tulalip Tribes of Washington (previously listed as the Tulalip Tribes of the Tulalip Reservation, Washington); and the Upper Skagit Indian Tribe, that this notice has been published.

    Dated: August 23, 2016. Melanie O'Brien, Manager, National NAGPRA Program.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22314 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4312-50-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR National Park Service [NPS-WASO-D-COS-POL-21889; PPWODIREP0; PPMPSPD1Y.YM0000] Notice of November 17-18, 2016, Meeting of the National Park System Advisory Board AGENCY:

    National Park Service, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Meeting notice.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given in accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. Appendix 1-16, and part 62 of title 36 of the Code of Federal Regulations that the National Park System Advisory Board will meet November 17-18, 2016, in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. The agenda will include the review of proposed actions regarding the National Historic Landmarks Program. Interested parties are encouraged to submit written comments and recommendations that will be presented to the Board. Interested parties also may attend the board meeting and upon request may address the Board concerning an area's national significance.

    DATES:

    (a) Written comments regarding any proposed National Historic Landmarks matter listed in this notice will be accepted by the National Park Service until November 15, 2016. (b) The Board will meet on November 17-18, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    The meeting will be held in The Liberty View meeting room on the second floor of the Independence Visitor Center, 1 N. Independence Mall W., Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19106, telephone (215) 965-2300.

    Agenda: On the morning of November 17, the Board will convene its business meeting at 8:15 a.m., Eastern Standard Time, and adjourn for the day at 11:30 a.m. On November 18, the Board will reconvene at 8:00 a.m., and adjourn at 5:00 p.m. During the course of the two days, the Board may be addressed by National Park Service Director Jonathan Jarvis and briefed by other NPS officials regarding education, philanthropy, NPS urban initiatives, science, and the NPS Centennial; deliberate and make recommendations concerning National Historic Landmarks Program proposals; and receive status briefings on matters pending before committees of the Board.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    (a) For information concerning the National Park System Advisory Board or to request to address the Board, contact Shirley Sears, Office of Policy, National Park Service, MC 0004-Policy, 1849 C Street NW., Washington, DC 20240, telephone (202) 354-3955, email [email protected] (b) To submit a written statement specific to, or request information about, any National Historic Landmarks matter listed below, or for information about the National Historic Landmarks Program or National Historic Landmarks designation process and the effects of designation, contact J. Paul Loether, Chief, National Register of Historic Places and National Historic Landmarks Program, National Park Service, 1849 C Street NW. (2280), Washington, DC 20240, email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Matters concerning the National Historic Landmarks Program will be considered by the Board as follows:

    National Historic Landmarks (NHL) Program

    NHL Program matters will be considered at the morning session of the business meeting on November 18, during which the Board may consider the following:

    Nominations for New NHL Designations Alaska • Walrus Islands Archeological District, Dillingham Census Area Arizona • Painted Desert Community Complex, Petrified Forest National Park, Apache County California • Chicano Park, San Diego • Neutra Studio and Residences (VDL Research House), Los Angeles • Our Lady of Guadalupe Mission Chapel, San Jose Delaware • George Read II House, New Castle Indiana • West Union Bridge, Parke County Iowa • Kimball Village Site, Plymouth County Kansas • Wyandotte National Burying Ground (Eliza Burton Conley Burial Site), Kansas City Maryland • Shifferstadt, Frederick Mississippi • Medgar and Myrlie Evers House, Jackson Nebraska • Omaha Union Station, Omaha New York • Davis-Ferris Organ, Village of Round Lake • Franklin D. Roosevelt Library, Hyde Park • New York State Barge Canal Historic District Albany County • City of Cohoes • Colonie • Cayuga County • Aurelius • Brutus • Cato • Conquest • Mentz • Montezuma Erie County • City of Tonawanda • Amherst • Tonawanda Herkimer County • City of Little Falls • Danube • Frankfort • German Flatts • Herkimer • Little Falls • Manheim • Ohio • Russia • Schuyler • Village of Frankfort • Village of Herkimer • Village of Ilion • Village of Mohawk Madison County • Lenox • Sullivan Monroe County • City of Rochester • Brighton • Chili • Clarkson • Trenton • Verona • Vienna • Western • Village of Sylvan Beach Onondaga County • City of Syracuse • Cicero • Clay • Elbridge • Geddes • Lysander • Salina • Van Buren • Village of Baldwinsville • Village of Liverpool Orleans County • Albion • Gaines • Murray • Ridgeway • Shelby • Village of Albion • Village of Holley • Village of Medina Oswego County • City of Fulton • City of Oswego • Constantia • Granby • Hastings • Minetto • Schroeppel • Scriba • Volney • West Monroe • Village of Cleveland • Village of Phoenix Rensselaer County • City of Troy • Schaghticoke Saratoga County • City of Mechanicville • Clifton Park • Halfmoon • Moreau • Northumberland • Saratoga • Stillwater • Waterford • Village of Schuylerville • Village of Stillwater • Village of Waterford Schenectady County • City of Schenectady • Glenville • Niskayuna • Rotterdam • Village of Scotia Seneca County • Seneca Falls • Tyre • Waterloo • Village of Waterloo Washington County • Easton • Fort Ann • Fort Edward • Greenwich • Hartford • Kingsbury • Whitehall • Village of Fort Ann • Village of Fort Edward • Village of Whitehall Wayne County • Arcadia • Galen • Lyons • Macedon • Palmyra • Savannah • Village of Clyde • Village of Lyons • Village of Macedon • Village of Newark • Village of Palmyra • Schomburg Center for Research in Black Culture, New York North Carolina • Pauli Murray Family Home, Durham North Dakota • Biesterfeldt Site, Ransom County Ohio • Eldean Bridge, Miami County • Greenhills Historic District, Greenhills • May 4, 1970, Kent State Shootings Site, Kent Pennsylvania • Keim Homestead, Oley • W. A. Young and Sons Foundry and Machine Shop, Rices Landing Texas • Casa José Antonio Navarro, San Antonio Wyoming • Site No. 48GO305, Goshen County Proposed Amendments to Existing Designations Indiana • Indiana War Memorials Historic District, Indianapolis (updated documentation, boundary and name change) Louisiana • Maison Olivier, St. Martinvilleb (updated documentation and name change) New York • Hamilton Grange, New York (updated documentation) North Carolina • Old Salem Historic District, Winston-Salem (updated documentation and boundary change) Virginia • Ball's Bluff Battlefield Historic District, Loudoun County (boundary change and updated documentation) • Virginia State Capitol, Richmond (name change and updated documentation) Proposed Withdrawal of Designation Louisiana • Kate Chopin House, Cloutierville

    The board meeting will be open to the public. The order of the agenda may be changed, if necessary, to accommodate travel schedules or for other reasons. Space and facilities to accommodate the public are limited and attendees will be accommodated on a first-come basis. Anyone may file with the Board a written statement concerning matters to be discussed. The Board also will permit attendees to address the Board, but may restrict the length of the presentations, as necessary to allow the Board to complete its agenda within the allotted time. Before including your address, telephone number, email address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment—including your personal identifying information—may be made publicly available at any time. While you may ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.

    Draft minutes of the meeting will be available for public inspection about 12 weeks after the meeting at the Office of Policy, MC 0004-Policy, 1849 C Street NW., Washington, DC.

    Alma Ripps, Chief, Office of Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22349 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-EE-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR National Park Service [NPS-AKRO-LACL-ANIA-WRST-GAAR-CAKR-KOVA-21821; PPAKAKROR4; PPMPRLE1Y.LS0000] Notice of Open Public Meetings for the National Park Service Alaska Region Subsistence Resource Commission Program AGENCY:

    National Park Service, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Meeting notice.

    SUMMARY:

    As required by the Federal Advisory Committee Act (16 U.S.C. Appendix 1-16), the National Park Service (NPS) is hereby giving notice that the Lake Clark National Park Subsistence Resource Commission (SRC), Aniakchak National Monument SRC, Wrangell-St. Elias National Park SRC, Cape Krusenstern National Monument SRC, Kobuk Valley National Park SRC, and Gates of the Arctic National Park SRC will hold public meetings to develop and continue work on NPS subsistence program recommendations, and other related regulatory proposals and resource management issues. The NPS SRC program is authorized under Section 808 of the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (16 U.S.C. 3118), title VIII.

    Lake Clark National Park SRC Meeting/Teleconference Date and Location: The Lake Clark National Park SRC will meet from 1:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. or until business is completed on Wednesday, September 28, 2016, at the Community Hall in Nondalton, AK. Teleconference participants must call the National Park Service office at (907) 644-3648, prior to the meeting to receive teleconference passcode information. For more detailed information regarding this meeting, or if you are interested in applying for SRC membership, contact Designated Federal Official Margaret L. Goodro, Superintendent, at (907) 644-3627, or via email at [email protected], or Liza Rupp, Subsistence Manager, at (907) 644-3648, or via email at [email protected] or Clarence Summers, Subsistence Manager, at (907) 644-3603 or via email at [email protected]

    Aniakchak National Monument SRC Meeting/Teleconference Date and Location: The Aniakchak National Monument SRC will meet from 2:00 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. or until business is completed on Friday, September 30, 2016, at the Subsistence Building in Chignik Lagoon, AK. Teleconference participants must call the National Park Service at (907) 246-2154 or (907) 246-3305, prior to the meeting for teleconference call in information. For more detailed information regarding this meeting, or if you are interested in applying for SRC membership, contact Linda Chisholm, Subsistence Coordinator, at (907) 246-2154, or via email [email protected], or Clarence Summers, Subsistence Manager, at (907) 644-3603, or via email [email protected]

    Wrangell-St. Elias National Park SRC Meeting Dates and Locations: The Wrangell-St. Elias National Park SRC will meet from 10:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. or until business is completed on Wednesday, October 12, 2016, at the Northway Village Hall in Northway, AK. On Thursday, October 13, 2016, the Wrangell-St. Elias National Park SRC will meet from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. or until business is completed at the Musher's Hall in Tok, AK. For more detailed information regarding these meetings, or if you are interested in applying for SRC membership, contact Barbara Cellarius, Subsistence Coordinator, at (907) 822-7236 or by email at [email protected] or Clarence Summers, Subsistence Manager, at (907) 644-3603 or via email at [email protected]

    Gates of The Arctic National Park SRC Meeting Date and Location: The Gates of the Arctic National Park SRC will meet from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. or until business is completed on Tuesday, November 15, 2016, and Wednesday, November 16, 2016, at the Gates of the Arctic National Park and Preserve office in Fairbanks, AK. For more detailed information regarding this meeting, or if you are interested in applying for SRC membership, contact Designated Federal Official Greg Dudgeon, Superintendent, at (907) 457-5752, or via email at [email protected] or Marcy Okada, Subsistence Coordinator, at (907) 455-0639 or via email at [email protected] or Clarence Summers, Subsistence Manager, at (907) 644-3603, or via email at [email protected]

    Cape Krusenstern National Monument SRC Meeting Date and Location: The Cape Krusenstern National Monument SRC will meet from 1:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. or until business is completed on Tuesday, November 8, 2016, and from 9:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. on November 9, 2016, at the Northwest Arctic Heritage Center in Kotzebue, AK. For more detailed information regarding this meeting or if you are interested in applying for SRC membership, contact Hannah Atkinson, Cultural Resource Specialist at the Cape Krusenstern National Monument office at (907) 442-4342, or via email at hannah_atkinson, or Clarence Summers, Subsistence Manager, at (907) 644-3603 or via email at [email protected]

    Kobuk Valley National Park SRC Meeting Date and Location: The Kobuk Valley National Park SRC will meet from 1:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. or until business is completed on Thursday, November 10, 2016, and from 9:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. on Friday, November 11, 2016, at the Northwest Arctic Heritage Center in Kotzebue, AK. For more detailed information regarding this meeting or if you are interested in applying for SRC membership, contact Hannah Atkinson, Cultural Resource Specialist at the Kobuk Valley National Park office at (907) 442-4342, or via email at hannah_atkinson, or Clarence Summers, Subsistence Manager, at (907) 644-3603 or via email at [email protected]

    Proposed Meeting Agenda: The agenda may change to accommodate SRC business. The proposed meeting agenda for each meeting includes the following:

    1. Call to Order—Confirm Quorum 2. Welcome and Introduction 3. Review and Adoption of Agenda 4. Approval of Minutes 5. Superintendent's Welcome and Review of the SRC Purpose 6. SRC Membership Status 7. SRC Chair and Members' Reports 8. Superintendent's Report 9. Old Business 10. New Business 11. Federal Subsistence Board Update 12. Alaska Boards of Fish and Game Update 13. National Park Service Reports a. Ranger Update b. Resource Manager's Report c. Subsistence Manager's Report 14. Public and Other Agency Comments 15. Work Session 16. Set Tentative Date and Location for Next SRC Meeting 17. Adjourn Meeting

    SRC meeting locations and dates may change based on inclement weather or exceptional circumstances. If the meeting dates and locations are changed, the Superintendent will issue a press release and use local newspapers and radio stations to announce the rescheduled meeting.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    SRC meetings are open to the public and will have time allocated for public testimony. The public is welcome to present written or oral comments to the SRC. SRC meetings will be recorded and meeting minutes will be available upon request from the Superintendent for public inspection approximately six weeks after the meeting. Before including your address, telephone number, email address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment—including your personal identifying information—may be made publicly available at any time. While you may ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.

    Exceptional Circumstance: Pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Management Regulations (41 CFR 102-3.150), the notice for this meeting is given less than 15 calendar days prior to the meeting due to exceptional circumstances. Given the exceptional urgency of the events, the agency and advisory committee deemed it important for the advisory committee to meet on the date given to discuss implementation strategies for NPS subsistence collections and plant gathering regulations.

    Alma Ripps, Chief, Office of Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22350 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-EE-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Ocean Energy Management [OMB Control Number 1010-0114; MMAA104000] Information Collection: General Oil and Gas and Sulphur and Production Requirements in the Outer Continental Shelf; Proposed Collection for OMB Review; Comment Request ACTION:

    60-Day notice.

    SUMMARY:

    To comply with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) is inviting comments on a collection of information that we will submit to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval. The information collection request (ICR) concerns the paperwork requirements in the regulations under 30 CFR 550, Subparts A, General; and K, and Oil and Gas Production Requirements, as well as the associated forms. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has assigned control number 1010-0114 to this information collection.

    DATES:

    Submit written comments by November 15, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Please send your comments on this ICR to the BOEM Information Collection Clearance Officer, Anna Atkinson, Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, 45600 Woodland Road, Sterling, Virginia 20166 (mail); or [email protected]; or 703-787-1209 (fax). Please reference OMB Control Number 1010-0114 in your comment and include your name and return address.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Anna Atkinson, Office of Policy, Regulations, and Analysis at 703-787-1025 for a copy of the ICR or the forms.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    OMB Control Number: 1010-0114.

    Title: 30 CFR 550, Subpart A, General, and Subpart K, Oil and Gas Production Requirements.

    Forms:

    • BOEM-0127, Sensitive Reservoir Information Report;

    • BOEM-0140, Bottomhole Pressure Survey Report;

    • BOEM-1123, Designation of Operator; and

    • BOEM-1832, Notification of Incident(s) of Noncompliance.

    Abstract: The Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) Lands Act, as amended (43 U.S.C. 1331 et seq. and 43 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.), authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to prescribe rules and regulations to administer leasing of the OCS. Such rules and regulations will apply to all operations conducted under a lease. Operations in the OCS must preserve, protect, and develop oil and natural gas resources in a manner that is consistent with the need to make such resources available to meet the Nation's energy needs as rapidly as possible; to balance orderly energy resource development with protection of human, marine, and coastal environments; to ensure the public a fair and equitable return on the resources of the OCS; and to preserve and maintain free enterprise competition. Section 1332(6) states that “operations in the [O]uter Continental Shelf should be conducted in a safe manner by well trained personnel using technology, precautions, and techniques sufficient to prevent or minimize . . . loss of well control . . . physical obstructions to other users of the waters or subsoil and seabed, or other occurrences which may cause damage to the environment or to property or endanger life or health.”

    The Independent Offices Appropriations Act (31 U.S.C. 9701), the Omnibus Appropriations Bill (Pub. L. 104-133, 110 Stat. 1321, April 26, 1996), and Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-25 authorize Federal agencies to recover the full cost of services that confer special benefits. Under the Department of the Interior's (DOI) implementing policy, the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) is required to charge fees for services that provide special benefits or privileges to an identifiable non-Federal recipient above and beyond those that accrue to the public.

    This information collection request addresses regulations at 30 CFR 550, Subpart A, General, and Subpart K, Oil and Gas Production Requirements, which deal with regulatory requirements of oil, gas, and sulphur operations on the OCS. This request also covers the related Notices to Lessees and Operators (NTLs) that BOEM issues to clarify and provide guidance on some aspects of our regulations, and forms BOEM-0127, BOEM-0140, BOEM-1123, and BOEM-1832.

    The BOEM uses the information collected under the Subparts A and K regulations to ensure that operations in the OCS are carried out in a safe and environmentally sound manner, do not interfere with the rights of other users in the OCS, and balance the protection and development of OCS resources. Specifically, we use the information collected to:

    • Determine the capability of a well to produce oil or gas in paying quantities or to determine the possible need for additional wells resulting in minimum royalty status on a lease.

    • Provide lessees/operators greater flexibility to comply with regulatory requirements through approval of alternative equipment or procedures and departures if they demonstrate equal or better compliance with the appropriate performance standards.

    • Ensure that subsurface storage of natural gas does not unduly interfere with development and production operations under existing leases.

    • Determine if an application for right-of-use and easement complies with the OCS Lands Act, other applicable laws, and BOEM regulations; and does not unreasonably interfere with the operations of any other lessee.

    • Provide for orderly development or disqualification of leases to determine the appropriateness of lessee/operator performance.

    • Approve requests to cancel leases and ascertain if/when the Secretary may cancel leases.

    • Ensure the protection of any discovered archaeological resources.

    • Form BOEM-0127, Sensitive Reservoir Information Report, is used to regulate production rates from sensitive reservoirs. BOEM engineers and geologists use the information for rate control and reservoir studies. The form requests general information about the reservoir and the company, volumetric data, and fluid analysis and production data.

    • Form BOEM-0140, Bottomhole Pressure Survey Report, is used to manage reservoirs in our efforts to conserve natural resources, prevent waste, and protect correlative rights, including the Government's royalty interest. Specifically, BOEM uses the information in reservoir evaluations to determine maximum production and efficiency rates and to review applications for downhole commingling to ensure that action does not harm ultimate recovery or undervalued royalties. The form requests information about the well and operator; test data information such as shut-in time, bottomhole temperature, kelly bushing elevation; and bottomhole pressure points that consist of measured depth(s), true vertical depth(s), pressure(s), and pressure gradient(s).

    • Form BOEM-1123, Designation of Operator, records the designation of an operator authorized to act on behalf of the lessee/operating rights owner and to fulfill their obligations under the OCS Lands Act and implementing regulations, or to record the local agent empowered to receive notices and comply with regulatory orders issued. Th