Federal Register Vol. 81, No.184,

Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 184 (September 22, 2016)

Page Range65169-65529
FR Document

81_FR_184
Current View
Page and SubjectPDF
81 FR 65289 - Air Quality Designations for the 2012 Primary Annual Fine Particle (PM2.5PDF
81 FR 65335 - Government in the Sunshine Act Meeting NoticePDF
81 FR 65175 - 2016 Amendments to the Manual for Courts-Martial, United StatesPDF
81 FR 65173 - Prescription Opioid and Heroin Epidemic Awareness Week, 2016PDF
81 FR 65171 - National Farm Safety and Health Week, 2016PDF
81 FR 65169 - Constitution Day and Citizenship Day, Constitution Week, 2016PDF
81 FR 65376 - Changes in Flood Hazard DeterminationsPDF
81 FR 65369 - Changes in Flood Hazard DeterminationsPDF
81 FR 65361 - Meeting Announcement for the Technical Advisory Panel on Medicare Trustee ReportsPDF
81 FR 65341 - Narrow Woven Ribbons With Woven Selvedge From the People's Republic of China and Taiwan: Continuation of Antidumping Duty Orders and Countervailing Duty OrderPDF
81 FR 65342 - Certain Polyester Staple Fiber From the Republic of Korea: Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2015-2016PDF
81 FR 65337 - Certain Carbon and Alloy Steel Cut-to-Length Plate From Brazil, South Africa, and the Republic of Turkey: Affirmative Preliminary Determinations of Sales at Less Than Fair ValuePDF
81 FR 65390 - National Protection and Programs DirectoratePDF
81 FR 65354 - Registration Review; Draft Malathion Human Health Risk Assessment; Notice of AvailabilityPDF
81 FR 65337 - Approval of Subzone Status; Michaels Stores Procurement Company, Inc., Hazleton, PennsylvaniaPDF
81 FR 65315 - National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan; National Priorities List: Partial Deletion of the Omaha Lead Superfund SitePDF
81 FR 65463 - Submission for OMB Review; Comment RequestPDF
81 FR 65356 - Information Collection Being Reviewed by the Federal Communications Commission Under Delegated AuthorityPDF
81 FR 65357 - Information Collection Being Reviewed by the Federal Communications CommissionPDF
81 FR 65358 - Information Collection Being Reviewed by the Federal Communications CommissionPDF
81 FR 65347 - Submission for OMB Review; Comment RequestPDF
81 FR 65349 - DOE/NSF Nuclear Science Advisory CommitteePDF
81 FR 65349 - Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Oak Ridge ReservationPDF
81 FR 65348 - Methane Hydrate Advisory Committee; Meeting NoticePDF
81 FR 65305 - Fisheries of the Northeastern United States; Atlantic Bluefish Fishery; Quota TransferPDF
81 FR 65413 - New Postal ProductsPDF
81 FR 65359 - Agency Forms Undergoing Paperwork Reduction Acct ReviewPDF
81 FR 65411 - Certain Sleep-Disordered Breathing Treatment Mask Systems and Components Thereof; Institution of InvestigationPDF
81 FR 65309 - Production or Disclosure of Records, Information and Employee Testimony in Legal ProceedingsPDF
81 FR 65305 - Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Shortraker Rockfish in the Central Regulatory Area of the Gulf of AlaskaPDF
81 FR 65361 - Renewal of Charter for the Advisory Committee on Organ TransplantationPDF
81 FR 65461 - Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements Under OMB ReviewPDF
81 FR 65281 - USAID Sovereign Loan Guarantees-Standard Terms and ConditionsPDF
81 FR 65307 - Horse Protection; Licensing of Designated Qualified Persons and Other AmendmentsPDF
81 FR 65351 - Aircraft Service International Group, Inc., American Airlines, Inc., Delta Air Lines, Inc., Hookers Point Fuel Facilities LLC, Southwest Airlines Co., United Aviation Fuels Corporation, United Parcel Service, Inc. v. Central Florida Pipeline LLC, Kinder Morgan Liquid Terminals LLC; Notice of ComplaintPDF
81 FR 65351 - Combined Notice of FilingsPDF
81 FR 65350 - Combined Notice of Filings #1PDF
81 FR 65335 - Agenda and Notice of Public Meeting of the Maryland Advisory CommitteePDF
81 FR 65378 - Final Flood Hazard DeterminationsPDF
81 FR 65379 - Final Flood Hazard DeterminationsPDF
81 FR 65358 - Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Holding CompaniesPDF
81 FR 65352 - Notice of Availability of Three Updated Chapters in the Environmental Protection Agency's Air Pollution Control Cost ManualPDF
81 FR 65405 - Information Collection Activities: Application for Permit To Modify (APM) and Supporting Documentation; Proposed Collection; Comment RequestPDF
81 FR 65399 - Information Collection Activities: Application for Permit Drill (APD, Revised APD), Supplemental APD Information Sheet, and All Supporting Documentation; Proposed Collection; Comment RequestPDF
81 FR 65403 - Information Collection Activities: Open and Nondiscriminatory Access to Oil and Gas Pipelines Under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act; Proposed Collection; Comment RequestPDF
81 FR 65367 - National Offshore Safety Advisory CommitteePDF
81 FR 65392 - Notice of Public Meetings, BLM Alaska Resource Advisory Council and Associated SubcommitteePDF
81 FR 65286 - Authority To Solicit Gifts and DonationsPDF
81 FR 65313 - Authority To Solicit Gifts and Donations; WithdrawalPDF
81 FR 65395 - Information Collection Activities: Platforms and Structures; Proposed Collection; Comment RequestPDF
81 FR 65412 - Information Collection: NRC Form 327, “Special Nuclear Material (SNM) and Source Material (SM) Physical Inventory Summary Report,” and NUREG/BR-0096, “Instructions and Guidance for Completing Physical Inventory”PDF
81 FR 65462 - Twentieth RTCA SC-223 Aeronautical Mobile Airport Communication System Plenary Calling NoticePDF
81 FR 65462 - Thirty Second RTCA SC-213 Enhanced Flight Vision Systems/Synthetic Vision Systems (EFVS/SVS)PDF
81 FR 65411 - Notice of Information CollectionPDF
81 FR 65283 - Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Red River, Alexandria, LAPDF
81 FR 65284 - Safety Zone; Columbia River, Sand Island, WAPDF
81 FR 65364 - Prospective Grant of Exclusive Patent License: Development of an Antibody-Drug Conjugate for Use in PhotoImmunoTherapyPDF
81 FR 65365 - National Institute of Allergy And Infectious Diseases; Notice of Closed MeetingPDF
81 FR 65365 - National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases; Notice of Closed MeetingPDF
81 FR 65364 - National Cancer Institute; Notice of MeetingPDF
81 FR 65366 - Center for Scientific Review; Notice of Closed MeetingsPDF
81 FR 65363 - Center for Scientific Review; Notice of Closed MeetingsPDF
81 FR 65362 - National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke; Notice of Closed MeetingsPDF
81 FR 65365 - National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke; Notice of Closed MeetingPDF
81 FR 65365 - National Institute of Mental Health; Cancellation of MeetingPDF
81 FR 65367 - National Institute of General Medical Sciences; Notice of Closed MeetingPDF
81 FR 65362 - National Institute of General Medical Sciences; Notice of Closed MeetingsPDF
81 FR 65367 - Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health & Human Development; Notice of Closed MeetingsPDF
81 FR 65359 - Technical Electronic Product Radiation Safety Standards Committee; Notice of MeetingPDF
81 FR 65343 - Privacy Act of 1974; System of RecordsPDF
81 FR 65391 - Renewal of Approved Information Collection; OMB Control No. 1004-0009PDF
81 FR 65393 - Information Collection Request Sent to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for Approval; National Park Service Lost and Found ReportPDF
81 FR 65345 - Strategic Environmental Research and Development Program, Scientific Advisory Board; Notice of Federal Advisory Committee MeetingPDF
81 FR 65347 - Strategic Environmental Research and Development Program, Scientific Advisory Board; Notice of Federal Advisory Committee MeetingPDF
81 FR 65414 - Clarifying Current Roles and Responsibilities Described in the Coordinated Framework for the Regulation of BiotechnologyPDF
81 FR 65279 - Medical Devices; Ophthalmic Devices; Classification of Strabismus Detection DevicePDF
81 FR 65394 - Information Collection Request Sent to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for Approval; Reporting and Recordkeeping for Snowcoaches and Snowmobiles, Yellowstone National ParkPDF
81 FR 65324 - Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Endangered Species Status for Rusty Patched Bumble BeePDF
81 FR 65356 - Information Collection Being Reviewed by the Federal Communications CommissionPDF
81 FR 65369 - Individual Assistance Declarations Factors GuidancePDF
81 FR 65380 - Changes in Flood Hazard DeterminationsPDF
81 FR 65460 - Northern Lights Fund Trust and Dearborn Capital Management, LLC; Notice of ApplicationPDF
81 FR 65415 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Options Clearing Corporation; Order Approving Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment No. 1, Concerning Enhancements to The Options Clearing Corporation's Governance ArrangementsPDF
81 FR 65458 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend Rule 7.35P (Auctions) Regarding Indicative Match PricePDF
81 FR 65442 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Stock Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change To Adopt the CHX Liquidity Taking Access DelayPDF
81 FR 65431 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing of Amendment No. 2 to a Proposed Rule Change To List and Trade Shares of the Global Currency Gold Fund Under NYSE Arca Equities Rule 8.201, and Order Instituting Proceedings To Determine Whether To Approve or Disapprove Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment No. 2PDF
81 FR 65304 - Radio Broadcasting Services; Eagle Butte, South DakotaPDF
81 FR 65373 - Changes in Flood Hazard DeterminationsPDF
81 FR 65389 - Senior Executive Service Performance Review BoardPDF
81 FR 65336 - Census Scientific Advisory CommitteePDF
81 FR 65383 - Changes in Flood Hazard DeterminationsPDF
81 FR 65336 - National Advisory CommitteePDF
81 FR 65390 - Agency Information Collection Activities: DHS Civil Rights Compliance FormPDF
81 FR 65368 - Louisiana; Amendment No. 5 to Notice of a Major Disaster DeclarationPDF
81 FR 65373 - Louisiana; Amendment No. 4 to Notice of a Major Disaster DeclarationPDF
81 FR 65463 - Hazardous Materials: Damaged, Defective, Recalled Lithium Cells or Batteries or Portable Electronic DevicesPDF
81 FR 65360 - Veterinary Feed Directive Common Format Questions and Answers; Guidance for Industry; AvailabilityPDF
81 FR 65313 - Air Plan Approval; TN; Revisions to the Knox County Portion of the TN SIPPDF
81 FR 65286 - Air Plan Approval; Alabama and North Carolina; Interstate Transport-2010 NO2PDF
81 FR 65335 - Secretary's Advisory Committee on Animal Health; Intent To ReestablishPDF
81 FR 65278 - Amendment of Class E Airspace, Ithaca, NYPDF
81 FR 65267 - Amendment of Class D and E Airspace and Revocation of Class E Airspace; Sioux City, IAPDF
81 FR 65274 - Revocation of Class E Airspace; Alliance, NE; and Amendment of Class E Airspace for the Following Nebraska Towns; Albion, NE; Alliance, NE; Gothenburg, NE; Holdrege, NE; Imperial, NE; Lexington, NE; and Millard Airport, Omaha, NEPDF
81 FR 65276 - Amendment of Class D and E Airspace, and Revocation of Class E Airspace; Troy, ALPDF
81 FR 65269 - Amendment of Class E Airspace, Truckee, CAPDF
81 FR 65270 - Establishment of Class D and E Airspace; Brookshire, TXPDF
81 FR 65265 - Airworthiness Directives; International Aero Engines AG Turbofan EnginesPDF
81 FR 65307 - Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company AirplanesPDF
81 FR 65353 - Release of Draft Policy Assessment for the Review of the Primary National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Nitrogen DioxidePDF
81 FR 65319 - Appraisals and Valuations of Indian PropertyPDF
81 FR 65296 - Federal Management Regulation (FMR); Transportation Payment and AuditPDF
81 FR 65509 - Facility Guarantee ProgramPDF
81 FR 65465 - Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Endangered Status for Five Species From American SamoaPDF
81 FR 65289 - Thiabendazole; Pesticide TolerancesPDF

Issue

81 184 Thursday, September 22, 2016 Contents Agency Agency for International Development RULES Sovereign Loan Guarantees: Standard Terms and Conditions; Ukraine, 65281-65283 2016-22856 Agriculture Agriculture Department See

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

See

Commodity Credit Corporation

Animal Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service PROPOSED RULES Horse Protection: Licensing of Designated Qualified Persons and Other Amendments; Comment Extension, 65307 2016-22855 NOTICES Charter Renewals: Secretary's Advisory Committee on Animal Health, 65335 2016-22742 Broadcasting Broadcasting Board of Governors NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 65335 2016-22992 Safety Enviromental Enforcement Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 65395-65399 2016-22829 Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Application for Permit Drill, Supplemental Application for Permit Drill Information Sheet, and All Supporting Documentation, 65399-65403 2016-22844 Application for Permit to Modify and Supporting Documentation, 65405-65410 2016-22845 Open and Nondiscriminatory Access to Oil and Gas Pipelines under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, 65403-65405 2016-22842 Census Bureau Census Bureau NOTICES Meetings: National Advisory Committee, 65336-65337 2016-22783 Scientific Advisory Committee, 65336 2016-22785 Centers Disease Centers for Disease Control and Prevention NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 65359 2016-22866 Civil Rights Civil Rights Commission NOTICES Meetings: Maryland Advisory Committee, 65335-65336 2016-22851 Coast Guard Coast Guard RULES Drawbridge Operations: Red River, Alexandria, LA, 65283-65284 2016-22822 Safety Zones: Columbia River, Sand Island, WA, 65284-65286 2016-22821 NOTICES Meetings: National Offshore Safety Advisory Committee, 65367-65368 2016-22839 Commerce Commerce Department See

Census Bureau

See

Foreign-Trade Zones Board

See

International Trade Administration

See

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

Commodity Credit Commodity Credit Corporation RULES Facility Guarantee Program, 65510-65529 2016-22367 Defense Department Defense Department NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 65347 2016-22872 Meetings: Scientific Advisory Board, 65347-65348 2016-22803 Strategic Environmental Research and Development Program, Scientific Advisory Board, 65345-65346 2016-22804 Privacy Act; Systems of Records, 65343-65345 2016-22807 Energy Department Energy Department See

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

NOTICES Meetings: DOE/NSF Nuclear Science Advisory Committee, 65349 2016-22871 Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Oak Ridge Reservation, 65349-65350 2016-22870 Methane Hydrate Advisory Committee, 65348-65349 2016-22869
Environmental Protection Environmental Protection Agency RULES Air Quality Designations: Georgia and Florida 2012 Primary Annual Fine Particle (PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality Standard, 65289 C1--2016--21338 Air Quality State Implementation Plans; Approvals and Promulgations: Alabama and North Carolina; Interstate Transport—2010 NO2 Standards, 65286-65289 2016-22760 Pesticide Tolerances: Thiabendazole, 65289-65296 2016-21753 PROPOSED RULES Air Quality State Implementation Plans; Approvals and Promulgations: Tennessee; Revisions to Knox County Portion of State Implementation Plan, 65313-65315 2016-22761 National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plans: National Priorities List; Partial Deletion of Omaha Lead Superfund Site, 65315-65319 2016-22877 NOTICES Air Pollution Control Cost Manual; Updates, 65352-65353 2016-22846 Draft Policy Assessment for Review of Primary National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Nitrogen Dioxide, 65353-65354 2016-22681 Registration Reviews: Draft Malathion Human Health Risk Assessment, 65354-65356 2016-22881 Federal Aviation Federal Aviation Administration RULES Airworthiness Directives: International Aero Engines AG Turbofan Engines, 65265-65267 2016-22703 Class D and E Airspace; Amendments and Revocations: Alliance, NE; Albion, NE; Alliance, NE; Gothenburg, NE; Holdrege, NE; Imperial, NE; Lexington, NE; Millard Airport, Omaha, NE, 65274-65276 2016-22736 Sioux City, IA, 65267-65268 2016-22738 Troy, AL, 65276-65277 2016-22735 Class E Airspace; Amendments Truckee, CA, 65269-65270 2016-22726 Class E Airspace; Amendments: Ithaca, NY, 65278-65279 2016-22741 Establishment of Class D and E Airspace: Brookshire, TX, 65270-65274 2016-22723 PROPOSED RULES Airworthiness Directives: The Boeing Co. Airplanes, 65307-65309 2016-22697 NOTICES Meetings: RTCA SC-213 Enhanced Flight Vision Systems/Synthetic Vision Systems, 65462 2016-22825 RTCA SC-223 Aeronautical Mobile Airport Communication System Plenary Calling Notice, 65462-65463 2016-22826 Federal Communications Federal Communications Commission RULES Radio Broadcasting Services: Eagle Butte, SD, 65304-65305 2016-22788 NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 2016-22797 2016-22873 65356-65358 2016-22874 2016-22875 Federal Emergency Federal Emergency Management Agency NOTICES Flood Hazard Determinations, 65369-65373, 65376-65380 2016-22848 2016-22850 2016-22894 2016-22895 Flood Hazard Determinations; Changes, 65373-65375, 65380-65389 2016-22784 2016-22787 2016-22794 Individual Assistance Declarations Factors Guidance, 65369 2016-22796 Major Disaster Declarations: Louisiana; Amendment No. 4, 65373 2016-22779 Louisiana; Amendment No. 5, 65368-65369 2016-22781 Federal Energy Federal Energy Regulatory Commission NOTICES Combined Filings, 65350-65351 2016-22852 2016-22853 Complaints: Aircraft Service International Group, Inc., et al. v. Central Florida Pipeline, LLC, et al., 65351-65352 2016-22854 Federal Reserve Federal Reserve System NOTICES Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Holding Companies, 65358-65359 2016-22847 Fish Fish and Wildlife Service RULES Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants: Status for Five Species from American Samoa, 65466-65508 2016-22276 PROPOSED RULES Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants: Status for Rusty Patched Bumble Bee, 65324-65334 2016-22799 Food and Drug Food and Drug Administration RULES Medical Devices; Ophthalmic Devices; Classification of Strabismus Detection Device, 65279-65281 2016-22801 NOTICES Guidance: Veterinary Feed Directive Common Format Questions and Answers, 65360-65361 2016-22775 Meetings: Technical Electronic Product Radiation Safety Standards Committee, 65359-65360 2016-22808 Foreign Trade Foreign-Trade Zones Board NOTICES Approvals of Subzone Status: Michaels Stores Procurement Co., Inc., Hazleton, PA, 65337 2016-22880 General Services General Services Administration RULES Federal Management Regulations: Transportation Payment and Audit, 65296-65304 2016-22609 Health and Human Health and Human Services Department See

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

See

Food and Drug Administration

See

Health Resources and Services Administration

See

National Institutes of Health

NOTICES Meetings: Technical Advisory Panel on Medicare Trustee Reports, 65361-65362 2016-22890
Health Resources Health Resources and Services Administration NOTICES Charter Renewals: Advisory Committee on Organ Transplantation, 65361 2016-22858 Homeland Homeland Security Department See

Coast Guard

See

Federal Emergency Management Agency

NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Civil Rights Compliance Form, 65390-65391 2016-22782 Requests for Voluntary Participation: Positioning, Navigation, and Timing Study, 65390 2016-22884 Senior Executive Service Performance Review Board, 65389-65390 2016-22786
Interior Interior Department See

Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement

See

Fish and Wildlife Service

See

Land Management Bureau

See

National Park Service

PROPOSED RULES Appraisals and Valuations of Indian Property, 65319-65324 2016-22650
International Trade Adm International Trade Administration NOTICES Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Investigations, Orders, or Reviews: Certain Polyester Staple Fiber from Republic of Korea, 65342-65343 2016-22886 Narrow Woven Ribbons with Woven Selvedge from People's Republic of China and Taiwan, 65341-65342 2016-22888 Determinations of Sales at Less than Fair Value: Certain Carbon and Alloy Steel Cut-to-Length Plate from Brazil, South Africa, and Republic of Turkey, 65337-65341 2016-22885 International Trade Com International Trade Commission NOTICES Complaints: Certain Sleep-Disordered Breathing Treatment Mask Systems and Components Thereof, 65411 2016-22865 Land Land Management Bureau NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 65391-65392 2016-22806 Meetings: Bureau of Land Management Alaska Resource Advisory Council and Associated Subcommittee, 65392-65393 2016-22836 NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 65411-65412 2016-22824 National Institute National Institutes of Health NOTICES Meetings: Center for Scientific Review, 65363-65364, 65366-65367 2016-22815 2016-22816 National Cancer Institute, 65364 2016-22817 National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, 2016-22818 65365 2016-22819 National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, 65367 2016-22809 National Institute of General Medical Sciences, 65362, 65367 2016-22810 2016-22811 National Institute of Mental Health; Cancellation, 65365 2016-22812 National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, 65362-65363, 65365-65366 2016-22813 2016-22814 Proposed Exclusive Licenses: Development of Antibody-drug Conjugate for Use in PhotoImmunoTherapy, 65364-65365 2016-22820 National Oceanic National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RULES Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska: Shortraker Rockfish in Central Regulatory Area of Gulf of Alaska, 65305-65306 2016-22862 Fisheries of the Northeastern United States: Atlantic Bluefish Fishery, 65305 2016-22868 National Park National Park Service NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: National Park Service Lost and Found Report, 65393-65394 2016-22805 Reporting and Recordkeeping for Snowcoaches and Snowmobiles, Yellowstone National Park, 65394-65395 2016-22800 Nuclear Regulatory Nuclear Regulatory Commission NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Special Nuclear Material and Source Material Physical Inventory Summary Report; Instructions and Guidance for Completing Physical Inventory, 65412-65413 2016-22827 Pipeline Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration NOTICES Safety Advisories: Damaged, Defective, Recalled Lithium Cells or Batteries or Portable Electronic Devices, 65463 2016-22777 Postal Regulatory Postal Regulatory Commission NOTICES New Postal Products, 65413-65414 2016-22867 Presidential Documents Presidential Documents PROCLAMATIONS Special Observances: Constitution Day and Citizenship Day, Constitution Week (Proc. 9497), 65169-65170 2016-22951 National Farm Safety and Health Week (Proc. 9498), 65171-65172 2016-22959 Prescription Opioid and Heroin Epidemic Awareness Week (Proc. 9499), 65173-65174 2016-22960 EXECUTIVE ORDERS Courts-Martial, United States, Manual for; 2016 Amendments (EO 13740), 65175-65264 2016-22962 Science Technology Science and Technology Policy Office NOTICES Clarifying Current Roles and Responsibilities Described in Coordinated Framework for Regulation of Biotechnology, 65414-65415 2016-22802 Securities Securities and Exchange Commission NOTICES Applications: Northern Lights Fund Trust and Dearborn Capital Management, LLC, 65460-65461 2016-22793 Self-Regulatory Organizations; Proposed Rule Changes: Chicago Stock Exchange, Inc., 65442-65458 2016-22790 NYSE Arca, Inc., 65431-65442, 65458-65460 2016-22789 2016-22791 Options Clearing Corp., 65415-65431 2016-22792 Small Business Small Business Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 2016-22849 65461-65462 2016-22857 Trade Representative Trade Representative, Office of United States PROPOSED RULES Production or Disclosure of Records: Information and Employee Testimony in Legal Proceedings, 65309-65313 2016-22864 Transportation Department Transportation Department See

Federal Aviation Administration

See

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration

Treasury Treasury Department NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 65463-65464 2016-22876 Veteran Affairs Veterans Affairs Department RULES Authority to Solicit Gifts and Donations, 65286 2016-22834 PROPOSED RULES Authority to Solicit Gifts and Donations; Withdrawal, 65313 2016-22833 Separate Parts In This Issue Part II Interior Department, Fish and Wildlife Service, 65466-65508 2016-22276 Part III Agriculture Department, Commodity Credit Corporation, 65510-65529 2016-22367 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.

81 184 Thursday, September 22, 2016 Rules and Regulations DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2016-5392; Directorate Identifier 2016-NE-10-AD; Amendment 39-18654; AD 2016-19-05] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; International Aero Engines AG Turbofan Engines AGENCY:

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain International Aero Engines AG (IAE) V2500-A1 turbofan engines. This AD was prompted by a report of an uncontainment caused by a high-pressure turbine (HPT) seal release. This AD requires removing the HPT No. 4 bearing front seal seat, part numbers (P/Ns) 2A0066, 2A1998, and 2A3432, and the HPT No. 4 bearing rear seal seat, P/Ns 2A0067, 2A1999, and 2A3433, and replacing them with parts eligible for installation. This AD also requires inspecting the HPT rotor and stator assembly, and, if necessary, their replacement with parts that are eligible for installation. We are issuing this AD to prevent failure of the HPT stage 2 seals, uncontained HPT seal release, damage to the engine, and damage to the airplane.

DATES:

This AD is effective October 27, 2016.

The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of October 27, 2016.

ADDRESSES:

For service information identified in this final rule, contact International Aero Engines AG, 400 Main Street, East Hartford, CT 06118; phone: 800-565-0140; email: [email protected]; Internet: http://fleetcare.pw.utc.com. You may view this service information at the FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate, 1200 District Avenue, Burlington, MA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 781-238-7125. It is also available on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-5392.

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-2016-5392; 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 (phone: 800-647-5527) is Document 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:

Brian Kierstead, Aerospace Engineer, Engine Certification Office, FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate, 1200 District Avenue, Burlington, MA 01803; phone: 781-238-7772; fax: 781-238-7199; email: [email protected]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Discussion

We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to certain IAE V2500-A1 turbofan engines. The NPRM published in the Federal Register on April 13, 2016 (81 FR 21768). The NPRM was prompted by a report of an uncontainment caused by a HPT seal release. The NPRM proposed to require removing from service the HPT No. 4 bearing front seal seat, P/Ns 2A0066, 2A1998, and 2A3432, and the HPT No. 4 bearing rear seal seat, P/Ns 2A0067, 2A1999, and 2A3433, and replacement with parts eligible for installation. This AD would also require inspecting the HPT rotor and stator assembly, and, if necessary, their replacement with parts that are eligible for installation. We are issuing this AD to correct the unsafe condition on these products.

Comments

We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing this AD. The following presents the comments received on the NPRM (81 FR 21768, April 13, 2016) and the FAA's response to each comment.

Request To Allow Monitoring of Oil Consumption and Monitoring Analysis

Air India Ltd. (AIL) commented that the fracture of the HPT stage 2 seal is a known problem with the type design. AIL does not agree that the root cause of the failure is clogged No. 4 bearing seal seats. AIL finds that increases in oil consumption and/or vibration signature are precursors to failure of the HPT stage 2 seal. We interpret AIL's comment as a request to allow monitoring of oil consumption rate and vibration signature analysis instead of the requirements of this AD.

We disagree. We disagree with AIL's analysis of the unsafe condition because although other failure modes leading to fracture of the HPT stage 2 seal exist, the uncontained part release noted in the NPRM (81 FR 21768, April 13, 2016) was caused by blockage of the No. 4 bearing seal seat's anti-weep circuit. We disagree with allowing oil consumption monitoring and vibration signature analysis because they do not provide an acceptable level of safety for engines with seal seats processed using methods susceptible to oil blockage. We did not change this AD.

Request To Delay Compliance

AIL commented that we should delay compliance to this AD until December 31, 2017. This additional time to comply with this AD would allow for minimal disruption to its fleet operations. AIL indicated that fleet safety would be maintained through engine oil consumption monitoring and vibration signature analysis.

We disagree. As noted in our previous comment response, oil consumption monitoring and vibration signature analysis do not provide an acceptable level of safety for engines with seal seats processed using methods susceptible to oil blockage. We did not change this AD.

Request To Revise Applicability

AIL commented that the applicability of this AD should not be limited to the IAE V2500-A1 fleet.

We disagree. The applicability of this AD is limited to the IAE V2500-A1 engines with affected serial numbers because this population of engines has been identified as having been processed using methods that could lead to failure of the HPT stage 2 seals. We did not change this AD.

Request To Include End Date for Compliance

IAE and Airbus commented that we should include an end date of December 31, 2016, for compliance with this AD.

We disagree. Our analysis of the unsafe condition determined that blockage of the No. 4 bearing seal seat anti-weep grooves is a function of engine cycles rather than time in service. We therefore did not base compliance on a calendar date. We did not change this AD.

Request To Require Oil Monitoring and Turbine Case Inspection

IAE and Airbus commented that not mandating oil monitoring and inspection of the turbine case weep-hole may increase risk to operators if they follow only the requirements of this AD. IAE indicated that this AD should match the compliance requirements of IAE SB V2500-ENG-72-0670, dated March 14, 2016.

We disagree. We find that the actions required by this AD adequately address the unsafe condition represented by the possibility of failure of the HPT stage 2 seals while not imposing unnecessary burdens on operators. We did not change this AD.

Revision to Compliance

We revised the compliance section to allow installed No. 4 bearing front and rear seal seats to be returned to service following removal and refurbishment.

Conclusion

We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments received, and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting this AD as proposed except for minor editorial changes. We have determined that these minor changes:

• Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the NPRM (81 FR 21768, April 13, 2016) for correcting the unsafe condition; and

• Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was already proposed in the NPRM (81 FR 21768, April 13, 2016).

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

We reviewed IAE Non-Modification Service Bulletin (NMSB) V2500-ENG-72-0670, dated March 14, 2016. The NMSB identifies affected engines and provides guidance for replacing the No. 4 bearing front and rear seal seats and for inspecting the HPT rotor and stator assembly. 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.

Costs of Compliance

We estimate that this AD affects 0 engines installed on airplanes of U.S. registry. We estimate that it will take about 10 hours to perform the seal seat replacement. The average labor rate is $85 per hour. We also estimate the cost of No. 4 bearing front and rear seal seats to be $13,562. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of this AD on U.S. operators to be $0.

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

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 DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979),

(3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska to the extent that it justifies making a regulatory distinction, and

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

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

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

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

§ 39.13 [Amended]
2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): 2016-19-05 International Aero Engines AG: Amendment 39-18654; Docket No. FAA-2016-5392; Directorate Identifier 2016-NE-10-AD. (a) Effective Date

This AD is effective October 27, 2016.

(b) Affected ADs

None.

(c) Applicability

This AD applies to International Aero Engines AG (IAE) V2500-A1 turbofan engines with serial numbers listed under Planning Information, Effectivity Data in IAE Non-Modification Service Bulletin (NMSB) V2500-ENG-72-0670, dated March 14, 2016.

(d) Unsafe Condition

This AD was prompted by a report of an uncontainment caused by a high-pressure turbine (HPT) seal release. We are issuing this AD to prevent failure of the HPT stage 2 seal, uncontained HPT seal release, damage to the engine, and damage to the airplane.

(e) Compliance

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

(1) Prior to accumulating 500 cycles in service after the effective date of this AD,

(i) Remove the No. 4 bearing front seal seat, part numbers (P/Ns) 2A0066, 2A1998, 2A3432; and the No. 4 bearing rear seal seat, P/Ns 2A0067, 2A1999, 2A3433, and replace with parts eligible for installation.

(ii) Inspect the HPT rotor and stator assembly. Use the Accomplishment Instructions, Part C, paragraph 1.B. of IAE NMSB V2500-ENG-72-0670, dated March 14, 2016 to perform the inspection.

(2) For any parts that fail the inspection required by paragraph (e)(1)(ii) of this AD, before further flight, remove and replace with parts eligible for installation.

(f) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

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

(g) Related Information

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

(h) 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 the AD specifies otherwise.

(i) International Aero Engines AG (IAE) Non-Modification Service Bulletin V2500-ENG-72-0670, dated March 14, 2016.

(ii) Reserved.

(3) For IAE service information identified in this AD, contact International Aero Engines AG, 400 Main Street, East Hartford, CT 06118; phone: 800-565-0140; email: [email protected]; Internet: http://fleetcare.pw.utc.com.

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

(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 Burlington, Massachusetts, on September 15, 2016. Ann C. Mollica, Acting Manager, Engine & Propeller Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2016-22703 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 71 [Docket No. FAA-2015-7487; Airspace Docket No. 15-ACE-7] Amendment of Class D and E Airspace and Revocation of Class E Airspace; Sioux City, IA AGENCY:

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

This action modifies the Class D and E airspace areas at Sioux Gateway/Col. Bud Day Field, Sioux City, IA, due to the decommissioning of the Gateway non-directional radio beacon (NDB) and cancellation of the NDB approaches at the airport. The Class E airspace area designated as an extension is being removed as it is no longer needed. Advances in Global Positioning System (GPS) capabilities have made this action necessary for the safety and management of Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) operations at the airport. This action also updates the geographic coordinates for Martin Field, NE., to coincide with the FAAs aeronautical database.

DATES:

Effective 0901 UTC, January 5, 2017. The Director of the Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under Title 1, Code of Federal Regulations, part 51, subject to the annual revision of FAA Order 7400.11 and publication of conforming amendments.

ADDRESSES:

FAA Order 7400.11A, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, and subsequent amendments can be viewed online at http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. For further information, you can contact the Airspace Policy Group, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC, 20591; telephone: 202-267-8783. The Order is also available for inspection at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of FAA Order 7400.11A at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal-regulations/ibr_locations.html.

FAA Order 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is published yearly and effective on September 15.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Authority for This Rulemaking

The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106 describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority as it amends Class D and E airspace at Sioux Gateway/Col. Bud Day Field, Sioux City, IA.

History

On April 13, 2016, the FAA published in the Federal Register a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to modify Class D airspace, Class E surface area airspace and Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface at Sioux Gateway/Col. Bud Day Field, Sioux City, IA (81 FR 21772) FAA-2015-7487. The Class E airspace area designated as an extension also would be removed as the extension is no longer needed. Interested parties were invited to participate in this rulemaking effort by submitting written comments on the proposal to the FAA. One comment was received from Thomas Glennon, Aeronautical Information Services, citing a correction to the geographic coordinates for Martin Field, South Sioux City, NE., which has been incorporated into this final rule.

Class D and E airspace designations are published in paragraph 5000, 6002, 6004, and 6005, respectively, of FAA Order 7400.11A, dated August 3, 2016, and effective September 15, 2016, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class D and E airspace designations listed in this document will be published subsequently in the Order.

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

This document amends FAA Order 7400.11A, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 3, 2016, and effective September 15, 2016. FAA Order 7400.11A is publicly available as listed in the ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order 7400.11A lists Class A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and reporting points.

The Rule

This amendment to Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 modifies Class E surface area airspace and Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface at Sioux Gateway/Col. Bud Day Field, Sioux City, IA. The Class E airspace area designated as an extension also would be removed as the extension is no longer needed. After review, the FAA found that due to the decommissioning of the Gateway NDB, cancellation of the NDB approaches at the airport, advances in GPS capabilities, and implementation of RNAV procedures at Sioux Gateway/Col. Bud Day Field, the Class E airspace designated as a surface area no longer requires extensions and is reduced to within a 4.3-mile radius of the airport; the Class E airspace designated as an extension to the Class D or Class E surface area is removed; and the Class E airspace area extending upward from 700 feet above the surface at the airport is reduced from a 7-mile radius to a 6.8-mile radius, with the northwest extension increased from 3 miles to 3.9 miles each side of the Sioux City VORTAC 319° radial extending from the 6.8-mile radius to 14.4 miles vice 25.3 miles; the northwest extension remains unchanged 4 miles each side of the 001° bearing from the airport from the 6.8-mile radius to 12 miles. The extensions to the southeast and northwest on the Sioux City VORTAC 316° radial are no longer required. All modifications to the Class E airspace are in accordance with airspace requirements specified in FAA Joint Order 7400.2K. This action is necessary for the safety and management of IFR operations under standard instrument approach procedures at the airport. The geographic coordinates for Martin Field, South Sioux City, NE., are amended for the existing Class D and E airspace areas.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

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

Environmental Review

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

Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

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

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

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

§ 71.1 [Amended]
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.11A, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 3, 2016, and effective September 15, 2016, is amended as follows: Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas Extending Upward From 700 Feet or More Above the Surface of the Earth. Paragraph 5000 Class D Airspace. ACE IA D Sioux City, IA [Amended] Sioux City, Sioux Gateway/Col. Bud Day Field, IA (Lat. 42°24′09″ N., long. 96°23′04″ W.) South Sioux City, Martin Field, NE (Lat. 42°27′15″ N., long. 96°28′21″ W.)

That airspace extending upward from the surface to and including 3,600 feet MSL within a 4.3-mile radius of Sioux Gateway/Col. Bud Day Field, excluding that airspace within a 1-mile radius of South Sioux City, Martin Field. This Class D airspace area is effective during the specific dates and times established in advance by a Notice to Airmen. The effective date and time will thereafter be continuously published in the Airport/Facility Directory.

Paragraph 6002 Class E Airspace Designated as Surface Areas. ACE IA E2 Sioux City, IA [Amended] Sioux City, Sioux Gateway/Col. Bud Day Field, IA (Lat. 42°24′09″ N., long. 96°23′04″ W.) South Sioux City, Martin Field, NE (Lat. 42°27′15″ N., long. 96°28′21″ W.)

Within a 4.3-mile radius of Sioux Gateway/Col. Bud Day Field, excluding that airspace within a 1-mile radius of the South Sioux City, Martin Field. This Class E airspace area is effective during the specific dates and times established in advance by a Notice to Airmen. The effective date and time will thereafter be continuously published in the Airport/Facility Directory.

Paragraph 6004 Class E Airspace Areas Designated as an Extension to a Class D or Class E Surface Area. ACE IA E4 Sioux City, IA [Removed] Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas Extending Upward From 700 Feet or More Above the Surface of the Earth. ACE IA E5 Sioux City, IA [Amended] Sioux City, Sioux Gateway Airport/Col. Bud Day Field, IA (Lat. 42°24′09″ N., long. 96°23′04″ W.) Sioux City VORTAC (Lat. 42°20′40″ N., long. 96°19′25″ W.)

That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface within a 6.8-mile radius of Sioux Gateway Airport/Col. Bud Day Field, and within 3.9 miles each side of the 319° radial of the Sioux City VORTAC extending from the 6.8-mile radius to 14.4 miles northwest of the VORTAC, and within 4 miles each side of the 001° bearing from Sioux Gateway Airport/Col. Bud Day Field extending from the 6.8-mile radius of the airport to 12 miles northwest of the airport.

Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on September 9, 2016. Walter Tweedy, Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, ATO Central Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2016-22738 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 71 [Docket No. FAA-2015-4074; Airspace Docket No. 15-AWP-16] Amendment of Class E Airspace, Truckee, CA AGENCY:

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

This action establishes Class E surface area airspace and modifies Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface at Truckee-Tahoe Airport, Truckee, CA, to increase safety and enhance existing instrument flight rules (IFR) operations in the immediate vicinity of the airport.

DATES:

Effective 0901 UTC, January 5, 2017. The Director of the Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under Title 1, Code of Federal Regulations, part 51, subject to the annual revision of FAA Order 7400.11 and publication of conforming amendments.

ADDRESSES:

FAA Order 7400.11A, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, and subsequent amendments can be viewed online at http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. For further information, you can contact the U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Bldg Ground Floor Rm W12-140, Washington, DC 20590; Telephone: 1-800-647-5527, or 202-366-9826. The Order is also available for inspection at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of FAA Order 7400.11A at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal-regulations/ibr_locations.html. FAA Order 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is published yearly and effective on September 15.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Tom Clark, Federal Aviation Administration, Operations Support Group, Western Service Center, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057; telephone (425) 203-4511.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106 describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority as it amends controlled airspace at Truckee-Tahoe Airport, Truckee, CA.

History

On December 18, 2015, the FAA published in the Federal Register a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface at Truckee-Tahoe Airport (80 FR 78988) Docket No. FAA-2015-4074. Interested parties were invited to participate in this rulemaking effort by submitting written comments on the proposal to the FAA. One comment was received requesting the FAA to establish Class E surface airspace within a 4.2 mile radius to increase safety and enhance existing instrument flight rules (IFR) procedures in the immediate vicinity of the airport. The FAA concurred with the comment and on April 22, 2016, published in the Federal Register a supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (SNPRM) to establish Class E surface airspace at Truckee-Tahoe Airport (81 FR 23658) Docket No. FAA-2015-4074. Interested parties were invited to participate in this rulemaking effort by submitting written comments on the proposal to the FAA. No comments were received.

Class E airspace designations are published in paragraph 6002 and 6005, respectively, of FAA Order 7400.11A, dated August 3, 2016, and effective September 15, 2016, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR part 71.1. The Class E airspace designation listed in this document will be published subsequently in the Order.

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

This document amends FAA Order 7400.11A, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 3, 2016, and effective September 15, 2016. FAA Order 7400.11A is publicly available as listed in the ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order 7400.11A lists Class A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and reporting points.

The Rule

This amendment to Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 establishes Class E surface area airspace within a 4.2-mile radius of Truckee-Tahoe Airport, Truckee, CA. Also, this action modifies Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface to within a 4.2-mile radius of the airport, with segments extending from the 4.2-mile radius to 19 miles north and 16.5 miles northwest of the airport, and removes reference to Homewood Seaplane Base, which is no longer operational.

Airspace modification is necessary to ensure the safety and management of standard instrument approach and departure procedures for IFR operations at the airport, with a minimum degree of airspace restriction.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

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

Environmental Review

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

Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

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

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

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

§ 71.1 [Amended]
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.11A, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 3, 2016, and effective September 15, 2016, is amended as follows: Paragraph 6002 Class E Airspace Designated as Surface Areas. AWP CA E2 Truckee, CA [New] Truckee-Tahoe Airport, CA (Lat. 39°19′12″ N., long. 120°08′22″ W.)

That airspace extending upward from the surface within a 4.2-mile radius of Truckee-Tahoe Airport.

Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas Extending Upward from 700 feet or More Above the Surface of the Earth. AWP CA E5 Truckee, CA [Modified] Truckee-Tahoe Airport, CA (Lat. 39°19′12″ N., long. 120°08′22″ W.)

That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface within a 4.2-mile radius of Truckee-Tahoe Airport, and within 2 miles each side of the Truckee-Tahoe Airport 015° bearing extending from the 4.2-mile radius to 19 miles north of the airport, and within 2 miles each side of the airport 328° bearing extending from the 4.2-mile radius to 16.5 miles northwest of the airport.

Issued in Seattle, Washington, on August 16, 2016. Richard Roberts, Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, Western Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2016-22726 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 71 [Docket No. FAA-2014-0742; Airspace Docket No. 14-ASW-5] Establishment of Class D and E Airspace; Brookshire, TX AGENCY:

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

This action establishes Class D airspace, Class E surface area airspace, and Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface at Brookshire, TX, to accommodate the new air traffic control tower at Houston Executive Airport. The FAA is taking this action for the safe and efficient use of the airspace to contain Instrument Flight Rule (IFR) arrival and departure operations at the airport.

DATES:

Effective 0901 UTC, November 10, 2016. The Director of the Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under title 1, Code of Federal Regulations, part 51, subject to the annual revision of FAA Order 7400.11 and publication of conforming amendments.

ADDRESSES:

FAA Order 7400.11A, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, and subsequent amendments can be viewed online at http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. For further information, you can contact the Airspace Policy Group, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591; telephone: 1-800-647-5527, or 202-267-8783. The Order is also available for inspection at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of FAA Order 7400.11A at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal-regulations/ibr_locations.html.FAA Order 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is published yearly and effective on September 15.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Raul Garza, Jr., Central Service Center, Operations Support Group, Federal Aviation Administration, Southwest Region, 10101 Hillwood Parkway, Fort Worth, TX 76177; telephone: (817) 222-5874.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106 describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part, A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority as it establishes controlled airspace at Houston Executive Airport, Brookshire, TX.

History

On March 28, 2016, the FAA published in the Federal Register a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to establish Class D and Class E Airspace at Houston Executive Airport, Brookshire, TX (81 FR 17114) Docket No. FAA-2014-0742. Houston Executive Airport opened an operating control tower October 1, 2014. Federal regulations (14 CFR 91.126, 91.127, and 91.129) establish airspace requirements around an operating tower. Interested parties were invited to participate in three informal meetings with the local community held on June 17, June 18, and December 15, 2015, during the course of establishing this airspace, and in this rulemaking effort by submitting written comments on the proposal to the FAA. 146 comments were received by the end of the comment period May 12, 2016. An additional five comments were received after the comment period (one having 322 signatures on a petition opposing the upper altitude limit of 2,700 feet MSL; the petition supports 2,000 feet MSL as acceptable and safer). One commenter requested to withdraw his request. Of the 150 comments, many voiced opinions on different aspects of the proposal as described in more detail below.

Summary of Comments

The FAA received multiple comments from 150 commenters that have been grouped to reflect general subject areas. The groups are categorized as follows;

1. Support of the Class D proposal at 2,500 feet 2. Support of the Class D airspace at 2,000 feet 3. Support of the Class D proposal at 1,700 feet 4. Support for Class D at 2,500 but with Full Circle (4 miles) Airspace without cutout for Sport Flyers Airport 5. Concerns of east-west VFR corridor compression 6. Increase airspace to match Class B airspace 7. Support for Class E airspace only 8. No support for any change to the present airspace allocation 9. Airspace compression in the northeast quadrant under Class B

1. Comment: Support of the Class D proposal at 2,500 feet.

Fifty-one comments supported the proposal, as is, with a top of 2,500 feet MSL. The positive comments ranged from support of the proposal at 2,500 feet MSL to extending and expanding controlled airspace to 2,700 feet MSL. One commenter proposed to increase the upper limit to 2,700 feet MSL. There were a variety of reasons cited in support of the proposal, including the following:

(a) Confusing to have an air traffic control tower but no Class D airspace surrounding the airport. Establishing class D airspace on the FAA sectionals charts will better identify the air traffic control tower to our transient and overflying aircraft.

(b) The air traffic control tower will enhance the safety of the operations and support the continued growth of the airport. Standard clearance from Houston Executive Airport is to maintain heading to 2,000 feet. Don't want aircraft at 2,100 feet. Aircraft transitioning along I-10 are in the direct flight path of departing traffic off TME RWY 18. Aircraft flying over I-10 at 2,000 feet without communicating with the tower could easily result in mid-air collision with departing traffic.

(c) Limiting airspace to 2,000 feet will only encourage pilots to transition the airspace with no communication, which is dangerous.

(d) A few miles north of the airport the Class B airspace begins at 3,000 feet but the majority of the Class B area over the airport is 4,000 feet.

(e) Simply requesting a transition to the tower will make everyone aware of the transitioning aircraft.

(f) The airspace is usually congested with pilots landing or departing Houston Executive Airport or nearby airports and pilots flying VFR alongI-10 at 2,500 feet Class D ceiling is the ceiling pilots have been taught to fly.

(g) Should declare the full circle of 4 NM radius as Class D, including surface to 2,700 feet MSL as done at KHY, KAFW, KFWS, KADS.

(h) The rule if adopted would make the controlled airspace around Houston Executive Airport consistent with comparable towered airfields in the U.S. Sugarland and Conroe were given higher ceiling altitudes than 2,500 feet.

(i) Houston Executive Airport is only airport on the west side of Houston on the I-10 corridor with the ability to handle large cabin class aircraft and a runway length of 6,610 feet.

(j) Not true that having the top of the Class D airspace at 2,500 feet “squeezes VFR aircraft into a narrow band.” It is a simple matter to call Houston Executive Tower and coordinate a clearance to transit the Class D airspace or call Houston Approach and get a clearance to transit through the Class B airspace. Support for Class D Airspace, but radar is necessary.

FAA response: An operating tower that meets 14 CFR part 91 regulations is entitled to the establishment of airspace around the tower. Houston Executive Airport (TME) became operational on October 1, 2014. Unless otherwise authorized or required by ATC, 14 CFR 91.126 and FAA Order 7400.2 states that no person may operate an aircraft to, from, or through, an airport having an operational control tower unless two-way radio communications are maintained between that aircraft and the control tower. Communications must be established prior to 4-nautical miles from the airport, up to and including 2,500 feet AGL.

Although the FAA initially considered a top altitude of 2,700 feet, based on feedback from the first informal meeting and considerations for the safe and efficient use of airspace, the FAA determined that 2,500 feet, as provided in 14 CFR 91.126, is an appropriate altitude for the operations at the airport based on further information received from informal meetings, radar operating practices, and surveillance equipment. The airspace was tailored to provide minimum inconvenience while optimizing safety. Radar equipment is not a requirement for a control tower. This particular tower is a Non Federal Contract Tower; the FAA is not responsible for providing this type of equipment. Currently, airport traffic activity does not meet the threshold for establishing a radar environment.

2. Comment: Support of the Class D airspace at 2,000 feet.

Seventy-six comments opposed the 2,500-foot top and another 322 signed a late-filed petition opposing the altitude of 2,500 feet. This group of 398 did support the creation of the airspace if the top altitude was 2,000 feet MSL. They said reducing tower coordination with a 2,000-foot altitude, and allowing for more separation of airspace between Class B and Class D, would provide a greater and safer transition for aircraft flying along Houston's east/west corridor.

Some of the reasons for limiting top of airspace to 2,000 included:

(a) Other airports (DWH, HQZ, GKY, and SGR) have a top altitude of 2,000 feet.

(b) A 2,500 foot MSL will severely restrict approaches and departures at IWS.

(c) A 2,000 foot ceiling or lower could lessen the effect on the KIWS traffic located 12 NM E of TME, which has a high proportion of VFR and sport pilot traffic. Most IFR departures from KIWS (Runway 15) are cleared to enter controlled airspace heading 270 degrees at 2,000 feet.

(d) Industry standard for Class D is a tower with a 4-NM radius and 2,000 feet MSL.

(e) The most commonly used altitudes are around 1,500 feet; this ensures clearance along the entire route of class B at 2,000 feet and 1000 feet minimum altitude over densely populated terrain. It is also common for westbound traffic to stay just north of I-10 and east-bound traffic stays south of I-10. Much of this VFR traffic doesn't want to communicate with the KTME tower. The wisdom of providing only 500 feet of space between the top of class D and the base of Class B (3,000 feet MSL) within two Victor Airways is in question. By establishing the upper limit of the Class D Airspace to 2,000 feet MSL, pilots would have a 500-foot separation from traffic in both Class B and Class D airspace, instead of only 250 feet separation under the proposal.

FAA response: Transiting VFR aircraft are able to fly through this airspace at 2,000 feet by establishing radio communications and receiving approval by the tower based on the air traffic situation. The same aircraft can fly over the airspace at 2,501 feet without communicating with the tower. The potential for aircraft to be departing Houston Executive Airport and climbing to 2,000 feet with aircraft overflying the same area at 2,001 feet does not provide an adequate safety net. Although there was a comment that Sugar Land Airport had a 2,000 foot top altitude, a review of this comment reveals a top altitude up to, but not including 2,600 feet. David Wayne Hooks Airport does have up to but not including a 2,000 foot top altitude; however, this airport underlies Class B airspace that begins at 2,000 feet. An IFR exit to the west of DWH is capped at 2,000 feet. In making its decision, the FAA reviewed the operations at the airport, informal meeting notes, radar operating practices, and surveillance equipment. With respect to the comment about victor airways, they are in a small section of the class D footprint. Approximately 10 percent underlie Class B Shelf at 3,000 feet. Controlled traffic on V-68 andV-222 will be at 3,000 feet or higher. VFR aircraft are knowledgeable about these airways and are to maneuver themselves to be clear of other aircraft, see and avoid. The airspace was tailored to provide minimum inconvenience while optimizing safety. The FAA has determined that 2,500 feet is an appropriate altitude to enhance safety and allow flexibility to the VFR pilot.

3. Comment: Support of the Class D proposal at 1,700 feet.

One commenter supported Class D airspace with an altitude of 1,700 feet.

FAA response: 14 CFR 91.129 sets minimum altitudes when operating in Class D airspace, unless otherwise required, by the distance from cloud criteria; each pilot of a turbine-powered airplane and each pilot of a large airplane must climb to an altitude of 1,500 feet above the surface as rapidly as possible. The FAA has determined that 2,500 feet is an appropriate altitude to enhance safety and allow flexibility to the VFR pilot.

4. Comment: Support for Class D at 2,500 feet but with Full Circle (4 miles) Airspace without Cutout for Sport Flyers Airport.

FAA response: The informal meetings with the community resulted in reducing the size of the proposed Class D to its current cutout shape. This proposal reduces the allowed 4-nautical mile radius around TME to assist the operators transitioning in and out of Sport Flyers Airport without the need of establishing radio communications with TME. The proposed cutout also allows for accommodation of a private airstrip to the southwest of TME. This cutout complies with established rules in FAA Order 7400.2K Chapter 17-2-3, SATELLITE AIRPORTS, paragraph a. Using shelves and/or cutouts to the extent practicable, exclude satellite airports from the Class D airspace area.

5. Comment: Concerns of east-west VFR corridor compression.

Forty-eight comments were received as to this loss of airspace and to the creation of airspace above 2,000 feet as a safety issue, having a major impact on the VFR community. They commented that the east/west corridor along I-10 has long been a familiar route for VFR pilots transitioning through the airspace for the last thirty years; they enjoy the visual reference and not having to communicate with small airports at the accustomed altitude of 2,000 feet. Comments included:

(a) Compressing transient VFR traffic along I-10 corridor to 500′ vertically will increase risk of collision.

(b) Will make flying cross country more stressful.

(c) Proposed airspace is dangerous because it sits at the mouth or exit of the VFR corridor between the two huge Class B airspaces over Houston.

(d) KTME does not need Class D because it does not have a lot of traffic and it is not for the common good of all.

(e) Proposed airspace significantly reduces usable airspace for the majority to accommodate a few elite jets; Safety should be for the most pilots, not the richest. There are only a few IFR days where Class D might be beneficial; but there are many VFR flyers.

(f) Class D should not be implemented until tower existence is published.

(g) Will cause transition to South and cause flights and noise over residential areas of Katy, Cinco Ranch, and Brookshire. Should consider these alternatives: (1) No Class D; (2) Class D ceiling 1,500 AGL rather than 2,000 AGL; (3) Make southern border of Class D align with northern edge of I-10.

(h) VFR traffic will deviate around the south side putting west and east-bound traffic on potential collision course for the following reasons:

(1) By establishing Class D around KTME, this VFR traffic will choose to deviate around the south side of the proposed Class D. That will put west- and east-bound traffic on a potential collision course. Although in practice VFR traffic is often at 1,500′ even this far out west, it could fly at a higher altitude. However, even the Houston VFR flyway chart encourages VFR traffic to stay below 2,500′ in this area. Adhering to that recommended altitude would still require a deviation south around the proposed KTME Class-D, so the safety concern noted above still stands.

(2) VFR aircraft flying in opposite directions would normally have a 1,000 ft. separation between themselves (whole altitudes + 500 ft.). With only 1,500 foot above TME (2,500 ft to 4,000 ft) . . . what are the procedures for safe separation??? IFR are at the whole altitudes! So . . . If TME Class D has a ceiling of 2,500 ft, 2,600 ft to 3,900 ft is all that is left! In such a case. Only one VFR altitude is available [Eastbound: 3,500 ft] [FAR Part 91.159] and that leaves Westbound VFR traffic with dangerous choices. VFR traffic flying over TME at 2,100 with a 2,000 ft. corridor above TME is less likely than VFR traffic using 2,600 or 3,900 in a 1,500 ft. corridor. Westbound VFR won't have any option that will give them more than 400 ft. separation from Eastbound VFR or IFR traffic.

(i) Would have to drop 1,500 feet in order to land at West Houston Airport when coming from the West. Would we be better off with this traffic flying over Houston at 10,000 feet or around the Class B airspace?

(j) This would interfere with all the commercial flights coming into IAH and HOU.

(k) Directly effects VFR traffic on Victor airways.

(l) Rather than speak with the tower at KTME, aircraft will in all likelihood divert either north or south. This then increases over flights to X09 and the Gloster (1XO7) skydive location JIM MAIM.

(m) Eliminates practice area used by local pilots.

(n) IFR has no priority over VFR in uncontrolled airspace.

(o) Same result can be achieved by Class E controlled airspace to the ground, not just at nighttime like in this proposal, but for 24/24 instead of a daytime Class D. I would therefore propose to change the controlled airspace for KTME to Class E 24h instead of day Class D/Night Class E.

(p) IFR pilots could use Hobby.

(q) IFR pilots have the same obligation as VFR pilots to “See and Avoid” when in VMC.

(r) Aircraft diverting either north or south would put aircraft closer to the instrument approaches for KTME.

FAA response: The term corridor is generally used for the portion of I-10 that is underneath the Class B airspace; when the Class B airspace terminates, so does the corridor. It is important to note that the portion of the east/west I-10 corridor that lies inside the Class D does not underlie Class B. The VFR operation can still occur along I-10 either by circumnavigating the area approximately 14 flying miles or by establishing radio communications with the operating tower according to 14 CFR 91.126 or (if Class E airspace) 14 CFR 91.127. Since this area is not charted and the opening of TME was not widely known, the FAA has provided relief during this period by waiving the requirement to establish radio communications with the control tower during the airspace rulemaking process. 14 CFR 91.129 set minimum altitudes when operating in Class D airspace, unless otherwise required by the distance from cloud criteria, each pilot of a turbine-powered airplane and each pilot of a large airplane must climb to an altitude of 1,500 feet above the surface as rapidly as possible. The distance needed to climb to 1,500 feet does not make the option to cap the southern border at I-10 feasible. VFR aircraft departing to and from West Houston Airport could have a normal climb/descent profile by communicating with TME tower and receiving permission to transition through the airspace; this should not be approved if aircraft activity is in the same area. This would maintain or increase safety from today's environment.

This airspace action is not expected to cause any potentially significant environmental impacts, including no significant noise impacts. No extraordinary circumstances exists that warrant preparation of an environmental assessment.

When operating in VFR weather conditions, it is the pilot's responsibility to be vigilant so as to see and avoid other aircraft (14 CFR 91.113(a)). The Aeronautical Information Manual (AIM) recommends that for aircraft 8,000 feet AGL and below, extra vigilance be maintained and that monitoring an appropriate control frequency is to the VFR pilot's advantage to “get the picture of traffic in the area.” VFR pilots are to see and avoid other aircraft and to be extremely vigilant in congested VFR areas and Victor airways. Once again, an operating tower that meets the requirements of FAA Order 7400.2K, Chapter 17, is authorized Class D airspace. This proposal will have Class D airspace during tower operating hours and Class E surface area airspace during non-operating hours. The proposed altitude of 2,500 does not interfere with commercial traffic landing or departing IAH or HOU. The formal establishment of Class D airspace will allow for charting of the airspace dimensions and altitude which will provide notice to pilots to communicate or circumnavigate this area. The pilot will not be affected if the aircraft flies above 2,500 feet. The FAA acknowledges the inconvenience to the VFR pilot of flying at or above 2,500 feet and establishing radio communications with control towers. 14 CFR 91.126, Class G airspace; 14 CFR 91.127, Class E airspace require communication with the operating control tower (TME) unless otherwise authorized by ATC. The FAA does not agree that altitude compression will be constrained in this area since the floor of the Class B airspace is southeast of the proposed Class D airspace.

6. Comment: Three commenters stated that the proposed rulemaking (NPRM) should be to establish Class B Airspace in the Brookshire, TX area, instead of Class D and Class E Airspace. The commenters preferred to have the entire airspace controlled by the FAA. Some of the reasons cited in favor of Class B airspace were:

(a) A few miles north of the airport, the Class B airspace begins at 3,000 feet but the majority of the Class B area over the airport is 4,000 feet.

(b) Raising the top to meet the Class B further removes any confusion to transient traffic.

(c) TME, with its physical location near Houston's Corporate Energy Corridor and ample 6,610′ × 100′ runway, is attracting an ever growing number of larger and faster aircraft (turboprops and jets).

(d) Class D airspace tends to have less recreational flyers and experimental traffic that tend to increase immediate airport traffic congestion and noise with constant circling for touch and goes, etc.

FAA response: This airport and its location do not meet criteria for Class B airspace.

7. Comment: Supports Class E airspace only.

Five comments received supported the proposal of 2,500 feet if the airspace would be classified as Class E airspace.

FAA response: The requirement for VFR aircraft to establish radio communications is still in effect for Class G and/or Class E airspace; 14 CFR 91.126 and 14 CFR 91.127. Establishing the proposed Class D airspace will reduce the overall airspace dimensions. Approval to transit the area is still required; the benefit will be that all aircraft will have access to VFR charts and the airspace would be depicted.

14 CFR 91.127, Operating on or in the vicinity of an airport in Class E airspace, states:

(c) Communications with control towers. Unless otherwise authorized or required by ATC, no person may operate an aircraft to, from, through or on an airport having an operational control tower unless two-way radio communications are maintained between that aircraft and the control tower. Communications must be established prior to 4 nautical miles from the airport, up to and including 2,500 feet AGL. However, if the aircraft radio fails in flight, the pilot in command may operate that aircraft and land if weather conditions are at or above basic VFR weather minimums, visual contact with the tower is maintained, and a clearance to land is received. If the aircraft radio fails while in flight under IFR, the pilot must comply with 14 CFR 91.185.

8. Comment: No support for any change to the present airspace allocation.

Thirty-one comments received rejected the proposal entirely. An immediate return to the status quo was requested based on the long standing operations in this area. Additionally, many commenters cited the east/west I-10 corridor and the compression of the VFR navigable air space in the northeast affected area as a concern. The majority of comments provided for an alternate choice of a top altitude of 2,000 feet.

FAA response: The TME control tower opened October 1, 2014, and is operational; the status quo can no longer be maintained. The FAA is complying with all appropriate regulations.

9. Comment: Airspace compression in the northeast quadrant under Class B.

Twenty comments received concerned the compression of navigable airspace under Class B and Class D airspace around TME. Cited were safety concerns for VFR aircraft to squeeze into an already congested airspace. The concerns were departures of airports underneath the Class B, practice areas for student training, and the airspace compression along the east west I-10 corridor.

FAA response: The FAA has reviewed these concerns and agrees this is a compression of airspace with the establishment of Class D airspace. The proposal notes that 10 percent of the Class D footprint sits below the Class B shelf at 3,000 feet. The east/west I-10 corridor underlies Class B airspace; however, the portion of I-10 that does underlie the proposed Class D does not underlie Class B airspace. During the informal meetings this factor was taken into consideration and resulted in the proposed airspace being lowered from 2,700 feet to 2,500 feet to allow for more airspace. The compression to the northeast underlying Class B airspace is not considered the VFR corridor. The FAA believes this to have minimal impact on those aircraft that would have to fly around or over the proposed airspace.

The tower at Houston Executive Airport is established and the Class D and E airspace areas are being provided according to federal regulations. The Class D proposal to reduce the allowed footprint of the airspace provides for safe and efficient use of airspace. Class D enhances safety by setting VFR weather minima specified in 14 CFR 91.155 and through the communications and other requirements in 14 CFR 91.129 (and 14 CFR 91.127 for E airspace). Once Class D airspace is charted, the information is accessible to all pilots. The FAA understands the concerns of the commenters. However, the FAA chose the upper limit of the airspace at 2,500 feet to establish higher weather minima for VFR aircraft, transitioning above the airspace thus restricting access to VFR flights in the airspace while IFR operations are in progress. VFR aircraft transitioning at 2,000 feet through the airspace will still be allowed to do so as long as radio communications are established with the tower prior to the aircraft entering the Class D airspace, and no additional conflicts with other airspace users arise.

Class D and Class E airspace designations are published in paragraph 5000, 6002, and 6005, respectively, of FAA Order 7400.11A dated August 3, 2016, and effective September 15, 2016, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR part 71.1. The Class E airspace designations listed in this document will be published subsequently in the Order.

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

This document amends FAA Order 7400.11A, airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 3, 2016, and effective September 15, 2016. FAA Order 7400.11A is publicly available as listed in the ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order 7400.11A lists Class A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and reporting points.

The Rule

This amendment to Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 establishes Class D airspace, and Class E surface area airspace extending upward from the surface to and including 2,500 feet MSL within a 4-mile radius of Houston Executive Airport, excluding that airspace west and northwest, to accommodate the establishment of an airport traffic control tower. This action reduces the allowed 4 nautical mile radius around Houston Executive Airport to assist the operators transitioning in and out of Sport Flyers Airport without the need of establishing radio communications with Houston Executive Airport. The proposed cutout also allows for accommodation for a private airstrip to the southwest of Houston Executive Airport. This amendment to Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 also establishes Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet or more above the surface of the earth within a 6.6-mile radius of Houston Executive Airport, to accommodate standard instrument approach procedures. Controlled airspace is needed for the safety and management of IFR operations at the airport.

Class D and E airspace areas are published in paragraph 5000, 6002, and 6005, respectively, of FAA Order 7400.11A, dated August 3, 2016, and effective September 15, 2016, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E airspace designations listed in this document will be published subsequently in the Order.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

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

Environmental Review

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

Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

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

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

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

§ 71.1 [Amended]
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.11A, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 3, 2016, effective September 15, 2016, is amended as follows: Paragraph 5000 Class D Airspace. ASW TX D Brookshire, TX [New] Houston Executive Airport, TX (Lat. 29°48′18″ N., long. 95°53′52″ W.)

That airspace extending upward from the surface to and including 2,500 feet MSL bounded by a line beginning at lat. 29°46′44″ N., long. 95°58′06″ W., to lat. 29°47′35″ N., long. 95°55′49″ W., to lat. 29°51′55″ N., long. 95°55′52″ W., thence clockwise along the 4-mile radius of Houston Executive Airport to the point of beginning. This Class D airspace area is effective during the specific dates and times established in advance by a Notice to Airmen. The effective date and time will thereafter be continuously published in the Chart Supplement.

Paragraph 6002 Class E Airspace Designated as Surface Areas. ASW TX E2 Brookshire, TX [New] Houston Executive Airport, TX (Lat. 29°48′18″ N., long. 95°53′52″ W.)

That airspace extending upward from the surface to and including 2,500 feet MSL bounded by a line beginning at lat. 29°46′44″ N., long. 95°58′06″ W., to lat. 29°47′35″ N., long. 95°55′49″ W., to lat. 29°51′55″ N., long. 95°55′52″ W., thence clockwise along the 4-mile radius of Houston Executive Airport, to the point of beginning. This Class E airspace area is effective during the specific dates and times established in advance by a Notice to Airmen. The effective date and time will thereafter be continuously published in the Chart Supplement.

Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas Extending Upward From 700 Feet or More Above the Surface of the Earth. ASW TX E5 Brookshire, TX [New] Houston Executive Airport, TX (Lat. 29°48′18″ N., long. 95°53′52″ W.)

That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface within a 6.6-mile radius of Houston Executive Airport.

Issued in Fort Worth, TX, on September 14, 2016. Vonnie L. Royal, Manager, Operations Support Group, ATO Central Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2016-22723 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 71 [Docket No. FAA-2016-5388; Airspace Docket No. 16-ACE-4] Revocation of Class E Airspace; Alliance, NE; and Amendment of Class E Airspace for the Following Nebraska Towns; Albion, NE; Alliance, NE; Gothenburg, NE; Holdrege, NE; Imperial, NE; Lexington, NE; and Millard Airport, Omaha, NE AGENCY:

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

This action removes Class E surface area airspace at Alliance Municipal Airport, Alliance, NE; and modifies Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface at Albion Municipal Airport, Albion, NE; Alliance Municipal Airport, Alliance, NE; Quinn Field, Gothenburg, NE; Brewster Field Airport, Holdrege, NE; Imperial Municipal Airport, Imperial, NE; Jim Kelly Field, Lexington, NE; and Millard Airport, Omaha, NE. Decommissioning of non-directional radio beacons (NDB), cancellation of NDB approaches, and implementation of area navigation (RNAV) procedures have made this action necessary for the safety and management of Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) operations at the above airports. This action also updates the geographic coordinates for Quinn Field, Imperial Municipal Airport, and Jim Kelly Field to coincide with the FAA's aeronautical database.

DATES:

Effective 0901 UTC, January 5, 2017. The Director of the Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under Title 1, Code of Federal Regulations, part 51, subject to the annual revision of FAA Order 7400.11A and publication of conforming amendments.

ADDRESSES:

FAA Order 7400.11A, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, and subsequent amendments can be viewed online at http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. For further information, you can contact the Airspace Policy Group, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591; telephone: 202-267-8783. The Order is also available for inspection at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of FAA Order 7400.11A at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal-regulations/ibr_locations.html.

FAA Order 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is published yearly and effective on September 15.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106 describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority as it removes Class E surface area airspace at Alliance Municipal Airport, Alliance, NE; and modifies Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface at Albion Municipal Airport, Albion, NE; Alliance Municipal Airport; Quinn Field, Gothenburg, NE; Brewster Field Airport, Holdrege, NE; Imperial Municipal Airport, Imperial, NE; Jim Kelly Field, Lexington, NE; and Millard Airport, Omaha, NE.

History

On May 3, 2016, the FAA published in the Federal Register a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to remove Class E surface area airspace at Alliance Municipal Airport, Alliance, NE; and modify Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface at Albion Municipal Airport, Albion, NE; Alliance Municipal Airport; Quinn Field, Gothenburg, NE; Brewster Field Airport, Holdrege, NE; Imperial Municipal Airport, Imperial, NE; Jim Kelly Field, Lexington, NE; and Millard Airport, Omaha, NE. (81 FR 26503) Docket No. FAA-2016-5388. Interested parties were invited to participate in this rulemaking effort by submitting written comments on the proposal to the FAA. No comments were received.

Class E airspace designations are published in paragraph 6002 and 6005, respectively, of FAA Order 7400.11A, dated August 3, 2016, and effective September 15, 2016, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E airspace designations listed in this document will be published subsequently in the Order.

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

This document amends FAA Order 7400.11A, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 3, 2016, and effective September 15, 2016. FAA Order 7400.11A is publicly available as listed in the ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order 7400.11A lists Class A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and reporting points.

The Rule

This amendment to Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 removes Class E surface area airspace at Alliance Airport, Alliance, NE., as the airspace is no longer needed. This action also modifies Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface at the following airports:

Within a 6.7-mile radius of Albion Municipal Airport, Albion, NE., with segments extending from the 6.7-mile radius to 9,7 miles southeast, and 6.7 miles northwest, of the airport;

Within a 7.2-mile radius of Alliance Municipal Airport, Alliance, NE;

Within a 7.3-mile radius of Quinn Field, Gothenburg, NE., with segments extending from the 7.3-mile radius of the airport to 11.1 miles northeast, and 7.3 miles southwest, of the airport;

Within a 6.5-mile radius of Brewster Field Airport, Holdrege, NE;

Within a 6.5-mile radius of Imperial Municipal Airport, Imperial, NE;

Within a 6.5-mile radius of Jim Kelly Field, Lexington, NE;

And within a 6.7-mile radius of Millard Airport, Omaha, NE.

Airspace reconfiguration is necessary due to the decommissioning of NDBs, cancellation of NDB approaches, and implementation of RNAV procedures at the above airports for the safety and management of the standard instrument approach procedures for IFR operations at the airports. The geographic coordinates for Quinn Field, Imperial Municipal Airport, and Jim Kelly Field are updated to be in concert with the FAAs aeronautical database.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

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

Environmental Review

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

Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

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

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

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

§ 71.1 [Amended]
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.11A, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 3, 2016, and effective September 15, 2016, is amended as follows: Paragraph 6002 Class E Airspace Designated as Surface Areas. ACE NE E2 Alliance, NE [Removed] Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas Extending Upward From 700 Feet or More Above the Surface of the Earth. ACE NE E5 Albion, NE [Amended] Albion Municipal Airport, NE (Lat. 41°43′43″ N., long. 98°03′21″ W.)

That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface within a 6.7-mile radius of Albion Municipal Airport, and within 2.6 miles each side of the 154° bearing from the airport extending from the 6.7-mile radius to 9.7 miles southeast of the airport, and within 3.7 miles each side of the 334° bearing from the airport extending from the 6.7-mile radius to 10.1 miles northwest from the airport.

ACE NE E5 Alliance, NE [Amended] Alliance Municipal Airport, NE (Lat. 42° 03′12″ N., long. 102°48′14″ W.)

That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface within a 7.2-mile radius of Alliance Municipal Airport.

ACE NE E5 Gothenburg, NE [Amended] Gothenburg, Quinn Field, NE (Lat. 40°55′32″ N., long. 100°08′48″ W.)

That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface within an 7.3-mile radius of Quinn Field, and within 4 miles each side of the 030° bearing from the airport extending from the 7.3-mile radius to 11.1 miles northeast of the airport, and within 4 miles each side of the 218° bearing from the airport extending from the 7.3-mile radius to 10.5 miles southwest of the airport.

ACE NE E5 Holdrege, NE [Amended] Holdrege, Brewster Field Airport, NE (Lat. 40°27′08″ N., long. 99°20′11″ W.)

That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface within a 6.5-mile radius of Brewster Field Airport.

ACE NE E5 Imperial, NE [Amended] Imperial Municipal Airport, NE (Lat. 40°30′37″ N., long. 101°37′13″ W.)

That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface within a 6.5-mile radius of Imperial Municipal Airport.

ACE NE E5 Lexington, NE [Amended] Lexington, Jim Kelly Field, NE (Lat. 40°47′26″ N., long. 99°46′33″ W.)

That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface within a 6.5-mile radius of Jim Kelly Field.

ACE NE E5 Omaha, Millard Airport, NE [Amended] Omaha, Millard Airport, NE (Lat. 41°11′46″ N., long. 96°06′44″ W.)

That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface within a 6.7-mile radius of Millard Airport.

Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on September 9, 2016. Walter Tweedy, Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, ATO Central Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2016-22736 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 71 [Docket No. FAA-2014-0726; Airspace Docket No. 14-ASO-9] Amendment of Class D and E Airspace, and Revocation of Class E Airspace; Troy, AL AGENCY:

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

This action amends Class D and E airspace, and removes Class E airspace designated as an extension at Troy Municipal Airport at N. Kenneth Campbell Field (formerly Troy Municipal Airport), Troy, AL. The Troy VHF Omnidirectional Radio Range (VOR) has been decommissioned, therefore Class E extension airspace is no longer needed, and new Standard Instrument Approach Procedures have been developed, requiring adjustments in Class D airspace and Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface at the airport. This action enhances the safety and airspace management of Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) operations at the airport. This action also updates the geographic coordinates of the airport and recognizes the name change of the airport.

DATES:

Effective 0901 UTC, November 10, 2016. The Director of the Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under title 1, Code of Federal Regulations, part 51, subject to the annual revision of FAA Order 7400.11 and publication of conforming amendments.

ADDRESSES:

FAA Order 7400.11A, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, and subsequent amendments can be viewed on line at http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. For further information, you can contact the Airspace Policy Group, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591; telephone: 1-800-647-8927, or 202-267-8783. The Order is also available for inspection at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of FAA Order 7400.11A at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal-regulations/ibr_locations.html.

FAA Order 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is published yearly and effective on September 15.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106 describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part, A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority as it amends Class D and Class E airspace at Troy Municipal Airport at N. Kenneth Campbell Field, Troy, AL.

History

On June 21, 2016, the FAA published in the Federal Register a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend Class D and Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface at Troy Municipal Airport at N. Kenneth Campbell Field, formerly Troy Municipal Airport, Troy, AL, (81 FR 40213) Docket No. FAA-2014-0726, as new Standard Instrument Approach Procedures have been developed requiring airspace redesign. Additionally, Class E airspace designated as an extension to Class D surface area would be removed due to the decommissioning of the Troy VOR and cancellation of the VOR approaches. The geographic coordinates of the airport would be amended to coincide with the FAA's aeronautical database. Interested parties were invited to participate in this rulemaking effort by submitting written comments on the proposal to the FAA. No comments were received.

Class D and Class E airspace designations are published in paragraphs 5000, 6004 and 6005, respectively, of FAA Order 7400.11A dated August 3, 2016, and effective September 15, 2016, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class D and Class E airspace designations listed in this document will be published subsequently in the Order.

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

This document amends FAA Order 7400.11A, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 3, 2016, and effective September 15, 2016. FAA Order 7400.11A is publicly available as listed in the ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order 7400.11A lists Class A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and reporting points.

The Rule

This amendment to Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 amends Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface within a 7.6-mile radius of Troy Municipal Airport at N. Kenneth Campbell Field and within 2-miles each side of a 070° bearing from the airport to 11.5-miles northeast of the airport, and within 2-miles each side of a 253° bearing from the airport to 11.3-miles southwest of the airport. Additionally, Class E airspace designated as an extension to Class D surface area is removed due to the decommissioning of the Troy VOR and cancellation of the VOR approaches. The geographic coordinates of the airport are amended to coincide with the FAAs aeronautical database. Also, this action recognizes the name change of Troy Municipal Airport at N. Kenneth Campbell Field (formerly Troy Municipal Airport).

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

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

Environmental Review

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

Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

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

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

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

§ 71.1 [Amended]
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.11A, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 3, 2016, effective September 15, 2016, is amended as follows: Paragraph 5000 Class D Airspace. ASO AL D Troy, AL [Amended] Troy Municipal Airport at N. Kenneth Campbell Field, AL (Lat. 31°51′36″ N., long. 86°00′50″ W.)

That airspace extending upward from the surface to and including 2,900 feet MSL within a 5-mile radius of Troy Municipal Airport at N. Kenneth Campbell Field. This Class D airspace area is effective during specific dates and times established in advance by a Notice to Airmen. The effective date and time will thereafter be continuously published in the Airport/Facility Directory.

Paragraph 6004 Class E Airspace Designated as an Extension to a Class D Surface Area. ASO AL E4 Troy, AL [Removed] Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas Extending Upward From 700 Feet or More Above the Surface of the Earth. ASO AL E5 Troy, AL [Amended] Troy Municipal Airport at N. Kenneth Campbell Field, AL (Lat. 31°51′36″ N., long. 86°00′50″ W.)

That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface within a 7.6-mile radius of Troy Municipal Airport at N. Kenneth Campbell Field and within 2-miles each side of a 070° bearing from the airport to 11.5-miles northeast of the airport, and within 2-miles each side of a 253° bearing from the airport to 11.3-miles southwest of the airport.

Issued in College Park, Georgia, on September 7, 2016. Joey L. Medders, Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, Eastern Service Center, Air Traffic Organization.
[FR Doc. 2016-22735 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 71 [Docket No. FAA-2016-8816; Airspace Docket No. 16-AEA-5] Amendment of Class E Airspace, Ithaca, NY AGENCY:

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

This action amends Class E airspace Designated as an Extension at Ithaca Tompkins Regional Airport, Ithaca, NY, by updating the geographic coordinates of the Ithaca VHF omnidirectional range/distance measuring equipment, (VOR/DME), and the airport, as well as changing the airport name. This is an administrative change and does not affect the boundaries or operating requirements of the airspace.

DATES:

Effective 0901 UTC, November 10, 2016. The Director of the Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under Title 1, Code of Federal Regulations, part 51, subject to the annual revision of FAA Order 7400.11 and publication of conforming amendments.

ADDRESSES:

FAA Order 7400.11A, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, and subsequent amendments can be viewed online at http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. For further information, you can contact the Airspace Policy Group, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591; telephone: 202-267-8783. The Order is also available for inspection at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of FAA Order 7400.11A at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal-regulations/ibr_locations.html.

FAA Order 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is published yearly and effective on September 15.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106 describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority as it amends Class E airspace at Ithaca Tompkins Regional Airport, Ithaca, NY.

History

In a review of the airspace for Ithaca Tompkins Regional Airport (formerly Tompkins County Airport), Ithaca, NY, the FAA found the airport name and geographic coordinates for the airport and the Ithaca VOR/DME, as published in FAA Order 7400.11A, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, do not match the FAA's charting information for Class E Airspace Designated as an Extension to a Class D Surface Area.

Class E airspace designations are published in paragraph 6004 of FAA Order 7400.11A dated August 3, 2016, and effective September 15, 2016, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR part 71.1. The Class E airspace designations listed in this document will be published subsequently in the Order.

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

This document amends FAA Order 7400.11A, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 3, 2016, and effective September 15, 2016. FAA Order 7400.11A is publicly available as listed in the ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order 7400.11A lists Class A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and reporting points.

The Rule

This action amends Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) Part 71 by amending Class E airspace designated as an extension at Ithaca Tompkins Regional Airport, Ithaca, NY. A minor adjustment to the geographic coordinates of the airport and the Ithaca VOR/DME is made to be in concert with the FAA's aeronautical database, as well as a name change from Tompkins County Airport to Ithaca Tompkins Regional Airport.

This is an administrative change and does not affect the boundaries, or operating requirements of the airspace, therefore, notice and public procedure under 5 U.S.C. 553(b) are unnecessary.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

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

Environmental Review

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

Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

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

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

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

§ 71.1 [Amended]
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.11A, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 3, 2016, effective September 15, 2016, is amended as follows: Paragraph 6004 Class E Airspace Designated as an Extension to a Class D Surface Area. AEA NY E4 Ithaca, NY [Amended] Ithaca Tompkins Regional Airport, Ithaca, NY (Lat. 42°29′29″ N., long. 76°27′31″ W.) Ithaca VOR/DME (Lat. 42°29′42″ N., long. 76°27′35″ W.)

That airspace extending upward from the surface from the 4-mile radius of the Ithaca Tompkins Regional Airport to the 5.7-mile radius of the airport; clockwise from the 329° bearing to the 081° bearing from the airport; that airspace from the 4-mile radius of Ithaca Tompkins Regional Airport to the 8.7-mile radius of the airport extending clockwise from the 081° bearing to the 137° from the airport; that airspace from the 4-mile radius of Ithaca Tompkins Regional Airport; to the 6.6-mile radius of the airport, extending clockwise from the 137° bearing to the 170° bearing from the airport; that airspace from the 4-mile radius to the 5.7-mile radius of the Ithaca Tompkins Regional Airport, extending clockwise from the 170° bearing to the 196° bearing from the airport; and that airspace within 2.7 miles each side of the Ithaca VOR/DME 305° radial extending from the 4-mile radius of Ithaca Tompkins Regional Airport to 7.4 miles northwest of the Ithaca VOR/DME. This Class E airspace area is effective during specific dates and times established in advance by a Notice to Airmen. The effective date and time will thereafter be published continuously in the Airport/Facility Directory.

Issued in College Park, Georgia, on September 7, 2016. Joey L. Medders, Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, Eastern Service Center, Air Traffic Organization.
[FR Doc. 2016-22741 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration 21 CFR Part 886 [Docket No. FDA-2016-N-2656] Medical Devices; Ophthalmic Devices; Classification of Strabismus Detection Device AGENCY:

Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION:

Final order.

SUMMARY:

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is classifying the strabismus detection device into class II (special controls). The special controls that will apply to the device are identified in this order and will be part of the codified language for the strabismus detection device's classification. The Agency is classifying the device into class II (special controls) in order to provide a reasonable assurance of safety and effectiveness of the device.

DATES:

This order is effective September 22, 2016. The classification was applicable on June 8, 2016.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Elvin Ng, Center for Devices and Radiological Health, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 66, Rm. 2431, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 240-402-4662, [email protected]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

In accordance with section 513(f)(1) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the FD&C Act) (21 U.S.C. 360c(f)(1)), devices that were not in commercial distribution before May 28, 1976 (the date of enactment of the Medical Device Amendments of 1976), generally referred to as postamendments devices, are classified automatically by statute into class III without any FDA rulemaking process. These devices remain in class III and require premarket approval, unless and until the device is classified or reclassified into class I or II, or FDA issues an order finding the device to be substantially equivalent, in accordance with section 513(i) of the FD&C Act, to a predicate device that does not require premarket approval. The Agency determines whether new devices are substantially equivalent to predicate devices by means of premarket notification procedures in section 510(k) of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 360(k)) and part 807 (21 CFR part 807) of the regulations.

Section 513(f)(2) of the FD&C Act, as amended by section 607 of the Food and Drug Administration Safety and Innovation Act (Pub. L. 112-144), provides two procedures by which a person may request FDA to classify a device under the criteria set forth in section 513(a)(1). Under the first procedure, the person submits a premarket notification under section 510(k) of the FD&C Act for a device that has not previously been classified and, within 30 days of receiving an order classifying the device into class III under section 513(f)(1) of the FD&C Act, the person requests a classification under section 513(f)(2). Under the second procedure, rather than first submitting a premarket notification under section 510(k) of the FD&C Act and then a request for classification under the first procedure, the person determines that there is no legally marketed device upon which to base a determination of substantial equivalence and requests a classification under section 513(f)(2) of the FD&C Act. If the person submits a request to classify the device under this second procedure, FDA may decline to undertake the classification request if FDA identifies a legally marketed device that could provide a reasonable basis for review of substantial equivalence with the device or if FDA determines that the device submitted is not of “low-moderate risk” or that general controls would be inadequate to control the risks and special controls to mitigate the risks cannot be developed.

In response to a request to classify a device under either procedure provided by section 513(f)(2) of the FD&C Act, FDA shall classify the device by written order within 120 days. This classification will be the initial classification of the device.

On December 11, 2013, RebiScan, Inc., submitted a request for classification of the Pediatric Vision Scanner under section 513(f)(2) of the FD&C Act.

In accordance with section 513(f)(2) of the FD&C Act, FDA reviewed the request in order to classify the device under the criteria for classification set forth in section 513(a)(1). FDA classifies devices into class II if general controls by themselves are insufficient to provide reasonable assurance of safety and effectiveness, but there is sufficient information to establish special controls to provide reasonable assurance of the safety and effectiveness of the device for its intended use. After review of the information submitted in the request, FDA determined that the device can be classified into class II with the establishment of special controls. FDA believes these special controls, in addition to general controls, will provide reasonable assurance of the safety and effectiveness of the device.

Therefore, on June 8, 2016, FDA issued an order to the requestor classifying the device into class II. FDA is codifying the classification of the device by adding 21 CFR 886.1342.

Following the effective date of this final classification order, any firm submitting a premarket notification (510(k)) for a strabismus detection device will need to comply with the special controls named in this final order.

The device is assigned the generic name strabismus detection device, and it is identified as a prescription device designed to simultaneously illuminate both eyes with polarized light for automated detection of strabismus by analyzing foveal birefringence properties.

FDA has identified the following risks to health associated specifically with this type of device and the measures required to mitigate these risks in table 1.

Table 1—Strabismus Detection Device Risks to Health and Mitigation Measures Identified risk Mitigation measures Diagnostic risks (false positives, false negatives, no output) • Clinical performance testing; • Non-clinical performance testing; • Software verification, validation and hazard analysis; and • Labeling. Electromagnetic interference with other devices • Electromagnetic compatibility (EMC) testing; and • Labeling. Electrical shock • Electrical safety testing; and • Labeling. Ocular Light Toxicity • Optical radiation safety testing; • Software verification, validation and hazard analysis; and • Labeling. Use Error • Labeling.

FDA believes that special controls, in combination with the general controls, address these risks to health and provide reasonable assurance of the safety and effectiveness.

Strabismus detection devices are not safe for use except under the supervision of a practitioner licensed by law to direct the use of the device. As such, the device is a prescription device and must satisfy prescription labeling requirements (see 21 CFR 801.109, Prescription devices).

Section 510(m) of the FD&C Act provides that FDA may exempt a class II device from the premarket notification requirements under section 510(k), if FDA determines that premarket notification is not necessary to provide reasonable assurance of the safety and effectiveness of the device. For this type of device, FDA has determined that premarket notification is necessary to provide reasonable assurance of the safety and effectiveness of the device. Therefore, this device type is not exempt from premarket notification requirements. Persons who intend to market this type of device must submit to FDA a premarket notification, prior to marketing the device, which contains information about the strabismus detection device they intend to market.

II. Analysis of Environmental Impact

The Agency has determined under 21 CFR 25.34(b) 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.

III. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

This final order refers to previously approved collections of information found in other FDA regulations. These collections of information are subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520). The collections of information in part 807, subpart E, regarding premarket notification submissions, have been approved under OMB control number 0910-0120; the collections of information in 21 CFR part 820, regarding the quality system regulation, have been approved under OMB control number 0910-0073; and the collections of information in 21 CFR part 801, regarding labeling, have been approved under OMB control number 0910-0485.

List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 886

Medical devices, Ophthalmic goods and services.

Therefore, under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and under authority delegated to the Commissioner of Food and Drugs, 21 CFR part 886 is amended as follows:

PART 886—OPHTHALMIC DEVICES 1. The authority citation for 21 CFR part 886 continues to read as follows: Authority:

21 U.S.C. 351, 360, 360c, 360e, 360j, 371.

2. Add § 886.1342 to subpart B to read as follows:
§ 886.1342 Strabismus detection device.

(a) Identification. A strabismus detection device is a prescription device designed to simultaneously illuminate both eyes with polarized light for automated detection of strabismus by analyzing foveal birefringence properties.

(b) Classification. Class II (special controls). The special controls for this device are:

(1) Clinical performance testing must demonstrate the device performs as intended under anticipated conditions of use. Testing must be conducted in a representative patient population and clinical setting for the indicated use. Demonstration of clinical performance must include assessment of sensitivity and specificity compared to a clearly defined reference standard (e.g., comprehensive ophthalmological examination comprises age-appropriate visual acuity testing, examination of the external ocular adnexae and orbit, anterior segment evaluation, extraocular motility evaluation, assessment of stereopsis, cycloplegic refraction, and dilated fundus examination).

(2) Non-clinical performance testing must demonstrate the device performs as intended under anticipated conditions of use. The following technical characteristics must be evaluated:

(i) Verification of lowest detectable amount of deviation; and

(ii) Validation of the accuracy and precision at the lowest detectable amount of deviation.

(3) Software verification, validation, and hazard analysis must be performed.

(4) Optical radiation safety testing must demonstrate the device is safe per the directions for use.

(5) Performance testing must demonstrate the electromagnetic compatibility of the device.

(6) Performance testing must demonstrate the electrical safety of the device.

(7) Labeling must include the following:

(i) Summaries of non-clinical and clinical performance testing;

(ii) Instructions on how to correctly use and maintain the device;

(iii) Instructions and explanation of all user-interface components; and

(iv) Information related to electromagnetic compatibility and optical radiation classification.

Dated: September 16, 2016. Leslie Kux, Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2016-22801 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT 22 CFR Part 240 USAID Sovereign Loan Guarantees—Standard Terms and Conditions AGENCY:

Agency for International Development (USAID).

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

This regulation prescribes the procedures and standard terms and conditions applicable to loan guarantees to be issued for the benefit of Ukraine.

DATES:

Effective September 21, 2016.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

D. Bruce McPherson, Office of the General Counsel, U.S. Agency for International Development, Washington, DC 20523-6601; tel. 202-712-1611, fax 202-216-3055.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Pursuant to the authority of section 7034(o)(1) of the Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 2016 (Div. K, Pub. L. 114-113), the United States of America, acting through the U.S. Agency for International Development, may issue certain loan guarantees applicable to sums borrowed by Ukraine (the “Borrower”), not exceeding an aggregate total of U.S. $1 billion in principal amount. Upon issuance, the loan guarantees shall ensure the Borrower's repayment of 100% of principal and interest due under such borrowings and the full faith and credit of the United States of America shall be pledged for the full payment and performance of such guarantee obligations.

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

List of Subjects in 22 CFR Part 240

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

Authority and Issuance Accordingly, part 240 is added to title 22, chapter II, of the Code of Federal Regulations, to read as follows: PART 240—SOVEREIGN LOAN GUARANTEE—STANDARD TERMS AND CONDITIONS Sec. 240.1 Purpose. 240.2 Definitions. 240.3 The Guarantee. 240.4 Guarantee eligibility. 240.5 Non-impairment of the Guarantee. 240.6 Transferability of Guarantee; Note Register. 240.7 Fiscal Agent obligations. 240.8 Event of Default; Application for Compensation; payment. 240.9 No acceleration of Eligible Notes. 240.10 Payment to USAID of excess amounts received by a Noteholder. 240.11 Subrogation of USAID. 240.12 Prosecution of claims. 240.13 Change in agreements. 240.14 Arbitration. 240.15 Notice. 240.16 Governing Law. Appendix A to Part 240—Application for Compensation Authority:

Section 7034(o)(1) of the Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 2016 (Div. K, Pub. L. 114-113).

§ 240.1 Purpose.

The purpose of the regulations in this part is to prescribe the procedures and standard terms and conditions applicable to loan guarantees issued for the benefit of the Borrower, pursuant to section 7034(o)(1) of the Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 2016 (Div. K, Pub. L. 114-113) (the “Authority”). The loan guarantees will be issued as provided herein pursuant to a Loan Guarantee Agreement signed on June 3, 2016, between the United States of America and Ukraine (the “Loan Guarantee Agreement”). The loan guarantee will apply to sums borrowed during a period beginning on the date that the Loan Guarantee Agreement enters into force and ending thirty days after such date, not exceeding an aggregate total of one billion United States Dollars ($1,000,000,000) in principal amount. The loan guarantees shall ensure the Borrower's repayment of 100% of principal and interest due under such borrowings. The full faith and credit of the United States of America is pledged for the full payment and performance of such guarantee obligations.

§ 240.2 Definitions.

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

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

Application for Compensation means an executed application in the form of appendix A to this part which a Noteholder, or the Fiscal Agent on behalf of a Noteholder, files with USAID pursuant to § 240.8.

Borrower means Ukraine.

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

Date of Application means the date on which an Application for Compensation is actually received by USAID pursuant to § 240.15.

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

Eligible Note(s) means [a] Note[s] meeting the eligibility criteria set out in § 240.4.

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

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

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

Guarantee means the guarantee of USAID pursuant to the Authority.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

§ 240.3 The Guarantee.

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

§ 240.4 Guarantee eligibility.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

§ 240.5 Non-impairment of the Guarantee.

After issuance of a Guarantee, that Guarantee will be an unconditional, full faith and credit obligation of the United States of America, and will not be affected or impaired by any subsequent condition or event. This non-impairment of the guarantee provision shall not, however, be operative with respect to any loss arising out of fraud or misrepresentation for which the claiming Noteholder is responsible or of which it had knowledge at the time it became a Noteholder. Moreover, the Guarantee shall not be affected or impaired by:

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

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

§ 240.6 Transferability of Guarantee; Note Register.

A Noteholder may assign, transfer or pledge an Eligible Note to any Person. Any such assignment, transfer or pledge shall be effective on the date that the name of the new Noteholder is entered on the Note Register. USAID shall be entitled to treat the Persons in whose names the Eligible Notes are registered as the owners thereof for all purposes of this Guarantee and USAID shall not be affected by notice to the contrary.

§ 240.7 Fiscal Agent obligations.

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

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

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

§ 240.9 No acceleration of Eligible Notes.

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

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

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

§ 240.11 Subrogation of USAID.

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

§ 240.12 Prosecution of claims.

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

§ 240.13 Change in agreements.

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

§ 240.14 Arbitration.

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

§ 240.15 Notice.

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

§ 240.16 Governing Law.

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

Appendix A to Part 240—Application for Compensation United States Agency for International Development Washington, DC 20523

Ref: Guarantee dated as of ___, 20_:

Gentlemen: You are hereby advised that payment of $___(consisting of $ ___ of principal, $___ of interest and $___ in Further Guaranteed Payments, as defined in § 240.02 of the Standard Terms and Conditions of the above-mentioned Guarantee) was due on ___, 20_, on $___ Principal Amount of Notes issued by Ukraine (the “Borrower”) held by the undersigned. Of such amount $___ was not received on such date and has not been received by the undersigned at the date hereof. In accordance with the terms and provisions of the above-mentioned Guarantee, the undersigned hereby applies, under § 240.08 of said Guarantee, for payment of $___, representing $___, the Principal Amount of the presently outstanding Note(s) of the Borrower held by the undersigned that was due and payable on ___ and that remains unpaid, and $___, the Interest Amount on such Note(s) that was due and payable by the Borrower on ___ and that remains unpaid, and $___ in Further Guaranteed Payments,1 plus accrued and unpaid interest thereon from the date of default with respect to such payments to and including the date payment in full is made by you pursuant to said Guarantee, at the rate of ___ % per annum, being the rate for such interest accrual specified in such Note. Such payment is to be made at [state payment instructions of Noteholder or Fiscal Agent, as applicable].

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

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

[Name of Applicant] By: Name: Title: Dated:
Dated: September 19, 2016. D. Bruce McPherson, Attorney Advisor, Office of the General Counsel, U.S. Agency for International Development.
[FR Doc. 2016-22856 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 117 [Docket No. USCG-2016-0890] Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Red River, Alexandria, LA AGENCY:

Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION:

Notice of deviation from drawbridge regulations.

SUMMARY:

The Coast Guard has issued a temporary deviation from the operating schedule that governs the US 165 (Jackson Street) Drawbridge across the Red River, mile 88.6, at Alexandria, Louisiana. The deviation is necessary to allow the bridge owner time to adjust the new pinion bearings that are essential to the continued safe operation of the drawbridge. This deviation allows the bridge to remain in the closed-to-navigation position.

DATES:

This deviation is effective without actual notice from September 22, 2016 until 6 p.m., September 30, 2016. For the purposes of enforcement, actual notice will be used from 6 a.m. to 6 p.m., each day, from September 26, 2016 until September 30, 2016.

ADDRESSES:

The docket for this deviation, (USCG-2016-0890) 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 Eric A. Washburn, Bridge Administrator, Western Rivers, Coast Guard; telephone 314-269-2378, email [email protected]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development requested a temporary deviation for the US 165 (Jackson Street) Drawbridge, across the Red River, mile 88.6, at Alexandria, Louisiana. It has a vertical clearance of 40.0 feet above normal pool in the closed-to-navigation position. The US 165 (Jackson Street) Drawbridge currently operates in accordance with 33 CFR 117.491(b).

This deviation period is from 6 a.m. to 6 p.m., each day, from September 26, 2016 to September 30, 2016 when the draw span will remain in the closed-to-navigation position. During this time the bridge owner will adjust the new pinion bearings that are essential to the continued safe operation of the drawbridge. Navigation on the waterway consists primarily of commercial tows and recreational watercraft and will not be significantly impacted. This temporary deviation has been coordinated with waterway users. No objections were received.

The bridge will not be able to open for emergencies and there is no immediate alternate route for vessels to pass this section of the Red River. The Coast Guard will also inform the users of the waterway through our Local and Broadcast Notices to Mariners of the change in operating schedule for the bridge so the vessel operators can arrange their transits to minimize any impact caused by the temporary deviation.

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

Dated: September 16, 2016. Eric A. Washburn, Bridge Administrator, Western Rivers.
[FR Doc. 2016-22822 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 165 [Docket Number USCG-2016-0818] RIN 1625-AA00 Safety Zone; Columbia River, Sand Island, WA AGENCY:

Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION:

Temporary final rule.

SUMMARY:

The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone for the navigable waters of the Columbia River within a 500-yard radius of the small boat “Nessy,” while in the area of Sand Island, near Chinook, WA, and all involved associated vessels in support of the Double-Crested Cormorant removal operations conducted by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and U.S. Department of Agriculture Wildlife Services. This regulation prohibits persons and vessels from being in the safety zone unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Columbia River, or a designated representative.

DATES:

This rule is effective from September 21, 2016 through October 21, 2016.

ADDRESSES:

To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-2016-0818 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 Mr. Kenneth Lawrenson, Waterways Management Division, Marine Safety Unit Portland, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone 503-240-9319, 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 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and U.S. Department of Agriculture Wildlife Services notified the Coast Guard that they intend to conduct federally permitted removal operations of the Double-Crested Cormorant starting September 21, 2016. In response, on August 23, 2016, the Coast Guard published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) titled Safety Zone; Columbia River, Sand Island, WA 81 FR 57507. There we stated why we issued the NPRM, and invited comments on our proposed regulatory action related to this safety zone. During the comment period that ended September 12, 2016 we received no comments.

We are issuing this rule, and under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for making it effective less than 30 days after publication in the Federal Register. Delaying the effective date of this rule would be impracticable because such delay would eliminate the safety zone's effectiveness and usefulness in preventing dangers to the boating public associated with the removal operations being conducted using firearms and live ammunition.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 33 U.S.C. 1231. Coast Guard Captains of the Port are granted authority to establish safety zones in 33 CFR 1.05-1(f) for safety purposes as described in 33 CFR part 165.

The Army Corps of Engineers and U.S. Department of Agriculture Wildlife Services will conduct a federally permitted removal operation of the Double-Crested Cormorant starting September 21, 2016. This operation will involve the use of firearms and live ammunition. The Captain of the Port Sector Columbia River (COTP) has determined that potential hazards associated with the removal operation will be a safety concern for anyone within a 500-yard radius of the small boat “Nessy,” while in the area encompassing these points: 46°15′45″ N., 123°59′39″ W.; 46°15′24″ N., 123°59′42″ W.; 46°13′32″ N., 123°57′18″ W.; 46°15′9″ N., 123°55′24″ W.; and 46°15′54″ N., 123°58′6″ W., and any associated support vessel(s). The safety zone is needed to protect personnel and vessels in the navigable waters within the safety zone during the removal operations.

IV. Discussion of Comments, Changes, and the Rule

As noted above, we received no comments on our NPRM published August 23, 2016. There are two changes in the regulatory text of this rule from the proposed rule in the NPRM. The change in paragraph (a) of the regulation is non-substantive and clarifies the language that describes the area that is designated a safety zone. The change in paragraph (c) of the regulation updates the language regarding assistance from state law enforcement to align with the statute cited.

This rule establishes a safety zone from September 21, 2016, through October 21, 2016. The safety zone will cover all navigable waters of the Columbia River within 500 yards of the small boat “Nessy,” and all involved associated support vessels being used by personnel during the removal operation, conducted in the area encompassed by these points: 46°15′45″ N., 123°59′39″ W.; 46°15′24″ N., 123°59′42″ W.; 46°13′32″ N., 123°57′18″ W.; 46°15′9″ N., 123°55′24″ W.; and 46°15′54″ N., 123°58′6″ W. The 500 yard radius area of the safety zone is intended to protect persons and vessels from the dangerous combined effects of live gunfire, unpredictable animal behavior, and a highly dynamic marine environment characterized by strong tides, river currents and wind. This safety zone will be enforced only when the small boat “Nessy,” and all involved associated support vessels, are conducting the removal operations, which will be three days a week for four weeks. No vessel or person will be permitted to enter the safety zone without obtaining permission from the COTP or a designated representative.

V. Regulatory Analyses

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

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

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

This regulatory action determination is based on the size, location, duration, and time-of-day of the safety zone. Vessel traffic would be able to safely transit around this safety zone which would impact a small designated area of the Columbia River in the area encompassing these points: 46°15′45″ N., 123°59′39″ W.; 46°15′24″ N., 123°59′42″ W.; 46°13′32″ N., 123°57′18″ W.; 46°15′9″ N., 123°55′24″ W.; and 46°15′54″ N., 123°58′6″ W. Moreover, the Coast Guard would issue a Broadcast Notice to Mariners via VHF-FM marine channel 16 about the zone, and the rule would allow vessels to seek permission to enter the zone.

B. Impact on Small Entities

The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term “small entities” comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000. The Coast Guard received no comments from the Small Business Administration on this rulemaking. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

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

Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-121), we want to assist small entities in understanding this rule. If the rule would affect your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR (1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard.

C. Collection of Information

This rule will not call for a new collection of information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

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

Also, this rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, because it does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. If you believe this rule has implications for federalism or Indian tribes, please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

F. Environment

We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have determined that this action is one of a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This rule involves a safety zone lasting four weeks, for three days a week, that will prohibit entry within 500 yards of the small boat “Nessy” and all involved associated support vessels, while in the area encompassing these points: 46°15′45″ N., 123°59′39″ W.; 46°15′24″ N., 123°59′42″ W.; 46°13′32″ N., 123°57′18″ W.; 46°15′9″ N., 123°55′24″ W.; and 46°15′54″ N., 123°58′6″ W., while personnel are conducting the removal operations of the Double-Crested Cormorant. It is categorically excluded from further review under paragraph 34(g) of Figure 2-1 of the Commandant Instruction. An environmental analysis checklist supporting this determination and a Categorical Exclusion Determination are available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES. We seek any comments or information that may lead to the discovery of a significant environmental impact from this rule.

G. Protest Activities

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

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

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

For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 CFR part 165 as follows:

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

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

2. Add § 165.T13-0818 to read as follows:
§ 165.T13-0818 Safety Zone; Columbia River.

(a) Location. The following area is the safety zone: all navigable waters of the Columbia River within 500 yards of the small boat “Nessy,” and all involved associated support vessels, while in the area encompassing these points: 46°15′45″ N., 123°59′39″ W.; 46°15′24″ N., 123°59′42″ W.; 46°13′32″ N., 123°57′18″ W.; 46°15′9″ N., 123°55′24″ W.; and 46°15′54″ N., 123°58′6″ W.

(b) Regulations. In accordance with the general regulations in subpart C of this part, no person may enter or remain in the safety zone created in this section or bring, cause to be brought, or allow to remain in the safety zone created in this section any vehicle, vessel, or object unless authorized by the Captain of the Port or his designated representative.

(c) Enforcement. Any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant, or petty officer may enforce the rules in this section. Where immediate action is required and representatives of the Coast Guard are not present or are not present in sufficient force to provide effective enforcement of this section, any Oregon Law Enforcement Officer or Washington Law Enforcement Officer may enforce the rules contained in this section pursuant to 46 U.S.C. 70118. In addition, the Captain of the Port may be assisted by members of the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers and U.S. Department of Agriculture Wildlife Services onboard the small boat “Nessy,” and other federal, state, or local agencies in enforcing this section.

(d) Enforcement period. This section is effective from September 21, 2016, through October 21, 2016. It will be enforced when the small boat “Nessy,” and all involved associated support vessels, are conducting the removal operations of the Double-Crested Cormorant. The small boat “Nessy” is described as a 20-foot black and gray aluminum work skiff with an overhead light arch. The Coast Guard will inform mariners of any change to this period of enforcement via Broadcast Notice to Mariners.

Dated: September 16, 2016. D.F. Berliner, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Acting Captain of the Port, Sector Columbia River.
[FR Doc. 2016-22821 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS 38 CFR Part 38 RIN 2900-AP75 Authority To Solicit Gifts and Donations AGENCY:

Department of Veterans Affairs.

ACTION:

Direct final rule; confirmation of effective date.

SUMMARY:

On July 11, 2016, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) published a direct final rule amending its regulation that governs soliciting contributions from the public by officials and employees of NCA, or authorizing the use of officials' or employees' names, name of the Secretary, or the name of VA for the purpose of making a gift or donation to VA. VA received two supportive comments and no adverse comments concerning the direct final rule and its companion substantially identical proposed rule published in the Federal Register on the same date. This document confirms that the direct final rule became effective on September 9, 2016. In a companion document in this issue of the Federal Register, we are withdrawing as unnecessary the proposed rule.

DATES:

The effective date of September 9, 2016, for the direct final rule published July 11, 2016, 81 FR 44792, is confirmed.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Thomas Howard, Chief of Staff, National Cemetery Administration (NCA), Department of Veterans Affairs, (40A), 810 Vermont Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20420, (202) 461-6215. (This is not a toll-free number.)

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

In a direct final rule published in the Federal Register on July 11, 2016, at 81 FR 44792, VA amended 38 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 38.603(b), giving the Under Secretary of Memorial Affairs (USMA), or his designee, authority to solicit gifts and donations, or approve the solicitation of gifts and donations from the public. VA published a companion substantially-identical proposed rule on the same date, at 81 FR 44827, to serve as a proposal for the revisions in the direct final rule in case adverse comments were received. The direct final rule and proposed rule each provided a 30-day comment period that ended on August 10, 2016. No adverse comments were received. Two comments that supported the rulemaking were received from the general public. VA is not making any changes to this rulemaking based on the comments.

Under the direct final rule procedures that were described in 81 FR 44827 and 81 FR 44792, the direct final rule became effective on September 9, 2016, because no adverse comments were received within the comment period. In a companion document in this issue of the Federal Register, VA is withdrawing the proposed rulemaking, RIN 2900-AP74, published at 81 FR 44827, as unnecessary.

Signing Authority

The Secretary of Veterans Affairs, or designee, approved this document and authorized the undersigned to sign and submit the document to the Office of the Federal Register for publication electronically as an official document of the Department of Veterans Affairs. Gina S. Farrisee, Deputy Chief of Staff, Department of Veterans Affairs, approved this document on September 16, 2016, for publication.

Dated: September 19, 2016. Jeffrey Martin, Office Program Manager, Office of Regulation Policy & Management, Office of the Secretary, Department of Veterans Affairs.
[FR Doc. 2016-22834 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8320-01-P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R04-OAR-2016-0209; FRL-9952-74-Region 4] Air Plan Approval; Alabama and North Carolina; Interstate Transport—2010 NO2 Standards AGENCY:

Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving a revision to the North Carolina SIP, submitted by the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (NC DEQ) on March 24, 2016, and the portions of a revision to the Alabama State Implementation Plan (SIP), submitted by the Alabama Department of Environmental Management (ADEM) on December 9, 2015, addressing the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) interstate transport (prongs 1 and 2) infrastructure SIP requirements for the 2010 1-hour Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS). The CAA requires that each state adopt and submit a SIP for the implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of each NAAQS promulgated by EPA, commonly referred to as an “infrastructure SIP.” Specifically, EPA is approving North Carolina's March 24, 2016, SIP submission and the portions of Alabama's December 9, 2015, SIP submission addressing interstate transport requirements for the 2010 NO2 NAAQS.

DATES:

This rule is effective on October 24, 2016.

ADDRESSES:

EPA has established a docket for these actions under Docket Identification No EPA-R04-OAR-2016-0209. All documents in the docket are listed on the www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the index, some information may not be publicly available, i.e., Confidential Business Information or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically through www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Air Regulatory Management Section, Air Planning and Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. EPA requests that if at all possible, you contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's official hours of business are Monday through Friday 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sean Lakeman of 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. Mr. Lakeman can be reached by telephone at (404) 562-9043 or via electronic mail at [email protected]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

By statute, SIPs meeting the requirements of sections 110(a)(1) and (2) of the CAA are to be submitted by states within three years after promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS to provide for the implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of the new or revised NAAQS. EPA has historically referred to these SIP submissions made for the purpose of satisfying the requirements of sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) as “infrastructure SIP” submissions. Sections 110(a)(1) and (2) require 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 newly established or revised NAAQS. More specifically, section 110(a)(1) provides the procedural and timing requirements for infrastructure SIPs. Section 110(a)(2) lists specific elements that states must meet for the infrastructure SIP requirements related to a newly established or revised NAAQS. The contents of an infrastructure SIP submission may vary depending upon the data and analytical tools available to the state, as well as the provisions already contained in the state's implementation plan at the time in which the state develops and submits the submission for a new or revised NAAQS.

Section 110(a)(2)(D) has two components: 110(a)(2)(D)(i) and 110(a)(2)(D)(ii). Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) includes four distinct components, commonly referred to as “prongs,” that must be addressed in infrastructure SIP submissions. The first two prongs, which are codified in section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), are provisions that prohibit any source or other type of emissions activity in one state from contributing significantly to nonattainment of the NAAQS in another state (prong 1) and from interfering with maintenance of the NAAQS in another state (prong 2). EPA sometimes refers to these two prongs conjointly as the “good neighbor” provision of the CAA. The third and fourth prongs, which are codified in section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), are provisions that prohibit emissions activity in one state from interfering with measures required to prevent significant deterioration of air quality in another state (prong 3) and from interfering with measures to protect visibility in another state (prong 4). Section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) requires SIPs to include provisions ensuring compliance with sections 115 and 126 of the Act, relating to interstate and international pollution abatement.

In a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) published on August 1, 2016 (81 FR 50409), EPA proposed to approve North Carolina's March 24, 2016, SIP submission and the portions of Alabama's December 9, 2015, SIP submission addressing interstate transport requirements for the 2010 NO2 NAAQS. The NPRM provides additional detail regarding the rationale for EPA's actions, including further discussion of the requirements for prongs 1 and 2. Comments on the proposed rulemaking were due on or before August 31, 2016. EPA received no adverse comments on the proposed actions. All other applicable infrastructure SIP requirements for Alabama and North Carolina for the 2010 1-hour NO2 NAAQS have been or will be addressed in separate rulemakings.

II. Final Actions

As described previously, EPA is approving North Carolina's March 24, 2016, SIP revision and the portions of Alabama's December 9, 2015, SIP revision addressing prongs 1 and 2 of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) for the 2010 1-hour NO2 NAAQS.

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, these actions merely approve state law as meeting federal requirements and do not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that reason, these actions:

• Are not “significant regulatory actions” 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);

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

• are 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.);

• do 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);

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

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

• are not significant regulatory actions subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);

• are 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

• do 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 SIPs are 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 rules do not have tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor will they 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 these actions 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. These actions are 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 these actions must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by November 21, 2016. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of these actions 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. These actions 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.

Dated: September 13, 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(e) is amended by adding a new entry for “110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) Infrastructure Requirements for the 2010 NO2 NAAQS—Update” at the end of the table to read as follows:
§ 52.50 Identification of plan.

(e) * * *

EPA-Approved Alabama 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 110(a)(2) Infrastructure Requirements for the 2010 NO2 NAAQS—Update Alabama 12/9/2015 9/22/2016, [Insert Federal Register citation] Addressing Prongs 1 and 2 of Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) only.
    Subpart II—North Carolina 3. Section 52.1770(e) is amended by adding a new entry “Good Neighbor Provisions (Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)) for the 2010 1-hour NO2 NAAQS” at the end of the table to read as follows:
    § 52.1770 Identification of plan.

    (e) * * *

    EPA-Approved North Carolina Non-Regulatory Provisions Provision State effective date EPA approval date Federal Register citation Explanation *         *         *         *         *         *         * Good Neighbor Provisions (Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)) for the 2010 1-hour NO2 NAAQS 3/24/2016 9/22/2016 [Insert Federal Register citation]
    [FR Doc. 2016-22760 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 81 [EPA-HQ-OAR-2012-0918; FRL-9951-91-OAR] Air Quality Designations for the 2012 Primary Annual Fine Particle (PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for Areas in Georgia and Florida Correction

    In rule document 2016-21338 beginning on page 61136 in the issue of Tuesday, September 6, 2016, make the following correction:

    § 83.311 [Amended]
    On page 61141, in § 81.311, in the table, in the third column, the sixth entry should read “Unclassifiable/Attainment”.
    [FR Doc. C1-2016-21338 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 1505-01-D
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 180 [EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0554; FRL-9950-05] Thiabendazole; Pesticide Tolerances AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of thiabendazole in or on the legume vegetable group 6 and foliage of legume vegetable group 7. Syngenta Crop Protection requested these tolerances under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA). This regulation also assigns an expiration date to existing tolerances for bean, dry, seed at 0.1 part per million (ppm) and soybean at 0.1 ppm as well as removes a threshold of regulation determination for seed treatment use of thiabendazole on dry pea (including field pea, pigeon pea, chickpea or lentil). Lastly, this regulation establishes a time-limited tolerance on sweet potato. The time-limited tolerance is in response to EPA's granting of an emergency exemption under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). The time-limited tolerance will expire and be revoked on December 31, 2019.

    DATES:

    This regulation is effective September 22, 2016. Objections and requests for hearings must be received on or before November 21, 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-2015-0554, 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 EPA's tolerance regulations at 40 CFR part 180 through the Government Printing Office's e-CFR site at http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title40/40tab_02.tpl.

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

    Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also request a hearing on those objections. You must file your objection or request a hearing on this regulation in accordance with the instructions provided in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0554 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 21, 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-2015-0554, 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 dock et, along with more information about dockets generally, is available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

    II. Summary of Agency's Action A. Petitioned-For Tolerances

    In the Federal Register of September 9, 2015 (80 FR 54257) (FRL-9933-26), EPA issued a document pursuant to FFDCA section 408(d)(3), 21 U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a pesticide petition (PP 5F8368) by Syngenta Crop Protection, LLC, P.O. Box 18300, Greensboro, NC 27419. The petition requested that 40 CFR 180.242 be amended by establishing tolerances for residues of the fungicide thiabendazole in or on legume vegetables (succulent or dried), crop group 6 at 0.01 parts per million (ppm); foliage of legume vegetables, crop group 7, except pea, field, hay and vines at 0.01 ppm; pea, field, hay at 0.15 ppm; and pea, field, vines at 0.03 ppm. The petition also requested to amend the tolerances in 40 CFR 180.242 for residues of thiabendazole by removing the tolerances in or on bean, dry, seed at 0.1 ppm and soybean at 0.1 ppm. That document referenced a summary of the petition prepared by Syngenta, the registrant, which is available in the docket, http://www.regulations.gov. A comment was received on the notice of filing. EPA's response to this comment is discussed in Unit IV.C.

    Based upon review of the data supporting the petition, EPA has modified levels at which the tolerances are being established by this document. The reason for these changes are explained in Unit IV.D.

    B. Thiabendazole Threshold of Regulation Determination

    In 2008, EPA established a rule codifying its determination that the use of thiabendazole as a seed treatment for dry pea using a maximum application rate of 0.075 pound of active ingredient per 100 pounds of seed did not require a tolerance because residues were below the Agency's threshold of regulation. (73 FR 1976 (Jan. 11, 2008); see 40 CFR 180.2010). The new tolerances for residues of thiabendazole on crop group 6 legume vegetable commodities, including dry pea, and on crop group 7, foliage of legume vegetable commodities, which includes vines and hay from the legume vegetables that the Agency is establishing make the existing threshold of regulation determination unnecessary. The new tolerances cover residues on these commodities resulting from new seed treatment uses that allow for higher application rates and thus residues associated uses covered by the threshold of regulation determination are covered by the new tolerances. As a result, the Agency is removing this determination from section 180.2010.

    C. Tolerance for Use of Pesticide Under Emergency Exemption

    In response to a crisis exemption request and authorization of a specific exemption request filed under section 18 of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) on behalf of the North Carolina Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services for the emergency use of thiabendazole to control black rot disease on sweet potato, EPA is establishing pursuant to FFDCA section 408(l)(6) time-limited tolerances for the use of thiabendazole on sweet potato at 10 ppm with an expiration date of December 31, 2019.

    As part of its evaluation of the emergency exemption application, EPA assessed the potential risks presented by residues of thiabendazole on sweet potato. In doing so, EPA considered the safety standard in section 408(b)(2) of FFDCA, and the Agency decided that the necessary tolerance under section 408(l)(6) of FFDCA would be consistent with the safety standard and with FIFRA section 18. Consistent with the need to move quickly on the emergency exemption in order to address an urgent non-routine situation and to ensure that the resulting food is safe and lawful, EPA is issuing this tolerance without notice and opportunity for public comment as provided in section 408(l)(6) of FFDCA. Although this time-limited tolerance expires and is revoked on December 31, 2019, under section 408(l)(5) of FFDCA, residues of the pesticide not in excess of the amounts specified in the tolerance remaining in or on sweet potato after that date will not be unlawful, provided the pesticide was applied in a manner that was lawful under FIFRA, and the residues do not exceed a level that was authorized by the time-limited tolerance at the time of that application. EPA will take action to revoke this time-limited tolerance earlier if any experience with, scientific data on, or other relevant information on this pesticide indicate that the residues are not safe.

    Because this time-limited tolerance is being approved under emergency conditions, EPA has not made any decisions whether thiabendazole meets FIFRA's registration requirements for use in or on sweet potato or whether a permanent tolerance for this use would be appropriate. Under these circumstances, EPA does not believe that this time-limited tolerances serves as a basis for registration of thiabendazole by a State for Special Local Needs under FIFRA section 24(c). Nor does this tolerance serve as the basis for persons in any State other than North Carolina to use this pesticide on sweet potato under FIFRA section 18 absent the issuance of an emergency exemption applicable within that State. For additional information regarding the emergency exemption for thiabendazole, contact the Agency's Registration Division at the address provided under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

    III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety

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

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

    A. Toxicological Profile

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

    The thyroid and liver (centrilobular hypertrophy) are the primary target organs of thiabendazole toxicity. Thiabendazole produced a treatment related increase in absolute and relative liver weights in both sexes in a chronic dog study. Other treatment related effects reported were histopathological changes in kidneys (hyperplasia of transitional epithelium, tubular degeneration) and spleen (congested and pigmented) in rats. Additional toxic effects observed in these studies included decreases in body weight and/or food consumption. The available database indicates that thiabendazole is not neurotoxic. In an acute neurotoxicity rat study (ACN), decreases in the Functional Observation Battery (FOB) (reduced body temperature in males, reduced rearing in females, and reduced locomotor activity in males and females at time of peak effect (approximately 3 hours post-dose)) were seen without morphological or histopathological effects on the brain. Thiabendazole was not neurotoxic in rats in a subchronic neurotoxicity study. In a 21-day dermal toxicity study in rats, no systemic or dermal effects were seen at the limit dose (1,000 milligram/kilogram/day (mg/kg/day)). In prenatal developmental toxicity studies in rats, rabbits, and mice and in the 2-generation reproduction study in rats, effects in the fetuses or neonates occurred at or above doses that caused maternal or parental toxicity.

    In the adult animal, effects on the thyroid following thiabendazole exposure were observed at a dose lower than the neurotoxicity dose observed in the ACN. There are no thiabendazole data with which to determine whether this is also the case in the fetus/postnatal animal. Based on a weight of evidence (WOE) approach considering all the available hazard and exposure information for thiabendazole, the Agency concluded that a developmental thyroid toxicity study is required since there is clear evidence of thyroid toxicity in adult animals and thus a concern for potential toxicity during pregnancy, infancy and childhood. The developmental thyroid toxicity study will better address this concern than a developmental neurotoxicity study. In an immunotoxicity study, thiabendazole produced significant decreased spleen activity at the highest dose tested (5,000 ppm equivalent to 1,027 mg/kg/day) which also produced significant increased liver weight. The genetic toxicology studies on thiabendazole indicate that it is not genotoxic in in vivo and in vitro assays. Review of literature studies indicated that thiabendazole has weak aneugenic activity in both somatic and germinal cells. In a chronic rat study, thiabendazole induced thyroid tumors in males only. Thiabendazole did not induce tumors in mice. Thiabendazole has been classified by the Agency as “Likely to be carcinogenic at doses high enough to cause a disturbance of the thyroid hormonal balance but not likely to be carcinogenic at doses lower than those which could cause a disturbance of this hormonal balance.” This conclusion is based on the observation that that thiabendazole was not mutagenic, but above a threshold dose it interfered with thyroid-pituitary homeostasis leading to increased thyroid stimulating hormone (TSH) stimulation of the thyroid and thyroid tumors. The chronic NOAEL (10 mg/kg/day) for non-cancer risk assessment is not expected to alter thyroid hormone homeostasis nor result in thyroid tumor formation; therefore, the Agency has determined that quantification of risk using a non-linear approach (i.e., chronic population adjusted dose (cPAD)) will adequately account for all chronic toxicity, including carcinogenicity, that could result from exposure to thiabendazole.

    Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the adverse effects caused by thiabendazole as well as the no-observed-adverse-effect-level (NOAEL) and the lowest-observed-adverse-effect-level (LOAEL) from the toxicity studies can be found at http://www.regulations.gov in the document titled “Thiabendazole: ID#16NC02—Section 18 Specific Emergency Exemption for the Postharvest Use of Thiabendazole on Sweet Potatoes in North Carolina” on page 32 in docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0554.

    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://www2.epa.gov/pesticide-science-and-assessing-pesticide-risks/assessing-human-health-risk-pesticides.

    A summary of the toxicological endpoints for thiabendazole used for human risk assessment is discussed in Unit III.B. of the final rule published in the Federal Register of September 25, 2014 (79 FR 57450) (FRL-9915-78).

    C. Exposure Assessment

    1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary exposure to thiabendazole, EPA considered exposure under the petitioned-for tolerances and the tolerance being established in response to the Agency issuing a section 18 emergency exemption, as well as all existing thiabendazole tolerances in 40 CFR 180.242. EPA assessed dietary exposures from thiabendazole in food as follows:

    i. Acute exposure. Quantitative acute dietary exposure and risk assessments are performed for a food-use pesticide if a toxicological study has indicated the possibility of an effect of concern occurring as a result of a 1-day or single exposure.

    Such effects were identified for thiabendazole. In estimating acute dietary exposure, EPA used 2003-2008 food consumption data from the U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA's) National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, What We Eat in America (NHANES/WWEIA). As to residue levels in food, EPA used a refined acute probabilistic dietary exposure assessment for thiabendazole using both anticipated residue estimates based on USDA Pesticide Data Program (PDP) monitoring data and percent crop treated (PCT) information for soybean and wheat and assumed 100 PCT for all other commodities.

    ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting the chronic dietary exposure assessment EPA used 2003-2008 food consumption data from the USDA's NHANES/WWEIA. As to residue levels in food, EPA used a refined chronic probabilistic dietary exposure assessment for thiabendazole using both anticipated residue estimates based on USDA PDP monitoring data and PCT information for soybean and wheat and assumed 100 PCT for all other commodities.

    iii. Cancer. Based on the data summarized in Unit III.A., EPA has concluded that a nonlinear RfD approach is appropriate for assessing cancer risk to thiabendazole. Cancer risk was assessed using the same exposure estimates as discussed in Unit III.C.1.ii., chronic exposure.

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

    Section 408(b)(2)(F) of FFDCA states that the Agency may use data on the actual percent of food treated for assessing chronic dietary risk only if:

    Condition a: The data used are reliable and provide a valid basis to show what percentage of the food derived from such crop is likely to contain the pesticide residue.

    Condition b: The exposure estimate does not underestimate exposure for any significant subpopulation group.

    Condition c: Data are available on pesticide use and food consumption in a particular area, the exposure estimate does not understate exposure for the population in such area.

    In addition, the Agency must provide for periodic evaluation of any estimates used. To provide for the periodic evaluation of the estimate of PCT as required by FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(F), EPA may require registrants to submit data on PCT.

    For the acute assessment, the Agency estimated the PCT for existing uses as follows:

    Soybeans, 2.5%; wheat, 2.5%.

    For the chronic assessment, the Agency estimated the PCT for existing uses as follows:

    Soybeans, 1%; wheat, 1%.

    In most cases, EPA uses available data from United States Department of Agriculture/National Agricultural Statistics Service (USDA/NASS), proprietary market surveys, and the National Pesticide Use Database for the chemical/crop combination for the most recent 6-7 years. EPA uses an average PCT for chronic dietary risk analysis. The average PCT figure for each existing use is derived by combining available public and private market survey data for that use, averaging across all observations, and rounding to the nearest 5%, except for those situations in which the average PCT is less than one. In those cases, 1% is used as the average PCT and 2.5% is used as the maximum PCT. EPA uses a maximum PCT for acute dietary risk analysis. The maximum PCT figure is the highest observed maximum value reported within the recent 6 years of available public and private market survey data for the existing use and rounded up to the nearest multiple of 5%.

    The Agency believes that the three conditions discussed in Unit III.C.1.iv. have been met. With respect to Condition a, PCT estimates are derived from Federal and private market survey data, which are reliable and have a valid basis. The Agency is reasonably certain that the percentage of the food treated is not likely to be an underestimation. As to Conditions b and c, regional consumption information and consumption information for significant subpopulations is taken into account through EPA's computer-based model for evaluating the exposure of significant subpopulations including several regional groups. Use of this consumption information in EPA's risk assessment process ensures that EPA's exposure estimate does not understate exposure for any significant subpopulation group and allows the Agency to be reasonably certain that no regional population is exposed to residue levels higher than those estimated by the Agency. Other than the data available through national food consumption surveys, EPA does not have available reliable information on the regional consumption of food to which thiabendazole may be applied in a particular area.

    2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. The Agency used screening level water exposure models in the dietary exposure analysis and risk assessment for thiabendazole in drinking water. These simulation models take into account data on the physical, chemical, and fate/transport characteristics of thiabendazole. Further information regarding EPA drinking water models used in pesticide exposure assessment can be found at http://www2.epa.gov/pesticide-science-and-assessing-pesticide-risks/about-water-exposure-models-used-pesticide.

    Based on the FQPA Index Reservoir Screening Tool (FIRST) and Pesticide Root Zone Model GroundWater (PRZM-GW), the estimated drinking water concentrations (EDWCs) of thiabendazole for acute exposures are estimated to be 3.80 parts per billion (ppb) for surface water and 0.62 ppb for ground water, and for chronic exposures are estimated to be 0.47 ppb for surface water.

    Modeled estimates of drinking water concentrations were directly entered into the dietary exposure model. For the acute dietary risk assessment, the water concentration value of 3.80 ppb was used to assess the contribution to drinking water.

    For the chronic dietary risk assessment, the water concentration of value 0.47 ppb was used to assess the contribution to drinking water.

    3. From non-dietary exposure. The term “residential exposure” is used in this document to refer to non-occupational, non-dietary exposure (e.g., for lawn and garden pest control, indoor pest control, termiticides, and flea and tick control on pets).

    Thiabendazole is currently registered for use as antimicrobial ingredient in paint, sponges, carpet backing, canvas textiles, wallboard and ceiling tiles, polyurethane foam, plastics and rubber, paper, and coatings and filters used in HVAC systems. There are two antimicrobial exposure scenarios that were assessed for residential exposures which are expected to result in the highest exposures from these antimicrobial uses: Treated paint and impregnated sponges. The other antimicrobial uses of thiabendazole (carpet backing, canvas textiles, wallboard and ceiling tiles, polyurethane foam, plastics and rubber, paper, and coatings and filters used in HVAC systems) are not expected to cause exposure in residential settings because there is no direct contact to the treated articles, the vapor pressure of thiabendazole is very low, and the unlikelihood that the treated plastics and rubbers would be used in toys.

    EPA assessed residential exposure to treated paint and impregnated sponges using the following assumptions: For treated paint, residential short-term dermal and inhalation exposure to residential handlers using brush/roller application and airless sprayer application; for the impregnated sponge use, short- and intermediate-term incidental oral exposure. Thiabendazole treated sponges are limited to 600 ppm thiabendazole on a sponge. Various residue amounts may be transferred from the sponge to food contact surfaces, such as countertops and utensils/glassware, and then to food and subsequently ingested. An assessment was conducted for incidental oral exposure assuming that 100% of the thiabendazole on a treated sponge is transferred to surfaces over 20 days and that each 20 days the user would use a new sponge (5% released per day). This assumption is considered conservative because (1) sponges will generally be used much longer than 20 days; (2) it is unlikely that 100% of the thiabendazole would be released from the sponge in such a short period; and (3) it is very unlikely that 100% of any released thiabendazole would be transferred to countertops because this assumption does not account any thiabendazole that is washed down the sink or that normally degrades.

    Further information regarding EPA standard assumptions and generic inputs for residential exposures may be found at http://www2.epa.gov/pesticide-science-and-assessing-pesticide-risks/standard-operating-procedures-residential-pesticide.

    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 thiabendazole to share a common mechanism of toxicity with any other substances, and thiabendazole does not appear to produce a toxic metabolite produced by other substances. For the purposes of this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has assumed that thiabendazole 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://www2.epa.gov/pesticide-science-and-assessing-pesticide-risks/cumulative-assessment-risk-pesticides.

    D. Safety Factor for Infants and Children

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

    2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity. No evidence of increased quantitative or qualitative susceptibility was seen following in utero exposure to thiabendazole with rats or rabbits in the prenatal developmental studies or in young rats in the 2-generation reproduction study. There is no evidence for neurotoxicity following oral exposures to thiabendazole. Thyroid toxicity was seen following subchronic and chronic exposures to adult rats in multiple studies. There is, however, no data regarding the potential effects of thiabendazole on thyroid homeostasis in the young animals. This lack of characterization creates uncertainty with regards to potential life stage sensitivities due to exposure to thiabendazole. Therefore, the Agency is requiring a developmental thyroid assay in rats with thiabendazole. This study will better address the concern for potential thyroid toxicity in the young.

    3. Conclusion. EPA has determined that reliable data show the safety of infants and children would be adequately protected if the FQPA SF is retained at 10X in the form of a database uncertainty factor (UFDB). That decision is based on the following findings:

    i. The toxicology database for thiabendazole is complete with the exception of a developmental thyroid toxicity study. Based on a WOE approach considering all the available hazard and exposure information for thiabendazole, the Agency concluded that a developmental thyroid toxicity study is required since there is clear evidence of thyroid toxicity in adult animals and thus a concern for potential toxicity during pregnancy, infancy and childhood. The developmental thyroid toxicity study will better address this concern than a developmental neurotoxicity study. Acceptable studies are available for developmental, reproduction, chronic, subchronic, subchronic neurotoxicity and immunotoxicity.

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

    iii. The data submitted to the Agency, as well as those from published literature, demonstrate no increased susceptibility in rats, rabbits, or mice to in utero and/or early postnatal exposure to thiabendazole. In the prenatal developmental toxicity studies in rats, rabbits, and mice and in the 2-generations reproduction study in rats, developmental effects in the fetuses or neonates occurred at or above doses that caused maternal or parental toxicity. A developmental neurotoxicity study with thiabendazole was deemed not required by the Agency.

    There is evidence of thyroid toxicity following subchronic and chronic exposures to rats characterized as histopathological changes in the thyroid in multiple studies in rats. Disruption of thyroid homeostasis is the initial, critical effect that may lead to adverse effects on the developing nervous system. Thus, as noted above, a developmental thyroid study is required.

    iv. There are no residual uncertainties in the exposure database. The dietary risk assessment is conservative and will not underestimate dietary and/or non-dietary occupational exposure to thiabendazole. The acute and chronic dietary assessments conducted with the Dietary Exposure Evaluation Model software with the Food Commodity Intake Database (DEEM-FCID) were refined analyses. The assessments utilized anticipated residues, default processing factors, and available percent crop treated data. The DEEM analysis also used Tier 1 drinking water estimates. For these reasons it can be concluded that the DEEM-FCID analysis does not underestimate risk from acute or chronic exposure to thiabendazole. Similarly, EPA does not believe that the non-dietary occupational exposures are underestimated because they are also based on conservative assumptions, including maximum application rates, and standard values for unit exposures and acreage treated/amount handled. These assessments will not underestimate the exposure and risks posed by thiabendazole.

    E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of Safety

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

    1. Acute risk. Using the exposure assumptions discussed in this unit for acute exposure, the acute dietary exposure from food and water to thiabendazole at the 99.9th percentile of exposure will occupy 68% of the aPAD for children 1-2 years old, the population group receiving the greatest exposure.

    2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure assumptions described in this unit for chronic exposure, EPA has concluded that chronic exposure to thiabendazole from food and water will utilize 5.1% of the cPAD for children 1-2 years old, the population group receiving the greatest exposure. Based on the explanation in Unit III.C.3., regarding residential use patterns, chronic residential exposure to residues of thiabendazole is not expected.

    3. Short- and intermediate-term risk. Short- and intermediate-term aggregate exposure takes into account short- and intermediate-term residential exposure plus chronic exposure to food and water (considered to be a background exposure level).

    Thiabendazole is currently registered for uses that could result in short- and intermediate-term residential exposure, and the Agency has determined that it is appropriate to aggregate chronic exposure through food and water with short- and intermediate-term residential exposures to thiabendazole.

    Using the exposure assumptions described in this unit for short- and intermediate-term exposures, EPA has concluded the combined short- and intermediate-term food, water, and residential exposures result in aggregate MOEs from the paint use of 2,000 or greater for all population subgroups and aggregate MOEs from the sponge use of 1,400 for children 1-2 years old and 7,000 for the general population. Because EPA's level of concern for thiabendazole is a MOE of 300 or below, these MOEs are not of concern.

    4. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. As discussed in Unit III.A., EPA is regulating chronic dietary risk, including cancer risk, with a chronic RfD that reflects a dose level below those levels at which thyroid hormone balance is impacted, which is protective of potential carcinogenic effects. Based on the lack of chronic risk, EPA concludes there is not a cancer risk from exposure to thiabendazole.

    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 thiabendazole residues.

    IV. Other Considerations A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology

    Acceptable enforcement analytical methods are available for thiabendazole and benzimidazole in plant commodities. Four spectrophotofluorometric methods for the determination of thiabendazole are published in the Pesticide Analytical Manual (PAM) Vol. II, and a high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) method with fluorescence detection (FLD) for the determination of benzimidazole (free and conjugated) is identified in the U.S. EPA Index of Residue Analytical Methods under thiabendazole as Study No. 93020.

    Another adequate analytical method, GRM040.05A, is also available for data collection and tolerance enforcement of residues of thiabendazole and benzimidazole (free and conjugated) in/on plant commodities. Method GRM040.05A, developed by Syngenta Crop Protection, LLC, is a high performance liquid chromatography with tandem mass spectrometry detection (LC/MS/MS) method used for data collection in crop matrices. HED has designated Method GRM040.05A as a new tolerance enforcement method.

    Both methods may be requested from: Chief, Analytical Chemistry Branch, Environmental Science Center, 701 Mapes Rd., Ft. Meade, MD 20755-5350; telephone number: (410) 305-2905; email address: [email protected]

    B. International Residue Limits

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

    The Codex has not established a MRL for thiabendazole on any of the commodities cited in this document.

    C. Response to Comments

    A comment was submitted by the Center for Food Safety and was primarily concerned about EPA's consideration of the impacts of thiabendazole on the environment, pollinators, and endangered species. This comment is not relevant to the Agency's evaluation of safety of the thiabendazole tolerances under section 408 of the FFDCA, which requires the Agency to evaluate the potential harms to human health, not effects on the environment.

    D. Revisions to Petitioned-For Tolerances

    The petitioned-for tolerances did not include measurement of benzimidazole (free and conjugated) which is a residue of concern for regulatory purposes. Therefore, the petitioned-for tolerance for the vegetable, legume, group 6 at 0.01 ppm for thiabendazole only, is adjusted to 0.02 ppm to account for the combined residues of thiabendazole and benzimidazole (free and conjugated). Also, EPA concluded that the maximum levels of the combined residues of concern in/on the representative crop commodities of vegetable, foliage of legume, group 7 are within 5x, and that a crop group 7 tolerance level of 0.20 ppm is more appropriate than the petitioned-for separate tolerances for pea, field, hay; pea, field, vines; and vegetable, foliage of legume, group 7, except pea, field, hay and vines.

    E. International Trade Considerations

    In this rulemaking, EPA is adding an expiration date of March 21, 2017 to the existing tolerances for bean, dry, seed at 0.1 ppm and soybean at 0.1 ppm. These tolerances were based on foliar uses of thiabendazole which are no longer registered and Syngenta requested that these tolerances be removed as part of the petition and notice of filing (NOF). The seed treatment uses on dry bean seed and soybean is now covered by the tolerance being established on vegetable, legume, group 6 at 0.02 ppm. This new tolerance is lower than some existing MRLs on these commodities in Europe and other countries.

    In accordance with the World Trade Organization's (WTO) Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures Agreement, EPA notified the WTO of the request to revise these tolerances on September 9, 2015, as WTO notification G/SPS/N/USA/2779. In this action, EPA is allowing the existing higher tolerances to remain in effect for 6 months following the publication of this rule in order to allow a reasonable interval for producers in exporting countries to adapt to the requirements of these modified tolerances. On March 21, 2017, those existing higher tolerances will expire, and the new reduced tolerances for vegetable, legume, group 6 at 0.02 ppm will remain to cover residues of thiabendazole on those commodities. Before that date, residues of thiabendazole on those commodities would be permitted up to the higher tolerance levels; after that date, residues of thiabendazole on vegetable, legume, group 6 will need to comply with the new lower tolerance levels. This reduction in tolerance is not discriminatory; the same food safety standard contained in the FFDCA applies equally to domestically produced and imported foods.

    V. Conclusion

    Therefore, tolerances are established for residues of thiabendazole in or on vegetable, foliage of legume, group 7 at 0.20 ppm and vegetable, legume, group 6 at 0.02 ppm. The Agency is also adding an expiration date of March 21, 2017 to the existing tolerances for bean, dry, seed at 0.1 ppm and soybean at 0.1 ppm. Residues of thiabendazole will be covered by these higher tolerances until the expiration date, after which time, they will need to comply with the lower tolerance being established today on the vegetable, legume, group 6 at 0.02 ppm. The tolerance for group 6 without a time limitation supersedes the existing section 18 time-limited tolerance for “pea, succulent shelled”; therefore, the Agency is removing that section 18 tolerance.

    The Agency is also removing the threshold of regulation determination for thiabendazole from 180.2010 because it is no longer necessary. Lastly, this regulation additionally establishes a time-limited tolerances for residues of thiabendazole in or on sweet potato at 10 ppm.

    VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

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

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

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

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

    VII. Congressional Review Act

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

    List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180

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

    Dated: August 26, 2016. Michael Goodis, 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 § 180.242; a. Revise the entries “bean, dry, seed” and “soybean” to the table in paragraph (a)(1); b. Add alphabetically the entries “Vegetable, foliage of legume, group 7” and “Vegetable, legume, group 6” to the table in paragraph (a)(1) c. Remove the entry for “Pea, succulent shelled” from the table in paragraph (b); d. Add alphabetically the entry “sweet potato” to the table in paragraph (b).

    The additions and revisions read as follows:

    § 180.242 Thiabendazole; tolerances for residues.

    (a) * * *

    (1) * * *

    Commodity Parts per
  • million
  • *    *    *    *    * Bean, dry, seed 2 0.1 *    *    *    *    * Soybean 2 0.1 *    *    *    *    * Vegetable, foliage of legume, group 7 0.20 Vegetable, legume, group 6 0.02 *    *    *    *    * 2 This tolerance expires on March 21, 2017.

    (b) * * *

    Commodity Parts per
  • million
  • Expiration date
    Sweet potato 10 December 31, 2019.
    § 180.2010 [Removed and Reserved]
    3. Section 180.2010 is removed and reserved.
    [FR Doc. 2016-21753 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION 41 CFR Parts 102-117 and 102-118 [Change 2016-01; FMR Case 2015-102-2; Docket 2015-0014; Sequence 1] RIN 3090-AJ59 Federal Management Regulation (FMR); Transportation Payment and Audit AGENCY:

    Office of Government-wide Policy (OGP), General Services Administration (GSA).

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    GSA is amending the Federal Management Regulation (FMR), Transportation Payment and Audit, to clarify agency and Department of Defense (DoD) transportation payment and audit requirements. GSA is also amending relevant definitions. The FMR is written in plain language to provide agencies with updated regulatory material that is easy to read and understand.

    DATES:

    Effective: September 22, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For clarification of content, contact Mr. Ron Siegel, Office of Government-wide Policy, at 202-357-9540 or by email at [email protected] For information pertaining to status or publication schedules, contact the Regulatory Secretariat Division (MVCB), 1800 F Street NW., Washington, DC 20405, 202-501-4755. Please cite FMR Case 2015-102-2.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    A. Background

    Agencies are authorized to procure transportation services either through the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) by utilizing a contract, or via 49 U.S.C. 10721 (for rail transportation), 49 U.S.C. 13712 (for surface transportation), and/or 49 U.S.C. 15504 (for pipeline transportation) by utilizing rate tenders. It is critical that agencies ensure that transportation services received are properly charged and that the payment made is correct.

    Toward that end, the Travel and Transportation Reform Act of 1998 (Pub. L. 105-264) established agency statutory requirements for prepayment audits of Federal agency and DoD transportation expenses. The Act also established GSA's statutory authority for audit oversight to protect the interests of the Government.

    This final rule clarifies and strengthens agency and DoD compliance with regulations for transportation prepayment audits and postpayment audits. In addition, this final rule updates definitions in 41 CFR part 102-117, Transportation Management, as a result of the amendments to 41 CFR 102-118.

    This final rule is the outcome of the first of a two phase review of FMR part 102-118, Transportation Payment and Audit, conducted by GSA and the Governmentwide Transportation Policy Council (GTPC). The GTPC is composed of representatives from civilian agencies and DoD and provides GSA with guidance in the planning and development of uniform transportation policies and procedures.

    The first phase review focused on FMR part 102-118 Subparts A (General), D (Prepayment Audits of Transportation Services), and E (Postpayment Transportation Audits). The second phase review will focus on FMR part 102-118 Subpart A (General), as well as Subparts B (Ordering and Paying for Transportation and Transportation Services), C (Use of Government Billing Documents), and F (Claims and Appeals Procedures).

    B. Public Comments and Responses

    In the proposed rule published at 80 FR 59094 in the Federal Register, on October 1, 2015, GSA provided the public a 60-day comment period which ended on November 30, 2015. GSA received comments from the National Motor Freight Traffic Association, Inc. (NMFTA), and Relocation Management Worldwide Incorporated (RMW). This final rule reflects the following changes made as a result of some of these comments.

    Comment: The definition in the proposed rule for declared value in FMR 102-117.25 and 102-118.35 contains reference to declared value and released value. However, NMFTA indicates that the “terms `declared value' and `released value' are neither synonymous nor recognized by the transportation industry. A carrier establishes released value provisions with the intent of the shipper agreeing to a lesser value for the cargo shipped in return for a lower rate for transportation. Declared value assigns a value to the cargo in order to authenticate loss and damage liability limitations on the cargo that was shipped. Furthermore, it is inequitable to define declared value as a price that could be `more' than the actual value of the cargo. In commercial practice, a transportation service provider (TSP) will not pay a loss or damage claim in excess of the actual value of the cargo transported.”

    Response: GSA agrees with the recommendation and consequently has modified the definition declared value that is added to 41 CFR 102-117.25 so that it does not reference released value; included a definition for released value in 41 CFR 102-117.25; and has removed the definition released value from 41 CFR 102-118.

    Comment: With regards to the definition claim, NMFTA indicates that in the transportation industry, the term claim is generally used in the context of claims for the payment of overcharges or claims for loss or damage. NMFTA recommends that any other terms for demands for payment by the TSP to the Government or amounts the TSP believes an agency owes them should not be included in this definition and would be better defined separately.

    Response: GSA does not accept this recommendation. The definition of claim presented in this final rule is modeled after the definition of claim or debt found in 31 U.S.C. 3701(b)(1).

    Comment: The Government Transportation Request (GTR) is defined, in part, as a Government document used to procure common carrier interstate transportation services. NMFTA indicates that as far as interstate motor carrier transportation is concerned, the term common carrier is no longer defined in 49 U.S.C. 13102. Former common carriers are now referred to as motor carriers. NFMTA suggests using the description motor carrier or TSP which is used elsewhere in these regulations. NFMTA also suggests that since the Government can procure intrastate transportation with a GTR, it does not make sense to include the word “interstate” in the final GTR definition.

    Response: The term common carrier is used to define Government Transportation Request (GTR) in the Federal Travel Regulation (FTR). In response to the comment, GSA has revised the definition of GTR to clarify that the document is used to acquire passenger transportation.

    Comment: Standard Carrier Alpha Code (SCAC) is defined, in part, as the unique four-letter code used to identify American-based motor transportation companies assigned by NMFTA. NMFTA indicates that the SCAC definition should be a two-to-four letter identification code assigned to all modes of transportation companies worldwide by the NMFTA.

    Response: GSA accepts this comment and has modified the definition of SCAC to a unique code, typically two to four characters, used to identify transportation companies.

    Comment: NFMTA indicates that the Standard Carrier Alpha Code (SCAC) is a proper noun and should be capitalized.

    Response: GSA agrees with this comment and has made the appropriate changes.

    Comment: When an agency notifies a TSP of any adjustment to a TSP bill, the notice must reference the TSP's Standard Carrier Alpha Code (SCAC) or other agency identifier for the carrier, such as the Department of Defense Activity Address Code (DoDAAC) number. NMFTA suggests deleting the reference to the DoDAAC as the DoDAAC is not used to identify TSPs. NMFTA indicates that the Defense Logistics Agency defines a DoDAAC as “. . . a six-character, alpha-numeric code that uniquely identifies a unit, activity, or organization within the DoDAAD [Department of Defense Activity Address Directory]. A unit, activity, or organization may have more than one DoDAAC for different authority codes or purposes. Each activity that requisitions, contracts for, receives, has custody of, issues, or ships DoD assets, or funds/pays bills for materials and/or services is identified by a six-position alphanumeric DoDAAC.”

    Response: GSA accepts this suggestion and has deleted the DoDAAC reference.

    Comment: The rule indicates that “the prepayment audit cannot be conducted by the same firm providing transportation services for the agency, such as a move manager.” Relocation Management Worldwide, Incorporated (RMW) suggests that the term move manager is an incorrect example of a TSP and should be removed. RMW indicates that a TSP, being a carrier, could have a conflict of interest auditing their own files, but a move manager does not have to be a TSP.

    Response: GSA agrees that the language may be confusing and has modified § 102-118.275(c) to explain that a move manager may not have any affiliation with or financial interest in the transportation company providing the transportation services for which the prepayment audit is being conducted.

    Comment: RMW asks if the rule's intent is to eliminate a move manager from being a prepayment auditor.

    Response: GSA has modified the rule to clarify the role of a move manager in the prepayment process. GSA's intent is to clarify transportation payment and audit requirements for all agencies including DoD.

    Comment: The rule indicates that agencies may choose to use a Third-Party Payment System or charge card company that includes prepayment audit functions, such as Syncada and Payport Express. RMW asks if GSA is allowed to promote specific companies and promote their own specific products in the Code of Federal Regulations.

    Response: GSA agrees that the reference to Syncada may constitute an endorsement of a private enterprise and has removed the reference from the final rule. However, PayPort Express is a GSA Center for Transportation Management payment solution that is compliant with the rules established by GSA Transportation Audits Division. Being a GSA product, the acknowledgement of PayPort Express, or subsequent GSA payment solution, does not constitute the endorsement of a private enterprise.

    Comment: The rule lists what information must be included in an agency's notice to a TSP when an agency is adjusting the TSP's bill. RMW points out that the list of required information excludes the reason for the adjustment and asks if this important element can be added to the list.

    Response: The final rule accepts and incorporates the comment.

    Comment: The rule indicates that the Administrator of General Services (GSA) has a congressionally mandated responsibility under 31 U.S.C. 3726 to perform oversight on transportation bills. The GSA Transportation Audits Division accomplishes this oversight by conducting postpayment audits of all agencies' transportation bills. RMW suggests that GSA should confirm and identify that the audits are actually performed by contracted auditing companies and not by GSA Transportation Audits.

    Response: GSA does not accept this recommendation. Information regarding the GSA Transportation Audits Division procedures, including reviewing transportation invoices in conjunction with audit contracting companies, is provided on the Division's Postpayment Audit homepage (www.gsa.gov/portal/content/100056).

    Comment: RMW requests that GSA identify what safeguards are in place to prevent contracted auditing companies from providing both the prepayment and postpayment audit of the same bill.

    Response: GSA has determined that this topic is outside the intended scope of this rule. GSA Transportation Audits Division's Dispute Resolution Branch (http://www.gsa.gov/portal/content/100753) provides oversight and quality control evaluation of GSA audit contractors and ensures integrity in all audit processes.

    Comment: This rule indicates that the GSA Transportation Audits Division does not charge agencies a fee for conducting the transportation postpayment audit and the expenses for such audits are financed from overpayments collected from the TSP's bills previously paid by the agency and similar type of refunds. Since the GSA Transportation Audits Division or contracted auditing companies do not receive funding unless they find errors in TSP billings, RMW asks how this is not a conflict of interest?

    Response: GSA has determined that this topic is outside the intended scope of this rule. The funding mechanism identified in this rule is established by statute, 31 U.S.C. 3726 Payment for transportation.

    Comment: If the GSA Transportation Audits Division is overseeing the prepay audit to ensure it is being done properly, RMW asks who is overseeing the GSA Transportation Audits Division to determine if the prepay oversight and the postpayment audit are being done properly?

    Response: While GSA has determined that this topic is outside the intended scope of this rule, the GSA Office of the Inspector General and the management of the Federal Acquisition Service (FAS) provide such oversight of the GSA Transportation Audits Division.

    C. Substantive Changes

    This final rule:

    • Revises the definitions for “Agency”, “Bill of lading” (BOL), “Government bill of lading” (GBL), “Transportation document” (TD), and “Transportation Service Provider” (TSP), removes the definition “Release/declared value”, and adds the definitions “Declared value” and “Released value” in FMR part 102-117; and revises the definitions “Agency”, “Bill of lading” (BOL), “Document reference number”, “Government bill of lading” (GBL), “Government transportation request”, Offset”, “Overcharge”, “Postpayment audit”, “Rate authority”, “Reparation”, “Standard Carrier Alpha Code” (SCAC), “Statement of difference”, “Supplemental bill”, “Transportation document (TD)”, and “Transportation Service provider” (TSP), removes the terms “Agency claim”, “Released value”, “Transportation service”, “Transportation service provider claim”, and “Virtual GBL (VGBL)”, and adds the terms “Claim” and “Transportation” in FMR part 102-118 to ensure consistency.

    • Strengthens agency requirements and responsibilities for transportation prepayment audits and transportation postpayment audit, submission requirements to the GSA Transportation Audits Division, and the required information on all transportation documentation.

    • Updates and clarifies GSA Transportation Audits Division roles and responsibilities.

    C. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563

    Executive Orders (E.O.) 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess all costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public health and safety effects, distributive impacts, and equity). E.O. 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting flexibility. This is not a significant regulatory action, and therefore, will not be subject to review under Section 6(b) of E.O. 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, dated September 30, 1993. This rule is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 804.

    D. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    These revisions are not substantive, and therefore, this rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities within the meaning of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601, et seq. The proposed rule is also exempt from the Administrative Procedure Act per 5 U.S.C. 553(a)(2), because it applies to agency management or personnel.

    E. Paperwork Reduction Act

    The rule does not contain any information collection requirements that require the approval of the Office of Management and Budget under the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35).

    F. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act

    This rule is also exempt from Congressional review prescribed under 5 U.S.C. 801 since it relates to agency management or personnel.

    List of Subjects in 41 CFR Parts 102-117 and 102-118

    Accounting, Claims, Freight, Government property management, Moving of household goods, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Transportation.

    Dated: September 8, 2016. Denise Turner Roth, Administrator.

    For the reasons set forth in the preamble, GSA amends 41 CFR parts 102-117 and 102-118 as follows:

    PART 102-117—TRANSPORTATION MANAGEMENT 1. The authority citation for 41 CFR part 102-117 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    31 U.S.C. 3726; 40 U.S.C. 121(c); 40 U.S.C. 501, et seq.; 46 U.S.C. 55305; 49 U.S.C. 40118.

    2. Amend § 102-117.25 by— a. Revising the definitions “Agency” and “Bill of lading (BOL)”; b. Adding, in alphabetical order, the definition “Declared value”; c. Revising the definition “Government bill of lading (GBL)”; d. Removing the definition “Release/declared value”; e. Adding, in alphabetical order, the definition “Released value”; and f. Revising the definitions “Transportation document (TD)”, and “Transportation service provider (TSP)”.

    The revisions and additions read as follows:

    § 102-117.25 What definitions apply to this part?

    Agency means a department, agency, and independent establishment in the executive branch of the Government as defined in 5 U.S.C. 101 et seq., and a wholly-owned Government corporation as defined in 31 U.S.C. 9101(3).

    Bill of lading (BOL), sometimes referred to as a commercial bill of lading, but includes a Government bill of lading (GBL), means the document used as a receipt of goods, a contract of carriage, and documentary evidence of title.

    Declared value means the actual value of cargo as declared by the agency for reimbursement purposes or to establish duties, taxes, or other customs fees. The declared value is the maximum amount that could be recovered by the agency in the event of loss or damage for the shipments of freight and household goods, unless the declared value exceeds the carrier's released value (see “Released value”). The statement of declared value must be shown on any applicable tariff, tender, contract, bill of lading, or other document covering the shipment.

    Government bill of lading (GBL) means the transportation document used as a receipt of goods, evidence of title, and a contract of carriage for Government international shipments (see Bill of Lading (BOL) definition).

    Released value means an assigned value of the cargo for reimbursement purposes that is not necessarily the actual value of the cargo. Released value may be more or less than the actual value of the cargo; however, in the event of loss or damage to the shipment, if the released value exceeds the actual value, reimbursement would be the lesser of the two values. When the released value is agreed upon as the basis of reimbursement and the actual value exceeds the released value, the released value is the maximum amount that could be recovered by the agency in the event of loss or damage to the shipments of freight or household goods. When negotiating for rates and the released value is proposed to be less than the actual value of the cargo, the TSP should offer a rate lower than other rates for shipping cargo at full value. The statement of released value may be shown in any applicable tariff, tender, contract, transportation document or other documents covering the shipment.

    Transportation document (TD) means any executed document for transportation service, such as a bill of lading, a tariff, a tender, a contract, a Government Transportation Request (GTR), invoices, paid invoices, any transportation bills, or other equivalent documents, including electronic documents.

    Transportation service provider (TSP) means any party, person, agent, or carrier that provides freight, household goods, or passenger transportation or related services to an agency.

    PART 102-118—TRANSPORTATION PAYMENT AND AUDIT 3. The authority citation for 41 CFR part 102-118 is revised to read as follows: Authority:

    31 U.S.C. 3726; 40 U.S.C. 121(c); 40 U.S.C. 501, et seq.; 46 U.S.C. 55305; 49 U.S.C. 40118.

    4. Revise § 102-118.10 to read as follows:
    § 102-118.10 What is a transportation audit?

    A transportation audit is a thorough review and validation of transportation related documents and bills. The audit must examine the validity, propriety, and conformity of the charges or rates with tariffs, quotations, contracts, agreements, or tenders, as appropriate.

    § 102-118.15 [Amended]
    5. Amend § 102-118.15 by removing “or people and/or” and adding “, people or” in its place. 6. Revise § 102-118.20 to read as follows:
    § 102-118.20 Who is subject to this part?

    This part applies to all agencies (including the Department of Defense (DoD)) and TSPs defined in § 102-118.35, and wholly-owned Government corporations as defined in 31 U.S.C. 101, et seq. and 31 U.S.C. 9101(3). Your agency is required to incorporate this part into its internal regulations.

    7. Revise §§ 102-118.25 and 102-118.30 to read as follows:
    § 102-118.25 What must my agency provide to GSA regarding its transportation policies?

    As part of the evaluation of agencies' transportation program and postpayment audit, GSA may request to examine your agency's transportation prepayment audit program and policies to verify the performance of the prepayment audit. GSA Office of Government-wide Policy, Transportation Policy Division and GSA Transportation Audits Division may suggest revisions of agencies' audit program or policies.

    § 102-118.30 Are Government-controlled corporations bound by this part?

    This part does not apply to Government-controlled corporations and mixed-ownership Government corporations as defined in 31 U.S.C. 9101(1) and (2).

    8. Amend § 102-118.35 by- a. Revising the definition “Agency”; b. Removing the definition “Agency claim”; c. Revising the definition “Bill of lading”; d. Adding, in alphabetical order, the definition “Claim”; e. Revising the definitions “Document reference number”, “Government bill of lading (GBL)”, “Government contractor-issued charge card”, “Government Transportation Request (GTR)”, “Offset”, “Overcharge”, “Postpayment audit”, “Prepayment audit”, and “Rate authority”; f. Removing the definition “Released value”; g. Revising the definitions “Reparation”, “Standard carrier alpha code (SCAC)”, “Statement of difference”, and “Supplemental bill”; h. Adding, in alphabetical order, the definition “Transportation”; i. Revising the definition “Transportation document (TD)”; j. Removing the definition “Transportation service”; k. Revising the definition “Transportation service provider (TSP)”; l. Removing the definitions “Transportation service provider claim” and “Virtual GBL (VGBL)”; and m. Revising the “Note” at the end of the section. The revisions and additions read as follows:
    § 102-118.35 What definitions apply to this part?

    Agency means a department, agency, or instrumentality of the United States Government (31 U.S.C. 101).

    Bill of lading (BOL), sometimes referred to as a commercial bill of lading, but includes a Government bill of lading (GBL), means the document used as a receipt of goods, a contract of carriage, and documentary evidence of title.

    Claim means—

    (1) Any demand by an agency upon a transportation service provider (TSP) for the payment of overcharges, ordinary debts, fines, penalties, administrative fees, special charges, and interest; or

    (2) Any demand by the TSP for amounts not included in the original bill that the TSP believes an agency owes them. This includes amounts deducted or offset by an agency; amounts previously refunded by the TSP, which is believed to be owed; and any subsequent bills from the TSP resulting from a transaction that was prepayment or postpayment audited by the GSA Transportation Audits Division.

    Document reference number (DRN) means the unique number on a bill of lading, Government Transportation Request (GTR), or transportation ticket used to track the movement of shipments and individuals.

    Government bill of lading (GBL) means the transportation document used as a receipt of goods, evidence of title, and a contract of carriage for Government international shipments (see Bill of lading (BOL) definition).

    Government contractor-issued charge card means the charge card used by authorized individuals to pay for official travel and transportation related expenses for which the contractor bills the employee. This is different than a centrally billed account paying for official travel and transportation related expenses for which the agency is billed.

    Government Transportation Request (GTR) (Optional Form 1169)—means a Government document used to procure passenger transportation services from a TSP. The document obligates the Government to pay for transportation services provided and is used when a Government contractor issued charge card is not.

    Offset means something that serves to counterbalance or to compensate for something else. These are funds owed to a TSP that are not released by the agency but instead used to repay the agency for a debt incurred by the TSP.

    Overcharge means those charges for transportation that exceed those applicable under the executed agreement for services such as bill of lading (including a GBL, contract, rate tender or a GTR).

    Postpayment audit means an audit of transportation billing documents, and all related transportation documents after payment, to decide their validity, propriety, and conformity of rates with tariffs, quotations, agreements, contracts, or tenders. The audit process may also include subsequent adjustments and collection actions taken against a TSP by the Government (31 U.S.C. 3726).

    Prepayment audit means an audit of transportation billing documents before payment to determine their validity, propriety, and conformity of rates with tariffs, quotations, agreements, contracts, or tenders (31 U.S.C. 3726).

    Rate authority means the document that establishes the legal charges for a transportation shipment. Charges included in a rate authority are those rates, fares, and charges for transportation and related services contained in tariffs, tenders, contracts, bills of lading, and other equivalent documents.

    Reparation means a payment to or from an agency to correct an improper transportation billing as determined by a postpayment audit involving a TSP. Improper routing, overcharges, or duplicate payments may cause such improper billing. This is different from a payment to settle a claim for loss and damage.

    Standard Carrier Alpha Code (SCAC) is a unique code, typically two to four characters, used to identify transportation companies.

    Statement of difference means a statement issued by an agency or its designated audit contractor during a prepayment audit when they determine that a TSP has billed the agency for more than the proper amount for the services. This statement tells the TSP on the invoice, the amount allowed and the basis for the proper charges. The statement also cites the applicable rate references and other data relied on for support. The agency issues a separate statement of difference for each transportation transaction.

    Supplemental bill means the bill for services that the TSP submits to the agency for additional payment of the services provided.

    Transportation means service involved in the physical movement (from one location to another) of people, household goods, and freight by a TSP or a Third Party Logistics (3PL) entity for an agency, as well as activities directly relating to or supporting that movement. These activities are defined in 49 U.S.C. 13102.

    Transportation document (TD) means any executed document for transportation services, such as a bill of lading, a tariff, a tender, a contract, a GTR, invoices, paid invoices, any transportation bills, or other equivalent documents, including electronic documents.

    Transportation service provider (TSP) means any party, person, agent, or carrier that provides freight, household goods, or passenger transportation or related services to an agency.

    Note to § 102-118.35:

    15 U.S.C. 96, et seq., 49 U.S.C. 13102, et seq., and 41 CFR Chapter 302 Federal Travel Regulation defines additional transportation terms not listed in this section.

    9. Revise Subpart D to read as follows: Subpart D—Prepayment Audit of Transportation Services Sec. Agency Requirements for a Transportation Prepayment Audit Program § 102-118.265 What is a prepayment audit? § 102-118.270 Must my agency establish a transportation prepayment audit program, and how is it funded? § 102-118.275 What must my agency consider when developing a transportation prepayment audit program? § 102-118.280 Must all transportation payment records, whether they are electronic or paper, undergo a prepayment audit? § 102-118.285 What must be included in my agency's transportation prepayment audit program? Agency Requirements With Transportation Service Providers § 102-118.290 Must my agency notify the TSP of any adjustment to the TSP bill? § 102-118.295 Does my agency transportation prepayment audit program need to establish appeal procedures? § 102-118.300 What must my agency do if the TSP disputes the findings and my agency cannot resolve the dispute? § 102-118.305 What information must be on all transportation payment records that have completed my agency's prepayment audit? § 102-118.310 What does the GSA Transportation Audits Division consider when verifying an agency prepayment audit program? § 102-118.315 How does my agency contact the GSA Transportation Audits Division? § 102-118.320 What action should my agency take if the agency's transportation prepayment audits program changes? Agency Certifying and Disbursing Officers § 102-118.325 Does establishing an agency Chief Financial Officer-approved transportation prepayment audit program change the responsibilities of the certifying officers? § 102-118.330 Does a transportation prepayment audit waiver change any liabilities of the certifying officer? § 102-118.335 What relief from liability is available for the certifying official under a transportation postpayment audit? § 102-118.340 Do the requirements of a transportation prepayment audit change the disbursing official's liability for overpayment? § 102-118.345 Where does relief from transportation prepayment audit liability for certifying, accountable, and disbursing officers reside in my agency? Exemptions and Suspensions of the Mandatory Transportation Prepayment Audit Program § 102-118.350 What agency has the authority to grant an exemption from the transportation prepayment audit requirement? § 102-118.355 How does my agency apply for an exemption from a transportation prepayment audit requirement? § 102-118.360 How long will GSA take to respond to an exemption request from a transportation prepayment audit requirement? § 102-118.365 Can my agency renew an exemption from the transportation prepayment audit requirements? § 102-118.370 Are my agency's prepayment audited transportation documentation subject to periodic postpayment audit oversight from the GSA Transportation Audits Division? § 102-118.375 Can GSA suspend my agency's transportation prepayment audit program? Authority:

    31 U.S.C. 3726; 40 U.S.C. 121(c); 40 U.S.C. 501, et seq.; 46 U.S.C. 55305; 49 U.S.C. 40118.

    Subpart D—Prepayment Audit of Transportation Services Agency Requirements for a Transportation Prepayment Audit Program
    § 102-118.265 What is a prepayment audit?

    Prepayment audit means a review of transportation documentation before payment to determine their validity, propriety, and conformity of rates with tariffs, quotations, agreements, contracts, or tenders. Prepayment auditing by your agency will detect and eliminate billing errors before payment (31 U.S.C. 3726).

    § 102-118.270 Must my agency establish a transportation prepayment audit program, and how is it funded?

    (a) Yes, under 31 U.S.C. 3726, your agency is required to establish a transportation prepayment audit program. Your agency's Chief Financial Officer (CFO) must approve the prepayment audit program.

    (b) Your agency must pay for the prepayment audit program from those funds appropriated for transportation services.

    (1) Agencies are encouraged to consider using a GSA Transportation Audits Division approved third party electronic payment processor for transportation invoice processing, payment, and prepayment audit. These electronic payment processors are no cost to the agency and are fully compliant with GSA Transportation Audits Division prepayment audit requirements.

    (2) Use of these third party payment processors generally means your agency will not have to provide any additional prepayment or postpayment documentation to GSA Transportation Audits Division.

    § 102-118.275 What must my agency consider when developing a transportation prepayment audit program?

    (a) Your agency's transportation prepayment audit program must consider all of the methods that your agency uses to order and pay for passenger, household goods, and freight transportation to include Government contractor-issued charge cards (see § 102-118.35 for definition Government contractor-issued charge cards).

    (b) Each method of ordering transportation and transportation services for passenger, household goods, and freight transportation may require a different kind of prepayment audit process. The manner in which your agency orders or procures transportation services determines how and by whom the bill for those services will be presented. Your agency should ensure that each TSP bill or employee travel voucher contains enough information for the prepayment audit to determine which contract or rate tender is used and that the type and quantity of any additional services are clearly delineated.

    (c) The prepayment audit cannot be conducted by the same firm providing the transportation services for the agency. If a move manager is being utilized, the move manager may not have any affiliation with or financial interest in the transportation company providing the transportation services for which the prepayment audit is being conducted. Contracts with charge card companies that provide prepayment audit services are a valid option. The agency can choose to—

    (1) Create an internal prepayment audit program;

    (2) Contract directly with a prepayment audit service provider;

    (3) Use the services of a prepayment audit contractor under GSA's multiple award schedule covering audit and financial management services (SIN 520.10 Transportation Audits); or

    (4) Use a Third-Party Payment System or charge card company that includes prepayment audit functions, such as the GSA Center for Transportation Management's PayPort Express.

    (d) An appeals process must be established for a TSP to appeal any reduction in the amount billed. It is recommended the agency establish an electronic appeal process that will direct TSP-filed appeals to an agency official for determination of the claim.

    (e) A process to ensure that all agency transportation procurement and related documents including contracts and tenders are submitted electronically to GSA Transportation Audits Division.

    (f) Use of GSA Transportation Audits Division's Prepayment Audit Program template is recommended (contact [email protected] for a copy of the template). If the template is not used, provide the same information listed on the template to GSA Transportation Audits Division.

    § 102-118.280 Must all transportation payment records, whether they are electronic or paper, undergo a prepayment audit?

    Yes, all transportation bills and payment records, whether they are electronic or paper, must undergo a prepayment audit with the following exceptions:

    (a) Your agency's prepayment audit program uses a statistical sampling technique of the bills. If your agency chooses to use statistical sampling, all bills must be

    (1) At or below the Comptroller General specified limit of $2,500.00 (31 U.S.C. 3521(b)); and

    (2) In compliance with the U.S. Government Accountability Office Using Statistical Sampling (GAO/PEMD-10.1.6), Rev. 1992, Chapter 7 Random Selection Procedures obtainable from http://www.gao.gov; or

    (b) The Administrator of General Services grants your agency a specific exemption from the prepayment audit requirement which may include bills determined to be below your agency's threshold, mode or modes of transportation, or for an agency or subagency.

    § 102-118.285 What must be included in an agency's transportation prepayment audit program?

    The agency prepayment audit program must include—

    (a) The agency's CFO approval of the transportation prepayment audit program with submission to GSA Transportation Audits Division;

    (b) Compliance with the Prompt Payment Act (31 U.S.C. 3901, et seq.);

    (c) Assurance that each TSP bill or employee travel voucher contains appropriate information for the prepayment audit to determine which contract or rate tender is used and that the type and quantity of any additional services are clearly delineated;

    (d) Verification of all transportation bills against filed rates and charges before payment;

    (e) A process to forward all transportation documentation (TD) monthly to the GSA Transportation Audits Division.

    (1) GSA Transportation Audits Division can provide your agency a Prepayment Audit Program with a monthly reporting template upon request at [email protected] (see § 102-118.35 for definition TD).

    (2) In addition to the requirements for agencies to maintain transportation records, GSA will store paid transportation bills in accordance with the General Records Schedule 9, Travel and Transportation (36 CFR 1228.22). GSA will arrange for storage of any document requiring special handling, such as bankruptcy and court cases. These bills will be retained pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 3309 until claims have been settled;

    (f) Establish procedures in which transportation bills not subject to prepayment audit, such as bills for unused tickets and charge card billings, are handled separately and are also forwarded monthly to the GSA Transportation Audits Division;

    (g) A minimum dollar threshold for transportation bills subject to audit;

    (h) A statement in a cost reimbursable contracts contract or rate tender that the contractor shall submit to the address and in the electronic format identified for prepayment audit, transportation documents which show that the United States will assume freight charges that were paid by the contractor. Cost reimbursable contractors shall only submit for audit bills of lading with freight shipment charges exceeding $100.00. Bills under $100.00 shall be retained on-site by the contractor and made available for on-site Government audits (Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 52.247-67);

    (i) Require your agency's paying office to offset, if directed by GSA's Transportation Audits Division, debts from amounts owed to the TSP within the 3 years (31 U.S.C. 3726(b));

    (j) A process to ensure complete and accurate audits of all transportation bills and notification to the TSP of any adjustment within 7 calendar days of receipt of the bill;

    (k) An appeals process as part of the approved prepayment audit program for a TSP to appeal any reduction in the amount billed. Refer to § 102-118.295 for details regarding the appeals process.

    (l) Accurate notices and agency procedures for notifying the TSPs with a detailed description of the reasons for any full or partial rejection of the stated charges on the invoice. Refer to § 102-118.290 for notice requirements; and

    (m) A unique agency numbering system to handle commercial paper and practices (see § 102-118.55 for information on administrative procedures your agency must establish).

    Agency Requirements With Transportation Service Providers
    § 102-118.290 Must my agency notify the TSP of any adjustment to the TSP bill?

    (a) Yes, your agency must notify the TSP of any adjustment to the TSP bill either electronically or in writing within seven calendar days of the agency receipt of the bill.

    (b) This notice must include:

    (1) TSP's bill number;

    (2) Agency name;

    (3) TSP's TIN;

    (4) SCAC;

    (5) DRN;

    (6) Date invoice submitted;

    (7) Amount billed;

    (8) Date invoice was approved for payment;

    (9) Date and amount agency paid;

    (10) Payment location number and agency organization name;

    (11) Payment voucher number;

    (12) Complete contract, tender or tariff authority, including item or section number;

    (13) Reason for the adjustment; and

    (14) Complete information on the agency appeal process.

    (c) A TSP must submit claims to the agency within three years under the guidelines established in subpart F, Claims and Appeals Procedures, of this part.

    § 102-118.295 Does my agency transportation prepayment audit program need to establish appeal procedures?

    Yes, your agency must establish, in the approved prepayment audit program, an appeals process for a TSP to appeal any reduction in the amount billed. It is recommended the agency establish an electronic appeal process that will direct TSP-filed appeals to an agency official for determination of the claim. Your agency must complete the review of the appeal and inform the TSP of the agency determination within 30 calendar days of the receipt of the appeal, either electronically or in writing.

    § 102-118.300 What must my agency do if the TSP disputes the findings and my agency cannot resolve the dispute?

    (a) If your agency is unable to resolve the disputed amount with the TSP, your agency must submit, within 30 calendar days, all relevant transportation documentation associated with the dispute, including a complete billing history and the appropriation or fund charged, to GSA Transportation Audits Division by email at [email protected], or by mail to: U.S. General Services Administration, 1800 F St. NW., 3rd Floor, Mail Hub 3400, Washington, DC 20405.

    (b) The GSA Transportation Audits Division will review the appeal of an agency's final, full, or partial denial of a claim and issue a decision within 30 calendar days of receipt of appeal.

    (c) A TSP must submit claims to the agency within three years under the guidelines established in subpart F of this part.

    § 102-118.305 What information must be on all transportation payment records that have completed my agency's prepayment audit?

    (a) The following information must be annotated on all transportation payment records, electronically or on paper, that have completed your agency's prepayment audit and for submission to GSA Transportation Audits Division:

    (1) The date the bill was received from a TSP;

    (2) A TSP's invoice number;

    (3) Your agency name;

    (4) DRN;

    (5) Amount billed;

    (6) Date invoice was approved for payment;

    (7) Date and amount agency paid;

    (8) Payment location code number and office or organization name;

    (9) Payment voucher number;

    (10) Complete contract, tender or tariff authority, including item or section number;

    (11) The TSP's TIN;

    (12) The TSP's SCAC;

    (13) The auditor's authorization code or initials; and

    (14) A copy of any statement of difference and the date it was sent to the TSP.

    (b) Your agency can find added guidance in the “U.S. Government Freight Transportation Handbook.” This handbook is located at www.gsa.gov/transaudits.

    § 102-118.310 What does the GSA Transportation Audits Division consider when verifying an agency prepayment audit program?

    GSA Transportation Audit Division bases verification of agency prepayment audit programs on objective cost-savings, paperwork reductions, current audit standards, and other positive improvements, as well as adherence to the guidelines listed in this part.

    § 102-118.315 How does my agency contact the GSA Transportation Audits Division?

    Your agency may contact the GSA Transportation Audits Division at [email protected]

    § 102-118.320 What action should my agency take if the agency's transportation prepayment audit program changes?

    (a) If your agency's transportation prepayment audit program changes in any way to include changes in prepayment auditors, your agency must submit the CFO-approved revised transportation prepayment audit program to GSA Transportation Audits Division via email at [email protected], Subject line: Agency PPA-Revised.

    (b) If GSA determines the agency's approved plan is insufficient, GSA will contact the agency CFO to inform of the prepayment audit program deficiencies and request corrective action and resubmission to GSA Transportation Audits Division.

    Agency Certifying and Disbursing Officers
    § 102-118.325 Does establishing an agency Chief Financial Officer-approved transportation prepayment audit program change the responsibilities of the certifying officers?

    No, in a prepayment audit program, the official certifying a transportation voucher is held liable for verifying transportation rates, freight classifications, and other information provided on a transportation billing instrument or transportation request undergoing a prepayment audit (31 U.S.C. 3528).

    § 102-118.330 Does a transportation prepayment audit waiver change any liabilities of the certifying officer?

    Yes, a certifying official is not personally liable for verifying transportation rates, freight classifications, or other information provided on a bill of lading or passenger transportation request when the Administrator of General Services or designee waives the prepayment audit requirement and your agency uses postpayment audits.

    § 102-118.335 What relief from liability is available for the certifying official under a transportation postpayment audit?

    The agency counsel relieves a certifying official from liability for transportation overpayments in cases where—

    (a) Postpayment is the approved method of auditing;

    (b) The overpayment occurred solely because the administrative review before payment did not verify transportation rates; and

    (c) The overpayment was the result of using improper transportation rates or freight classifications or the failure to deduct the correct amount under a land grant law or agreement.

    § 102-118.340 Do the requirements of a transportation prepayment audit change the disbursing official's liability for overpayment?

    No, the disbursing official has a liability for overpayments on all transportation bills subject to prepayment audit (31 U.S.C. 3322).

    § 102-118.345 Where does relief from transportation prepayment audit liability for certifying, accountable, and disbursing officers reside in my agency?

    Your agency's counsel has the authority to relieve liability and give advance opinions on liability issues to certifying, accountable, and disbursing officers (31 U.S.C. 3527).

    Exemptions and Suspensions of the Mandatory Transportation Prepayment Audit Program
    § 102-118.350 What agency has the authority to grant an exemption from the transportation prepayment audit requirement?

    Only the Administrator of General Services or their designee has the authority to grant an exemption for a specific time period from the prepayment audit requirement. The Administrator may exempt bills, a particular mode or modes of transportation, or an agency or subagency from a prepayment audit and verification and in lieu thereof require a postpayment audit, based on cost effectiveness, public interest, or other factors the Administrator considers appropriate (31 U.S.C. 3726(a)(2)).

    § 102-118.355 How does my agency apply for an exemption from a transportation prepayment audit requirement?

    Your agency must submit a request for an exemption from the requirement to perform transportation prepayment audits by email to [email protected], Subject Line: Prepayment Audit Exemption Request. The agency exemption request must explain in detail why the request is submitted based on cost effectiveness, public interest, or other factors the Administrator considers appropriate, such as transportation modes, dollar thresholds, adversely affecting the agency's mission, or is not feasible (31 U.S.C. 3726(a)(2)).

    § 102-118.360 How long will GSA take to respond to an exemption request from a transportation prepayment audit requirement?

    GSA will respond to the exemption from the transportation prepayment audit requirement request within 180 calendar days from the date of receipt.

    § 102-118.365 Can my agency renew an exemption from the transportation prepayment audit requirements?

    It may be possible for your agency to be granted a prepayment audit exemption extension. Your agency must submit a request for the extension to GSA Transportation Audits Division at least six months in advance of the current exemption expiration.

    § 102-118.370 Are my agency's prepayment audited transportation documentation subject to periodic postpayment audit oversight from the GSA Transportation Audits Division?

    Yes. All your agency's prepayment audited transportation documents are subject to the GSA Transportation Audits Division postpayment audit oversight. Upon request, GSA Transportation Audits Division will provide a report analyzing your agency's prepayment audit program.

    § 102-118.375 Can GSA suspend my agency's transportation prepayment audit program?

    (a) Yes. The Director of the GSA Transportation Audits Division may suspend your agency's transportation prepayment audit program until the agency corrects their prepayment audit program deficiencies. This suspension may be in whole or in part. If GSA suspends your agency's transportation prepayment audit and GSA assumes responsibility for auditing an agencies prepayment audit program, the agency will reimburse GSA for the expense.

    (b) This suspension determination is based on identification of a systematic or frequent failure of the agency's transportation prepayment audit program to—

    (1) Conduct a prepayment audit of your agency's transportation bills; and/or

    (2) Abide by the terms of the Prompt Payment Act (31 U.S.C. 3901, et seq.);

    (3) Adjudicate TSP claims disputing prepayment audit positions of the agency regularly within 30 calendar days of receipt;

    (4) Follow Comptroller General decisions, Civilian Board of Contract Appeals decisions, the Federal Management Regulation and GSA instructions or precedents about substantive and procedure matters; and/or

    (5) Provide information and data or to cooperate with on-site inspections necessary to conduct a quality assurance review.

    10. Revise Subpart E to read as follows: Subpart E—Postpayment Transportation Audits Sec. § 102-118.400 What is a transportation postpayment audit? § 102-118.405 Who conducts a transportation postpayment audit? § 102-118.410 If agencies perform the mandatory transportation prepayment audit, will this eliminate the requirement for a transportation postpayment audit conducted by GSA? § 102-118.415 Can the Administrator of General Services exempt the transportation postpayment audit requirement?
    § 102-118.420 Is my agency allowed to perform a postpayment audit on our transportation documents? § 102-118.425 Is my agency required to forward all transportation documents to the GSA Transportation Audits Division, and what information must be on these documents? § 102-118.430 What is the process the GSA Transportation Audits Division employs to conduct a postpayment audit? § 102-118.435 What are the transportation postpayment audit roles and responsibilities of the GSA Transportation Audits Division? § 102-118.440 Does my agency pay for a transportation postpayment audit conducted by the GSA Transportation Audits Division? § 102-118.445 How do I contact the GSA Transportation Audits Division?
    Subpart E—Postpayment Transportation Audits
    § 102-118.400 What is a transportation postpayment audit?

    Postpayment audit means an audit of transportation billing documents after payment to decide their validity, propriety, and conformity of rates with tariffs, quotations, agreements, contracts, or tenders. The audit may also include subsequent adjustments and collection actions taken against a TSP by the Government (31 U.S.C. 3726).

    § 102-118.405 Who conducts a transportation postpayment audit?

    The Administrator of General Services (GSA) has a congressionally mandated responsibility under 31 U.S.C. 3726 to perform oversight on transportation bills. The GSA Transportation Audits Division accomplishes this oversight by conducting postpayment audits of all agencies' transportation bills.

    § 102-118.410 If agencies perform the mandatory transportation prepayment audit, will this eliminate the requirement for a transportation postpayment audit conducted by GSA?

    No, agency compliance to the mandatory transportation prepayment audit does not eliminate the requirement of the transportation postpayment audit conducted by GSA (31 U.S.C. 3726).

    § 102-118.415 Can the Administrator of General Services exempt the transportation postpayment audit requirement?

    Yes. The Administrator of General Services or designee may exempt, for a specified time, an agency or subagency from the GSA transportation postpayment audit oversight requirements of this subpart. The Administrator can also exempt modes (31 U.S.C. 3726).

    § 102-118.420 Is my agency allowed to perform a postpayment audit on our transportation documents?

    No. Your agency may not perform a transportation postpayment audit unless granted an exemption and specifically directed to do so by the Administrator in lieu of a prepayment audit. Whether such an exemption is granted or not, your agency must forward all transportation documents (TD) to GSA for postpayment audit (see § 102-118.35 for definition TD).

    § 102-118.425 Is my agency required to forward all transportation documents to GSA Transportation Audits Division, and what information must be on these documents?

    (a) Yes, your agency must provide all TDs to GSA Transportation Audits Division (see § 102-118.35 for definition TD).

    (b) The following information must be annotated on all TDs and bills that have completed your agency's prepayment audit for submission to GSA Transportation Audits Division:

    (1) The date the bill was received from a TSP;

    (2) A TSP's invoice number;

    (3) Your agency name;

    (4) A DRN;

    (5) Amount billed;

    (6) Date invoice was approved for payment;

    (7) Payment date and amount agency paid;

    (8) Payment location code number and office name;

    (9) Payment voucher number;

    (10) Complete contract, tender, or tariff authority, including item or section number;

    (11) The TSP's TIN;

    (12) The TSP's SCAC;

    (13) The auditor's full name, email address, contact telephone number, and authorization code; and

    (14) A copy of any statement of difference sent to the TSP.

    (c) Your agency can find additional guidance in the “U.S. Government Freight Transportation Handbook.” This handbook is located at www.gsa.gov/transaudits.

    § 102-118.430 What is the process the GSA Transportation Audits Division employs to conduct a postpayment audit?

    The GSA Transportation Audits Division

    (a) Audits select TSP bills after payment;

    (b) Audits select TSP bills before payment as needed to protect the Government's interest;

    (c) Examines, settles, and adjusts accounts involving payment for transportation and related services for the account of agencies;

    (d) Adjudicates and settles transportation claims by and against agencies;

    (e) Offsets an overcharge by any TSP from an amount subsequently found to be due that TSP;

    (f) Issues a Notice of Overcharge stating that a TSP owes a debt to the agency. This notice states the amount paid and the basis for the proper charge for the document reference number (DRN), and cites applicable contract, tariff, or tender, along with other data relied on to support the overcharge; and

    (g) Issues a GSA Notice of Indebtedness when a TSP owes an ordinary debt to an agency. This notice states the basis for the debt, the TSP's rights, interest, penalty, and other results of nonpayment. The debt is due immediately and is subject to interest charges, penalties, and administrative cost under 31 U.S.C. 3717.

    § 102-118.435 What are the transportation postpayment audit roles and responsibilities of the GSA Transportation Audits Division?

    (a) The GSA Transportation Audits Division role is to perform the oversight responsibility of transportation prepayment and postpayment granted to the Administrator. The GSA Transportation Audits Division will—

    (1) Examine and analyze transportation documents and payments to discover their validity, relevance and conformity with tariffs, quotations, contracts, agreements, or tenders and make adjustments to protect the interest of an agency;

    (2) Examine, adjudicate, and settle transportation claims by and against the agency;

    (3) Collect from TSPs by refund, setoff, offset, or other means, the amounts determined to be due the agency;

    (4) Adjust, terminate, or suspend debts due on TSP overcharges;

    (5) Prepare reports to the Attorney General of the United States with recommendations about the legal and technical bases available for use in prosecuting or defending suits by or against an agency and provide technical, fiscal, and factual data from relevant records;

    (6) Provide transportation specialists and lawyers to serve as expert witnesses; assist in pretrial conferences; draft pleadings, orders, and briefs; and participate as requested in connection with transportation suits by or against an agency;

    (7) Review agency policies, programs, and procedures to determine their adequacy and effectiveness in the audit of freight or passenger transportation payments, and review related fiscal and transportation practices;

    (8) Furnish information on rates, fares, routes, and related technical data upon request;

    (9) Inform an agency of irregular shipping routing practices, inadequate commodity descriptions, excessive transportation cost authorizations, and unsound principles employed in traffic and transportation management; and

    (10) Confer with individual TSPs or related groups and associations presenting specific modes of transportation to resolve mutual problems concerning technical and accounting matters, and providing information on requirements.

    (b) The Administrator of General Services may provide transportation audit and related technical assistance services, on a reimbursable basis, to any other agency. Such reimbursements may be credited to the appropriate revolving fund or appropriation from which the expenses were incurred (31 U.S.C. 3726(j)).

    § 102-118.440 Does my agency pay for a transportation postpayment audit conducted by the GSA Transportation Audits Division?

    The GSA Transportation Audits Division does not charge agencies a fee for conducting the transportation postpayment audit. Transportation postpayment audits expenses are financed from overpayments collected from the TSP's bills previously paid by the agency and similar type of refunds. However, if a postpayment audit is conducted in lieu of a prepayment audit at the request of an agency, or if there are additional services required, GSA may charge the agency.

    § 102-118.445 How do I contact the GSA Transportation Audits Division?

    You may contact the GSA Transportation Audits Division by email at [email protected]

    [FR Doc. 2016-22609 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6820-14-P
    FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 47 CFR Part 73 [MB Docket No. 16-182; RM-11770; DA 16-1007] Radio Broadcasting Services; Eagle Butte, South Dakota AGENCY:

    Federal Communications Commission.

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    At the request of the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe, the Audio Division amends the FM Table of Allotments, by allotting Channel 228C1 at Eagle Butte, South Dakota, as the first local Tribal-owned service. A staff engineering analysis indicates that Channel 228C1 can be allotted to Eagle Butte consistent with the minimum distance separation requirements of the Commission's rules with no site restriction. The reference coordinates are 45-01-32 NL and 101-14-22 WL.

    DATES:

    Effective October 17, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Adrienne Y. Denysyk, Media Bureau, (202) 418-2700.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This is a synopsis of the Commission's Report and Order, MB Docket No. 16-182, adopted September 1, 2016, and released September 2, 2016. The full text of this Commission decision is available for inspection and copying during normal business hours in the FCC's Reference Information Center at Portals II, CY-A257, 445 12th Street SW., Washington, DC 20554. The full text is also available online at http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/. This document does not contain information collection requirements subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. The Commission will send a copy of the Report and Order in a report to be sent to Congress and the Government Accountability Office pursuant to the Congressional Review Act, see 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A).

    List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73

    Radio, Radio broadcasting.

    Federal Communications Commission.

    Nazifa Sawez, Assistant Chief, Audio Division, Media Bureau.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Federal Communications Commission amends 47 CFR part 73 as follows:

    PART 73—RADIO BROADCAST SERVICES 1. The authority citation for part 73 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    47 U.S.C. 154, 303, 334, 336, and 339.

    § 73.202 [Amended].
    2. Section 73.202(b), the Table of FM Allotments under South Dakota, is amended by adding Eagle Butte, Channel 228C1.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22788 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 50 CFR Part 648 [Docket No. 151130999-6225-01] RIN 0648-XE868 Fisheries of the Northeastern United States; Atlantic Bluefish Fishery; Quota Transfer AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Temporary rule; approval of quota transfer.

    SUMMARY:

    NMFS announces its approval of a transfer of a portion of the 2016 commercial bluefish quota from the State of New Jersey to the State of New York. This approval of the transfer complies with the Atlantic Bluefish Fishery Management Plan quota transfer provision. This announcement also informs the public of the revised commercial quotas for New Jersey and New York.

    DATES:

    Effective September 21, 2016, through December 31, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Reid Lichwell, Fishery Management Specialist, (978) 281-9112.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Regulations governing the Atlantic bluefish fishery are found in 50 CFR 648.160 through 648.167. The regulations require annual specification of a commercial quota that is apportioned among the coastal states from Maine through Florida. The process to set the annual commercial quota and the percent allocated to each state are described in § 648.162.

    The final rule implementing Amendment 1 to the Bluefish Fishery Management Plan published in the Federal Register on July 26, 2000 (65 FR 45844), and provided a mechanism for transferring bluefish quota from one state to another. Two or more states, under mutual agreement and with the concurrence of the Administrator, Greater Atlantic Region, NMFS (Regional Administrator), can request approval of a transfer of bluefish commercial quota under § 648.162(e)(1)(i) through (iii). The Regional Administrator must first approve any such transfer based on the criteria in § 648.162(e).

    Both states have requested the transfer of 40,000 lb (18,144 kg) of bluefish commercial quota from New Jersey to New York. Both states have certified that the transfer meets all pertinent state requirements. This quota transfer was requested by the New York to ensure that its 2016 quota would not be exceeded. The Regional Administrator has approved this quota transfer based on his determination that the criteria set forth in § 648.162(e)(1)(i) through (iii) have been met. The revised bluefish quotas for calendar year 2016 are: New Jersey, 683,739 lb (310,139 kg); and New York, 727,289 lb (329,893 kg). These quota adjustments revise the quotas specified in the final rule implementing the 2016-2018 Atlantic Bluefish Specifications published on August 4, 2016 (81 FR 51370), and reflect all subsequent commercial bluefish quota transfers completed to date. For information of previous transfers for fishing year 2016, visit: http://go.usa.gov/xZT8H.

    Classification

    This action is taken under 50 CFR part 648 and is exempt from review under Executive Order 12866.

    Authority:

    16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

    Dated: September 19, 2016. Alan D. Risenhoover, Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22868 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 50 CFR Part 679 [Docket No. 150818742-6210-02] RIN 0648-XE897 Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Shortraker Rockfish in the Central Regulatory Area of the Gulf of Alaska AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Temporary rule; closure.

    SUMMARY:

    NMFS is prohibiting retention of shortraker rockfish in the Central Regulatory Area of the Gulf of Alaska (GOA). This action is necessary because the 2016 total allowable catch of shortraker rockfish in the Central Regulatory Area of the GOA has been reached. This closure does not apply to vessels participating in the catcher/processor cooperative fishery in the Rockfish Program.

    DATES:

    Effective 1200 hours, Alaska local time (A.l.t.), September 19, 2016, through 2400 hours, A.l.t., December 31, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Steve Whitney, 907-586-7228.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    NMFS manages the groundfish fishery in the GOA exclusive economic zone according to the Fishery Management Plan for Groundfish of the Gulf of Alaska (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 total allowable catch (TAC) of shortraker rockfish in the Central Regulatory Area of the GOA by vessels not participating in the catcher/processor cooperative fishery in the Rockfish Program is 181 metric tons (mt) as established by the final 2016 and 2017 harvest specifications for groundfish of the GOA (81 FR 14740, March 18, 2016).

    In accordance with § 679.20(d)(2), the Administrator, Alaska Region, NMFS (Regional Administrator), has determined that the 2016 TAC of shortraker rockfish in the Central Regulatory Area of the GOA by vessels not participating in the catcher/processor cooperative fishery in the Rockfish Program has been reached. Therefore, NMFS is requiring that shortraker rockfish in the Central Regulatory Area of the GOA be treated as prohibited species in accordance with § 679.21(b). This closure does not apply to vessels participating in the catcher/processor cooperative fishery in the Rockfish Program.

    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 prohibiting the retention of shortraker rockfish in the Central Regulatory Area of the GOA for vessels not participating in the catcher/processor cooperative fishery in the Rockfish Program. NMFS was unable to publish a notice providing time for public comment because the most recent, relevant data only became available as of September 16, 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 679.21 and is exempt from review under Executive Order 12866.

    Authority:

    16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

    Dated: September 19, 2016. Alan D. Risenhoover, Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22862 Filed 9-19-16; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    81 184 Thursday, September 22, 2016 Proposed Rules DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service 9 CFR Part 11 [Docket No. APHIS-2011-0009] RIN 0579-AE19 Horse Protection; Licensing of Designated Qualified Persons and Other Amendments AGENCY:

    Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA.

    ACTION:

    Proposed rule; extension of comment period and clarification.

    SUMMARY:

    We are extending the comment period for our proposed rule to amend the horse protection regulations to provide that the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service will train and license inspectors to inspect horses at horse shows, exhibitions, sales, and auctions for compliance with the Horse Protection Act. This action will allow interested persons additional time to prepare and submit comments. We are also making a clarification to the proposed regulations pertaining to specific prohibitions concerning exhibitors.

    DATES:

    The comment period for the proposed rule published on July 26, 2016 (81 FR 49112) is extended. We will consider all comments that we receive on or before October 26, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments by either of the following methods:

    Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2011-0009.

    Postal Mail/Commercial Delivery: Send your comment to Docket No. APHIS-2011-0009, 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-2011-0009 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:

    Dr. Kay Carter-Corker, Director, National Policy Staff, Animal Care, APHIS, 4700 River Road Unit 84, Riverdale, MD 20737; (301) 851-3751.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background

    On July 26, 2016, we published in the Federal Register (81 FR 49112-49137, Docket No. APHIS-2011-0009) a proposal to revise the Horse Protection Act regulations in 9 CFR part 11 to improve our enforcement of the Act and regulations. The proposed rule provides that the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) will train and license inspectors to inspect horses at horse shows, exhibitions, sales, and auctions for compliance with the Horse Protection Act. The proposed rule also proposes changes to the list of devices, equipment, substances, and practices that can cause soring or are otherwise prohibited under the Act and regulations, as well as other amendments pertaining to horse inspections and show management.

    Comments on the proposed rule were required to be received on or before September 26, 2016. We are extending the comment period on Docket No. APHIS-2011-0009 for an additional 30 days. This action will allow interested persons more time to prepare and submit comments.

    Clarification

    As part of our proposed rule, we proposed to retitle § 11.2 as “Prohibited actions, practices, devices, and substances” and to prohibit all action devices, pads, and substances applied to a horse's limbs. Also prohibited is any practice involving a horse, and, as a result of such practice, such horse suffers, or can reasonably be expected to suffer, physical pain or distress, inflammation, or lameness when walking, trotting, or otherwise moving. These proposed changes were intended to successfully and significantly reduce the number of sored horses shown, exhibited, sold, and auctioned. In our proposed changes to § 11.2, we included provisions in proposed paragraph (a)(3) of that section stating that the use of any weight on horses up to 2 years old, except a keg or similar conventional horseshoe is prohibited, as is the use of a horseshoe on horses up to 2 years old that weighs more than 16 ounces. In keeping with the intent of our other proposed changes, we are considering changing proposed paragraph (a)(3) to read “The use of any weight on horses, except a keg or similar conventional horseshoe, is prohibited.” We will consider all comments we received on this provision throughout the comment period so that those who have already commented know we will continue to consider their views.

    Authority:

    15 U.S.C. 1823-1825 and 1828; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 371.7.

    Done in Washington, DC, this 16th day of September 2016. Kevin Shea, Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22855 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-34-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2016-9111; Directorate Identifier 2016-NM-132-AD] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes AGENCY:

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

    SUMMARY:

    We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain The Boeing Company Model 757 airplanes. This proposed AD was prompted by reports of single and multiple uncommanded spoiler panel extensions during flight when there was a hydraulic system failure. This proposed AD would require replacing certain spoiler power control units (PCUs) with new or changed PCUs. We are proposing this AD to prevent an uncommanded extension of spoiler panels in the event of a hydraulic system failure, which could result in loss of control of the airplane.

    DATES:

    We must receive comments on this proposed AD by November 7, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

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

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

    Fax: 202-493-2251.

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

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

    For service information identified in this NPRM, contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management, P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, WA 98124-2207; telephone 206-544-5000, extension 1; fax 206-766-5680; Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You may view this referenced service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. 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-2016-9111.

    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-2016-9111; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street address for the Docket Office (phone: 800-647-5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Myra Kuck, Aerospace Engineer, Cabin Safety/Mechanical & Environmental Systems branch, ANM-150L, FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, California 90712-4137; phone: 562-627-5316; fax: 562-627-5210; email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include “Docket No. FAA-2016-9111; Directorate Identifier 2016-NM-132-AD” at the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this proposed AD because of those comments.

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

    Discussion

    We have received reports of single and multiple uncommanded spoiler panel extensions during flight. The condition known as “spoiler panel float” occurred when there was a hydraulic system pressure loss and the flaps were extended beyond 20 degrees. A subsequent investigation determined that the spoiler PCUs' blocking and thermal relief valve (BTRV) housings had reached a point of fatigue that made them likely to develop internal failures. One purpose of the spoiler PCU BTRV is to prevent the spoiler panel from extending during a loss of hydraulic pressure. An uncommanded extension of spoiler panels, in the event of a hydraulic system failure, could result in the loss of control of the airplane.

    Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    We reviewed Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 757-27A0154, dated July 22, 2016. The service information describes procedures for replacing certain spoiler PCUs with new or changed PCUs. This service information is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

    FAA's Determination

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

    Proposed AD Requirements

    This proposed AD would require accomplishing the actions specified in the service information described previously, For information on the procedures and compliance times, see this service information at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-9111.

    Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD affects 573 airplanes of U.S. registry. We estimate the following costs to comply with this proposed AD:

    Estimated Costs Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per
  • product
  • Cost on U.S. operators
    Replacement of six PCUs 8 work-hours × $85 per hour = $680 $32,652 $33,332 $19,099,236
    Authority for This Rulemaking

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

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

    Regulatory Findings

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

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

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

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

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

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

    List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

    The Proposed Amendment

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

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

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

    § 39.13 [Amended]
    2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): The Boeing Company: Docket No. FAA-2016-9111; Directorate Identifier 2016-NM-132-AD. (a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by November 7, 2016.

    (b) Affected ADs

    None.

    (c) Applicability

    This AD applies to The Boeing Company Model 757-200, -200PF, -200CB, and -300 series airplanes, certificated in any category, as identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 757-27A0154, dated July 22, 2016.

    (d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 27; Flight controls.

    (e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by reports of single and multiple uncommanded spoiler panel extensions during flight when there was a hydraulic system failure. We are issuing this AD to prevent an uncommanded extension of spoiler panels in the event of a hydraulic system failure, which could result in loss of control of the airplane.

    (f) Compliance

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

    (g) Replacement

    Within 51 months after the effective date of this AD: Replace each spoiler power control unit (PCU) with a new or changed PCU at spoiler positions 2, 3, and 4 on the left wing, and spoiler positions 9, 10, and 11 on the right wing, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 757-27A0154, dated July 22, 2016.

    (h) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information directly to the manager of the ACO, send it to the attention of the person identified in paragraph (i)(1) of this AD. Information may be emailed to: [email protected]

    (2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding district office.

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

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

    (i) The steps labeled as RC, including substeps under an RC step and any figures identified in an RC step, must be done to comply with the AD. If a step or substep is labeled “RC Exempt,” then the RC requirement is removed from that step or substep. An AMOC is required for any deviations to RC steps, including substeps and identified figures.

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

    (i) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Myra Kuck, Aerospace Engineer, Cabin Safety/Mechanical & Environmental Systems branch, ANM-150L, FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, California 90712-4137; phone: 562-627-5316; fax: 562-627-5210; email: [email protected]

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

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on September 12, 2016. Michael Kaszycki, Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22697 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE 15 CFR Part 2004 [Docket Number USTR-2016-0016] RIN 0350-AA10 Production or Disclosure of Records, Information and Employee Testimony in Legal Proceedings AGENCY:

    Office of the United States Trade Representative.

    ACTION:

    Proposed rule with request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    The Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR) is renaming and reorganizing part 2004 to include all of the rules governing disclosure of records and information by USTR. Part 2004 will include four subparts—subpart A will contain definitions used throughout part 2004, subpart B will implement the Freedom of Information Act, subpart C will implement the Privacy Act of 1974, and subpart D will govern how USTR responds to official demands and informal requests for records, information or employee testimony in connection with legal proceedings in which neither the United States nor USTR is a party. This proposed rule would establish subpart A, which contains definitions used throughout part 2004, and subpart D, which includes the requirements and procedures for demanding or requesting parties to submit demands or requests, and factors for USTR to consider in determining whether USTR employees will provide records, information or testimony relating to their official duties.

    DATES:

    We must receive your written comments on or before November 21, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    You should submit written comments through the Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. The docket number for this rulemaking is USTR-2016-0016. USTR invites comments on all aspects of the proposed rule, and will revise the language as appropriate after taking all timely comments into consideration. Copies of all comments will be available for public viewing at www.regulations.gov upon completion of processing. You can view a submission by entering the docket number USTR-2016-0016 in the search field at http://www.regulations.gov. We will post comments without change and will include any personal information you provide, such as your name, mailing address, email address, and telephone number.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Janice Kaye, Monique Ricker or Melissa Keppel, Office of General Counsel, United States Trade Representative, Anacostia Naval Annex, Building 410/Door 123, 250 Murray Lane SW., Washington, DC 20509, [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; 202-395-3150.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background

    Federal agencies often receive formal demands (including subpoenas) or informal requests to produce records, information or testimony in judicial, legislative or administrative proceedings in which those agencies or the United States is not a named party. Many federal agencies have issued regulations to address the submission, evaluation and processing of these demands or requests. They have done so because responding to these demands or requests can be burdensome, may disrupt an agency employee's work schedule, may involve the agency in issues unrelated to its responsibilities, may divert agency resources from accomplishing mission critical functions, and may impede the agency's accomplishment of its mission and goals. Standard rules alleviate these difficulties by ensuring timely notice and centralized, objective decision making. The United States Supreme Court upheld this type of regulation in United States ex rel. Touhy v. Ragen, 340 U.S. 462 (1951), holding that agencies may issue rules governing record production and employee testimony. These rules are commonly referred to as “Touhy rules.”

    The proposed rule will establish a USTR Touhy rule that governs the process we use to authorize or deny such demands. It prohibits USTR employees from producing records, information or testimony in response to demands or requests, unless the demands or requests comply with the rule, and USTR grants permission for the production. Compliance with the rule is necessary, but not sufficient, for production to occur. The rule identifies the information that demanding or requesting parties must provide and the factors that USTR may consider when evaluating demands or requests.

    We are renaming and reorganizing 15 CFR part 2004, which will include all of the rules governing disclosure of records and information by USTR. Part 2004 will include four subparts—subpart A will contain definitions used throughout part 2004, subpart B will implement the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 552, subpart C will implement the Privacy Act of 1974, 5 U.S.C. 552a, and subpart D will establish the USTR Touhy rule.

    II. Section-by-Section Analysis Subpart A: Definitions

    Section 2004.0—Definitions: This section sets forth definitions of select terms that are used throughout Part 2004.

    Subpart D: Touhy Rule

    Section 2004.30—Purpose and scope: This section describes the proposed rule's scope, which includes internal agency operations. It also sets forth the rule's purpose, which is to specify the manner in which, and standards by which, demands or requests for records, information or testimony must be submitted, evaluated and processed.

    Section 2004.31—Definitions: This section defines terms relevant to this subpart.

    Section 2004.32—Production prohibited unless approved: This section bars producing USTR records, information or testimony in response to a demand or request without proper written authorization.

    Section 2004.33—Factors the General Counsel May Consider: This section sets forth factors that the USTR General Counsel may consider when evaluating demands or requests.

    Section 2004.34—Submitting demands and requests: This section describes the manner in which demands or requests for USTR records, information or testimony must be submitted. It prescribes the information that must be included in the demand or request and explains limitations on the scope of production or testimony. It also explains the consequences of failing to meet requirements in this subpart and the limited instances in which we may waive them.

    Section 2004.35—Processing demands and requests: This section describes how we will process demands or requests and establishes deadlines.

    Section 2004.36—Restrictions that apply to testimony: This section authorizes the imposition of conditions on USTR employee testimony.

    Section 2004.37—Restrictions that apply to released records and information: This section authorizes the imposition of conditions on production of USTR records or information.

    Section 2004.38—In the event of an adverse ruling: This section directs persons in possession of USTR information to decline to comply with a court order that conflicts with a USTR determination. It establishes an administrative mechanism by which parties aggrieved by a USTR determination about a demand or request may seek reconsideration of that determination. This section also establishes a petition for USTR reconsideration as a prerequisite to judicial review.

    Section 2004.39—Fees: This section describes USTR's entitlement to fees arising from the production of requested records, information or testimony.

    III. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    USTR has considered the impact of the proposed rule and determined that if adopted as a final rule it is not likely to have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small business entities because it is applicable only to USTR's internal operations and legal obligations. See 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.

    IV. Paperwork Reduction Act

    The proposed rule does not contain any information collection requirement that requires the approval of the Office of Management and Budget under the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).

    List of Subjects in 15 CFR Part 2004

    Administrative practice and procedure, Courts, Disclosure, Exemptions, Freedom of information, Government employees, Privacy, Records, Subpoenas, Testimony.

    For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Office of the United States Trade Representative is proposing to revise part 2004 of chapter XX of title 15 of the Code of Federal Regulations to read as follows: PART 2004—DISCLOSURE OF RECORDS AND INFORMATION Subpart A—Definitions Sec. 2004.0 Definitions. Subpart B—Freedom of Information Act Policies and Procedures 2004.1 through 2004.9 [Reserved] Subpart C—Privacy Act Policies and Procedures 2004.10 through 2004.29 [Reserved] Subpart D—Production or Disclosure of Records, Information and Employee Testimony in Legal Proceedings 2004.30 Purpose and scope. 2004.31 Definitions. 2004.32 Production prohibited unless approved. 2004.33 Factors the General Counsel may consider. 2004.34 Submitting demands and requests. 2004.35 Processing demands and requests. 2004.36 Restrictions that apply to testimony. 2004.37 Restrictions that apply to released records or information. 2004.38 In the event of an adverse ruling. 2004.39 Fees. Subpart A—Definitions Authority:

    19 U.S.C. 2171(e)(3).

    § 2004.0 Definitions.

    For purposes of this part:

    Days, unless otherwise indicated, means working days, and does not include Saturdays, Sundays, and legal public holidays. If the last day of a specified period falls on a Saturday, Sunday, or legal public holiday, the period will be extended until the next working day.

    FOIA means the Freedom of Information Act, as amended, 5 U.S.C. 552.

    Privacy Act means the Privacy Act of 1974, as amended, 5 U.S.C. 552a.

    USTR means the Office of the United States Trade Representative.

    Subpart D—Production or Disclosure of USTR Records, Information and Employee Testimony in Legal Proceedings Authority:

    5 U.S.C. 301; 19 U.S.C. 2171(e)(3).

    § 2004.30 Purpose and scope.

    (a) Why are we issuing this rule? This subpart establishes the procedures USTR will follow when any federal, state or local government court or other authority seeks production of USTR records or information, or testimony relating to an employee's official duties, in the context of a legal proceeding. Parties seeking records, information or testimony must comply with these requirements when submitting demands or requests to USTR.

    (b) What does this rule cover? This subpart applies to demands or requests for records, information or testimony in legal proceedings in which USTR is not a named party. It does not apply to: Demands or requests for a USTR employee to testify as to facts or events that are unrelated to his or her official duties or to USTR's functions; FOIA or Privacy Act requests; or Congressional demands or requests for records or testimony.

    (c) Not a waiver. (1) By providing these policies and procedures, USTR does not waive the sovereign immunity of the United States.

    (2) The production of records, information or testimony pursuant to this subpart does not constitute a waiver by USTR of any privilege.

    (d) This subpart provides guidance for USTR's internal operations and does not create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, that a party may rely upon in any legal proceeding against USTR or the United States.

    § 2004.31 Definitions.

    For purposes of this subpart:

    Demand means a request, order, subpoena or other demand of a federal, state or local court or other authority for records, information or employee testimony in a legal proceeding in which USTR is not a named party.

    Employee means any current or former employee or officer of USTR, including contractors, detailees, interns, and any individual who has served or is serving in any consulting or advisory capacity to USTR, whether formal or informal.

    General Counsel means USTR's General Counsel or a person within USTR's Office of General Counsel to whom the General Counsel has delegated authority to act under this subpart.

    Legal proceeding means any matter, including all phases of litigation, before a court of law, administrative board or tribunal, commission, administrative law judge, hearing officer, or other body that conducts a legal or administrative proceeding.

    Records or Information means all documents and materials that are USTR agency records under the FOIA; any original or copy of a record or other property, no matter what media, contained in USTR files; and any other information or materials acquired by a USTR employee in the performance of his or her official duties or because of his or her official status.

    Request means any informal request, by whatever method, in connection with a legal proceeding, seeking production of records, information or testimony that has not been ordered by a court or other competent authority.

    Testimony means any written or oral statements, including depositions, answers to interrogatories, affidavits, declarations and recorded interviews made by an individual about USTR information in connection with a legal proceeding.

    § 2004.32 Production prohibited unless approved.

    (a) Approval required. An employee or any other person or entity in possession of records or information may not produce those records or information, or provide any testimony related to the records or information, in response to any demand or request without prior written approval from the General Counsel.

    (b) Penalties. Any person or entity that fails to comply with this subpart may be subject to the penalties provided in 18 U.S.C. 641 and other applicable laws. A current employee also may be subject to administrative or disciplinary proceedings.

    § 2004.33 Factors the General Counsel may consider.

    The General Counsel may grant an employee permission to testify regarding USTR matters and to produce records and information in response to a demand or request. Among the relevant factors the General Counsel may consider in making this determination are whether:

    (a) The requested records, information or testimony are reasonable in scope, relevant and material to the pending action, and unavailable from other sources such as a non-USTR employee, or a USTR employee other than the employee named.

    (b) Production of the records, information or testimony might result in USTR appearing to favor one litigant over another.

    (c) USTR has an interest in the decision that may be rendered in the legal proceeding.

    (d) Approving the demand or request would assist or hinder USTR in performing statutory duties or unduly burden USTR resources.

    (e) The demand or request is unduly burdensome or otherwise inappropriate under the rules of discovery or procedure governing the case or matter in which the demand or request arose.

    (f) Production of the records, information or testimony might violate or be inconsistent with a statute, Executive Order, regulation or other legal authority.

    (g) Disclosure, including release in camera, is appropriate or necessary under the relevant substantive law concerning privilege.

    (h) Disclosure, except when in camera and necessary to assert a claim of privilege, would reveal information properly classified or other matters exempt from unrestricted disclosure.

    (i) Disclosure would interfere with ongoing enforcement proceedings, compromise constitutional rights, reveal the identity of an intelligence source or confidential informant, or disclose trade secrets or similarly confidential commercial or financial information.

    (j) Any other appropriate factor.

    § 2004.34 Submitting demands and requests.

    (a) Where do I send a demand or request? To make a demand or request for records, information or testimony you should write directly to the General Counsel. Heightened security delays mail delivery. To avoid mail delivery delays, we strongly suggest that you email your demand or request to [email protected] The mailing address is General Counsel, Office of the United States Trade Representative, Anacostia Naval Annex, Building 410/Door 123, 250 Murray Lane SW., Washington, DC 20509. To ensure delivery, you should mark the subject line of your email or your envelope and letter “Touhy Request.”

    (b) When should I submit it? You should submit your demand or request at least 45 calendar days in advance of the date on which the records, information or testimony is needed.

    (c) What must be included? A demand or request must include an affidavit or, if that is not feasible, a clear and concise statement by the party or his or her counsel summarizing the legal and factual issues in the proceeding and explaining how the records, information or testimony will contribute substantially to the resolution of one or more specifically identified issues.

    A demand or request for testimony also must include an estimate of the amount of time that the employee will need to devote to the process of testifying (including anticipated travel time and anticipated duration of round trip travel), plus a showing that no document or the testimony of non-USTR persons, including retained experts, could suffice in lieu of the employee's testimony.

    (d) Limits. The General Counsel will limit any authorization for testimony to the scope of the demand, and the scope of permissible production of records and information to that set forth in the written authorization.

    (e) Failure to meet requirements and exceptions. USTR may oppose any demand or request that does not meet the requirements set forth in this subpart. The General Counsel may grant exceptions to the requirements in this subpart upon a showing of compelling need, to promote a significant interest of USTR or the United States, or for other good cause.

    § 2004.35 Processing demands and requests.

    (a) The General Counsel will review a request or demand to produce or disclose records, information or testimony and determine whether, or under what conditions, to authorize the employee to testify regarding USTR matters or produce records and information. The General Counsel will notify the requester of the final determination, the reasons for the grant or denial of the demand or request, and any conditions on disclosure.

    (b) When necessary, the General Counsel will coordinate with the U.S. Department of Justice to file appropriate motions, including motions to remove the matter to Federal court, to quash, or to obtain a protective order.

    (c) The General Counsel will process demands and requests in the order in which they are received. Absent unusual circumstances and depending on the scope of the demand or request, the General Counsel will respond within 45 calendar days of the date USTR receives all information necessary to evaluate the demand or request.

    § 2004.36 Restrictions that apply to testimony.

    (a) The General Counsel may impose conditions or restrictions on the testimony of USTR employees including, for example, limiting the scope of testimony or requiring the requester and other parties to the legal proceeding to agree that the testimony transcript will be kept under seal or will only be used or made available in the particular legal proceeding for which testimony was requested. The General Counsel also may require a copy of the testimony transcript at the requester's expense.

    (b) USTR may offer the employee's written declaration in lieu of testimony.

    (c) If authorized to testify pursuant to this subpart, an employee may testify as to relevant facts within his or her personal knowledge, but, unless specifically authorized to do so by the General Counsel, the employee must not:

    (1) Disclose classified, confidential or privileged information; or

    (2) For a current USTR employee, testify as an expert or opinion witness with regard to any matter arising out of the employee's official duties or USTR's mission or functions, unless testimony is provided on behalf of the United States. A former employee can provide expert or opinion testimony where the testimony involves only general expertise gained while employed as a USTR employee.

    § 2004.37 Restrictions that apply to released records and information.

    (a) The General Counsel may impose conditions or restrictions on the release of records and information, including requiring the parties to the legal proceeding to obtain a protective order or to execute a confidentiality agreement to limit access and further disclosure. The terms of a protective order or confidentiality agreement must be acceptable to the General Counsel. In cases where protective orders or confidentiality agreements already have been executed, USTR may condition the release of records and information on an amendment to the existing protective order or confidentiality agreement.

    (b) If the General Counsel so determines, USTR may present original records for examination in response to a demand or request, but the records cannot be marked or altered or presented as evidence or otherwise used in a manner by which they could lose their status as original records. In lieu of original records, certified copies will be presented for evidentiary purposes. (See 28 U.S.C. 1733).

    § 2004.38 In the event of an adverse ruling.

    (a) Notwithstanding USTR's rejection of a demand or request for records, information or testimony, if a court or other competent authority orders a USTR employee to comply with the demand, the employee promptly must notify the General Counsel of the order, and must respectfully decline to comply, citing United States ex rel. Touhy v. Ragen, 340 U.S. 462 (1951).

    (b) To seek reconsideration of USTR's rejection of a demand or request, or of any restrictions on receiving records, information or testimony, a requester must send a petition for reconsideration in accordance with § 2004.34(a) within 10 days of the date of the determination. The petition must contain a clear and concise statement of the basis for the reconsideration with supporting authorities. Determinations about petitions for reconsideration are within the discretion of the United States Trade Representative or his/her designee, and are final.

    (c) Pursuant to section 704 of the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 704, a petition for reconsideration of a final determination under this section is a prerequisite to judicial review.

    § 2004.39 Fees.

    (a) USTR may condition the production of records, information or an employee's appearance on advance payment of reasonable costs, which may include but are not limited to those associated with employee search time, copying, computer usage, and certifications.

    (b) Witness fees will include fees, expenses and allowances prescribed by the rules applicable to the particular legal proceeding. If no fees are prescribed, USTR will base fees on the rule of the federal district court closest to the location where the witness will appear. Such fees may include but are not limited to time for preparation, travel and attendance at the legal proceeding.

    Janice Kaye, Chief Counsel for Administrative Law, Office of the U.S. Trade Representative.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22864 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3290-F6-P
    DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS 38 CFR Part 38 RIN 2900-AP74 Authority To Solicit Gifts and Donations; Withdrawal AGENCY:

    Department of Veterans Affairs.

    ACTION:

    Withdrawal of proposed rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) is withdrawing VA's proposed rulemaking, published on July 11, 2016, to amend its regulation giving the Under Secretary of Memorial Affairs (USMA), or his designee, authority to solicit gifts and donations. VA received two supportive comments and no adverse comments concerning the proposed rule and its companion substantially identical direct final rule published in the Federal Register on the same date. Accordingly, this document withdraws as unnecessary the proposed rule.

    DATES:

    The proposed rule published on July 11, 2016, 81 FR 44827, is withdrawn.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Thomas Howard, Chief of Staff, National Cemetery Administration (NCA), Department of Veterans Affairs, (40A), 810 Vermont Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20420, (202) 461-6215. (This is not a toll-free number.)

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    In a proposed rule published in the Federal Register on July 11, 2016, 81 FR 44827, VA proposed to amend 38 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 38.603(b) that prohibits the solicitation of contributions. On the same date, VA published a substantially identical direct final rule at 81 FR 44792. The direct final rule and proposed rule each provided a 30-day comment period that ended on August 10, 2016. Two public comments were received, both in support of the rulemakings. Because no adverse comments were received, VA is withdrawing the proposed rule as unnecessary. In a companion document in this issue of the Federal Register, VA is confirming the effective date of September 9, 2016 for the direct final rule, RIN 2900-AP75, published at 81 FR 44792.

    Signing Authority

    The Secretary of Veterans Affairs, or designee, approved this document and authorized the undersigned to sign and submit the document to the Office of the Federal Register for publication electronically as an official document of the Department of Veterans Affairs. Gina S. Farrisee, Deputy Chief of Staff, Department of Veterans Affairs, approved this document on September 16, 2016, for publication.

    Dated: September 19, 2016. Jeffrey Martin, Office Program Manager, Office of Regulation Policy & Management, Office of the Secretary, Department of Veterans Affairs.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22833 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8320-01-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R04-OAR-2016-0359; FRL-9952-73-Region 4] Air Plan Approval; TN; Revisions to the Knox County Portion of the TN SIP AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency.

    ACTION:

    Proposed rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the State of Tennessee, through the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation (TDEC), on January 11, 2016. The proposed revision was submitted by TDEC on behalf of the Knox County Department of Air Quality Management, which has jurisdiction over Knox County, Tennessee. The revision that EPA is proposing for approval amends the Knox County Air Quality Management Department's regulations, which are part of the Tennessee SIP, to address EPA's startup, shutdown, and malfunction (SSM) SIP call for Knox County. EPA is proposing approval of the January 11, 2016, SIP revision because the Agency has determined that it is in accordance with the requirements for SIP provisions under the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act).

    DATES:

    Comments must be received on or before October 24, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R04-OAR-2016-0359 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:

    Madolyn Sanchez, 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. The telephone number is (404) 562-9644. Ms. Sanchez can also be reached via electronic mail at [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. What action is EPA proposing today?

    EPA is proposing to approve a revision to the Tennessee SIP at Knox County Regulation Section 32.0, “Use of Evidence.” The revision would remove the existing text of provision Section 32.1(C), which states: “A determination that there has been a violation of these regulations or orders issued pursuant thereto shall not be used in any lawsuit brought by any private citizen.” This text would be replaced with “(Reserved).” TDEC submitted the January 11, 2016, SIP revision to address EPA's final action entitled “State Implementation Plans: Response to Petition for Rulemaking; Restatement and Update of EPA's SSM Policy Applicable to SIPs; Findings of Substantial Inadequacy; and SIP Calls To Amend Provisions Applying to Excess Emissions During Periods of Startup, Shutdown and Malfunction,” 80 FR 33839 (June 12, 2015), hereafter referred to as the “SSM SIP Action.”

    II. What is the background for EPA's proposed action?

    On June 30, 2011, the Sierra Club (the Petitioner) filed a petition for rulemaking with the EPA Administrator, asking EPA to take action on specific provisions in the SIPs of 39 states. The petition included interrelated requests concerning state rule treatment of excess emissions by sources during periods of SSM. Exemptions from emission limits during periods of SSM exist in a number of state rules, some of which were adopted and approved into SIPs by EPA many years ago. The petition alleged that SSM exemptions undermine the emission limits in SIPs and threaten states' abilities to achieve and maintain compliance with national ambient air quality standards, thereby threatening public health and public welfare. The Petitioner requested that EPA either (i) notify the states of the substantial inadequacies in their SIPs and finalize a rule requiring them to revise their plans pursuant to CAA section 110(k)(5) (referred to as a “SIP call”), or (ii) determine that EPA's action approving the implementation plan provisions was in error and revise those approvals so that the SIPs are brought into compliance with the requirements of the CAA pursuant to CAA section 110(k)(6).

    On February 22, 2013 (78 FR 12459), EPA proposed an action that would either grant or deny the Sierra Club petition with respect to each of the SIP provisions alleged to be inconsistent with the CAA. That proposal summarizes EPA's review of all of the provisions that were identified in the petition, providing a detailed analysis of each provision and explaining how each one either does or does not comply with the CAA with regard to excess emission events. For each SIP provision that appeared to be inconsistent with the CAA, EPA proposed to find that the existing SIP provision was substantially inadequate to meet CAA requirements and thus proposed to issue a SIP call under CAA section 110(k)(5) of the CAA.

    On May 22, 2015, the EPA Administrator signed the final SSM SIP Action. That action responds to the Sierra Club petition by granting it with respect to the provisions determined to be deficient and denying it with respect to the others. The final action responds to all public comments received on the proposed action and calls for 36 states to submit corrective SIP revisions by November 22, 2016, to bring specified provisions into compliance with the CAA. In addition, the final action reiterates EPA's interpretation of the CAA regarding excess emissions during SSM periods and clarifies EPA's longstanding SSM Policy as it applies to SIPs.

    With regard to the Knox County portion of the Tennessee SIP, the Petitioner objected to Regulation 32.1(C), arguing that the provision prevents required reports of SSM conditions from being used as evidence in citizen suits, thereby undermining the express authorization of citizen enforcement actions under the CAA. After consideration of public comments on the SSM SIP proposal, EPA agreed that the Knox County rule is inconsistent with the fundamental requirements of CAA sections 113(e)(1), 114(c) and 304 and the credible evidence rule 1 for the reasons fully explained in Section IX.E.11 of the SSM SIP proposal. Therefore, EPA determined in its final SIP call action that Knox County Regulation 32.1(C) is substantially inadequate to meet CAA requirements and thus issued a SIP call requiring the State to submit a corrective SIP revision addressing this provision. See 80 FR 33965.

    1 40 CFR 51.212(c); see also “Credible Evidence Revisions,” 62 FR 8314 (Feb. 24, 1997).

    III. Why is EPA proposing this action?

    In the SSM SIP Action, EPA granted the Sierra Club's petition with respect to Knox County Regulation 32.1(C), finding this provision substantially inadequate to meet CAA requirements. Today's action, if finalized, would remove the existing text of this provision from Knox County's EPA-approved SIP regulation. EPA is proposing to find that this revision is consistent with the CAA and that it adequately addresses the SSM SIP call with respect to the Knox County portion of the Tennessee SIP.

    IV. Incorporation by Reference

    In this rule, 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, EPA is proposing to incorporate by reference the Knox County Regulation 32.0 entitled “Use of Evidence,” effective November 12, 2015, which replaces the language previously included in Section 32.1(C) with “(Reserved).” 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).

    V. Proposed Action

    EPA is proposing to approve the Tennessee SIP revision consisting of replacing the language in Section 32.1(C) currently in the EPA-approved SIP for Knox County with “(Reserved).” EPA is proposing approval of the January 11, 2016, SIP revision because the Agency has determined that it is in accordance with the requirements for SIP provisions under the CAA.

    VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    The SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land or in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, the 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.

    List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

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

    Authority:

    42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    Dated: September 13, 2016. V. Anne Heard, Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22761 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 300 [EPA-HQ-SFUND-2003-0010; FRL-9952-80-Region 7] National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan; National Priorities List: Partial Deletion of the Omaha Lead Superfund Site AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Proposed rule; notice of intent.

    SUMMARY:

    The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region 7 is issuing a Notice of Intent to Delete 294 residential parcels of the Omaha Lead, Superfund Site (Site) located in Omaha, Nebraska, from the National Priorities List (NPL) and requests public comments on this proposed action. The NPL, promulgated pursuant to section 105 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) of 1980, as amended, is an appendix of the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP). The EPA and the State of Nebraska, through the Nebraska Department of Environmental Quality, determined that all appropriate Response actions under CERCLA were completed at the identified parcels. However, this deletion does not preclude future actions under Superfund.

    This partial deletion pertains to 294 residential parcels. The remaining parcels will remain on the NPL and are not being considered for deletion as part of this action.

    DATES:

    Comments must be received on or before October 24, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID no. EPA-HQ-SFUND-2003-0010, by one of the following methods: http://www.regulations.gov; by email to [email protected] or [email protected]; or by mail to U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 7, 11201 Renner Boulevard, Lenexa, KS 66219 Attention: Steve Kemp, SUPR Division or Tamara Freeman, ECO Office. For comments submitted to Regulations.gov, follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. For any 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.

    The docket contains the information that was the basis for the partial deletion, specifically the documentation regarding the results of soil cleanup activities. Information regarding the optional voluntary cleanup activities such as the lead-based paint stabilization and interior dust sampling is not provided in the docket but is available from EPA on a case-by-case basis. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in the hard copy. Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically in http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Region 7 Records Center/docket at 11201 Renner Boulevard, Lenexa, Kansas 66219. The Omaha public libraries also have computer resources available to assist the public. The W. Dale Clark Library, located at 215 S. 15th Street, Omaha, NE 68102 is centrally located within the site boundary.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Steve Kemp, Remedial Project Manager, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 7, SUPR/LMSE, 11201 Renner Boulevard, Lenexa, KS 66219, telephone (913) 551-7194, email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Throughout this document “we,” “us,” or “our” refer to EPA. This section provides additional information by addressing the following:

    I. Introduction II. NPL Deletion Criteria III. Deletion Procedures IV. Background and Basis for Intended Partial Site Deletion I. Introduction

    EPA Region 7 is proposing to delete 294 residential parcels of the Omaha Lead Superfund site (Site), from the National Priorities List (NPL) and is requesting public comment on this proposed action. The table of 294 Properties Proposed for the Second Partial Deletion of Properties from the Omaha Lead Superfund site 2016 (EPA-HQ-SFUND-2003-0010-1849) identifies specific properties included for this proposed partial deletion. The location of the 294 properties are shown on Figure 1 “2016 Partial Deletion Omaha Lead Site” (EPA-HQ-SFUND-2003-0010-1848). The NPL constitutes appendix B of 40 CFR part 300, which is the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP), which EPA promulgated pursuant to section 105 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) of 1980, as amended. EPA maintains the NPL as those sites that appear to present a significant risk to public health, welfare, or the environment. Sites on the NPL may be the subject of remedial actions financed by the Hazardous Substance Superfund (Fund). This partial deletion of the Omaha Lead Superfund site is proposed in accordance with 40 CFR 300.425(e) and is consistent with the Notice of Policy Change: Partial Deletion of Sites Listed on the National Priorities List. 60 FR 55466 (November 1, 1995). As described in 300.425(e)(3) of the NCP, a portion of a site deleted from the NPL remains eligible for Fund-financed remedial action if future conditions warrant such actions.

    EPA will accept comments on the proposal to partially delete this site for thirty (30) days after publication of this document in the Federal Register.

    Section II of this document explains the criteria for deleting sites from the NPL. Section III discusses procedures that EPA is using for this action. Section IV discusses the 294 residential parcels of the Omaha Lead Superfund Site and demonstrates how they meet the deletion criteria.

    II. NPL Deletion Criteria

    The NCP establishes the criteria that EPA uses to delete sites from the NPL. In accordance with 40 CFR 300.425(e), sites may be deleted from the NPL where no further response is appropriate. In making such a determination pursuant to 40 CFR 300.425(e), EPA will consider, in consultation with the State, whether any of the following criteria have been met:

    i. Responsible parties or other persons have implemented all appropriate response actions required;

    ii. all appropriate Fund-financed response under CERCLA has been implemented, and no further response action by responsible parties is appropriate; or

    iii. the remedial investigation has shown that the release poses no significant threat to public health or the environment and, therefore, the taking of remedial measures is not appropriate.

    III. Deletion Procedures

    The following procedures apply to deletion of the 294 residential parcels of the Site:

    (1) EPA consulted with the State before developing this Notice of Intent for Partial Deletion.

    (2) EPA has provided the state 30 working days for review of this notice prior to publication of it today.

    (3) In accordance with the criteria discussed above, EPA has determined that no further response is appropriate.

    (4) The State of Nebraska, through the Nebraska Department of Environmental Quality, has concurred with the deletion of the 294 residential parcels of the Omaha Lead Superfund site, from the NPL.

    (5) Concurrently, with the publication of this Notice of Intent for Partial Deletion in the Federal Register, a notice is being published in a major local newspaper, Omaha World Herald. The newspaper announces the 30-day public comment period concerning the Notice of Intent for Partial Deletion of the Site from the NPL.

    (6) The EPA placed copies of documents supporting the proposed partial deletion in the deletion docket, and made these items available for public inspection and copying at the Site information repositories identified above.

    If comments are received within the 30-day comment period on this document, EPA will evaluate and respond accordingly to the comments before making a final decision to delete the 294 residential parcels. If necessary, EPA will prepare a Responsiveness Summary to address any significant public comments received. After the public comment period, if EPA determines it is still appropriate to delete the 294 residential parcels of the Omaha Lead Superfund site, the Regional Administrator will publish a final Notice of Partial Deletion in the Federal Register. Public notices, public submissions and copies of the Responsiveness Summary, if prepared, will be made available to interested parties and included in the site information repositories listed above.

    Deletion of a portion of a site from the NPL does not itself create, alter, or revoke any individual's rights or obligations. Deletion of a portion of a site from the NPL does not in any way alter EPA's right to take enforcement actions, as appropriate. The NPL is designed primarily for informational purposes and to assist EPA management. Section 300.425(e)(3) of the NCP states that the deletion of a site from the NPL does not preclude eligibility for future response actions, should future conditions warrant such actions.

    IV. Background and Basis for Partial Site Deletion

    The following information provides EPA's rationale for deleting the 294 residential parcels of the Omaha Lead Superfund site from the NPL, as previously identified.

    Site Background and History

    The Omaha Lead Site (OLS or Site [CERCLIS ID #NESFN0703481]) includes surface soils present at residential properties, child-care centers, and other residential-type properties in the city of Omaha, Douglas County, Nebraska. The properties were contaminated as a result of deposition of aerial emissions from historic lead smelting and refining operations. The OLS encompasses the eastern portion of the greater metropolitan area in Omaha, Nebraska. The site extends from the Douglas-Sarpy County line on the south, north to Read Street and from the Missouri River on the east to 56th Street on the west. The Site is centered around downtown Omaha, Nebraska, where two former lead-processing facilities operated. American Smelting and Refining Company, Inc. (ASARCO) operated a lead refinery at 500 Douglas Street in Omaha, Nebraska, for over 120 years. Aaron Ferer & Sons Company (Aaron Ferer), and later Gould Electronics, Inc., (Gould) operated a lead battery recycling plant located at 555 Farnam Street. Both ASARCO and Aaron Ferer/Gould facilities released lead-containing particulates into the atmosphere from their smokestacks. The lead particles were subsequently deposited on surrounding residential properties.

    Beginning in 1984, the Douglas County Health Department (DCHD) monitored ambient air quality around the ASARCO facility. This air monitoring routinely measured ambient air lead concentrations in excess of the ambient air standard. Between 1972 and 1998 the DCHD measured the blood lead level in children within the county. The results of the measurements indicated a high incidence of elevated blood lead level in children. Blood lead screening of children living in zip codes located east of 45th Street have consistently exceeded the 10 microgram per deciliter (μg/dl) health-based threshold more frequently than children living elsewhere in the county.

    In 1998, the Omaha City Council requested assistance from the EPA to address the high incidence of children found with elevated blood lead levels by the DCHD. In 1999, the EPA initiated an investigation into the lead contamination under the authority of Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA). On April 30, 2003, the OLS was listed on the NPL (68 FR 23094).

    The OLS includes those residential properties where EPA determines through soil sampling that soil lead levels represent an unacceptable risk to human health. Residential properties where soil sampling indicates that lead concentrations in the soil are below a level that represent an unacceptable risk are not included in the Site. Residential properties include those with high accessibility to sensitive populations (children seven years of age and younger [0 to 84 months] and pregnant or nursing women). The properties include single and multi-family dwellings, apartment complexes, child daycare facilities, vacant lots in residential areas, schools, churches, community centers, parks, greenways, and any other areas where children may be exposed to site-related contaminated media. Commercial and industrial properties are excluded from the definition of the Site.

    The residential properties proposed for deletion from the NPL site were cleaned up under both CERCLA removal and remedial authority. Regardless of the authority used for the remediation of yards, the cleanup levels for soils for all the properties proposed for deletion were the same.

    Response Actions

    The initial EPA response was conducted under CERCLA removal authority. Due to the size of the site and the very large number of individual properties, it was necessary to prioritize sites for clean up. The prioritization was based on factors such as the elevated blood level of children at each property and the lead concentration in the soil at each property. The result was a series of action levels that reflected the priority of categories of sites. Consequently, the action level for the site changed over time from 2500 mg/kg to 400 mg/kg, as the highest priority sites were cleaned up first. The cleanup level was established using the Integrated Exposure Uptake Biokinetic (IEUBK) model to determine the concentration to which the lead is cleaned up at each property within the site. The cleanup level for the OLS is 400 mg/kg of lead in the soil. The cleanup level of 400 mg/kg was selected to allow for unlimited use and unrestricted exposure. The cleanup level has not changed, and all properties, regardless of the action level, were cleaned up to 400 mg/kg.

    Removal Activities

    Beginning in March 1999, the EPA began collecting soil samples from properties that provided licensed child daycare services. The initial removal action dated August 2, 1999, consisted of excavation and replacement of contaminated soil where the lead concentration exceeded the action levels identified in the Action Memorandum. Response actions were implemented at properties that met either of the following criteria:

    • A child seven years of age or younger (0 to 84 months) residing at the property was identified with an elevated blood level (EBL) exceeding 15 μg/dl (this EBL was reduced to 10 μg/dl in August 2001) and a soil sample collected from a non-foundation quadrant exhibited lead concentrations greater than 400 mg/kg, and

    • A property was used as a child-care facility and a soil sample collected from a non-foundation quadrant exhibited a lead concentration greater than 400 mg/kg.

    On August 22, 2002, EPA initiated a second removal action. This second removal action included all other residential type properties where the maximum non-foundation soil lead concentration exceeded an action level of 2,500 mg/kg. The 2002 Action Memorandum explicitly identifies the possibility of lead-based paint as a potential contributor to lead contamination of soils within thirty inches of the foundation of a painted structure. Due to the potential contribution of deteriorating lead-based paint near the foundations of structures, a lead concentration greater than 400 mg/kg in the soil in the drip zone (areas near structure foundations) was not, in itself, sufficient to trigger soil removal. However, if a soil sample from any mid-yard quadrant exceeded the action level, soil was removed from all areas of the property exceeding the 400 mg/kg cleanup level, including the drip zone. In November 2003, EPA amended the second removal action to reduce the action level to 1,200 mg/kg. In March 2004, EPA amended the second removal action to combine the two removal actions. In March 2005, EPA amended the removal action to reduce the action level from 1200 mg/kg to 800 mg/kg.

    At properties determined to be eligible for response under either of the Action Memoranda soil with lead concentrations greater than the cleanup level was excavated and replaced with clean soil and the excavated areas were revegetated.

    Beginning with the construction season of 2005, the scope of the removal action was expanded to address the requirements of the 2004 Interim ROD to include: (1) Stabilization of deteriorating exterior lead-based paint at properties where the continued effectiveness of the soil remediation was threatened; (2) response to interior dust at properties where interior dust lead levels exceeded applicable criteria; (3) public health education; and (4) participation in a comprehensive remedy with other agencies and organizations that addresses all identified lead hazards in the Omaha community.

    Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study (RI/FS)—Human Health Risk Assessment

    As part of the RI/FS EPA developed a Human Health Risk Assessment (HHRA) for the Site using site-specific information collected during the OLS Remedial Investigation. Lead was identified as the primary contaminant of concern. The HHRA also identified arsenic as a potential contaminant of concern, but arsenic was eliminated based on its relatively low overall risk to residents and lack of connection to the release from the industrial sources being addressed by this Superfund action.

    The risk assessment for lead focused on young children under the age of seven (0 to 84 months) who are site residents. Young children are most susceptible to lead exposure because they have higher contact rates with soil or dust, absorb lead more readily than adults absorb, and are more sensitive to the adverse effects of lead than are older children and adults. The effect of greatest concern in children is impairment of the nervous system, including learning deficits, reduced intelligence, and adverse effects on behavior. The IEUBK model for lead in children was used to evaluate the risks posed to young children (0 to 84 months) resulting from the lead contamination at the site. Because lead does not have a nationally-approved reference dose (RfD), cancer slope factor, or other accepted toxicological factor which can be used to assess risk, standard risk assessment methods cannot be used to evaluate the health risks associated with lead contamination. The modeling results determined that there was an unacceptable risk to young children from exposure to soils above 400 mg/kg.

    In October 2008, EPA released a draft Final Remedial Investigation. Based on the 2008 data set, EPA established the boundary of the Final Focus Area for the Site. The Final Focus Area is generally bounded by Read Street to the north, 56th Street to the west, Harrison Street (Sarpy County line) to the south, and the Missouri River to the east, and encompasses 17,280 acres (27.0 square miles). By the time the Final Remedial Investigation was completed, EPA had collected soil samples from 37,076 residential properties, including 34,565 properties within the Final Focus Area's boundary. In total, 34.2 percent of properties sampled through completion of the 2008 RI had at least one mid-yard sample with a soil lead level exceeding 400 mg/kg. In addition to soil sampling, EPA collected dust samples from the interior of 159 residences to support the OLS Human Health Risk Assessment.

    Record of Decision

    EPA completed the Final Record of Decision (ROD) for the OLS in May 2009. The Remedial Action Objective is to reduce the risk of exposure of young children to lead such that an individual child, or group of similarly exposed children, have no greater than a 5 percent chance of having a blood-lead concentration exceeding 10 μg/dl. The selected remedy include the following components:

    • Excavation and Replacement of Soils Exceeding 400 mg/kg Lead

    • Stabilization of Deteriorating Exterior Lead-Based Paint

    • Response to Lead-Contaminated Interior Dust

    • Health Education

    • Operation of a Local Lead Hazard Registry as a type of Institutional Control

    Each of these components is described below.

    Remedial Actions Excavation and Replacement of Soils Exceeding 400 mg/kg Lead

    Excavation of soils was accomplished using lightweight excavation equipment and hand tools in the portions of the yard where the concentration of lead in the surface soil exceeded 400 mg/kg. Excavation continued in all quadrants, play zones, and drip zone areas exceeding 400 mg/kg lead until the residual lead concentration measured at the exposed surface of the excavation was less than 400 mg/kg in the upper foot, or less than 1,200 mg/kg at depths greater than one foot. Typically, soil excavation depths were between six and ten inches in depth. Soils in garden areas were excavated until reaching a residual concentration of less than 400 mg/kg in the upper two feet measured from the original surface, or less than 1,200 mg/kg at depths greater than two feet.

    After confirmation sampling verified that cleanup goals were achieved, the excavated areas were backfilled with clean soil to original grade and sod was placed over the remediated areas.

    EPA's remediation contractors stockpiled contaminated soil in staging areas, collected samples, and subsequently transported soil to an off-site subtitle D solid waste disposal landfill for use as daily cover and/or disposal.

    Stabilization of Deteriorating Exterior Lead-Based Paint

    EPA used the lead-based paint assessment protocol, presented in the Final Lead-Based Paint Recontamination Study Report prepared for the OLS, to determine eligibility for exterior lead-based paint stabilization at those properties where soil lead concentrations exceed 400 mg/kg. At those properties where the exterior lead-based paint assessment identified a threat from deteriorating paint to the continued protectiveness of the soil remedy, the owner of the property was offered stabilization of painted surfaces on structures located on the property. Exterior lead-based paint stabilization is not mandatory and was provided to those qualifying property owners who chose to have their exterior paint stabilized. Removal of loose and flaking lead-based paint was performed using lead-safe practices as described in EPA's Renovate, Repair and Painting Rule. The practices include wet scraping, and collection of paint chips using plastic sheeting. Scraped areas were primed and all previously painted surfaces had two coats of paint applied.

    Response to Lead-Contaminated Interior Dust

    As part of the final remedy, residents at eligible properties are provided the opportunity to have interior dust sampled. The interior dust response is not mandatory and the resident may choose to decline. If the property owner agrees, EPA collects samples of dust from interior surfaces. The analytical data is provided to the resident/tenant in a letter and the letter informs them whether any HUD criteria are exceeded. The Douglas County Health Department conducts follow up activities at any residence where the concentration of lead in the interior dust levels exceed the HUD criteria. For those residences that qualify and where the resident agrees, the residents are provided with a high-efficiency household vacuum cleaner, training on the maintenance and the importance of proper usage of the vacuum, and education on mitigation of household lead hazards. The Douglas County Health Department also provides training and education regarding the need to mitigate interior dust.

    Exterior lead-based paint stabilization and interior dust response were conducted retroactively at properties where soil cleanups were performed under CERCLA removal authority, as well as to properties addressed under CERCLA remedial authority.

    Health Education

    There are a number of identified lead hazards within the OLS, not all of which are connected to the contaminant source of the OLS. To better address all potential lead sources within the OLS, a health education program was developed and continues to be implemented to increase public awareness and mitigate exposure. An active educational program continues in cooperation with agencies and organizations that include ATSDR, the Nebraska Department of Health and Human Services (NDHHS), DCHD, local non-governmental organizations, and other interested parties throughout the duration of the remedial action. The following, although not an exhaustive list, indicate the types of educational activities provided at the Site:

    • Support for in-home assessments for children identified with elevated blood lead levels.

    • Development and implementation of lead poisoning prevention curriculum in schools.

    • Support for efforts to increase community-wide blood lead monitoring.

    • Physicians' education for diagnosis, treatment, and surveillance of lead exposure.

    • Operation of Public Information Centers to distribute information, and respond to questions about the EPA response activities and lead hazards in the community.

    • Use of mass media (television, radio, internet, print media, etc.) to distribute health education messages.

    Development and distribution of informational tools such as fact sheets, brochures, refrigerator magnets, etc., to inform the public about lead hazards and measures that can be taken to avoid or eliminate exposure. Institutional Controls

    The Omaha Lead Registry, (available at www.omahalead.org) is a GIS based database that provides the public with on-line access to the status of the EPA investigation and response actions. EPA notifies residents and property owners about the information that is available through the lead hazard registry as part of the transmittal sent at the completion of soil remediation at each individual property.

    Community Involvement

    EPA worked extensively with the Omaha community through a variety of communication vehicles including, but not limited to: Local speaking engagements, participation in citizens' groups and city council meetings, local public access television, public service announcements on local cable television, coverage on radio, television, in local and national newspapers, mass mailings of informational materials, public outreach by telephone, conducting public meetings, and through the EPA Web site.

    EPA has been performing outreach to Omaha citizens, elected officials, school officials, health officials, the media, nonprofit groups, and others since becoming involved in the project in an effort to convey information about the hazards of lead poisoning, particularly the ways that lead affects the health of children. The EPA participated in numerous formal and informal meetings to explain EPA's role and commitment in Omaha, convey information about the Superfund process, and provide general information about the site and lead contamination. EPA responds to inquiries on a daily basis regarding the site and individual property owner's sampling results.

    In January 2004, a Community Advisory Group (CAG) was formed for the OLS site. A CAG is a committee, task force, or board made up of residents affected by a Superfund site. They provided a public forum where representatives with diverse community interests could present and discuss their needs and concerns related to the site and the cleanup process. The CAG was discontinued after the last meeting was held in October 2011. A new group, Child Lead Poisoning Prevention Group, formed. The first meeting of the Child Lead Poisoning Group was held at City Hall in May 2012. The Group is no longer active.

    Five-Year Review

    EPA completed the first Five-Year Review for the site in September 2014. Five-Year Reviews for the site are statutory. The triggering action for the Five-Year Review is the completion of the Final Record of Decision for Operable Unit 2, completed in May 2009.

    The protectiveness of the remedy was deferred in the Five-Year Review because the remedy has not been completed at all of the properties within the site boundary. However, clean up activities at the 294 residential parcels included in this partial deletion action are complete and protective of human health.

    The next Five-Year Review will be completed in 2019.

    Summary of EPA Work Completed Soil Testing and Remediation

    EPA Region 7 completed the EPA lead portion of the remedial action on December 29, 2015. The City of Omaha and the Douglas County Health Department will be performing the remaining field work. As of December 29, 2015, EPA collected soil samples from 42,047 properties. There are 489 remaining properties to be sampled. The EPA has obtained access to collect samples from 163 of the 489 properties.

    Based on the soil sampling results, 14,019 properties were eligible for soil remediation. The EPA remediated lead contaminated soil at 13,090 properties (93 percent) of the properties that were eligible for remediation. There are approximately 929 remaining properties that are eligible for soil remediation. The EPA obtained access to remediate fifty-one of the remaining properties.

    Lead-Based Paint Testing and Stabilization

    The EPA tested 12,057 properties for the presence of lead-based paint (LBP) and determined 6,782 properties qualified for LBP stabilization. The EPA has completed LBP stabilization on 6,249, (92 percent) of the eligible properties.

    Dust Sampling

    The EPA collected dust samples from 3,933 properties consisting of 4,477 residences for lead contaminated dust. These numbers reflect the fact that some of the properties are multi-residence properties.

    Continuing Remedial Action

    EPA completed Cooperative Agreements with the City of Omaha and the Douglas County Health Department that provide funds to allow these local government agencies to continue efforts to obtain access to the remaining properties and conduct sampling and remediation activities at those properties where they obtain access.

    Determination That the Criteria for Deletion Has Been Achieved

    In accordance with 40 CFR 300.425(e), Region 7 of the EPA finds that the 294 residential parcels of the Omaha Lead Superfund site (the subject of this deletion) meet the substantive criteria for deletion from the NPL. EPA has consulted with and has the concurrence of the State of Nebraska.

    All responsible parties or other persons have implemented all appropriate response actions required. All appropriate Fund-financed response under CERCLA was implemented, and no further response action by responsible parties is appropriate.

    List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 300

    Environmental protection, air pollution control, Chemicals, Hazardous waste, Hazardous substances, Intergovernmental relations, Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Superfund, Water pollution control, Water supply.

    Authority:

    33 U.S.C. 1321(c)(2); 42 U.S.C. 9601-9657; E.O. 12777, 56 FR 54757,3 CFR, 1991 Comp., p.351; E.O. 12580, 52 FR 2923, 3 CFR, 1987 Comp., p.193.

    Dated: September 12, 2016. Mark Hague, Regional Administrator, Region 7.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22877 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Office of the Secretary 43 CFR Part 100 [167A2100DD/AAKC001030/A0A501010.999900] RIN 1093-AA20 Appraisals and Valuations of Indian Property AGENCY:

    Office of the Secretary, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Proposed rule.

    SUMMARY:

    Congress recently passed the Indian Trust Asset Reform Act (ITARA), which requires the Secretary of the Interior to establish and publish in the Federal Register minimum qualifications for individuals to prepare appraisals and valuations of Indian trust property. This proposed rule would establish the minimum qualifications and would also implement provisions of ITARA that require the Secretary to accept appraisals and valuations without additional review or approval under certain circumstances.

    DATES:

    Please submit written comments by November 21, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments on the proposed rule by any of the following methods:

    Federal rulemaking portal: http://www.regulations.gov. The proposed rule is listed under the agency name “Office of the Secretary” and has been assigned Docket ID: DOI-2016-0005. If you would like to submit comments through the Federal e-Rulemaking Portal, go to www.regulations.gov and follow the instructions. Email: [email protected] Include the number “1093-AA20” in the subject line of the message. Mail or hand-delivery: Ms. Elizabeth Appel, Office of Regulatory Affairs & Collaborative Action, U.S. Department of the Interior, 1849 C Street NW., MS 3642, Washington, DC 20240. Include the number “1093-AA20” on the envelope. Please note, email or www.regulations.gov are the preferred methods for submitting comments; there is no need to submit a hard copy if you have submitted the comments through either of these electronic methods.

    Comments on the Paperwork Reduction Act information collections contained in this rule are separate from comments on the substance of the rule. Submit comments on the information collection requirements in this rule to the Desk Officer for the Department of the Interior by email at [email protected] or by facsimile at (202) 395-5806. Please also send a copy of your comments to [email protected]

    We cannot ensure that comments received after the close of the comment period (see DATES) will be included in the docket for this rulemaking and considered. Comments sent to an address other than those listed above will not be included in the docket for this rulemaking.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ms. Elizabeth Appel, Office of Regulatory Affairs and Collaborative Action—Indian Affairs at [email protected] or (202) 273-4680.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Background II. Summary of Proposed Rule III. Tribal Consultation IV. Specific Questions on Which the Department Seeks Comment V. Procedural Requirements A. Regulatory Planning and Review (E.O. 12866) B. Regulatory Flexibility Act C. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act E. Takings (E.O. 12630) F. Federalism (E.O. 13132) G. Civil Justice Reform (E.O. 12988) H. Consultation With Indian Tribes (E.O. 13175) I. Paperwork Reduction Act J. National Environmental Policy Act K. Effects on the Energy Supply (E.O. 13211) L. Clarity of This Regulation M. Public Availability of Comments I. Background

    On June 22, 2016, President Obama signed into law the Indian Trust Asset Reform Act, Public Law 114-178. Title III of this Act. In relevance to this rulemaking, the Act requires Interior to establish minimum qualifications for individuals to prepare appraisals and valuations of Indian trust property and allow an appraisal or valuation by a qualified person to be considered final without being reviewed or approved by Interior.

    This proposed rule would establish the minimum qualifications for individuals to prepare appraisals and valuations of Indian trust property and allow an appraisal or valuation by a qualified person to be considered final without being reviewed or approved by Interior.

    The Act also requires appraisals and valuations of Indian trust property to be administered by a single administrative entity within Interior. This rule is proposed under the Office of the Secretary for Department of the Interior, but may be finalized by another entity or agency within Interior depending on what single entity ultimately administers appraisals and valuations of Indian trust property.

    II. Summary of Proposed Rule

    This rule would establish a new Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part to establish the minimum qualifications for appraisers, employed by or under contract with an Indian tribe or individual Indian, to become qualified appraisers who may prepare an appraisal or valuation of Indian property that will, in certain circumstances, be accepted by the Department without further review or approval. We note that, because the Department is not reviewing and approving the appraisal or valuation, it is not liable for any deficiency or inaccuracy in the appraisal or valuation.

    Subpart A, General Provisions, would define terms used in the regulation, describe the purpose of the regulation, and provide the standard Paperwork Reduction Act compliance statement. The terms are defined to include, in the context of this regulation, any property that the U.S. Government holds in trust or restricted status for an Indian tribe or individual Indian, to include not just land, but also natural resources or other assets. Other important terms include “appraisal,” “valuation,” and “qualified appraiser.” Consistent with the statutory direction, the purpose of the regulations is written broadly, to include appraisals or valuations of any Indian trust property, including:

    • Appraisals and valuations of real property;

    • Appraisals and valuations of timber, minerals, or other property to the extent they contribute to the value of the whole property (for use in appraisals and valuations of real property); and

    • Appraisals and valuations of timber, minerals, or other property separate from appraisals and valuations of real property.

    Subpart B, Appraiser Qualifications, would establish the minimum qualifications an appraiser must meet to be considered a “qualified appraiser” and would establish that the Secretary must verify that the appraiser meets those minimum qualifications. The Department seeks comment as to whether these minimum qualifications are appropriate for both real property appraisals and valuations and for appraisals and valuations of timber, minerals, or other property separate from appraisals and valuations of real property.

    This subpart would require that the verification information be submitted contemporaneously with the appraisal or valuation so that the Secretary can verify that the appraiser is a qualified appraiser at that point in time. The Department seeks ideas for allowing for verification in a way that would not require submission with each appraisal, but would ensure there were no changes in the appraiser's qualifications (e.g., the appraiser no longer holds a current Certified General Appraiser license) at the time the appraisal is submitted.

    Subpart C, Appraisals and Valuations, would require the submission of appraisals and valuations to the Department for transactions requiring Secretarial approval under titles 25 and 43 of the Code of Federal Regulations (e.g., 25 CFR 162, Leases and Permits; 25 CFR 169, Rights-of-Way on Indian Land). This subpart also sets out the circumstances in which the Department will forego review and approval of the appraisal or valuation. The proposed rule would require submission of the appraisal or valuation to the Department regardless of whether the Department will be reviewing and approving the appraisal or valuation. This requirement is included because the Department must use the results of the appraisal or valuation in completing the transaction requiring Secretarial approval.

    The proposed rule would require the Department to forego review and approval of the appraisal or valuation and consider the appraisal or valuation final if three conditions are met: (1) The appraisal or valuation was completed by a qualified appraiser; (2) the Indian tribe or individual Indian expressed their intent to waive Departmental review and approval; and (3) no owner of any interest in the Indian property objects to the use of the appraisal or valuation without Departmental review and approval. The first condition is clearly required by ITARA. The second condition is implied by ITARA. The number of individual Indian owners of fractionated tracts that must express their intent to waive Departmental review and approval, under the second condition, would depend upon the underlying title 43 or title 25 requirements. For example, if the underlying transaction is a right-of-way, then the owners of a majority of the interests in the tract must express their intent to waive Departmental review and approval, consistent with the general consent requirements in 25 CFR part 169. The third condition, that no Indian property owner objects, is necessary to address situations where one or more owners of the tract still want Departmental review and approval of the appraisal or valuation, consistent with our trust responsibility to all owners of the Indian trust property.

    This subpart proposes to exempt certain transactions, thereby requiring Departmental review of the appraisal or valuation. The exempted transactions include any legislation expressly requiring the Department to review and approve an appraisal or valuation, such as the Land Buy Back Program under Claims Resolution Act of 2010 (Pub. L. 111-291), and purchase at probate under 43 CFR part 30, because the judge will not be in a position to verify an appraiser's qualifications.

    III. Tribal Consultation

    The Department is hosting listening sessions and consultation sessions with Indian tribes and trust beneficiaries on each of the items in Title III of ITARA (see “I. Background” for the list of items) at the dates and locations announced in 81 FR 47176 (July 20, 2016), as corrected by 81 FR 51210 (August 3, 2016). The Department will also consult on this proposed rule at those listening sessions and consultation sessions.

    IV. Specific Questions on Which the Department Seeks Comment

    The Department seeks comment on any aspect of this rule that commenters wish to comment on, but also specifically poses the following questions for your consideration in commenting:

    1. Do any tribes grant Certified General Appraiser licenses similar to those granted by States? If so, are the prerequisite requirements of individuals receiving this license consistent with the requirements established by the Appraisal Qualifications Board for State certification?

    2. Are the minimum qualifications in this regulation appropriate for appraisals and valuations of timber, minerals, or other property separate from appraisals and valuations of real property? If not, what qualifications would be better suited to those appraisals and valuations?

    3. Is there a way to allow for the Department to verify an appraiser's qualifications, without requiring the qualifications to be submitted with each appraisal, that would ensure the appraiser is qualified at the time the appraisal is submitted (and that there have been no changes in the appraiser's qualifications)?

    V. Procedural Requirements A. Regulatory Planning and Review (E.O. 12866)

    Executive Order (E.O.) 12866 provides that the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) at the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) will review all significant rules. OIRA has determined that this rule is not significant.

    E.O. 13563 reaffirms the principles of E.O. 12866 while calling for improvements in the Nation's regulatory system to promote predictability, to reduce uncertainty, and to use the best, most innovative, and least burdensome tools for achieving regulatory ends. The E.O. directs agencies to consider regulatory approaches that reduce burdens and maintain flexibility and freedom of choice for the public where these approaches are relevant, feasible, and consistent with regulatory objectives. E.O. 13563 emphasizes further that regulations must be based on the best available science and that the rulemaking process must allow for public participation and an open exchange of ideas. We have developed this rule in a manner consistent with these requirements.

    B. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Department of the Interior certifies that this document will not have a significant economic effect on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). It does not change current funding requirements and any economic effects on small entities (e.g., the cost to obtain an appraiser license) would be incurred as part of their normal cost of doing business.

    C. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act

    This proposed rule is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 804(2), the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act. This proposed rule:

    (a) Will not have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more.

    (b) Will not cause a major increase in costs or prices for consumers, individual industries, Federal, State, or local government agencies, or geographic regions.

    (c) Will not have significant adverse effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or the ability of the U.S.-based enterprises to compete with foreign-based enterprises.

    D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    This proposed rule does not impose an unfunded mandate on State, local, or Tribal governments or the private sector of more than $100 million per year. The proposed rule does not have a significant or unique effect on State, local, or Tribal governments or the private sector. A statement containing the information required by the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) is not required.

    E. Takings (E.O. 12630)

    This proposed rule does not affect a taking of private property or otherwise have taking implications under Executive Order 12630. A takings implication assessment is not required.

    F. Federalism (E.O. 13132)

    Under the criteria in section 1 of Executive Order 13132, this proposed rule does not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant the preparation of a federalism summary impact statement. A federalism summary impact statement is not required.

    G. Civil Justice Reform (E.O. 12988)

    This proposed rule complies with the requirements of Executive Order 12988. Specifically, this rule:

    (a) Meets the criteria of section 3(a) requiring that all regulations be reviewed to eliminate errors and ambiguity and be written to minimize litigation; and

    (b) Meets the criteria of section 3(b)(2) requiring that all regulations be written in clear language and contain clear legal standards.

    H. Consultation With Indian Tribes (E.O. 13175)

    The Department of the Interior strives to strengthen its government-to-government relationship with Indian tribes through a commitment to consultation with Indian tribes and recognition of their right to self-governance and tribal sovereignty. We have evaluated this proposed rule under the Department's consultation policy and under the criteria in Executive Order 13175 and have identified substantial direct effects on federally recognized Indian tribes that will result from this rulemaking. Tribes may be substantially and directly affected by this rulemaking because it allows for the submission of appraisals for transactions involving Indian property without Departmental review and approval. As such, the Department is consulting with tribes on this proposed rule as part of the consultation sessions addressing ITARA.

    I. Paperwork Reduction Act

    This proposed rule contains an information collection that requires approval by OMB. The Department is seeking approval of a new information collection and a revision to an existing regulation, as follows.

    OMB Control Number: 1076—NEW.

    Title: Appraisals & Valuations of Indian Property, 43 CFR 100.

    Brief Description of Collection: The Department is proposing to establish minimum qualifications for appraisers of Indian property that require the submission of the appraiser's qualifications to the Department for verification. Submission of the appraisal or valuation itself is already authorized by other OMB Control Numbers under the associated 43 CFR or 25 CFR part (for example, the submission of appraisals for leasing of Indian land is included in the lease information collection authorized by OMB Control Number 1076-0181).

    Type of Review: New collection.

    Respondents: Individuals and Private Sector.

    Obligation to Respond: To Obtain or Retain a Benefit

    Number of Respondents: 155.

    Number of Responses: 465.

    Frequency of Response: 3 per year, on average.

    Estimated Time per Response: One hour.

    Estimated Total Annual Hour Burden: 465 hours.

    Estimated Total Annual Non-Hour Cost Burden: $0.

    A Federal agency may not conduct or sponsor, and you are not required to respond to, a collection of information unless the form or regulation requesting the information displays a currently valid OMB Control Number.

    J. National Environmental Policy Act

    This proposed rule does not constitute a major Federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment. A detailed statement under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) is not required because this is an administrative and procedural regulation. (For further information see 43 CFR 46.210(i)). We have also determined that the rule does not involve any of the extraordinary circumstances listed in 43 CFR 46.215 that would require further analysis under NEPA.

    K. Effects on the Energy Supply (E.O. 13211)

    This proposed rule is not a significant energy action under the definition in Executive Order 13211. A Statement of Energy Effects is not required.

    L. Clarity of This Regulation

    We are required by Executive Orders 12866 and 12988 and by the Presidential Memorandum of June 1, 1998, to write all rules in plain language. This means that each rule we publish must:

    a. Be logically organized;

    b. Use the active voice to address readers directly;

    c. Use clear language rather than jargon;

    d. Be divided into short sections and sentences; and

    e. Use lists and tables wherever possible.

    If you feel that we have not met these requirements, send us comments by one of the methods listed in the ADDRESSES section. To better help us revise the rule, your comments should be as specific as possible. For example, you should tell us the numbers of the sections or paragraphs that are unclearly written, which sections or sentences are too long, the sections where you believe lists or tables would be useful, etc.

    M. Public Availability of Comments

    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.

    List of Subjects in 43 CFR Part 100

    Indians, Indians—claims, Indians—lands, Mineral resources.

    For the reasons given in the preamble, the Department of the Interior proposes to amend 43 CFR subtitle A, to add part 100 to read as follows: Title 43—Public Lands; Interior Subtitle A—Office of the Secretary of the Interior Department of the Interior PART 100—APPRAISALS AND VALUATIONS OF INDIAN PROPERTY Subpart A—General Provisions Sec. 100.100 What terms should I know for this part? 100.101 What is the purpose of this part? 100.102 Does this part apply to me? 100.103 How does the Paperwork Reduction Act affect this part? Subpart B—Appraiser Qualifications 100.200 What are the minimum qualifications for qualified appraisers? 100.201 Does a qualified appraiser have authority to conduct appraisals or valuations of any type of Indian property? 100.202 Will the Secretary verify the appraiser's qualifications? 100.203 What must the tribe or individual Indian submit to the Secretary for verification of the appraiser's qualifications? 100.204 When must the tribe or individual Indian submit a package for Secretarial verification of appraiser qualifications? Subpart C—Appraisals and Valuations 100.300 Must I submit an appraisal or valuation to the Department? 100.301 Will the Department review and approve by appraisal or valuation? 100.302 May I request Departmental review of an appraisal even if a qualified appraiser completed the appraisal or valuation? 100.303 What happens if the Indian tribe or individual Indian does not agree with the submitted appraisal or valuation? Authority:

    5 U.S.C. 301; Pub. L. 114-178.

    Subpart A—General Provisions
    § 100.100 What terms I should know for this part?

    Appraisal means a written statement independently and impartially prepared by a qualified appraiser setting forth an opinion of defined value of an adequately described property as of a specific date, supported by the presentation and analysis of relevant market information.

    Appraiser means one who is expected to perform an appraisal or valuation competently and in a manner that is independent, impartial, and objective.

    Indian means:

    (1) Any person who is a member of any Indian tribe, is eligible to become a member of any Indian tribe, or is an owner as of October 27, 2004, of a trust or restricted interest in land;

    (2) Any person meeting the definition of Indian under the Indian Reorganization Act (25 U.S.C. 479) and the regulations promulgated thereunder; or

    (3) With respect to the inheritance and ownership of trust or restricted land in the State of California under 25 U.S.C. 2206, any person described in paragraph (1) or (2) of this definition or any person who owns a trust or restricted interest in a parcel of such land in that State.

    Indian property means trust property or restricted property.

    Indian tribe means an Indian tribe under section 102 of the Federally Recognized Indian Tribe List Act of 1994 (25 U.S.C. 479a).

    Land Buy-Back Program for Tribal Nations means the program implementing the land consolidation provisions of the settlement agreement in Cobell v. Salazar, No. 1:96CV01285-JR (D.D.C.), as confirmed by Congress in the Claims Resolution Act of 2010 (Pub. L. 111-291).

    Qualified appraiser means an appraiser that is authorized to prepare an appraisal or valuation of Indian property because he or she meets the minimum qualifications of this part.

    Qualifications statement means a written overview of an appraiser's education, professional history and job qualifications, providing an indication of an appraiser's competency to perform specific types of assignments. The qualifications may include information regarding education (degrees and educational institutions or programs); professional affiliations, designations, certifications, and licenses; work experience (including companies or organizations, the dates of employment, job titles and duties, and any service as an expert witness); awards and publications; types of properties appraised; types of appraisal and valuation assignments; and clients.

    Restricted property means lands, natural resources, or other assets owned by Indian tribes or individual Indians that can only be alienated or encumbered with the approval of the United States because of limitations contained in the conveyance instrument, or limitations in Federal law.

    Secretary means the Secretary of the Interior or an authorized representative.

    Trust property means lands, natural resources, or other assets held by the United States in trust for Indian tribes or individual Indians.

    Us/we/our means the single bureau, agency, or entity within the Department of the Interior that administers appraisals and valuations of Indian property.

    Valuation means all other valuation methods or a market analysis, such as a general description of market trends, values, or benchmarks, prepared by a qualified appraiser.

    § 100.101 What is the purpose of this part?

    This part describes the minimum qualifications for appraisers, employed by or under contract with an Indian tribe or individual Indian, to become qualified appraisers who may prepare an appraisal or valuation of Indian property that will be accepted by the Department without further review or approval.

    § 100.102 Does this part apply to me?

    This part applies to anyone preparing or relying upon an appraisal or valuation of Indian property.

    § 100.103 How does the Paperwork Reduction Act affect this part?

    The collections of information contained in this part have been approved by the Office of Management and Budget under 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. and assigned OMB Control Number 1076—NEW. Response is required to obtain a benefit.

    Subpart B—Appraiser Qualifications
    § 100.200 What are the minimum qualifications for qualified appraisers?

    (a) An appraiser must meet the following minimum qualifications to be a qualified appraiser under this part:

    (1) The appraiser must hold a current Certified General Appraiser license in the State in which the property appraised or valued is located;

    (2) The appraiser must be in good standing with the appraiser regulatory agency of the State in which the property appraised or valued is located; and

    (3) The appraiser must comply with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP) rules and provisions applicable to appraisers (including but not limited to Competency requirements applicable to the type of property being appraised or valued and Ethics requirements). This includes competency in timber and mineral valuations if applicable to the subject property.

    § 100.201 Does a qualified appraiser have the authority to conduct appraisals or valuations of any type of Indian property?

    All qualified appraisers of Indian property must meet the Competency requirements of USPAP for the type of property being appraised or valued. Competency can be demonstrated by previous completed assignments on the type of properties being appraised, additional education or training in specific property types, or membership and/or professional designation by a related professional appraisal association or group.

    § 100.202 Will the Secretary verify the appraiser's qualifications?

    The Secretary will verify the appraiser's qualifications to determine whether the appraiser meets the requirements of § 100.200.

    § 100.203 What must the tribe or individual Indian submit to the Secretary for a verification of the appraiser's qualifications?

    The tribe or individual Indian must submit the following with the appraisal or valuation:

    (a) A copy of the appraiser's current Certified General Appraiser license;

    (b) A copy of the appraiser's qualifications statement;

    (c) The appraiser's self-certification that the appraiser meets the criteria in § 100.200; and

    (d) If the property contains natural resource elements that contribute to the value of the property, such as timber or minerals, a list of the appraiser's additional qualifications for the specific type of property being valued in the appraisal report.

    § 100.204 When must the tribe or individual Indian submit a package for Secretarial verification of appraiser qualifications?

    The tribe or individual Indian must submit the package of appraiser qualifications to the Secretary with the appraisal or valuation.

    Subpart C—Appraisals and Valuations
    § 100.300 Must I submit an appraisal or valuation to the Department?

    Appraisals and valuations must be submitted to us for transactions requiring Secretarial approval under titles 25 and 43 of the CFR.

    § 100.301 Will the Department review and approve my appraisal or valuation?

    (a) The Department will not review the appraisal or valuation of Indian property and the appraisal or valuation will be considered final as long as:

    (1) The submission acknowledges the intent of the Indian tribe or individual Indian to waive Departmental review and approval;

    (2) The appraisal or valuation was completed by a qualified appraiser meeting the requirements of this part; and

    (3) No owner of any interest in the Indian property objects to use of the appraisal or valuation without Departmental review and approval.

    (b) The Department must review and approve the appraisal or valuation if:

    (1) Any of the criteria in paragraph (a) of this section are not met; or

    (2) The appraisal or valuation was submitted for:

    (i) Purchase at probate under 43 CFR 30;

    (ii) The Land Buy-Back Program for Tribal Nations; or

    (iii) Specific legislation requiring the Department to review and approve an appraisal or valuation.

    § 100.302 May I request Departmental review of an appraisal even if a qualified appraiser completed the appraisal or valuation?

    If you do not specifically request waiver of Departmental review and approval under § 100.300(a)(1), the Department will review the appraisal or valuation.

    § 100.303 What happens if the Indian tribe or individual Indian does not agree with the submitted appraisal or valuation?

    If the Indian tribe or individual Indian does not agree with the submitted appraisal or valuation, the Indian tribe or individual Indian may request that the Department perform an appraisal or valuation instead of relying on the submitted appraisal or valuation.

    Dated: September 7, 2016. Michael L. Connor, Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22650 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4337-15-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service 50 CFR Part 17 [Docket No. FWS-R3-ES-2015-0112; 4500030113] RIN 1018-BB66 Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Endangered Species Status for Rusty Patched Bumble Bee AGENCY:

    Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Proposed rule.

    SUMMARY:

    We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce a 12-month finding on a petition to list the rusty patched bumble bee (Bombus affinis) as endangered or threatened under the Endangered Species Act, as amended (Act). After review of the best available scientific and commercial information, we find that listing the rusty patched bumble bee is warranted. Accordingly, we propose to list the rusty patched bumble bee, a species that occurs in the eastern and midwestern United States and Ontario, Canada, as an endangered species under the Endangered Species Act (Act). If we finalize this rule as proposed, it would extend the Act's protections to this species. The effect of this regulation will be to add this species to the List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife.

    DATES:

    We will accept comments received or postmarked on or before November 21, 2016. Comments submitted electronically using the Federal eRulemaking Portal (see ADDRESSES below) must be received by 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on the closing date. We must receive requests for public hearings, in writing, at the address shown in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT by November 7, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments by one of the following methods:

    (1) Electronically: Go to the Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. In the Search box, enter FWS-R3-ES-2015-0112, which is the docket number for this rulemaking. Then, in the Search panel on the left side of the screen, under the Document Type heading, click on the Proposed Rules link to locate this document. You may submit a comment by clicking on “Comment Now!”

    (2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail or hand-delivery to: Public Comments Processing, Attn: FWS-R3-ES-2015-0112; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Headquarters, MS: BPHC, 5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041-3803.

    We request that you send comments only by the methods described above. We will post all comments on http://www.regulations.gov. This generally means that we will post any personal information you provide us (see Public Comments below for more information).

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Peter Fasbender, Field Supervisor, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Twin Cities Ecological Services Field Office, 4101 American Blvd. E., Bloomington, MN 55425, by telephone 952-252-0092, extension 210. Persons who use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 800-877-8339.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Executive Summary

    Why we need to publish a proposed rule. Under the Act, if a species is determined to be an endangered or threatened species throughout all or a significant portion of its range, we are required to promptly publish a proposal in the Federal Register and make a determination on our proposal within 1 year. Critical habitat shall be designated, to the maximum extent prudent and determinable, for any species determined to be an endangered or threatened species under the Act. Listing a species as an endangered or threatened species and designations and revisions of critical habitat can only be completed by issuing a rule. This rulemaking will propose the listing of the rusty patched bumble bee (Bombus affinis) as an endangered species.

    The basis for our action. Under the Act, we can determine that a species is an endangered or threatened species based on any of five factors: (A) The present or threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment of its habitat or range; (B) Overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or educational purposes; (C) Disease or predation; (D) The inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms; or (E) Other natural or manmade factors affecting its continued existence. While the exact cause of the species' decline is uncertain, the primary causes attributed to the decline include habitat loss and degradation, pathogens, pesticides, and small population dynamics.

    We will seek peer review. We sought comments on the species status assessment (SSA) from independent specialists to ensure that our analysis was based on scientifically sound data, assumptions, and analyses. We will also invite these peer reviewers to comment on our listing proposal. Because we will consider all comments and information received during the comment period, our final determinations may differ from this proposal.

    An SSA team prepared an SSA report for the rusty patched bumble bee. The SSA team was composed of U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service biologists, in consultation with other species experts. The SSA represents a compilation of the best scientific and commercial data available concerning the status of the species, including the impacts of past, present, and future factors (both negative and beneficial) affecting the rusty patched bumble bee. The SSA underwent independent peer review by 15 scientists with expertise in bumble bee biology, habitat management, and stressors (factors negatively affecting the species) to the species. The SSA and other materials relating to this proposal can be found on the Midwest Region Web site at http://www.fws.gov/midwest/Endangered/ and at http://www.regulations.gov under docket number FWS-R3-ES-2015-0112.

    Information Requested Public Comments

    We intend that any final action resulting from this proposed rule will be based on the best scientific and commercial data available and be as accurate and effective as possible. Therefore, we request comments or information from the public, other concerned governmental agencies, Native American tribes, the scientific community, industry, or any other interested parties concerning this proposed rule. We particularly seek comments concerning:

    (1) The rusty patched bumble bee's biology, range, and population trends, including:

    (a) Biological or ecological requirements of the species, including habitat requirements for feeding, breeding, and sheltering;

    (b) Genetics and taxonomy;

    (c) Historical and current range, including distribution patterns (in particular, we are interested in the locations and dates of surveys targeting bumble bees within the historical range of the rusty patched bumble bee, including negative survey results);

    (d) Historical and current population levels, and current and projected trends; and

    (e) Past and ongoing conservation measures for the species, its habitat, or both.

    (2) Factors that may affect the continued existence of the species, which may include habitat modification or destruction, overutilization, disease, predation, the inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms, or other natural or manmade factors.

    (3) Biological, commercial trade, or other relevant data concerning any threats (or lack thereof) to this species and existing conservation measures or regulations that may be addressing those threats.

    (4) The reasons why any habitat should or should not be determined to be critical habitat for the rusty patched bumble bee as provided by section 4 of the Act, including physical or biological features within areas that are occupied or specific areas outside of the geographic area that are occupied that are essential for the conservation of the species.

    Please include sufficient information with your submission (such as scientific journal articles or other publications) to allow us to verify any scientific or commercial information you include.

    Please note that submissions merely stating support for or opposition to the action under consideration without providing supporting information, although noted, will not be considered in making a determination, as section 4(b)(1)(A) of the Act directs that determinations as to whether any species is a threatened or endangered species must be made “solely on the basis of the best scientific and commercial data available.”

    You may submit your comments and materials concerning this proposed rule by one of the methods listed in ADDRESSES. We request that you send comments only by the methods described in ADDRESSES.

    If you submit information via http://www.regulations.gov, your entire submission—including any personal identifying information—will be posted on the Web site. If your submission is made via a hardcopy that includes personal identifying information, you may request at the top of your document that we withhold this information from public review. However, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. We will post all hardcopy submissions on http://www.regulations.gov.

    Comments and materials we receive, as well as supporting documentation we used in preparing this proposed rule, will be available for public inspection on http://www.regulations.gov, or by appointment, during normal business hours, at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Twin Cities Ecological Service Field Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).

    Public Hearing

    Section 4(b)(5) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), provides for one or more public hearings on this proposal, if requested. Requests must be received within 45 days after the date of publication of this proposed rule in the Federal Register. Such requests must be sent to the address shown in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. We will schedule public hearings on this proposal, if any are requested, and announce the dates, times, and places of those hearings, as well as how to obtain reasonable accommodations, in the Federal Register and local newspapers at least 15 days before the hearing.

    Peer Review

    In accordance with our joint policy on peer review published in the Federal Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34270), we sought the expert opinions of 25 appropriate and independent specialists regarding the Species Status Assessment, which informed this proposed rule. The purpose of peer review is to ensure that our listing determination is based on scientifically sound data, assumptions, and analyses. The peer reviewers have expertise in bumble bee biology, habitat, and stressors (factors negatively affecting the species) to the species. We invite additional comment from the peer reviewers during this public comment period.

    Previous Federal Action

    We received a petition from The Xerces Society for Invertebrate Conservation (Xerces Society) to list the rusty patched bumble bee as an endangered species on February 5, 2013. On May 13, 2014, the Xerces Society filed a lawsuit against the Service for failure to complete a petition finding in accordance with statutory deadlines. Per a December 24, 2014, settlement agreement with the Xerces Society, we agreed to make a 90-day finding no later than September 30, 2015, and, if that finding were substantial, to complete a 12-month finding no later than September 30, 2016. On September 18, 2015, we published in the Federal Register a 90-day finding that the petition presented substantial information indicating that listing the species may be warranted (80 FR 56423). We then conducted a status review, and this proposed listing rule constitutes our 12-month petition finding for the species.

    Background

    A thorough review of the taxonomy, life history, and ecology of the rusty patched bumble bee (Bombus affinis) is presented in the species status assessment report (Szymanski et al. 2016, Chapter 2; available at http://www.fws.gov/midwest/Endangered/ and at http://www.regulations.gov under Docket No. FWS-R3-ES-2015-0112). All bumble bees, including the rusty patched, belong to the genus Bombus (within the family Apidae) (Williams et al. 2008, p. 53).

    The rusty patched bumble bee is a eusocial (highly social) organism forming colonies consisting of a single queen, female workers, and males. Colony sizes of B. affinis are considered large compared to other bumble bees, and healthy colonies may consist of up to 1,000 individual workers in a season (Macfarlane et al. 1994, pp. 3-4). Queens and workers differ slightly in size and coloration; queens are larger than workers (Plath 1922, p. 192, Mitchell 1962, p. 518). All rusty patched bumble bees have entirely black heads, but only workers and males have a rusty reddish patch centrally located on the abdomen.

    The rusty patched bumble bee's annual cycle begins in early spring with colony initiation by solitary queens and progresses with the production of workers throughout the summer and ending with the production of reproductive individuals (males and potential queens) in mid- to late summer and early fall (Macfarlane et al. 1994, p. 4; Colla and Dumesh 2010, p. 45; Plath 1922, p. 192). The males and new queens disperse to mate and the original founding queen, males, and workers die. The new queens go into diapause (a form of hibernation) over winter. The following spring, the queen, or foundress, searches for suitable nest sites and collects nectar and pollen from flowers to support the production of her eggs, which are fertilized by sperm she has stored since mating the previous fall. She is solely responsible for establishing the colony. As the workers hatch and the colony grows, they assume the responsibility of food collection, colony defense, and care of the young, while the foundress remains within the nest and continues to lay eggs. During later stages of colony development, in mid-July or August to September, the new queens and males hatch from eggs. At the end of the season the foundress dies and the new queens (gynes, or reproductive females) mate before hibernating.

    The rusty patched bumble bee has been observed and collected in a variety of habitats, including prairies, woodlands, marshes, agricultural landscapes, and residential parks and gardens (Colla and Packer 2008, p. 1381; Colla and Dumesh 2010, p. 46; USFWS rusty patched bumble bee unpublished geodatabase 2016). The species requires areas that support sufficient food (nectar and pollen from diverse and abundant flowers), undisturbed nesting sites in proximity to floral resources, and overwintering sites for hibernating queens (Goulson et al. 2015, p. 2; Potts et al. 2010, p. 349). Rusty patched bumble bees live in temperate climates, and are not likely to survive prolonged periods of high temperatures (over 35 °Celsius (C) (95 °F (F)) (Goulson 2016, pers. comm.).

    Bumble bees are generalist foragers, meaning they gather pollen and nectar from a wide variety of flowering plants (Xerces 2013, pp. 27-28). The rusty patched bumble bee is one of the first bumble bees to emerge early in the spring and the last to go into hibernation, so to meet its nutritional needs, the species requires a constant and diverse supply of blooming flowers.

    Rusty patched bumble bee nests are typically in abandoned rodent nests or other similar cavities (Plath 1922, pp. 190-191; Macfarlane et al. 1994, p. 4). Little is known about the overwintering habitats of rusty patched bumble bee foundress queens, but other species of Bombus typically form a chamber in soft soil, a few centimeters deep, and sometimes use compost or mole hills to overwinter (Goulson 2010, p. 11).

    Prior to the mid- to late 1990s, the rusty patched bumble bee was widely distributed across areas of 31 States/Provinces: Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Ontario, Pennsylvania, Quebec, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Vermont, Virginia, West Virginia, and Wisconsin. Since 2000, the rusty patched bumble bee has been reported from 13 States/Provinces: Illinois, Indiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, North Carolina/Tennessee (single record on the border between the States), Ontario, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and Wisconsin (Figure 1).

    Summary of Biological Status and Threats

    The Act directs us to determine whether any species is an endangered species or a threatened species because of any factors affecting its continued existence. We completed a comprehensive assessment of the biological status of the rusty patched bumble bee, and prepared a report of the assessment, which provides a thorough account of the species' overall viability. We define viability as the ability of the species to persist over the long term and, conversely, to avoid extinction. In this section, we summarize the conclusions of that assessment, which can be accessed at Docket No. FWS-R3-ES-2015-0112 on http://www.regulations.gov and at http://www.fws.gov/midwest/Endangered/. The reader is directed to the Rusty Patched Bumble Bee (Bombus affinis) Species Status Assessment (SSA report; Szymanski et al. 2016) for a detailed discussion of our evaluation of the biological status of the rusty patched bumble bee and the influences that may affect its continued existence.

    To assess rusty patched bumble bee viability, we used the three conservation biology principles of resiliency, representation, and redundancy (Shaffer and Stein 2000, pp. 306-310). Briefly, resiliency supports the ability of the species to withstand environmental stochasticity (for example, wet or dry, warm or cold years); representation supports the ability of the species to adapt over time to long-term changes in the environment (for example, climate changes); and redundancy supports the ability of the species to withstand catastrophic events (for example, droughts, hurricanes). In general, the more redundant, representative, and resilient a species is, the more likely it is to sustain populations over time, even under changing environmental conditions. Using these principles, we identified the species' ecological requirements for survival and reproduction at the individual, population, and species levels, and described the beneficial and risk factors influencing the species' viability.

    We evaluated the change in resiliency, representation, and redundancy from the past until the present, and projected the anticipated future states of these conditions. To forecast the biological condition into the future, we devised likely future scenarios by eliciting expert information on the primary stressors anticipated in the future to the rusty patched bumble bee: Pathogens, pesticides, habitat loss and degradation, climate change, and small population dynamics. To assess resiliency, we evaluated the trend in rusty patched bumble bee occurrences (populations) over time and the trend in the species abundance relative to all Bombus spp. over time. To forecast anticipated future abundance, we used a population model to project the number of populations expected to persist based on plausible future risk scenarios. To assess representation (as an indicator of adaptive capacity) of the rusty patched bumble bee, we evaluated the spatial extent of occurrences over time. At a coarse scale, we tallied the number of counties, States, and ecoregions occupied by the species. Ecoregions are areas defined by environmental conditions including climate, landforms, and soil characteristics. Bailey Ecoregions (Bailey 1983, Bailey et al. 1994) and the equivalent Canadian Ecoregions (Ecological Stratification Working Group, 1996) were used. At a finer scale, we calculated the extent of occurrence within each ecoregion (within the historically occupied range) over time. To assess redundancy, we calculated the risk of ecoregion-wide extirpations given the number of populations present historically, currently, and forecasted for 5 to 50 years into the future.

    Our analyses indicate that the resiliency, representation, and redundancy of the rusty patched bumble bee have all declined since the late 1990s and are projected to continue to decline over the next several decades. Historically, the species was abundant and widespread, with hundreds of populations across an expansive range, and was the fourth-ranked Bombus species in our relative abundance analysis.

    Since the late 1990s, rusty patched bumble bee abundance and distribution has declined significantly. The number of populations has declined by 91 percent (from 845 historically (historical = occurrences in the period 1900-1999) to 69 currently (current = occurrences in the period 2000-2015)), and the rusty patched bumble bee's relative abundance declined from 8 percent historically, to 1 percent currently. Many of the current populations, however, have not been reconfirmed since the early 2000s and may no longer persist. For example, no rusty patched bumble bees were observed at any of the historical sites that were revisited in 2015. Also, many of the current populations (64 of 69 (93 percent)) are documented by 5 or fewer individuals; only 2 populations are documented by more than 10 individuals (healthy colonies consist of up to 1,000 individual workers, and a healthy population contains tens to hundreds of colonies (Macfarlane et al. 1994,pp. 3-4)).

    Along with the loss of populations, a marked decrease in the spatial extent has occurred in recent times. As noted above, the rusty patched bumble bee was broadly distributed historically across the eastern United States, upper Midwest, and southern Quebec and Ontario, an area comprising 15 ecoregions, 31 States/Provinces, and 378 counties. Since 2000, the species' distribution has declined across its range, with current records from 6 ecoregions, 13 States/Provinces, and 41 counties (Figure 1). The spatial extent of the species' current range has been reduced to 8 percent of its historical extent. The loss of occurrences has increased the risk of ecoregion-wide extirpations due to catastrophic events (i.e., severe drought and prolonged, high temperatures).

    EP22SE16.005

    Many of the existing populations continue to face the effects of past and ongoing stressors, including pathogens, pesticides, habitat loss and degradation, small population dynamics, and climate change. A brief summary of these primary stressors is presented below; for a full description of these stressors, refer to Chapter 5 of the SSA report.

    Pathogens—The precipitous decline of several bumble bee species (including the rusty patched) from the mid-1990s to present was contemporaneous with the collapse in populations of commercially bred western bumble bees (B. occidentalis), raised primarily to pollinate greenhouse tomato and sweet pepper crops, beginning in the late 1980s (for example, Szabo et al. 2012, pp. 232-233). This collapse was attributed to the microsporidium (fungus) Nosema bombi. Around the same time, several North American wild bumble bee species also began to decline rapidly (Szabo et al. 2012, p. 232). The temporal congruence and speed of these declines led to the suggestion that they were caused by transmission or “spillover” of N. bombi from the commercial colonies to wild populations through shared foraging resources. Patterns of losses observed, however, cannot be completely explained by exposure to N. bombi. Several experts have surmised that N. bombi may not be the culpable (or only culpable) pathogen in the precipitous decline of certain wild bumble bees in North America (for example, Goulson 2016, pers. comm.; Strange and Tripodi 2016, pers. comm.), and the evidence for chronic pathogen spillover from commercial bumble bees as a main cause of decline remains debatable (see various arguments in Colla et al. 2006, entire; Otterstatter and Thomson 2008, entire; Szabo et al. 2012, entire; Manley et al. 2015, entire).

    In addition to fungi such as N. bombi, other viruses, bacteria, and parasites are being investigated for their effects on bumble bees in North America, such as deformed wing virus, acute bee paralysis, and parasites such as Crithidia bombi and Apicystis bombi (for example, Szabo et al. 2012, p. 237; Manley et al. 2015, p. 2; Tripodi 2016, pers. comm.; Goulson et al. 2015, p. 3). Little is known about these diseases in bumble bees, and no studies specific to the rusty patched bumble bee have been conducted. Refer to Szymanski et al. (2016, pp. 40-43) for a brief summary of those that have the greatest potential to affect the rusty patched bumble bee.

    Pesticides—A variety of pesticides are widely used in agricultural, urban, and even natural environments, and native bumble bees are simultaneously exposed to multiple pesticides, including insecticides, fungicides, and herbicides. The pesticides with greatest effects on bumble bees are insecticides and herbicides: Insecticides are specifically designed to directly kill insects, including bumble bees, and herbicides reduce available floral resources, thus indirectly affecting bumble bees. Although the overall toxicity of pesticides to rusty patched or other bumble bees is unknown, pesticides have been documented to have both lethal and sublethal effects (for example, reduced or no male production, reduced or no egg hatch, and reduced queen production and longevity) on bumble bees (for example, Gill et al. 2012, p. 107; Mommaerts et al. 2006, pp. 3-4; Fauser-Misslin et al. 2014, pp. 453-454).

    Neonicotinoids are a class of insecticides used to target pests of agricultural crops, forests (for example, emerald ash borer), turf, gardens, and pets and have been strongly implicated as the cause of the decline of bees in general (European Food Safety Authority 2015, p. 4211; Pisa et al. 2015, p. 69; Goulson 2013, pp. 7-8), and specifically for rusty patched bumble bees, due to the contemporaneous introduction of neonicotinoid use and the precipitous decline of the species (Colla and Packer 2008, p. 10). The neonicotinoid imidacloprid became widely used in the United States starting in the early 1990s, and clothianidin and thiamethoxam entered the commercial market beginning in the early 2000s (Douglas and Tooker 2015, pp. 5091-5092). The use of neonicotinoids rapidly increased as seed-applied products were introduced in field crops, marking a shift toward large-scale, preemptive insecticide use. If current trends continue, Douglas and Tooker (2015, p. 5093) predict that neonicotinoid use will increase further, through application to more soybeans and other crop species.

    Most studies examining the effect of neonicotinoids on bees have been conducted using the European honey bee (Apis mellifera) (Lundin et al. 2015, p. 7). Bumble bees, however, may be more vulnerable to pesticide exposure for several reasons: (1) They are more susceptible to pesticides applied early in the year, because for one month the entire bumble bee population depends on the success of the queens to forage and establish new colonies; (2) bumble bees forage earlier in the morning and later in the evening than honey bees, thus are susceptible to pesticide applications that are done in the early morning or evening to avoid effects to honey bees; (3) most bumble bees have smaller colonies than honey bees, thus, a single bumble bee worker is more important to the survival of the colony (Thompson and Hunt 1999, p. 155); (4) bumble bees nest underground, thus, are also exposed to pesticide residues in the soil (Arena and Sgolastra 2014, p. 333); and (5) bumble bee larvae consume large amounts of unprocessed pollen (as opposed to honey), and, therefore, are much more exposed to pesticide residues in the pollen (Arena and Sgolastra 2014, p. 333).

    Habitat loss and degradation—The rusty patched bumble bee historically occupied native grasslands of the Northeast and upper Midwest; however, much of this landscape has now been lost or is fragmented. Estimates of native grassland losses since European settlement of North America are as high as 99.9 percent (Samson and Knofp 1994, p. 418). Habitat loss is commonly cited as a long-term contributor to bee declines through the 20th century, and may continue to contribute to current declines, at least for some species (Goulson et al. 2015, p. 2; Goulson et al. 2008; Potts et al. 2010, p. 348; Brown and Paxton 2009, pp. 411-412). However, the rusty patched bumble bee may not be as severely affected by habitat loss compared to habitat specialists, such as native prairie endemics, because it is not dependent on specific plant species, but can use a variety of floral resources. Still, loss or degradation of habitat has been shown to reduce both bee diversity and abundance (Potts et al. 2010, pp. 348-349). Large monocultures do not support the plant diversity needed to provide food resources throughout the rusty patched bumble bees' long foraging season, and small, isolated patches of habitat may not be sufficient to support healthy bee populations (Hatfield and LeBuhn 2007, pp. 154-156; Öckinger and Smith 2007, pp. 55-56).

    Although habitat loss has established negative effects on bumble bees (Goulson et al. 2008; Williams and Osborne 2009, pp. 371-373), many feel it is unlikely to be a main driver of the recent, widespread North American bee declines (Szabo et al. 2012; p. 236; Colla and Packer 2008, p. 1388; Cameron et al. 2011b, p. 665). However, the past effects of habitat loss and degradation may continue to have impacts on bumble bees that are stressed by other factors. If there is less food available or if the bumble bees must expend more energy and time to find food, they are less healthy overall, and, thus, less resilient to other stressors (for example, nutritional stress may decrease the ability to survive parasite infection (Brown et al. 2000, pp. 425-426) or cope with pesticides (Goulson et al. 2015, p. 5)). Furthermore, bumble bees may be more vulnerable to extinction than other animals because their colonies have long cycles, where reproductive individuals are primarily produced near the end of those cycles. Thus, even slight changes in resource availability could have significant cumulative effects on colony development and productivity (Colla and Packer 2008, p. 1380).

    Small population dynamics—The social organization of bees has a large effect on their population biology and genetics (Pamilo and Crozier 1997, entire; Chapman and Bourke 2001, entire; Zayed 2009, entire). The rusty patched bumblebee is a eusocial bee species (cooperative brood care, overlapping generations within a colony of adults, and a division of labor into reproductive and non-reproductive groups), and a population is made up of colonies, rather than individuals. Consequently, the effective population size (number of individuals in a population who contribute offspring to the next generation) is much smaller than the census population size (number of individuals in a population). Genetic effects of small population sizes depend on the effective population size (rather than the actual size), and in the rusty patched bumble bee the effective population sizes are inherently small due to their eusocial structure, haplodiploidy reproduction, and the associated “diploid male vortex.”

    Like many insect species, the rusty patched bumble bee has haplodiploidy sex differentiation, in which haploid (having one set of chromosomes) males are produced from unfertilized eggs and diploid (containing two complete sets of chromosomes) females from fertilized eggs (Zayed 2009, p. 239). When females mate with related males, however (as is more likely to happen in small populations), half of the females' progeny will develop into diploid males instead of females. Having fewer females decreases the health of the colony, as males do not contribute food resources to the colony (Ellis et al. 2006, p. 4376). Additionally, diploid males are mostly unviable, or if viable and mate, produce unviable eggs or sterile daughters (Zayed 2009, p. 239 and references within), so those males that are produced are unable to contribute to next year's cohort. (See Szymanski et al. 2016, pp. 17-18 for a more detailed explanation of this life-history characteristic). This reproductive strategy (haplodiploidy) makes the rusty patched bumble bee particularly vulnerable to the effects of a small population size, as the species can experience a phenomenon called a “diploid male vortex,” where the proportion of nonviable males increases as abundance declines, thereby further reducing population size. Given this, due to the size of the current populations, some may no longer persist and others are likely already quasi-extirpated (the level at which a population will go extinct, although it is not yet at zero individuals) (Szymanski et al. 2016, p. 66).

    Effects of climate change—Global climate change is broadly accepted as one of the most significant risks to biodiversity worldwide, however, specific impacts of climate change on pollinators are not well understood. The changes in climate likely to have the greatest effects on bumble bees include: Increased drought, increased flooding, increased storm events, increased temperature and precipitations, early snow melt, late frost, and increased variability in temperatures and precipitation. These climate changes may lead to decreased resource availability (due to mismatches in temporal and spatial co-occurrences, such as availability of floral resources early in the flight period), decreased availability of nesting habitat (due to changes in rodent populations or increased flooding or storms), increased stress from overheating (due to higher temperatures), and increased pressures from pathogens and nonnative species, (Goulson et al. 2015, p. 4; Goulson 2016, pers. comm.; Kerr et al. 2015, pp. 178-179; Potts et al. 2010, p. 351; Cameron et al. 2011a, pp. 35-37; Williams and Osborne 2009, p. 371).

    Synergistic effects—It is likely that several of the above summarized risk factors are acting synergistically or additively on the species, and the combination of multiple stressors is likely more harmful than a single stressor acting alone. Although the ultimate source of the decline is debated, and despite that the relative role and synergistic effects of the primary stressors are unknown, the acute and widespread decline of rusty patched bumble bees is undisputable.

    Beneficial factors—We are aware of only a few specific measures for bumble bee conservation at any of the current rusty patched bumble bee locations in the United States. In Canada, the species was listed as endangered on Schedule 1 of the Species at Risk Act in 2012, and a recovery strategy has been proposed (Environment and Climate Change Canada 2016, entire). However, we are aware of only nine current occurrences (three populations) in Canada. The rusty patched bumble bee is listed as State endangered in Vermont and Special Concern in Connecticut, Michigan, and Wisconsin. Of those four States, Wisconsin is the only State with current records (18 populations). A few organizations have or may soon start monitoring programs, such as Bumble Bee Watch (www.bumble beewatch.org), a collaborative citizen science effort to track North American bumble bees, and the Xerces Society. Also, the International Union of Concerned Scientists Conservation Breeding Specialist Group has developed general conservation guidelines for bumble bees (Hatfield et al. 2014b, pp. 11-16; Cameron et al. 2011a, entire). There is an increased awareness on pollinators, in general, and thus efforts to conserve pollinators may have a fortuitous effect on the rusty patched bumble bee. For example, planting appropriate flowers may contribute to pollinator conservation; however, there is a need to develop regionally appropriate, bumble bee-specific recommendations based on evidence of use (Goulson 2015, p. 6).

    In summary, the magnitude of population losses and range contraction to date have greatly reduced the rusty patched bumble bee's ability to adapt to changing environmental conditions and to guard against further losses of adaptive diversity and potential extinction due to catastrophic events. In reality, the few populations persisting and the limited distribution of these populations have substantially reduced the ability of the rusty patched bumble bee to withstand environmental variation, catastrophic events, and changes in physical and biological conditions. Coupled with the increased risk of extirpation due to the interaction of reduced population size and its haplodiploidy reproductive strategy, the rusty patched bumble bee may lack the resiliency required to sustain populations into the future, even without further exposure to stressors.

    12-Month Petition Finding on the Rusty Patched Bumble Bee

    As required by the Act, we considered the five factors in assessing whether the rusty patched bumblebee is an endangered species, as cited in the petition, throughout all of its range. We examined the best scientific and commercial information available regarding the past, present, and future threats faced by the bumble bee. We reviewed the petition, information available in our files, and other available published and unpublished information, and we consulted with recognized bumble bee experts and other Federal and State agencies. We identify the threats to the rusty patched bumble bee to be attributable to habitat loss and degradation (Factor A), impacts of pathogens (Factor C), impacts of pesticides (Factor E), the effects of small population size (Factor E), and effects of climate change (Factor E). On the basis of the best scientific and commercial information available, we find that the petitioned action to list the rusty patched bumble bee as an endangered species is warranted. A determination on the status of the species as an endangered or threatened species is presented below in the proposed listing determination.

    Determination

    Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533), and its implementing regulations at 50 CFR part 424, set forth the procedures for adding species to the Federal Lists of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants. Under section 4(a)(1) of the Act, we may list a species based on (A) The present or threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment of its habitat or range; (B) Overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or educational purposes; (C) Disease or predation; (D) The inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms; or (E) Other natural or manmade factors affecting its continued existence. Listing actions may be warranted based on any of the above threat factors, singly or in combination.

    We have carefully assessed the best scientific and commercial information available regarding the past, present, and future threats to the rusty patched bumble bee. Habitat loss and degradation from residential and commercial development and agricultural conversion occurred rangewide and resulted in fragmentation and isolation of the species from formerly contiguous native habitat. Habitat loss and degradation has resulted in the loss of the diverse floral resources needed throughout the rusty patched bumble bee's long feeding season, as well as loss of appropriate nesting and overwintering sites. Although much of the habitat conversion occurred in the past, the dramatic reduction and fragmentation of habitat has persistent and ongoing effects on the viability of populations; furthermore, conversion of native habitats to agriculture (i.e., monocultures) or other uses is still occurring today (Factor A).

    The species' range has been reduced by 92 percent, and its current distribution is limited to just one to a few populations in each of 12 States and Ontario. Ninety-three percent of the 69 current populations are documented by 5 or fewer individuals, and only 2 populations are documented by more than 10 individuals. Drought frequency and increased duration of high temperatures are likely to increase due to climate change, further restricting floral resources, reducing foraging times, and fragmenting or eliminating populations (Factor E). Fungi such as N. bombi, parasites such as Crithidia bombi and Apicystis bombi, deformed wing virus, acute bee paralysis, and bacteria are all suspected causes of decline for the rusty patched bumble bee (Factor C).

    Pesticide use, including the use of many insecticides that have known lethal and sublethal effects to bumble bees, is occurring at increasing levels rangewide (Factor E). Similarly, herbicide use occurs rangewide and can reduce available floral resources (Factor A). Additionally, the rusty patched bumble bee is not able to naturally recolonize unoccupied areas that are not connected by suitable dispersal habitat (Factors A and E).

    The rusty patched bumble bee's reproductive strategy makes it particularly vulnerable to the effects of small population size, and the species can experience a “diploid male vortex,” where the number of nonviable males increases as abundance declines, thereby further reducing population size (Factor E). There is virtually no redundancy of populations within each occupied ecoregion, further increasing the risk of loss of representation of existing genetic lineages and, ultimately, extinction.

    These threats have already resulted in the extirpation of the rusty patched bumble bee throughout an estimated 92 percent of its range, and these threats are likely to continue or increase in severity. Although the relative contribution of pesticides, pathogens, loss of floral resources, and other threats to the species' past and continued decline is not known, the prevailing data indicate that threats are acting synergistically and additively and that the combination of multiple threats is likely more harmful than a single threat acting alone. These threats are occurring rangewide, are expected to continue or increase in the future, and are significant because they further reduce the already limited distribution and decrease the resiliency of the rusty patched bumble bee within those limited areas.

    Existing regulatory mechanisms vary across the species' range, and although the rusty patched bumble bee is listed as State endangered in Vermont (which prohibits taking, possessing, or transporting), as special concern (no legal protection) in Connecticut, Michigan, and Wisconsin, and is protected under Canada's Species At Risk Act, these mechanisms do not currently ameliorate threats to the rusty patched bumble bee.

    The Act defines an endangered species as any species that is “in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range” and a threatened species as any species “that is likely to become endangered throughout all or a significant portion of its range within the foreseeable future.” We find that the rusty patched bumble bee is presently in danger of extinction throughout its entire range. Relative to its historical (pre-2000s) condition, the abundance of rusty patched bumble bees has declined precipitously over a short period of time. Only nine percent of the locations where it was historically found are currently occupied, and the abundance of the species relative to other Bombus species has declined from eight percent to one percent. The current spatial extent of occurrence is eight percent of its historical extent.

    Further adding to the species' imperilment, its reproductive strategy (haplodiploidy) renders bumble bees particularly sensitive to loss of genetic diversity, which is further exacerbated by decreasing population size (for example, diploid male vortex). The small number of persisting colonies continues to be affected by high-severity stressors, including pathogens, pesticides, habitat loss and degradation, effects of climate change, and small population dynamics throughout all of the species' range. These stressors are acting synergistically and additively on the species, and the combination of multiple stressors is more harmful than a single stressor acting alone. Due to the above factors, the species does not have the adaptive capacity in its current state to withstand physical and biological changes in the environment presently or into the future, and optimistic modeling suggests that all but one of the ecoregions are predicted to be extirpated within 5 years (Szymanski et al. 2016, Table 7.3).

    In conclusion, the species' overall range has been considerably reduced and the remaining populations are under threat from a variety of factors acting in combination to significantly reduce the overall viability of the species. The risk of extinction is currently high because there are a small number of remaining populations, most of which are extremely small in size (all but 2 have 10 or fewer individuals), in a severely reduced range. Therefore, on the basis of the best available scientific and commercial information, we propose listing the rusty patched bumble bee as an endangered species in accordance with sections 3(6) and 4(a)(1) of the Act. We find that a threatened species status is not appropriate for the rusty patched bumble bee because (1) given its current condition, the species lacks the ability to withstand physical and biological changes in the environment presently and into the future; (2) based on the prediction that all but one ecoregion will be extinct within 5 years, the species presently has a high probability of extinction based on its current status; and (3) even were the current stressors to be reduced or eliminated, the species is at high risk of extinction based on small population size effects alone.

    Under the Act and our implementing regulations, a species may warrant listing if it is endangered or threatened throughout all or a significant portion of its range. Because we have determined that the rusty patched bumble bee is endangered throughout all of its range, no portion of its range can be “significant” for purposes of the definitions of “endangered species” and “threatened species.” See the Final Policy on Interpretation of the Phrase “Significant Portion of Its Range” in the Endangered Species Act's Definitions of “Endangered Species” and “Threatened Species” (79 FR 37577; July 1, 2014).

    Critical Habitat

    Section 4(a)(3) of the Act, as amended, and implementing regulations in title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations (50 CFR 424.12), require that, to the maximum extent prudent and determinable, we designate critical habitat at the time the species is determined to be an endangered or threatened species. Critical habitat is defined in section 3 of the Act as:

    (1) The specific areas within the geographical area occupied by the species, at the time it is listed in accordance with the Act, on which are found those physical or biological features

    (a) Essential to the conservation of the species, and

    (b) Which may require special management considerations or protection; and

    (2) Specific areas outside the geographical area occupied by the species at the time it is listed, upon a determination that such areas are essential for the conservation of the species.

    Our regulations at 50 CFR 424.02 define the geographical area occupied by the species as: An area that may generally be delineated around species' occurrences, as determined by the Secretary (i.e., range). Such areas may include those areas used throughout all or part of the species' life cycle, even if not used on a regular basis (for example, migratory corridors, seasonal habitats, and habitats used periodically, but not solely by vagrant individuals).

    Conservation, as defined under section 3 of the Act, means to use, and the use of, all methods and procedures that are necessary to bring an endangered or threatened species to the point at which the measures provided pursuant to the Act are no longer necessary. Such methods and procedures include, but are not limited to, all activities associated with scientific resources management such as research, census, law enforcement, habitat acquisition and maintenance, propagation, live trapping, and transplantation, and, in the extraordinary case where population pressures within a given ecosystem cannot be otherwise relieved, may include regulated taking.

    Critical habitat receives protection under section 7 of the Act through the requirement that Federal agencies ensure, in consultation with the Service, that any action they authorize, fund, or carry out is not likely to result in the destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat. The designation of critical habitat does not affect land ownership or establish a refuge, wilderness, reserve, preserve, or other conservation area. Critical habitat designation does not allow the government or public to access private lands, nor does it require implementation of restoration, recovery, or enhancement measures by non-Federal landowners. Where a landowner requests Federal agency funding or authorization for an action that may affect a listed species or critical habitat, the Federal agency would be required to consult under section 7(a)(2) of the Act, but even if consultation leads to a finding that the action would likely cause destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat, the resulting obligation of the Federal action agency and the landowner is not to restore or recover the species, but rather to implement reasonable and prudent alternatives to avoid destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat.

    Under the first prong of the Act's definition of critical habitat, areas within the geographical area occupied by the species at the time it was listed are included in a critical habitat designation if they contain physical or biological features (1) that are essential to the conservation of the species and (2) that may require special management considerations or protection. For these areas, critical habitat designations identify, to the extent known using the best scientific and commercial data available, those physical or biological features that are essential to the conservation of the species (such as space, food, cover, and protected habitat). In identifying those physical or biological features, we focus on the specific features that support the life-history needs of the species, including but not limited to, water characteristics, soil type, geological features, prey, vegetation, symbiotic species, or other features. A feature may be a single habitat characteristic, or a more complex combination of habitat characteristics. Features may include habitat characteristics that support ephemeral or dynamic habitat conditions. Features may also be expressed in terms relating to principles of conservation biology, such as patch size, distribution distances, and connectivity. Under the second prong of the Act's definition of critical habitat, we can designate critical habitat in areas outside the geographical area occupied by the species at the time it is listed if we determine that such areas are essential for the conservation of the species.

    Section 4 of the Act requires that we designate critical habitat on the basis of the best scientific data available. Further, our Policy on Information Standards Under the Endangered Species Act (published in the Federal Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34271)), the Information Quality Act (section 515 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (Pub. L. 106-554; H.R. 5658)), and our associated Information Quality Guidelines, provide criteria, establish procedures, and provide guidance to ensure that our decisions are based on the best scientific data available. For example, they require our biologists, to the extent consistent with the Act and with the use of the best scientific data available, to use primary and original sources of information as the basis for recommendations to designate critical habitat.

    Our regulations (50 CFR 424.12(a)(1)) state that the designation of critical habitat is not prudent when any of the following situations exist: (i) The species is threatened by taking or other human activity, and identification of critical habitat can be expected to increase the degree of threat to the species, or (ii) such designation of critical habitat would not be beneficial to the species. The regulations also provide that, in determining whether a designation of critical habitat would not be beneficial to the species, the factors the Services may consider include but are not limited to: Whether the present or threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment of a species' habitat or range is not a threat to the species, or whether any areas meet the definition of “critical habitat” (50 CFR 424.12(a)(1)(ii)).

    We do not know of any imminent threat of take attributed to collection or vandalism for the rusty patched bumble bee. The available information does not indicate that identification and mapping of critical habitat is likely to initiate any threat of collection or vandalism for the bee. Therefore, in the absence of finding that the designation of critical habitat would increase threats to the species, if there are benefits to the species from a critical habitat designation, a finding that designation is prudent is warranted.

    The potential benefits of designation may include: (1) Triggering consultation under section 7 of the Act, in new areas for actions in which there may be a Federal nexus where it would not otherwise occur because, for example, it is unoccupied; (2) focusing conservation activities on the most essential features and areas; (3) providing educational benefits to State or county governments or private entities; and (4) preventing people from causing inadvertent harm to the protected species. Because designation of critical habitat will not likely increase the degree of threat to the species and may provide some measure of benefit, designation of critical habitat may be prudent for the rusty patched bumble bee.

    Our regulations (50 CFR 424.12(a)(2)) further state that critical habitat is not determinable when one or both of the following situations exists: (1) Information sufficient to perform required analysis of the impacts of the designation is lacking; or (2) the biological needs of the species are not sufficiently well known to permit identification of an area as critical habitat.

    Delineation of critical habitat requires, within the geographical area occupied by the species, identification of the physical or biological features essential to the species' conservation. Information regarding the rusty patched bumble bee life functions is complex, and complete data are lacking for most of them. We require additional time to analyze the best available scientific data in order to identify specific areas appropriate for critical habitat designation and to prepare and process a proposed rule. Accordingly, we find designation of critical habitat for these species in accordance with section 4(3)(A) of the Act to be “not determinable” at this time.

    Available Conservation Measures

    Conservation measures provided to species listed as endangered or threatened species under the Act include recognition, recovery actions, requirements for Federal protection, and prohibitions against certain practices. Recognition through listing results in public awareness, and conservation by Federal, State, Tribal, and local agencies, private organizations, and individuals. The Act encourages cooperation with the States and other countries and calls for recovery actions to be carried out for listed species. The protection required by Federal agencies and the prohibitions against certain activities are discussed, in part, below.

    The primary purpose of the Act is the conservation of endangered and threatened species and the ecosystems upon which they depend. The ultimate goal of such conservation efforts is the recovery of these listed species, so that they no longer need the protective measures of the Act. Subsection 4(f) of the Act calls for the Service to develop and implement recovery plans for the conservation of endangered and threatened species. The recovery planning process involves the identification of actions that are necessary to address the threats to its survival and recovery. The goal of this process is to restore listed species to a point where they are secure, self-sustaining, and functioning components of their ecosystems.

    Recovery planning includes the development of a draft and final recovery plan. Revisions of the plan may be done to address continuing or new threats to the species, as new substantive information becomes available. The recovery plan also identifies recovery criteria for review of when a species may be ready for downlisting or delisting, and methods for monitoring recovery progress. Recovery plans also establish a framework for agencies to coordinate their recovery efforts and provide estimates of the cost of implementing recovery tasks. When completed, the draft recovery plan and the final recovery plan will be available on our Web site (http://www.fws.gov/endangered), or from our Twin Cities Ecological Service Field Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).

    Implementation of recovery actions generally requires the participation of a broad range of partners, including other Federal agencies, States, Tribes, nongovernmental organizations, businesses, and private landowners. Examples of recovery actions include habitat restoration (for example, restoration of native vegetation), research, captive propagation and reintroduction, and outreach and education. The recovery of many listed species cannot be accomplished solely on Federal lands because their range may occur primarily or solely on non-Federal lands. To achieve recovery of these species requires cooperative conservation efforts on private, State, and Tribal lands. If this species is listed, funding for recovery actions will be available from a variety of sources, including Federal budgets, State programs, and cost-share grants for non-Federal landowners, the academic community, and nongovernmental organizations. In addition, pursuant to section 6 of the Act, the States of Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Vermont, Virginia, West Virginia, and Wisconsin would be eligible for Federal funds to implement management actions that promote the protection or recovery of the rusty patched bumble bee. Information on our grant programs that are available to aid species recovery can be found at: http://www.fws.gov/grants.

    Although the rusty patched bumble bee is only proposed for listing under the Act at this time, please let us know if you are interested in participating in conservation efforts for this species. Additionally, we invite you to submit any new information on this species whenever it becomes available and any information you may have for recovery planning purposes (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).

    Section 7(a) of the Act requires Federal agencies to evaluate their actions with respect to any species that is proposed or listed as an endangered or threatened species and with respect to its critical habitat, if any is proposed or designated. Regulations implementing this interagency cooperation provision of the Act are codified at 50 CFR part 402. Section 7(a)(4) of the Act requires Federal agencies to confer with the Service on any action that is likely to jeopardize the continued existence of a species proposed for listing or result in destruction or adverse modification of proposed critical habitat. If a species is listed subsequently, section 7(a)(2) of the Act requires Federal agencies to ensure that activities they authorize, fund, or carry out are not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of the species or destroy or adversely modify its critical habitat. If a Federal action may affect a listed species or its critical habitat, the responsible Federal agency must enter into consultation with the Service.

    Federal agency actions within the species' habitat that may require conference or consultation or both as described in the preceding paragraph include management and any other landscape-altering activities on Federal lands, for example, lands administered by the National Park Service, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and U.S. Forest Service.

    The Act and its implementing regulations set forth a series of general prohibitions and exceptions that apply to endangered wildlife. The prohibitions of section 9(a)(1) of the Act, codified at 50 CFR 17.21, make it illegal for any person subject to the jurisdiction of the United States to take (which includes harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect; or to attempt any of these) endangered wildlife within the United States or on the high seas. In addition, it is unlawful to import; export; deliver, receive, carry, transport, or ship in interstate or foreign commerce in the course of commercial activity; or sell or offer for sale in interstate or foreign commerce any listed species. It is also illegal to possess, sell, deliver, carry, transport, or ship any such wildlife that has been taken illegally. Certain exceptions apply to employees of the Service, the National Marine Fisheries Service, other Federal land management agencies, and State conservation agencies.

    We may issue permits to carry out otherwise prohibited activities involving endangered wildlife under certain circumstances. Regulations governing permits are codified at 50 CFR 17.22. With regard to endangered wildlife, a permit may be issued for the following purposes: For scientific purposes, to enhance the propagation or survival of the species, and for incidental take in connection with otherwise lawful activities. There are also certain statutory exemptions from the prohibitions, which are found in sections 9 and 10 of the Act.

    It is our policy, as published in the Federal Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34272), to identify to the maximum extent practicable at the time a species is listed, those activities that would or would not constitute a violation of section 9 of the Act. The intent of this policy is to increase public awareness of the effect of a proposed listing on proposed and ongoing activities within the range of the species proposed for listing.

    Based on the best available information, the following activities may potentially result in a violation of section 9 of the Act; this list is not comprehensive:

    (1) Unauthorized handling or collecting of the species;

    (2) The unauthorized release of biological control agents that attack any life stage of the rusty patched bumble bee, including the unauthorized use of herbicides, pesticides, or other chemicals in habitats in which the rusty patched bumble bee is known to occur;

    (3) Unauthorized release of nonnative species or native species that carry pathogens, diseases, or fungi that are known or suspected to adversely affect rusty patched bumble bee where the species is known to occur;

    (4) Unauthorized modification, removal, or destruction of the habitat (including vegetation and soils) in which the rusty patched bumble bee is known to occur; and

    (5) Unauthorized discharge of chemicals or fill material into any wetlands in which the rusty patched bumble bee is known to occur.

    Questions regarding whether specific activities would constitute a violation of section 9 of the Act should be directed to the Twin Cities Ecological Services Field Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).

    Required Determinations Clarity of the Rule

    We are required by Executive Orders 12866 and 12988 and by the Presidential Memorandum of June 1, 1998, to write all rules in plain language. This means that each rule we publish must:

    (1) Be logically organized;

    (2) Use the active voice to address readers directly;

    (3) Use clear language rather than jargon;

    (4) Be divided into short sections and sentences; and

    (5) Use lists and tables wherever possible.

    If you feel that we have not met these requirements, send us comments by one of the methods listed in ADDRESSES. To better help us revise the rule, your comments should be as specific as possible. For example, you should tell us the numbers of the sections or paragraphs that are unclearly written, which sections or sentences are too long, the sections where you feel lists or tables would be useful, etc.

    National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.)

    We have determined that environmental assessments and environmental impact statements, as defined under the authority of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), need not be prepared in connection with listing a species as an endangered or threatened species under the Endangered Species Act. We published a notice outlining our reasons for this determination in the Federal Register on October 25, 1983 (48 FR 49244).

    References Cited

    A complete list of references cited in this rulemaking is available on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov and upon request from the Twin Cities Ecological Services Field Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).

    Authors

    The primary authors of this proposed rule are the staff members of the Twin Cities Ecological Services Field Office and the Region 3 Regional Office.

    List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17

    Endangered and threatened species, Exports, Imports, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Transportation.

    Proposed Regulation Promulgation

    Accordingly, we propose to amend part 17, subchapter B of chapter I, title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations, as set forth below:

    PART 17—ENDANGERED AND THREATENED WILDLIFE AND PLANTS 1. The authority citation for part 17 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    16 U.S.C. 1361-1407; 1531-1544; 4201-4245; unless otherwise noted.

    2. In § 17.11(h) add an entry for “Bumble bee, rusty patched” to the List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife in alphabetical order under INSECTS to read as follows:
    § 17.11 Endangered and threatened wildlife.

    (h) * * *

    Common name Scientific name Where listed Status Listing citations and applicable rules *         *         *         *         *         *         * Insects *         *         *         *         *         *         * Bumble bee, rusty patched Bombus affinis Wherever found E [Federal Register citation when published as a final rule]. *         *         *         *         *         *         *
    Dated: September 12, 2016. Stephen Guertin, Acting Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22799 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4333-15-P
    81 184 Thursday, September 22, 2016 Notices DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service [Docket No. APHIS-2016-0046] Secretary's Advisory Committee on Animal Health; Intent To Reestablish AGENCY:

    Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA.

    ACTION:

    Notice of intent.

    SUMMARY:

    We are giving notice that the Secretary of Agriculture intends to reestablish the Secretary's Advisory Committee on Animal Health for a 2-year period. The Secretary has determined that the Committee is necessary and in the public interest.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Dr. Diane L. Sutton, Designated Federal Officer, VS, APHIS, 4700 River Road, Unit 43, Riverdale, MD 20737; (301) 851-3509.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA, 5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given that the Secretary of Agriculture intends to reestablish the Secretary's Advisory Committee on Animal Health (the Committee) for 2 years.

    The Committee advises the Secretary on strategies, policies, and programs to prevent, control, or eradicate animal diseases. The Committee considers agricultural initiatives of national scope and significance and advises on matters of public health, conservation of national resources, stability of livestock economies, livestock disease management and traceability strategies, prioritizing animal health imperatives, and other related aspects of agriculture. The Committee Chairperson and Vice Chairperson are elected by the Committee from among its members.

    Done in Washington, DC, this 15th day of September 2016. Kevin Shea, Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22742 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-34-P
    BROADCASTING BOARD OF GOVERNORS Government in the Sunshine Act Meeting Notice DATE AND TIME:

    Wednesday, September 28, 2016, 2:30 p.m. EDT.

    PLACE:

    Cohen Building, Room 3321, 330 Independence Ave. SW., Washington, DC 20237.

    SUBJECT:

    Notice of Meeting of the Broadcasting Board of Governors.

    SUMMARY:

    The Broadcasting Board of Governors (Board) will be meeting at the time and location listed above. The Board will vote on a consent agenda consisting of the minutes of its June 23, 2016 meeting, a resolution honoring the 10th anniversary of Voice of America's (VOA) Deewa Service, a resolution honoring the 20th anniversary of VOA's broadcasts in Afan Oromo and Tigrigna, a resolution honoring the 20th anniversary of VOA's broadcasts in Kirundi and Kinyarwanda, and a resolution honoring the 20th anniversary of Radio Free Asia. The Board will receive a report from the Chief Executive Officer and Director of BBG.

    This meeting will be available for public observation via streamed webcast, both live and on-demand, on the agency's public Web site at www.bbg.gov. Information regarding this meeting, including any updates or adjustments to its starting time, can also be found on the agency's public Web site.

    The public may also attend this meeting in person at the address listed above as seating capacity permits. Members of the public seeking to attend the meeting in person must register at

    https://bbgboardmeetingsept2016.eventbrite.com by 12:00 p.m. (EDT) on September 27. For more information, please contact BBG Public Affairs at (202) 203-4400 or by email at [email protected]

    CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION:

    Persons interested in obtaining more information should contact Oanh Tran at (202) 203-4545.

    Oanh Tran, Director of Board Operations.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22992 Filed 9-20-16; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE 86100-01-P
    COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS Agenda and Notice of Public Meeting of the Maryland 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 Maryland Advisory Committee to the Commission will convene by conference call at 12:30 p.m. (EST) on the following dates: Friday, October 21, 2016; Friday, November 18, 2016; Friday, December 16, 2016; Friday, January 27, 2017; Friday, February 17, 2017 and Friday, March 17, 2017. The purpose of each planning meeting is to discuss project planning for the Committee's civil rights review.

    DATES:

    The following dates: Friday, October 21, 2016; Friday, November 18, 2016; Friday, December 16, 2016; Friday, January, 27, 2017; Friday, February 17, 2017 and Friday, March 17, 2017.

    Time: Each meeting starts at 12:30 p.m. (EST).

    Public Call-In Information: Conference call-in number: 1-800-946-0719 and conference call ID: 5397395.

    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-in number: 1-800-946-0719 and conference call ID: 5397395. 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 conference call-in number.

    Persons with hearing impairments may also follow the discussion by first calling the Federal Relay Service at 1-800-977-8339 and providing the operator with the toll-free conference call-in number: 1-800-946-0719 and conference call ID: 5397395.

    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 http://facadatabase.gov/committee/meetings.aspx?cid=253; 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 numbers, email or street address.

    Agenda I. Welcome and Introductions —Rollcall Planning Meeting —Discuss Project Planning II. Emerging Issues III. Other Business Adjournment Dated: September 19, 2016. David Mussatt, Supervisory Chief, Regional Programs Unit.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22851 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Bureau of the Census Census Scientific Advisory Committee AGENCY:

    Bureau of the Census, Department of Commerce.

    ACTION:

    Notice of public virtual meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    The Bureau of the Census (Census Bureau) is giving notice of a virtual meeting of the Census Scientific Advisory Committee (CSAC). The Committee will address the results of the 2015 National Content Test on race and ethnicity. The CSAC will meet virtually on Thursday, October 6, 2016. Last minute changes to the schedule are possible, which could prevent giving advance public notice of schedule adjustments. Please visit the Census Advisory Committees Web site for the most current meeting agenda at: http://www.census.gov/about/cac.html.

    DATES:

    October 6, 2016. The virtual meeting will begin at approximately 2:00 p.m. ET and end at approximately 4:00 p.m. ET.

    ADDRESSES:

    The meeting will be held via WebEx at the following URL link: https://census.webex.com/census/j.php?MTID=m8a838a44aa1d499cce581f7bf1432058. For audio please call the following phone number: 888-790-3565. When prompted, please use the following password: 8267816.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Tara Dunlop Jackson, Advisory Committee Branch Chief, Customer Liaison and Marketing Services Office, [email protected], Department of Commerce, U.S. Census Bureau, Room 8H177, 4600 Silver Hill Road, Washington, DC 20233, telephone 301-763-5222. For TTY callers, please use the Federal Relay Service 1-800-877-8339.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Members of the CSAC are appointed by the Director, U.S. Census Bureau. The Committee provides scientific and technical expertise, as appropriate, to address Census Bureau program needs and objectives. The Committee was established in accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Title 5, United States Code, Appendix 2, Section 10).

    All meetings are open to the public. A brief period will be set aside at the meeting for public comment on October 6. Individuals with extensive questions or statements must submit them in writing to: [email protected] (subject line “October 6, 2016 CSAC Virtual Meeting Public Comment”), or by letter submission to the Committee Liaison Officer, Department of Commerce, U.S. Census Bureau, Room 8H179, 4600 Silver Hill Road, Washington, DC 20233.

    Dated: September 13, 2016. John H. Thompson, Director, Bureau of the Census.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22785 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-07-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Bureau of the Census National Advisory Committee AGENCY:

    Bureau of the Census, Department of Commerce.

    ACTION:

    Notice of public virtual meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    The Bureau of the Census (Census Bureau) is giving notice of a virtual meeting of the National Advisory Committee (NAC). The Committee will address the results of the 2015 National Content Test on race and ethnicity. The NAC will meet virtually on Monday, October 3, 2016. Last minute changes to the schedule are possible, which could prevent giving advance public notice of schedule adjustments. Please visit the Census Advisory Committees Web site for the most current meeting agenda at: http://www.census.gov/about/cac.html.

    DATES:

    October 3, 2016. The virtual meeting will begin at approximately 1:00 p.m. ET and end at approximately 3:00 p.m. ET.

    ADDRESSES:

    The meeting will be held via WebEx at the following URL link: https://census.webex.com/census/j.php?MTID=m672cd26cdb95b86935763b6bef2f35f9. For audio please call the following phone number: 888-324-3615. When prompted, please use the following password: 7055861.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Tara Dunlop Jackson, Advisory Committee Branch Chief, Customer Liaison and Marketing Services Office, [email protected], Department of Commerce, U.S. Census Bureau, Room 8H177, 4600 Silver Hill Road, Washington, DC 20233, telephone 301-763-5222. For TTY callers, please use the Federal Relay Service 1-800-877-8339.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The NAC was established in March 2012 and operates in accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Title 5, United States Code, Appendix 2, Section 10). NAC members are appointed by the Director, U.S. Census Bureau, and consider topics such as hard-to-reach populations, race and ethnicity, language, aging populations, American Indian and Alaska Native tribal considerations, new immigrant populations, populations affected by natural disasters, highly mobile and migrant populations, complex households, rural populations, and population segments with limited access to technology. The Committee also advises on data privacy and confidentiality, among other issues.

    All meetings are open to the public. A brief period will be set aside at the meeting for public comment on October 3. Individuals with extensive questions or statements must submit them in writing to: [email protected] (subject line “October 3, 2016 NAC Virtual Meeting Public Comment”), or by letter submission to the Committee Liaison Officer, Department of Commerce, U.S. Census Bureau, Room 8H179, 4600 Silver Hill Road, Washington, DC 20233.

    Dated: September 13, 2016. John H. Thompson, Director, Bureau of the Census.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22783 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-07-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Foreign-Trade Zones Board [S-103-2016] Approval of Subzone Status; Michaels Stores Procurement Company, Inc., Hazleton, Pennsylvania

    On July 26, 2016, the Executive Secretary of the Foreign-Trade Zones (FTZ) Board docketed an application submitted by the Eastern Distribution Center, Inc., grantee of FTZ 24, requesting subzone status subject to the existing activation limit of FTZ 24, on behalf of Michaels Stores Procurement Company, Inc., in Hazleton, Pennsylvania.

    The application was processed in accordance with the FTZ Act and Regulations, including notice in the Federal Register inviting public comment (81 FR 49927-49928, July 29, 2016). The FTZ staff examiner reviewed the application and determined that it meets the criteria for approval. Pursuant to the authority delegated to the FTZ Board Executive Secretary (15 CFR 400.36(f)), the application to establish Subzone 24D is approved, subject to the FTZ Act and the Board's regulations, including Section 400.13, and further subject to FTZ 24's 2,000-acre activation limit.

    Dated: September 15, 2016. Andrew McGilvray, Executive Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22880 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-351-847, A-791-822, A-489-828] Certain Carbon and Alloy Steel Cut-to-Length Plate From Brazil, South Africa, and the Republic of Turkey: Affirmative Preliminary Determinations of Sales at Less Than Fair Value AGENCY:

    Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Commerce (the Department) preliminarily determines that imports of Certain Carbon and Alloy Steel Cut-to-Length Plate (CTL plate) from Brazil, South Africa, and the Republic of Turkey (Turkey) are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value (LTFV). The period of investigation (POI) for these investigations is April 1, 2015, through March 31, 2016. The estimated margins of sales at LTFV are shown in the “Preliminary Determinations” section of this notice. Interested parties are invited to comment on these preliminary determinations.

    DATES:

    Effective September 22, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Mark Kennedy at (202) 482-7883 (Brazil); Julia Hancock or Susan Pulongbarit at (202) 482-1394 or (202) 482-4031, respectively (South Africa); or Dmitry Vladimirov at (202) 482-0665 (Turkey), AD/CVD Operations, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background

    The Department published the notice of initiation of these investigations on May 5, 2016.1 Companhia Siderurgica Nacional (CSN) and Usinas Siderurgicas de Minas Gerais SA (Usiminas) are the mandatory respondents in the investigation covering CTL plate from Brazil; Evraz Highveld Steel and Vanadium Corp. (Evraz Highveld) is the mandatory respondent in the investigation covering CTL plate from South Africa; and Ereğli Demir ve Çelik Fabrikalari T.A.Ş. (Erdemir) is the mandatory respondent in the investigation covering CTL plate from Turkey. For a complete description of the events that followed the initiation of these investigations, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum dated concurrently with these determinations and hereby adopted by this notice.2 A list of topics included in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum is included as Appendix II to this notice. The Preliminary Decision Memorandum is a public document and is made available to the public via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS). ACCESS is available to registered users at https://access.trade.gov, and to all parties in the Department's Central Records Unit, Room B8024 of the main Department of Commerce building. In addition, a complete version of the Preliminary Decision Memorandum can be found at http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/. The signed and the electronic versions of the Preliminary Decision Memorandum are identical.

    1See Certain Carbon and Alloy Steel Cut-To-Length Plate From Austria, Belgium, Brazil, France, the Federal Republic of Germany, Italy, Japan, the Republic of Korea, the People's Republic of China, South Africa, Taiwan, and the Republic of Turkey: Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigations, 81 FR 27089 (May 5, 2016) (Initiation Notice).

    2See Memorandum from Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, to Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance “Decision Memorandum for the Preliminary Determinations in the Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigations of Certain Carbon and Alloy Steel Cut-to-Length Plate from Brazil, South Africa, and the Republic of Turkey,” dated concurrently with this notice (Preliminary Decision Memorandum).

    Scope of the Investigations

    The products covered by these investigations are CTL plate. For a full description of the scope of these investigations, see the “Scope of the Investigations,” in Appendix I of this notice.

    Scope Comments

    In accordance with the Preamble to the Department's regulations,3 the Initiation Notice set aside a period of time for parties to raise issues regarding product coverage (i.e., scope).4 Certain interested parties commented on the scope of these investigations as it appeared in the Initiation Notice, as well as additional language proposed by the Department. For a summary of the product coverage comments and rebuttal responses submitted to the records of these investigations, and a discussion and analysis of all comments timely received, see the Department's Preliminary Scope Decision Memorandum.5 The Department is preliminarily modifying the scope language as it appeared in the Initiation Notice to clarify the exclusion for stainless steel plate. The Department is also correcting two tariff numbers that were misidentified in the Petitions and in the Initiation Notice. 6

    3See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties, 62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997) (Preamble).

    4See Initiation Notice, 81 FR at 27089.

    5See Memorandum to Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, “Certain Carbon and Alloy Steel Cut-to-Length Plate From Austria, Belgium, Brazil, the People's Republic of China, France, the Federal Republic of Germany, Italy, Japan, the Republic of Korea, the Republic of South Africa, Taiwan, and Turkey: Scope Comments Decision Memorandum for the Preliminary Determinations,” dated September 6, 2016 (Preliminary Scope Decision Memorandum).

    6Id.

    Methodology

    The Department is conducting these investigations in accordance with section 731 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). Pursuant to section 776(a) of the Act, the Department preliminarily relied upon facts otherwise available to assign an estimated weighted-average dumping margin to the mandatory respondents in these three investigations, because none of the respondents submitted a response to the Department's questionnaire.7 Further, the Department is preliminarily determining that these mandatory respondents failed to cooperate by not acting to the best of their ability to comply with a request for information and applying adverse facts available (AFA) to these respondents, in accordance with section 776(b) of Act. For a full description of the methodology underlying our preliminary determinations, see Preliminary Decision Memorandum.

    7See Letter from CSN, “Carbon and Alloy Steel Cut-To-Length Plate from Brazil,” dated July 14, 2016; See Letter from Usiminas, “Carbon and Alloy Steel Cut-To-Length Plate from Brazil; Questionnaire Response,” dated July 14, 2016; see also Letter from Erdemir, “Certain Carbon and Alloy Steel Cut-to-Length Plate from Turkey: Erdemir notification of intent not to participate,” dated June 24, 2016; see also Memorandum to File regarding, “Placing Federal Express Documents on the Record,” dated concurrently with this notice.

    Critical Circumstances

    On July 26, 2016, the petitioners 8 filed timely critical circumstances allegations, pursuant to section 733(e)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.206(c)(1), alleging that critical circumstances exist with respect to imports of the subject merchandise from, among other countries, Brazil and Turkey.9 The petitioners did not file a critical circumstances allegation with respect to South Africa.

    8 ArcelorMittal USA LLC, Nucor Corporation, and SSAB Enterprises, LLC (collectively, the petitioners).

    9See Letter from the petitioners, “Certain Carbon and Alloy Steel Cut-to-Length Plate From Austria, Belgium, Brazil, the Republic of Korea, Taiwan, and Turkey: Critical Circumstances Allegations,” dated July 26, 2016.

    Section 733(e)(1) of the Act provides that the Department will preliminarily determine that critical circumstances exist in a LTFV investigation if there is a reasonable basis to believe or suspect that: (A) There is a history of dumping and material injury by reason of dumped imports in the United States or elsewhere of the subject merchandise, or the person by whom, or for whose account, the merchandise was imported knew or should have known that the exporter was selling the subject merchandise at less than its fair value and that there was likely to be material injury by reason of such sales; and (B) there have been massive imports of the subject merchandise over a relatively short period. On September 7, 2016, we published our preliminarily determination that critical circumstances exist with respect to imports of CTL plate exported from Brazil and Turkey.10

    10See Antidumping Duty Investigations of Certain Carbon and Alloy Steel Cut-to-Length Plate From Austria, Belgium, Brazil, the Republic of Korea, Taiwan, and Turkey: Preliminary Determinations of Critical Circumstances, 81 FR 61666 (September 7, 2016).

    All-Others Rate

    Section 733(d)(1)(A)(ii) of the Act provides that in the preliminary determination the Department shall determine an estimated “all-others” rate for all exporters and producers not individually investigated, in accordance with section 735(c)(5) of the Act. Section 735(c)(5)(A) of the Act states that generally the estimated rate for all-others shall be an amount equal to the weighted average of the estimated weighted-average dumping margins established for exporters and producers individually investigated, excluding any zero and de minimis margins, and any margins determined entirely under section 776 of the Act. The estimated weighted-average dumping margins in these preliminary determinations were calculated entirely under section 776 of the Act. In cases where no weighted-average dumping margins other than zero, de minimis, or those determined entirely under section 776 of the Act have been established for individually examined entities, in accordance with section 735(c)(5)(B) of the Act, the Department averages the margins calculated in the petition and applies the result to “all-other” entities not individually examined.

    With respect to Brazil, in the Petitions,11 the petitioners calculated only one margin. Therefore, for the all-others rate in the investigation covering CTL plate from Brazil, we preliminarily assigned the only margin calculated for subject merchandise from Brazil in the Petitions, as recalculated for the purposes of initiation, which is 74.52 percent.12

    11See Letter to the Secretary of Commerce from the petitioners, “Certain Carbon and Alloy Steel Cut-to-Length Plate from Austria, Belgium, Brazil, the People's Republic of China, France, the Federal Republic of Germany, Italy, Japan, the Republic of Korea, South Africa, Taiwan, and Turkey—Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing Duties” (April 8, 2016) (the Petitions) at Volume III. See also, AD Investigation Initiation Checklist: Certain Carbon and Alloy Steel Cut-to-Length Plate from Brazil (April 28, 2016) (in which the petition margin was recalculated for purposes of initiation).

    12See Certain Oil Country Tubular Goods From Thailand: Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, and Postponement of Final Determination, 79 FR 10487 (February 25, 2014), and accompanying Preliminary Decision Memorandum, unchanged in Certain Oil Country Tubular Goods From India, the Republic of Korea, Taiwan, the Republic of Turkey, and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam: Antidumping Duty Orders; and Certain Oil Country Tubular Goods From the Socialist Republic of Vietnam: Amended Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, 79 FR 53691 (September 10, 2014).

    With respect to South Africa, in the Petitions,13 the petitioners calculated two margins.14 Consistent with our practice, we preliminarily assigned as the “all-others” rate in the investigation covering CTL plate from South Africa the simple average of the two dumping margins calculated for subject merchandise from South Africa provided in the Petitions, which is 87.72 percent.15

    13See the Petitions at Volume X.

    14Id.

    15Id.; see also Certain Polyethylene Terephthalate (PET) Resin from India: Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Final Affirmative Determination of Critical Circumstances, 81 FR 13327 (March 14, 2016) (PET Resin from India Final Determination) and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment 14.

    With respect to Turkey, in the Petitions,16 the petitioners calculated two margins. Consistent with our practice, we preliminarily assigned as the “all-others” rate in the investigation covering CTL plate from Turkey the simple average of the two dumping margins calculated for subject merchandise from Turkey provided in the Petitions, which is 42.02 percent.17

    16See the Petitions at Volume XII.

    17Id.; PET Resin from India Final Determination at Comment 14.

    Preliminary Determinations

    The Department preliminarily determines that the following weighted-average dumping margins exist:

    Exporter/producer Weighted
  • average
  • margin
  • (percent)
  • Brazil Companhia Siderurgica Nacional 74.52 Usinas Siderurgicas de Minas Gerais SA 74.52 All Others 74.52 South Africa Evraz Highveld Steel and Vanadium Corp 94.14 All Others 87.72 Turkey Ereğli Demir ve Çelik Fabrikalari T.A.Ş 50.00 All Others 42.02
    Suspension of Liquidation

    In accordance with section 733(d)(2) of the Act, we will direct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to suspend liquidation of all entries of CTL plate from Brazil, South Africa and Turkey, as described in the “Scope of the Investigations” in Appendix I, entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication of this notice in the Federal Register. Further, section 733(e)(2) of the Act provides that, given an affirmative determination of critical circumstances, any suspension of liquidation shall apply to unliquidated entries of merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the later of: (a) The date which is 90 days before the date on which the suspension of liquidation was first ordered; or (b) the date on which notice of initiation of the investigation was published. On September 7, 2016, we published our preliminarily determination that critical circumstances exist for imports from all producers and exporters of CTL plate from Brazil and Turkey. In accordance with 733(e)(2)(A), suspension of liquidation of CTL plate from Brazil and Turkey as described in the “Scope of the investigations” in Appendix I, shall apply to unliquidated entries of merchandise from all producers in Brazil and Turkey, that are entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date which is 90 days before the publication of this notice, the date suspension of liquidation is first ordered. At such time, we will also instruct CBP, pursuant to section 733 (d)(1)(B) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.205(d), to require a cash deposit equal to the margins indicated in the charts above.18 These suspension of liquidation instructions will remain in effect until further notice.

    18See Modification of Regulations Regarding the Practice of Accepting Bonds During the Provisional Measures Period in Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Investigations, 76 FR 61042 (October 3, 2011).

    Verification

    Because the mandatory respondents in these investigations did not provide the information requested, the Department will not conduct verifications.

    Disclosure

    Normally, the Department discloses to interested parties the calculations performed in connection with a preliminary determination within five days after public announcement of the preliminary determination in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b). Because the Department preliminarily applied AFA to each of the mandatory respondents in these investigations, in accordance with section 776 of the Act, there are no calculations to disclose.

    Public Comment

    Interested parties are invited to comment on these preliminary determinations no later than 30 days after the date of publication of these preliminary determinations.19 Rebuttal briefs, limited to issues raised in case briefs, may be submitted no later than five days after the deadline date for case briefs.20 Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.309(c)(2) and (d)(2), parties who submit case briefs or rebuttal briefs in these proceedings are encouraged to submit with each argument: (1) A statement of the issue; (2) a brief summary of the argument; and (3) a table of authorities.

    19See 19 CFR 351.309(c)(1)(i); see also 19 CFR 351.303 (for general filing requirements).

    20See 19 CFR 351.309(d); see also 19 CFR 351.303 (for general filing requirements).

    In its Preliminary Scope Decision Memorandum, the Department established separate deadlines for interested parties to provide comments on scope issues.21 Specifically, case briefs on scope issues may be submitted no later than 30 days after the publication of the preliminary countervailing duty determinations for CTL plate from China and Korea in the Federal Register. Rebuttal scope briefs, limited to issues raised in the scope case briefs, may be submitted no later than five days after the deadline for the scope case briefs. Parties should limit any comments on scope issues to their scope case brief and rebuttal scope brief.

    21See Preliminary Scope Decision Memorandum at page 15.

    Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.310(c), interested parties who wish to request a hearing, limited to issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs, must submit a written request to the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, U.S. Department of Commerce. All documents must be filed electronically using ACCESS. An electronically-filed request must be received successfully in its entirety by ACCESS by 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time, within 30 days after the date of publication of this notice.22 Requests should contain the party's name, address, and telephone number, the number of participants, and a list of the issues to be discussed. If a request for a hearing is made, the Department intends to hold the hearing at the U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230, at a time and date to be determined. Parties should confirm by telephone the date, time, and location of the hearing two days before the scheduled date.

    22See 19 CFR 351.310(c).

    U.S. International Trade Commission Notification

    In accordance with section 733(f) of the Act, we are notifying the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) of our affirmative preliminary determinations of sales at LTFV. If our final determinations are affirmative, the ITC will determine before the later of 120 days after the date of these preliminary determinations or 45 days after our final determinations whether these imports are materially injuring, or threaten material injury to, the U.S. industry.

    These determinations are issued and published in accordance with sections 733(f) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.205(c).

    Dated: September 15, 2016. Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. Appendix I Scope of the Investigations

    The products covered by these investigations are certain carbon and alloy steel hot-rolled or forged flat plate products not in coils, whether or not painted, varnished, or coated with plastics or other non-metallic substances (cut-to-length plate). Subject merchandise includes plate that is produced by being cut-to-length from coils or from other discrete length plate and plate that is rolled or forged into a discrete length. The products covered include (1) Universal mill plates (i.e., flat-rolled products rolled on four faces or in a closed box pass, of a width exceeding 150 mm but not exceeding 1250 mm, and of a thickness of not less than 4 mm, which are not in coils and without patterns in relief), and (2) hot-rolled or forged flat steel products of a thickness of 4.75 mm or more and of a width which exceeds 150 mm and measures at least twice the thickness, and which are not in coils, whether or not with patterns in relief. The covered products described above may be rectangular, square, circular or other shapes and include products of either rectangular or non-rectangular cross-section where such non-rectangular cross-section is achieved subsequent to the rolling process, i.e., products which have been “worked after rolling”, (e.g., products which have been beveled or rounded at the edges).

    For purposes of the width and thickness requirements referenced above, the following rules apply:

    (1) Except where otherwise stated where the nominal and actual thickness or width measurements vary, a product from a given subject country is within the scope if application of either the nominal or actual measurement would place it within the scope based on the definitions set forth above unless the product is already covered by an order existing on that specific country (e.g., orders on hot-rolled flat-rolled steel); and

    (2) where the width and thickness vary for a specific product (e.g., the thickness of certain products with non-rectangular cross-section, the width of certain products with non-rectangular shape, etc.), the measurement at its greatest width or thickness applies.

    Steel products included in the scope of these investigations are products in which: (1) Iron predominates, by weight, over each of the other contained elements; and (2) the carbon content is 2 percent or less by weight.

    Subject merchandise includes cut-to-length plate that has been further processed in the subject country or a third country, including but not limited to pickling, oiling, levelling, annealing, tempering, temper rolling, skin passing, painting, varnishing, trimming, cutting, punching, beveling, and/or slitting, or any other processing that would not otherwise remove the merchandise from the scope of these investigations if performed in the country of manufacture of the cut-to-length plate.

    All products that meet the written physical description, are within the scope of these investigations unless specifically excluded or covered by the scope of an existing order. The following products are outside of, and/or specifically excluded from, the scope of these investigations:

    (1) Products clad, plated, or coated with metal, whether or not painted, varnished or coated with plastic or other non-metallic substances;

    (2) military grade armor plate certified to one of the following specifications or to a specification that references and incorporates one of the following specifications:

    • MIL-A-12560,

    • MIL-DTL-12560H,

    • MIL-DTL-12560J,

    • MIL-DTL-12560K,

    • MIL-DTL-32332,

    • MIL-A-46100D,

    • MIL-DTL-46100-E,

    • MIL-46177C,

    • MIL-S-16216K Grade HY80,

    • MIL-S-16216K Grade HY100,

    • MIL-S-24645A HSLA-80;

    • MIL-S-24645A HSLA-100,

    • T9074-BD-GIB-010/0300 Grade HY80,

    • T9074-BD-GIB-010/0300 Grade HY100,

    • T9074-BD-GIB-010/0300 Grade HSLA80,

    • T9074-BD-GIB-010/0300 Grade HSLA100, and

    • T9074-BD-GIB-010/0300 Mod. Grade HSLA115, except that any cut-to-length plate certified to one of the above specifications, or to a military grade armor specification that references and incorporates one of the above specifications, will not be excluded from the scope if it is also dual- or multiple-certified to any other non-armor specification that otherwise would fall within the scope of this order;

    (3) stainless steel plate, containing 10.5 percent or more of chromium by weight and not more than 1.2 percent of carbon by weight;

    (4) CTL plate meeting the requirements of ASTM A-829, Grade E 4340 that are over 305 mm in actual thickness;

    (5) Alloy forged and rolled CTL plate greater than or equal to 152.4 mm in actual thickness meeting each of the following requirements:

    (a) Electric furnace melted, ladle refined & vacuum degassed and having a chemical composition (expressed in weight percentages):

    • Carbon 0.23-0.28,

    • Silicon 0.05-0.20,

    • Manganese 1.20-1.60,

    • Nickel not greater than 1.0,

    • Sulfur not greater than 0.007,

    • Phosphorus not greater than 0.020,

    • Chromium 1.0-2.5,

    • Molybdenum 0.35-0.80,

    • Boron 0.002-0.004,

    • Oxygen not greater than 20 ppm,

    • Hydrogen not greater than 2 ppm, and

    • Nitrogen not greater than 60 ppm;

    (b) With a Brinell hardness measured in all parts of the product including mid thickness falling within one of the following ranges:

    (i) 270-300 HBW,

    (ii) 290-320 HBW, or

    (iii) 320-350HBW;

    (c) Having cleanliness in accordance with ASTM E45 method A (Thin and Heavy): A not exceeding 1.5, B not exceeding 1.0, C not exceeding 0.5, D not exceeding 1.5; and

    (d) Conforming to ASTM A578-S9 ultrasonic testing requirements with acceptance criteria 2 mm flat bottom hole;

    (6) Alloy forged and rolled steel CTL plate over 407 mm in actual thickness and meeting the following requirements:

    (a) Made from Electric Arc Furnace melted, Ladle refined & vacuum degassed, alloy steel with the following chemical composition (expressed in weight percentages):

    • Carbon 0.23-0.28,

    • Silicon 0.05-0.15,

    • Manganese 1.20-1.50,

    • Nickel not greater than 0.4,

    • Sulfur not greater than 0.010,

    • Phosphorus not greater than 0.020,

    • Chromium 1.20-1.50,

    • Molybdenum 0.35-0.55,

    • Boron 0.002-0.004,

    • Oxygen not greater than 20 ppm,

    • Hydrogen not greater than 2 ppm, and

    • Nitrogen not greater than 60 ppm;

    (b) Having cleanliness in accordance with ASTM E45 method A (Thin and Heavy): A not exceeding 1.5, B not exceeding 1.5, C not exceeding 1.0, D not exceeding 1.5;

    (c) Having the following mechanical properties:

    (i) With a Brinell hardness not more than 237 HBW measured in all parts of the product including mid thickness; and having a Yield Strength of 75ksi min and UTS 95ksi or more, Elongation of 18% or more and Reduction of area 35% or more; having charpy V at −75 degrees F in the longitudinal direction equal or greater than 15 ft. lbs (single value) and equal or greater than 20 ft. lbs (average of 3 specimens) and conforming to the requirements of NACE MR01-75; or

    (ii) With a Brinell hardness not less than 240 HBW measured in all parts of the product including mid thickness; and having a Yield Strength of 90 ksi min and UTS 110 ksi or more, Elongation of 15% or more and Reduction of area 30% or more; having charpy V at −40 degrees F in the longitudinal direction equal or greater than 21 ft. lbs (single value) and equal or greater than 31 ft. lbs (average of 3 specimens);

    (d) Conforming to ASTM A578-S9 ultrasonic testing requirements with acceptance criteria 3.2 mm flat bottom hole; and

    (e) Conforming to magnetic particle inspection in accordance with AMS 2301;

    (7) Alloy forged and rolled steel CTL plate over 407 mm in actual thickness and meeting the following requirements:

    (a) Made from Electric Arc Furnace melted, ladle refined & vacuum degassed, alloy steel with the following chemical composition (expressed in weight percentages):

    • Carbon 0.25-0.30,

    • Silicon not greater than 0.25,

    • Manganese not greater than 0.50,

    • Nickel 3.0-3.5,

    • Sulfur not greater than 0.010,

    • Phosphorus not greater than 0.020,

    • Chromium 1.0-1.5,

    • Molybdenum 0.6-0.9,

    • Vanadium 0.08 to 0.12

    • Boron 0.002-0.004,

    • Oxygen not greater than 20 ppm,

    • Hydrogen not greater than 2 ppm, and

    • Nitrogen not greater than 60 ppm.

    (b) Having cleanliness in accordance with ASTM E45 method A (Thin and Heavy): A not exceeding 1.0(t) and 0.5(h), B not exceeding 1.5(t) and 1.0(h), C not exceeding 1.0(t) and 0.5(h), and D not exceeding 1.5(t) and 1.0(h);

    (c) Having the following mechanical properties: A Brinell hardness not less than 350 HBW measured in all parts of the product including mid thickness; and having a Yield Strength of 145ksi or more and UTS 160ksi or more, Elongation of 15% or more and Reduction of area 35% or more; having charpy V at −40 degrees F in the transverse direction equal or greater than 20 ft. lbs (single value) and equal or greater than 25 ft. lbs (average of 3 specimens);

    (d) Conforming to ASTM A578-S9 ultrasonic testing requirements with acceptance criteria 3.2 mm flat bottom hole; and

    (e) Conforming to magnetic particle inspection in accordance with AMS 2301.

    The products subject to these investigations are currently classified in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) under item numbers: 7208.40.3030, 7208.40.3060, 7208.51.0030, 7208.51.0045, 7208.51.0060, 7208.52.0000, 7211.13.0000, 7211.14.0030, 7211.14.0045, 7225.40.1110, 7225.40.1180, 7225.40.3005, 7225.40.3050, 7226.20.0000, and 7226.91.5000.

    The products subject to these investigations may also enter under the following HTSUS item numbers: 7208.40.6060, 7208.53.0000, 7208.90.0000, 7210.70.3000, 7210.90.9000, 7211.19.1500, 7211.19.2000, 7211.19.4500, 7211.19.6000, 7211.19.7590, 7211.90.0000, 7212.40.1000, 7212.40.5000, 7212.50.0000, 7214.10.0000, 7214.30.0010, 7214.30.0080, 7214.91.0015, 7214.91.0060, 7214.91.0090, 7225.11.0000, 7225.19.0000, 7225.40.5110, 7225.40.5130, 7225.40.5160, 7225.40.7000, 7225.99.0010, 7225.99.0090, 7226.11.1000, 7226.11.9060, 7226.19.1000, 7226.19.9000, 7226.91.0500, 7226.91.1530, 7226.91.1560, 7226.91.2530, 7226.91.2560, 7226.91.7000, 7226.91.8000, and 7226.99.0180.

    The HTSUS subheadings above are provided for convenience and customs purposes only. The written description of the scope of these investigations is dispositive.

    Appendix II List of Topics Discussed in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum I. Summary II. Background III. Period of Investigations IV. Scope of the Investigations V. Scope Comments VI. Application of Facts Available and Use of Adverse Inference, and Calculation of All-Others Rate VII. Critical Circumstances VIII. Verification IX. Conclusion
    [FR Doc. 2016-22885 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-570-952; A-583-844; C-570-953] Narrow Woven Ribbons With Woven Selvedge From the People's Republic of China and Taiwan: Continuation of Antidumping Duty Orders and Countervailing Duty Order AGENCY:

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

    SUMMARY:

    As a result of the determinations by the Department of Commerce (the “Department”) and the International Trade Commission (the “ITC”) that revocation of the antidumping duty (“AD”) orders on narrow woven ribbons with woven selvedge (“NWRs”) from the People's Republic of China (“PRC”) and Taiwan and the countervailing duty (“CVD”) order on NWRs from the PRC would likely lead to a continuation or recurrence of dumping and countervailable subsidies and material injury to an industry in the United States, the Department is publishing this notice of continuation of the AD orders and the CVD order.

    DATES:

    Effective September 22, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Robert Galantucci (202-482-2923) or Toby Vandall (202-482-1664), AD/CVD Operations, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background

    On August 3, 2015, the Department initiated 1 and the ITC instituted 2 five-year (sunset) reviews of the AD orders on NWRs from the PRC and Taiwan, and the CVD order on NWRs from the PRC, pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (“the Act”). The Department conducted expedited sunset reviews of these orders. As a result of its reviews, the Department determined that revocation of the AD orders on NWRs from the PRC and Taiwan would likely lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping, and that revocation of the CVD order would likely lead to continuation or recurrence of countervailable subsidies.3 The Department, therefore, notified the ITC of the magnitude of the dumping margins and net countervailable subsidy rates likely to prevail should the AD orders and the CVD order be revoked.4 On September 15, 2016, the ITC published its determination, pursuant to sections 751(c) and 752 of the Act, that revocation of the AD orders on NWRs from the PRC and Taiwan, and the CVD order on NWRs from the PRC, would likely lead to continuation or recurrence of material injury to an industry in the United States within a reasonably foreseeable time.5

    1See Initiation of Five-Year (“Sunset”) Review, 80 FR 45945 (August 3, 2015).

    2See Narrow Woven Ribbons With Woven Selvedge From China and Taiwan; Institution of Five-Year Reviews, 80 FR 46048 (August 3, 2015).

    3See Narrow Woven Ribbons With Woven Selvedge From the People's Republic of China and Taiwan: Final Results of the Expedited Sunset Reviews of the Antidumping Duty Orders, 80 FR 76266 (December 8, 2015); Narrow Woven Ribbons With Woven Selvedge From the People's Republic of China: Final Results of Expedited Sunset Review of the Countervailing Duty Order, 80 FR 75967 (December 7, 2015).

    4Id.

    5See Narrow Woven Ribbons With Woven Selvedge From China and Taiwan, 81 FR 63494 (September 15, 2016).

    Scope of the Orders

    The merchandise covered by the scope of the orders is narrow woven ribbons with woven selvedge, in any length, but with a width (measured at the narrowest span of the ribbon) less than or equal to 12 centimeters, composed of, in whole or in part, man-made fibers (whether artificial or synthetic, including but not limited to nylon, polyester, rayon, polypropylene, and polyethylene teraphthalate), metal threads and/or metalized yarns, or any combination thereof. Narrow woven ribbons subject to the orders may:

    • Also include natural or other non-man-made fibers;

    • be of any color, style, pattern, or weave construction, including but not limited to single-faced satin, double-faced satin, grosgrain, sheer, taffeta, twill, jacquard, or a combination of two or more colors, styles, patterns, and/or weave constructions;

    • have been subjected to, or composed of materials that have been subjected to, various treatments, including but not limited to dyeing, printing, foil stamping, embossing, flocking, coating, and/or sizing;

    • have embellishments, including but not limited to appliqué, fringes, embroidery, buttons, glitter, sequins, laminates, and/or adhesive backing;

    • have wire and/or monofilament in, on, or along the longitudinal edges of the ribbon;

    • have ends of any shape or dimension, including but not limited to straight ends that are perpendicular to the longitudinal edges of the ribbon, tapered ends, flared ends or shaped ends, and the ends of such woven ribbons may or may not be hemmed;

    • have longitudinal edges that are straight or of any shape, and the longitudinal edges of such woven ribbon may or may not be parallel to each other;

    • consist of such ribbons affixed to like ribbon and/or cut-edge woven ribbon, a configuration also known as an “ornamental trimming;”

    • be wound on spools; attached to a card; hanked (i.e., coiled or bundled); packaged in boxes, trays or bags; or configured as skeins, balls, bateaus or folds; and/or

    • be included within a kit or set such as when packaged with other products, including but not limited to gift bags, gift boxes and/or other types of ribbon.

    Narrow woven ribbons with woven selvedge subject to the orders include all narrow woven fabrics, tapes, and labels that fall within this written description of the scope of the AD orders. Excluded from the scope of the orders are the following:

    (1) Formed bows composed of narrow woven ribbons with woven selvedge;

    (2) “pull-bows” (i.e., an assemblage of ribbons connected to one another, folded flat and equipped with a means to form such ribbons into the shape of a bow by pulling on a length of material affixed to such assemblage) composed of narrow woven ribbons;

    (3) narrow woven ribbons comprised at least 20 percent by weight of elastomeric yarn (i.e., filament yarn, including monofilament, of synthetic textile material, other than textured yarn, which does not break on being extended to three times its original length and which returns, after being extended to twice its original length, within a period of five minutes, to a length not greater than one and a half times its original length as defined in the (HTSUS, Section XI, Note 13) or rubber thread;

    (4) narrow woven ribbons of a kind used for the manufacture of typewriter or printer ribbons;

    (5) narrow woven labels and apparel tapes, cut-to-length or cut-to-shape, having a length (when measured across the longest edge-to-edge span) not exceeding eight centimeters;

    (6) narrow woven ribbons with woven selvedge attached to and forming the handle of a gift bag;

    (7) cut-edge narrow woven ribbons formed by cutting broad woven fabric into strips of ribbon, with or without treatments to prevent the longitudinal edges of the ribbon from fraying (such as by merrowing, lamination, sono-bonding, fusing, gumming or waxing), and with or without wire running lengthwise along the longitudinal edges of the ribbon;

    (8) narrow woven ribbons comprised at least 85 percent by weight of threads having a denier of 225 or higher;

    (9) narrow woven ribbons constructed from pile fabrics (i.e., fabrics with a surface effect formed by tufts or loops of yarn that stand up from the body of the fabric);

    (10) narrow woven ribbon affixed (including by tying) as a decorative detail to non-subject merchandise, such as a gift bag, gift box, gift tin, greeting card or plush toy, or affixed (including by tying) as a decorative detail to packaging containing non-subject merchandise;

    (11) narrow woven ribbon that is (a) affixed to non-subject merchandise as a working component of such non-subject merchandise, such as where narrow woven ribbon comprises an apparel trimming, book marker, bag cinch, or part of an identity card holder, or (b) affixed (including by tying) to non-subject merchandise as a working component that holds or packages such non-subject merchandise or attaches packaging or labeling to such non-subject merchandise, such as a “belly band” around a pair of pajamas, a pair of socks or a blanket;

    (12) narrow woven ribbon(s) comprising a belt attached to and imported with an item of wearing apparel, whether or not such belt is removable from such item of wearing apparel; and

    (13) narrow woven ribbon(s) included with non-subject merchandise in kits, such as a holiday ornament craft kit or a scrapbook kit, in which the individual lengths of narrow woven ribbon(s) included in the kit are each no greater than eight inches, the aggregate amount of narrow woven ribbon(s) included in the kit does not exceed 48 linear inches, none of the narrow woven ribbon(s) included in the kit is on a spool, and the narrow woven ribbon(s) is only one of multiple items included in the kit.

    The merchandise subject to the orders is classifiable under the HTSUS statistical categories 5806.32.1020; 5806.32.1030; 5806.32.1050 and 5806.32.1060. Subject merchandise also may enter under subheadings 5806.31.00; 5806.32.20; 5806.39.20; 5806.39.30; 5808.90.00; 5810.91.00; 5810.99.90; 5903.90.10; 5903.90.25; 5907.00.60; and 5907.00.80 and under statistical categories 5806.32.1080; 5810.92.9080; 5903.90.3090; and 6307.90.9889. The HTSUS statistical categories and subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes; however, the written description of the merchandise covered by the orders is dispositive.

    Continuation of the Orders

    As a result of the determinations by the Department and the ITC that revocation of the AD and CVD orders would likely lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping and countervailable subsidies and material injury to an industry in the United States, pursuant to section 751(d)(2) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.218(a), the Department hereby orders the continuation of the AD orders on NWRs from the PRC and Taiwan and the CVD order on NWRs from the PRC. United States Customs and Border Protection will continue to collect AD and CVD cash deposits at the rates in effect at the time of entry for all imports of subject merchandise.

    The effective date of the continuation of the orders will be the date of publication in the Federal Register of this notice of continuation. Pursuant to section 751(c)(2) of the Act, the Department intends to initiate the next five-year reviews of the orders not later than 30 days prior to the fifth anniversary of the effective date of continuation of the orders.

    These five-year sunset reviews and this notice are in accordance with section 751(c) of the Act and published pursuant to section 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.218(f)(4).

    Dated: September 15, 2016. Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22888 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-580-839] Certain Polyester Staple Fiber From the Republic of Korea: Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2015-2016 AGENCY:

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

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Commerce is rescinding the administrative review of the antidumping duty order on certain polyester staple fiber from the Republic of Korea, based on the timely withdrawal of requests for review. The period of review is May 1, 2015, through April 30, 2016.

    DATES:

    Effective: September 22, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Sergio Balbontin at (202) 482-6478, AD/CVD Operations, Office I, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background

    On May 2, 2016, the Department of Commerce (the Department) published a notice of opportunity to request an administrative review of the antidumping duty order on certain polyester staple fiber (PSF) from the Republic of Korea (Korea) for the period of review (POR) of May 1, 2015, through April 30, 2016 in the Federal Register.1 On May 31, 2016, the Department received timely-filed requests from DAK Americas LLC and Auriga Polymers (the petitioners), and Huvis Corporation (Huvis), in accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(b), for an administrative review of Huvis.2 On July 7, 2016, pursuant to these requests and in accordance with 19 CFR 351.221(c)(1)(i), the Department published a notice of initiation of an administrative review of Huvis.3 On July 12, 2016, and July 26, 2016, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), the petitioners and Huvis, respectively, timely withdrew their requests for an administrative review.4

    1See Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Order, Finding, or Suspended Investigation; Opportunity To Request Administrative Review, 81 FR 26206 (May 2, 2016).

    2See Letters from the petitioners, “Polyester Staple Fiber from Korea,” and Huvis, “Certain Polyester Staple Fiber from Korea; Request for Administrative Review for 2015-2016 Period,” both dated May 31, 2016. The petitioners also requested a review of Toray Chemical Korea, Inc. (Toray); because the petitioners withdrew this request before the initiation notice was published, and there were no other requests for a review of Toray, the Department did not initiate a review of Toray. See Letter from the petitioners, “Certain Polyester Staple Fiber from Korea; Withdrawal of Review Request for Toray Chemical Korea,” dated June 27, 2016.

    3See Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews, 81 FR 44260 (July 7, 2016) (Initiation Notice).

    4See Letter from the petitioners, “Polyester Staple Fiber From Korea—Withdrawal of Review Request,” dated July 12, 2016, and letter from Huvis, “Certain Polyester Staple Fiber from Korea; Withdrawal of Review Request for 2015-2016 Period,” dated July 26, 2016.

    Rescission of Review

    Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(l), the Department will rescind an administrative review, in whole or in part, if the party, or parties, that requested a review withdraw the request/s within 90 days of the publication date of the notice of initiation of the requested review. As noted above, the petitioner withdrew its request for review of Huvis within 90 days of the publication date of the notice of initiation. In addition, Huvis also timely withdrew its request for an administrative review. No other parties requested an administrative review of the antidumping duty order on certain polyester staple fiber from the Republic of Korea. Therefore, in response to the timely withdrawal of requests for review and in accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(d)(l), the Department is rescinding this review.

    Assessment

    The Department will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to assess antidumping duties on all appropriate entries of PSF from Korea during the POR. Antidumping duties shall be assessed at rates equal to the cash deposit of estimated antidumping duties required at the time of entry, or withdrawal from warehouse, for consumption in accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(c)(l)(i). The Department intends to issue appropriate assessment instructions to CBP 15 days after publication of this notice in the Federal Register.

    Notification To Importers

    This notice serves as a final reminder to importers of their responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate regarding the reimbursement of antidumping duties prior to liquidation of the relevant entries during this review period. Failure to comply with this requirement could result in the presumption that reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of double antidumping duties.

    Notification Regarding Administrative Protective Order

    This notice also serves as a final reminder to parties subject to administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information disclosed under an APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely written notification of the return or destruction of APO materials, or conversion to judicial protective order, is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation.

    This notice is issued and published in accordance with sections 751(a)(l) and 777(i)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, and 19 CFR 351.213(d)(4).

    Dated: September 16, 2016. Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22886 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Office of the Secretary [Docket ID: DOD-2016-OS-0092] Privacy Act of 1974; System of Records AGENCY:

    Office of the Secretary of Defense, DoD.

    ACTION:

    Notice to add a System of Records.

    SUMMARY:

    Pursuant to the Privacy Act of 1974, 5 U.S.C. 552a, and Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular No. A-130, notice is hereby given that the Office of the Secretary of Defense proposes to add a new system of records, DSCA 07, entitled “Security Assistance Network (SAN).” The SAN is the international security cooperation (SC) database and communications network that provides the Security Cooperation Offices (SCOs) and others in the SC community access to SC financial and logistics management systems, information via various bulletin boards, and a library system for large files. The SAN provides the primary interface for the input and output of data from all military departments, SCOs, and International Military Student Offices (IMSOs). Most importantly, the SAN is where the SCO training manager obtains data used for the Security Cooperation Training Management System (SC-TMS). All SCOs and IMSOs must use the SAN and its components to perform their assigned SC training management functions.

    DATES:

    Comments will be accepted on or before October 24, 2016. This proposed action will be effective the day following the end of the comment period unless comments are received which result in a contrary determination.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments, identified by docket number and title, by any of the following methods:

    * Federal Rulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.

    * Mail: Department of Defense, Office of the Deputy Chief Management Officer, Directorate of Oversight and Compliance, 4800 Mark Center Drive, Mailbox #24, Alexandria, VA 22350-1700.

    Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name and docket number for this Federal Register document. The general policy for comments and other submissions from members of the public is to make these submissions available for public viewing on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov as they are received without change, including any personal identifiers or contact information.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Mrs. Luz D. Ortiz, Chief, Records, Privacy and Declassification Division (RPD2), 1155 Defense Pentagon, Washington, DC 20301-1155, or by phone at (571) 372-0478.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Office of the Secretary of Defense notices for systems of records subject to the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended, have been published in the Federal Register and are available from the address in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT or at the Defense Privacy, Civil Liberties, and Transparency Division Web site http://dpcld.defense.gov/. The proposed system report, as required by 5 U.S.C. 552a(r) of the Privacy Act of 1974, as amended, was submitted on September 2, 2016, to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, the Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs, and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) pursuant to paragraph 4c of Appendix I to OMB Circular No. A-130, “Federal Agency Responsibilities for Maintaining Records About Individuals,” revised November 28, 2000 (December 12, 2000 65 FR 77677).

    Dated: September 16, 2016. Aaron Siegel, Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense. DSCA 07 System name:

    Security Assistance Network (SAN)

    System location:

    Institute for Defense Analysis (IDA), 4850 Mark Center Drive, Alexandria, VA 22311-1882.

    Categories of individuals covered by the system:

    DoD civilian, military, contractor personnel (collectively, “U.S. personnel”), and individuals with dual citizenship with the U.S., selected to attend DoD security cooperation training (collectively, “students”).

    Categories of records in the system:

    Security Cooperation Training Management System (SC-TMS): U.S. Personnel Data: Name, organization, office telephone and fax numbers, point of contact function, and military rank.

    Student Data: Full name and alias, full face photograph, gender, citizenship, nationality, date and place of birth, physical descriptions, email addresses, work and home addresses, work and home telephone numbers, marital status, military rank and date of rank, branch of military service, worksheet and student control numbers, clearance, passport and visa information, health information, lodging and travel information, emergency contact(s), language capabilities, educational and employment information, academic evaluation, religious affiliation, personal preferences (i.e., dietary needs, religious accommodations, customs and traditions), activity remarks, and dependency data (if accompanied).

    Security Cooperation Workforce Database (SCWD):

    U.S. Personnel Data: Name, DoD Identification Number (DoD ID Number), military rank, position number, source and title, funding source, billet category, headquarters, current service, organization, country, state, rotate date, minimal training, and level of training.

    International Affairs Certification Database (IACD):

    U.S. Personnel Data: Full name, personal or work email address, mailing address, telephone and fax number, major command and work mailing address, name of organization, office symbol/code, job title, job function, grade/rank, job series, military specialty, start date, total months in International Affairs related work, billet information, current certification level, highest education completed, and field of study. Supervisor information that consists of the first and last name, work email address, organization, office symbol, work phone, and fax number.

    Authority for maintenance of the system:

    10 U.S.C. 134, Under Secretary of Defense for Policy; 22 U.S.C. 39, Arms Export Control Act, Chapters 32 and Chapter 39; DoD Directive (DoDD) 5105.65, Defense Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA); DoDD 5101.1, DoD Executive Agent; DoDD 5132.03, DoD Policy and Responsibilities Relating to Security Cooperation; Army Regulation 12-15, Secretary of the Navy Instruction 4950.4B/Air Force Instruction 16-105, Joint Security Cooperation Education and Training; and DSCA Manual 5105.38-M, Security Assistance Management Manual (SAMM), Chapter 10, International Training.

    Purpose(s):

    The SAN is a network used to exchange Security Cooperation personnel management, training, and budget information between overseas Security Cooperation Offices, Geographical Combatant Commands, Military Departments, Defense Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA), Defense Finance and Accounting Services (DFAS), DoD Schoolhouses, Regional Centers, and international host nation organizations.

    The SAN hosts the Security Cooperation Training Management System (SC-TMS) which are tools used by the Security Cooperation community to manage student training data, including the Security Cooperation Workforce Database (SCWD) and International Affairs Certification Database (IACD) which tracks and provides the status of training for the Security Cooperation workforce certification levels.

    In addition, the SAN hosts the Security Assistance Automated Resource Management Suite and the Security Cooperation International Resource Management System, both of which are budget programs that do not collect personally identifiable information (PII).

    Routine uses of records maintained in the system, including categories of users and the purposes of such uses:

    In addition to those disclosures generally permitted under 5 U.S.C. 552a(b) of the Privacy Act of 1974, as amended, the records contained herein may specifically be disclosed outside the DoD as a routine use pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(b)(3) as follows to:

    Law Enforcement Routine Use: If a system of records maintained by a DoD Component to carry out its functions indicates a violation or potential violation of law, whether civil, criminal, or regulatory in nature, and whether arising by general statute or by regulation, rule, or order issued pursuant thereto, the relevant records in the system of records may be referred, as a routine use, to the agency concerned, whether federal, state, local, or foreign, charged with the responsibility of investigating or prosecuting such violation or charged with enforcing or implementing the statute, rule, regulation, or order issued pursuant thereto.

    Congressional Inquiries Disclosure Routine Use: Disclosure from a system of records maintained by a DoD Component may be made to a congressional office from the record of an individual in response to an inquiry from the congressional office made at the request of that individual.

    Disclosures Required by International Agreements Routine Use: A record from a system of records maintained by a DoD Component may be disclosed to foreign law enforcement, security, investigatory, or administrative authorities to comply with requirements imposed by, or to claim rights conferred in, international agreements and arrangements including those regulating the stationing and status in foreign countries of DoD military and civilian personnel.

    Disclosure to the Department of Justice for Litigation Routine Use: A record from a system of records maintained by a DoD Component may be disclosed as a routine use to any component of the Department of Justice for the purpose of representing the Department of Defense, or any officer, employee or member of the Department in pending or potential litigation to which the record is pertinent.

    Disclosure of Information to the National Archives and Records Administration Routine Use: A record from a system of records maintained by a DoD Component may be disclosed as a routine use to the National Archives and Records Administration for the purpose of records management inspections conducted under authority of 44 U.S.C. 2904 and 2906.

    Data Breach Remediation Purposes Routine Use: A record from a system of records maintained by a Component may be disclosed to appropriate agencies, entities, and persons when (1) The Component suspects or has confirmed that the security or confidentiality of the information in the system of records has been compromised; (2) the Component has determined that as a result of the suspected or confirmed compromise there is a risk of harm to economic or property interests, identity theft or fraud, or harm to the security or integrity of this system or other systems or programs (whether maintained by the Component or another agency or entity) that rely upon the compromised information; and (3) the disclosure made to such agencies, entities, and persons is reasonably necessary to assist in connection with the Components efforts to respond to the suspected or confirmed compromise and prevent, minimize, or remedy such harm.

    Policies and Practices for Storing, Retrieving, Accessing, Retaining, and Disposing of Records in the System: Storage:

    Paper records and electronic storage media.

    Retrievability:

    Individual's name, DoD Identification Number, Worksheet Control Number, or Student Control Number.

    Safeguards:

    Records are maintained in a controlled facility. Physical entry is restricted by the use of locks, and is accessible only to authorized personnel. Access to records is limited to person(s) responsible for servicing the record in performance of their official duties and who are properly screened and cleared for need-to-know. Access to computerized data is restricted by centralized access control to include the use of CAC, passwords, file permissions, and audit logs.

    Retention and disposal:

    Destroy five years after completion of a specific training program, after period covered by account, from last activity or when superseded or obsolete, whichever is sooner.

    System manager(s) and address:

    SAN System Administrator, Defense Institute of Security Management, 2475 K. Street, Bldg. 52, Wright-Patterson AFB, OH 45433-7641.

    Notification procedure:

    Individuals seeking to determine whether information about themselves is contained in this system of records should address written inquiries to Defense Institute of Security Management, ATTN: Director of International Studies or Director of Research, 2475 K Street, Wright-Patterson AFB, OH 45433-7641.

    Signed, written requests should include the full name, DoD ID Number (if applicable), current address and telephone number, and the name and number of this system of records notice.

    In addition, the requester must provide a notarized statement or an unsworn declaration made in accordance with 28 U.S.C. 1746, in the following format:

    If executed outside the United States: “I declare (or certify, verify, or state) under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on (date). (Signature).”

    If executed within the United States, its territories, possessions, or commonwealths: “I declare (or certify, verify, or state) under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on (date). (Signature).”

    Record access procedures:

    Individuals seeking access to records about themselves contained in this system should address written inquiries to the Office of the Secretary of Defense/Joint Staff, Freedom of Information Act Requester Services, 1155 Defense Pentagon, Washington, DC 20301-1155.

    Signed, written requests should include the full name, DoD ID number (if applicable), current address and telephone number, and the name and number of this system of records notice.

    In addition, the requester must provide a notarized statement or an unsworn declaration made in accordance with 28 U.S.C. 1746, in the following format:

    If executed outside the United States: “I declare (or certify, verify, or state) under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on (date). (Signature).”

    If executed within the United States, its territories, possessions, or commonwealths: “I declare (or certify, verify, or state) under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on (date). (Signature).”

    Contesting record procedures:

    The OSD rules for accessing records, for contesting contents and appealing initial agency determinations are published in OSD Administrative Instruction 81; 32 CFR part 311; or may be obtained from the system manager.

    Record source categories:

    Individual or service organization.

    Exemptions claimed for the system:

    None.

    [FR Doc. 2016-22807 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001-06-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Office of the Secretary Strategic Environmental Research and Development Program, Scientific Advisory Board; Notice of Federal Advisory Committee Meeting AGENCY:

    Department of Defense.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Defense is publishing this notice to announce an open meeting of the Strategic Environmental Research and Development Program, Scientific Advisory Board (SAB). This meeting will be open to the public.

    DATES:

    Wednesday, October 19, 2016, from 8:30 a.m. to 3:50 p.m.

    ADDRESSES:

    901 N. Stuart Street, Suite 200, Arlington, VA 22203.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Dr. Herb Nelson, SERDP Office, 4800 Mark Center Drive, Suite 17D08, Alexandria, VA 22350-3605; or by telephone at (571) 372-6565.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This meeting is being held under the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act of 1972 (5 U.S.C. Appendix, as amended), the Government in the Sunshine Act of 1976 (5 U.S.C. 552b, as amended), and 41 CFR 102-3.150. This notice is published in accordance with Section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463).

    Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552b and 41 CFR 102-3.140 through 102-3.165, and the availability of space, this meeting is open to the public. Seating is on a first-come basis.

    The purpose of the October 19, 2016 meeting is to review new start research and development projects requesting Strategic Environmental Research and Development Program funds as required by the SERDP Statute, U.S. Code—Title 10, Subtitle A, Part IV, Chapter 172, § 2904. The full agenda follows:

    BILLING CODE 5001-06-P EN22SE16.006

    Pursuant to 41 CFR 102-3.140, and section 10(a)(3) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act of 1972, the public or interested organizations may submit written statements to the Strategic Environmental Research and Development Program, Scientific Advisory Board. Written statements may be submitted to the committee at any time or in response to an approved meeting agenda.

    All written statements shall be submitted to the Designated Federal Officer (DFO) for the Strategic Environmental Research and Development Program, Scientific Advisory Board. The DFO will ensure that the written statements are provided to the membership for their consideration. Contact information for the DFO can be obtained from the GSA's FACA Database at http://www.facadatabase.gov/.

    Time is allotted at the close of each meeting day for the public to make comments. Oral comments are limited to 5 minutes per person.

    Dated: September 16, 2016. Aaron Siegel, Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22804 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001-06-C
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Office of the Secretary [Docket ID: DOD-2016-OS-0049] Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Defense has submitted to OMB for clearance, the following proposal for collection of information under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act.

    DATES:

    Consideration will be given to all comments received by October 24, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Fred Licari, 571-372-0493.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Title, Associated Form and OMB Number: DoD's Defense Industrial Base (DIB) Cybersecurity (CS) Activities Cyber Incident Reporting; OMB Control Number 0704-0489.

    Type of Request: Extension.

    Number of Respondents: 8,500.

    Responses per Respondent: 5.

    Annual Responses: 42,500.

    Average Burden per Response: 2 hours.

    Annual Burden Hours: 85,000.

    Needs and Uses: This information collection supports voluntary cyber incident reporting from DoD contractors to DoD in accordance with 32 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 236, “Department of Defense (DoD)—Defense Industrial Base (DIB) Cybersecurity (CS) Activities,” which authorizes the DIB CS program.

    Affected Public: Business or other for-profit and not for profit institutions.

    Frequency: On occasion.

    Respondent's Obligation: Voluntary.

    OMB Desk Officer: Ms. Jasmeet Seehra.

    Comments and recommendations on the proposed information collection should be emailed to Ms. Jasmeet Seehra, DoD Desk Officer, at [email protected] Please identify the proposed information collection by DoD Desk Officer and the Docket ID number and title of the information collection.

    You may also submit comments and recommendations, identified by Docket ID number and title, by the following method:

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

    Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name, Docket ID number and title for this Federal Register document. The general policy for comments and other submissions from members of the public is to make these submissions available for public viewing on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov as they are received without change, including any personal identifiers or contact information.

    DOD Clearance Officer: Mr. Frederick Licari.

    Written requests for copies of the information collection proposal should be sent to Mr. Licari at WHS/ESD Directives Division, 4800 Mark Center Drive, East Tower, Suite 02G09, Alexandria, VA 22350-3100.

    Dated: September 19, 2016. Aaron Siegel, Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22872 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001-06-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Office of the Secretary Strategic Environmental Research and Development Program, Scientific Advisory Board; Notice of Federal Advisory Committee Meeting AGENCY:

    Department of Defense.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Defense is publishing this notice to announce an open meeting of the Strategic Environmental Research and Development Program, Scientific Advisory Board (SAB). This meeting will be open to the public.

    DATES:

    Tuesday, October 18, 2016, from 8:30 a.m. to 4:35 p.m.

    ADDRESSES:

    901 N. Stuart Street Suite 200, Arlington, VA 22203.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Dr. Herb Nelson, SERDP Office, 4800 Mark Center Drive, Suite 17D08, Alexandria, VA 22350-3605; or by telephone at (571) 372-6565.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This meeting is being held under the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act of 1972 (5 U.S.C. Appendix, as amended), the Government in the Sunshine Act of 1976 (5 U.S.C. 552b, as amended), and 41 CFR 102-3.150. This notice is published in accordance with Section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463).

    Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552b and 41 CFR 102-3.140 through 102-3.165, and the availability of space, this meeting is open to the public. Seating is on a first-come basis.

    The purpose of the October 18, 2016 meeting is to review new start research and development projects requesting Strategic Environmental Research and Development Program funds as required by the SERDP Statute, U.S. Code—Title 10, Subtitle A, Part IV, Chapter 172, § 2904. The full agenda follows:

    BILLING CODE 5001-06-P EN22SE16.007

    Pursuant to 41 CFR 102-3.140, and section 10(a)(3) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act of 1972, the public or interested organizations may submit written statements to the Strategic Environmental Research and Development Program, Scientific Advisory Board. Written statements may be submitted to the committee at any time or in response to an approved meeting agenda.

    All written statements shall be submitted to the Designated Federal Officer (DFO) for the Strategic Environmental Research and Development Program, Scientific Advisory Board. The DFO will ensure that the written statements are provided to the membership for their consideration. Contact information for the DFO can be obtained from the GSA's FACA Database at http://www.facadatabase.gov/. Time is allotted at the close of each meeting day for the public to make comments. Oral comments are limited to 5 minutes per person.

    Dated: September 16, 2016. Aaron Siegel, Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22803 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001-06-C
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Methane Hydrate Advisory Committee; Meeting Notice AGENCY:

    Office of Fossil Energy, Department of Energy.

    ACTION:

    Notice of open meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice announces a meeting of the Methane Hydrate Advisory Committee. The Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 86 Stat. 770) requires that notice of these meetings be announced in the Federal Register.

    DATES:

    Wednesday, October 19, 2016; 8:45 a.m. to 9:30 a.m. (EDT)—Registration; 9:30 a.m. to 4:45 p.m. (EDT)—Meeting.

    ADDRESSES:

    U.S. Department of Energy, Forrestal Building, Room 3F-071, 1000 Independence Ave. SW., Washington, DC 20585.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Lou Capitanio, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Oil and Natural Gas, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585. Phone: (202) 586-5098.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Purpose of the Committee: The purpose of the Methane Hydrate Advisory Committee is to provide advice on potential applications of methane hydrate to the Secretary of Energy, and assist in developing recommendations and priorities for the Department of Energy's Methane Hydrate Research and Development Program.

    Tentative Agenda: The agenda will include: Welcome and Introduction by the Designated Federal Officer; Committee Business including election of Committee Chair; Review of Secretary's Energy Advisory Board Report on the Methane Hydrate Program; Update on Review of Methane Hydrate Program Activities and Plans; Methane Hydrate Program Budget; Methane Hydrate Program Strategic Direction; Major Project Review; International Activity; Advisory Committee Discussion; and Public Comments, if any.

    Public Participation: The meeting is open to the public. The Designated Federal Officer and the Chair of the Committee will conduct the meeting to facilitate the orderly conduct of business. If you would like to file a written statement with the Committee, you may do so either before or after the meeting. If you would like to make oral statements regarding any of the items on the agenda, you should contact Lou Capitanio at the phone number listed above. You must make your request for an oral statement at least five business days prior to the meeting, and reasonable provisions will be made to include the presentation on the agenda. Public comment will follow the three-minute rule.

    Minutes: The minutes of this meeting will be available for public review and copying within 60 days at the following Web site: http://energy.gov/fe/services/advisory-committees/methane-hydrate-advisory-committee.

    Issued at Washington, DC, on September 16, 2016. LaTanya R. Butler, Deputy Committee Management Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22869 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY DOE/NSF Nuclear Science Advisory Committee AGENCY:

    Office of Science, Department of Energy.

    ACTION:

    Notice of open meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice announces a meeting of the DOE/NSF Nuclear Science Advisory Committee (NSAC). The Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 86 Stat. 770) requires that public notice of these meetings be announced in the Federal Register.

    DATES:

    Friday, October 28, 2016; 8:30 a.m.-4:00 p.m.

    ADDRESSES:

    Hilton Washington DC/North Gaithersburg, 620 Perry Parkway, Gaithersburg, Maryland 20877, (301) 977-8900.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Brenda L. May, U.S. Department of Energy; SC-26/Germantown Building, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585-1290; Telephone: (301) 903-0536 or email: [email protected]

    The most current information concerning this meeting can be found on the Web site: http://science.gov/np/nsac/meetings/.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Purpose of the Board: The purpose of the Board is to provide advice and guidance on a continuing basis to the Department of Energy and the National Science Foundation on scientific priorities within the field of basic nuclear science research.

    Tentative Agenda: Agenda will include discussions of the following:

    Friday, October 28, 2016 • Update from the Department of Energy and National Science Foundation's Nuclear Physics Office's • Presentation of the Committee of Visitor's Report • Discussion on the Committee of Visitor's Report • Presentation of New Charge on Molybdenum-99 • Presentation of the NP SBIR/STTR Program Note:

    The NSAC Meeting will be broadcast live on the Internet. You may find out how to access this broadcast by going to the following site prior to the start of the meeting. A video record of the meeting including the presentations that are made will be archived at this site after the meeting ends: http://www.tvworldwide.com/events/DOE/161028.

    Public Participation: The meeting is open to the public. If you would like to file a written statement with the Committee, you may do so either before or after the meeting. If you would like to make oral statements regarding any of these items on the agenda, you should contact Brenda L. May, (301) 903-0536 or [email protected] (email). You must make your request for an oral statement at least five business days before the meeting. Reasonable provision will be made to include the scheduled oral statements on the agenda. The Chairperson of the Committee will conduct the meeting to facilitate the orderly conduct of business. Public comment will follow the 10-minute rule.

    The minutes of the meeting will be available for review on the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Nuclear Physics' Web site at: http://science.gov/np/nsac/meetings/.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on September 16, 2016. LaTanya R. Butler, Deputy Committee Management Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22871 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Oak Ridge Reservation AGENCY:

    Department of Energy.

    ACTION:

    Notice of open meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice announces a meeting of the Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board (EM SSAB), Oak Ridge Reservation. The Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 86 Stat. 770) requires that public notice of this meeting be announced in the Federal Register.

    DATES:

    Wednesday, October 12, 2016; 6:00 p.m.

    ADDRESSES:

    Department of Energy Information Center, Office of Science and Technical Information, 1 Science.gov Way, Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37831.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Melyssa P. Noe, Alternate Deputy Designated Federal Officer, U.S. Department of Energy, Oak Ridge Office of Environmental Management, P.O. Box 2001, EM-942, Oak Ridge, TN 37831. Phone (865) 241-3315; Fax (865) 241-6932; Email: [email protected] Or visit the Web site at www.energy.gov/orssab.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Purpose of the Board: The purpose of the Board is to make recommendations to DOE-EM and site management in the areas of environmental restoration, waste management, and related activities.

    Tentative Agenda • Welcome and Announcements • Comments from the Deputy Designated Federal Officer (DDFO) • Comments from the DOE, Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, and Environmental Protection Agency Liaisons • Public Comment Period • Discussion: State of Oak Ridge Environmental Management Program • Additions/Approval of Agenda • Motions/Approval of September 14, 2016 Meeting Minutes • Status of Recommendations with DOE • Committee Reports • Alternate DDFO Report • Adjourn

    Public Participation: The EM SSAB, Oak Ridge, welcomes the attendance of the public at its advisory committee meetings and will make every effort to accommodate persons with physical disabilities or special needs. If you require special accommodations due to a disability, please contact Melyssa P. Noe at least seven days in advance of the meeting at the phone number listed above. Written statements may be filed with the Board either before or after the meeting. Individuals who wish to make oral statements pertaining to the agenda item should contact Melyssa P. Noe at the address or telephone number listed above. Requests must be received five days prior to the meeting and reasonable provision will be made to include the presentation in the agenda. The Deputy Designated Federal Officer is empowered to conduct the meeting in a fashion that will facilitate the orderly conduct of business. Individuals wishing to make public comments will be provided a maximum of five minutes to present their comments.

    Minutes: Minutes will be available by writing or calling Melyssa P. Noe at the address and phone number listed above. Minutes will also be available at the following Web site: www.energy.gov/orssab.

    Issued at Washington, DC, on September 16, 2016. LaTanya R. Butler, Deputy Committee Management Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22870 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Combined Notice of Filings #1

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric corporate filings:

    Docket Numbers: EC16-183-000.

    Applicants: Noble Altona Windpark, LLC, Noble Bliss Windpark, LLC, Noble Clinton Windpark I, LLC, Noble Ellenburg Windpark, LLC, Noble Chateaugay Windpark, LLC, Noble Great Plains Windpark, LLC, Noble Wethersfield Windpark, LLC.

    Description: Application for Authorization under Section 203 of the Federal Power Act and Request for Waivers, Confidential Treatment, and Expedited Consideration of Noble Altona Windpark, LLC, et al.

    Filed Date: 9/16/16.

    Accession Number: 20160916-5121.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/7/16.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following exempt wholesale generator filings:

    Docket Numbers: EG16-151-000.

    Applicants: Dermott Wind, LLC.

    Description: Notice of Self-Certification of Exempt Wholesale Generator Status of Dermott Wind, LLC.

    Filed Date: 9/16/16.

    Accession Number: 20160916-5062.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/7/16.

    Docket Numbers: EG16-152-000.

    Applicants: Innovative Solar 46, LLC.

    Description: Notice of Self-Certification of Exempt Wholesale Generator Status of Innovative Solar 46, LLC.

    Filed Date: 9/16/16.

    Accession Number: 20160916-5115.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/7/16.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER10-1818-012; ER10-1819-014; ER10-1820-017; ER10-1817-013.

    Applicants: Public Service Company of Colorado, Southwestern Public Service Company, Northern States Power Company, a Minnesota corporation, Northern States Power Company, a Wisconsin corporation.

    Description: Supplement to August 24, 2016 Supplement to Triennial Market Power Analysis and Notice of Change in Status of Public Service Company of Colorado, et al.

    Filed Date: 9/13/16.

    Accession Number: 20160913-5459.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/4/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-2091-000.

    Applicants: Idaho Power Company.

    Description: Supplement to June 30, 2016 Market Based Rate Triennial Analysis of Idaho Power Company.

    Filed Date: 9/15/16.

    Accession Number: 20160915-5236.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/6/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-2595-000.

    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: 3240 WAPA & City of Flandreau, SD Interconnection Agreement to be effective 8/31/2016.

    Filed Date: 9/16/16.

    Accession Number: 20160916-5029.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/7/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-2596-000.

    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: 2233R2 Osage Wind/GRDA Facilities Construction Agreement to be effective 8/25/2016.

    Filed Date: 9/16/16.

    Accession Number: 20160916-5030.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/7/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-2597-000.

    Applicants: Public Service Company of Colorado.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: 2016-9-16_OATT Att-O-PSCo_Admin SAP Filing to be effective 1/1/2016.

    Filed Date: 9/16/16.

    Accession Number: 20160916-5048.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/7/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-2598-000.

    Applicants: Public Service Company of Colorado.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: OATT-Att O-PSCo_O-SPS Administrative SAP Filing to be effective 4/16/2016.

    Filed Date: 9/16/16.

    Accession Number: 20160916-5052.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/7/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-2599-000.

    Applicants: Arizona Public Service Company.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: Rate Schedule No. 272 to be effective 11/16/2016.

    Filed Date: 9/16/16.

    Accession Number: 20160916-5105.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/7/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-2600-000.

    Applicants: San Diego Gas & Electric Company.

    Description: Notice of Cancellation of Large Generator Interconnection Agreement of San Diego Gas & Electric Company.

    Filed Date: 9/16/16.

    Accession Number: 20160916-5125.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/7/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-2601-000.

    Applicants: Summit Farms Solar, LLC.

    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Baseline—Market-Based Rate Tariff to be effective 11/1/2016.

    Filed Date: 9/16/16.

    Accession Number: 20160916-5131.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/7/16.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following public utility holding company filings:

    Docket Numbers: PH16-13-000.

    Applicants: Corning Natural Gas Holding Corporation.

    Description: Corning Natural Gas Holding Corporation submits FERC 65-A Exemption Notification.

    Filed Date: 9/15/16.

    Accession Number: 20160915-5233.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/6/16.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the links or querying the docket number.

    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the proceeding.

    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

    Dated: September 16, 2016. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22852 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Combined Notice of Filings

    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:

    Filings Instituting Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP16-1237-000.

    Applicants: Golden Triangle Storage, Inc.

    Description: § 4(d) Rate Filing: Revisions to GTS Contact Information in FERC Gas Tariff to be effective 9/20/2016.

    Filed Date: 9/14/16.

    Accession Number: 20160914-5055.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/26/16.

    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the proceeding.

    Filings in Existing Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP15-673-002.

    Applicants: Equitrans, L.P.

    Description: Compliance filing FLPS First Year of Service—Compliance Filing.

    Filed Date: 9/15/16.

    Accession Number: 20160915-5085.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/27/16.

    Any person desiring to protest in any of the above proceedings must file in accordance with Rule 211 of the Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the links or querying the docket number.

    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

    Dated: September 15, 2016. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22853 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. OR16-26-000] Aircraft Service International Group, Inc., American Airlines, Inc., Delta Air Lines, Inc., Hookers Point Fuel Facilities LLC, Southwest Airlines Co., United Aviation Fuels Corporation, United Parcel Service, Inc. v. Central Florida Pipeline LLC, Kinder Morgan Liquid Terminals LLC; Notice of Complaint

    Take notice that on September 16, 2016, pursuant to Rule 206 of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission) Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.206, section 343.2 of the Commission's Rules Applicable to Oil Pipeline Proceedings, 18 CFR 343.2 (2016), and sections 1, 6, 8, 9, 13, 15, and 16 of the Interstate Commerce Act (ICA), 49 U.S.C. app. §§ 1, 6, 8, 9, 13, 15, & 16 (1988), Aircraft Service International Group, Inc., American Airlines, Inc., Delta Air Lines, Inc., Hookers Point Fuel Facilities LLC, Southwest Airlines Co., United Aviation Fuels Corporation, and United Parcel Service, Inc. (Complainants) filed a formal complaint against Central Florida Pipeline LLC (CFPL) and Kinder Morgan Liquid Terminals LLC (KMLT) (Respondents) alleging that CFPL has unlawfully provided for physical transportation of jet fuel in interstate commerce on its pipeline without filing a tariff with the Commission in violation of ICA § 6(1) and KMLT has unlawfully provided untariffed FERC jurisdictional break out tankage service at its liquids terminal in Tampa, Florida (KMLT Tampa Terminal) in violation of ICA § 6(1). Complainants further allege that the rates charged by CFPL for the transportation of jet fuel from Tampa, Florida to the Orlando Terminal and the ASIG Terminal at Orlando International Airport in Orlando, Florida are not just and reasonable, as more fully explained in the complaint.

    Complainants certify that copies of the complaint were served upon (1) the corporate representative identified in CFPL's March 1, 2016 letter to shippers establishing the currently effective tariff rates on CFPL, Meredith West, as CFPL has not designated a person on the Commission's Corporate Officials List as representing CFPL in this action, and (2) Mark Evans and Jeff Hulbert, representatives identified on Kinder Morgan's Web site as responsible for Central Florida Pipeline and Southeast Terminals and Products Pipelines Tariffs, respectively.

    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 Complainants.

    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 October 17, 2016.

    Dated: September 16, 2016. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22854 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0341; FRL-9951-84-OAR] Notice of Availability of Three Updated Chapters in the Environmental Protection Agency's Air Pollution Control Cost Manual AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Notice of availability and public comment period.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is providing notice that three chapters of the current EPA Air Pollution Control Cost Manual (Control Cost Manual) have been updated. The EPA is requesting comment on Section 1, Chapter 2, “Cost Estimation: Concepts and Methodology”; Section 3.1, Chapter 1, “Refrigerated Condensers”; and Section 3.2, Chapter 2, “Incinerators/Oxidizers.”

    DATES:

    Comments must be received on or before December 21, 2016. Please refer to SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for additional information on submitting comments on the provided data.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0341, to the Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or withdrawn. The EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 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, 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:

    Larry Sorrels, Health and Environmental Impacts Division, C439-02, Environmental Protection Agency, 109 T.W. Alexander Drive, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709; telephone number: (919) 541-5041; fax number: (919) 541-0839; email address: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The EPA is requesting comment on the specific Control Cost Manual chapters included in this NODA.

    I. General Information A. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for the EPA?

    1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to the EPA through www.regulations.gov or email. Clearly mark the part or all of the information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or CD-ROM that you mail to the EPA docket office, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM as CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket. Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 2.

    2. Tips for Preparing your Comments. When submitting comments, remember to:

    • Identify the notification by docket number and other identifying information (subject heading, Federal Register date and page number).

    • Follow directions—The agency may ask you to respond to specific questions or organize comments by referencing a CFR part or section number.

    • Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and substitute language/data for your requested changes.

    • Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information and/or data that you used.

    • If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be reproduced.

    • Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and suggest alternatives.

    • Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of profanity or personal threats.

    • Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period deadline identified.

    II. Information Available for Public Comment

    The EPA is requesting comment on three updated chapters of the EPA Air Pollution Control Cost Manual. The Control Cost Manual contains individual chapters on control measures, including data and equations to aid users in estimating capital costs for installation and annual costs for operation and maintenance of these measures. The Control Cost Manual is used by the EPA for estimating the impacts of rulemakings, and serves as a basis for sources to estimate costs of controls that are Best Available Control Technology under the New Source Review Program, and Best Available Retrofit Technology under the Regional Haze Program and for other programs.

    The three updated Control Cost Manual chapters are: Section 1, Chapter 2, Cost Estimation: Concepts and Methodology; Section 3.1, Chapter 1, Refrigerated Condensers; and Section 3.2, Chapter 2, Incinerators/Oxidizers. Section 3.2, Chapter 2, ”Incinerators” will now include oxidizers, for this type of control device is commonly used for destruction of volatile organic compounds (VOC) emissions, which is the primary function of incinerators. These three revised Control Cost Manual chapters can be found in the docket for the Control Cost Manual update (Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0341). The current Control Cost Manual version (sixth edition) is available at https://www3.epa.gov/ttn/ecas/cost_manual.html, and was last updated in 2003. The Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2014 requested that the EPA begin development of a seventh edition of the Control Cost Manual. The EPA has met with state, local, and tribal officials to discuss plans for the Control Cost Manual update as called for under the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2014. The EPA has met with other groups as well at their request. The EPA recently updated the selective non-catalytic reduction (SNCR) and selective catalytic reduction (SCR) chapters (Section 4, Chapters 1 and 2) which were made available to the public in May 2016 (81 FR 38702, June 14, 2016).

    To help focus review of the three chapters, Cost Estimation: Concepts and Methodology (Section 1, Chapter 2,); Refrigerated Condensers (Section 3.1, Chapter 1); and Incinerators/Oxidizers (Section 3.2, Chapter 2), we offer the following list of questions that the EPA is particularly interested in addressing in the updated chapters. Commenters are welcome to address any aspects of these chapters. Please provide supporting data for responses to these questions and other aspects of the chapters.

    For the Cost Estimation: Concepts and Methodology chapter:

    (1) Is the cost methodology included in this chapter consistent with best practices for cost estimation of pollution control equipment installation, operation and maintenance?

    (2) Is the use of the equivalent uniform annual cost method appropriate for estimating costs for pollution control devices, particularly end-of-pipe controls?

    (3) Are the cost items included in the definition of capital cost or total capital investment valid? Are the cost items included in the definition of annual costs valid?

    For the Refrigerated Condensers chapter:

    (1) What is a reasonable estimate of equipment life (defined as design or operational life) for this control measure?

    (2) Is the description of refrigerated condensers complete, up to date, and accurate, particularly with regard to control of VOC?

    (3) Are the cost correlations, factors, and equations for refrigerated condensers accurate? If not, how should they be revised?

    (4) Are the estimates of VOC destruction efficiency for refrigerated condensers accurate?

    (5) Is the discussion on the effect of fouling on refrigerated condensers accurate?

    For the Incinerators/Oxidizers chapter:

    (1) What is a reasonable estimate of equipment life (defined as design or operational life) for this control measure?

    (2) Is the description of incinerator technologies complete, up to date, and accurate? For oxidizers?

    (3) Are the cost correlations, factors, and equations for incinerators and oxidizers accurate? If not, how should they be revised?

    (4) Are the estimates of incinerators VOC destruction efficiency accurate? For oxidizers?

    Dated: September 8, 2016. Stephen Page, Director, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22846 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [EPA-HQ-OAR-2013-0146; FRL-9952-68-OAR] Release of Draft Policy Assessment for the Review of the Primary National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Nitrogen Dioxide AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Notice of availability.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is reviewing the primary National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2). On or about September 23, 2016, the EPA will make available for public review the document titled Policy Assessment for the Review of the Primary National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Nitrogen Dioxide—External Review Draft (draft PA). This draft PA is intended to facilitate the Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee's (CASAC's) advice and public input as part of the ongoing review of the primary NAAQS for NO2.

    DATES:

    Comments should be received on or before December 8, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2013-0146, to the Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or withdrawn. The EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 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, 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.

    The draft PA will be available primarily via the Internet at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/standards/nox/s_nox_index.html.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Dr. Jennifer Nichols, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Mail Code C504-06, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711; telephone number: 919-541-0708; fax number: 919-541-5315; email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. General Information A. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for the EPA?

    1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through http://regulations.gov or email. Clearly mark the part or all of the information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or CD-ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM as CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket. Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 2.

    2. Tips for Preparing your Comments. When submitting comments, remember to:

    • Identify the notice by docket number and other identifying information (subject heading, Federal Register date and page number).

    • Follow directions. The agency may ask you to respond to specific questions or organize comments by referencing a CFR part or section number.

    • Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternative and substitute language for your requested changes.

    • Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information and/or data that you used.

    • If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be reproduced.

    • Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns and suggest alternatives.

    • Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of profanity or personal threats.

    • Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period deadline identified.

    II. Information About the Document

    Two sections of the Clean Air Act (CAA) govern the establishment and revision of the NAAQS. Section 108 (42 U.S.C. 7408) directs the Administrator to identify and list certain air pollutants and then to issue air quality criteria for those pollutants. The Administrator is to list those air pollutants that in her “judgment, cause or contribute to air pollution which may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare;” “the presence of which in the ambient air results from numerous or diverse mobile or stationary sources;” and “for which * * * [the Administrator] plans to issue air quality criteria * * *.” Air quality criteria are intended to “accurately reflect the latest scientific knowledge useful in indicating the kind and extent of all identifiable effects on public health or welfare which may be expected from the presence of [a] pollutant in the ambient air * * * ” (42 U.S.C. 7408(b)). Under section 109 (42 U.S.C. 7409), the EPA establishes primary (health-based) and secondary (welfare-based) NAAQS for pollutants for which air quality criteria are issued. Section 109(d) requires periodic review and, if appropriate, revision of existing air quality criteria. The revised air quality criteria reflect advances in scientific knowledge on the effects of the pollutant on public health or welfare. The EPA is also required to periodically review and revise the NAAQS, if appropriate, based on the revised criteria. Section 109(d)(2) requires that an independent scientific review committee “shall complete a review of the criteria * * * and the national primary and secondary ambient air quality standards * * * and shall recommend to the Administrator any new * * * standards and revisions of the existing criteria and standards as may be appropriate * * *.” Since the early 1980s, this independent review function has been performed by the CASAC.

    Presently, the EPA is reviewing the primary NAAQS for NO2. The first draft Integrated Science Assessment for Oxides of Nitrogen (Health Criteria) (ISA) was released on November 22, 2013 (78 FR 70040), and the draft Integrated Review Plan for the Primary NAAQS for Nitrogen Dioxide (IRP) was released on February 6, 2014 (79 FR 7184). Both documents were reviewed by the CASAC at a public meeting in March 2014, announced in a separate notice (79 FR 8701, February 13, 2014). The final IRP was released in June 2014 (79 FR 36801, June 30, 2014) and is available at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/standards/nox/s_nox_2012_pd.html. The second draft ISA was made available to both the CASAC and the public (80 FR 5110, January 30, 2015), and was reviewed in addition to the Risk and Exposure Assessment Planning Document (REA Planning Document) (80 FR 27304, May 13, 2015) at a public meeting in June 2015 (80 FR 22993, April 24, 2015). The final ISA was then released in January 2016 (81 FR 4910, January 28, 2016) after taking into consideration the CASAC's advice and public comments.

    The PA, when final, will serve to “bridge the gap” between the scientific information and the judgments required of the Administrator in determining whether to retain or revise the existing primary NAAQS for NO2, and, if revision is considered, what revisions may be appropriate. The draft PA announced today builds upon information presented in the final ISA and the REA Planning Document. The draft PA will be available on or about September 16, 2016, through the agency's Technology Transfer Network (TTN) Web site at https://www3.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/standards/nox/s_nox_index.html.

    The EPA is soliciting advice and recommendations from the CASAC by means of a review of this draft document at an upcoming public meeting of the CASAC, scheduled for November 9-10, 2016. Information about this public meeting will be published as a separate notice in the Federal Register. Following the CASAC meeting, the EPA will consider comments received from the CASAC and the public in preparing revisions to this document. The EPA will also consider public comments submitted in response to this notice when revising the document. Comments should be submitted to the docket, as described above. The document that is the subject of today's notice does not represent and should not be construed to represent any final EPA policy, viewpoint or determination.

    Dated: September 15, 2016. Stephen Page, Director, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22681 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0317; FRL-9952-53] Registration Review; Draft Malathion Human Health Risk Assessment; Notice of Availability AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice announces the availability of EPA's draft human health risk assessment for the registration review of malathion (case 0248) for public review and comment. Registration review is EPA's periodic review of pesticide registrations to ensure that each pesticide continues to satisfy the statutory standard for registration, that is, the pesticide can perform its intended function without unreasonable adverse effects on human health or the environment. As part of the registration review process, the Agency has completed a comprehensive draft human health risk assessment for malathion. After reviewing comments received during the public comment period, EPA may issue a revised human health risk assessment, explain any changes to the draft risk assessment, respond to comments, and may request public input on risk mitigation before completing its proposed registration review decision for malathion. Through this program, EPA is ensuring that each pesticide's registration is based on current scientific and other knowledge, including its effects on human health and the environment.

    DATES:

    Comments must be received on or before November 21, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments, identified by docket identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0317, by one of the following methods:

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

    Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental Protection Agency Docket Center (EPA/DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania 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.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For pesticide specific information contact the Chemical Review Manager: Steven Snyderman at telephone number: (703) 347-0249; email address: [email protected].

    For general questions on the registration review program, contact: Richard Dumas, Pesticide Re-Evaluation Division (7508P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number: (703) 308-8015; email address: [email protected].

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

    This action is directed to the public in general, and may be of interest to a wide range of stakeholders including environmental, human health, farm worker, and agricultural advocates; the chemical industry; pesticide users; and members of the public interested in the sale, distribution, or use of pesticides. Since others also may be interested, the Agency has not attempted to describe all the specific entities that may be affected by this action. If you have any questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the Chemical Review Manager identified in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

    B. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?

    1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through regulations.gov or email. Clearly mark the part or all of the information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or CD-ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM as CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket. Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.

    2. Tips for preparing your comments. When preparing and submitting your comments, see the commenting tips at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/comments.html.

    3. Environmental justice. EPA seeks to achieve environmental justice, the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of any group, including minority and/or low income populations, in the development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies. To help address potential environmental justice issues, the Agency seeks information on any groups or segments of the population who, as a result of their location, cultural practices, or other factors, may have atypical or disproportionately high and adverse human health impacts or environmental effects from exposure to the pesticide discussed in this document, compared to the general population.

    II. Authority

    EPA is conducting its registration review of malathion pursuant to section 3(g) of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) (7 U.S.C. 136a(g)) and the Procedural Regulations for Registration Review at 40 CFR part 155, subpart C. FIFRA section 3(g) provides, among other things, that the registrations of pesticides are to be reviewed every 15 years. Under FIFRA, a pesticide product may be registered or remain registered only if it meets the statutory standard for registration given in FIFRA section 3(c)(5) (7 U.S.C. 136a(c)(5)). When used in accordance with widespread and commonly recognized practice, the pesticide product must perform its intended function without unreasonable adverse effects on the environment; that is, without any unreasonable risk to man or the environment, or a human dietary risk from residues that result from the use of a pesticide in or on food.

    III. Registration Review

    As directed by FIFRA section 3(g), EPA is reviewing the pesticide registrations for malathion to ensure that they continue to satisfy the FIFRA standard for registration—that is, that malathion can still be used without unreasonable adverse effects on human health or the environment. Information concerning the registration review of malathion (case 0248) is in the docket, under Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0317.

    Pursuant to 40 CFR 155.53(c), EPA is providing an opportunity, through this notice of availability, for interested parties to provide comments and input concerning the Agency's draft human health risk assessment for malathion. Such comments and input could address, among other things, the Agency's risk assessment methodologies and assumptions, as applied to this draft human health risk assessment. The Agency will consider all comments received during the public comment period and make changes, as appropriate, to the draft human health risk assessment. EPA will then issue a revised risk assessment, explain any changes to the draft risk assessment, and respond to comments. In the Federal Register notice announcing the availability of the revised risk assessment, if the revised risk assessment indicates risks of concern, the Agency may provide a comment period for the public to submit suggestions for mitigating the risk identified in the revised risk assessment before developing a proposed registration review decision for malathion.

    1. Other related information. Additional information on the registration review status of malathion, as well as information on the Agency's registration review program and on its implementing regulation is available at https://www.epa.gov/pesticide-reevaluation.

    2. Information submission requirements. Anyone may submit data or information in response to this document. To be considered during a pesticide's registration review, the submitted data or information must meet the following requirements:

    • To ensure that EPA will consider data or information submitted, interested persons must submit the data or information during the comment period. The Agency may, at its discretion, consider data or information submitted at a later date.

    • The data or information submitted must be presented in a legible and useable form. For example, an English translation must accompany any material that is not in English and a written transcript must accompany any information submitted as an audiographic or videographic record. Written material may be submitted in paper or electronic form.

    • Submitters must clearly identify the source of any submitted data or information.

    • Submitters may request the Agency to reconsider data or information that the Agency rejected in a previous review. However, submitters must explain why they believe the Agency should reconsider the data or information in the pesticide's registration review.

    As provided in 40 CFR 155.58, the registration review docket for each pesticide case will remain publicly accessible through the duration of the registration review process; that is, until all actions required in the final decision on the registration review case have been completed.

    Authority:

    7 U.S.C. 136 et seq.

    Dated: September 14, 2016. Yu-Ting Guilaran, Director, Pesticide Re-Evaluation Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22881 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION [OMB 3060-0653] Information Collection Being Reviewed by the Federal Communications Commission AGENCY:

    Federal Communications Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice and request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, and as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), the Federal Communications Commission (FCC or Commission) invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the following information collections. Comments are requested concerning: Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Commission, including whether the information shall have practical utility; the accuracy of the Commission's burden estimate; ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on the respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and ways to further reduce the information collection burden on small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees.

    The FCC may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. No person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information subject to the PRA that does not display a valid OMB control number.

    DATES:

    Written PRA comments should be submitted on or before November 21, 2016. If you anticipate that you will be submitting comments, but find it difficult to do so within the period of time allowed by this notice, you should advise the contact listed below as soon as possible.

    ADDRESSES:

    Direct all PRA comments to Cathy Williams, FCC, via email [email protected] and to [email protected]

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For additional information about the information collection, contact Cathy Williams at (202) 418-2918.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    OMB Control Number: 3060-0653.

    Title: Sections 64.703(b) and (c), Consumer Information—Posting by Aggregators.

    Form No.: N/A.

    Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection.

    Respondents: Business or other for-profit entities.

    Number of Respondents: 56,075 respondents; 5,339,038 responses.

    Estimated Time per Response: .017 hours (1 minute) to 3 hours.

    Frequency of Response: On occasion reporting requirements; Third party disclosure.

    Obligation to Respond: Required to obtain or retain benefits. The statutory authority for this information collection is found at section 226 [47 U.S.C. 226] Telephone Operator Services codified at 47 CFR 64.703(b) Consumer Information.

    Total Annual Burden: 174,401 hours.

    Total Annual Cost: $1,343,721.

    Privacy Act Impact Assessment: An assurance of confidentiality is not offered because this information collection does not require the collection of personally identifiable information (PII) from individuals.

    Nature and Extent of Confidentiality: No impact(s).

    Needs and Uses: The information collection requirements included under this OMB Control Number 3060-0653, requires aggregators (providers of telephones to the public or to transient users of their premises) under 47 U.S.C. 226(c)(1)(A), 47 CFR 64.703(b) of the Commission's rules, to post in writing, on or near such phones, information about the pre-subscribed operator services, rates, carrier access, and the FCC address to which consumers may direct complaints.

    Section 64.703(c) of the Commission's rules requires the posted consumer information to be added when an aggregator has changed the pre-subscribed operator service provider (OSP) no later than 30 days following such change. Consumers will use this information to determine whether they wish to use the services of the identified OSP.

    Federal Communications Commission. Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, Office of the Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22797 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
    FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION [OMB 3060-0655] Information Collection Being Reviewed by the Federal Communications Commission Under Delegated Authority AGENCY:

    Federal Communications Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice and request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, and as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), the Federal Communications Commission (FCC or Commission) invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the following information collections. Comments are requested concerning: Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Commission, including whether the information shall have practical utility; the accuracy of the Commission's burden estimate; ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on the respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and ways to further reduce the information collection burden on small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees. The FCC may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. No person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information subject to the PRA that does not display a valid OMB control number.

    DATES:

    Written PRA comments should be submitted on or before November 21, 2016. If you anticipate that you will be submitting comments, but find it difficult to do so within the period of time allowed by this notice, you should advise the contact listed below as soon as possible.

    ADDRESSES:

    Direct all PRA comments to Nicole Ongele, FCC, via email to [email protected] and to [email protected]

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For additional information about the information collection, contact Nicole Ongele at (202) 418-2991.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    OMB Control Number: 3060-0655.

    Title: Requests for Waivers of Regulatory Fees and Application Fees.

    Form Number: N/A.

    Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection.

    Respondents: Business or other for-profit entities.

    Number of Respondents and Responses: 340 respondents, 340 responses.

    Estimated Time per Response: 1 hour.

    Frequency of Response: On occasion reporting requirements.

    Obligation to Respond: Required to obtain or retain benefits. Statutory authority for this information collection is contained in 47 U.S.C. 158 and 47 U.S.C. 159.

    Total Annual Burden: 340 hours.

    Total Annual Cost: No cost.

    Privacy Act Impact Assessment: No impact(s).

    Nature and Extent of Confidentiality: Parties filing information may request that the information be withheld from disclosure. Requests for confidentiality are processed in accordance with FCC rules under 47 CFR 0.459. This information collection does not affect individuals; however, should any personally identifiable information (PII) be submitted, “the FCC has a system of records notice, FCC/OMD-6, “Financial Accounting Systems (FAS)” and FCC/OMD-9, “Commission Registration Systems (CORES)” to cover the collection, use, storage, and destruction of this PII, as required by the Privacy Act of 1974, as amended, 5 U.S.C. 552a.”

    Needs and Uses: Pursuant to 47 U.S.C. 158 and 47 U.S.C. 159, the FCC is required to collect application fees and annual regulatory fees from its licensees and permittees. Licensees and permittees may request waivers of these fees where good cause is shown and where waiver or deferral of the fee would promote the public interest. Financial information and reports that are submitted to support waiver requests are ordinarily maintained as business records and can be easily assembled. The FCC uses the information submitted in support of the waiver request to determine if such waiver is warranted.

    Federal Communications Commission. Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary. Office of the Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22875 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
    FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION [OMB 3060-0960] Information Collection Being Reviewed by the Federal Communications Commission AGENCY:

    Federal Communications Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice and request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, and as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), the Federal Communications Commission (FCC or Commission) invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the following information collections. Comments are requested concerning: Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Commission, including whether the information shall have practical utility; the accuracy of the Commission's burden estimate; ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on the respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and ways to further reduce the information collection burden on small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees. The FCC may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. No person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information subject to the PRA that does not display a valid OMB control number.

    DATES:

    Written PRA comments should be submitted on or before November 21, 2016. If you anticipate that you will be submitting comments, but find it difficult to do so within the period of time allowed by this notice, you should advise the contact listed below as soon as possible.

    ADDRESSES:

    Direct all PRA comments to Cathy Williams, FCC, via email [email protected] and to [email protected]

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For additional information about the information collection, contact Cathy Williams at (202) 418-2918.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    OMB Control Number: 3060-0960.

    Title: 47 CFR 76.122, Satellite Network Non-duplication Protection Rules; 47 CFR 76.123, Satellite Syndicated Program Exclusivity Rules and 47 CFR 76.124, Requirements for Invocation of Non-duplication and Syndicated Exclusivity Protection.

    Form Number: Not applicable.

    Type of Review: Revision of a currently approved collection.

    Respondents: Business or other for-profit entities.

    Number of Respondents and Responses: 1,428 respondents and 9,636 responses.

    Estimated Time per Response: 0.5-1 hour.

    Frequency of Response: On occasion reporting requirement; Third party disclosure requirement.

    Total Annual Burden: 9,272 hours.

    Total Annual Costs: None.

    Obligation to Respond: Required to obtain or retain benefits. The statutory authority for this collection is contained in Sections 4(i), 4(j), 303(r), 339 and 340 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended.

    Nature and Extent of Confidentiality: There is no need for confidentiality with this collection of information.

    Privacy Impact Assessment: No impact(s).

    Needs and Uses: 47 CFR 76.122, 76.123 and 76.124 are used to protect exclusive contract rights negotiated between broadcasters, distributors, and rights holders for the transmission of network syndicated in the broadcasters' recognized market areas. Rule sections 76.122 and 76.123 implement statutory requirements to provide rights for in-market stations to assert non- duplication and exclusivity rights.

    Federal Communications Commission. Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, Office of Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22874 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
    FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION [OMB 3060-1215] Information Collection Being Reviewed by the Federal Communications Commission AGENCY:

    Federal Communications Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice and request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, and as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), the Federal Communications Commission (FCC or Commission) invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the following information collections. Comments are requested concerning: Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Commission, including whether the information shall have practical utility; the accuracy of the Commission's burden estimate; ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on the respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and ways to further reduce the information collection burden on small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees.

    The FCC may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. No person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information subject to the PRA that does not display a valid OMB control number.

    DATES:

    Written PRA comments should be submitted on or before November 21, 2016. If you anticipate that you will be submitting comments, but find it difficult to do so within the period of time allowed by this notice, you should advise the contact listed below as soon as possible.

    ADDRESSES:

    Direct all PRA comments to Cathy Williams, FCC, via email [email protected] and to [email protected]

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For additional information about the information collection, contact Cathy Williams at (202) 418-2918.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    OMB Control Number: 3060-1215.

    Title: Use of Spectrum Bands Above 24 GHz for Mobile Radio Services.

    Form Number: N/A.

    Type of Review: Revision of an existing collection.

    Respondents: Business or other for-profit, not-for-profit institutions, and state, local and tribal government.

    Number of Respondents: 247 respondents; 247 responses.

    Estimated Time per Response: .5-10 hours.

    Frequency of Response: On occasion reporting requirement; third party disclosure requirement; upon commencement of service, or within 3 years of effective date of rules; and at end of license term, or 2024 for incumbent licensees.

    Obligation to Respond: Statutory authority for this collection are contained in sections 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 10, 201, 225, 227, 301, 302, 302a, 303, 304, 307, 309, 310, 316, 319, 332, and 336 of the Communications Act of 1934, 47 U.S.C. 151, 152, 153, 154, 155, 157, 160, 201, 225, 227, 301, 302, 302a, 303, 304, 307, 309, 310, 316, 319, 332, 336, Section 706 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 1302.

    Total Annual Burden: 363 hours.

    Total Annual Cost: $196,875.

    Privacy Act Impact Assessment: No impact(s).

    Nature and Extent of Confidentiality: There is no need for confidentiality with this collection of information.

    Needs and Uses: In this collection, the Commission adopted new licensing, service, and technical rules for bands 27.5-28.35 GHz band (28 GHz band), the 38.6-40 GHz band (39 GHz band), and the 37-38.6 GHz band (37 GHz band), to include 64-71 GHz band under Part 15. In so doing, the Commission created a consistent framework across all of the bands that can serve as a template for additional bands in the future.

    The rules adopted by the Commission, in FCC 16-89, contain the following information collections:

    Section 25.136—This rule contains both a third party coordination requirement and a filing requirement. Both requirements are necessary to ensure that Fixed Satellite Service earth stations can receive interference protection without having an undue impact on terrestrial deployment.

    Section 30.3—This rule contains a filing requirement which is necessary to ascertain compliance with the foreign ownership restrictions contained in the Communications Act and the Commission's rules.

    Section 30.8—This rule contains a requirement that each licensee file a statement describing its network security plans and related information, which shall be signed by a senior executive within the licensee's organization with personal knowledge of the security plans and practices within the licensee's organization. This statement is necessary to ensure that licensees properly take security into consideration when designing their systems.

    Section 30.105—This rule contains filing requirements relating to demonstration of compliance with the Commission's buildout requirements. These filings are necessary in order to ensure that licensees are placing the spectrum in use and not warehousing spectrum.

    Section 30.107—This rule contains filing requirements that apply when licensees propose to discontinue service. These filings are necessary in order to ensure that licensees are placing the spectrum in use and not warehousing spectrum.

    Federal Communications Commission. Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, Office of the Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22873 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
    FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Holding Companies

    The companies listed in this notice have applied to the Board for approval, pursuant to the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 1841 et seq.) (BHC Act), Regulation Y (12 CFR part 225), and all other applicable statutes and regulations to become a bank holding company and/or to acquire the assets or the ownership of, control of, or the power to vote shares of a bank or bank holding company and all of the banks and nonbanking companies owned by the bank holding company, including the companies listed below.

    The applications listed below, as well as other related filings required by the Board, are available for immediate inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The applications will also be available for inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their views in writing on the standards enumerated in the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1842(c)). If the proposal also involves the acquisition of a nonbanking company, the review also includes whether the acquisition of the nonbanking company complies with the standards in section 4 of the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1843). Unless otherwise noted, nonbanking activities will be conducted throughout the United States.

    Unless otherwise noted, comments regarding each of these applications must be received at the Reserve Bank indicated or the offices of the Board of Governors not later than October 17, 2016.

    A. Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland (Nadine Wallman, Vice President) 1455 East Sixth Street, Cleveland, Ohio 44101-2566. Comments can also be sent electronically to [email protected]:

    1. F.N.B. Corporation, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania; to acquire Yadkin Financial Corporation, Raleigh, North Carolina, and thereby acquire Yadkin Bank, Statesville, North Carolina,

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, September 19, 2016. Michele Taylor Fennell, Assistant Secretary of the Board.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22847 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6210-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [30Day-16-0997] Agency Forms Undergoing Paperwork Reduction Acct Review AGENCY:

    Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

    ACTION:

    Notice with comment period; withdrawal.

    SUMMARY:

    The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) announces the withdrawal of the notice published under the same title on August 25, 2016 for public comment.

    DATES:

    Effective September 22, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Information Collection Review Office, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1600 Clifton Road NE., MS-D74, Atlanta, Georgia 30329; phone: 404-639-7570; Email: [email protected].

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    On August 25, 2016 CDC published a notice in the Federal Register titled “Agency Forms Undergoing Paperwork Reduction Act Review” (Vol. 81, No. 165 FR Doc. 2016-20333, Pages 58511-58512). This notice was published prematurely and inadvertently. The notice is being withdrawn immediately for public comment. A new notice will be published at a later date for public comment.

    Leroy A. Richardson, Chief, Information Collection Review Office, Office of Scientific Integrity, Office of the Associate Director for Science, Office of the Director, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22866 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4163-18-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2016-N-0001] Technical Electronic Product Radiation Safety Standards Committee; Notice of Meeting AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announces a forthcoming public advisory committee meeting of the Technical Electronic Product Radiation Safety Standards Committee. The general function of the committee is to provide advice and recommendations to the Agency on FDA's regulatory issues. The meeting will be open to the public.

    DATES:

    The meeting will be held on October 25, 2016, from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. and October 26, 2016, from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m.

    ADDRESSES:

    Gaithersburg Holiday Inn, Ballroom, Two Montgomery Village Ave., Gaithersburg, MD 20879. The hotel's telephone number is 301-948-8900. Answers to commonly asked questions including information regarding special accommodations due to a disability, visitor parking, and transportation may be accessed at: http://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/AboutAdvisoryCommittees/ucm408555.htm.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Sara J. Anderson, Center for Devices and Radiological Health, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 66, Rm. 1643, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, [email protected], 301-796-7047, or FDA Advisory Committee Information Line, 1-800-741-8138 (301-443-0572 in the Washington, DC area). A notice in the Federal Register about last minute modifications that impact a previously announced advisory committee meeting cannot always be published quickly enough to provide timely notice. Therefore, you should always check the Agency's Web site at http://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/default.htm and scroll down to the appropriate advisory committee meeting link, or call the advisory committee information line to learn about possible modifications before coming to the meeting.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Agenda: The general function of the committee is to provide advice and recommendations to the Agency on the technical feasibility, reasonableness, and practicability of performance standards for electronic products to control the emission of radiation from such products, and may recommend electronic product radiation safety standards to the Agency for consideration.

    On October 25, 2016, the committee will discuss and make recommendations regarding possible FDA performance standards for the following topics: Radiofrequency (RF) radiation products, such as microwave ovens and wireless power transfer; laser products, including an update to amendments to the laser rule, light detection and ranging (LIDAR), laser data (Light Fidelity-LiFi)/energy transfer, illumination applications and infrared applications; sunlamp products including an update on the performance standards amendments; and non-coherent light sources (e.g., LEDs and UVC lamps) including new initiatives.

    On October 26, 2016, the committee will discuss and make recommendations regarding possible FDA performance standards for the following topics: International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) standards versus performance standards for medical devices; computed tomography (CT); radiography and fluoroscopy; diagnostic and therapeutic ultrasound; and radiation therapy.

    FDA intends to make background material available to the public no later than 2 business days before the meeting. If FDA is unable to post the background material on its Web site prior to the meeting, the background material will be made publicly available at the location of the advisory committee meeting, and the background material will be posted on FDA's Web site after the meeting. Background material is available at http://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/Calendar/default.htm. Scroll down to the appropriate advisory committee meeting link.

    Procedure: Interested persons may present data, information, or views, orally or in writing, on issues pending before the committee. Written submissions may be made to the contact person on or before October 14, 2016. Oral presentations from the public will be scheduled between approximately 10 a.m. to 10:30 a.m. and 3 p.m. to 3:30 p.m. on October 25, 2016, and between approximately 10:15 a.m. to 10:45 a.m. and 2:30 p.m. to 3 p.m. on October 26, 2016. Those individuals interested in making formal oral presentations should notify the contact person and submit a brief statement of the general nature of the evidence or arguments they wish to present, the names and addresses of proposed participants, and an indication of the approximate time requested to make their presentation on or before October 6, 2016. Time allotted for each presentation may be limited. If the number of registrants requesting to speak is greater than can be reasonably accommodated during the scheduled open public hearing session, FDA may conduct a lottery to determine the speakers for the scheduled open public hearing session. The contact person will notify interested persons regarding their request to speak by October 7, 2016.

    Persons attending FDA's advisory committee meetings are advised that the Agency is not responsible for providing access to electrical outlets.

    FDA welcomes the attendance of the public at its advisory committee meetings and will make every effort to accommodate persons with disabilities. If you require accommodations due to a disability, please contact AnnMarie Williams at [email protected] or 301-796-5966 at least 7 days in advance of the meeting.

    FDA is committed to the orderly conduct of its advisory committee meetings. Please visit our Web site at http://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/AboutAdvisoryCommittees/ucm111462.htm for procedures on public conduct during advisory committee meetings.

    Notice of this meeting is given under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. app. 2).

    Dated: September 16, 2016. Janice M. Soreth, Acting Associate Commissioner, Special Medical Programs.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22808 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2010-N-0155] Veterinary Feed Directive Common Format Questions and Answers; 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 #233 entitled “Veterinary Feed Directive Common Format Questions and Answers.” FDA had received comments requesting that we require a uniform Veterinary Feed Directive (VFD) form. We declined this request because we think that requiring a specific VFD form would be too prescriptive. However, we acknowledge that a common VFD format would help veterinarians, their clients (i.e., animal producers), and distributors (including feed mills) quickly identify relevant information on the VFD. We are issuing this guidance to recommend a common VFD format. We expect this guidance will reduce potential errors on VFDs.

    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-2010-N-0155 for “Veterinary Feed Directive Common Format Questions and Answers.” 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 guidance document.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Dragan Momcilovic, Center for Veterinary Medicine (HFV-226), Food and Drug Administration, 7519 Standish Pl., Rockville, MD 20855, 240-402-5944, email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Background

    Following publication of the proposed rule to update FDA's veterinary feed directive (VFD) regulation in December 2013 (78 FR 75515), in the Federal Register of December 1, 2015 (80 FR 75119), FDA published the notice of availability for a draft guidance entitled “Veterinary Feed Directive Common Format Questions and Answers” giving interested persons until February 1, 2016, to comment on the draft guidance. FDA received several comments on the draft guidance and those comments were considered as the guidance was finalized. The guidance announced in this notice finalizes the draft guidance dated December 2015.

    II. Significance of Guidance

    This level 1 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 Veterinary Feed Directive Common Format Questions and Answers. 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 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 514.1 have been approved under OMB Control No. 0910-0032. The collections of information in 21 CFR 558.6 have been approved under OMB Control No. 0910-0363.

    IV. Electronic Access

    Persons with access to the Internet may obtain the guidance at either http://www.fda.gov/AnimalVeterinary/GuidanceComplianceEnforcement/GuidanceforIndustry/default.htm or http://www.regulations.gov.

    Dated: September 16, 2016. Leslie Kux, Associate Commissioner for Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22775 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Health Resources and Services Administration Renewal of Charter for the Advisory Committee on Organ Transplantation AGENCY:

    Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA), Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    HRSA is giving notice that the Advisory Committee on Organ Transplantation (ACOT) has been rechartered. The effective date of the renewed charter is September 1, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Robert Walsh, Executive Secretary, Advisory Committee on Organ Transplantation, HRSA, Room 08W60, 5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20857. Phone: (301) 443-6839; fax: (301) 594-6095; email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Under the authority of 42 U.S.C. Section 217a, Section 222 of the Public Health Service Act, as amended, 42 CFR 121.12 (2000), and in accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), Public Law 92-463, ACOT was initially chartered on September 1, 2000, and was renewed at appropriate intervals. ACOT provides advice to the Secretary of HHS (the Secretary) on all aspects of organ donation, procurement, allocation, and transplantation, and on such other matters that the Secretary determines. The recommendations of ACOT facilitate Department efforts to oversee the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network, as set forth in the National Organ Transplant Act of 1984, as amended.

    On August 31, 2016, the Secretary approved the ACOT charter to be renewed. The filing date of the renewed charter was September 1, 2016. Renewal of the ACOT charter gives authorization for the Committee to operate until September 1, 2018.

    A copy of the ACOT charter is available on the ACOT Web site at http://www.organdonor.gov/legislation/advisory.html. A copy of the charter also can be obtained by accessing the FACA database that is maintained by the Committee Management Secretariat under the General Services Administration. The Web site address for the FACA database is http://www.facadatabase.gov/.

    Jason E. Bennett, Director, Division of the Executive Secretariat.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22858 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4165-15-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Meeting Announcement for the Technical Advisory Panel on Medicare Trustee Reports ACTION:

    Notice of public meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice announces the meeting date for the second Technical Advisory Panel on Medicare Trustee Reports on Friday, September 30, 2016 in Washington, DC.

    DATES:

    The meeting will be held on Friday, September 30, 2016 from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.. Eastern Daylight Time (EDT) and it is open to the public.

    ADDRESSES:

    This will be a virtual meeting held via WebEx.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Dr. Donald Oellerich, Designated Federal Officer, at the Office of Human Services Policy, Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 200 Independence Ave. SW., Washington, DC 20201, (202) 690-8410.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Purpose: The Panel will discuss the long-term rate of change in health spending and may make recommendations to the Secretary on how the Medicare Trustees might more accurately estimate health spending in the short and long run. The Panel's discussion is expected to be very technical in nature and will focus on the actuarial and economic assumptions and methods by which Trustees might more accurately measure health spending. This Committee is governed by the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended(5 U.S.C. App. 2, section 10(a)(1) and (a)(2)). The Committee is composed of 9 members appointed by the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation.

    II. Agenda. The Panel will likely hear presentations from the HHS Office of the Actuary on issues they wish the panel to address. This may be followed by HHS staff presentations regarding the methods and assumptions for the short range (10 year) Part A, Part B and Part D. After any presentations, the Panel will deliberate openly on the topics. Interested persons may observe the deliberations, but the Panel will not hear public comments during this time. The Panel will also allow an open public session for any attendee to address issues specific to the topic.

    III. Meeting Attendance. The Friday, September 30, 2016 meeting is open to the public through WebEx; however, WebEx attendance is limited to space available.

    Meeting Registration

    The public may join the meeting through WebEx. Space is limited and registration is required in order to attend. Registration may be completed by emailing or faxing all the following information to Dr. Donald Oellerich at [email protected] or fax 202-690-6562:

    Name. Company name. Postal address. Email address.

    A confirmation email with the WebEx information will be sent to the registrants shortly after completing the registration process. If language interpretation or other reasonable accommodation for a disability is needed, please contact Dr. Oellerich, no later than Sept 24, 2016 by sending an email message to [email protected] or calling 202-690-8410.

    IV. Special Accommodations. Individuals requiring special accommodations must include the request for these services during registration.

    V. Copies of the Charter. The Secretary's Charter for the Technical Advisory Panel on Medicare Trustee Reports is available upon request from Dr. Donald Oellerich at [email protected] or by calling 202-690-8410.

    Dated: September 16, 2016. Kathryn E. Martin, Acting Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22890 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4150-05-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Institute of General Medical Sciences; Notice of Closed Meetings

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following meetings.

    The meetings will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute of General Medical Sciences Special Emphasis Panel: Review of MIRA Applications.

    Date: October 27-28, 2016.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Hilton Garden Inn Bethesda, 7301 Waverly Street, Bethesda, MD 20814.

    Contact Person: Brian R. Pike, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Office of Scientific Review, National Institute of General Medical Sciences, National Institutes of Health, 45 Center Drive, Room 3AN18, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-594-3907, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: National Institute of General Medical Sciences Special Emphasis Panel: To Review COBRE Grant Applications.

    Date: November 2, 2016.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Hilton Garden Inn Bethesda, 7301 Waverly Street, Bethesda, MD 20814.

    Contact Person: Nina Sidorova, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Office of Scientific Review, National Institute of General Medical Sciences, National Institutes of Health, 45 Center Drive, Room 3AN22, Bethesda, MD 20892-6200, 301-594-3663, [email protected].

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.375, Minority Biomedical Research Support; 93.821, Cell Biology and Biophysics Research; 93.859, Pharmacology, Physiology, and Biological Chemistry Research; 93.862, Genetics and Developmental Biology Research; 93.88, Minority Access to Research Careers; 93.96, Special Minority Initiatives; 93.859, Biomedical Research and Research Training, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: September 16, 2016. Melanie J. Gray, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22810 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke; 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: Neurological Sciences Training Initial Review Group; NST-1 Subcommittee.

    Date: October 10-11, 2016.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Embassy Suites Alexandria Old Town, 1900 Diagonal Road, Alexandria, VA 22314.

    Contact Person: William Benzing, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Scientific Review Branch, Division of Extramural Research, NINDS/NIH/DHHS, Neuroscience Center, 6001 Executive Blvd., Suite 3204, MSC 9529, Bethesda, MD 20892-9529, 301-496-0660, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Neurological Disorder and Stroke Initial Review Group; Neurological Sciences and Disorders A.

    Date: October 24-25, 2016.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Melrose Hotel, 2430 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20037.

    Contact Person: Natalia Strunnikova, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Scientific Review Branch, Division of Extramural Research, NINDS/NIH/DHHS, Neuroscience Center, 6001 Executive Blvd., Suite 3204, MSC 9529, Bethesda, MD 20892-9529,301-496-0288, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: Neurological Sciences Training Initial Review Group; NST-2 Subcommittee.

    Date: October 24, 2016.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Embassy Suites Alexandria Old Town, 1900 Diagonal Road, Alexandria, VA 22314.

    Contact Person: Elizabeth Webber, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Scientific Review Branch, Division of Extramural Research, NINDS/NIH/DHHS, Neuroscience Center, 6001 Executive Blvd., Suite 3204, MSC 9529, Bethesda, MD 20892-9529, 301-496-0660, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Neurological Disorder and Stroke Initial Review Group; Neurological Sciences and Disorders B.

    Date: October 27-28, 2016.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Lorien Hotel and Spa, 1600 King Street, Alexandria, VA 22314.

    Contact Person: Birgit Neuhuber, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Scientific Review Branch, Division of Extramural Research, NINDS/NIH/DHHS, Neuroscience Center, 6001 Executive Blvd., Suite 3204, MSC 9529, Bethesda, MD 20892-9529, 301-496-0288, [email protected].

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.853, Clinical Research Related to Neurological Disorders; 93.854, Biological Basis Research in the Neurosciences, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: September 16, 2016. Sylvia L. Neal, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22814 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health Center for Scientific Review; Notice of Closed Meetings

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following meetings.

    The meetings will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel; Member Conflict: Cancer Immunopathology and Immunotherapy.

    Date: October 6, 2016.

    Time: 12:00 p.m. to 2:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: Syed M. Quadri, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 6210, MSC 7804, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-435-1211, [email protected]

    This notice is being published less than 15 days prior to the meeting due to the timing limitations imposed by the review and funding cycle.

    Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel; Member Conflict: Auditory Processes.

    Date: October 11-12, 2016.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Virtual Meeting).

    Contact Person: John Bishop, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5182, MSC 7844, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 408-9664, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: Vascular and Hematology Integrated Review Group: Hemostasis and Thrombosis Study Section.

    Date: October 20, 2016.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Residence Inn Bethesda, 7335 Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20814.

    Contact Person: Bukhtiar H. Shah, DVM, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Vascular and Hematology IRG, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4120, MSC 7802, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 806-7314, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: Biobehavioral and Behavioral Processes Integrated Review Group: Language and Communication Study Section.

    Date: October 20-21, 2016.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Hotel Palomar, 2121 P Street NW., Washington, DC 20037.

    Contact Person: Wind Cowles, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 3172, Bethesda, MD 20892, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel: Ocular Surface, Cornea, and Refractive Error.

    Date: October 20, 2016.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Pier 2620 Hotel, 2620 Jones Street, San Francisco, CA 94133.

    Contact Person: Kristin Kramer, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5205, MSC 7846, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 437-0911, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: Infectious Diseases and Microbiology Integrated Review Group; Drug Discovery and Mechanisms of Antimicrobial Resistance Study Section.

    Date: October 20-21, 2016.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: St. Gregory Hotel, 2033 M Street NW., Washington, DC 20036.

    Contact Person: Guangyong Ji, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 3188, MSC 7808, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-435-1146, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: Infectious Diseases and Microbiology Integrated Review Group; Virology—A Study Section.

    Date: October 20-21, 2016.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Embassy Suites Alexandria, 1900 Diagonal Road, Alexandria, VA 22314.

    Contact Person: Kenneth M. Izumi, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 3204, MSC 7808, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-496-6980, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel; Member Conflict: Neurobiology of Epilepsy, Spinal Cord Injury, and Protein, Processing in Neurodegeneration.

    Date: October 20, 2016.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 6:30 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Virtual Meeting).

    Contact Person: Wei-Qin Zhao, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5181, MSC 7846, Bethesda, MD 20892-7846, 301-435-1236, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: Biobehavioral and Behavioral Processes Integrated Review Group; Child Psychopathology and Developmental Disabilities Study Section.

    Date: October 20-21, 2016.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: The William F. Bolger Center, 9600 Newbridge Drive, Potomac, MD 20854.

    Contact Person: Jane A. Doussard-Roosevelt, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 3184, MSC 7848, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435-4445, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: Infectious Diseases and Microbiology Integrated Review Group; Pathogenic Eukaryotes Study Section.

    Date: October 20-21, 2016.

    Time: 8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Residence Inn Washington DC Downtown, 1199 Vermont Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20005.

    Contact Person: Tera Bounds, DVM, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 3198, MSC 7808, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-435-2306, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel; Drug Discovery and Mechanisms of Antimicrobial Resistance.

    Date: October 20, 2016.

    Time: 1:00 p.m. to 2:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: St. Gregory Hotel, 2033 M Street NW., Washington, DC 20036.

    Contact Person: John C. Pugh, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 1206, MSC 7808, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435-2398, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel; Language and Communication.

    Date: October 20, 2016.

    Time: 1:00 p.m. to 2:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Palomar Hotel, 2121 P Street NW., Washington, DC 20037.

    Contact Person: Maribeth Champoux, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 3182, MSC 7759, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-594-3163, [email protected]

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.306, Comparative Medicine; 93.333, Clinical Research, 93.306, 93.333, 93.337, 93.393-93.396, 93.837-93.844, 93.846-93.878, 93.892, 93.893, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: September 16, 2016. Anna Snouffer, Deputy Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22815 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Cancer Institute; Notice of Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(a) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of a meeting of the National Cancer Institute Board of Scientific Advisors.

    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 also be videocast and can be accessed from the NIH Videocasting and Podcasting Web site (http://videocast.nih.gov).

    Name of Committee: Board of Scientific Advisors.

    Open: October 31, 2016, 1:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m.

    Agenda: RFA and RFP Concept Reviews.

    Place: National Cancer Institute Shady Grove, 9609 Medical Center Drive, Room TE406, Rockville, MD 20850 (Virtual Meeting).

    Contact Person: Paulette S. Gray, Ph.D., Executive Secretary, Division of Extramural Activities, National Cancer Institute—Shady Grove, National Institutes of Health, 9609 Medical Center Drive, Room 7W444, Bethesda, MD 20892, 240-276-6340, [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/bsa/bsa.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 16, 2016. Melanie J. Gray, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22817 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health Prospective Grant of Exclusive Patent License: Development of an Antibody-Drug Conjugate for Use in PhotoImmunoTherapy AGENCY:

    National Institutes of Health, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The National Cancer Institute, an institute of the National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Services, is contemplating the grant of an exclusive patent license to practice the inventions embodied in the U.S. Patents and Patent Applications listed in the Summary Information section of this notice to Aspyrian Therapeutics, Inc. (“Aspyrian”) located in San Diego, California USA.

    DATES:

    Only written comments and/or applications for a license which are received by the National Cancer Institute's Technology Transfer Center on or before October 7, 2016 will be considered.

    ADDRESSES:

    Requests for copies of the patent application, inquiries, and comments relating to the contemplated exclusive license should be directed to: Thomas Clouse, J.D., Senior Licensing and Patenting Manager, NCI Technology Transfer Center, 9609 Medical Center Drive, RM 1E530 MSC 9702, Bethesda, MD 20892-9702 (for business mail), Rockville, MD 20850-9702 Telephone: (240)-276-5530; Facsimile: (240)-276-5504 Email: [email protected].

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Intellectual Property

    United States Provisional Patent Application No. 62/202,252, filed August 7, 2015 “Near Infrared PhotoImmunoTherapy (NIR-PIT) of Suppressor Cells to Treat Cancer” [HHS Reference No. E-231-2015/0-US-01]; and

    PCT Patent Application PCT/US2016/045090, filed August 2, 2016 “Near Infrared PhotoImmunoTherapy (NIR-PIT) of Suppressor Cells to Treat Cancer” [HHS Reference No. E-231-2015/0-PCT-02].

    The patent rights in these inventions have been assigned and/or exclusively licensed to the government of the United States of America.

    The prospective exclusive license territory may be worldwide and the field of use may be limited to the use of Licensed Patent Rights for the following: “Use of photosensitizing antibody-fluorophore conjugate defined by the Licensed Patent Rights by itself for PhotoImmunoTherapy (PIT), or in combination with cancer therapeutic agents, to treat cancer or hyperplasia.”

    This technology discloses the concept of binding an anti-foxp3+ antibody to IR700 to bind to foxp3+ T-cells. When irradiated with near infrared light localized at the site of the solid tumor, controlled local knockdown of foxp3+ negative regulatory T-cells in tumors results in rapid tumor death without the severe autoimmune response that is induced by systemic knock-down of foxp3+ T-cells. Theoretically, this technology can be used in a broad spectrum of patients with a variety of solid cancers including those with multiple distant metastasis as foxp3+ T-cells are generally believed to be critical to immunotolerance found in cancers. By treating a single local site with this technology, systemic host immunity against in situ cancers can be dramatically activated, leading to rapid tumor regression at the treated lesion as well as distant metastatic lesions untreated with the near infrared light while inducing minimal side effects.

    The prospective exclusive license will be royalty bearing and will comply with the terms and conditions of 35 U.S.C. 209 and 37 CFR part 404.7. The prospective exclusive license may be granted unless within fifteen (15) days from the date of this published notice, the National Cancer Institute receives written evidence and argument that establishes that the grant of the license would not be consistent with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 209 and 37 CFR part 404.7.

    Complete applications for a license in the prospective field of use that are filed in response to this notice will be treated as objections to the grant of the contemplated Exclusive Patent License Agreement. Comments and objections submitted to this notice will not be made available for public inspection and, to the extent permitted by law, will not be released under the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 552.

    Dated: September 16, 2016. Richard U. Rodriguez, Associate Director, Technology Transfer Center, National Cancer Institute.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22820 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Institute of Mental Health; Cancellation of Meeting

    Notice is hereby given of the cancellation of the National Institute of Mental Health Special Emphasis Panel, September 14, 2016, 10:00 a.m. to September 14, 2016, 11:00 a.m., National Institutes of Health, NSC, 6001 Executive Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892 which was published in the Federal Register on August 30, 2016, 81 FR 59643.

    The meeting notice is being cancelled due to reviewer conflicts. The review will be rescheduled.

    Dated: September 16, 2016. Carolyn A. Baum, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22812 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Institute of Allergy And Infectious Diseases; Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The contract proposals and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the contract proposals, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Special Emphasis Panel; NIAID Peer Review Meeting.

    Date: October 26, 2016.

    Time: 9:30 a.m. to 12:30 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate contract proposals.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, 5601 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20892 (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: Dharmendar Rathore, Ph.D., Senior Scientific Review Officer, Scientific Review Program, Division of Extramural Activities, Room 3G30, National Institutes of Health/NIAID, 5601 Fishers Lane, Drive, MSC 9823, Bethesda, MD 20892-9823, 240-669-5058, [email protected].

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.855, Allergy, Immunology, and Transplantation Research; 93.856, Microbiology and Infectious Diseases Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: September 16, 2016. Natasha M. Copeland, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22819 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases; Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The contract proposals and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the contract proposals, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Special Emphasis Panel; NIAID Peer Review Meeting.

    Date: October 13, 2016.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate contract proposals.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, 5601 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20892 (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: Jay Bruce Sundstrom, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Scientific Review Program, Division of Extramural Activities, Room 3G11A, National Institutes of Health/NIAID, 5601 Fishers Lane, MSC 9823, Bethesda, MD 20892-9823, 240-669-5045, [email protected]

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.855, Allergy, Immunology, and Transplantation Research; 93.856, Microbiology and Infectious Diseases Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: September 15, 2016. Natasha M. Copeland, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22818 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke; Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke Special Emphasis Panel; R13 Review.

    Date: October 20-21, 2016.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Neuroscience Center, 6001 Executive Boulevard, Rockville, MD 20852 (Virtual Meeting).

    Contact Person: Li Jia, Ph.D., Scientific Review Administrator, Scientific Review Branch, NINDS/NIH/DHHS, Neuroscience Center, 6001 Executive Blvd., Suite 3204, MSC 9529, Bethesda, MD 20892-9529, 301-496-9223, [email protected]

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.853, Clinical Research Related to Neurological Disorders; 93.854, Biological Basis Research in the Neurosciences, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: September 16, 2016. Sylvia L. Neal, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22813 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health Center for Scientific Review; Notice of Closed Meetings

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following meetings.

    The meetings will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: Cell Biology Integrated Review Group; Molecular and Integrative Signal Transduction Study Section.

    Date: October 18-19, 2016.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Hotel Kabuki, 1625 Post Street, San Francisco, CA 94115.

    Contact Person: Raya Mandler, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5134, MSC 7840, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 402-8228, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: Brain Disorders and Clinical Neuroscience Integrated Review Group; Clinical Neuroscience and Neurodegeneration Study Section.

    Date: October 18-19, 2016.

    Time: 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892.

    Contact Person: Alessandra C Rovescalli, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, National Institutes of Health, Center for Scientific Review, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Rm. 5205 MSC7846, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435-1021, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: Healthcare Delivery and Methodologies Integrated Review Group; Community Influences on Health Behavior Study Section.

    Date: October 20-21, 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, Montgomery County Conference Center Facility, 5701 Marinelli Road, North Bethesda, MD 20852.

    Contact Person: Tasmeen Weik, DRPH, MPH, Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 3141, Bethesda, MD 20892, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: Brain Disorders and Clinical Neuroscience Integrated Review Group; Clinical Neuroplasticity and Neurotransmitters Study Section.

    Date: October 20-21, 2016.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Fairmont Washington DC, Georgetown, 2401 M Street NW., Washington, DC 20037.

    Contact Person: Suzan Nadi, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5217B, MSC 7846, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-435-1259, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: Integrative, Functional and Cognitive Neuroscience Integrated Review Group; Auditory System Study Section.

    Date: October 20-21, 2016.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Bethesda North Marriott Hotel & Conference Center, Montgomery County Conference Center Facility, 5701 Marinelli Road, North Bethesda, MD 20852.

    Contact Person: Lynn E Luethke, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5166, MSC 7844, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 806-3323, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel; Fellowships: Immunology.

    Date: October 20-21, 2016.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Doubletree Hotel Bethesda, (Formerly Holiday Inn Select), 8120 Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20814.

    Contact Person: Alok Mulky, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4203, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435-3566, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: Biological Chemistry and Macromolecular Biophysics Integrated Review Group; Synthetic and Biological Chemistry A Study Section.

    Date: October 20-21, 2016.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Bethesda Marriott Suites, 6711 Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20817.

    Contact Person: Anita Szajek, Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4187, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-827-6276, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: Endocrinology, Metabolism, Nutrition and Reproductive Sciences Integrated Review Group: Cellular, Molecular and Integrative Reproduction Study Section

    Date: October 20-21, 2016

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications

    Place: New Orleans Marriott, 555 Canal Street, New Orleans, LA 70131.

    Contact Person: Gary Hunnicutt, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 6164, MSC 7892, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-435-0229, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: Endocrinology, Metabolism, Nutrition and Reproductive Sciences Integrated Review Group: Clinical and Integrative Diabetes and Obesity Study Section.

    Date: October 20-21, 2016.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Cambria Suites Rockville, 1 Helen Henghan Way, Rockville, MD 20850.

    Contact Person: Hui Chen, MD, Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-435-1044, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: Population Sciences and Epidemiology Integrated Review Group: Social Sciences and Population Studies A Study Section.

    Date: October 20-21, 2016.

    Time: 8:30 a.m. to 12:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Hilton Alexandria Old Town, 1767 King Street, Alexandria, VA 22314.

    Contact Person: Suzanne Ryan, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 3139, MSC 7770, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435-1712, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: Molecular, Cellular and Developmental Neuroscience Integrated Review Group: Cellular and Molecular Biology of Neurodegeneration Study Section.

    Date: October 20-21, 2016.

    Time: 8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: Grant applications.

    Place: The Ritz-Carlton, Tysons Corner, 1700 Tysons Boulevard, McLean, VA 22102.

    Contact Person: Laurent Taupenot, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4183, MSC 7850, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-435-1203, [email protected].

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.306, Comparative Medicine; 93.333, Clinical Research, 93.306, 93.333, 93.337, 93.393-93.396, 93.837-93.844, 93.846-93.878, 93.892, 93.893, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: September 16, 2016. Anna Snouffer, Deputy Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22816 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Institute of General Medical Sciences; Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: NIGMS Initial Review Group: Training and Workforce Development Subcommittee—A Review of T32 Applications.

    Date: December 8-9, 2016.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Cambria Suites Rockville, 1 Helen Heneghan Way, Rockville, MD 20850.

    Contact Person: John J. Laffan, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Office of Scientific Review, National Institute of General Medical Sciences, National Institutes of Health, Natcher Building, Room 3AN18J, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-594-2773, [email protected]

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.375, Minority Biomedical Research Support; 93.821, Cell Biology and Biophysics Research; 93.859, Pharmacology, Physiology, and Biological Chemistry Research; 93.862, Genetics and Developmental Biology Research; 93.88, Minority Access to Research Careers; 93.96, Special Minority Initiatives; 93.859, Biomedica Research and Research Training, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: September 16, 2016. Melanie J. Gray, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22811 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health & Human Development; Notice of Closed Meetings

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following meetings.

    The meetings will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Special Emphasis Panel; NICHD ZIKV R21 Teleconference Review.

    Date: October 25, 2016.

    Time: 2:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Rockledge 6710B, 6710B Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20817 (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: Sherry L. Dupere, Ph.D., Chief, Scientific Review Branch, Scientific Review Branch, Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, NIH, Rockledge 6710B, 6710B Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20817, 301-451-3415, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Special Emphasis Panel.

    Date: November 7, 2016.

    Time: 11:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, 6710 B Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: Dennis E. Leszczynski, Ph.D., Scientific Review Administrator, Division of Scientific Review, National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, NIH, Rockledge 6710B, 6710B Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20817, (301) 435-6884, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Special Emphasis Panel.

    Date: November 14, 2016.

    Time: 9:30 a.m. to 1:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, 6710B Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: Dennis E. Leszczynski, Ph.D., Scientific Review Administrator, Division of Scientific Review, National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, NIH, Rockledge 6710B, 6710B Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20817, (301) 435-6884, [email protected]

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.864, Population Research; 93.865, Research for Mothers and Children; 93.929, Center for Medical Rehabilitation Research; 93.209, Contraception and Infertility Loan Repayment Program, National Institutes of Health, HHS).
    Dated: September 16, 2016. Michelle Trout, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22809 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard [Docket No. USCG-2016-0848] National Offshore Safety Advisory Committee AGENCY:

    Coast Guard, Department of Homeland Security.

    ACTION:

    Notice of Federal advisory committee meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    The National Offshore Safety Advisory Committee and its Subcommittee will hold meetings in Houston, TX to discuss the safety of operations and other matters affecting the offshore oil and gas industry. These meetings are open to the public.

    DATES:

    The Well Intervention Subcommittee of the National Offshore Safety Advisory Committee will meet on Tuesday, November 1, 2016, from 1 p.m. to 2:30 p.m. and the full Committee will meet on Wednesday, November 2, 2016, from 8:30 a.m. to 6 p.m. (All times are Central Daylight Time). These meetings may end early if the Committee has completed its business, or they may be extended based on the number of public comments.

    ADDRESSES:

    The meetings will be held at the Offices of Beirne, Maynard and Parsons, L.L.P., 25th Floor Conference Room, 1300 Post Oak Blvd., Houston, TX 77056. Phone (713) 968-3811.

    For information on facilities or services for individuals with disabilities, or to request special assistance at the meetings, contact the individuals listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section as soon as possible.

    Instruction: To facilitate public participation, we are inviting public comment on the issues to be considered by the Committee as listed in the “Agenda” section below. Written comments for distribution to Committee members must be submitted no later than October 14, 2016, if you want the Committee members to be able to review your comments before the meeting, and must be identified by docket number USCG-2016-0848. Written comments may be submitted using the Federal e-Rulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. For technical difficulties, contact the individuals listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document. Comments received will be posted without alteration at http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided. 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).

    Docket Search: For access to the docket or to read documents or comments related to this notice, go to http://www.regulations.gov, insert USCG-2016-0848 in the Search box, press Enter, and then click on the item you wish to view.

    A public oral comment period will be held during the meeting on November 2, 2016, and speakers are requested to limit their comments to 3 minutes. Contact one of the individuals listed below to register as a speaker.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Commander Jose Perez, Designated Federal Officer of the National Offshore Safety Advisory Committee, Commandant (CG-OES-2), U.S. Coast Guard, 2703 Martin Luther King, Jr. Avenue SE., Stop 7509, Washington, DC 20593-7509; telephone (202) 372-1410, fax (202) 372-8382 or email [email protected], or Mr. Patrick Clark, telephone (202) 372-1358, fax (202) 372-8382 or email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Notice of this meeting is in compliance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act, Title 5 United States Code Appendix. The National Offshore Safety Advisory Committee provides advice and recommendations to the Department of Homeland Security on matters and actions concerning activities directly involved with or in support of the exploration of offshore mineral and energy resources insofar as they relate to matters within U.S. Coast Guard jurisdiction.

    A copy of all meeting documentation including the agenda, any draft final reports, new task statement and presentations will be available at https://homeport.uscg.mil/NOSAC no later than October 21, 2016. Alternatively, you may contact Mr. Patrick Clark as noted in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section above.

    Agenda Day 1

    The Subcommittee on Well Intervention Activities on the Outer Continental Shelf will meet on November 1, 2016 from 1 p.m. to 2:30 p.m. (Central Daylight Time) to review, discuss, and formulate recommendations.

    Day 2

    The National Offshore Safety Advisory full Committee will hold a public meeting on November 2, 2016 from 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. (Central Daylight Time) to review and discuss the progress of, and any reports and recommendations received from, the above listed Subcommittee from their deliberations on November 1, 2016. The Committee will then use this information and consider public comments in formulating recommendations to the U.S. Coast Guard. Public comments or questions will be taken at the discretion of the Designated Federal Officer during the discussion and recommendation portions of the meeting and during the public comment period, see Agenda item (6).

    A complete agenda for November 2, 2016 Committee meeting is as follows:

    (1) Welcoming remarks.

    (2) General Administration and accept minutes from March 2016 National Offshore Safety Advisory Committee public meeting.

    (3) Current Business—Presentation and discussion of updates and a final report to include recommendations from the Subcommittee on Well Intervention.

    (4) New Business.

    (a) Discussion of any new business items.

    (b) Introduction of a task statement requesting National Offshore Safety Advisory Committee's input on the draft Navigation and Vessel Inspection Circular on Cyber Security for Marine Operations on the U.S. Outer Continental Shelf.

    (5) Presentations on the following matters:

    (a) Eighth Coast Guard District Officer in Charge Marine Inspection Risk Based Inspection Program;

    (b) Oil Companies International Marine Forum presentation on their Offshore Vessel Inspection Database Program;

    (c) Update from the Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement;

    (d) Strengthening the Safety Culture of the Offshore Oil and Gas Industry Report presented by representatives from the Transportation Research Board.

    (6) Public comment period.

    Minutes

    Meeting minutes from this public meeting will be available for public view and copying within 90 days following the close of the meeting at the https://homeport.uscg.mil/NOSAC Web site.

    Dated: September 7, 2016. J.G. Lantz, Director of Commercial Regulations and Standards.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22839 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Federal Emergency Management Agency [Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4277-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2016-0001] Louisiana; Amendment No. 5 to Notice of a Major Disaster Declaration AGENCY:

    Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration for the State of Louisiana (FEMA-4277-DR), dated August 14, 2016, and related determinations.

    DATES:

    Effective August 31, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Dean Webster, Office of Response and Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW., Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-2833.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Notice is hereby given that the incident period for this disaster is closed effective August 31, 2016.

    The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance—Disaster Housing Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households—Other Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants—Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

    W. Craig Fugate, Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22781 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-23-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Federal Emergency Management Agency [Docket ID FEMA-2014-0005] Individual Assistance Declarations Factors Guidance AGENCY:

    Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) is accepting comments on the Individual Assistance Declarations Factors Guidance.

    DATES:

    Comments must be received by October 24, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Comments must be identified by docket ID FEMA-2014-0005 and may be submitted by one of the following methods:

    Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Please note that this proposed policy is not a rulemaking and the Federal Rulemaking Portal is being utilized only as a mechanism for receiving comments.

    Mail: Regulatory Affairs Division, Office of Chief Counsel, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 8NE, 500 C Street SW., Washington, DC 20472-3100.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Mark Millican, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW., Washington, DC 20472, (phone) 202-212-3221 or (email) [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Public Participation

    Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name and docket ID. Regardless of the method used for submitting comments or material, all submissions will be posted, without change, to the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov, and will include any personal information you provide. Therefore, submitting this information makes it public. You may wish to read the Privacy Act notice, which can be viewed by clicking on the “Privacy Notice” link in the footer of www.regulations.gov.

    You may submit your comments and material by the methods specified in the ADDRESSES section. Please submit your comments and any supporting material by only one means to avoid the receipt and review of duplicate submissions.

    Docket: The proposed guidance is available in docket ID FEMA-2014-0005. For access to the docket to read background documents or comments received, go to the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov and search for the docket ID. Submitted comments may also be inspected at FEMA, Office of Chief Counsel, 8NE, 500 C Street SW., Washington, DC 20472.

    II. Background

    Section 1109 of the Sandy Recovery Improvement Act of 2013 1 requires FEMA, in cooperation with State, local, and Tribal emergency management agencies, to review, update, and revise through rulemaking the factors found at 44 CFR 206.48(b) that FEMA uses to determine whether to recommend provision of Indiviual Assistance during a major disaster. On November 12, 2015, FEMA published a notice of proposed rulemaking as part of its effort to meet the requirements in section 1109 of the Sandy Recovery Improvement Act of 2013. 80 FR 70116. FEMA is now seeking comment on its proposed Individual Assistance Declarations Factors Guidance, which is intended to provide additional information to the public regarding the manner in which FEMA is proposing to evaluate a request for a major disaster declaration authorizing Individual Assistance.

    1 Public Law 113-2, § 1109.

    The proposed guidance does not have the force or effect of law.

    FEMA seeks comment on the proposed guidance, which is available online at http://www.regulations.gov in docket ID FEMA-2014-0005, and whether there is any additional information that FEMA could include in the guidance to provide further clarity. Based on the comments received, FEMA may make appropriate revisions to the proposed guidance, and as appropriate, revisions to the final rule. When FEMA issues a final guidance, FEMA will publish a notice of availability for the final guidance in the Federal Register and make the final guidance available at http://www.regulations.gov.

    Authority:

    Pub. L. 113-2.

    Dated: September 14, 2016. W. Craig Fugate, Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22796 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-23-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Federal Emergency Management Agency [Docket ID FEMA-2016-0002] Changes in Flood Hazard Determinations AGENCY:

    Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Final notice.

    SUMMARY:

    New or modified Base(1-percent annual chance) Flood Elevations (BFEs), base flood depths, Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) boundaries or zone designations, and/or regulatory floodways (hereinafter referred to as flood hazard determinations) as shown on the indicated Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) for each of the communities listed in the table below are finalized. Each LOMR revises the Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs), and in some cases the Flood Insurance Study (FIS) reports, currently in effect for the listed communities. The flood hazard determinations modified by each LOMR will be used to calculate flood insurance premium rates for new buildings and their contents.

    DATES:

    The effective date for each LOMR is indicated in the table below.

    ADDRESSES:

    Each LOMR is available for inspection at both the respective Community Map Repository address listed in the table below and online through the FEMA Map Service Center at www.msc.fema.gov.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Rick Sacbibit, Chief, Engineering Services Branch, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration, FEMA, 400 C Street SW., Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-7659, or (email) [email protected]; or visit the FEMA Map Information eXchange (FMIX) online at www.floodmaps.fema.gov/fhm/fmx_main.html.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) makes the final flood hazard determinations as shown in the LOMRs for each community listed in the table below. Notice of these modified flood hazard determinations has been published in newspapers of local circulation and 90 days have elapsed since that publication. The Deputy Associate Administrator for Insurance and Mitigation has resolved any appeals resulting from this notification.

    The modified flood hazard determinations are made pursuant to section 206 of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C. 4105, and are in accordance with the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968, 42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq., and with 44 CFR part 65.

    For rating purposes, the currently effective community number is shown and must be used for all new policies and renewals.

    The new or modified flood hazard information is the basis for the floodplain management measures that the community is required either to adopt or to show evidence of being already in effect in order to remain qualified for participation in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP).

    This new or modified flood hazard information, together with the floodplain management criteria required by 44 CFR 60.3, are the minimum that are required. They should not be construed to mean that the community must change any existing ordinances that are more stringent in their floodplain management requirements. The community may at any time enact stricter requirements of its own or pursuant to policies established by other Federal, State, or regional entities.

    This new or modified flood hazard determinations are used to meet the floodplain management requirements of the NFIP and also are used to calculate the appropriate flood insurance premium rates for new buildings, and for the contents in those buildings. The changes in flood hazard determinations are in accordance with 44 CFR 65.4.

    Interested lessees and owners of real property are encouraged to review the final flood hazard information available at the address cited below for each community or online through the FEMA Map Service Center at www.msc.fema.gov.

    (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. 97.022, “Flood Insurance.”) Dated: August 26, 2016. Roy E. Wright, Deputy Associate Administrator for Insurance and Mitigation, Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency. State and county Location and case No. Chief executive, officer of community Community map repository Effective date of
  • modification
  • Community No.
    Alabama: Shelby (FEMA Docket No.: B-1611) City of Hoover (15-04-7711P) The Honorable Gary Ivey, Mayor, City of Hoover, 100 Municipal Lane, Hoover, AL 35216 Building Inspections Department, 2020 Valleydale Road, Hoover, AL 35244 Jun. 13, 2016 010123 Shelby (FEMA Docket No.: B-1611) Unincorporated areas of Shelby County, (15-04-7711P) The Honorable Rick Shepherd, Chairman, Shelby County Commission, 200 West College Street, Columbiana, AL 35051 Shelby County Engineer's Office, 506 Highway 70, Columbiana, AL 35051 Jun. 13, 2016 010191 Arizona: Maricopa (FEMA Docket No.: B-1611) City of Scottsdale, (15-09-1857P) The Honorable W.J. “Jim” Lane, Mayor, City of Scottsdale, 3939 North Drinkwater Boulevard, Scottsdale, AZ 85251 Stormwater and Floodplain Management Department, 7447 East Indian School Road, Suite 125, Scottsdale, AZ 85251 Jun. 10, 2016 045012 Arkansas: Van Buren (FEMA Docket No.: B-1555) City of Clinton, (15-06-3659P) The Honorable Richard McCormac, Mayor, City of Clinton, P.O. Box 970, Clinton, AR 72031 City Hall, 342 Main Street, Clinton, AR 72031 Mar. 4, 2016 050211 Van Buren (FEMA Docket No.: B-1555) Unincorporated areas of Van Buren County, (15-06-3659P) The Honorable Roger Hooper, Van Buren County Judge, P.O. Box 60, Clinton, AR 72031 Van Buren County Clerk's Office, 1414 Highway 65 South, Clinton, AR 72031 Mar. 4, 2016 050566 White (FEMA Docket No.: B-1614) City of Beebe, (15-06-1373P) The Honorable Mike Robertson, Mayor, City of Beebe, 321 North Elm Street, Beebe, AR 72012 City Hall, 321 North Elm Street, Beebe, AR 72012 Jun. 22, 2016 050223 White (FEMA Docket No.: B-1614) Unincorporated areas of White County, (15-06-1373P) The Honorable Michael Lincoln, White County Judge, 300 North Spruce Street, Searcy, AR 72143 White County Office of Emergency Management, 417 North Spruce Street, Searcy, AR 72143 Jun. 22, 2016 050467 California: Santa Barbara (FEMA Docket No.: B-1611) City of Santa Barbara, (15-09-1420P) The Honorable Helene Schneider, Mayor, City of Santa Barbara, P.O. Box 1990, Santa Barbara, CA 93102 Public Works Department, 630 Garden Street, Santa Barbara, CA 93101 Jun. 13, 2016 060335 Colorado: Douglas (FEMA Docket No.: B-1614) Town of Castle Rock, (16-08-0265P) The Honorable Paul Donahue, Mayor, Town of Castle Rock, 100 North Wilcox Street, Castle Rock, CO 80104 Utilities Department, 175 Kellogg Court, Castle Rock, CO 80109 Jun. 24, 2016 080050 Jefferson (FEMA Docket No.: B-1618) Unincorporated areas of Jefferson County, (15-08-0540P) The Honorable Casey Tighe, Chairman, Jefferson County Board of Commissioners, 100 Jefferson County Parkway, Golden, CO 80419 Department of Planning and Zoning, 100 Jefferson County Parkway, Golden, CO 80419 Jul. 22, 2016 080087 Florida: Alachua (FEMA Docket No.: B-1611) City of Hawthorne, (15-04-8602P) The Honorable Matthew Surrency, Mayor, City of Hawthorne, P.O. Box 2413, Hawthorne, FL 32640 Building Department, 6700 Southeast 221st Street, Hawthorne, FL 32640 Jun. 16, 2016 120682 Alachua (FEMA Docket No.: B-1611) Unincorporated areas of Alachua County, (15-04-A130P) The Honorable Robert “Hutch” Hutchinson, Chairman, Alachua County Board of Commissioners, 12 Southeast 1st Street, Gainesville, FL 32601 Alachua County Public Works Department, 5620 Northwest 120th Lane, Gainesville, FL 32601 Jun. 21, 2016 120001 Bay (FEMA Docket No.: B-1611) City of Panama City Beach, (15-04-9706P) The Honorable Gayle Oberst, Mayor, City of Panama City Beach, 110 South Arnold Road, Panama City Beach, FL 32413 Engineering Department, 110 South Arnold Road, Panama City Beach, FL 32413 Jun. 21, 2016 120013 Bay (FEMA Docket No.: B-1614) Unincorporated areas of Bay County, (15-04-8357P) The Honorable Mike Nelson, Chairman, Bay County Board of Commissioners, 840 West 11th Street, Panama City, FL 32401 Bay County Planning and Zoning Division, 840 West 11th Street, Panama City, FL 32401 Jun. 27, 2016 120004 Bay (FEMA Docket No.: B-1611) Unincorporated areas of Bay County, (15-04-9706P) The Honorable Mike Nelson, Chairman, Bay County Board of Commissioners, 840 West 11th Street, Panama City, FL 32401 Bay County Planning and Zoning Division, 840 West 11th Street, Panama City, FL 32401 Jun. 21, 2016 120004 Collier (FEMA Docket No.: B-1611) Unincorporated areas of Collier County, (16-04-1863P) The Honorable Donna Fiala, Chair, Collier County Board of Commissioners, 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 303, Naples, FL 34112 Collier County Floodplain Management Section, 2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples, FL 34104 Jun. 15, 2016 120067 Monroe (FEMA Docket No.: B-1611) City of Marathon, (16-04-1559P) The Honorable Mark Senmartin, Mayor, City of Marathon, 9805 Overseas Highway, Marathon, FL 33050 Planning Department, 9805 Overseas Highway, Marathon, FL 33050 Jun. 16, 2016 120681 Monroe (FEMA Docket No.: B-1614) Unincorporated areas of Monroe County, (16-04-0898P) The Honorable Heather Carruthers, Mayor, Monroe County Board of Commissioners, 500 Whitehead Street, Suite 102, Key West, FL 33040 Monroe County Building Department, 2798 Overseas Highway, Suite 300, Marathon, FL 33050 Jun. 30, 2016 125129 Monroe (FEMA Docket No.: B-1611) Unincorporated areas of Monroe County, (16-04-1380P) The Honorable Heather Carruthers, Mayor, Monroe County Board of Commissioners, 500 Whitehead Street, Suite 102, Key West, FL 33040 Monroe County Building Department, 2798 Overseas Highway, Suite 300, Marathon, FL 33050 Jun. 17, 2016 125129 Monroe (FEMA Docket No.: B-1611) Unincorporated areas of Monroe County, (16-04-1801P) The Honorable Heather Carruthers, Mayor, Monroe County Board of Commissioners, 500 Whitehead Street, Suite 102, Key West, FL 33040 Monroe County Building Department, 2798 Overseas Highway, Suite 300, Marathon, FL 33050 Jun. 17, 2016 125129 Sarasota (FEMA Docket No.: B-1614) Unincorporated areas of Sarasota County, (16-04-1646P) The Honorable Alan Maio, Chairman, Sarasota County Board of Commissioners, 1660 Ringling Boulevard, Sarasota, FL 34236 Sarasota County Development Services Department, 1001 Sarasota Center Boulevard, Sarasota, FL 34240 Jun. 23, 2016 125144 Seminole (FEMA Docket No.: B-1614) City of Altamonte Springs, (16-04-0514P) The Honorable Patricia Bates, Mayor, City of Altamonte Springs, 225 Newburyport Avenue, Altamonte Springs, FL 32701 Public Works Department, 950 Calabria Drive, Altamonte Springs, FL 32701 Jun. 29, 2016 120290 St. Johns (FEMA Docket No.: B-1611) Unincorporated areas of St. Johns County, (15-04-9500P) The Honorable Jeb Smith, Chairman, St. Johns County Board of Commissioners, 500 San Sebastian View, St. Augustine, FL 32084 St. Johns County, Building Services Division, 4040 Lewis Speedway, St. Augustine, FL 32084 Jun. 13, 2016 125147 St. Johns (FEMA Docket No.: B-1614) Unincorporated areas of St. Johns County, (16-04-1087P) The Honorable Jeb Smith, Chairman, St. Johns County Board of Commissioners, 500 San Sebastian View, St. Augustine, FL 32084 St. Johns County Building Services Division, 4040 Lewis Speedway, St. Augustine, FL 32084 Jun. 28, 2016 125147 Maine: Hancock (FEMA Docket No.: B-1614) Town of Gouldsboro, (15-01-2374P) The Honorable Dana Rice, Chair, Town of Gouldsboro Board of Selectmen, P.O. Box 68, Prospect Harbor, ME 04669 Town Hall, 59 Main Street, Prospect Harbor, ME 04669 Jun. 24. 2016 230283 New Mexico: Bernalillo (FEMA Docket No.: B-1618) Unincorporated areas of Bernalillo County, (15-06-4028P) The Honorable Art De La Cruz, Chairman, Bernalillo County Board of Commissioners, 1 Civic Plaza Northwest, Albuquerque, NM 87102 Bernalillo County Public Works Department, 2400 Broadway Southeast, Albuquerque, NM 87102 Jun 7, 2016 350001 North Carolina: Buncombe (FEMA Docket No.: B-1614) Unincorporated areas of Buncombe County, (15-04-4244P) The Honorable David Gantt, Chairman, Buncombe County Board of Commissioners, 200 College Street,, Suite 316, Ashville, NC 28801 Buncombe County Planning Department, 46 Valley Street, Ashville, NC 28801 Jun. 30, 2016 370031 Forsyth (FEMA Docket No.: B-1611) City of Winston-Salem, (15-04-9863P) The Honorable Allen Joines, Mayor, City of Winston-Salem, 101 North Main Street, Suite 150, Winston Salem, NC 27101 City Hall, 101 North Main Street, Winston-Salem, NC 27101 Jun. 16, 2016 375360 Ohio: Montgomery (FEMA Docket No.: B-1611) City of Centerville, (15-05-1744P) The Honorable Brooks Compton, Mayor, City of Centerville, 350 Roselake Drive, Centerville, OH 45458 Public Works Department, 7970 South Suburban Road, Centerville, OH 45458 Jun. 15, 2016 390408 Pennsylvania: Elk (FEMA Docket No.: B-1618) Borough of Johnsonburg, (14-03-2810P) The Honorable Theresa Cherry, Mayor, Borough of Johnsonburg, 100 Main Street, Johnsonburg, PA 15845 Borough Hall, 100 Main Street, Johnsonburg, PA 15845 Jun. 27, 2016 420443 Elk (FEMA Docket No.: B-1618) Township of Ridgway, (14-03-2810P) The Honorable Richard Glover, Chairman, Township of Ridgway Board of Supervisors, 1537-A Montmorenci Road, Ridgway, PA 15853 Township Municipal Building, 1537-A Montmorenci Road, Ridgway, PA 15853 Jun. 27, 2016 420445 Lebanon (FEMA Docket No.: B-1605) Township of Heidelberg, (15-03-0736P) The Honorable Paul Fetter, Chairman, Township of Heidelberg Board of Supervisors, 111 Mill Road, Schaefferstown, PA 17088 Township Hall, 111 Mill Road, Schaefferstown, PA 17088 Jun. 16, 2016 420969 Lebanon (FEMA Docket No.: B-1605) Township of Millcreek, (15-03-0736P) The Honorable Donald R. Leibig, Chairman, Township of Millcreek Board of Supervisors, 81 East Alumni Avenue, Newmanstown, PA 17073 Planning and Zoning Department, 400 South 8th Street, Newmanstown, PA 17042 Jun. 16, 2016 420574 South Carolina: Berkeley (FEMA Docket No.: B-1614) Unincorporated areas of Berkeley County, (16-04-1799P) The Honorable William W. Peagler, III, Chairman, Berkeley County Council, 1003 Highway 52, Moncks Corner, SC 29461 Berkeley County Planning and Zoning Department, 1003 Highway 52, Moncks Corner, SC 29461 Jun. 30, 2016 450029 South Dakota: Lawrence (FEMA Docket No.: B-1614) City of Hill City, (15-08-0904P) The Honorable Dave Gray, Mayor, City of Hill City, P.O. Box 395, Hill City, SD 57745 Planning Department, 243 Deerfield Road, Hill City, SD 57745 Jun. 30, 2016 460064 Lawrence (FEMA Docket No.: B-1614) City of Spearfish, (15-08-0993P) The Honorable Dana Boke, Mayor, City of Spearfish, 625 5th Street, Spearfish, SD 57783 Municipal Services Centre, 625 5th Street, Spearfish, SD 57783 Jun. 24, 2016 460046 Pennington (FEMA Docket No.: B-1614) Unincorporated areas of Pennington County, (15-08-0904P) The Honorable Lyndell H. Petersen, Chairman, Pennington County Board of Commissioners, 130 Kansas City Street, Suite 100, Rapid City, SD 57701 Pennington County Planning Department, 832 St. Joseph Street, Rapid City, SD 57701 Jun. 30, 2016 460116 Texas: Bexar (FEMA Docket No.: B-1611) City of San Antonio, (15-06-0951P) The Honorable Ivy R. Taylor, Mayor, City of San Antonio, P.O. Box 839966, San Antonio, TX 78283 Transportation and Capital Improvements Department, Storm Water Division, 1901 South Alamo Street, 2nd Floor, San Antonio, TX 78204 Jun. 16, 2016 480045 Bexar (FEMA Docket No.: B-1614) City of San Antonio, (15-06-4534P) The Honorable Ivy R. Taylor, Mayor, City of San Antonio, P.O. Box 839966, San Antonio, TX 78283 Transportation and Capital Improvements Department, Stormwater Division, 1901 South Alamo Street, 2nd Floor, San Antonio, TX 78204 Jun. 22, 2016 480045 Bexar (FEMA Docket No.: B-1614) Unincorporated areas of Bexar County, (15-06-2058P) The Honorable Nelson W. Wolff, Bexar County Judge, Paul Elizondo Tower, 101 West Nueva Street, 10th Floor, San Antonio, TX 78205 Bexar County Public Works Department, 233 North Pecos-La Trinidad Street, Suite 420, San Antonio, TX 78207 Jun. 27, 2016 480035 Dallas (FEMA Docket No.: B-1614) City of Mesquite, (15-06-2748P) The Honorable Stan Pickett, Mayor, City of Mesquite, 1515 North Galloway Avenue, Mesquite, TX 75149 Engineering Division, 1515 North Galloway Avenue, Mesquite, TX 75149 Jun. 17, 2016 485490 Denton (FEMA Docket No.: B-1611) City of Carrollton, (15-06-3828P) The Honorable Matthew Marchant, Mayor, City of Carrollton, P.O. Box 110535, Carrollton, TX 75011 Building Inspections Department, 1945 East Jackson Road, Carrollton, TX 75006 Jun. 13, 2016 480167 Denton (FEMA Docket No.: B-1611) City of Plano, (15-06-3828P) The Honorable Harry LaRosiliere, Mayor, City of Plano, P.O. Box 860358, Plano, TX 75086 City Hall, 1520 K Avenue, Plano, TX 75074 Jun. 13, 2016 480140 Denton (FEMA Docket No.: B-1611) City of The Colony, (15-06-3828P) The Honorable Joe McCourry, Mayor, City of The Colony, 6800 Main Street, The Colony, TX 75056 Engineering Department, 6800 Main Street, The Colony, TX 75056 Jun. 13, 2016 481581 Harris (FEMA Docket No.: B-1614) Unincorporated areas of Harris County, (15-06-0921P) The Honorable Ed Emmett, Harris County Judge, 1001 Preston Street, Suite 911, Houston, TX 77002 Harris County Permit Office, 10555 Northwest Freeway, Houston, TX 77002 Jun. 29, 2016 480287 Montgomery (FEMA Docket No.: B-1611) City of Conroe, (15-06-1222P) The Honorable Webb K. Melder, Mayor, City of Conroe, P.O. Box 3066, Conroe, TX 77305 Department of Public Works, Engineering Division, 300 West Davis Street, Conroe, TX 77301 Jun. 13, 2016 480484 Wichita (FEMA Docket No.: B-1611) City of Wichita Falls, (15-06-2136P) The Honorable Glenn Barham, Mayor, City of Wichita Falls, P.O. Box 1431, Wichita Falls, TX 76307 City Hall, 1300 7th Street, Room 105, Wichita Falls, TX 76301 Jun. 14, 2016 480662 Utah: Davis (FEMA Docket No.: B-1611) City of Farmington, (15-08-1200P) The Honorable H. James Talbot, Mayor, City of Farmington, P.O. Box 160, Farmington, UT 84025 City Hall, 160 South Main Street, Farmington, UT 84025 Jun. 24, 2016 490044 Davis (FEMA Docket No.: B-1611) Unincorporated areas of Davis County, (15-08-1200P) The Honorable John Petroff, Jr., Chairman, Davis County Board of Commissioners, P.O. Box 618, Farmington, UT 84025 Davis County Planning Department, 61 South Main Street, Room 304, Farmington, UT 84025 Jun. 24, 2016 490038 Washington (FEMA Docket No.: B-1614) City of St. George, (16-08-0186P) The Honorable Jon Pike, Mayor, City of St. George, 175 East 200 North, St. George, UT 84770 City Hall, 175 East 200 North, St. George, UT 84770 Jun. 27, 2016 490177 Washington (FEMA Docket No.: B-1611) Unincorporated areas of Washington County, (15-08-1225P) The Honorable Alan D. Gardner, Chairman, Washington County Board of Commissioners, 197 East Tabernacle Street, St. George, UT 84770 Washington County Planning and Zoning Department, 197 East Tabernacle Street, St. George, UT 84770 Jun. 15, 2016 490224 Virginia: Chesterfield (FEMA Docket No.: B-1614) Unincorporated areas of Chesterfield County, (15-03-1125P) The Honorable Steve A. Elswick, Chairman, Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors, P.O. Box 40, Chesterfield, VA 23832 Chesterfield County Department of Environmental Engineering, 9800 Government Center Parkway, Chesterfield, VA 23832 Jun. 22, 2016 510035 Prince William (FEMA Docket No.: B-1618) Unincorporated areas of Prince William County, (16-03-0467P) The Honorable Corey A. Stewart, Chairman At-Large, Prince William County, Board of Supervisors, 1 County Complex Court, Prince William, VA 22192 Prince William County Department of Public Works, 5 County Complex Court, Prince William, VA 22192 Jun. 30, 2016 510119
    [FR Doc. 2016-22894 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-12-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Federal Emergency Management Agency [Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4277-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2016-0001] Louisiana; Amendment No. 4 to Notice of a Major Disaster Declaration AGENCY:

    Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration for the State of Louisiana (FEMA-4277-DR), dated August 14, 2016, and related determinations.

    DATES:

    Effective Date: September 1, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Dean Webster, Office of Response and Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW., Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-2833.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The notice of a major disaster declaration for the State of Louisiana is hereby amended to include the following areas among those areas determined to have been adversely affected by the event declared a major disaster by the President in his declaration of August 14, 2016.

    St. James and West Baton Rouge Parishes for Individual Assistance.

    Assumption, Cameron, St. Charles, St. James, St. John the Baptist, and West Baton Rouge Parishes for Public Assistance.

    The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance—Disaster Housing Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households—Other Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants—Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

    W. Craig Fugate, Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22779 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-23-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Federal Emergency Management Agency [Docket ID FEMA-2016-0002; Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-B-1646] Changes in Flood Hazard Determinations AGENCY:

    Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice lists communities where the addition or modification of Base Flood Elevations (BFEs), base flood depths, Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) boundaries or zone designations, or the regulatory floodway (hereinafter referred to as flood hazard determinations), as shown on the Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs), and where applicable, in the supporting Flood Insurance Study (FIS) reports, prepared by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) for each community, is appropriate because of new scientific or technical data. The FIRM, and where applicable, portions of the FIS report, have been revised to reflect these flood hazard determinations through issuance of a Letter of Map Revision (LOMR), in accordance with Title 44, Part 65 of the Code of Federal Regulations (44 CFR part 65). The LOMR will be used by insurance agents and others to calculate appropriate flood insurance premium rates for new buildings and the contents of those buildings. For rating purposes, the currently effective community number is shown in the table below and must be used for all new policies and renewals.

    DATES:

    These flood hazard determinations will become effective on the dates listed in the table below and revise the FIRM panels and FIS report in effect prior to this determination for the listed communities.

    From the date of the second publication of notification of these changes in a newspaper of local circulation, any person has 90 days in which to request through the community that the Deputy Associate Administrator for Insurance and Mitigation reconsider the changes. The flood hazard determination information may be changed during the 90-day period.

    ADDRESSES:

    The affected communities are listed in the table below. Revised flood hazard information for each community is available for inspection at both the online location and the respective community map repository address listed in the table below. Additionally, the current effective FIRM and FIS report for each community are accessible online through the FEMA Map Service Center at www.msc.fema.gov for comparison.

    Submit comments and/or appeals to the Chief Executive Officer of the community as listed in the table below.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Rick Sacbibit, Chief, Engineering Services Branch, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration, FEMA, 400 C Street SW., Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-7659, or (email) [email protected]; or visit the FEMA Map Information eXchange (FMIX) online at www.floodmaps.fema.gov/fhm/fmx_main.html.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The specific flood hazard determinations are not described for each community in this notice. However, the online location and local community map repository address where the flood hazard determination information is available for inspection is provided.

    Any request for reconsideration of flood hazard determinations must be submitted to the Chief Executive Officer of the community as listed in the table below.

    The modifications are made pursuant to section 201 of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C. 4105, and are in accordance with the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968, 42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq., and with 44 CFR part 65.

    The FIRM and FIS report are the basis of the floodplain management measures that the community is required either to adopt or to show evidence of having in effect in order to qualify or remain qualified for participation in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP).

    These flood hazard determinations, together with the floodplain management criteria required by 44 CFR 60.3, are the minimum that are required. They should not be construed to mean that the community must change any existing ordinances that are more stringent in their floodplain management requirements. The community may at any time enact stricter requirements of its own or pursuant to policies established by other Federal, State, or regional entities. The flood hazard determinations are in accordance with 44 CFR 65.4.

    The affected communities are listed in the following table. Flood hazard determination information for each community is available for inspection at both the online location and the respective community map repository address listed in the table below. Additionally, the current effective FIRM and FIS report for each community are accessible online through the FEMA Map Service Center at www.msc.fema.gov for comparison.

    (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. 97.022, “Flood Insurance.”) Dated: August 18, 2016. Roy E. Wright, Deputy Associate Administrator for Insurance and Mitigation, Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency. State and county Location and case No. Chief executive officer of community Community map
  • repository
  • Online location of letter of map revision Effective date of modification Community No.
    Colorado: Teller City of Woodland Park (16-08-0585P) The Honorable Neil Levy, Mayor, City of Woodland Park, City Hall, 220 West South Avenue, Woodland Park, CO 80866 City Hall, 220 West South Avenue, Woodland Park, CO 80866 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lomc. Nov. 3, 2016 080175 Idaho: Bonneville City of Ammon (16-10-0506P) The Honorable Dana Kirkham, Mayor, City of Ammon, City Hall, 2135 South Ammon Road, Ammon, ID 83406 City Hall, 2135 South Ammon Road, Ammon, ID 83406 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lomc Nov. 18, 2016 160028 Bonneville Unincorporated Areas of Bonneville County (16-10-0506P) Mr. Roger Christensen, Chairman, Bonneville County Board of Commissioners, 605 North Capital Avenue, Idaho Falls, ID 83402 Bonneville County Courthouse, 605 North Capital Avenue, Idaho Falls, ID 83402 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lomc Nov. 18, 2016 160027 Illinois: Will City of Lockport (15-05-2936P) The Honorable Steven Streit, Mayor, City of Lockport, 222 East 9th Street, Lockport, IL 60441 Public Works and Engineering, 17112 South Prime Boulevard, Lockport, IL 60441 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lomc Oct. 31, 2016 170703 Will City of Naperville (15-05-5882P) The Honorable Steve Chirico, Mayor, City of Naperville, 400 South Eagle Street, Naperville, IL 60540 City Hall, 400 South Eagle Street, Naperville, IL 60540 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lomc Nov. 7, 2016 170213 Will Unincorporated Areas of Will County (15-05-2936P) The Honorable Lawrence M. Walsh, County Executive, Will County, Will County Office Building, 302 North Chicago Street, Joliet, IL 60432 Land Use Department, 58 East Clinton Street, Suite 100, Joliet, IL 60432 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lomc Oct. 31, 2016 170695 Will Unincorporated Areas of Will County (15-05-5882P) The Honorable Lawrence M. Walsh, County Executive, Will County, Will County Office Building, 302 North Chicago Street, Joliet, IL 60432 Land Use Department, 58 East Clinton Street Suite 100, Joliet, IL 60432 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lomc Nov. 7, 2016 170695 Indiana: Delaware City of Muncie (16-05-1816P) The Honorable Dennis Tyler, Mayor, City of Muncie, City Hall, 300 North High Street 3rd Floor, Muncie, IN 47342 Delaware County Building, 100 West Main Street, Room 206, Muncie, IN 47305 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lomc Nov. 10, 2016 180053 Delaware City of Muncie (16-05-2551P) The Honorable Dennis Tyler, Mayor, City of Muncie, City Hall, 3rd Floor, 300 North High Street, Muncie, IN 47305 Delaware County Building, 100 West Main Street, Room 206, Muncie, IN 47305 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lomc Oct. 14, 2016 180053 Delaware Town of Yorktown (16-05-2551P) The Honorable Rich Lee, President, Town of Yorktown, 9800 West Smith Street, Yorktown, IN 47396 Town Hall, 9800 West Smith Street, Yorktown, IN 47396 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lomc Oct. 14, 2016 180361 Hamilton City of Noblesville (16-05-2763P) The Honorable John Ditslear, Mayor, City of Noblesville, 16 South 10th Street, Noblesville, IN 46060 City Hall, Department of Planning and Zoning, 16 South 10th Street Suite 150, Noblesville, IN 46060 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lomc Nov. 4, 2016 180082 Hamilton UnincorporatedAreas of Hamilton County (16-05-2763P) The Honorable Steve Dillinger, President, Hamilton County Board of, Commissioners, 1 Hamilton County Square, Suite 157, Noblesville, IN 46060 Hamilton County Government and Judicial Center, 1 Hamilton County Square, Noblesville, IN 46060 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lomc Nov. 4, 2016 180080 Kansas: Rice City of Lyons (16-07-1283P) The Honorable Michael Young, Mayor, City of Lyons, 201 West Main Street, P.O. Box 808, Lyons, KS 67554 City Hall, 201 West Main Street, Lyons, KS 67554 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lomc Nov. 4, 2016 200295 Minnesota: Clay City of Moorhead (16-05-3467P) The Honorable Del Rae Williams, Mayor, City of Moorhead, Moorhead City Hall, 500 Center Avenue, Moorhead, MN 56561 City Hall, 500 Center Avenue, Moorhead, MN 56561 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lomc Nov. 11, 2016 275244 Nebraska: Lincoln City of North Platte (16-07-0952P) The Honorable Dwight Livingston, Mayor, City of North Platte, 211 West 3rd Street, North Platte, NE 69101 City Hall, 211 West 3rd Street, North Platte, NE 69101 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lomc Oct. 26, 2016 310143 New Jersey: Monmouth Borough of Highlands (16-02-0850P) The Honorable Frank Nolan, Mayor, Borough of Highlands, Administrative Offices, 42 Shore Drive, Highlands, NJ 07732 Highlands Borough Hall, 171 Bay Avenue, Highlands, NJ 07732 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lomc Nov. 28, 2016 345297 Virginia: Independent City City of Newport News (16-03-0266P) The Honorable McKinley L. Price, Mayor, City of Newport News, City Council, 2400 Washington Avenue, Newport News, VA 23607 Department of Engineering, 2400 Washington Avenue, Newport News, VA 23607 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lomc Nov. 4, 2016 510103 Wisconsin: Dane City of Madison (16-05-3204P) The Honorable Paul R. Soglin, Mayor, City of Madison, 210 Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard, Room 403, Madison, WI 53703 City Hall, 210 Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard, Room 403, Madison, WI 53703 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lomc Oct. 27, 2016 550083 Dane Unincorporated Areas of Dane County (16-05-3204P) Mr. Joe Parisi, County Executive, Dane County, City County Building, 210 Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard, Room 421, Madison, WI 53703 City County Building, 210 Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard, Room 116, Madison, WI 53703 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lomc Oct. 27, 2016 550077 Eau Claire Unincorporated Areas of Eau Claire County (16-05-4739X) Mr. Gregg Moore, County Board Chair, Eau Claire County, 721 Oxford Avenue, Eau Claire, WI 54703 Eau Claire County Courthouse, 721 Oxford Avenue, Eau Claire, WI 54703 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lomc Oct. 26, 2016 555552 Kenosha Unincorporated Areas of Kenosha County (16-05-2093P) Mr. Edward Kubicki, County Board Supervisor, Kenosha County, Administrative Building, 1010 56th Street, Kenosha, WI 53140 Kenosha County Department of Planning and Development, 19600 75th Street, Kenosha, WI 53140 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lomc Oct. 25, 2016 550523
    [FR Doc. 2016-22787 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-12-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Federal Emergency Management Agency [Docket ID FEMA-2016-0002] Changes in Flood Hazard Determinations AGENCY:

    Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Final notice.

    SUMMARY:

    New or modified Base (1-percent annual chance) Flood Elevations (BFEs), base flood depths, Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) boundaries or zone designations, and/or regulatory floodways (hereinafter referred to as flood hazard determinations) as shown on the indicated Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) for each of the communities listed in the table below are finalized. Each LOMR revises the Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs), and in some cases the Flood Insurance Study (FIS) reports, currently in effect for the listed communities. The flood hazard determinations modified by each LOMR will be used to calculate flood insurance premium rates for new buildings and their contents.

    DATES:

    The effective date for each LOMR is indicated in the table below.

    ADDRESSES:

    Each LOMR is available for inspection at both the respective Community Map Repository address listed in the table below and online through the FEMA Map Service Center at www.msc.fema.gov.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Rick Sacbibit, Chief, Engineering Services Branch, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration, FEMA, 400 C Street SW., Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-7659, or (email) [email protected]; or visit the FEMA Map Information eXchange (FMIX) online at www.floodmaps.fema.gov/fhm/fmx_main.html.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) makes the final flood hazard determinations as shown in the LOMRs for each community listed in the table below. Notice of these modified flood hazard determinations has been published in newspapers of local circulation and 90 days have elapsed since that publication. The Deputy Associate Administrator for Insurance and Mitigation has resolved any appeals resulting from this notification.

    The modified flood hazard determinations are made pursuant to section 206 of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C. 4105, and are in accordance with the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968, 42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq., and with 44 CFR part 65.

    For rating purposes, the currently effective community number is shown and must be used for all new policies and renewals.

    The new or modified flood hazard information is the basis for the floodplain management measures that the community is required either to adopt or to show evidence of being already in effect in order to remain qualified for participation in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP).

    This new or modified flood hazard information, together with the floodplain management criteria required by 44 CFR 60.3, are the minimum that are required. They should not be construed to mean that the community must change any existing ordinances that are more stringent in their floodplain management requirements. The community may at any time enact stricter requirements of its own or pursuant to policies established by other Federal, State, or regional entities.

    This new or modified flood hazard determinations are used to meet the floodplain management requirements of the NFIP and also are used to calculate the appropriate flood insurance premium rates for new buildings, and for the contents in those buildings. The changes in flood hazard determinations are in accordance with 44 CFR 65.4.

    Interested lessees and owners of real property are encouraged to review the final flood hazard information available at the address cited below for each community or online through the FEMA Map Service Center at www.msc.fema.gov.

    (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. 97.022, “Flood Insurance.”) Dated: August 26, 2016. Roy E. Wright, Deputy Associate Administrator for Insurance and Mitigation, Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency. State and county Location and case No. Chief executive officer of community Community map
  • repository
  • Online location of letter of map revision Effective date of modification Community No.
    California: Sacramento (FEMA Docket No.: B-1608) Unincorporated Areas of Sacramento County (15-09-2246P) The Honorable Phil Serna, Chairman, Board of Supervisors, Sacramento County, 700 H Street, Suite 2450, Sacramento, CA 95814 Sacramento County, Department of Water Resources, 827 7th Street, Room 301, Sacramento, CA 95814 Mar. 21, 2016 060262 Connecticut: New Haven (FEMA Docket No.: B-1619) Town of Madison (15-01-1621P) Mr. Fillmore McPherson, First Selectman, Town of Madison, Town Office, 8 Campus Drive, Madison, CT 06443 Town Offices, 8 Campus Drive, Madison, CT 06443 Jul. 8, 2016 090079 Idaho: Ada FEMA Docket No.: B-1619) Unincorporated Areas of Ada County (16-10-0348X) Mr. Jim Tibbs, Chairman, Board of County Commissioners, 200 West Front Street, 3rd Floor, Boise, ID 83702 Ada County Courthouse, 200 West Front Street, Boise, ID 83702 Jun. 2, 2016 160001 Ada (FEMA Docket No.: B-1626) Unincorporated Areas of Ada County (16-10-0446P) Mr. Jim Tibbs, Chairman, Board of County Commissioners, 200 West Front Street, 3rd Floor, Boise, ID 83702 Ada County Courthouse, 200 West Front Street, Boise, ID 83702 Aug. 9, 2016 160001 Illinois: McHenry (FEMA Docket No.: B-1619) Unincorporated Areas of McHenry County (15-05-7970P) The Honorable Joseph Gottemoller, Chairman, McHenry County Board, County Government Center, 2200 North Seminary Avenue, Woodstock, IL 60098 County Government Center, 2200 North Seminary Avenue, Woodstock, IL 60098 Jul. 18, 2016 170732 McHenry (FEMA Docket No.: B-1619) Village of Fox River Grove (15-05-7970P) The Honorable Robert J. Nunamaker, Village President, Village of Fox River Grove, 305 Illinois Street, Fox River Grove, IL 60021 Village Hall, 305 Illinois Street, Fox River Grove, IL 60021 Jul. 18, 2016 170477 Sangamon FEMA Docket No.: B-1606) City of Springfield (15-05-8063X) The Honorable James O. Langfelder, Mayor, City of Springfield, 800 East Monroe, Springfield, IL 62701 Public Works Department, 300 South 7th Street, Room 203, Springfield, IL 62701 May 5, 2016 170604 Sangamon (FEMA Docket No.: B-1606) Unincorporated Areas of Sangamon County (15-05-8063X) The Honorable Andy Van Meter, Chairman, Sangamon County Board, 200 South 9th Street, Room 201, Springfield, IL 62701 Springfield-Sangamon County Regional Planning Commission, 200 South 9th Street, Room 212, Springfield, IL 62701 May 5, 2016 170912 Indiana: Hendricks (FEMA Docket No.: B-1626) Unincorporated Areas of Hendricks County (16-05-2570P) Mr. Michael E. Graham, Administrator to the County Commissioner, Hendricks County Government Center, 355 South Washington Street, Danville, IN 46122 Hendricks County Government Center, 355 South Washington Street, Danville, IN 46122 Jul. 7, 2016 180415 Iowa: Johnson (FEMA Docket No.: B-1619) City of Coralville (15-07-1807P) The Honorable John Lundell, Mayor, City of Coralville, 1512 7th Street, P.O. Box 5127, Coralville, IA 52241 City Hall, 1512 7th Street, Coralville, IA 52241 Jun. 24, 2016 190169 Johnson (FEMA Docket No.: B-1619) Unincorporated Areas of Johnson County (15-07-1807P) Mr. Rod Sullivan, Chairperson, Board of Supervisors, Johnson County Administration Building, 913 South Dubuque Street, Suite 204, Iowa City, IA 52240 Johnson County, Planning and Zoning, 913 South Dubuque Street, Iowa City, IA 52240 Jun. 24, 2016 190882 Kansas: Johnson (FEMA Docket No.: B-1619) City of Olathe (16-07-0379P) The Honorable Michael Copeland, Mayor, City of Olathe, P.O. Box 768, Olathe, KS 66051 City Hall, Olathe Planning Office, 100 West Santa Fe Drive, Olathe, KS 66061 Jul. 15, 2016 200173 Sedgwick (FEMA Docket No.: B-1606) City of Wichita (15-07-0922P) The Honorable Carl Brewer, Mayor, City of Wichita, City Hall, 455 North Main Street, 1st Floor, Wichita, KS 67202 Office of Stormwater Management, 455 North Main Street, 8th Floor, Wichita, KS 67202 Apr. 26, 2016 200328 Sedgwick (FEMA Docket No.: B-1606) Unincorporated Areas of Sedgwick County (15-07-0922P) The Honorable Richard Ranzau, Chairman, Sedgwick County Commission, 525 North Main No. 320, Wichita, KS 67203 Sedgwick County Code Enforcement Office, 144 South Seneca Street, Wichita, KS 67213 Apr. 26, 2016 200321 Minnesota: Anoka (FEMA Docket No.: B-1619) City of Blaine (15-05-7513P) The Honorable Tom Ryan, Mayor, City of Blaine, 10801 Town Square Drive Northeast, Blaine, MN 55449 City Hall Offices, 10801 Town Square Drive Northeast, Blaine, MN 55449 Jul. 1, 2016 270007 Clay (FEMA Docket No.: B-1619) City of Moorhead (16-05-0672P) The Honorable Del Rae Williams, Mayor, City of Moorhead, Moorhead City Hall, 500 Center Avenue, Moorhead, MN 56561 City Hall, 500 Center Avenue, Moorhead, MN 56561 Jun. 10, 2016 275244 New Jersey: Burlington (FEMA Docket No.: B-1626) Township of Medford (16-02-0032P) The Honorable Jeffrey Beenstock, Mayor, Township of Medford, 17 North Main Street, Medford, NJ 08055 Municipal Center, 17 North Main Street, Medford, NJ 08055 Aug. 5, 2016 340104 Middlesex (FEMA Docket No.: B-1626) Borough of Middlesex (16-02-0324P) The Honorable Ronald J. DiMura, Mayor, Borough of Middlesex, 1200 Mountain Avenue, Middlesex, NJ 08846 Municipal Court, 1200 Mountain Avenue, Middlesex, NJ 08846 Jul. 18, 2016 345305 Somerset (FEMA Docket No.: B-1626) Borough of Bound Brook (16-02-0324P) The Honorable Robert Fazen, Mayor, Borough of Bound Brook, 230 Hamilton Street, Bound Brook, NJ 08805 Municipal Building, 230 Hamilton Street, Bound Brook, NJ 08805 Jul. 18, 2016 340430 Somerset (FEMA Docket No.: B-1626) Borough of South Bound Brook (16-02-0324P) The Honorable Caryl Shoffner, Mayor, Borough of South Bound Brook, 12 Main Street, South Bound Brook, NJ 08880 Municipal Building, 12 Main Street, South Bound Brook, NJ 08880 Jul. 18, 2016 340445 Somerset (FEMA Docket No.: B-1626) Township of Bridgewater (16-02-0324P) The Honorable Daniel J. Hayes, Jr., Mayor, Township of Bridgewater, 100 Commons Way, Bridgewater, NJ 08807 Department of Code Enforcement, 700 Garretson Road, Bridgewater, NJ 08807 Jul. 18, 2016 340432 Somerset (FEMA Docket No.: B-1626) Township of Bridgewater (16-02-0607P) The Honorable Daniel J. Hayes Jr., Mayor, Township of Bridgewater, 100 Commons Way, Bridgewater, NJ 08807 Township of Bridgewater Department of Code Enforcement, 700 Garretson Road, Bridgewater, NJ 08807 Aug. 4, 2016 340432 Ohio: Franklin (FEMA Docket No.: B-1544) City of Columbus (15-05-2037P) The Honorable Michael B. Coleman, Mayor, City of Columbus, City Hall, 2nd Floor, 90 West Broad Street, Columbus, OH 43215 Department of Development, 757 Carolyn Avenue, Columbus, OH 43224 Dec. 18, 2015 390170 Franklin (FEMA Docket No.: B-1544) City of Grandview Heights (15-05-2037P) The Honorable Ray DeGraw, Mayor, City of Grandview Heights, City Hall, 1016 Grandview Avenue, Grandview Heights, OH 43212 Development Office, 1525 West Goodale Boulevard, Grandview Heights, OH 43123 Dec. 18, 2015 390172 Licking (FEMA Docket No.: B-1626) Village of Granville (16-05-1572P) The Honorable Melissa Hartfield, Mayor, Village of Granville, City Hall, 141 East Broadway Street, Granville, OH 43023 Village Offices, 141 East Broadway Street, Granville, OH 43023 Aug. 4, 2016 390330 Oregon: Lane (FEMA Docket No.: B-1619) City of Creswell (16-10-0415X) The Honorable Dave Stram, Mayor, City of Creswell, P.O. Box 276, Creswell, OR 97426 City Hall, 13 South 1st Street, Creswell, OR 97426 Jul. 5, 2016 410121 Lane (FEMA Docket No.: B-1619) Unincorporated Areas of Lane County (16-10-0415X) The Honorable Faye Stewart, Commissioner, East Lane County, Lane County Public Service Building, 125 East 8th Street, Eugene, OR 97401 Lane County Planning Department, Public Service Building, 125 East 8th Street, Eugene, OR 97401 Jul. 5, 2016 415591 Tennessee: Hamblen (FEMA Docket No.: B-1619) City of Morristown (15-04-8338P) The Honorable Gary Chesney, Mayor, City of Morristown, 100 West 1st North Street, P.O. Box 1499, Morristown, TN 37816 County Courthouse, 511 West 2nd North Street, Morristown, TN 37814 May 27, 2016 470070
    [FR Doc. 2016-22895 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-12-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Federal Emergency Management Agency [Docket ID FEMA-2016-0002] Final Flood Hazard Determinations AGENCY:

    Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Final notice.

    SUMMARY:

    Flood hazard determinations, which may include additions or modifications of Base Flood Elevations (BFEs), base flood depths, Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) boundaries or zone designations, or regulatory floodways on the Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) and where applicable, in the supporting Flood Insurance Study (FIS) reports have been made final for the communities listed in the table below.

    The FIRM and FIS report are the basis of the floodplain management measures that a community is required either to adopt or to show evidence of having in effect in order to qualify or remain qualified for participation in the Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA's) National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). In addition, the FIRM and FIS report are used by insurance agents and others to calculate appropriate flood insurance premium rates for buildings and the contents of those buildings.

    DATES:

    The effective date of January 20, 2017 which has been established for the FIRM and, where applicable, the supporting FIS report showing the new or modified flood hazard information for each community.

    ADDRESSES:

    The FIRM, and if applicable, the FIS report containing the final flood hazard information for each community is available for inspection at the respective Community Map Repository address listed in the tables below and will be available online through the FEMA Map Service Center at www.msc.fema.gov by the effective date indicated above.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Rick Sacbibit, Chief, Engineering Services Branch, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration, FEMA, 400 C Street SW., Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-7659, or (email) [email protected]; or visit the FEMA Map Information eXchange (FMIX) online at www.floodmaps.fema.gov/fhm/fmx_main.html.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) makes the final determinations listed below for the new or modified flood hazard information for each community listed. Notification of these changes has been published in newspapers of local circulation and 90 days have elapsed since that publication. The Deputy Associate Administrator for Insurance and Mitigation has resolved any appeals resulting from this notification.

    This final notice is issued in accordance with section 110 of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C. 4104, and 44 CFR part 67. FEMA has developed criteria for floodplain management in floodprone areas in accordance with 44 CFR part 60.

    Interested lessees and owners of real property are encouraged to review the new or revised FIRM and FIS report available at the address cited below for each community or online through the FEMA Map Service Center at www.msc.fema.gov. The flood hazard determinations are made final in the watersheds and/or communities listed in the table below.

    (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. 97.022, “Flood Insurance.”) Dated: August 18, 2016. Roy E. Wright, Deputy Associate Administrator for Insurance and Mitigation, Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency.

    I. Non-Watershed-Based Studies:

    Jackson County, Missouri and Incorporated Areas [Docket No.: FEMA-B-1524] Community Community map repository address City of Blue Springs City Hall, 903 West Main Street, Blue Springs, MO 64015. City of Buckner Municipal Building, 315 South Hudson Street, Buckner, MO 64016. City of Grain Valley City Hall, 711 Main Street, Grain Valley, MO 64029. City of Grandview City Hall, 1200 Main Street, Grandview, MO 64030. City of Greenwood City Hall, 709 West Main Street, Greenwood, MO 64034. City of Independence Public Works Department, 111 East Maple Avenue, Independence, MO 64050. City of Kansas City City Hall, Planning and Development, 414 East 12th Street, 15th Floor, Kansas City, MO 64106. City of Lake Lotawana City Hall, 100 Lake Lotawana Drive, Lake Lotawana, MO 64086. City of Lake Tapawingo City Hall, 144 Anchor Drive, Lake Tapawingo, MO 64015. City of Lee's Summit City Hall, 220 Southeast Green Street, Lee's Summit, MO 64063. City of Levasy City Hall, 103 Pacific Street, Levasy, MO 64066. City of Lone Jack City Hall, 207 North Bynum Road, Lone Jack, MO 64070. City of Oak Grove City Hall, 1300 South Broadway Street, Oak Grove, MO 64075. City of Raytown City Hall, 10000 East 59th Street, Raytown, MO 64133. City of Sugar Creek City Hall, 103 South Sterling Avenue, Sugar Creek, MO 64054. Unincorporated Areas of Jackson County Jackson County Courthouse, 415 East 12th Street, Suite 200, Kansas City, MO 64106. Village of River Bend Village Hall, 3923 North Cobbler Road, River Bend, MO 64058. Village of Sibley City Hall, 208 Front Street, Sibley, MO 64088. Village of Unity Facilities Building, 1901 Northwest Blue Parkway, Unity, MO 64065.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22850 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-12-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Federal Emergency Management Agency [Docket ID FEMA-2016-0002] Final Flood Hazard Determinations AGENCY:

    Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Final notice.

    SUMMARY:

    Flood hazard determinations, which may include additions or modifications of Base Flood Elevations (BFEs), base flood depths, Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) boundaries or zone designations, or regulatory floodways on the Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) and where applicable, in the supporting Flood Insurance Study (FIS) reports have been made final for the communities listed in the table below.

    The FIRM and FIS report are the basis of the floodplain management measures that a community is required either to adopt or to show evidence of having in effect in order to qualify or remain qualified for participation in the Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA's) National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). In addition, the FIRM and FIS report are used by insurance agents and others to calculate appropriate flood insurance premium rates for buildings and the contents of those buildings.

    DATES:

    The effective date of January 6, 2017 which has been established for the FIRM and, where applicable, the supporting FIS report showing the new or modified flood hazard information for each community.

    ADDRESSES:

    The FIRM, and if applicable, the FIS report containing the final flood hazard information for each community is available for inspection at the respective Community Map Repository address listed in the tables below and will be available online through the FEMA Map Service Center at www.msc.fema.gov by the effective date indicated above.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Rick Sacbibit, Chief, Engineering Services Branch, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration, FEMA, 400 C Street SW., Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-7659, or (email) [email protected]; or visit the FEMA Map Information eXchange (FMIX) online at www.floodmaps.fema.gov/fhm/fmx_main.html.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) makes the final determinations listed below for the new or modified flood hazard information for each community listed. Notification of these changes has been published in newspapers of local circulation and 90 days have elapsed since that publication. The Deputy Associate Administrator for Insurance and Mitigation has resolved any appeals resulting from this notification.

    This final notice is issued in accordance with section 110 of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C. 4104, and 44 CFR part 67. FEMA has developed criteria for floodplain management in floodprone areas in accordance with 44 CFR part 60.

    Interested lessees and owners of real property are encouraged to review the new or revised FIRM and FIS report available at the address cited below for each community or online through the FEMA Map Service Center at www.msc.fema.gov.

    The flood hazard determinations are made final in the watersheds and/or communities listed in the table below.

    (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. 97.022, “Flood Insurance.”) Dated: August 26, 2016. Roy E. Wright, Deputy Associate Administrator for Insurance and Mitigation, Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency. Community Community map repository address Harris County, Texas and Incorporated Areas Docket No.: FEMA-B-1343 City of Baytown City Hall, 2401 Market Street, Baytown, TX 75522. City of Deer Park City Hall, 710 East San Augustine, Deer Park, TX 77536. City of El Lago City Hall, 411 Tallowood Drive, El Lago, TX 77586. City of Galena Park City Hall, 2000 Clinton Drive, Galena Park, TX 77547. City of Houston Floodplain Management Office, 1002 Washington Avenue, 3rd Floor, Houston, TX 77002. City of Jacinto City Jacinto City City Hall, 1301 Mercury Drive, Houston, TX 77029. City of La Porte City Hall, 604 West Fairmont Parkway, La Porte, TX 77571. City of Morgan's Point City Hall, 1415 East Main Street, Morgan's Point, TX 77571. City of Nassau Bay City Hall, 1800 Space Park Drive, Suite 200, Nassau Bay, TX 77058. City of Pasadena Municipal Services Building, 1114 Davis Street, Pasadena, TX 77506. City of Seabrook City Hall, 1700 1st Street, Seabrook, TX 77586. City of Shoreacres City Hall, 601 Shore Acres Boulevard, Shoreacres, TX 77571. City of South Houston City Hall, 1018 Dallas Street, South Houston, TX 77587. City of Taylor Lake Village City Hall, 500 Kirby Boulevard, Taylor Lake Village, TX 77586. City of Webster City Hall, 101 Pennsylvania Avenue, Webster, TX 77598. Unincorporated Areas of Harris County Harris County Permit Office, 10555 Northwest Freeway, Suite 120, Houston, TX 77092.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22848 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-12-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Federal Emergency Management Agency [Docket ID FEMA-2016-0002] Changes in Flood Hazard Determinations AGENCY:

    Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Final notice.

    SUMMARY:

    New or modified Base (1-percent annual chance) Flood Elevations (BFEs), base flood depths, Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) boundaries or zone designations, and/or regulatory floodways (hereinafter referred to as flood hazard determinations) as shown on the indicated Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) for each of the communities listed in the table below are finalized. Each LOMR revises the Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs), and in some cases the Flood Insurance Study (FIS) reports, currently in effect for the listed communities. The flood hazard determinations modified by each LOMR will be used to calculate flood insurance premium rates for new buildings and their contents.

    DATES:

    The effective date for each LOMR is indicated in the table below.

    ADDRESSES:

    Each LOMR is available for inspection at both the respective Community Map Repository address listed in the table below and online through the FEMA Map Service Center at www.msc.fema.gov.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Rick Sacbibit, Chief, Engineering Services Branch, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration, FEMA, 400 C Street SW., Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-7659, or (email) [email protected]; or visit the FEMA Map Information eXchange (FMIX) online at www.floodmaps.fema.gov/fhm/fmx_main.html.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) makes the final flood hazard determinations as shown in the LOMRs for each community listed in the table below. Notice of these modified flood hazard determinations has been published in newspapers of local circulation and 90 days have elapsed since that publication. The Deputy Associate Administrator for Insurance and Mitigation has resolved any appeals resulting from this notification.

    The modified flood hazard determinations are made pursuant to section 206 of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C. 4105, and are in accordance with the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968, 42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq., and with 44 CFR part 65.

    For rating purposes, the currently effective community number is shown and must be used for all new policies and renewals.

    The new or modified flood hazard information is the basis for the floodplain management measures that the community is required either to adopt or to show evidence of being already in effect in order to remain qualified for participation in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP).

    This new or modified flood hazard information, together with the floodplain management criteria required by 44 CFR 60.3, are the minimum that are required. They should not be construed to mean that the community must change any existing ordinances that are more stringent in their floodplain management requirements. The community may at any time enact stricter requirements of its own or pursuant to policies established by other Federal, State, or regional entities.

    This new or modified flood hazard determinations are used to meet the floodplain management requirements of the NFIP and also are used to calculate the appropriate flood insurance premium rates for new buildings, and for the contents in those buildings. The changes in flood hazard determinations are in accordance with 44 CFR 65.4.

    Interested lessees and owners of real property are encouraged to review the final flood hazard information available at the address cited below for each community or online through the FEMA Map Service Center at www.msc.fema.gov.

    (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. 97.022, “Flood Insurance.”) Dated: August 18, 2016. Roy E. Wright, Deputy Associate Administrator for Insurance and Mitigation, Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency. State and county Location and case No. Chief executive officer of community Community map repository Effective date of
  • modification
  • Community No.
    Alabama: Coffee (FEMA Docket No.: B-1618) City of Enterprise (15-04-A168P) The Honorable Kenneth W. Boswell, Mayor, City of Enterprise, P.O. Box 311000, Enterprise, AL 36330 City Hall, 501 South Main Street, Enterprise, AL 36331 July 11, 2016 010045 Tuscaloosa (FEMA Docket No.: B-1614) City of Tuscaloosa (16-04-1952X) The Honorable Walter Maddox, Mayor, City of Tuscaloosa, P.O. Box 2089, Tuscaloosa, AL 35401 Engineering Department, 2201 University Boulevard, Tuscaloosa, AL 35401 July 5, 2016 010203 Arkansas: Benton (FEMA Docket No.: B-1618) Unincorporated areas of Benton County (15-06-4245P) The Honorable Robert D. Clinard, Benton County Judge, 215 East Central Avenue, Bentonville, AR 72712 Planning Department, 905 Northwest 8th Street, Bentonville, AR 72712 July 20, 2016 050419 Colorado: Boulder (FEMA Docket No.: B-1618) City of Boulder (15-08-0360P) The Honorable Suzanne Jones, Mayor, City of Boulder, P.O. Box 791, Boulder, CO 80306 Planning and Development Services Department, 1739 Broadway Street, Boulder, CO 80302 July 22, 2016 080024 Weld (FEMA Docket No.: B-1618) City of Greeley (15-08-0573P) The Honorable Tom Norton, Mayor, City of Greeley, 1000 10th Street, Greeley, CO 80631 City Hall, 1000 10th Street, Greeley, CO 80631 July 14, 2016 080184 Weld (FEMA Docket No.: B-1618) Unincorporated areas of Weld County (15-08-0573P) The Honorable Mike Freeman, Chairman, Weld County Board of Commissioners, P.O. Box 758, Greeley, CO 80632 Weld County Planning and Zoning Department, 1555 North 17th Avenue, Greeley, CO 80631 July 14, 2016 080266 Florida: Broward (FEMA Docket No.: B-1618) City of Fort Lauderdale (15-04-7586P) The Honorable John P. Seiler, Mayor, City of Fort Lauderdale, 100 North Andrews Avenue, 8th Floor, Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Building Services Department, 700 Northwest 19th Avenue, Plantation, FL 33311 July 14, 2016 125105 Broward (FEMA Docket No.: B-1618) Unincorporated areas of Broward County (15-04-7586P) Ms. Bertha Henry, Broward County Administrator, 115 South Andrews Avenue, Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Broward County Environmental Licensing and Building Permitting Division, 1 North University Drive, Fort Lauderdale, FL 33311 July 14, 2016 125093 Bay (FEMA Docket No.: B-1614) City of Pompano Beach (15-04-9775P) The Honorable Lamar Fisher, Mayor, City of Pompano Beach, 100 West Atlantic Boulevard, Pompano Beach, FL 33060 Building Inspections Division, 100 West Atlantic Boulevard, Pompano Beach, FL 33060 July 7, 2016 120055 Indian River (FEMA Docket No.: B-1618) City of Vero Beach (16-04-2464P) The Honorable Jay Kramer, Mayor, City of Vero Beach, 1053 20th Place, Vero Beach, FL 32960 City Hall, 1053 20th Place, Vero Beach, FL 32960 July 26, 2016 120124 Lake (FEMA Docket No.: B-1618) Unincorporated areas of Lake County (15-04-2425P) The Honorable Sean Parks, Chairman, Lake County Board of Commissioners, P.O. Box 7800, Tavares, FL 32778 Lake County Public Works Department, 323 North Sinclair Avenue, Tavares, FL 32778 July 25, 2016 120421 Manatee (FEMA Docket No.: B-1614) Unincorporated areas of Manatee County (16-04-1946X) The Honorable Vanessa Baugh, Chair, Manatee County Board of Commissioners, P.O. Box 1000, Bradenton, FL 34206 Manatee County Building and Development Services Department, 1112 Manatee Avenue West, Bradenton, FL 34205 July 5, 2016 120153 Miami-Dade (FEMA Docket No.: B-1614) City of Miami (15-04-9311P) The Honorable Tomás P. Regalado, Mayor, City of Miami, 3500 Pan American Drive, Miami, FL 33133 Building Department, 444 Southwest 2nd Avenue, 4th Floor, Miami, FL 33130 July 8, 2016 120650 Miami-Dade (FEMA Docket No.: B-1618) City of Miami (16-04-1012P) The Honorable Tomás P. Regalado, Mayor, City of Miami, 3500 Pan American Drive, Miami, FL 33133 Emergency Management Department, 444 Southwest 2nd Avenue, 10th Floor, Miami, FL 33130 July 29, 2016 120650 Osceola (FEMA Docket No.: B-1618) City of Kissimmee (14-04-A515P) The Honorable Jim Swan, Mayor, City of Kissimmee, 101 Church Street, Kissimmee, FL 34741 Engineering Department, 101 Church Street, Kissimmee, FL 34741 July 27, 2016 120190 Osceola (FEMA Docket No.: B-1618) Unincorporated areas of Osceola County (14-04-A515P) The Honorable Viviana Janer, Chair, Osceola County Board of Commissioners, 1 Courthouse Square, Suite 4700, Kissimmee, FL 34741 Osceola County Stormwater Department, 1 Courthouse Square, Suite 3100, Kissimmee, FL 34741 July 27, 2016 120189 St. Lucie (FEMA Docket No.: B-1618) City of Fort Pierce (16-04-2206P) The Honorable Linda Hudson, Mayor, City of Fort Pierce, 100 North U.S. Highway 1, Fort Pierce, FL 34950 Building Department, 100 North U.S. Highway 1, Fort Pierce, FL 34950 July 26, 2016 120286 St. Lucie (FEMA Docket No.: B-1618) Unincorporated areas of St. Lucie County (16-04-2206P) The Honorable Kim Johnson, Chairman, St. Lucie County Board of Commissioners, 2300 Virginia Avenue, Fort Pierce, FL 34982 St. Lucie County Planning and Development Department, 2300 Virginia Avenue, Fort Pierce, FL 34982 July 26, 2016 120285 Volusia (FEMA Docket No.: B-1614) City of Orange City (15-04-9264P) The Honorable Tom Laputka, Mayor, City of Orange City, 205 East Graves Avenue, Orange City, FL 32763 City Hall, 205 East Graves Avenue, Orange City, FL 32763 July 5, 2016 120633 Georgia: Chatham (FEMA Docket No.: B-1618) City of Pooler (16-04-1717P) The Honorable Mike Lamb, Mayor, City of Pooler, 100 Southwest Highway 80, Pooler, GA 31322 Zoning Administration Division, 100 Southwest Highway 80, Pooler, GA 31322 July 13, 2016 130261 Kentucky: Hardin (FEMA Docket No.: B-1618) City of Elizabethtown (15-04-9058P) The Honorable Edna Berger, Mayor, City of Elizabethtown, P.O. Box 550, Elizabethtown, KY 42702 City Hall, 200 West Dixie Avenue, Elizabethtown, KY 42701 July 19, 2016 210095 Hardin (FEMA Docket No.: B-1618) Unincorporated areas of Hardin County (15-04-9058P) The Honorable Harry L. Berry, Hardin County Judge/Executive, P.O. Box 568, Elizabethtown, KY 42702 Hardin County Planning and Development Commission, 150 North Provident Way, Suite 225, Elizabethtown, KY 42701 July 19, 2016 210094 Louisiana: East Baton Rouge (FEMA Docket No.: B-1618) City of Central (15-06-4438P) The Honorable Jr. Shelton, Mayor, City of Central, 13421 Hooper Road, Suite 9, Central, LA 70818 Planning and Zoning Commission, 6703 Sullivan Road, Central, LA 70739 July 15, 2016 220060 Massachusetts: Barnstable (FEMA Docket No.: B-1618) Town of Chatham (16-01-0500P) The Honorable Jeffrey S. Dykens, Chairman, Town of Chatham Board of Selectmen, 549 Main Street, Chatham, MA 02633 Community Development Department, 261 George Ryder Road, Chatham, MA 02633 July 8, 2016 250004 Barnstable (FEMA Docket No.: B-1618) Town of Harwich (16-01-0500P) The Honorable Peter S. Hughes, Chairman, Town of Harwich Board of Selectmen, 732 Main Street, Harwich, MA 02645 Town Hall, 732 Main Street, Harwich, MA 02645 July 8, 2016 250008 Mississippi: Copiah (FEMA Docket No.: B-1618) City of Hazlehurst (15-04-7795P) The Honorable Henry Banks, Mayor, City of Hazlehurst, 209 South Extension Street, Hazlehurst, MS 39083 City Hall, 209 South Extension Street, Hazlehurst, MS 39083 July 28, 2016 280046 Copiah (FEMA Docket No.: B-1618) Unincorporated areas of Copiah County (15-04-7795P) The Honorable Perry L. Hood, President, Copiah County Board of Supervisors, P.O. Box 551, Hazlehurst, MS 39083 Copiah County Circuit Clerk's Office, 100 Caldwell Street, Hazlehurst, MS 39083 July 28, 2016 280221 Montana: Ravalli (FEMA Docket No.: B-1618) Unincorporated areas of Ravalli County (16-08-0080P) The Honorable Ray Hawk, Chairman, Ravalli County Board of Commissioners, 215 South 4th Street, Suite A, Hamilton, MT 59840 Ravalli County Planning Department, 215 South 4th Street, Suite F, Hamilton, MT 59840 July 28, 2016 300061 New Hampshire: Rockingham (FEMA Docket No.: B-1618) Town of Windham (15-01-1350P) The Honorable Joel Desilets, Chairman, Town of Windham Board of Selectmen, 3 North Lowell Road, Windham, NH 03087 Community Development Department, 3 North Lowell Road, Windham, NH 03087 July 14, 2016 330144 North Carolina: Burke (FEMA Docket No.: B-1628) Unincorporated areas of Burke County (15-04-9342P) The Honorable Wayne F. Abele, Sr, Chairman, Burke County Board of Commissioners, P.O. Box 219, Morganton, NC 28680 Burke County Community Development Department, 110 North Green Street,, Morganton, NC 28655 Aug. 1, 2016 370034 Oklahoma: Tulsa (FEMA Docket No.: B-1618) City of Tulsa (15-06-0681P) The Honorable Dewey Bartlett, Jr., Mayor, City of Tulsa, 175 East 2nd Street, 15th Floor, Tulsa, OK 74103 Stormwater Design Department, 2317 South Jackson Avenue, Suite 302, Tulsa, OK 74103 July 19, 2016 405381 Pennsylvania: Delaware (FEMA Docket No.: B-1618) Borough of Trainer (15-03-2447P) The Honorable Frances Zalewski, Mayor, Borough of Trainer, 824 Main Street, Trainer, PA 19061 Borough Hall, 824 Main Street, Trainer, PA 19061 July 13, 2016 420437 Tennessee: Hamblen (FEMA Docket No.: B-1618) City of Morristown (15-04-7679P) The Honorable Gary Chesney, Mayor, City of Morristown, 100 West 1st North Street, Morristown, TN 37814 Community Development and Planning Department, 100 West 1st North Street, Morristown, TN 37814 July 7, 2016 470070 Sequatchie (FEMA Docket No.: B-1628) City of Dunlap (16-04-1892P) The Honorable Dwain Land, Mayor, City of Dunlap, P.O. Box 546, Dunlap, TN 37327 City Hall, 15595 Rankin Avenue, Dunlap, TN 37327 July 8, 2016 470270 Texas: Bexar (FEMA Docket No.: B-1618) City of San Antonio (16-06-0036P) The Honorable Ivy R. Taylor, Mayor, City of San Antonio, P.O. Box 839966, San Antonio, TX 78283 Transportation and Capital Improvements Department, Storm Water Division, 1901 South Alamo Street, 2nd Floor, San Antonio, TX 78204 July 11, 2016 480045 Bexar (FEMA Docket No.: B-1618) City of San Antonio (16-06-0941P) The Honorable Ivy R. Taylor, Mayor, City of San Antonio, P.O. Box 839966, San Antonio, TX 78283 Transportation and Capital Improvements Department, Storm Water Division, 1901 South Alamo Street, 2nd Floor, San Antonio, TX 78204 July 15, 2016 480045 Bexar (FEMA Docket No.: B-1628) Unincorporated areas of Bexar County (15-06-3161P) The Honorable Nelson W. Wolff, Bexar County Judge, Paul Elizondo Tower, 101 West Nueva Street, 10th Floor, San Antonio, TX 78205 Bexar County Public Works Department, 233 North Pecos-La Trinidad Street, Suite 420, San Antonio, TX 78207 July 22, 2016 480035 Collin (FEMA Docket No.: B-1618) City of Frisco (15-06-3867P) The Honorable Maher Maso, Mayor, City of Frisco, 6101 Frisco Square Boulevard, Frisco, TX 75034 Engineering Services Department, 6101 Frisco Square Boulevard, 3rd Floor, Frisco, TX 75034 July 11, 2016 480134 Collin (FEMA Docket No.: B-1618) City of McKinney (15-06-3643P) The Honorable Brian Loughmiller, Mayor, City of McKinney, P.O. Box 517, McKinney, TX 75070 Engineering Department, 221 North Tennessee Street, McKinney, TX 75069 July 11, 2016 480135 Collin (FEMA Docket No.: B-1618) City of McKinney (16-06-0893P) The Honorable Brian Loughmiller, Mayor, City of McKinney, P.O. Box 517, McKinney, TX 75070 Engineering Department, 221 North Tennessee Street, McKinney, TX 75069 July 11, 2016 480135 Collin (FEMA Docket No.: B-1628) Town of Westminster (16-06-0644P) Mr. Phil Goplin, President, Westminster Special Utility District, 409 East Houston Street, Westminster, TX 75485 Town Hall, 309 West Houston Street, Westminster, TX 75069 June 17, 2016 480758 Collin (FEMA Docket No.: B-1628) Unincorporated areas of Collin County (16-06-0644P) The Honorable Keith Self, Collin County Judge, 2300 Bloomdale Road, Suite 4192, McKinney, TX 75071 Collin County Engineering Department, 4690 Community Avenue, Suite 200, McKinney, TX 75071 June 17, 2016 480130 Denton (FEMA Docket No.: B-1618) City of Fort Worth (15-06-1721P) The Honorable Betsy Price, Mayor, City of Fort Worth, 1000 Throckmorton Street, Fort Worth, TX 76102 Stormwater Management Division, 1000 Throckmorton Street, Fort Worth, TX 76102 July 1, 2016 480596 Denton (FEMA Docket No.: B-1618) Town of Northlake (15-06-1721P) The Honorable Peter Dewing, Mayor, Town of Northlake, 1400 FM 407, Northlake, TX 76247 Public Works Department, 1400 FM 407, Northlake, TX 76247 July 1, 2016 480782 Denton (FEMA Docket No.: B-1614) Town of Trophy Club (15-06-3923P) The Honorable Nick Sanders, Mayor, Town of Trophy Club, 100 Municipal Drive, Trophy Club, TX 76262 Community Development Department, 100 Municipal Drive, Trophy Club, TX 76262 July 7, 2016 481606 Denton (FEMA Docket No.: B-1618) Unincorporated areas of Denton County (15-06-1721P) The Honorable Mary Horn, Denton County Judge, 110 West Hickory Street, 2nd Floor, Denton, TX 76201 Public Works Engineering Division, 1505 East McKinney Street, Suite 175, Denton, TX 76209 July 1, 2016 480774 Denton (FEMA Docket No.: B-1614) Unincorporated areas of Denton County (15-06-3923P) The Honorable Mary Horn, Denton County Judge, 110 West Hickory Street, 2nd Floor, Denton, TX 76201 Denton County Public Works and Planning Division, 1505 East McKinney Street, Suite 175, Denton, TX 76209 July 7, 2016 480774 Lamar (FEMA Docket No.: B-1618) City of Paris (14-06-4102P) The Honorable AJ Hashmi, Mayor, City of Paris, 135 Southeast 1st Street, Paris, TX 75460 Engineering, Planning and Development Department, 135 Southeast 1st Street, Paris, TX 75460 July 11, 2016 480427 Midland (FEMA Docket No.: B-1618) City of Midland (15-06-4466P) The Honorable Jerry Morales, Mayor, City of Midland, 300 North Loraine Street, Midland, TX 79701 Engineering Department, 300 North Loraine Street, Midland, TX 79701 July 20, 2016 480477 Montgomery (FEMA Docket No.: B-1618) Unincorporated areas of Montgomery County (16-06-0123P) The Honorable Craig Doyal, Montgomery County Judge, 501 North Thompson, Suite 401, Conroe, TX 77301 Montgomery County Engineering Department, 501 North Thompson Street, Suite 103, Conroe, TX 77301 July 14, 2016 480483 Parker (FEMA Docket No.: B-1618) City of Weatherford (15-06-1755P) The Honorable Dennis Hooks, Mayor, City of Weatherford, P.O. Box 255, Weatherford, TX 76086 Department of Code Enforcement, 303 Palo Pinto Street, Weatherford, TX 76086 July 20, 2016 480522 Travis (FEMA Docket No.: B-1618) City of Austin (15-06-3816P) The Honorable Steve Adler, Mayor, City of Austin, P.O. Box 1088, Austin, TX 78767 Watershed Engineering Division, 505 Barton Springs Road, 12th Floor, Austin, TX 78767 July 5, 2016 480624 Travis (FEMA Docket No.: B-1614) City of Pflugerville (16-06-0047P) The Honorable Jeff Coleman, Mayor, City of Pflugerville, P.O. Box 589, Pflugerville, TX 78691 Development Services Center, 201-B East Pecan Street, Pflugerville, TX 78660 July 11, 2016 481028 Williamson (FEMA Docket No.: B-1618) Unincorporated areas of Williamson County (15-06-4383P) The Honorable Dan A. Gattis, Williamson County Judge, 710 South Main Street, Suite 101, Georgetown, TX 78626 Williamson County Department of Infrastructure, 3151 Southeast Inner Loop, Suite B, Georgetown, TX 78626 July 7, 2016 481079 Utah: Utah (FEMA Docket No.: B-1618) City of Spanish Fork (15-08-0248P) The Honorable Steve Leifson, Mayor, City of Spanish Fork, 40 South Main Street, Spanish Fork, UT 84660 Engineering Department, 40 South Main Street, Spanish Fork, UT 84660 July 8, 2016 490241 Utah (FEMA Docket No.: B-1618) Unincorporated areas of Utah County (15-08-0248P) The Honorable Larry Ellertson, Chairman, Utah County Board of Commissioners, 100 East Center Street, Suite 2300, Provo, UT 84606 Utah County Community Development Department, 51 South University Avenue, Suite 117, Provo, UT 84601 July 8, 2016 495517 Virginia: Fairfax (FEMA Docket No.: B-1614) Unincorporated areas of Fairfax County (15-03-1061P) The Honorable Edward L. Long, Jr., Fairfax County Executive, 12000 Government Center Parkway, Fairfax, VA 22035 Fairfax County Stormwater Planning Division, 12000 Government Center Parkway, Suite 449, Fairfax, VA 22035 July 1, 2016 515525 York (FEMA Docket No.: B-1614) Unincorporated areas of York County (16-03-0468P) The Honorable Jeffrey D. Wassmer, Chairman, York County Board of Supervisors, P.O. Box 532, Yorktown, VA 23690 York County Stormwater Engineering Division, P.O. Box 532, Yorktown, VA 23690 July 1, 2016 510182
    [FR Doc. 2016-22794 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-12-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Federal Emergency Management Agency [Docket ID FEMA-2016-0002; Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-B-1645] Changes in Flood Hazard Determinations AGENCY:

    Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice lists communities where the addition or modification of Base Flood Elevations (BFEs), base flood depths, Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) boundaries or zone designations, or the regulatory floodway (hereinafter referred to as flood hazard determinations), as shown on the Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs), and where applicable, in the supporting Flood Insurance Study (FIS) reports, prepared by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) for each community, is appropriate because of new scientific or technical data. The FIRM, and where applicable, portions of the FIS report, have been revised to reflect these flood hazard determinations through issuance of a Letter of Map Revision (LOMR), in accordance with Title 44, Part 65 of the Code of Federal Regulations (44 CFR part 65). The LOMR will be used by insurance agents and others to calculate appropriate flood insurance premium rates for new buildings and the contents of those buildings. For rating purposes, the currently effective community number is shown in the table below and must be used for all new policies and renewals.

    DATES:

    These flood hazard determinations will become effective on the dates listed in the table below and revise the FIRM panels and FIS report in effect prior to this determination for the listed communities.

    From the date of the second publication of notification of these changes in a newspaper of local circulation, any person has 90 days in which to request through the community that the Deputy Associate Administrator for Insurance and Mitigation reconsider the changes. The flood hazard determination information may be changed during the 90-day period.

    ADDRESSES:

    The affected communities are listed in the table below. Revised flood hazard information for each community is available for inspection at both the online location and the respective community map repository address listed in the table below. Additionally, the current effective FIRM and FIS report for each community are accessible online through the FEMA Map Service Center at www.msc.fema.gov for comparison.

    Submit comments and/or appeals to the Chief Executive Officer of the community as listed in the table below.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Rick Sacbibit, Chief, Engineering Services Branch, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration, FEMA, 400 C Street SW., Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-7659, or (email) [email protected]; or visit the FEMA Map Information eXchange (FMIX) online at www.floodmaps.fema.gov/fhm/fmx_main.html.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The specific flood hazard determinations are not described for each community in this notice. However, the online location and local community map repository address where the flood hazard determination information is available for inspection is provided.

    Any request for reconsideration of flood hazard determinations must be submitted to the Chief Executive Officer of the community as listed in the table below.

    The modifications are made pursuant to section 201 of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C. 4105, and are in accordance with the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968, 42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq., and with 44 CFR part 65.

    The FIRM and FIS report are the basis of the floodplain management measures that the community is required either to adopt or to show evidence of having in effect in order to qualify or remain qualified for participation in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP).

    These flood hazard determinations, together with the floodplain management criteria required by 44 CFR 60.3, are the minimum that are required. They should not be construed to mean that the community must change any existing ordinances that are more stringent in their floodplain management requirements. The community may at any time enact stricter requirements of its own or pursuant to policies established by other Federal, State, or regional entities. The flood hazard determinations are in accordance with 44 CFR 65.4.

    The affected communities are listed in the following table. Flood hazard determination information for each community is available for inspection at both the online location and the respective community map repository address listed in the table below. Additionally, the current effective FIRM and FIS report for each community are accessible online through the FEMA Map Service Center at www.msc.fema.gov for comparison.

    (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. 97.022, “Flood Insurance.”) Dated: August 26, 2016. Roy E. Wright, Deputy Associate Administrator for Insurance and Mitigation, Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency. State and county Location and
  • case No.
  • Chief executive officer
  • of community
  • Community map
  • repository
  • Online location of letter of
  • map revision
  • Effective date of
  • modification
  • Community
  • No.
  • Alabama: Etowah City of Gadsden (16-04-2081P) The Honorable Sherman Guyton, Mayor, City of Gadsden, 90 Broad Street, Gadsden, AL 35902 City Hall, 90 Broad Street, Gadsden, AL 35902 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lomc Oct. 6, 2016 010080 Etowah City of Rainbow City (16-04-2081P) The Honorable Terry J. Calhoun, Mayor, City of Rainbow City, 3700 Rainbow Drive, Rainbow City, AL 35906 City Hall, 3700 Rainbow Drive, Rainbow City, AL 35906 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lomc Oct. 6, 2016 010351 Etowah Unincorporated areas of Etowah County (16-04-2081P) The Honorable Lewis Fuller, President, Etowah County Commission, 800 Forrest Avenue, Suite 113, Gadsden, AL 35901 Etowah County Courthouse, 800 Forrest Avenue, Suite 3, Gadsden, AL 35901 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lomc Oct. 6, 2016 010077 Jefferson City of Trussville (15-04-A460P) The Honorable Eugene Melton, Mayor, City of Trussville, 131 Main Street, Trussville, AL 35173 City Hall, 131 Main Street, Trussville, AL 35173 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lomc Sep. 29, 2016 010133 Jefferson Unincorporated areas of Jefferson County (15-04-A460P) The Honorable James A. Stephens, Chairman, Jefferson County Commission, 716 Richard Arrington Jr. Boulevard North, Birmingham, AL 35203 Jefferson County Land Development Department, 716 Richard Arrington Jr. Boulevard North, Birmingham, AL 35203 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lomc Sep. 29, 2016 010217 Mobile City of Mobile (15-04-A099P) The Honorable Sandy Stimpson, Mayor, City of Mobile, 205 Government Street, Mobile, AL 36602 Engineering Department, 205 Government Street, Mobile, AL 36602 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lomc Oct. 27, 2016 015007 Shelby City of Chelsea (16-04-3295P) The Honorable Samuel E. Niven, Sr., Mayor, City of Chelsea, 11611 Chelsea Road, Chelsea, AL 35043 City Hall, 11611 Chelsea Road, Chelsea, AL 35043 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lomc Oct. 27, 2016 010432 Shelby Unincorporated areas of Shelby County (16-04-3295P) The Honorable Rick Shepherd, Chairman, Shelby County Commission, 200 West College Street, Columbiana, AL 35051 Shelby County Engineering Department, 506 Highway 70, Columbiana, AL 35051 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lomc Oct. 27, 2016 010191 Arkansas: Pulaski City of North Little Rock (16-06-2901X) The Honorable Joe Smith, Mayor, City of North Little Rock, P.O. Box 5757, North Little Rock, AR 72119 Planning Department, 500 West 13th Street, North Little Rock, AR 72114 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lomc Oct. 19, 2016 050182 Pulaski City of Sherwood (16-06-2901X) The Honorable Virginia Hillman Young, Mayor, City of Sherwood, P.O. Box 6256, Sherwood, AR 72124 Engineering, Permit and Planning Department, 2199 East Kiehl Avenue, Sherwood, AR 72124 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lomc Oct. 19, 2016 050235 Sebastian City of Fort Smith (15-06-0085P) Mr. Jeff Dingman, Acting Administrator, City of Fort Smith, P.O. Box 1908, Fort Smith, AR 72902 City Hall, 623 Garrison Avenue, Fort Smith, AR 72901 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lomc Oct. 6, 2016 055013 Colorado: El Paso City of Colorado Springs (16-08-0119P) The Honorable John Suthers, Mayor, City of Colorado Springs, 30 South Nevada Avenue, Colorado Springs, CO 80903 Regional Building Department, 2880 International Circle, Colorado Springs, CO 80910 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lomc Oct. 27, 2016 080060 El Paso Unincorporated areas of El Paso County (16-08-0119P) The Honorable Darryl Glenn, Chairman, El Paso County Board of Commissioners, 200 South Cascade Avenue, Suite 100, Colorado Springs, CO 80903 El Paso County Regional Building Department, 2880 International Circle, Colorado Springs, CO 80910 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lomc Oct. 27, 2016 080059 Jefferson Unincorporated areas of Jefferson County (15-08-0549P) The Honorable Libby Szabo, Chair, Jefferson County Board of Commissioners, 100 Jefferson County Parkway, Golden, CO 80419 Jefferson County Planning and Zoning Division, 100 Jefferson County Parkway, Golden, CO 80419 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lomc Oct. 7, 2016 080087 Jefferson Unincorporated areas of Jefferson County (15-08-1142P) The Honorable Libby Szabo, Chair, Jefferson County Board of Commissioners, 100 Jefferson County Parkway, Golden, CO 80419 Jefferson County Planning and Zoning Division, 100 Jefferson County Parkway, Golden, CO 80419 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lomc Oct. 21, 2016 080087 Connecticut: Middlesex Town of Old Saybrook (16-01-0590P) The Honorable Carl P. Fortuna, Jr., First Selectman, Town of Old Saybrook Board of Selectmen, 302 Main Street, Old Saybrook, CT 06475 Town Hall, 302 Main Street, Old Saybrook, CT 06475 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lomc Oct. 7, 2016 090069 Florida: Bay Unincorporated areas of Bay County (15-04-9588P) The Honorable Mike Nelson, Chairman, Bay County Board of Commissioners, 840 West 11th Street, Panama City, FL 32401 Bay County Planning and Zoning Division, 840 West 11th Street, Panama City, FL 32401 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lomc Oct. 17, 2016 120004 Broward City of Fort Lauderdale (15-04-3747P) The Honorable John P. “Jack” Seiler, Mayor, City of Fort Lauderdale, 100 North Andrews Avenue, Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Building Services Division, 700 Northwest 19th Avenue, Fort Lauderdale, FL 33311 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lomc Oct. 17, 2016 125105 Broward City of Hallandale Beach (15-04-7116P) The Honorable Joy F. Cooper, Mayor, City of Hallandale Beach, 400 South Federal Highway, Hallandale Beach, FL 33009 Development Services Department, 400 South Federal Highway, Hallandale Beach, FL 33009 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lom Nov. 2. 2016 125110 Broward City of Hollywood (15-04-7116P) The Honorable Peter Bober, Mayor, City of Hollywood, P.O. Box 229045, Hollywood, FL 33022 City Hall, 2600 Hollywood Boulevard, Hollywood, FL 33020 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lom Nov. 2. 2016 125113 Broward Unincorporated areas of Broward County (15-04-3747P) The Honorable Marty Kiar, Mayor, Broward County Board of Commissioners, 115 South Andrews Avenue, Room 417, Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Broward County Environmental Licensing and Building Permitting Division, 1 North University Drive, Plantation, FL 33324 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lom Oct. 17, 2016 125093 Collier City of Marco Island (16-04-2785P) The Honorable Bob Brown, Chairman, City of Marco Island Council, 50 Bald Eagle Drive, Marco Island, FL 34145 City Hall, 50 Bald Eagle Drive, Marco Island, FL 34145 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lom Oct. 7, 2016 120426 Escambia Pensacola Beach-Santa Rosa Island Authority (16-04-4004P) The Honorable Dave Pavlock, Chairman, Santa Rosa Island Authority Board, P.O. Drawer 1208, Pensacola Beach, FL 32562 City Hall, 1 Via de Luna, Pensacola Beach, FL 32561 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lom Oct. 25, 2016 125138 Lee City of Sanibel (15-04-9705P) The Honorable Kevin Ruane, Mayor, City of Sanibel, 800 Dunlop Road, Sanibel, FL 33957 Building Department, 800 Dunlop Road, Sanibel, FL 33957 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lom Oct. 17, 2016 120402 Pinellas City of St. Petersburg (16-04-4003P) The Honorable Rick Kriseman, Mayor, City of St. Petersburg, 175 5th Street North, St. Petersburg, FL 33701 Municipal Services Center, Permit Division, 1 4th Street North, St. Petersburg, FL 33701 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lom Oct. 25, 2016 125148 Polk Unincorporated areas of Polk County (16-04-1134P) The Honorable John E. Hall, Chairman, Polk County Board of Commissioners, P.O. Box 9005, Bartow, FL 33831 Polk County Land Development Division, 330 West Church Street, Bartow, FL 33831 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lom Oct. 27, 2016 120261 Volusia City of DeBary (16-04-4470P) The Honorable Clint Johnson, Mayor, City of DeBary, 16 Colomba Road, DeBary, FL 32713 City Hall, 16 Colomba Road, DeBary, FL 32713 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lom Oct. 5, 2016 130322 Georgia: Gwinnett Unincorporated areas of Gwinnett County (16-04-2468P) The Honorable Charlotte J. Nash, Chair, Gwinnett County Board of Commissioners, 75 Langley Drive, Lawrenceville, GA 30046 Gwinnett County Stormwater Management Division, 684 Winder Highway, Lawrenceville, GA 30045 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lom Oct. 11, 2016 130322 Lee City of Leesburg (16-04-3621P) The Honorable Jim Quinn, Mayor, City of Leesburg, P.O. Box 890, Leesburg, GA 31763 City Hall, 107 Walnut Avenue South, Leesburg, GA 31763 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lom Oct. 13, 2016 130348 Lee Unincorporated areas of Lee County (16-04-3621P) The Honorable Rick Muggridge, Chairman, Lee County Board of Commissioners, 110 Starksville Avenue North, Leesburg, GA 31763 Lee County Administration Building, 110 Starksville Avenue North, Leesburg, GA 31763 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lom Oct. 13, 2016 130122 Massachusetts: Barnstable Town of Dennis (16-01-0605P) The Honorable Paul McCormick, Chairman, Town of Dennis Board of Selectmen, P.O. Box 2060, South Dennis, MA 02660 Town Hall, 685 Route 134, South Dennis, MA 02660 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lom Sep. 16, 2016 250005 Norfolk Town of Weymouth (15-01-2574P) The Honorable Robert L. Hedlund, Mayor, Town of Weymouth, 75 Middle Street, Weymouth, MA 02189 City Hall, 75 Middle Street, Weymouth, MA 02189 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lom Sep. 29, 2016 250257 Worcester City of Fitchburg (15-01-2126P) The Honorable Stephen L. DiNatale, Mayor, City of Fitchburg, 166 Boulder Drive, Suite 108, Fitchburg, MA 01420 Community Development Department, Planning Division, 301 Broad Street, Fitchburg, MA 01420 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lom Oct. 6, 2016 250304 Worcester City of Leominster (15-01-2126P) The Honorable Dean J. Mazzarella, Mayor, City of Leominster, 25 West Street, Leominster, MA 01453 Office of Emergency Management, 37 Carter Street, Leominster, MA 01453 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lom Oct. 6, 2016 250314 Montana: Butte-Silver Bow Unincorporated areas of Butte-Silver Bow County (15-08-1320P) The Honorable Matthew Vincent, Chief Executive, Butte-Silver Bow County, 155 West Granite Street, Butte, MT 59701 Butte-Silver Bow Planning Department, 155 West Granite Street, Butte, MT 59701 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lom Oct. 25, 2016 300077 North Carolina: Alamance City of Burlington (16-04-0421P) The Honorable Ian Baltutis, Mayor, City of Burlington, P.O. Box 1358, Burlington, NC 27216 Municipal Building, 425 South Lexington Avenue, Burlington, NC 27215 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lom Nov. 7. 2016 370002 Rhode Island: Kent Town of Coventry (16-01-1501P) Mr. Graham Waters, Manager, Town of Coventry, 1670 Flat River Road, Coventry, RI 02816 Planning and Zoning Department, 1670 Flat River Road, Coventry, RI 02816 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lom Oct. 31, 2016 440004 South Carolina: Horry City of Myrtle Beach (16-04-2072P) The Honorable John T. Rhodes, Mayor, City of Myrtle Beach, P.O. Box 2468, Myrtle Beach, SC 29577 Construction Services Department, 921 North Oak Street, Myrtle Beach, SC 29577 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lom Sep. 26, 2016 450109 Tennessee: Williamson City of Franklin (15-04-8778P) The Honorable Ken Moore, Mayor, City of Franklin, 109 3rd Avenue South, Franklin, TN 37064 City Hall, 109 3rd Avenue South, Franklin, TN 37064 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lom Sep. 30, 2016 470206 Texas: Collin City of Allen (16-06-2118P) The Honorable Stephen Terrell, Mayor, City of Allen, 305 Century Parkway, Allen, TX 75013 Engineering Department, 305 Century Parkway, Allen, TX 75013 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lom Nov. 4, 2016 480131 Collin City of McKinney (16-06-0922P) The Honorable Brian Loughmiller, Mayor, City of McKinney, P.O. Box 517, McKinney, TX 75070 City Hall, 221 North Tennessee Street, McKinney, TX 75069 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lom Oct. 10, 2016 480135 Collin City of Melissa (16-06-0922P) Mr. Jason Little, Manager, City of Melissa, 3411 Barker Avenue, Melissa, TX 75454 City Hall, 3411 Barker Avenue, Melissa, TX 75454 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lom Oct. 10, 2016 481626 Collin City of Plano (16-06-0669P) The Honorable Harry LaRosiliere, Mayor, City of Plano, P.O. Box 860358, Plano, TX 75074 City Hall, 1520 K Avenue, Plano, TX 75074 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lom Oct. 14, 2016 480140 Collin Unincorporated areas of Collin County (16-06-0922P) The Honorable Keith Self, Collin County Judge, 2300 Bloomdale Road, Suite 4192, McKinney, TX 75071 Collin County Engineering Department, 4690 Community Avenue, Suite 200, McKinney, TX 75071 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lom Oct. 10, 2016 480130 Dallas City of Garland (14-06-4283P) The Honorable Douglas Athas, Mayor, City of Garland, 200 North 5th Street, Garland, TX 75040 Municipal Building, 800 Main Street, Garland, TX 75040 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lom Oct. 24, 2016 485471 Dallas City of Richardson (14-06-4283P) The Honorable Paul Voelker, Mayor, City of Richardson, P.O. Box 830309, Richardson, TX 75080 City Hall, 411 West Arapaho Road, Richardson, TX 75080 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lom Oct. 24, 2016 480184 Dallas City of Sachse (16-06-0772P) The Honorable Mike Felix, Mayor, City of Sachse, 3815 Sachse Road, Building B, Sachse, TX 75048 Public Works Department, 3815-B Sachse Road, Sachse, TX 75048 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lom Oct. 21, 2016 480186 Fort Bend Unincorporated areas of Fort Bend County (16-06-1116P) The Honorable Robert Hebert, Fort Bend County Judge, 401 Jackson Street, Richmond, TX 77469 Fort Bend County Engineering Department, 301 Jackson Street, Richmond, TX 77469 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lom Oct. 17, 2016 480228 Harris City of Baytown (16-06-0437P) The Honorable Stephen DonCarlos, Mayor, City of Baytown, P.O. Box 424, Baytown, TX 77522 City Hall, 2401 Market Street, Baytown, TX 77520 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lom Oct. 28, 2016 485456 Harris City of Houston (16-06-0527P) The Honorable Sylvester Turner, Mayor, City of Houston, P.O. Box 1562, Houston, TX 77251 Floodplain Management Department, 1002 Washington Avenue, 3rd Floor, Houston, TX 77002 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lom Nov. 4, 2016 480296 Harris Unincorporated areas of Harris County (16-06-0437P) The Honorable Edward M. Emmett, Harris County Judge, 1001 Preston Street, Suite 911, Houston, TX 77002 Harris County Permit Office, 10555 Northwest Freeway, Suite 120, Houston, TX 77092 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lom Oct. 28, 2016 480287 Harris Unincorporated areas of Harris County (16-06-0527P) The Honorable Edward M. Emmett, Harris County Judge, 1001 Preston Street, Suite 911, Houston, TX 77002 Harris County Permit Office, 10555 Northwest Freeway, Suite 120, Houston, TX 77092 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lom Nov. 4, 2016 480287 Harris Unincorporated areas of Harris County (16-06-0557P) The Honorable Edward M. Emmett, Harris County Judge, 1001 Preston Street, Suite 911, Houston, TX 77002 Harris County Permit Office, 10555 Northwest Freeway, Suite 120, Houston, TX 77092 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lom Nov. 4, 2016 480287 Kendall Unincorporated areas of Kendall County (16-06-0702P) The Honorable Darrel L. Lux, Kendall County Judge, 201 East San Antonio Avenue, Suite 122, Boerne, TX 78006 Kendall County Engineering Department, 201 East San Antonio Avenue, Suite 101, Boerne, TX 78006 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lom Oct. 5, 2016 480417 Tarrant City of Mansfield (16-06-0957P) The Honorable David L. Cook, Mayor, City of Mansfield, 1200 East Broad Street, Mansfield, TX 76063 City Hall, 1200 East Broad Street, Mansfield, TX 76063 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lom Oct. 20, 2016 480606 Williamson Unincorporated areas of Williamson County (16-06-0303P) The Honorable Dan A. Gattis, Williamson County Judge, 710 South Main Street, Suite 101, Georgetown, TX 78626 Williamson County Engineering Department, 3151 Southeast Inner Loop, Suite B, Georgetown, TX 78626 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lom Oct. 27, 2016 481079 Wise City of Boyd (16-06-1325P) The Honorable Rodney Scroggins, Mayor, City of Boyd, 100 East Rock Island Avenue, Boyd, TX 76023 City Hall, 100 East Rock Island Avenue, Boyd, TX 76023 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lom Oct. 27, 2016 480676 Utah: Salt Lake Town of Herriman (16-08-0214P) The Honorable Carmen Freeman, Mayor, Town of Herriman, 13011 South Pioneer Street, Herriman, UT 84096 Town Hall, 13011 South Pioneer Street, Herriman, UT 84096 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lom Oct. 12, 2016 490252 Tooele City of Tooele (16-08-0138P) The Honorable Patrick Dunlavy, Mayor, City of Tooele, 90 North Main Street, Tooele, UT 84074 Town Hall, 90 North Main Street, Tooele, UT 84074 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lom Sep. 28, 2016 490145 Virginia: Prince William Unincorporated areas of Prince William. County (16-03-0170P) Mr. Christopher E. Martino, Acting Prince William County Executive, 1 County Complex Court, Prince William, VA 22192 Prince William County Department of Public Works, 5 County Complex Court, Prince William, VA 22192 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lom Oct. 6, 2016 510119 Washington, DC District of Columbia (15-03-2388P) The Honorable Muriel Bowser, Mayor, District of Columbia, 1350 Pennsylvania Avenue Northwest, Washington, DC 20004 Department of Energy and Environmental Services, 1200 1st Street Northeast, Washington, DC 20002 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lom Sep. 14, 2016 110001 West Virginia: Harrison City of Bridgeport (15-03-0999P) The Honorable Robert Greer, Mayor, City of Bridgeport, 515 West Main Street, Bridgeport, WV 26330 Engineering Department, 515 West Main Street, Bridgeport, WV 26330 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lom Oct. 11, 2016 540055 Harrison Unincorporated areas of Harrison County (15-03-0999P) The Honorable Ronald Watson, President, Harrison County Commission, 301 West Main Street, Clarksburg, WV 26301 Harrison County Planning Department, 301 West Main Street, Clarksburg, WV 26301 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lom Oct. 11, 2016 540053 Mingo Town of Matewan (16-03-1666P) The Honorable Sheila Kessler, Mayor, Town of Matewan, P.O. Box 306, Matewan, WV 25678 Mingo County Floodplain Coordinator's Office, 78 East 2nd Avenue, Room B200, Williamson, WV 25661 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lom Oct. 31, 2016 545538 Mingo Unincorporated areas of Mingo County (16-03-1666P) The Honorable John Mark Hubbard, President, Mingo County Commission, 75 East 2nd Avenue, Room 308, Williamson, WV 25661 Mingo County Floodplain Coordinator's Office, 78 East 2nd Avenue, Room B200, Williamson, WV 25661 http://www.msc.fema.gov/lom Oct. 31, 2016 540133
    [FR Doc. 2016-22784 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-12-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Senior Executive Service Performance Review Board AGENCY:

    Office of the Secretary, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice announces the appointment of the members of the Senior Executive Service Performance Review Boards for the Department of Homeland Security. The purpose of the Performance Review Board (PRB) is to view and make recommendations concerning proposed performance appraisals, ratings, bonuses, pay adjustments, and other appropriate personnel actions for incumbents of Senior Executive Service, Senior Level and Senior Professional positions of the Department.

    DATES:

    This Notice is effective September 22, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Elizabeth Haefeli, Office of the Chief Human Capital Officer, telephone (202) 357-8164.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Each Federal agency is required to establish one or more performance review boards to make recommendations, as necessary, in regard to the performance of senior executives within the agency. 5 U.S.C. 4314(c). This notice announces the appointment of the members of the PRB for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). The purpose of the PRB is to review and make recommendations concerning proposed performance appraisals, ratings, bonuses, pay adjustments, and other appropriate personnel actions for incumbents of SES positions within DHS.

    The Board shall consist of at least three members. In the case of an appraisal of a career appointee, more than half of the members shall consist of career appointees. Composition of the specific PRBs will be determined on an ad hoc basis from among the individuals listed below:

    Agarwal, Nimisha Albence, Matthew T. Allen, Matthew C. Alles, Randolph D. Allison, Roderick J. Anderson, Sandra D. Asseng Jr., George A. Awni, Muhammad H. Ayala, Janice Bailey, Angela Baker, Paul E. Baroukh, Nader Barrera, Staci A. Bartlett, Jonathan M. Benner, Derek N. Borkowski, Mark S. Braccio, Dominick D. Brinsfield, Kathryn Brothers, L. Reginald Brown, A Scott Brown, Dallas C. Brown, Michael C. Brunjes, David H. Bunnell, Steven E. Caggiano, Marshall L. Cahill, Donna L. Callahan, Colleen B. Callahan, William J. Carpenter, Dea D. Carraway, Melvin Carver, Jonathan Ira Castro, Raul Chavez, Richard Cheng, Wen Ting Clancy, Joseph P. Cogswell, Patricia F. Davis, Diana L. Davis, Michael P. DiFalco, Frank DiPietro, Joseph R. Dolan, Mark E. Dougherty, Thomas E. Dunbar, Susan Cullen Edge, Peter T. Edwards, B. Roland Erichs, Alysa D. Fallon, William T. Falk, Scott K. Fenton, Jennifer M. Fields, Kathy Fitzmaurice, Stacey D. Fleming, Gwen K. Fluty, Larry Foucart, Bruce M. Fujimura, Paul N. Fulghum , Charles Gallihugh II, Ronald B. Gladwell, Angela Glawe, David J. Gowadia, Huban Griffin, Robert Griggs, Christine Gunter, Brett A. Hall, Christopher J. Harris, Melvin Havranek, John F. Healy, Craig C. Heller, Susan J. Henderson, Latetia M. Hess, David Higgins, Jennifer Hochman, Kathleen T. Homan, Thomas Hutchinson, Kimberly S. Isbell, Valerie S. Jacksta, Linda L. Jaddou, Ur M. Jenkins, Jr., Kenneth T. Jeronimo, Jose M. Johnson, Tae D. Jones, Franklin C. Jones, Keith A. Jones, Sophia D. Karoly, Stephen J. Kelly, William G. RDML Kerner, Francine Kerns, Kevin King, Tatum S. Klein, Matthew Koumans, Mark R. Kronisch, Matthew L. Kruger, Mary Kubiak, Lev J. LaJoye, Darby R. Landfried, Phillip A. Langlois, Joseph E. Lanum, Scott F. Lechleitner, Patrick J. Lewis, Donald R. Lowery, III, Edward W. Luck, Scott A. Ludtke, Meghan G. Magaw, Craig D. Maher, Joseph B. Manaher, Colleen M. Marcott, Stacy Mayenschein, Eddie D. McAleenan, Kevin K. McDonald, Christina E. Mclane, Jo Ann McShaffrey, Richard S. Meckley, Tammy M. Melero, Mariela Micone, Vincent Miles, Jere T. Miller, Philip T. Mitchell, Ernest Moore, Joseph D. Morgan, Mark A. Moskowitz, Brian M. Moynihan, Timothy M. Mulligan, George D. Mulligan, Scott E. Nally, Kevin Neufeld, Donald W. Newhouse, Victoria E. O'Connor, Kimberly Owen, Todd C. Padilla, Kenneth Palmer, David J. Pane, Karen W. Paramore, Faron K. Patrick, Connie L. Patterson, Eric Pineiro, Marlen Provost, Carla L. Ragsdale, Daniel H. Rahilly, Lyn M. Raj, Kiran S. Ramlogan Seuradge, Riah Rasicot, Gary Reid, Paula A. Renaud, Daniel M. Renaud, Tracy L. Rice, Stephen Risley, Lisa Rittenberg, Scot R. Robbins, Timothy S. Roberts, Russell A. Roger, Debra A. Rose Jr., Pat A. Rosenberg, Ronald M. Ruppel, Joanna Ryan, Paul Samaan, Robert Saunders, Ian C. Scanlon, Julie A. Schied, Eugene H. Scott, Kika Mary Sevier, Adrian Shahoulian, David Shelton Waters, Karen R. Short, Victoria Silvers, Robert Smith, Brenda B. Sutherland, Daniel W. Swartz, Neal J. Sykes, Gwendolyn Taylor, Francis Terrell, Joseph P. Trotta, Nicholas Ulrich Ii, Dennis A. Valerio, Tracey A. Vaughan, Jill A. Venture, Veronica Villanueva, Raymond Vitiello, Ronald D. Wagner, John P. Walton, Kimberly H. Whittenburg, Cynthia F. Williams, Dwight Williams, Jaye F. Windham, Nicole Young, Edward E.

    This notice does not constitute a significant regulatory action under sec. 3(f) of E.O. 12866. Therefore, DHS has not submitted this notice to the Office of Management and Budget. Further, because this notice is a matter of agency organization, procedure and practice, DHS is not required to follow the rulemaking requirements under the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 553).

    Dated: September 13, 2016. Thomas Vieira, Manager, Executive Resources Policy, Office of the Chief Human Capital Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22786 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-9B-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY [Docket No. DHS 2016-0060] National Protection and Programs Directorate AGENCY:

    Office of Infrastructure Protection, National Protection and Programs Directorate, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Study Participation; notice for voluntary participation regarding Positioning, Navigation, and Timing Study.

    SUMMARY:

    The purpose of this notice is to inform the public that the Departmenet of Homeland Security (DHS) Science and Technology Directorate (S&T) and DHS National Protection and Programs Directorate (NPPD), Office of Infrastructure Protection (IP) are engaging critical infrastructure sector owners and operators in a study to define and validate current and future positioning, navigation, and timing (PNT) requirements for critical infrastructure. This study will be coordinated with the Department of Transportation, which is establishing PNT requirements for the transportation sector. The requirements defined and validated by the study will support key decisions in the development of complementary PNT solution(s).

    Accurate PNT is essential for critical infrastructures across the country. Currently, the Global Positioning System (GPS) is the primary source of PNT information. However, GPS signals are susceptible to both unintentional and intentional disruption leaving critical infrastructure vulnerable to operational impacts from disruptions. Due to the essential need for precise timing within many of the critical infrastructure sectors, DHS will initially focus the study on timing requirements within the electricity and wireless communications sectors. Subsequently, DHS will engage additional sectors and expand the study to include positioning and navigation requirements.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Organizations or individuals interested in providing PNT requirements or other information pertaining to the study should contact the points of contact below by February 28, 2017: John Dragseth, NPPD, DHS, [email protected], 703-235-9467; or Sarah Mahmood, S&T, DHS, [email protected],202-254-6721.

    Dated: September 15, 2016. Sarah Ellis Peed, Director, Strategy, Policy & Budget, Office of Infrastructure Protection.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22884 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-9P-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY [Docket No. DHS—2016—0068] Agency Information Collection Activities: DHS Civil Rights Compliance Form AGENCY:

    Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties, DHS.

    ACTION:

    60-Day notice and request for comments; New Collection, 1601-NEW.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties, will submit the following Information Collection Request (ICR) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and clearance in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

    DATES:

    Comments are encouraged and will be accepted until November 21, 2016. This process is conducted in accordance with 5 CFR 1320.1

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments, identified by docket number DHS-2016-0068, by one of the following methods:

    Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Please follow the instructions for submitting comments.

    Email: [email protected] Please include docket number DHS-2016-0068 in the subject line of the message.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Recipients of Federal financial assistance from DHS are required to meet certain legal requirements relating to nondiscrimination and nondiscriminatory use of Federal funds. Those requirements include ensuring that entities receiving Federal financial assistance from DHS do not deny benefits or services, or otherwise discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin, disability, age, or sex, in accordance with the following authorities: Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VI) Public Law 88-352, 42 U.S.C. 2000d-1 et seq., and the Department's implementing regulation, 6 CFR part 21 and 44 CFR part 7; section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (sec. 504), Public Law 93-112, as amended by Public Law 93-516, 29 U.S.C. 794; title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 (Title IX), 20 U.S.C. 1681 et seq., and the Department's implementing regulations, 6 CFR part 17, and 44 CFR part 19; Age Discrimination Act of 1975, Public Law 94-135, 42 U.S.C. 6101 et seq., and the Department implementing regulation at 44 CFR part 7.

    DHS has an obligation to enforce nondiscrimination requirements to ensure that its Federally-assisted programs and activities are administered in a nondiscriminatory manner. In order to carry out its enforcement responsibilities, DHS must obtain a signed assurance of compliance and collect and review information from recipients to ascertain their compliance with applicable requirements. DHS implementing regulations and the Department of Justice (DOJ) regulation Coordination of Non-discrimination in Federally Assisted Program, 28 CFR part 42, provide for the collection of data and information from recipients (see 28 CFR 42.406).

    DHS has developed the DHS Civil Rights Compliance Form as the primary tool to implement this information collection. The purpose of the information collection is to advise recipients of their civil rights obligation; obtain an assurance of compliance from each recipient, and collect pertinent civil rights information to ascertain if the recipient has in place adequate policies and procedures to achieve compliance, and to determine what, if any, further action may be needed (technical assistance, training, compliance review, etc.) to ensure the recipient is in compliance and will carry out its programs and activities in a nondiscriminatory manner. DHS will make available sample policies and procedures to assist recipients in completing Section 4 of the Form, and providing technical assistance directly to recipients as needed.

    DHS will use the DHS Civil Rights Compliance Form to collect civil rights related information from all primary recipients of Federal financial assistance from the Department. Primary recipients are non-federal entities that receive Federal financial assistance in the form of a grant, cooperative agreement, or other type of financial assistance directly from the Department and not through another recipient or “pass-through” entity. This information collection does not apply to sub-recipients, Federal contractors (unless the contract includes the provision of financial assistance), nor the ultimate beneficiaries of services, financial aid, or other benefits from the Department. Recipients will be required to provide the information once every two years, not every time a grant is awarded. Entities whose award does not run a full two years are required to provide the information again if they receive a subsequent award more than two (2) years after the prior award. In responding to Section 4: Required Information, which contains the bulk of the information collection, if the recipient's responses have not changed in the two year period since their initial submission, the recipient does not need to resubmit the information. Instead, the recipient will indicate “no change” for each applicable item. DHS will require recipients to submit their completed forms and supporting information electronically, via email, to the Department, in an effort to minimize administrative burden on the recipient and the Department. DHS anticipates that records or files that will be used to respond to the information collection are already maintained in electronic format by the recipient, so providing the information electronically will further minimize administrative burden. DHS will allow recipients to scan and submit documents that are not already maintained electronically. If the recipient is unable to submit their information electronically, alternative arrangements will be made to submit responses in hard copy.

    There are no confidentiality assurances associated with this collection. The system of record notices associated with this information collection are: DHS/ALL-029—Civil Rights and Civil Liberties Records, (July 8, 2010, 75 FR 39266) and DHS/ALL-016—Department of Homeland Security Correspondence Records, (November 10, 2008, 73 FR 66657). The privacy impact assessment associated with this information collection is pending. The DHS Civil Rights Compliance Form is subject to the Privacy Act and will contain a Privacy Act Statement.

    This is a new information collection. The Office of Management and Budget is particularly interested in comments which:

    1. Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;

    2. Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

    3. Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

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

    Analysis

    Agency: Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties, DHS.

    Title: Agency Information Collection Activities: DHS Civil Rights Compliance Form.

    OMB Number: 1601—NEW.

    Frequency: Bi-annually.

    Affected Public: Private and Public Sector.

    Number of Respondents: 2,220.

    Estimated Time per Respondent: 4 hours.

    Total Burden Hours: 8,880 hours.

    Dated: September 16, 2016. Carlene C. Ileto, Executive Director, Enterprise Business Management Office.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22782 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-9B-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Land Management [16X.LLWO350000.L14400000.PN0000] Renewal of Approved Information Collection; OMB Control No. 1004-0009 AGENCY:

    Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

    ACTION:

    60-Day notice and request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) invites public comments on, and plans to request approval to continue, the collection of information from individuals, private entities, and State or local governments seeking leases, permits, and easements for the use, occupancy, or development of public lands administered by the BLM. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has assigned control number 1004-0009 to this information collection.

    DATES:

    Please submit comments on the proposed information collection by November 21, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Comments may be submitted by mail, fax, or electronic mail.

    Mail: U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, 1849 C Street NW., Room 2134LM, Attention: Jean Sonneman, Washington, DC 20240.

    Fax: to Jean Sonneman at 202-245-0050.

    Electronic mail: [email protected]

    Please indicate “Attn: 1004-0009” regardless of the form of your comments.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Jeff Cartwright, at (202) 912-7336. Persons who use a telecommunication device for the deaf may call the Federal Information Relay Service at 1-800-877-8339, to leave a message for Mr. Cartwright.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    OMB regulations at 5 CFR part 1320, which implement provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501-3521, require that interested members of the public and affected agencies be given an opportunity to comment on information collection and recordkeeping activities (see 5 CFR 1320.8 (d) and 1320.12(a)). This notice identifies an information collection that the BLM plans to submit to OMB for approval. The Paperwork Reduction Act provides that an agency may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. Until OMB approves a collection of information, you are not obligated to respond.

    The BLM will request a 3-year term of approval for this information collection activity. Comments are invited on: (1) The need for the collection of information for the performance of the functions of the agency; (2) the accuracy of the agency's burden estimates; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information collection; and (4) ways to minimize the information collection burden on respondents, such as use of automated means of collection of the information. A summary of the public comments will accompany our submission of the information collection requests to OMB.

    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.

    The following information pertains to this request:

    Title: Land Use Application and Permit (43 CFR part 2920)

    OMB Control Number: 1004-0009

    Summary: Section 302 the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (FLPMA) (43 U.S.C. 1732) and regulations at 43 CFR part 2920 authorize the issuance of leases, permits, and easements for use, occupancy, or development of public lands administered by the BLM. A variety of land uses are permissible. The burdens to respondents also can vary.

    Frequency of Collection: On occasion.

    Forms: Form 2920-1, Land Use Application and Permit.

    Description of Respondents: Individuals, private entities, and State or local governments seeking leases, permits, and easements for the use, occupancy, or development of public lands.

    Estimated Annual Responses: 407.

    Estimated Annual Burden Hours: 1,597.

    Estimated Annual Non-Hour Costs: $131,760.

    The estimated burdens are itemized in the following table:

    Type of response Number of
  • responses
  • Hours per
  • response
  • Annual hour burden
  • (column B × column C)
  • A B C D Land Use Application and Permit, Individuals 43 CFR part 2920 Form 2920-1 66 1 66 Land Use Application and Permit, State and Local Governments 43 CFR part 2920 Form 2920-1 45 1 45 Land Use Application and Permit, Private Sector/Typical 43 CFR part 2920 Form 2920-1 286 1 286 Land Use Application and Permit, Private Sector/Complex 43 CFR part 2920 Form 2920-1 10 120 1,200 Totals 407 1,597
    Jean Sonneman, Information Collection Clearance Officer, Bureau of Land Management.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22806 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-84-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Land Management [16X LLAK980600.L1820000.XX0000.LXSIARAC0000] Notice of Public Meetings, BLM Alaska Resource Advisory Council and Associated Subcommittee AGENCY:

    Alaska State Office, Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice of public meetings.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 as amended (FLPMA) and the Federal Advisory Committee Act of 1972 (FACA), the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Alaska Resource Advisory Council (RAC) and associated placer mining subcommittee will meet as indicated below.

    DATES:

    The RAC will meet October 24-25, 2016, beginning at 1 p.m. on the first day and at 8 a.m. on the second day. The RAC placer mining subcommittee will meet October 24 from 9 a.m.-12 p.m. Both meetings will be held at the BLM Alaska State Office, Denali conference room, located on the fourth floor of the federal courthouse building, at 222 W. 7th Avenue, Anchorage, Alaska. The council will accept comments from the public on October 24 from 4:30 to 5:30 p.m.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    June Lowery, RAC Coordinator, BLM Alaska State Office, 222 W. 7th Avenue #13, Anchorage, AK 99513; [email protected]; 907-271-3130. Persons who use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8339 to contact the above individual during normal business hours. The FIRS is available 24 hours a day, seven days a week, to leave a message or question with the above individual. You will receive a reply during normal business hours.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The 15-member council advises the Secretary of the Interior, through the BLM, on a variety of planning and management issues associated with public land management in Alaska. At this meeting, the council will hear the RAC placer mining subcommittee's report and associated recommendations from their July field trip to Chicken, Alaska. The council will also receive updates on current planning efforts and an update on the Regional Mitigation Strategy for the National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska. An agenda will be posted to the BLM Alaska RAC Web site (www.blm.gov/ak/rac) by October 14, 2016.

    All meetings are open to the public. Depending upon the number of people wishing to comment, time for individual oral comments may be limited. Please be prepared to submit written comments. 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. Individuals who plan to attend and need special assistance, such as sign language interpretation or other reasonable accommodations, should contact the BLM RAC Coordinator listed above.

    Dated: September 14, 2016. Bud C. Cribley, State Director.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22836 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-JA-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR National Park Service [NPS-WASO-OPSM-19986; PPWOCOMPP0, PEA001T01.ZA0000 (166)] Information Collection Request Sent to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for Approval; National Park Service Lost and Found Report AGENCY:

    National Park Service, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice; request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    We (National Park Service, NPS) have sent an Information Collection Request (ICR) to OMB for review and approval. We summarize the ICR below and describe the nature of the collection and the estimated burden and cost. We may not conduct or sponsor and a person is not required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

    DATES:

    You must submit comments on or before October 24, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Send your comments and suggestions on this information collection to the Desk Officer for the Department of the Interior at OMB-OIRA at (202) 395-5806 (fax) or [email protected] (email). Please provide a copy of your comments to Madonna L. Baucum, Information Collection Clearance Officer, National Park Service, 12201 Sunrise Valley Drive, Mail Stop 242, Reston, VA 20192 (mail); or [email protected] (email). Please include “1024-New Form 10-166” in the subject line of your comments. You may review the ICR online at http://www.reginfo.gov. Follow the instructions to review Department of the Interior collections under review by OMB.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    To request additional information about this IC, please contact Frances Hill, Manager, Office of Property Management, National Park Service, 13461 Sunrise Valley Drive, Herndon, VA 20171-3272 (mail); or [email protected] (email).

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Abstract

    The NPS Organic Act of 1916 (Organic Act) (54 U.S.C. 100101 et seq.; Pub. L. 113-287), requires that the NPS preserve national parks for the enjoyment, education, and inspiration of this and future generations. The NPS cooperates with partners to extend the benefits of natural and cultural resource conservation and outdoor recreation throughout this country and the world. Each year, visitors to the various units of the National Park System file reports of lost or found items.

    Reporting of lost or found personal property in national parks is governed by 36 CFR 2.22, “Disposition of Property” which requires unattended property be impounded and deemed to be abandoned unless claimed by the owner or an authorized representative within 60 days. The 60-day period commences upon notification to the rightful owner of the property, if the owner can be identified, or from the time the property was placed in the superintendent's custody, if the owner cannot be identified.

    Unclaimed property must be stored for a minimum period of 60 days and unless claimed by the owner or an authorized representative, may be claimed by the finder, provided the finder is not an employee of the National Park Service (NPS). Found property not claimed by the owner, an authorized representative of the owner, or the finder, shall be deemed abandoned and disposed of in accordance with Title 41 Code of Federal Regulations.

    In order to comply with the requirements of 36 CFR 2.22, the NPS utilizes NPS Form 10-166, “Lost-Found Report” to allow the park to properly identify personal property reported as lost or found and to return found items to the legitimate owner, when possible, or to the finder if the item is not claimed by the owner or their authorized representative. NPS Form 10-166 collects the following information from the visitor filing the report:

    • Park name, receiving station (if appropriate), and date item was lost or found;

    • Name, address, city, state, zip code, email address, and contact phone numbers (cell and home);

    • Type of item, detailed description of item, and location where the item was last seen or found;

    • Photograph of item (if available); and

    II. Data

    OMB Control Number: 1024—New.

    Title: National Park Service Lost and Found Report.

    Service Form Number(s): Form 10-166.

    Type of Request: Existing collection in use without an OMB control number.

    Description of Respondents: Visitors of NPS units who file reports of lost or found items.

    Respondent's Obligation: Voluntary.

    Frequency of Collection: On occasion.

    Activity Number of
  • responses
  • Completion time per
  • response
  • (hours)
  • Total annual burden hours
    NPS Form 10-166, “Lost-Found Report” 7,500 5 min 625 Totals 7,500 625

    Estimated Annual Nonhour Burden Cost: None.

    III. Comments

    On June 10, 2015, we published in the Federal Register (80 FR 32977) a notice of our intent to request that OMB approve this information collection. In that notice, we solicited comments for 60 days, ending on August 10, 2015. We did not receive any comments.

    We again invite comments concerning this information collection on:

    • Whether or not the collection of information is necessary, including whether or not the information will have practical utility;

    • The accuracy of our estimate of the burden for this collection of information;

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

    • Ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents.

    Comments that you submit in response to this notice are a matter of public record. 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 OMB and us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that it will be done.

    Dated: September 16, 2016. Madonna L. Baucum, Information Collection Clearance Officer, National Park Service.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22805 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-EH-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR National Park Service [NPS-IMR-YELL-20564; PPIMYELL1W, PROIESUC1.380000 (166)] Information Collection Request Sent to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for Approval; Reporting and Recordkeeping for Snowcoaches and Snowmobiles, Yellowstone National Park AGENCY:

    National Park Service, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice; request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    We (National Park Service, NPS) have sent an Information Collection Request (ICR) to OMB for review and approval. We summarize the ICR below and describe the nature of the collection and the estimated burden and cost. This information collection is scheduled to expire on October 31, 2016. We may not conduct or sponsor and a person is not required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. However, under OMB regulations, we may continue to conduct or sponsor this information collection while it is pending at OMB.

    DATES:

    You must submit comments on or before October 24, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Send your comments and suggestions on this information collection to the Desk Officer for the Department of the Interior at OMB-OIRA at (202) 395-5806 (fax) or [email protected] (email). Please provide a copy of your comments to Madonna L. Baucum, Information Collection Clearance Officer, National Park Service, 12201 Sunrise Valley Drive (Mail Stop 242), Reston, VA 20192 (mail); or [email protected] (email). Please reference OMB Control Number 1024-0266 in the subject line of your comments. You may review the ICR online at http://www.reginfo.gov. Follow the instructions to review Department of the Interior collections under review by OMB.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    To request additional information about this IC, contact Christina Mills, Outdoor Recreation Planner, Yellowstone National Park, National Park Service, PO Box 168, Yellowstone National Park, WY 82190; (307) 344-2320 (phone); or [email protected]@nps.gov.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Abstract

    The Yellowstone National Park Organic Act (54 U.S.C. 100301-1000302), signed March 1, 1872, established Yellowstone National Park to “dedicate and set apart as a public park or pleasuring-ground for the benefit and enjoyment of the people” and “for the preservation, from injury or spoliation, of all timber, mineral deposits, natural curiosities, or wonders within said park, and their retention in their natural condition” The Organic Act of 1916 (54 U.S.C. 100101 et seq.) authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to develop regulations for national park units under the Department's jurisdiction.

    We (NPS) provide opportunities for people to experience Yellowstone in the winter via oversnow vehicles (snowmobiles and snowcoaches, collectively OSVs). Access to most of the park in the winter is limited by distance and the harsh winter environment, which presents challenges to safety and park operations. The park does not provide wintertime OSV tours directly, but currently authorizes OSV tours through concessions contracts (for snowcoach tours) and commercial use authorizations (for snowmobile tours) with area businesses to provide transportation to visitors (Title IV, Section 403 of the National Parks Omnibus Management Act of 1998, Pub. L. 105-391). The park issued 10-year concession contracts for all OSVs starting in December 2014.

    OSV use is a form of off-road vehicle use governed by Executive Order 11644 (Use of Off-road Vehicles on Public Lands, as amended by Executive Order 11989). Implementing regulations are published at 36 CFR 2.18, 36 CFR part 13, and 43 CFR part 36. Routes and areas may be designated for OSV use only by special regulation after it has first been determined through park planning to be an appropriate use that will meet the requirements of 36 CFR 2.18 and not otherwise result in unacceptable impacts.

    Information collection requirements in this renewal request include:

    (1) Emission and Sound Standards (§ 7.13(l)(4)(vii) and (5)). Only OSVs that meet NPS emission and sound standards may operate in the park. Before the start of each winter season:

    (a) Snowcoach manufacturers or commercial tour operators must demonstrate, by means acceptable to the Superintendent, that their snowcoaches meet the standards.

    (b) Snowmobile manufacturers must demonstrate, by means acceptable to the Superintendent, that their snowmobiles meet the standards.

    (2) Transportation Events (§ 7.13(l)(11)(i)-(iii)). So that we can monitor compliance with the required average and maximum size of transportation events, as of December 15, 2014, each commercial tour operator must:

    (a) Maintain accurate and complete records on the number of snowmobiles and snowcoaches he or she brings into the park on a daily basis. These records must be made available for inspection by the park upon request.

    (b) Provide a monthly use report on their activities. Form 10-650, “Concessioner Monthly Use Report”, available on the park Web site, is used to collect the following information for transportation events:

    • Report Month/Year • Concessioner/Sub Contractor Contract Number • Departure Date • Duration of Trip (in days) • Transportation event type (snowmobile or snowcoach) • Number of vehicles • Best Available Technology (BAT) and Enhanced Best Available Technology (E BAT) • Number of visitors and guides • Route and primary destination • Administrative or guest services trip • If the transportation event allocation was from another commercial tour operator • Miscellaneous comments • Transportation event group size (number of guests/guides)

    (3) Enhanced Emission Standards (§ 7.13(l)(11)(iv)). To qualify for the increased average size of snowmobile transportation events or increased maximum size of snowcoach transportation events, each commercial tour operator must:

    (a) Before the start of each winter season, demonstrate, by means acceptable to the Superintendent, that his or her snowmobiles or snowcoaches meet the enhanced emission standards; and

    (b) Maintain separate records for snowmobiles and snowcoaches that meet enhanced emission standards and those that do not.

    We will use the information collected to:

    • Ensure that OSVs meet NPS emission standards to operate in the park; (2) evaluate commercial tour operators' compliance with allocated transportation events and daily and seasonal OSV group size limits; • ensure that established daily transportation event limits for the park are not exceeded, • confirm that commercial tour operators do not run out of authorizations before the end of the season and create a gap when prospective visitors cannot be accommodated, and • guarantee compliance with applicable laws and regulations.

    Responsible commercial tour operators are required to provide this information to minimize liabilities, maintain business records for tax and other purposes, obtain financial backing, and ensure a safe, efficient, and well-planned operation.

    II. Data

    OMB Control Number: 1024-0266.

    Title: Reporting and Recordkeeping for Snowcoaches and Snowmobiles, Yellowstone National Park, 36 CFR 7.13(l).

    Service Form Number: NPS Form 10-650.

    Type of Request: Extension without change of a currently approved collection.

    Description of Respondents: Individuals desiring to operate snowcoaches and snowmobiles in Yellowstone National Park.

    Respondent's Obligation: Required to obtain or retain a benefit.

    Frequency of Collection: On occasion.

    Activity Number of
  • respondents
  • Completion
  • time per
  • response
  • (hours)
  • Total annual
  • burden hours
  • Meet Emission/Sound Standards—Snowcoaches (7.13(l)(4)(vi) 12 .5 6 Meet Emission/Sound Standards—Snowmobiles (7.13(l)(5) 2 .5 1 Report and Recordkeeping (7.13(l)(11)(i)-(iii)) Form 10-650, “Concessioner Monthly Use Report” 45 2 90 Meet Enhanced Emission Standards (7.13(l)(11)(iv)) 5 .5 3 Total 64 100

    Estimated Annual Nonhour Burden Cost: None.

    III. Request for Comments

    On March 15, 2016, we published in the Federal Register (81 FR 13818) a notice of our intent to request that OMB renew approval for this information collection. In that notice, we solicited public comments for 60 days, ending on May 16, 2016. We did not receive any comments.

    We again invite comments concerning this information collection on:

    • Whether or not the collection of information is necessary, including whether or not the information will have practical utility;

    • The accuracy of our estimate of the burden for this collection of information;

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

    • Ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents.

    Please note that the comments submitted in response to this notice are a matter of public record. 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 OMB or us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that it will be done.

    Dated: September 16, 2016. Madonna L. Baucum, Information Collection Clearance Officer, National Park Service.
    [FR Doc. 2016-22800 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-EH-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement [Docket ID BSEE-2016-0014; OMB Control Number 1014-0011; 16XE1700DX EEEE500000 EX1SF0000.DAQ000] Information Collection Activities: Platforms and Structures; Proposed Collection; Comment Request ACTION:

    60-day Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    To comply with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), the Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement (BSEE) 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 a renewal to the paperwork requirements in the regulations under Subpart I, Platforms and Structures.

    DATES:

    You must submit comments by November 21, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments by either of the following methods listed below.

    • Electronically go to http://www.regulations.gov. In the Search box, enter BSEE-2016-0014 then click search. Follow the instructions to submit public comments and view all related materials. We will post all comments.

    • Email [email protected], fax (703) 787-1546, or mail or hand-carry comments to the Department of the Interior; Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement; Regulations and Standards Branch; ATTN: Nicole Mason; 45600 Woodland Road, Sterling, VA 20166. Please reference ICR 1014-0011 in your comment and include your name and return address.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Nicole Mason, Regulations and Standards Branch, (703) 787-1607, to request additional information about this ICR.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Title: 30 CFR 250, Subpart I, Platforms and Structures.

    OMB Control Number: 1014-0011.

    Abstract: The Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) Lands Act (OCSLA) at 43 U.S.C. 1334 authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to prescribe rules and regulations necessary for the administration of the leasing provisions of that Act related to mineral resources on the OCS. Such rules and regulations will apply to all operations conducted under a lease, right-of-way, or a right-of-use and easement. Operations on 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.

    In addition to the general rulemaking authority of the OCSLA at 43 U.S.C. 1334, section 301(a) of the Federal Oil and Gas Royalty Management Act (FOGRMA), 30 U.S.C. 1751(a), grants authority to the Secretary to prescribe such rules and regulations as are reasonably necessary to carry out FOGRMA's provisions. While the majority of FOGRMA is directed to royalty collection and enforcement, some provisions apply to offshore operations. For example, section 108 of FOGRMA, 30 U.S.C. 1718, grants the Secretary broad authority to inspect lease sites for the purpose of determining whether there is compliance with the mineral leasing laws. Section 109(c)(2) and (d)(1), 30 U.S.C. 1719(c)(2) and (d)(1), impose substantial civil penalties for failure to permit lawful inspections and for knowing or willful preparation or submission of false, inaccurate, or misleading reports, records, or other information. Because the Secretary has delegated some of the authority under FOGRMA to BSEE, 30 U.S.C. 1751 is included as additional authority for these requirements.

    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 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 implementing policy, BSEE is required to charge fees for services that provide special benefits or privileges to an identifiable non-Federal recipient above and beyond those which accrue to the public at large. Various applications, reports, and certifications for Platform Verification Program, fixed structure, Caisson/Well Protector, and modification repairs are subject to cost recovery, and BSEE regulations specify service fees for these requests.

    These authorities and responsibilities are among those delegated to BSEE. The regulations at 30 CFR 250, Subpart I, pertain to Platforms and Structures and are the subject of this collection. This request also covers the related Notices to Lessees and Operators (NTLs) that BSEE issues to clarify, supplement, or provide additional guidance on some aspects of our regulations.

    Some responses are mandatory and some are required to obtain or retain a benefit. No questions of a sensitive nature are asked. BSEE will protect proprietary information according to the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552) and DOI's implementing regulations (43 CFR 2); 30 CFR part 250.197, Data and information to be made available to the public or for limited inspection; and 30 CFR part 252, OCS Oil and Gas Information Program.

    The BSEE uses the information submitted under Subpart I to determine the structural integrity of all OCS platforms and floating production facilities and to ensure that such integrity will be maintained throughout the useful life of these structures. We use the information to ascertain, on a case-by-case basis, that the fixed and floating platforms and structures are structurally sound and safe for their intended use to ensure safety of personnel and prevent pollution. More specifically, we use the information to:

    • Review data concerning damage to a platform to assess the adequacy of proposed repairs.

    • Review applications for platform construction (construction is divided into three phases-design, fabrication, and installation) to ensure the structural integrity of the platform.

    • Review verification plans and third-party reports for unique platforms to ensure that all nonstandard situations are given proper consideration during the platform design, fabrication, and installation.

    • Review platform design, fabrication, and installation records to ensure that the platform is constructed according to approved applications.

    • Review inspection reports to ensure that platform integrity is maintained for the life of the platform.

    Frequency: On occasion, as a result of situations encountered; and annually.

    Description of Respondents: Potential respondents include Federal OCS oil, gas, or sulfur lessees and/or operators and holders of pipeline rights-of-way.

    Estimated Reporting and Recordkeeping Hour Burden: The currently approved annual reporting burden for this collection is 261,313 hours and $392,874 non-hour costs. The following chart details the individual components and estimated hour burdens. In calculating the burdens, we assumed that respondents perform certain requirements in the normal course of their activities. We consider these to be usual and customary and took that into account in estimating the burden.

    Burden Breakdown Citation 30 CFR 250 subpart I and related NTLs Reporting and/or recordkeeping requirement * Hour burden Average number of annual reponses Annual burden
  • hours
  • Non-hour cost burdens General Requirements for Platforms 900(b), (c), (e); 901(b); 905; 906; 910(c), (d); 911(c), (g); 912; 913; 919; NTL(s)
  • [PAP 904-908; PVP 909-918]
  • Submit application, along with reports/surveys and relevant data, to install new platform or floating production facility or significant changes to approved applications, including but not limited to: Summary of safety factors utilized in design of the platform; use of alternative codes, rules, or standards; CVA changes; and Platform Verification Program (PVP) plan for design, fabrication, and installation of new, fixed, bottom-founded, pile-supported, or concrete-gravity platforms and new floating platforms. Consult as required with BSEE and/or USCG. Re/Submit application for major modification(s)/repairs to any platform and obtain approval; and related requirements 817 100 applications 81,700
    $22,734 × 3 PVP = $68,202 $3,256 × 12 fixed structure = $39,072 $1,657 × 20 Caisson/Well Protector = $33,140 $3,884 × 65 modifications/repairs = $252,460 900(b)(4) Submit application for approval to convert an existing platform for a new purpose 105 4 applications