Federal Register Vol. 81, No.204,

Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 204 (October 21, 2016)

Page Range72681-73006
FR Document

81_FR_204
Current View
Page and SubjectPDF
81 FR 72739 - Pipeline Safety: Expanding the Use of Excess Flow Valves in Gas Distribution Systems to Applications Other Than Single-Family ResidencesPDF
81 FR 73013 - Minority Enterprise Development Week, 2016PDF
81 FR 72683 - Presidential Determinations With Respect to the Child Soldiers Prevention Act of 2008PDF
81 FR 72681 - Delegation of Authority Under Section 404(c) of the Child Soldiers Prevention Act of 2008PDF
81 FR 72805 - Sunshine Act MeetingPDF
81 FR 72837 - Sunshine Act Meeting; National Science BoardPDF
81 FR 72841 - Sunshine Act Meeting NoticePDF
81 FR 72837 - Sunshine Act MeetingPDF
81 FR 72832 - Meeting of the Advisory Committee on Actuarial ExaminationsPDF
81 FR 72854 - Proposed Collection; Comment Request for NoticePDF
81 FR 72853 - Proposed Collection; Comment Request for Form 8976PDF
81 FR 72777 - Small Diameter Graphite Electrodes From the People's Republic of China: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2015-2016PDF
81 FR 72776 - Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip From the People's Republic of China: Postponement of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value InvestigationPDF
81 FR 72775 - Utility Scale Wind Towers From the People's Republic of China: Notice of Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2015-2016PDF
81 FR 72819 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Request for CommentsPDF
81 FR 72738 - Federal Acquisition Regulation; Contractors Performing Private Security Functions; CorrectionsPDF
81 FR 72806 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection; Comment RequestPDF
81 FR 72829 - Notice of Meeting for the Star-Spangled Banner National Historic Trail Advisory CouncilPDF
81 FR 72824 - Notice of Public Meeting and Request for Comments; The National Christmas Tree LightingPDF
81 FR 72829 - Notice of November 9, 2016, Meeting of the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal National Historical Park CommissionPDF
81 FR 72854 - Special Medical Advisory Group, Notice of MeetingPDF
81 FR 72823 - Notice of the December 7, 2016, Meeting of the Cold War Advisory CommitteePDF
81 FR 72827 - Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Review Committee; MeetingsPDF
81 FR 72783 - International Fisheries; Pacific Tuna Fisheries; Well Volume in the Regional Vessel Register of the Inter-American Tropical Tuna CommissionPDF
81 FR 72791 - Applications for New Awards; Minority Science and Engineering Improvement ProgramPDF
81 FR 72830 - Notice of Availability of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Long-Term Plan To Protect Adult Salmon in the Lower Klamath RiverPDF
81 FR 72803 - Environmental Impact Statements; Notice of AvailabilityPDF
81 FR 72782 - Taking and Importing Marine Mammals; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to U.S. Navy Operations of Surveillance Towed Array Sensor System Low Frequency Active SonarPDF
81 FR 72785 - Procurement List; DeletionsPDF
81 FR 72784 - Procurement List; Proposed DeletionsPDF
81 FR 72819 - Amended Notice of Intent To Amend the Resource Management Plan for the Farmington Field Office, New Mexico and Prepare an Associated Environmental Impact StatementPDF
81 FR 72776 - Utility Scale Wind Towers From the Socialist Republic of Vietnam: Notice of Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2015-2016PDF
81 FR 72832 - United States v. VA Partners I, LLC, et al.; Public Comment and Response on Proposed Final JudgmentPDF
81 FR 72777 - Environmental Technologies Trade Advisory Committee, Notice of ReestablishmentPDF
81 FR 72849 - CSX Transportation, Inc.-Trackage Rights Exemption-Central Railroad Company of Indianapolis, Chicago d/b/a Ft. Wayne and Eastern Railroad DivisionPDF
81 FR 72812 - National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, Interagency Pain Research Coordinating Committee Call for Committee Membership NominationsPDF
81 FR 72787 - Intent To Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement for the Jasper Ocean Terminal in Jasper County, South CarolinaPDF
81 FR 72802 - Supplemental Notice of Agenda and Discussion Topics for Staff Technical Conference; California Independent System Operator CorporationPDF
81 FR 72799 - Combined Notice of Filings #2PDF
81 FR 72801 - Combined Notice of Filings #1PDF
81 FR 72804 - Proposed Settlement Agreement, Clean Air Act Citizen SuitPDF
81 FR 72729 - Reconsideration of Standards of Performance for New Residential Wood Heaters, New Residential Hydronic Heaters and Forced-Air FurnacesPDF
81 FR 72753 - Safety Zone; Willamette River, Portland, ORPDF
81 FR 72806 - Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Holding CompaniesPDF
81 FR 72850 - Supreme Corporation, Grant of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential NoncompliancePDF
81 FR 72791 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to the Office of Management and Budget for Review and Approval; Comment Request; Fast Response Survey System (FRSS) 108: Career and Technical Education (CTE) Programs in Public School DistrictsPDF
81 FR 72685 - Federal Employees' Group Life Insurance Program: Excepted Service and Pathways ProgramsPDF
81 FR 72694 - Trademark Fee AdjustmentPDF
81 FR 72739 - Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Pacific Ocean Perch in the Bering Sea Subarea of the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Management AreaPDF
81 FR 72797 - Proposed Agency Information Collection Extension With ChangesPDF
81 FR 72838 - Exelon Generation Company, LLC; Braidwood Station, Unit 2PDF
81 FR 72771 - Tobacco Inspection and Grading Services: Notice of Request for an Extension of a Currently Approved Information CollectionPDF
81 FR 72771 - Plant Variety Protection Board; Open MeetingPDF
81 FR 72772 - Cotton Classing, Testing and Standards: Notice of Request for an Extension and Revision to a Currently Approved Information CollectionPDF
81 FR 72770 - Cotton Classification and Market News Service: Notice of Request for an Extension and Revision of a Currently Approved Information CollectionPDF
81 FR 72773 - Notice of Intent To Revise a Currently Approved Information CollectionPDF
81 FR 72809 - Request for Nominations for Voting Members on a Public Advisory Committee; Food Advisory CommitteePDF
81 FR 72807 - Announcement of the Award of 38 Single-Source Low-Cost Extension Supplement Grants Under the Refugee School Impact Grant ProgramPDF
81 FR 72824 - Information Collection Request Sent to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for Approval; Land and Water Conservation Fund State Assistance ProgramPDF
81 FR 72803 - Information Collection Request Submitted to OMB for Review and Approval; Comment Request; Motor Vehicle and Engine Compliance Program Fees (Renewal)PDF
81 FR 72686 - EZ Guarantee Program and Micro Lender Program (MLP) StatusPDF
81 FR 72817 - Otay River Estuary Restoration Project, South San Diego Bay Unit of the San Diego Bay National Wildlife Refuge, California; Draft Environmental Impact StatementPDF
81 FR 72692 - Investigation of Claims of Evasion of Antidumping and Countervailing DutiesPDF
81 FR 72780 - South Atlantic Fishery Management Council-Public MeetingsPDF
81 FR 72852 - Notice of Receipt of Petition for Decision That Nonconforming Model Year 1996 and 1997 Ferrari F50 Passenger Cars Are Eligible for ImportationPDF
81 FR 72774 - Notice of Petitions by Firms for Determination of Eligibility To Apply for Trade Adjustment AssistancePDF
81 FR 72790 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to the Office of Management and Budget for Review and Approval; Comment Request; Application for New Grants Under the Ronald E. McNair Postbaccalaureate Achievement Program (1890-0001)PDF
81 FR 72810 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Animal Drug User Fee Cover SheetPDF
81 FR 72808 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for Office of Management and Budget Review; Comment Request; Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff on Dear Health Care Provider Letters: Improving Communication of Important Safety InformationPDF
81 FR 72693 - Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Sacramento River, Sacramento, CAPDF
81 FR 72815 - Lower Mississippi River Waterway Safety Advisory CommitteePDF
81 FR 72780 - Notice of Availability of a Final Environmental Impact Statement for Effects of Oil and Gas Activities in the Arctic OceanPDF
81 FR 72815 - Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health & Human Development; Notice of Closed MeetingsPDF
81 FR 72814 - National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases; Notice of Closed MeetingsPDF
81 FR 72813 - National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases; Notice of Closed MeetingsPDF
81 FR 72813 - National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism; Notice of Closed MeetingsPDF
81 FR 72815 - Center for Scientific Review; Notice of Closed MeetingPDF
81 FR 72813 - Center for Scientific Review; Notice of Closed MeetingsPDF
81 FR 72814 - Notice of Availability of License; Mutant IHD1 Inhibitors Useful for Treating CancerPDF
81 FR 72844 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend Specialized Quote Feed Port FeesPDF
81 FR 72842 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend Its Price List To Eliminate Take Fees for Bonds Executed on the NYSE BondsSMPDF
81 FR 72831 - Notice of Receipt of Complaint; Solicitation of Comments Relating to the Public InterestPDF
81 FR 72692 - Conforming Justice Department Regulations to the Federal Vacancies Reform Act of 1998PDF
81 FR 72798 - Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Oak Ridge ReservationPDF
81 FR 72797 - Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, NevadaPDF
81 FR 72841 - New Postal ProductsPDF
81 FR 72823 - National Register of Historic Places; Notification of Pending Nominations and Related ActionsPDF
81 FR 72811 - Notice of Interest Rate on Overdue DebtsPDF
81 FR 72811 - Meeting Announcement for the Technical Advisory Panel on Medicare Trustee ReportsPDF
81 FR 72801 - Combined Notice of FilingsPDF
81 FR 72799 - Combined Notice of FilingsPDF
81 FR 72854 - Veterans' Rural Health Advisory Committee; Notice of MeetingPDF
81 FR 72779 - Proposed Information Collection; Comment Request; Marine Recreational Fishing Expenditure SurveyPDF
81 FR 72806 - Advisory Committee to the Director (ACD), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)PDF
81 FR 72784 - Proposed Information Collection; Comment Request; Alaska Region Gear IdentificationPDF
81 FR 72837 - Notice of Lodging of Proposed National Resources Restoration Consent Decree Under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability ActPDF
81 FR 72847 - Louisiana Disaster Number LA-00065.PDF
81 FR 72848 - North Carolina Disaster Number NC-00081PDF
81 FR 72773 - Notice of the Advisory Committee on Agriculture Statistics MeetingPDF
81 FR 72740 - Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Exchange of Flatfish in the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Management AreaPDF
81 FR 72847 - North Carolina Disaster Number NC-00081PDF
81 FR 72848 - California Disaster #CA-00244 Declaration of Economic InjuryPDF
81 FR 72708 - Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Virginia; Adoption of Control Techniques Guidelines for Control of Volatile Organic Compound EmissionsPDF
81 FR 72759 - Significant New Uses of Chemical Substances; Updates to the Hazard Communication Program and Regulatory Framework; Minor Amendments To Reporting Requirements for Premanufacture Notices; Reopening of Comment PeriodPDF
81 FR 72805 - Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Holding CompaniesPDF
81 FR 72759 - Revisions to Hatchery Programs Included as Part of Pacific Salmon and Steelhead Species Listed Under the Endangered Species ActPDF
81 FR 72755 - Air Plan Approval; KY; RACM Determination for the KY Portion of the Louisville Area 1997 Annual PM2.5PDF
81 FR 72738 - Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement; Technical AmendmentsPDF
81 FR 72821 - Notice of Availability of the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Proposed Vantage to Pomona Heights 230 kV Transmission Line Project in Benton, Grant, Kittitas, and Yakima Counties, WashingtonPDF
81 FR 72788 - Notice of Availability of the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Lower Yellowstone Intake Diversion Dam Fish Passage Project, Dawson County, MontanaPDF
81 FR 72737 - Requirements for Vessels With Registry Endorsements or Foreign-Flagged Vessels That Perform Certain Aquaculture Support OperationsPDF
81 FR 73007 - Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement: Undefinitized Contract Action Definitization (DFARS Case 2015-D024)PDF
81 FR 72730 - Louisiana: Final Authorization of State-Initiated Changes and Incorporation by Reference of Approved State Hazardous Waste Management ProgramPDF
81 FR 73005 - Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement: Display of Hotline Posters (DFARS Case 2016-D018)PDF
81 FR 73002 - Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement: Use of the Government Property Clause (DFARS Case 2015-D035)PDF
81 FR 72986 - Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement: Network Penetration Reporting and Contracting for Cloud Services (DFARS Case 2013-D018)PDF
81 FR 72758 - Louisiana: Final Authorization of State-Initiated Changes and Incorporation by Reference of State Hazardous Waste Management ProgramPDF
81 FR 72716 - Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; North Dakota; Revisions to Air Pollution Control RulesPDF
81 FR 72724 - Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Virginia; Removal of Stage II Gasoline Vapor Recovery Requirements for Gasoline Dispensing FacilitiesPDF
81 FR 72757 - Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Virginia; Removal of Stage II Gasoline Vapor Recovery Requirements for Gasoline Dispensing FacilitiesPDF
81 FR 72714 - Partial Approval and Partial Disapproval of Attainment Plan for Oakridge, Oregon PM2.5PDF
81 FR 72720 - Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; State of Colorado; Motor Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance, Clean Screen Program and the Low Emitter Index, On-Board Diagnostics, and Associated RevisionsPDF
81 FR 72849 - Notice of Final Federal Agency Actions on Proposed Highway in UtahPDF
81 FR 72850 - Requested Administrative Waiver of the Coastwise Trade Laws: Vessel HOLOHOLO; Invitation for Public CommentsPDF
81 FR 72816 - Federal Property Suitable as Facilities to Assist the HomelessPDF
81 FR 72858 - Treatment of Certain Interests in Corporations as Stock or IndebtednessPDF
81 FR 72751 - Treatment of Certain Interests in Corporations as Stock or IndebtednessPDF
81 FR 72742 - Airworthiness Directives; Piper Aircraft, Inc. AirplanesPDF
81 FR 72748 - Airworthiness Directives; Airbus AirplanesPDF

Issue

81 204 Friday, October 21, 2016 Contents Agricultural Marketing Agricultural Marketing Service NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Cotton Classification and Market News Service, 72770-72771 2016-25499 Cotton Classing, Testing, and Standards, 72772-72773 2016-25500 Tobacco Inspection and Grading Services, 72771 2016-25502 Meetings: Plant Variety Protection Board, 72771-72772 2016-25501 Agriculture Agriculture Department See

Agricultural Marketing Service

See

Farm Service Agency

See

National Agricultural Statistics Service

See

National Institute of Food and Agriculture

Antitrust Division Antitrust Division NOTICES Proposed Final Judgments: United States v. VA Partners I, LLC, et al., 72832-72837 2016-25525 Centers Disease Centers for Disease Control and Prevention NOTICES Meetings: Advisory Committee to the Director; Correction, 72806 2016-25453 Centers Medicare Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 72806-72807 2016-25547 Children Children and Families Administration NOTICES Single-Source Grants: Refugee School Impact Grant Program, 72807-72808 2016-25496 Coast Guard Coast Guard RULES Drawbridge Operations: Sacramento River, Sacramento, CA, 72693-72694 2016-25479 Requirements for Vessels with Registry Endorsements or Foreign-Flagged Vessels that Perform Certain Aquaculture Support Operations, 72737-72738 2016-25364 PROPOSED RULES Safety Zones: Willamette River, Portland, OR, 72753-72755 2016-25511 NOTICES Meetings: Lower Mississippi River Waterway Safety Advisory Committee, 72815-72816 2016-25477 Commerce Commerce Department See

Economic Development Administration

See

International Trade Administration

See

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

See

Patent and Trademark Office

Committee for Purchase Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled NOTICES Procurement List; Additions and Deletions, 72784-72787 2016-25530 2016-25531 Defense Acquisition Defense Acquisition Regulations System RULES Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplements: Display of Hotline Posters, 73005-73006 2016-25317 Network Penetration Reporting and Contracting for Cloud Services, 72986-73001 2016-25315 Technical Amendments, 72738 2016-25425 PROPOSED RULES Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplements: Undefinitized Contract Action Definitization, 73007-73009 2016-25332 Use of Government Property Clause, 73002-73004 2016-25316 Defense Department Defense Department See

Defense Acquisition Regulations System

See

Engineers Corps

RULES Federal Acquisition Regulations: Contractors Performing Private Security Functions; Corrections, 72738 2016-25548
Economic Development Economic Development Administration NOTICES Trade Adjustment Assistance Eligibility; Petitions, 72774-72775 2016-25486 Education Department Education Department NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 72791 2016-25508 Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Application for New Grants under Ronald E. McNair Postbaccalaureate Achievement Program, 72790-72791 2016-25483 Applications for New Awards: Minority Science and Engineering Improvement Program, 72791-72797 2016-25539 Energy Department Energy Department See

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 72797-72798 2016-25504 Meetings: Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Nevada, 72797 2016-25462 Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Oak Ridge Reservation, 72798-72799 2016-25463
Engineers Engineers Corps NOTICES Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc.: Jasper Ocean Terminal, Jasper County, SC, 72787-72788 2016-25519 Lower Yellowstone Intake Diversion Dam Fish Passage Project, Dawson County, MT, 72788-72790 2016-25375 Environmental Protection Environmental Protection Agency RULES Air Quality State Implementation Plans; Approvals and Promulgations: Colorado; Motor Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance, Clean Screen Program and the Low Emitter Index, On-Board Diagnostics, and Associated Revisions, 72720-72724 2016-25295 North Dakota; Revisions to Air Pollution Control Rules, 72716-72720 2016-25302 Oakridge, OR; Partial Approval and Partial Disapproval of Attainment Plan for PM2.5 Nonattainment Area, 72714-72716 2016-25296 Virginia; Adoption of Control Techniques Guidelines for Control of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions, 72708-72714 2016-25441 Virginia; Removal of Stage II Gasoline Vapor Recovery Requirements for Gasoline Dispensing Facilities, 72724-72729 2016-25301 Standards of Performance: New Residential Wood Heaters, New Residential Hydronic Heaters and Forced-Air Furnaces, 72729-72730 2016-25512 State Hazardous Waste Management Programs: Louisiana: Final Authorization of State-initiated Changes and Incorporation by Reference, 72730-72737 2016-25318 PROPOSED RULES Air Quality State Implementation Plans; Approvals and Promulgations: Kentucky; RACM Determination for KY Portion of Louisville Area 1997 Annual PM2.5, 72755-72757 2016-25433 Virginia; Removal of Stage II Gasoline Vapor Recovery Requirements for Gasoline Dispensing Facilities, 72757-72758 2016-25297 Significant New Uses: Chemical Substances; Updates to Hazard Communication Program and Regulatory Framework, etc.; Reopening of Comment Period, 72759 2016-25440 State Hazardous Waste Management Programs: Louisiana, 72758-72759 2016-25313 NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Motor Vehicle and Engine Compliance Program Fees, 72803-72804 2016-25494 Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc., 72803 2016-25533 Proposed Settlement Agreements: Clean Air Act Citizen Suit, 72804-72805 2016-25513 Farm Service Farm Service Agency RULES EZ Guarantee Program and Micro Lender Program Status, 72686-72692 2016-25492 Federal Aviation Federal Aviation Administration PROPOSED RULES Airworthiness Directives: Airbus Airplanes, 72748-72751 2016-23787 Piper Aircraft, Inc. Airplanes, 72742-72748 2016-24857 Federal Deposit Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 72805 2016-25652 Federal Energy Federal Energy Regulatory Commission NOTICES Combined Filings, 72799-72802 2016-25456 2016-25457 2016-25514 2016-25515 Staff Attendances, 72802-72803 2016-25516 Federal Highway Federal Highway Administration NOTICES Final Federal Agency Actions: Proposed Highway in Utah, 72849-72850 2016-25256 Federal Reserve Federal Reserve System NOTICES Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Holding Companies, 72805-72806 2016-25439 2016-25510 Fish Fish and Wildlife Service NOTICES Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc.: Otay River Estuary Restoration Project, South San Diego Bay Unit of San Diego Bay National Wildlife Refuge, CA, 72817-72819 2016-25490 Food and Drug Food and Drug Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Animal Drug User Fee Cover Sheet, 72810-72811 2016-25482 Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff on Dear Health Care Provider Letters, 72808-72809 2016-25481 Requests for Nominations: Food Advisory Committee, 72809-72810 2016-25497 General Services General Services Administration RULES Federal Acquisition Regulations: Contractors Performing Private Security Functions; Corrections, 72738 2016-25548 Geological Geological Survey NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 72819 2016-25549 Health and Human Health and Human Services Department See

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

See

Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services

See

Children and Families Administration

See

Food and Drug Administration

See

National Institutes of Health

NOTICES Interest Rates on Overdue Debts, 72811 2016-25459 Meetings: Technical Advisory Panel on Medicare Trustee Reports, 72811-72812 2016-25458
Homeland Homeland Security Department See

Coast Guard

See

U.S. Customs and Border Protection

Housing Housing and Urban Development Department NOTICES Federal Properties Suitable as Facilities to Assist the Homeless, 72816 2016-25149 Indian Affairs Indian Affairs Bureau NOTICES Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc.: Resource Management Plan, Farmington Field Office, NM, 72819-72821 2016-25527 Interior Interior Department See

Fish and Wildlife Service

See

Geological Survey

See

Indian Affairs Bureau

See

Land Management Bureau

See

National Park Service

See

Reclamation Bureau

Internal Revenue Internal Revenue Service RULES Treatment of Certain Interests in Corporations as Stock or Indebtedness, 72858-72984 2016-25105 PROPOSED RULES Treatment of Certain Interests in Corporations as Stock or Indebtedness, 72751-72753 2016-25104 NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 72853-72854 2016-25555 2016-25558 International Trade Adm International Trade Administration NOTICES Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Investigations, Orders, or Reviews: Small Diameter Graphite Electrodes from People's Republic of China, 72777-72779 2016-25553 Utility Scale Wind Towers from People's Republic of China, 72775-72776 2016-25550 Utility Scale Wind Towers from Socialist Republic of Vietnam, 72776-72777 2016-25526 Committee Reestablishments: Environmental Technologies Trade Advisory Committee, 72777 2016-25524 Determinations of Sales at Less than Fair Value: Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip from People's Republic of China, 72776 2016-25552 International Trade Com International Trade Commission NOTICES Complaints: Certain Mobile Electronic Devices, 72831-72832 2016-25465 Joint Joint Board for Enrollment of Actuaries NOTICES Meetings: Advisory Committee on Actuarial Examinations, 72832 2016-25560 Justice Department Justice Department See

Antitrust Division

See

Parole Commission

RULES Conforming Justice Department Regulations to Federal Vacancies Reform Act of 1998, 72692-72693 2016-25464 NOTICES Proposed National Resources Restoration Consent Decrees under CERCLA, 72837 2016-25451
Land Land Management Bureau NOTICES Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc.: Resource Management Plan, Farmington Field Office, NM, 72819-72821 2016-25527 Vantage to Pomona Heights 230 kV Transmission Line Project, Benton, Grant, Kittitas, and Yakima Counties, WA, 72821-72823 2016-25404 Maritime Maritime Administration NOTICES Requests for Administrative Waivers of Coastwise Trade Laws: Vessel HOLOHOLO, 72850 2016-25229 NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration RULES Federal Acquisition Regulations: Contractors Performing Private Security Functions; Corrections, 72738 2016-25548 National Agricultural National Agricultural Statistics Service NOTICES Meetings: Advisory Committee on Agriculture Statistics, 72773 2016-25447 National Highway National Highway Traffic Safety Administration NOTICES Petitions for Decisions of Inconsequential Noncompliance: Supreme Corp., 72850-72851 2016-25509 Petitions for Import Eligibility: Nonconforming Model Year 1996 and 1997 Ferrari F50 Passenger Cars, 72852-72853 2016-25487 National Institute Food National Institute of Food and Agriculture NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 72773-72774 2016-25498 National Institute National Institutes of Health NOTICES Government-Owned Inventions; Availability for Licensing, 72814 2016-25468 Meetings: Center for Scientific Review, 72813, 72815 2016-25469 2016-25470 Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, 72815 2016-25474 National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases, 72813-72815 2016-25472 2016-25473 National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, 72813 2016-25471 Requests for Nominations: Interagency Pain Research Coordinating Committee, National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, 72812 2016-25522 National Oceanic National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RULES Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska: Exchange of Flatfish in Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Management Area, 72740-72741 2016-25446 Pacific Ocean Perch in Bering Sea Subarea of Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Management Area, 72739 2016-25505 PROPOSED RULES Hatchery Programs Included as Part of Pacific Salmon and Steelhead Species Listed under the Endangered Species Act, 72759-72769 2016-25438 NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Alaska Region Gear Identification, 72784 2016-25452 Marine Recreational Fishing Expenditure Survey, 72779 2016-25454 Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc.: Effects of Oil and Gas Activities in Arctic Ocean, 72780-72781 2016-25475 International Fisheries: Pacific Tuna Fisheries; Well Volume in Regional Vessel Register of Inter American Tropical Tuna Commission, 72783-72784 2016-25540 Meetings: South Atlantic Fishery Management Council; Webinars, 72780 2016-25488 Takes of Marine Mammals: U.S. Navy Operations of Surveillance Towed Array Sensor System Low Frequency Active Sonar, 72782-72783 2016-25532 National Park National Park Service NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Land and Water Conservation Fund State Assistance Program, 72824-72827 2016-25495 Meetings: Chesapeake and Ohio Canal National Historical Park Commission, 72829-72830 2016-25544 Cold War Advisory Committee, 72823-72824 2016-25542 National Christmas Tree Lighting, 72824 2016-25545 Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Review Committee, 72827-72829 2016-25541 Star-Spangled Banner National Historic Trail Advisory Council, 72829 2016-25546 Pending Nominations and Related Actions: National Register of Historic Places, 72823 2016-25460 National Science National Science Foundation NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 72837-72838 2016-25635 Nuclear Regulatory Nuclear Regulatory Commission NOTICES License Applications; Amendments: Exelon Generation Co., LLC; Braidwood Station, Unit 2, 72838-72841 2016-25503 Meetings; Sunshine Act, 72841 2016-25624 Parole Parole Commission NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 72837 2016-25582 2016-25583 Patent Patent and Trademark Office RULES Trademark Fee Adjustment, 72694-72708 2016-25506 Personnel Personnel Management Office RULES Federal Employees' Group Life Insurance Program: Excepted Service and Pathways Programs, 72685-72686 2016-25507 Pipeline Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration RULES Pipeline Safety: Expanding Use of Excess Flow Valves in Gas Distribution Systems to Applications Other Than Single-Family Residences, 72739 C1--2016--24817 Postal Regulatory Postal Regulatory Commission NOTICES New Postal Products, 72841-72842 2016-25461 Presidential Documents Presidential Documents PROCLAMATIONS Special Observances: Minority Enterprise Development Week (Proc. 9526), 73011-73014 2016-25739 ADMINISTRATIVE ORDERS Child Soldiers Prevention Act of 2008; Delegation of Authority (Memorandum of September 28, 2016), 72681 2016-25682 Child Soldiers Prevention Act of 2008; Presidential Determinations (Presidential Determination No. 2016-14 of September 28, 2016), 72683-72684 2016-25685 Reclamation Reclamation Bureau NOTICES Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc.: Long-Term Plan to Protect Adult Salmon in Lower Klamath River, 72830-72831 2016-25535 Lower Yellowstone Intake Diversion Dam Fish Passage Project, Dawson County, MT, 72788-72790 2016-25375 Securities Securities and Exchange Commission NOTICES Self-Regulatory Organizations; Proposed Rule Changes: NASDAQ Stock Market, LLC, 72844-72847 2016-25467 New York Stock Exchange, LLC, 72842-72844 2016-25466 Small Business Small Business Administration NOTICES Disaster Declarations: California; Amendment 1, 72848 2016-25443 Louisiana, 72847 2016-25450 North Carolina; Amendment 1, 72847 2016-25445 North Carolina; Amendment 2, 72847-72848 2016-25442 North Carolina; Amendment 3, 72848 2016-25449 North Carolina; Amendment 4, 72848 2016-25444 Surface Transportation Surface Transportation Board NOTICES Trackage Rights Exemptions: CSX Transportation, Inc. from Central Railroad Co. of Indianapolis, Chicago d/b/a Ft. Wayne and Eastern Railroad Division, 72849 2016-25523 Transportation Department Transportation Department See

Federal Aviation Administration

See

Federal Highway Administration

See

Maritime Administration

See

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

See

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration

Treasury Treasury Department See

Internal Revenue Service

RULES Investigation of Claims of Evasion of Antidumping and Countervailing Duties, 72692 2016-25489
Customs U.S. Customs and Border Protection RULES Investigation of Claims of Evasion of Antidumping and Countervailing Duties, 72692 2016-25489 Veteran Affairs Veterans Affairs Department NOTICES Meetings: Special Medical Advisory Group, 72854 2016-25543 Veterans' Rural Health Advisory Committee, 72854-72855 2016-25455 Separate Parts In This Issue Part II Treasury Department, Internal Revenue Service, 72858-72984 2016-25105 Part III Defense Department, Defense Acquisition Regulations System, 72986-73009 2016-25317 2016-25315 2016-25332 2016-25316 Part IV Presidential Documents, 73011-73014 2016-25739 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.

81 204 Friday, October 21, 2016 Rules and Regulations OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT 5 CFR Parts 870 RIN 3206-AM98 Federal Employees' Group Life Insurance Program: Excepted Service and Pathways Programs AGENCY:

U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

This action amends the rule to reflect that excepted service employees hired under the internship program known as the Pathways Programs may elect to enroll in Federal Employee's Group Life Insurance (FEGLI), if applicable Federal requirements are met. This action is necessary due to the omission of technical changes to OPMs final rule, Excepted Service, Career and Career-Conditional Employment, and Pathways Programs, issued on May 11, 2012, which concerns the excepted service internship programs. The effect of this action is to remove a barrier to recruiting students and recent graduates to help the Federal Government better compete with all employers when it comes to hiring qualified applicants for entry-level positions.

DATES:

This rule is effective on October 21, 2016.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Ronald Brown, Policy Analyst, (202) 606-0004, or by email to [email protected]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background

On December 27, 2010, Executive Order (E.O.) 13562 was signed and established the Internship Program and the Recent Graduates Program, which, along with the Presidential Management Fellows Program, as modified therein, became the Pathways Programs. As directed by the President, the Pathways Programs provides clear paths to Federal internships and potential careers in Government for students and recent graduates. The E.O. also created the Schedule D authority that supports the Pathways Programs by authorizing exceptions to the competitive hiring rules. Under the Schedule D authority, agencies are able, under OPM's guidance, to use excepted service hiring to fill positions from among a particular class of eligible individuals—students and recent graduates.

II. Discussion of Final Rule

This final rule updates the FEGLI regulation to change the name of the internship programs under FEGLI rules and provides that employees hired under the Pathways Programs authority may elect to enroll for coverage in FEGLI, if applicable Federal requirements are met. This change was omitted in the OPM final rule (77 FR 28194) issued in 2012 concerning the excepted service internship programs. However, this final rule does not establish new enrollment eligibility for any Pathways Programs interns.

Agencies should continue to refer to the supplementary information published in the aforementioned final rule and the guidance that is on the OPM Web site at: http://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/hiring-authorities/students-recent-graduates/.

Analysis of and Responses to Public Comments

We received one comment on the interim final rule relating to agency guidance materials. The sole commenter asked if OPM will issue new guidance to Federal agencies concerning the changed scheduling authority for Pathways Programs participants. In response to the comment, OPM will not issue guidance to Federal agencies based on the changed scheduling authority. The OPM amends this rule to reflect technical changes concerning Pathways Program interns to conform with the final Pathways rule published on May 11, 2012 (77 FR 28194). The technical changes are necessary to reflect that the schedule appointment authority for Pathways Programs interns changed to Schedule D. Lastly, the intern programs were renamed and we needed to change the name in the regulation. See § 870.302(b)(2).

Regulatory Flexibility Act

The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (Pub. L. 96-354) (RFA) establishes “as a principle of regulatory issuance that agencies shall endeavor, consistent with the objectives of the rule and of applicable statutes, to fit regulatory and informational requirements to the scale of the businesses, organizations, and governmental jurisdictions subject to regulation. To achieve this principle, agencies are required to solicit and consider flexible regulatory proposals and to explain the rationale for their actions to assure that such proposals are given serious consideration.” The RFA covers a widerange of small entities, including small businesses, not-for-profit organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions.

Agencies must perform a review to determine whether a rule will have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. If the agency determines that it will, the agency must prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis as described in the RFA. I certify that this regulation will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities because the regulation only affects life insurance benefits of Federal employees and retirees.

Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Review

This rule has been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget in accordance with Executive Order 12866.

Federalism

We have examined this rule in accordance with Executive Order 13132, Federalism, and have determined that this rule will not have any negative impact on the rights, roles and responsibilities of State, local, or tribal governments.

List of Subjects in 5 CFR Parts 870

Administrative practice and procedure, Government employees, Life insurance, Retirement.

U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

Beth F. Cobert, Acting Director.

Accordingly, OPM is amending 5 CFR part 870 as follows:

PART 870—FEDERAL EMPLOYEES' GROUP LIFE INSURANCE PROGRAM 1. The authority citation for part 870 is revised to read as follows: Authority:

5 U.S.C. 8716; Subpart J also issued under section 599C of Pub. L. 101-513, 104 Stat. 2064, as amended; Sec. 870.302(a)(3)(ii) also issued under section 153 of Pub. L. 104-134, 110 Stat. 1321; Sec. 870.302(a)(3) also issued under sections 11202(f), 11232(e), and 11246(b) and (c) of Pub. L. 105-33, 111 Stat. 251, and section 7(e) of Pub. L. 105-274, 112 Stat. 2419; Sec. 870.302(a)(3) also issued under section 145 of Pub. L. 106-522, 114 Stat. 2472; Secs. 870.302(b)(8), 870.601(a), and 870.602(b) also issued under Pub. L. 110-279, 122 Stat. 2604. Subpart E also issued under 5 U.S.C. 8702(c); Sec. 870.601(d)(3) also issued under 5 U.S.C. 8706(d); Sec. 870.703(e)(1) also issued under section 502 of Pub. L. 110-177, 121 Stat. 2542; Sec. 870.705 also issued under 5 U.S.C. 8714b(c) and 8714c(c); Public Law 104-106, 110 Stat. 521.

Subpart C—Eligibility 2. Revise § 870.302(b)(2) to read as follows:
§ 870.302 Exclusions.

(b) * * *

(2) An employee who is employed for an uncertain or purely temporary period, who is employed for brief periods at intervals, or who is expected to work less than 6 months in each year. Exception: An employee who receives an appointment of at least 1 year's duration as an Intern under § 213.3402 of this chapter, entitled “Entire executive civil service; Pathways Programs,” and who is expected to be in a pay status for at least one-third of the total period of time from the date of the first appointment to the completion of the work-study program.

[FR Doc. 2016-25507 Filed 10-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6325-39-P
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Farm Service Agency 7 CFR Parts 761 and 762 RIN 0560-AI34 EZ Guarantee Program and Micro Lender Program (MLP) Status AGENCY:

Farm Service Agency, USDA.

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

The Farm Service Agency (FSA) is amending the guaranteed Farm Loan Programs (FLP) regulations to implement an EZ Guarantee Program and establish an additional lender status. The EZ Guarantee Program will help lenders reduce costs of underwriting and servicing loans to help meet the unique financing needs of small farm operations. The intended effects of the rule are to make guaranteed loan programs more widely available and attractive to small farm operations and the lenders who work with those farm operations through a more flexible underwriting analysis process, reduced application requirements, and faster FSA approval. In addition, FSA is amending the regulations to make a technical correction related to chattel appraisal appeals related to both guaranteed and direct loans.

DATES:

Effective Date: October 21, 2016.

Comment Dates: We will consider comments on the Paperwork Reduction Act that we receive by: December 20, 2016.

We will consider comments on the regulatory changes that we receive by: January 19, 2017.

ADDRESSES:

We invite you to submit comments on this rule. In your comment, specify RIN 0560-AI34, and include the volume, date, and page number of this issue of the Federal Register. You may submit comments by either of the following methods:

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

Mail: Director, Loan Making Division, FLP, FSA, US Department of Agriculture, 1400 Independence Avenue SW., Stop 0522, Washington, DC 20250-0522.

Comments will be available for viewing online at http://www.regulations.gov. In addition, comments will be available for public inspection at the above address during business hours from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Randi Sheffer; telephone: (202) 205-0682. Persons with disabilities or who require alternative means for communications should contact the USDA Target Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background

FSA makes and services a variety of direct and guaranteed loans to the nation's farmers and ranchers who are unable to obtain private commercial credit at reasonable rates and terms. FSA also provides direct loan customers with credit counseling and supervision to enhance their opportunity for success. FSA direct and guaranteed loan applicants are often beginning farmers and socially disadvantaged farmers who do not qualify for conventional loans because of insufficient net worth or established farmers who have suffered financial setbacks due to natural disasters or economic downturns. FSA tailors direct and guaranteed loans to a customer's needs and may be used to buy farmland and to finance agricultural production.

The Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act of 1972 (CONACT, Pub. L. 92-419), as amended, authorizes FSA's Guaranteed Farm Loan Programs.

EZ Guarantee Program

FSA is amending its FLP regulations to add an EZ Guarantee Program to further assist the financing needs of small farm operations. Section 333A(g)(1)(A) of the CONACT states that FSA will provide lenders with a short, simplified application for loans which are $125,000 or less (see 7 U.S.C. 1983a(g)(1)(A)). The EZ Guarantee Program process will be the same as the Guaranteed Loan Program, except there is a new, self-contained application specifically formatted for EZ Guarantee loans. FSA may request additional information for the application when necessary to clarify a response on the application before making an approval decision.

FSA is adding a definition of an EZ Guarantee loan in 7 CFR 761.2. The EZ Guarantee Program will provide alternatives for application and financial underwriting process for Operating Loan (OL) and Farm Ownership loan (FO) purposes. All other FLP rules will remain unchanged and the funding sources for these EZ Guarantee loans will continue to be through FSA's guaranteed OL and FO annual appropriations.

All lenders who meet FSA eligibility criteria (see 7 CFR 762.105, 762.106, and 762.107) will be eligible to originate EZ Guarantee loans. As discussed below, the rule adds MLP Status in addition to Standard Eligible Lender (SEL), Certified Lender Program (CLP), and Preferred Lender Program (PLP) status. SELs, CLPs, and PLPs may originate EZ Guarantee loans up to $100,000. Because of their limited experience in making agricultural loans, MLPs will be limited to loans up to $50,000. The streamlined application and new underwriting process will reduce the burden for all of the FSA lender types. Beyond that, we expect that this new EZ Guarantee Program may be of particular interest to and used primarily by small commercial lenders desiring to build their agriculture portfolio and by nontraditional lenders who typically work with small farm operations.

EZ Guarantee loans will be subject to the same eligibility, security, and environmental requirements, as any other guaranteed OL or FO. Loan purposes, interest rate requirements, loan terms, appraisal requirements, and percent guarantee, and guarantee fees will also remain the same. Therefore, §§ 762.120 through 762.124 and 762.126 through 762.127 are not being revised.

Because small loans present less credit risk, and lenders are less inclined to finance small loans, FSA is revising § 762.110 to reflect a new, all-inclusive application form to be used only for EZ Guarantee loans. Unlike other guaranteed applications, lenders will not need to submit supporting information to FSA; therefore, the approval process will require significantly less time. In addition, the application format is different from the application forms now being used by FSA guaranteed lenders. The EZ Guarantee application will include a series of questions that pertain to eligibility, loan repayment prospects, collateral, and environmental review, which if appropriate, will allow for an accelerated FSA approval. An application not qualifying for the accelerated FSA approval will not necessarily be rejected, but instead will require additional information. This rule also makes additional changes to § 762.110 for clarity, but the rules for regular guaranteed applications remain the same.

As part of streamlining the application process, FSA is revising § 762.125 to use a more streamlined underwriting process for EZ Guarantee loans. Because of the limited income derived from a small loan, commercial lenders typically perform very limited financial analysis at loan origination. With the EZ Guarantee Program, the lender may analyze the loan in the same manner they would analyze a nonguaranteed loan of the same size and type, saving them time and money. Many lenders are now using historical averages, industry standards, or scorecard lending rather than projecting cash flow budgets to determine feasibility. Scorecard lending is an underwriting method where lenders use a variety of financial ratios and other information to predict the level of credit risk a particular applicant presents. Lenders will be required to analyze an EZ Guarantee application and determine that the applicant demonstrated reasonable prospects for repayment using normal, industry accepted methods and criteria. As part of the lender's information added to the application, the lender will describe the method and standards used on the EZ Guarantee application.

The lender's standards need to meet the following requirements:

1. The lender must perform the same financial analysis and apply the same underwriting standards for an EZ Guarantee loan as they would for a nonguaranteed loan of the same size and type.

2. The lender must determine that the EZ Guarantee applicant demonstrates reasonable prospects to repay the requested loan. This determination must be arrived at using the lender's typical underwriting criteria and methods, such as a cash flow projection, a scorecard underwriting model, historical income and expenses, or other repayment capacity indicator.

3. The lender will describe the methods and criteria used to determine the applicant's prospects for repayment on the EZ Guarantee application form.

FSA anticipates changes in accepted lending practices, portfolio performance, and economic conditions will create a need to update the EZ Guarantee underwriting criteria; therefore, § 762.125(d) specifies that the standards will be updated for future changes through an FSA announcement posted on the FSA Web site (www.fsa.usda.gov). That will allow for timely updating of the standards as needs change.

Since lenders will continue to analyze and document EZ Guarantee loans using the same methods and standards they use for nonguaranteed loans, FSA anticipates little to no change in default rates resulting from the limited underwriting analysis.

FSA will service EZ Guarantee loans as it currently services guaranteed OLs and FOs with exceptions for term loans performing according to the promissory notes and loan agreements. The lender will be responsible for servicing the entire loan in a reasonable and prudent manner, protecting and accounting for collateral; and the lender will also remain as the mortgagee or secured party of record. The lender will be responsible for servicing its guaranteed loans as it services any other loan in its portfolio and complying with all FLP requirements in 7 CFR 762.140 through 762.149. The reporting requirements will be the current reporting requirements in 7 CFR 761.141 including semi-annual status and default status reporting.

FSA is revising 7 CFR 762.140 for more limited analysis of borrowers with EZ Guarantee loans. If the loan is performing as intended, an annual analysis may not be required. All delinquent servicing lender responsibilities in 7 CFR 762.143 will remain the same.

Guaranteed MLP

FSA will administer MLP to increase collaboration with nontraditional lenders and assist small farm operations typically in underserved areas. The additional MLP Status will also enable nontraditional lenders to participate in the EZ Guarantee Program. Also, establishing a stronger working relationship with nontraditional lenders will be beneficial because they share a common goal with FSA to assist producers in underserved areas, including credit deserts such as Indian Country.

Minor reference changes in the rules are being made in §§ 761.2, 762.101, and 762.128. In § 761.2, an abbreviation of “Micro Lender Program” is being added. In § 762.101, “Micro Lender” is being added to the lender classification. In § 762.128, “MLP” is being added to the list of lenders who must comply with the environmental requirements.

Also, this rule adds § 762.107 to implement MLP including the creation of an additional MLP Status for nontraditional lenders and commercial lenders who are not eligible for or do not want Standard Eligible Lender (SEL), Certified Lender Program (CLP), or Preferred Lender Program (PLP) status. To request MLP Status, a lender will submit an application form to any FSA office. The application form will collect information from the lender, such as loan portfolio characteristics (delinquency and default rates), source(s) of loan funding, and certifications by the lender.

FSA will evaluate the MLP Status application using the criteria in 7 CFR 762.107(b).

FSA regulations require guaranteed lenders to be subject to credit examination and supervision by an acceptable State or Federal regulatory agency (see 7 CFR 762.105(b)). This requirement has prevented many nontraditional lenders from qualifying to receive FSA Guarantees on loans made to their customers. MLP Status will allow nontraditional lenders to participate in FSA's EZ Guarantee Program by permitting this examination and supervision to be performed by other types of regulatory agencies. In the new § 762.107(b)(3), FSA requires lenders to be subject to appropriate oversight to participate in the FSA Guaranteed Program as micro lenders. Nontraditional lenders such as Community Development Financial Institutions (CDFIs) are supervised and regulated, but not to the same degree that agencies like the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency or other banking authorities regulate commercial banks. The following types of organizations have currently been determined to meet these standards:

1. A lender meeting the examination and supervision requirement in § 762.105(b).

2. CDFI. CDFIs that have been awarded funds and are under the supervision of the CDFIs Program described in 12 CFR part 1805.

3. Rural Rehabilitation Corporation (RRC). RRCs that have entered into an agreement establishing an ongoing reporting and credit supervision relationship with FSA.

Traditional lenders, such as banks or credit unions, that are currently not eligible to obtain SEL, CLP or PLP status, would be eligible to apply for MLP status. Additionally nontraditional lenders that are certified by the U.S. Department of the Treasury—such as CDFIs—or that are subject to credit examination and supervision by FSA's Deputy Administrator for FLP (DAFLP)—such as RRCs—would be eligible to apply for MLP Status because:

1. FSA has experience in working with CDFIs and RRCs. In addition, CDFIs and RRCs typically make loans to small farms and underserved farmers, and are expected to be one of the primary users of the new EZ Guarantee Program; and

2. At this time, FSA does not have sufficient knowledge or expertise regarding other types of nontraditional lenders. Further research, including the potential need for guarantees by other types of nontraditional lenders is required before allowing these lenders to participate in the EZ Guarantee Program.

FSA expects to allow future expansion of the MLP Status to include other types of nontraditional lenders once further research is conducted; therefore, § 762.107(b)(3) specifies that FSA will announce future modifications to acceptable oversight on the FSA Web site. This will allow FSA to include other lenders as our experience with MLP Status grows.

In addition to the oversight and portfolio performance criteria, FSA also will require the lender to demonstrate experience in making the types of loans they will be requesting FSA to guarantee and the resources to properly make and service these loans, which is very similar to what FSA requires of its other lenders. MLPs lending capabilities may be demonstrated by their experience making and servicing other loans rather than just agricultural loans, as with other FSA guaranteed lenders.

As an objective measure of the capability to make and service loans, FSA is establishing minimum volume and maximum loss rates. These rates will be based on the lender's entire portfolio. In 7 CFR 762.107(b)(3), FSA requires lenders to demonstrate significant positive experience in making and servicing loans. The experience must be that:

1. The lender has originated 20 or more business loans of $50,000 or less; and

2. The lender's losses on all business loans of $50,000 or less made over the past 7 years do not exceed 3 percent.

Again, to allow for timely modification of these rates as circumstances change, FSA may modify these rates by posting rates on the FSA Web site.

Once approved, MLP Status will be valid for 5 years unless revoked by FSA. This is consistent with the timeframe of FSA's CLP and PLP lender status. FSA will also reconsider MLP Status in the event a lender's ownership changes, as is currently done with CLP and PLP lenders.

An MLP Status lender will be bound by all existing terms specified in FSA's Lender's Agreement. It will have the same reporting requirements and be subject to periodic lender review. Unlike FSA's other guaranteed lenders, however, MLP lenders typically have limited experience with agricultural loans and therefore will only be able to underwrite loans up to $50,000 under the EZ Guarantee Program.

Technical Correction for Chattel Appraisal Appeals

FSA is amending the regulations in 7 CFR 761.7(e)(2) to make a technical correction related to chattel appraisal appeals in connection with both guaranteed and direct loans. In the FSA final rule published on November 28, 2013, (78 FR 65523-65541), changes made relative to chattel appraisal appeals specified that the borrower needs to provide an independent appraisal. However, it was the intent of FSA that the borrower provide an independent appraisal review by a person that possesses sufficient experience or training to establish market value of chattel property based on public sales of the same or similar property in the market area, rather than an entirely new appraisal. Therefore, this rule is correcting that error in 7 CFR 761.7(e)(2).

Notice and Comment

In general, the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 553) requires that a notice of proposed rulemaking be published in the Federal Register and interested persons be given an opportunity to participate in the rulemaking through submission of written data, views, or arguments with or without opportunity for oral presentation, except that when the rule involves a matter relating to public property, loans, grants, benefits, or contracts section 553 does not apply. This rule involved matters relating to loans and is therefore being published as a final rule without the prior opportunity for comments. Although FSA is not required to provide the opportunity for comments on this rule, we are requesting public comments for 90 days to request public input on the changes.

Effective Date

The Administrative Procedure Act (APA, 5 U.S.C. 553) provides generally that before rules are issued by Government agencies, the rule is required to be published in the Federal Register, and the required publication of a substantive rule is to be not less than 30 days before its effective date. However, as noted above, one of the exceptions is that section 553 does not apply to rulemaking that involves a matter relating to loans. Therefore, because this rule relates to loans, the 30-day effective period requirement in section 553 does not apply. This final rule is effective when published in the Federal Register. Most FLP guaranteed loans are established at the beginning of the calendar year; therefore, implementing this rule quickly will benefit beginning and small farms starting in 2016, instead of having to wait for 2017.

Executive Order 12866 and 13563

Executive Order 12866, “Regulatory Planning and Review,” and Executive Order 13563, “Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review,” 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). Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting flexibility.

The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) designated this rule as not significant under Executive Order 12866 and, therefore, OMB was not required to review this final rule.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), as amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA), generally requires an agency to prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule whenever an agency is required by APA or any other law to publish a proposed rule, unless the agency certifies that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This rule is not subject to the Regulatory Flexibility Act because it is exempt from notice and comment rulemaking requirements of the APA and no other law requires that a proposed rule be published for this rulemaking initiative.

Environmental Review

The environmental impacts of this rule have been considered in a manner consistent with the provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA, 42 U.S.C. 4321-4347), the regulations of the Council on Environmental Quality (40 CFR parts 1500-1508), and the FSA regulations for compliance with NEPA (7 CFR part 799). Through this rule, FSA is establishing the EZ Guarantee Program to provide a guarantee for OLs and FOs up to $100,000, which are expected to be most used by beginning farmers and farmers with small farms (farms with annual gross agricultural products sales from $1,000 to $99,999) with less traditional farm operations who are not typically FSA Guaranteed loan customers. FSA is implementing the MLP Status to allow nontraditional lenders to participate in the EZ Guarantee Program, which is an administrative change. FSA is revising the existing FLP regulations to make those changes, but it is not changing the environmental review requirements that apply. The environmental responsibilities for each prospective applicant will not change from the current process followed for all FLP actions (7 CFR 799). Each EZ Guarantee Program action will be reviewed under the existing process to ensure it will not have a significant impact on the quality of the human environment either individually or cumulatively. Therefore, FSA will not prepare a programmatic environmental assessment or environmental impact statement on this rule.

Executive Order 12372

Executive Order 12372, “Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs,” requires consultation with State and local officials that would be directly affected by proposed Federal financial assistance. The objectives of the Executive Order are to foster an intergovernmental partnership and a strengthened Federalism, by relying on State and local processes for State and local government coordination and review of proposed Federal Financial assistance and direct Federal development. For reasons specified in the final rule related notice regarding 7 CFR part 3015, subpart V (48 FR 29115, June 24, 1983), the programs and activities within this rule are excluded from the scope of Executive Order 12372.

Executive Order 12988

This rule has been reviewed in accordance with Executive Order 12988, “Civil Justice Reform.” This rule will not preempt State or local laws, regulations, or policies unless they represent an irreconcilable conflict with this rule. The rule does not have retroactive effect. Before any judicial action may be brought regarding the provisions of this rule, the administrative appeal provisions of 7 CFR parts 11 and 780 are to be exhausted.

Executive Order 13132

This rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 13132, “Federalism.” The policies contained in this rule do not have any substantial direct effect on States, on the relationship between the Federal government and the States, or the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government, except as required by law. Nor will this rule impose substantial direct compliance costs on State and local governments. Therefore, consultation with the States is not required.

Executive Order 13175

This rule has been reviewed in accordance with the requirements of Executive Order 13175, “Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments.” Executive Order 13175 requires Federal agencies to consult and coordinate with tribes on a government-to-government basis on policies that have tribal implications, including regulations, legislative comments or proposed legislation, and other policy statements or actions that have substantial direct effects 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.

FSA has assessed the impact of this rule on Indian tribes and determined that this rule does not, to our knowledge, have tribal implications that require tribal consultation under Executive Order 13175. If a Tribe requests consultation, FSA will work with the USDA Office of Tribal Relations to ensure meaningful consultation is provided.

Unfunded Mandates

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA, Pub. L. 104-4) requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, or Tribal governments or the private sector. Agencies generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost benefit analysis, for proposed and final rules with Federal mandates that may result in expenditures of $100 million or more in any 1 year for State, local, or Tribal governments, in the aggregate, or to the private sector. UMRA generally requires agencies to consider alternatives and adopt the more cost effective or least burdensome alternative that achieves the objectives of the rule. This rule contains no Federal mandates, as defined in Title II of UMRA, for State, local, or Tribal governments, or private sector. Therefore, this rule is not subject to the requirements of sections 202 and 205 of UMRA.

Paperwork Reduction Act

In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the following new information collection request that supports the EZ Guarantee Program was submitted to OMB for emergency approval and is also being submitted to OMB for the 3-year approval. FSA is requesting comments from interested individuals and organizations on the information collection activities related to the EZ Guarantee application process as described in this rule. FSA is currently modifying the loan application process in order to provide loans to eligible borrowers through the EZ Guarantee process.

After OMB approval of the information collection request, FSA will merge this new information collection request with FSA's approved information collection of the OMB control number 0560-0155.

Title: EZ Guarantee Program.

OMB Control Number: 0560—New.

Type of Request: New Collection.

Abstract: This information collection is required to support the regulation in 7 CFR part 762, “Guaranteed Farm Loans,” which establishes the requirements for most of FSA's guaranteed loan programs and the changes in the rule that add the EZ Guarantee application process, as well as the application for lenders to receive MLP Status. The information collection established in this rule is necessary for FSA to evaluate the applicant's request and determine if eligibility, loan repayment, and security requirements can be met. The application includes information from the borrower and the lender; in general, the lender submits the application to FSA electronically. In addition, the information collection from lenders seeking MLP Status is necessary to ensure they meet the necessary regulatory standards to make and service agricultural loans.

The formulas used to calculate the total burden hours is estimated average time per response hours times total annual burden hours.

The estimated Public Burden for the EZ Guarantee and MLP Status are:

Estimate of Burden: Public reporting for this collection of information is estimated to average 0.46899 hours. The travel time, which is included in the total annual burden, is estimated to be 1 hour per respondent.

Type of Respondents: Individuals or households, businesses or other for profit, and farms.

Estimated Number of Respondents: 6,280.

Estimated Average Number of Responses per Respondent: 1.3.

Estimated Total Annual Number of Responses: 8,160.

Estimated Total Annual Burden on Respondents: 3,827 hours.

We are requesting comments on all aspects of this information collection and to help us:

1. Evaluate whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the FSA functions, including whether the information will have practical utility;

2. Evaluate the accuracy of FSA's estimate of burden 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.

All comments received in response to this document, including names and addresses when provided, will be a matter of public record. Comments will be summarized and included in the submission for OMB approval.

E-Government Act Compliance

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

Federal Assistance Programs

The title and number of the Federal assistance programs, as found in the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance, to which this interim rule would apply are:

10.406 Farm Operating Loans;

10.407 Farm Ownership Loans.

List of Subjects 7 CFR Part 761

Accounting, Loan programs-agriculture, Rural areas.

7 CFR Part 762

Agriculture, Banks, Banking, Credit, Loan Programs—agriculture.

For the reasons discussed above, FSA amends 7 CFR parts 761 and 762 as follows:

PART 761—FARM LOAN PROGRAM; GENERAL PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION 1. The authority citation for part 761 continues to read as follows: Authority:

5 U.S.C. 301 and 7 U.S.C. 1989.

Subpart A—General Provisions 2. Amend § 761.2 as follows: a. In paragraph (a), add the abbreviation for “MLP” in alphabetical order; and b. In paragraph (b), add the definition of “EZ Guarantee” in alphabetical order.

The addition and revision read as follows:

§ 761.2 Abbreviations and definitions.

(a) * * *

MLP Micro Lender Program.

(b) * * *

EZ Guarantee means a type of OL or FO of $100,000 or less made using a simplified loan application. As part of the simplified application process, EZ Guarantees are processed using a streamlined underwriting method to determine financial feasibility.

§ 761.7 [Amended]
3. Amend § 761.7(e)(2) by removing the words “independent appraisal” in both places and add the words “independent appraisal review” in their place. PART 762—GUARANTEED FARM LOANS 4. The authority citation for part 762 continues to read as follows: Authority:

5 U.S.C. 301 and 7 U.S.C. 1989.

5. Amend § 762.101(c) as follows: a. In paragraph (c)(2), remove the punctuation and word “, or” and add a semicolon in their place; b. In paragraph (c)(3), remove the period and add the punctuation and word “; or” in its place; and c. Add paragraph (c)(4).

The addition reads as follows:

§ 762.101 Introduction.

(c) * * *

(4) Micro Lender under § 762.107.

§ 762.105 [Amended]
6. In § 762.105(d)(2) remove “CLP or PLP” and add “CLP, PLP, or MLP” in its place. 7. Add § 762.107 to read as follows:
§ 762.107 Micro Lender Program.

(a) General. The lenders must submit the following items:

(1) To request MLP Status, a lender must submit an application form to any local FSA office.

(2) The lender must provide any additional information requested by the Agency to process an MLP request, if the lender continues with the approval process.

(3) MLP lender authorities are limited to originating and servicing EZ Guarantee loans.

(b) MLP criteria. An MLP lender must satisfy the following requirements to obtain MLP Status:

(1) Have experience in making and servicing business loans.

(2) Have the staff and resources to properly and efficiently discharge its loan making and loan servicing responsibilities that may include use of Agency approved agents.

(3) Be subject to oversight as established and announced by the Agency on the FSA Web site (www.fsa.usda.gov).

(4) Have a loss rate not in excess of the maximum MLP loss rate established and announced by the Agency on the FSA Web site (www.fsa.usda.gov).

(5) Have made the minimum number of loans as established and announced by the Agency on the FSA Web site (www.fsa.usda.gov).

(6) Not be debarred or suspended from participation in Government contracts or programs or be delinquent on a Government debt. This includes the lender's officers and agents.

(c) Renewal of MLP Status. MLP Status will expire within a period not to exceed 5 years from the date the lender's agreement is executed, unless a new lender's agreement is executed.

(1) Renewal of MLP Status is not automatic. A lender must submit a new application for renewal.

(2) MLP Status will be renewed if the applicable eligibility criteria under this section are met, and no cause exists for denying renewal under paragraph (d)(1) of this section.

(d) Revocation of MLP Status. The Agency may revoke the lender's MLP Status at any time during the 5 year term for cause as specified in paragraph (d)(1) of this section.

(1) Any of the following instances constitutes cause for revoking or not renewing MLP Status:

(i) Violation of the terms of the lender's agreement;

(ii) Failure to maintain MLP eligibility criteria;

(iii) Knowingly submitting false or misleading information to the Agency;

(iv) Deficiencies that indicate an inability to process or service Agency guaranteed farm loan programs loans in accordance with this subpart;

(v) Failure to correct cited deficiencies in loan documents upon notification by the Agency;

(vi) Failure to submit status reports in a timely manner; or

(vii) Failure to comply with the reimbursement requirements of § 762.144(c)(7) and (c)(8).

(2) A lender that has lost MLP Status may reapply for MLP Status once the problem that caused the MLP Status to be revoked has been resolved.

8. Amend § 762.110 as follows: a. Redesignate paragraphs (a) through (h) as paragraphs (c) through (j); b. Add new paragraphs (a) and (b); c. Revise newly redesignated paragraphs (c), (d) introductory text, and (f); d. In newly redesignated paragraph (e) introductory text, remove the references “(a)” and (b)” and add the references “(c)” and (d)” in their place; e. Remove newly redesignated paragraphs (e)(3) and (4); f. Further redesignate newly redesignated paragraph (e)(5) as paragraph (e)(3). g. In newly redesignated paragraph (g)(1), remove the last sentence; and h. In newly redesignated paragraph (g)(4), remove “CLP and PLP” and add the word “All” in their place.

The additions and revisions read follows:

§ 762.110 Loan application.

(a) General. This paragraph (a) specifies the general requirements for guaranteed loan applications:

(1) Lenders must perform at least the same level of evaluation and documentation for a guaranteed loan that the lender typically performs for non-guaranteed loans of a similar type and amount.

(2) The application thresholds in this section apply to any single loan, or package of loans submitted for consideration at any one time. A lender must not split a loan into two or more parts in order to fall below the threshold in order to avoid additional documentation.

(3) The Agency may require lenders with a lender loss rate in excess of the rate for CLP lenders to assemble additional documentation specified in paragraph (d) of this section.

(b) EZ Guarantee loans. MLP lenders may submit an EZ Guarantee application for loans up to $50,000. All other lenders may submit EZ Guarantee applications for loans up to $100,000. Lenders must submit:

(1) An EZ Guarantee application form.

(2) If the loan fails to pass the underwriting criteria for EZ Guarantee approval in § 762.125(d), or the responses in the application are insufficient for the Agency to make a loan decision, the lender must provide additional information as requested by the Agency.

(c) Loans up to $125,000. Lenders must submit the following items for loans up to $125,000 (other than EZ Guarantees):

(1) The application form;

(2) Loan narrative, including a plan for servicing the loan;

(3) Balance sheet;

(4) Cash flow budget; and

(5) Credit report.

(d) Loans over $125,000. A complete application for loans over $125,000 will require items specified in paragraph (c) of this section, plus the following items:

(f) CL Guarantees. In addition to the other requirements in this section, the following items apply when a lender is requesting a CL guarantee:

(1) Lenders must submit a copy of the conservation plan or Forest Stewardship Management Plan;

(2) Lenders must submit plans to transition to organic or sustainable agriculture when the funds requested will be used to facilitate the transition and the lender is requesting consideration for priority funding;

(3) When CL guarantee applicants meet all the following criteria, the cash flow budget requirement in this section will be waived:

(i) Be current on all payments to all creditors including the Agency (if currently an Agency borrower);

(ii) Debt to asset ratio is 40 percent or less;

(iii) Balance sheet indicates a net worth of 3 times the requested loan amount or greater; and

(iv) FICO credit score is at least 700; for entity applicants, the FICO credit score of the majority of the individual members of the entity must be at least 700.

9. Amend § 762.125 as follows: a. Revise paragraphs (a) introductory text and (b) introductory text; and b. Add paragraph (d).

The revisions and addition read as follows:

§ 762.125 Financial feasibility.

(a) General. Except for streamlined CL guarantees (see § 762.110(f)), the following requirements must be met:

(b) Estimating production. Except for streamlined CL guarantees (see § 762.110(f)), the following requirements must be met:

(d) EZ Guarantee feasibility. Notwithstanding any other provision of this section:

(1) The Agency will evaluate EZ Guarantee application financial feasibility using criteria determined and announced by the Agency on the FSA Web site (www.fsa.usda.gov).

(2) EZ Guarantee applications that satisfy the criteria will be determined to meet the financial feasibility standards in this section.

(3) EZ Guarantee applications that do not satisfy the criteria will require further documentation as determined by the Agency and announced on the FSA Web site (www.fsa.usda.gov).

§ 762.128 [Amended]
10. Amend § 762.128(a) by removing “CLP and PLP” and adding “CLP, PLP, and MLP” in its place. 11. Amend § 762.140 by revising the introductory text of paragraph (b)(5) and adding paragraph (b)(5)(v) to read as follows:
§ 762.140 General servicing responsibilities.

(b) * * *

(5) Performing an annual analysis of the borrower's financial condition to determine the borrower's progress for all term loans with aggregate balances greater than $100,000 and all line of credit loans. The annual analysis will include:

(v) For borrowers with an outstanding loan balance for existing term loans of $100,000 or less, the need for an annual analysis will be determined by the Agency for SEL, CLP, and MLP lenders. The annual analysis for PLP lenders will be in accordance with requirements in lender's credit management system (CMS).

Val Dolcini, Administrator, Farm Service Agency.
[FR Doc. 2016-25492 Filed 10-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-05-P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY U.S. Customs and Border Protection DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 19 CFR Part 165 [USCBP-2016-0053; CBP Dec. 16-11] RIN 1515-AE10 Investigation of Claims of Evasion of Antidumping and Countervailing Duties AGENCY:

U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security; Department of the Treasury.

ACTION:

Interim final regulations; extension of comment period.

SUMMARY:

This document provides an additional 60 days for interested parties to submit comments on the interim final rule that amended the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) regulations setting forth procedures for CBP to investigate claims of evasion of antidumping and countervailing duty orders in accordance with section 421 of the Trade Facilitation and Trade Enforcement Act of 2015. The interim final rule was published in the Federal Register on August 22, 2016, with comments due on or before October 21, 2016. To have as much public participation as possible in the formulation of the final rule, CBP is extending the comment period to December 20, 2016.

DATES:

The comment period for the interim final rule published August 22, 2016, at 81 FR 56477, effective August 22, 2016, is extended. Comments must be received on or before December 20, 2016.

ADDRESSES:

You may submit comments, identified by docket number, by one of the following methods:

Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments via docket number USCBP-2016-0053.

Mail: Trade and Commercial Regulations Branch, Regulations and Rulings, Office of Trade, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, 90 K Street NE., 10th Floor, Washington, DC 20229-1177.

Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name and docket number for this rulemaking. All comments received will be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided. For detailed instructions on submitting comments and additional information on the rulemaking process, see the “Public Participation” heading of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.

Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or comments received, go to http://www.regulations.gov. Submitted comments may also be inspected during regular business days between the hours of 9 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. at the Trade and Commercial Regulations Branch, Regulations and Rulings, Office of Trade, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, 90 K Street NE., 10th Floor, Washington, DC Arrangements to inspect submitted comments should be made in advance by calling Mr. Joseph Clark at (202) 325-0118.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Kevin M. McCann, Chief, Analytical Communications Branch, Office of Trade, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, 202-863-6078.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Public Participation

Interested persons are invited to participate in this rulemaking by submitting written data, views, or arguments on all aspects of the interim rule. U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) also invites comments that relate to the economic, environmental, or federalism effects that might result from this interim rule. Comments that will provide the most assistance to CBP in developing these regulations will reference a specific portion of the interim rule, explain the reason for any recommended change, and include data, information, or authority that support such recommended change. See ADDRESSES above for information on how to submit comments.

Background

On August 22, 2016, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) published in the Federal Register (81 FR 56477) an Interim Final Rule (CBP Dec. 16-11) that amended the CBP regulations setting forth procedures for CBP to investigate claims of evasion of antidumping and countervailing duty orders in accordance with section 421 of the Trade Facilitation and Trade Enforcement Act of 2015. The document solicited public comments in the interim rule, and requested that submitted comments be received by CBP on or before October 21, 2016.

Extension of Comment Period

With the goal of establishing the most effective and transparent procedures as possible for CBP to employ to investigate claims of evasion of antidumping and countervailing duty orders, CBP believes that it is very important to have as much public participation as possible in the formulation of the final rule that establishes those procedures for CBP. Therefore, CBP has decided to allow additional time for the public to submit comments on the final rule. Accordingly, the comment period is extended to December 20, 2016.

Dated: October 18, 2016. Alice A. Kipel, Executive Director, Regulations and Rulings Office of Trade, U.S. Customs and Border Protection.
[FR Doc. 2016-25489 Filed 10-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-14-P
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Office of the Attorney General 28 CFR Part 0 [OAG Docket No. 152; A.G. Order No. 3754-2016] Conforming Justice Department Regulations to the Federal Vacancies Reform Act of 1998 AGENCY:

Department of Justice.

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

This final rule amends the Department of Justice (DOJ) organizational regulations to remove authority from United States Attorneys (USAs) to designate any Assistant United States Attorney as Acting United States Attorney. The Federal Vacancies Reform Act of 1998 governs designations of Acting USAs. The removal of authority from USAs is designed to bring DOJ's organizational regulations in compliance with the Act.

DATES:

This rule is effective October 21, 2016.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Jay Macklin, General Counsel, Executive Office for United States Attorneys, 600 E Street NW., Suite 5100, Washington, DC 20530; Telephone: (202) 252-1600; Fax: (202) 252-1650.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The Federal Vacancies Reform Act of 1998, 5 U.S.C. 3345-3349d, provides that, when a Senate-confirmed officer in an Executive agency “dies, resigns, or is otherwise unable to perform the functions and duties of the office,” the First Assistant to that office automatically becomes the acting officer, unless the President designates someone else to perform the functions and duties of the office under 5 U.S.C. 3345(a)(2) or (a)(3). 5 U.S.C. 3345(a)(1). Only individuals performing the functions and duties of a vacant office pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 3345 may use the acting title, because the Act, with exceptions not relevant here, is “the exclusive means for temporarily authorizing an acting official to perform the functions and duties” of an office covered by the Act. 5 U.S.C. 3347. Currently, 28 CFR 0.136, which governs the designation of Acting USAs, is inconsistent with the Act, insofar as it authorizes each USA to designate any AUSA in the office to perform the functions and duties of the USA office and use the title of Acting USA.

The Department's regulations already account for potential USA vacancies under 28 CFR 0.137(b), which provides that each Department office “to which appointment is required to be made by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate (PAS office) shall have a First Assistant within the meaning of the Federal Vacancies Reform Act of 1998,” and “[w]here there is a position of Principal Deputy to the PAS office, the Principal Deputy shall be the First Assistant.” Id. The offices of USAs each have a First Assistant United States Attorney who is considered the Principal Deputy for purposes of § 0.137(b) and, by operation of the Act, automatically becomes the Acting USA when the USA leaves office or is otherwise unable to perform the office's functions or duties, unless the President designates another individual to serve as Acting USA.

Executive Orders 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review) and 13563 (Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review)

This rule is limited to agency organization, management, or personnel matters, and accordingly it is not subject to review under Executive Order 12866, § 3(d) (Sept. 30, 1993).

Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)

This rule will not have substantial direct effects 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. Therefore, in accordance with Executive Order 13132 (Aug. 4, 1999), the Department has determined that this rule does not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant the preparation of a federalism summary impact statement.

Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice Reform)

This rule meets the applicable standards set forth in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988 (Feb. 5, 1996).

Administrative Procedure Act

This rule is exempt from the rulemaking provisions of 5 U.S.C. 553 because this action pertains to rules of agency organization, procedure, and practice. 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(A). Accordingly, it is not necessary to issue this rule using the notice and public procedure set forth in 5 U.S.C. 553(b), and the requirement of a delayed effective date in 5 U.S.C. 553(d) does not apply.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

This rule will not result in the expenditure by State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100 million or more in any one year, and it will not significantly or uniquely affect small governments. Therefore, no actions were deemed necessary under the provisions of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995, 2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

The Attorney General, in accordance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 605(b), has reviewed this rule and, by approving it, certifies that it will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The rule removes authority that was inconsistent with the Federal Vacancies Reform Act of 1998.

Congressional Review Act

This action pertains to agency management, personnel, and organization and does not substantially affect the rights or obligations of non-agency parties. Accordingly, it is not a “rule” for purposes of the reporting requirement of 5 U.S.C. 801. See 5 U.S.C. 804(3). Therefore, the reports to Congress and the General Accounting Office are not required.

List of Subjects in 28 CFR Part 0

Authority delegations (Government agencies), Government employees, Organization and functions (Government agencies), Privacy, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Whistleblowing.

Accordingly, by virtue of the authority vested in me as Attorney General, including 5 U.S.C. 301 and 28 U.S.C. 509 and 510, Chapter I of Title 28 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:

PART 0—ORGANIZATION OF THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 1. The authority citation for part 0 continues to read as follows: Authority:

5 U.S.C. 301; 28 U.S.C. 509, 510, 515-519.

§ 0.136 [Removed and Reserved]
2. Remove and reserve § 0.136. Dated: October 14, 2016. Loretta E. Lynch, Attorney General.
[FR Doc. 2016-25464 Filed 10-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-07-P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 117 [Docket No. USCG-2016-0941] Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Sacramento River, Sacramento, CA AGENCY:

Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION:

Notice of deviation from drawbridge regulation.

SUMMARY:

The Coast Guard has issued a temporary deviation from the operating schedule that governs the Tower Drawbridge across the Sacramento River, mile 59.0, at Sacramento, CA. The deviation is necessary to allow the community to participate in the Golden Arches Run event. This deviation allows the bridge to remain in the closed-to-navigation position during the deviation period.

DATES:

This deviation is effective from 7:30 a.m. to 11 a.m. on October 23, 2016.

ADDRESSES:

The docket for this deviation, [USCG-2016-0941], is available at http://www.regulations.gov. Type the docket number in the “SEARCH” box and click “SEARCH”. Click on Open Docket Folder on the line associated with this deviation.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

California Department of Transportation has requested a temporary change to the operation of the Tower Drawbridge, mile 59.0, over Sacramento River, at Sacramento, CA. The vertical lift bridge navigation span provides a vertical clearance of 30 feet above Mean High Water in the closed-to-navigation position. The draw operates as required by 33 CFR 117.189(a). Navigation on the waterway is commercial and recreational.

The drawspan will be secured in the closed-to-navigation position from 7:30 a.m. to 11 a.m. on October 23, 2016, to allow the community to participate in the Golden Arches Run event. This temporary deviation has been coordinated with the waterway users. No objections to the proposed temporary deviation were raised.

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

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

Dated: October 17, 2016. D.H. Sulouff, District Bridge Chief, Eleventh Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2016-25479 Filed 10-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Patent and Trademark Office 37 CFR Parts 2 and 7 [Docket No. PTO-T-2016-0005] RIN 0651-AD08 Trademark Fee Adjustment AGENCY:

United States Patent and Trademark Office, Commerce.

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

The United States Patent and Trademark Office (Office or USPTO) is amending its rules to set or increase certain trademark fees, as authorized by the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (AIA). The fees will allow the Office to further USPTO strategic objectives by: Better aligning fees with the full cost of the relevant products and services; protecting the integrity of the register by incentivizing more timely filing or examination of applications and other filings and more efficient resolution of appeals and trials; and promoting the efficiency of the process, in large part through lower-cost electronic filing options. The changes will also continue to recover the aggregate estimated cost of Trademark and Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) operations and USPTO administrative services that support Trademark operations.

DATES:

This rule is effective on January 14, 2017.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Jennifer Chicoski, Office of the Deputy Commissioner for Trademark Examination Policy, by email at [email protected], or by telephone at (571) 272-8943.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Purpose: Section 10 of the AIA (Section 10) authorizes the Director of the USPTO (Director) to set or adjust by rule any fee established, authorized, or charged under the Trademark Act of 1946, 15 U.S.C. 1051 et seq., as amended (the Trademark Act or the Act) for any services performed by, or materials furnished by, the Office. See Section 10 of the AIA, Public Law 112-29, 125 Stat. 284, 316-17. Section 10 prescribes that fees may be set or adjusted only to recover the aggregate estimated costs to the Office for processing, activities, services, and materials relating to trademarks, including administrative costs to the Office with respect to such Trademark and TTAB operations. The Director may set individual fees at, below, or above their respective cost. Section 10 authority includes flexibility to set individual fees in a way that furthers key policy considerations, while taking into account the cost of the respective services. Section 10 also establishes certain procedural requirements for setting or adjusting fee regulations, such as public hearings and input from the Trademark Public Advisory Committee (TPAC) and oversight by Congress. Accordingly, on October 14, 2015, the Director notified the TPAC of the Office's intent to set or adjust trademark fees and submitted a preliminary trademark fee proposal with supporting materials.

The TPAC held a public hearing in Alexandria, Virginia on November 3, 2015 and released its report regarding the preliminary proposed fees on November 30, 2015. The Office considered the comments, advice, and recommendations received from the TPAC and the public in proposing the fees set forth in the notice of proposed rulemaking published in the Federal Register on May 27, 2016, at 81 FR 33619. The proposed rule included links to the preliminary trademark fee proposal and associated materials and to the TPAC report. The Office considered all public comments received during the comment period in the development of this final rule.

The USPTO protects consumers and provides benefits to businesses by effectively and efficiently carrying out the trademark laws of the United States. The final rule will advance key policy considerations, while taking into account the cost of individual services. For example, the increased fees for paper filings aim to better align the required fees with the cost of processing paper filings and incentivize electronic filings to promote efficiency of the registration process. Other trademark fees are increased to encourage timely filings and notices to further promote the efficiency of the process.

The fee schedule implemented in this rulemaking will also continue to recover the aggregate estimated costs to the Office to achieve strategic and operational goals, such as maintaining an operating reserve, implementing measures to maintain trademark pendency and high quality, modernizing the trademark information technology (IT) systems, continuing programs for stakeholder and public outreach, and enhancing operations of the TTAB.

Summary of Major Provisions: The Office herein sets or adjusts 42 trademark processing and service fees. The fee structure increases the per-class fee for an initial application filed on paper by $225 to $600, and increases the fees for 31 other paper filings by between $75 and $200 (per class, where applicable). The per-class fee for an initial application filed using the regular Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS) option is increased by $75 to $400. This increase also applies to requests for extension of protection and subsequent designations filed under the Madrid Protocol. 15 U.S.C. 1141e; Madrid Protocol Article 8(7)(a). As discussed below, in response to comments regarding requests for extensions of time to file a statement of use filed electronically, the USPTO is reducing the fee for such extensions. In addition, 10 TTAB-related fees are established or revised, six of which differentiate the fees for initiating a proceeding, as filed electronically or on paper, and increase these as compared to the prior undifferentiated fees; and four that establish electronic and paper filing fees for requests to extend time to file a notice of opposition in certain circumstances. A link to a full list of current and final rule fees, including the unit cost by fee from fiscal years 2013, 2014, and 2015, is available at: http://www.uspto.gov/about-us/performance-and-planning/fee-setting-and-adjusting.

Rulemaking Goals and Strategies: This final rule will allow the Office to achieve the dual goals of furthering key policy considerations while continuing to recover prospective aggregate costs of operation. One of the overall objectives of this rulemaking is to set individual fees to further key IP-protection policy considerations while taking into account the cost of the particular service. The Office seeks to enhance trademark protection for IP rights holders by offering application filing options and promoting the Administration's innovation strategies.

This final rule is based on furthering three key policy considerations: (1) To better align fees with full costs; (2) to protect the integrity of the register; and (3) to promote the efficiency of the trademark process.

Better Align Fees with Full Costs: The first fee-setting objective is to set and adjust trademark fees to better align those fees with the full costs of providing the relevant services to achieve aggregate cost recovery. In determining which fees to set or adjust, the Office targeted changes to fees where the gap between the cost of the service and the current fee rate was the greatest. Paper filings are generally more expensive to process than electronic filings. Currently, however, most fees for paper filings are not set at full cost; instead they are subsidized by electronic filers. Because of this, across-the-board increases in fees for paper filings are implemented herein to bring the respective fees closer to the actual cost of processing paper filings and incentivize lower-cost electronic options. Additionally, adjustments to TTAB fees, which have not been adjusted, depending on the fee, for 15-25 years, will bring the fees closer to current processing costs, and new fees for extensions of time to file a notice of opposition will allow recovery of some of the cost of processing these filings.

Protect the Integrity of the Trademark Register: The second fee-setting objective is to set or adjust fees to further the policy objective of protecting the accuracy of the trademark register by incentivizing timely filings and examination, as well as efficient trial and appeal resolutions. These fees are used to encourage actions that help to facilitate efficient processing and encourage the prompt conclusion of application prosecution. An accurate register allows the public to rely on the register to determine potential trademark rights. Filings that may result in a less-accurate register are among those filings targeted under this objective.

Promote the Efficiency of the Trademark Process: The third fee-setting objective pertains to furthering key policy objectives and meeting stakeholder expectations by improving the efficiency of the trademark registration process, and related appeals and trial cases, primarily by incentivizing electronic filings. To reach this objective, the Office targets changes to fees that could administratively improve application processing by encouraging more electronic filing. Electronic filing expedites processing, shortens pendency, minimizes manual processing and the potential for data-entry errors, and is more efficient for both the filer and the USPTO. The Office believes that the increase in fees for paper filings, in conjunction with such prior rulemakings as the TEAS Reduced Fee (TEAS RF) rulemaking that took effect in January 2015 (79 FR 74633 (Dec. 16, 2014)) and increased electronic-filing options at lower rates, will continue to result in a greater percentage of electronic filings, in turn improving the efficiency of the trademark process.

Consistent with the Office's goals and obligations under the AIA, another overall objective of this rulemaking is to ensure the fee schedule continues to generate sufficient revenue to recover the prospective aggregate costs of Trademark and TTAB operations and the associated administrative costs. Fees must be set at levels projected to cover future aggregate costs, which include budgetary requirements and an operating reserve. A record number of over 500,000 classes were filed in fiscal year (FY) 2015, the seventh consecutive year of increased filings, and the Office projects this trend of increased filings to continue for the foreseeable future. Additionally, to maintain trademark pendency and quality goals with the increased filings, the Office must ensure it continues to have adequate resources and IT systems to support future processing and examination requirements. The Office is in the midst of a multi-year IT systems and infrastructure upgrade, which is critical to the future of the U.S. trademark registration system and long sought after by stakeholders.

Maintaining the current fee schedule is unlikely to meet budgetary requirements, including: Full costs associated with the projected increases in filings; the full costs necessary to support Trademark and TTAB operations; and necessary investments in IT systems, intellectual property (IP) policy, and USPTO programs. The USPTO FY 2017 President's Budget was the basis for the initial fee proposal. It includes two revenue estimates based on the projected demand for trademark products and services and fee rates: (1) The current fee schedule; and (2) the initial fee proposal as submitted to the TPAC and discussed in its public hearing and report. It also includes information on estimated aggregate cost that may be found in the USPTO FY 2017 President's Budget (Figure #4, page 23) at http://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/fy17pbr.pdf.

The Office notes that because the FY 2017 President's Budget was submitted prior to the USPTO making final decisions on the fee adjustments, and given that the Office reduced several fees from the initial proposal in response to comments from the TPAC and the public, and further reduced fees in response to comments submitted regarding the proposed rule, as discussed herein, the aggregate revenue projected for FY 2017-FY 2021 is higher in that document than the projections for this final rule. Under the fee schedule in this final rule, assuming the same level of budgetary requirements, optimal operating reserves are projected by FY 2021. The USPTO would use its existing authority going forward to adjust fees to cover budgetary requirements and to maintain the optimal operating reserve balance. If the actual operating reserve exceeds the estimated optimal level by 15 percent for two consecutive years, the USPTO would consider lowering fees.

Aggregate costs are estimated through the USPTO budget-formulation process with the annual preparation of a five-year performance-based budget request.

These fee-schedule goals are consistent with strategic goals and objectives detailed in the USPTO 2014-2018 Strategic Plan (Strategic Plan) that is available at: http://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/USPTO_2014-2018_Strategic_Plan.pdf. The Strategic Plan defines the USPTO's mission and long-term goals and presents the actions the Office will take to realize those goals. The significant actions the Office describes in the Strategic Plan that are specifically related to the goals of this rulemaking are: Ensuring optimal IT service to all users, maintaining trademark pendency and high quality, continuing and enhancing stakeholder and public outreach, and enhancing operations of the TTAB.

The trademark fee schedule implemented herein will achieve the goals of furthering the key policy considerations of better aligning fees with full costs, protecting the integrity of the register, and promoting the efficiency of the trademark process in FY 2017 and beyond while recovering prospective aggregate costs of operation. It will also create a better and fairer cost-recovery system that balances subsidizing costs to encourage broader usage of IP rights-protection mechanisms and participation by more trademark owners.

The following table shows the current and final fee amounts implemented by this rulemaking for paper-filed applications and documents.

Fees for Paper Filings 37 CFR Fee code Description Current fee Final rule
  • fee
  • Change
    2.6(a)(1)(i) 6001 Filing an Application on Paper, per Class $375 $600 $225 2.6(a)(19)(i) 6006 Request to Divide an Application Filed on Paper, per New Application Created 100 200 100 2.6(a)(1)(v) 6008 Additional Processing Fee under § 2.22(c) or § 2.23(c), per Class 50 125 75 2.6(a)(5)(i) 6201 Filing an Application for Renewal of a Registration on Paper, per Class 400 500 100 2.6(a)(6)(i) 6203 Additional Fee for Filing a Renewal Application During the Grace Period on Paper, per Class 100 200 100 2.6(a)(21)(i) 6204 Correcting a Deficiency in a Renewal Application via Paper Filing 100 200 100 2.6(a)(12)(i) 6205 Filing an Affidavit under § 8 of the Act on Paper, per Class 100 225 125 2.6(a)(14)(i) 6206 Additional Fee for Filing a § 8 Affidavit During the Grace Period on Paper, per Class 100 200 100 2.6(a)(20)(i) 6207 Correcting a Deficiency in a § 8 Affidavit via Paper Filing 100 200 100 2.6(a)(13)(i) 6208 Filing an Affidavit under § 15 of the Act on Paper, per Class 200 300 100 2.6(a)(7)(i) 6210 Filing to Publish a Mark under § 12(c) on Paper, per Class 100 200 100 2.6(a)(8)(i) 6211 Issuing New Certificate of Registration upon Request of Registrant, Request Filed on Paper 100 200 100 2.6(a)(9)(i) 6212 Certificate of Correction of Registrant's Error, Request Filed on Paper 100 200 100 2.6(a)(10)(i) 6213 Filing a Disclaimer to a Registration, on Paper 100 200 100 2.6(a)(11)(i) 6214 Filing an Amendment to a Registration, on Paper 100 200 100 2.6(a)(2)(i) 6002 Filing an Amendment to Allege Use under § 1(c) of the Act on Paper, per Class 100 200 100 2.6(a)(3)(i) 6003 Filing a Statement of Use under § 1(d)(1) of the Act on Paper, per Class 100 200 100 2.6(a)(4)(i) 6004 Filing a Request under § 1(d)(2) of the Act for a Six-Month Extension of Time for Filing a Statement of Use under § 1(d)(1) of the Act on Paper, per Class 150 225 75 7.6(a)(1)(i) 6901 Certifying an International Application Based on a Single Application or Registration, Filed on Paper, per Class 100 200 100 7.6(a)(2)(i) 6902 Certifying an International Application Based on More Than One Basic Application or Registration Filed on Paper, per Class 150 250 100 7.6(a)(4)(i) 6903 Transmitting a Request to Record an Assignment or Restriction, or Release of a Restriction, under § 7.23 or § 7.24 Filed on Paper 100 200 100 7.6(a)(5)(i) 6904 Filing a Notice of Replacement under § 7.28 on Paper, per Class 100 200 100 7.6(a)(6)(i) 6905 Filing an Affidavit under § 71 of the Act on Paper, per Class 100 225 125 7.6(a)(7)(i) 6906 Surcharge for Filing an Affidavit under § 71 of the Act During Grace Period on Paper, per Class 100 200 100 7.6(a)(3)(i) 6907 Transmitting a Subsequent Designation under § 7.21, Filed on Paper 100 200 100 7.6(a)(8)(i) 6908 Correcting a Deficiency in a § 71 Affidavit Filed on Paper 100 200 100 2.6(a)(16)(i) 6401 Filing a Petition to Cancel on Paper, per Class 300 500 200 2.6(a)(17)(i) 6402 Filing a Notice of Opposition on Paper, per Class 300 500 200 2.6(a)(18)(i) 6403 Ex Parte Appeal to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board Filed on Paper, per Class 100 300 200 2.6(a)(22)(i) New Filing a Request for an Extension of Time to File a Notice of Opposition under § 2.102(c)(3) on Paper 200 n/a 2.6(a)(23)(i) New Filing a Request for an Extension of Time to File a Notice of Opposition under § 2.102(c)(1)(ii) or (c)(2) on Paper 300 n/a 2.6(a)(15)(i) 6005 Petitions to the Director Filed on Paper 100 200 100
    Comments and Responses

    The USPTO published a proposed rule on May 27, 2016 soliciting comments on the proposed fee schedule. In response, the USPTO received comments from four intellectual property organizations and seven individual commenters representing law firms, corporations, and individuals. These comments are posted on the USPTO's Web site at http://www.uspto.gov/trademark/trademark-updates-and-announcements/comments-proposed-rulemaking-relating-trademark-fee.

    The Office received comments both generally supporting and objecting to the fee increases. Three commenters objected to any increase in fees, as they believed such increases placed hardships on individual filers and small-business owners. Two of these commenters suggested that fees be maintained at their current levels for these groups and one suggested that the Office consider lowering the fees for individual entrepreneurs, artisans, and crafts people. Alternatively, one commenter expressed support of the Office's goal of incentivizing use of electronic filings, the proposed fee increases on certain paper filings, and the increase of the application fee for the regular TEAS application.

    The USPTO appreciates the commenter's support of the objective of incentivizing electronic filing, but it also appreciates the concerns of the commenters regarding the impact of the increased fees on individuals and small-business owners. After review of the comments to the fee proposal, the USPTO is reducing the current fee for electronically filed requests for extensions of time to file a statement of use and the proposed increases for affidavits under sections 8 and 71. Furthermore, the majority of the fee increases are for paper filings. The less-expensive electronic filing method can be used by all types of filers, including small companies and individuals focused on minimizing costs, and the Office's experience is that small companies and individual filers have proven particularly adept at finding and choosing lower-cost filing options.

    The USPTO also received public comments expressing concerns with several individual fees. In the interest of providing context to those comments, they are summarized and responded to in the general discussion of the individual fee rationale below.

    Individual Fee Rationale: The Office projects the aggregate revenue generated from trademark fees will recover the prospective aggregate cost, including the attainment and maintenance of an adequate operating reserve for its Trademark and TTAB operations. In addition, as described above, some of the fees are set to balance several key policy factors, and executing these policy factors in the trademark fee schedule is consistent with the goals and objectives outlined in the Strategic Plan. Once the key policy factors are considered, fees are set at, above, or below individual cost-recovery levels for the service provided. For more information regarding the cost methodologies used to derive the historical fee unit expenses, please refer to USPTO Fee Setting—Activity Based Information and Trademark Fee Unit Expense Methodology available at: http://www.uspto.gov/about-us/performance-and-planning/fee-setting-and-adjusting.

    Fees for Paper Filings: The final rule increases the fees for paper filings in order to meet two objectives: Better align fees with costs and improve the efficiency of the trademark process. The fee for filing a trademark application for registration on paper is increased by $225, from $375 per International Class to $600 per International Class. Additionally, all trademark processing fees for paper filings are increased by $75 to $200 more than current fees (per class, when applicable).

    The costs of processing paper filings are generally higher than electronic filings and higher than current fee schedules. A full list of current and new fees including the unit cost by fee from fiscal years 2013, 2014, and 2015 is available in the Table of Trademark Fees—Current, Final Rule and Unit Cost at: http://www.uspto.gov/about-us/performance-and-planning/fee-setting-and-adjusting. An increase in the fees for these filings will help to offset the higher processing costs and come closer to recovering the total processing costs. Furthermore, setting a higher fee for paper filings incentivizes electronic filings, which are more cost efficient for the Office to process and which reduce the possibility of data-entry errors. As a result, adjustments of 5-10% in the estimated number of paper filings have been made in projecting filings and estimating revenue considering the impact of the fee increase on the behavior of applicants and parties to TTAB proceedings and the resulting revenues. The rationale behind this fee increase is consistent with prior fee reductions for electronic filings.

    At present, the vast majority of filings are electronic. For example, in FY 2015, only 0.4% of initial applications for registration were filed on paper, increasing the unit costs as filings decrease. Additionally, more than 95% of all fee-paid requests were filed electronically in FY 2015. Thus, the increase in all paper filing fees will have virtually no impact on the vast majority of applicants and registrants who file documents electronically.

    Three commenters objected to the amounts of the proposed fee increases for paper filings. The USPTO understands the concerns to keep costs low for all filers. The objections to these fees have been carefully considered. However, some of the amended fees are set to balance several key policy factors, and executing these policy factors in the trademark fee schedule is consistent with the goals and objectives outlined in the Strategic Plan. In addition, given the costs to process paper filings, the USPTO has determined that a fee increase is necessary at this time in order to bring the fees charged closer to the costs of processing the filings. The USPTO encourages the use of electronic filing as a preferred filing method because it is less expensive, with lower processing fees and costs. It is also more efficient, because electronic filing expedites processing by eliminating the need for individual data entry as well as decreasing the potential for data-entry errors. The USPTO provides guidance on using TEAS electronic filing forms on its Web site at http://www.uspto.gov/trademarks-getting-started/trademark-basics/teas-nuts-and-bolts-videos.

    Two commenters suggested a waiver of any higher fee for paper filing in situations where electronic filing is unavailable, whether due a system outage or to TEAS limitations regarding the submission of evidence or specimens in video format. One of the commenters also suggested that the difference in fees in such situations be waived by some mechanism other than a petition to the Director.

    The USPTO notes that it is currently possible to submit electronic files containing sound or multimedia specimens or evidence directly through TEAS in all initial application forms as well as response forms, allegation-of-use forms, petitions forms, and post-registration maintenance forms. The complete list of forms is available on the USPTO Web site at http://www.uspto.gov/trademarks-application-process/filing-online/trademark-electronic-application-system-teas-1#164074. The USPTO is also enhancing additional forms to permit direct submission of sound or multimedia files on an ongoing basis, with the next enhancement planned for October 2016. Therefore, there are few situations in which a party would be unable to attach an electronic file to a TEAS form. Until such time as all forms accept such attachments, the USPTO has provided a workaround approach for submitting such files via email.

    The USPTO makes every effort to have TEAS and the Electronic System for Trademark Trials and Appeals (ESTTA) for trademark and TTAB filings, respectively, available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Sometimes, TEAS or ESTTA may be unavailable because of routine maintenance or are unexpectedly inaccessible. In such cases, the USPTO provides information about the outage on its Web site and makes every attempt to restore service as soon as possible. The USPTO also provides information regarding filing documents during an outage at http://www.uspto.gov/trademarks-application-process/filing-online/filing-documents-during-outage. Requests to waive a fee because a document had to be filed on paper due to a system outage or other circumstance are considered on a case-by-case basis. In order to properly assess the circumstances and evidence regarding each request for a fee waiver, the appropriate mechanism is to file a petition to the Director under 37 CFR 2.146.

    Other Trademark-Processing Fees: The Office also increases certain other trademark-processing fees in order to further key policy considerations, and reduces one fee. The rule increases the per-class fee for an initial application filed through TEAS from $325 to $400. This fee increase applies to both U.S. and foreign filers as well as to applications submitted under the Madrid Protocol as requests for extension of protection and subsequent designation. The rule also increases the processing fee for failure to meet the requirements for a TEAS Plus or TEAS RF filing from $50 to $125 per International Class to better align the resulting total charge with the fee for filing a regular TEAS application. In addition, the final rule increases the fees for affidavits under sections 8 and 71 of the Act in the amount of $25 per class for electronic filings and $125 per class for paper filings. However, as a result of public comments, the rule reduces the current fee for electronically filing a request for an extension of time to file a statement of use from $150 to $125 per class and reduces the increase for filing such a request on paper to $225, rather than the proposed increase to $250.

    Initial Application Filed Through TEAS: The final rule increases the fee for an initial application filed through TEAS as a regular TEAS application in order to better align the fee with the costs and to incentivize subsequent electronic filing and communications. The fee is increased from $325 to $400 to bring the fee closer to the full processing cost of the service. Unlike the TEAS Plus and TEAS RF application options, the regular TEAS application does not require the applicant to commit to communicating electronically with the Office throughout the course of prosecution of the application. Increasing the fee for this application option will encourage applicants to commit to complete electronic processing using one of the lower-cost application options. Corresponding increases to the individual fee for requests for protection of an International Registration through the Madrid Protocol are also affected by invoking the relevant provisions under the Protocol and its Common Regulations to adjust fees at the request of a contracting party.

    One commenter stated that the proposed increase of “from $75 a class to $400 a class” for regular TEAS applications is extremely burdensome on small companies and individuals, and suggested reducing the fee to no more than $150 per class. The USPTO appreciates the commenter's concerns regarding the increased price for the regular TEAS application and assumes that the commenter is referring to the $75 increase from the current fee of $325 per class to $400 per class. The USPTO notes that all filers, including small companies and individuals, have less-expensive filing options. Filers seeking lower-cost alternatives may select between the TEAS Plus application, at $225 per class, and the TEAS RF option, which has fewer filing requirements than the TEAS Plus option, at $275 per class. The USPTO has no plans to introduce a lower-cost filing option at this time as these fees are set based on the reasons mentioned above.

    Other Trademark-Processing Fees [Initial application filed through TEAS] 37 CFR Fee code Description Current fee Final rule
  • fee
  • Change
    2.6(a)(1)(ii) 7001 Filing and Application through TEAS, per Class $325 $400 $75

    (1) Processing Fee for Failure to Meet Requirements for TEAS Plus or TEAS RF: The final rule increases the fee for failure to meet TEAS Plus or TEAS RF filing requirements in order to promote the efficiency of the trademark application process by incentivizing electronic filings and communication. Both TEAS Plus and TEAS RF feature reduced filing fees in exchange for meeting certain requirements, including a requirement to file certain documents electronically. Applicants who fail to meet the requirements are charged a per-class processing fee. This fee is increased from $50 to $125 to address the difference between the filing fees for these applications and the filing fee for a regular TEAS application, and to further encourage applicants to maintain the discounted application status by meeting all TEAS Plus and TEAS RF requirements to avoid being assessed the additional processing fee. Thus, the Office will continue to promote use of electronic filings, which are more efficient and cost-effective to review.

    Other Trademark-Processing Fees [Processing fee for failure to meet requirements for TEAS plus or TEAS RF] 37 CFR Fee code Description Current fee Final rule
  • fee
  • Change
    2.6(a)(1)(v) 6008 Additional Processing Fee under § 2.22(c) or § 2.23(c), per Class (paper) $50 $125 $75 2.6(a)(1)(v) 7008 Additional Processing Fee under § 2.22(c) or § 2.23(c), per Class (electronic) 50 125 75

    (2) Affidavits under sections 8 and 71 of the Act: In addition to aligning the fees with full costs, the increase in fees for submitting affidavits under sections 8 and 71 will help to ensure the accuracy and integrity of the trademark register. Costs are set to increase for these filings as a result of the need for increased legal examination. In 2012, the USPTO began the Post Registration Proof of Use Pilot Program, during which 500 registrations (for which section 8 or 71 affidavits were filed) were reviewed to assess the accuracy and integrity of the trademark register as to the actual use of the mark with the goods and/or services identified in the registration. The findings of the pilot program demonstrated a need for ongoing measures for additional review of these filings on a permanent basis. Such additional measures, which are currently under development in a separate rulemaking (see “Changes in Requirements for Affidavits or Declarations of Use, Continued Use, or Excusable Nonuse in Trademark Cases” (81 FR 40589; June 22, 2016)), will help identify and remove registrations with insufficient maintenance filings, thereby reducing the number of invalid registrations, and resulting in a more accurate trademark register. Increased fees are required to recover the costs associated with the additional review.

    The USPTO has reassessed its aggregate cost and determined that a reduction in the proposed increase for affidavits under sections 8 and 71 that are filed on paper is appropriate. The fee for such affidavits filed using TEAS is increased by $25, rather than the proposed increase of $50. The fee for such affidavits filed on paper is increased by $125, rather than the proposed increase of $150.

    Other Trademark-Processing Fees [Affidavits under § 8 and § 71 of the Act] 37 CFR Fee code Description Current fee Final rule
  • fee
  • Change
    2.6(a)(12)(i) 6205 Filing an Affidavit under § 8 of the Act on Paper, per Class $100 $225 $125 2.6(a)(12)(ii) 7205 Filing an Affidavit under § 8 of the Act through TEAS, per Class 100 125 25 7.6(a)(6)(i) 6905 Filing an Affidavit under § 71 of the Act on Paper, per Class 100 225 125 7.6(a)(6)(ii) 7905 Filing an Affidavit under § 71 of the Act through TEAS, per Class 100 125 25

    (3) Extension of Time to File a Statement of Use: Two commenters encouraged the USPTO to reduce the fee for extensions of time to file a statement of use filed through TEAS, given the disparity between the cost to process such extensions and the TEAS fee. The comment is well-taken, and the USPTO will reduce the fee for electronically filed extensions of time to file a statement of use from $150 to $125 per class. Although reduced, the fee will still serve to incentivize electronic filing, a more efficient process than paper filing.

    Other Trademark-Processing Fees [Extension of time to file a statement of use] 37 CFR Fee code Description Current fee Final rule
  • fee
  • Change
    2.6(a)(4)(i) 6004 Filing a Request under § 1(d)(2) of the Act for a Six-Month Extension of Time for Filing a Statement of Use under § 1(d)(1) of the Act on Paper, per Class $150 $225 $75 2.6(a)(4)(i) 7004 Filing a Request under § 1(d)(2) of the Act for a Six-Month Extension of Time for Filing a Statement of Use under § 1(d)(1) of the Act through TEAS, per Class 150 125 (25)

    Trademark Service Fees: The final rule discontinues two trademark service fees and replaces two “at-cost” service fees with a set fee. The deposit account set-up fee is discontinued because the process will be handled electronically, thus reducing the cost to process. The self-service copy fee is discontinued because the service will be provided by a third-party vendor. Additionally, the USPTO is not moving forward with the proposed hourly fee for using X-Search. The Office revaluated the proposed fee change and determined to continue to charge no fee for this service. Finally, the unspecified labor fees are replaced with a set fee of $160 for expedited service and $40 for overnight delivery. The fees are based on an average hourly cost of $40 per hour and the additional time estimated to fulfill the type of request.

    Trademark Service Fees 37 CFR Fee code Description Current fee Final rule
  • fee
  • Change
    8524 Unspecified Other Services, Excluding Labor At cost n/a n/a. 9201 Establish Deposit Account $10 n/a n/a. 8902 Self-Service Copy Charge, per Page Copishare Card $0.25 n/a n/a. 8523 Labor Charges for Services, per Hour or Fraction Thereof $40 n/a n/a. 2.6(b)(9) New Additional Fee for Expedited Service $160 n/a. 2.6(b)(8) New Additional Fee for Overnight Delivery $40 n/a.

    Existing Fees at the TTAB: This final rule also increases ex parte (i.e., appeal) fees, which have not been adjusted in more than 25 years, and inter partes (i.e., trial) fees, which have not been adjusted in 15 years. With this rule, the TTAB differentiates paper and electronic filing fees. The rule includes a $100 per-class increase in fees for electronic filings for petitions for cancellation, notices of opposition, and ex parte appeals. A $200 increase, per class, is enacted for paper filings for the same requests. Currently, the cost of TTAB operations is heavily subsidized by revenue from other trademark processing fees. The fee increases will not recover the full costs of TTAB operations, but will bring the fees closer to the full costs in order to better align costs and fees. Furthermore, the larger increased fees for paper filings will incentivize lower-cost electronic filing in order to improve the efficiency of processing and reduce total costs.

    The Office interpreted one comment to raise concerns about the $200 increase per class to file a notice of appeal on paper. Another commenter pointed out that most notices of appeal are filed electronically, so the $100 per-class increase would affect more stakeholders than the $200 increase to the paper filing fee. Both comments explained that notices of appeal often are filed to “buy time” or “preserve the right to appeal” while a request for reconsideration of an examining attorney's final refusal is pending, and as an alternative to any increase in the fee for a notice of appeal, suggested adding a separate fee for only those applicants who file an appeal brief.

    The Office recognizes that a significant percentage of notices of appeal are filed, in essence, to obtain an extension of time to continue discussions with an examining attorney regarding issues presented by a final refusal. The final rule retains the proposed increase in the appeal fee (and the differentiation between paper filings and electronic filings). The higher paper filing fee encourages electronic filing, and the increase in the appeal fee encourages efficiency by promoting earlier and more comprehensive communication between applicants and examining attorneys regarding issues raised in Office actions refusing registration. In reviewing appeals that do not result in the filing of appeal briefs, because requests for reconsideration are granted or lead to further discussion obviating the need to file an appeal brief, the Office has learned that many issues could have been resolved earlier in the examination process or through prompt filing of a request for reconsideration after receipt of a final refusal, rather than much later as a complement to the notice of appeal. For many applicants who receive a final refusal, but promptly file a request for reconsideration, filing a notice of appeal and the fee therefor can be avoided entirely. In addition, were the Office to implement the recommendation to add a fee for filing an appeal brief, the brief fee would have to be significantly higher than the proposed increase in the notice of appeal fee in order to raise revenue equivalent to that generated by the fee increase for the notice of appeal, which, as noted, is avoidable when used primarily as an extension of the examination process.

    Existing Fees at the TTAB 37 CFR Fee code Description Current fee Final rule
  • fee
  • Change
    2.6(a)(16)(i) 6401 Filing a Petition to Cancel on Paper, per Class $300 $500 $200 2.6(a)(16)(ii) 7401 Filing a Petition to Cancel through ESTTA, per Class 300 400 100 2.6(a)(17)(i) 6402 Filing a Notice of Opposition on Paper, per Class 300 500 200 2.6(a)(17)(ii) 7402 Filing a Notice of Opposition through ESTTA, per Class 300 400 100 2.6(a)(18)(i) 6403 Ex Parte Appeal to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board Filed on Paper, per Class 100 300 200 2.6(a)(18)(ii) 7403 Ex Parte Appeal to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board Filed through ESTTA, per Class 100 200 100

    Establish Fees for Extensions of Time at the TTAB: The final rule establishes new fees for requests for extensions of time to file a notice of opposition in order to better align the fees with the processing costs as well as to protect the integrity of the trademark register. The public has 30 days from the date of publication of an application to file a notice of opposition with the TTAB. However, prior to this rule, a potential opposer had available to it several types of extensions, at no fee, that allowed the opposer to delay an application or delay making a decision regarding whether to file an opposition. This rulemaking establishes a tiered fee structure for these filings. Under the new structure, potential opposers may request: (1) An initial 30-day extension for no fee; (2) a subsequent 60-day extension for a fee of $100 for electronic filings and $200 for paper filings, OR a single 90-day extension effectively combining the 30-day no-fee extension and the subsequent 60-day extension, at these fees; and (3) a final 60-day extension for a fee of $200 for electronic filings and $300 for paper filings. The “subsequent 60-day” extension or 90-day extension both require a showing of good cause, 37 CFR 2.102(c)(1) to (2), in addition to the appropriate fee. The “final 60-day extension” requires written consent of the applicant or its representative, or a showing of extraordinary circumstances warranting this final extension, see 37 CFR 2.102(c)(3), in addition to the appropriate fee.

    Three commenters addressed the proposed new fees for extensions of time to oppose. None took issue with higher costs for paper filings. One comment addressed the perceived “abrogation” of the option to file for a 90-day initial extension of time to oppose and noted this would increase filing costs as parties would file for the no-cost 30-day extension and then separately for the subsequent 60-day good-cause extension. The Office does not intend to remove the option for filing an initial 90-day extension, as explained above. All three commenters suggested that the fees for extensions of time to oppose might actually encourage potential opposers to file more notices of opposition to avoid the extension fees. Two of the commenters suggested a fee only for the “final” 60-day extension of time to oppose. The final rule retains the proposed extension fees, which are noted to be “per application” fees and not “per class” fees, and therefore lower than total fees for filing an opposition to a multi-class application.

    These fees will yield efficiencies by encouraging potential opposers to make decisions regarding filing an opposition sooner, thus reducing delays to applicants. Thousands of applications are delayed each year without any subsequent filing of a notice of opposition, and the Office has received complaints from applicants whose applications have been delayed, from the applicants' perspective, unjustly. Additionally, for those that file the notice of opposition, the fee will result in faster commencement and, therefore, conclusion of TTAB cases by encouraging earlier decisions to initiate proceedings. This should also help to protect the integrity of the trademark register by encouraging timely decisions and filings to ensure that the rights of other applicants and the public are not adversely affected.

    New Fees for Extensions of Time at the TTAB 37 CFR Fee code Description Current fee Final rule
  • fee
  • Change
    2.6(a)(22)(i) New Filing a Request for an Extension of Time to File a Notice of Opposition under § 2.102(c)(3) on Paper $200 n/a. 2.6(a)(22)(ii) New Filing a Request for an Extension of Time to File a Notice of Opposition under § 2.102(c)(3) through ESTTA n/a 100 n/a. 2.6(a)(23)(i) New Filing a Request for an Extension of Time to File a Notice of Opposition under § 2.102(c)(1)(ii) or (c)(2) on Paper n/a 300 n/a. 2.6(a)(23)(ii) New Filing a Request for an Extension of Time to File a Notice of Opposition under § 2.102(c)(1)(ii) or (c)(2) through ESTTA n/a 200 n/a.

    Given that the fee for the notice of opposition has been increased, the Office believes that the extension fees should encourage earlier calculated decisions based on all of the available information and fees. Furthermore, implementing a tiered-fee structure will reduce the number of potential opposers that use the extensions merely to delay applications.

    Finally, these fees will help offset the processing costs. In FY 2015, the Office received 17,000 requests for extensions of time to file a notice of opposition, but there has been no fee to cover the costs to process these filings. It is customary for requests that delay processing of records, such as extensions, to require a fee to contribute to the cost of processing the filing as well as the overall cost of processing of appeals and trials. These fees are necessary to help attain primary Office goals of furthering key policy considerations, such as encouraging efficient processing, along with recovering the aggregate cost of operations.

    Costs and Benefits: This rulemaking is not considered to be economically significant under Executive Order 12866 (Sept. 30, 1993).

    Discussion of Regulatory Changes

    The USPTO amends §§ 2.6 and 7.6 to establish new or increase certain existing trademark fees, and to make other conforming changes, as described in the section-by-section analysis below.

    The USPTO revises § 2.6(a)(1)(i) to increase the fee for an initial application filed on paper from $375 to $600 per class, and § 2.6(a)(1)(ii) to increase the fee for an initial application filed using the regular TEAS option from $325 to $400 per class. This increase also applies to requests for extension of protection filed under the Madrid Protocol.

    The USPTO revises § 2.6(a)(1)(v) to increase the fee for failure to meet TEAS Plus or TEAS RF requirements from $50 to $125 per class.

    The USPTO revises § 2.6(a)(2) to read “Amendment to allege use” and adds §§ 2.6(a)(2)(i) and (ii) to set out the fees for filing an amendment to allege use on paper and through TEAS, respectively. The paper filing fee is increased from $100 to $200 per class.

    The USPTO revises § 2.6(a)(3) to read “Statement of use” and adds §§ 2.6(a)(3)(i) and (ii) to set out the fees for filing a statement of use on paper and through TEAS, respectively. The paper filing fee is increased from $100 to $200 per class.

    The USPTO revises § 2.6(a)(4) to read “Extension of time for filing statement of use” and adds §§ 2.6(a)(4)(i) and (ii) to set out the fees for filing an extension of time to file a statement of use on paper and through TEAS, respectively. The paper filing fee is increased from $150 to $225 per class. The fee for filing through TEAS is reduced from $150 to $125 per class.

    The USPTO revises § 2.6(a)(5)(i) to increase the fee for filing an application for renewal of a registration on paper from $400 to $500 per class.

    The USPTO revises § 2.6(a)(6) to read “Renewal during grace period” and adds §§ 2.6(a)(6)(i) and (ii) to set out the fees for filing a renewal application during the grace period on paper and through TEAS, respectively. The paper filing fee is increased from $100 to $200 per class.

    The USPTO revises § 2.6(a)(7) to read “Publishing mark under section 12(c)” and adds §§ 2.6(a)(7)(i) and (ii) to set out the fees for filing a request to publish a mark under section 12(c) on paper and through TEAS, respectively. The paper filing fee is increased from $100 to $200 per class.

    The USPTO revises § 2.6(a)(8) to read “New certificate of registration” and adds §§ 2.6(a)(8)(i) and (ii) to set out the fees for a filing a request to issue a new certificate of registration on paper and through TEAS, respectively. The paper filing fee is increased from $100 to $200.

    The USPTO revises § 2.6(a)(9) to read “Certificate of correction of registrant's error” and adds §§ 2.6(a)(9)(i) and (ii) to set out the fees for filing a request to issue a certification of correction of a registrant's error on paper and through TEAS, respectively. The paper filing fee is increased from $100 to $200.

    The USPTO revises § 2.6(a)(10) to read “Disclaimer to a registration” and adds §§ 2.6(a)(10)(i) and (ii) to set out the fees for submitting a disclaimer to a registration on paper and through TEAS or the Electronic System for Trademark Trials and Appeals (ESTTA), respectively. The paper filing fee is increased from $100 to $200.

    The USPTO revises § 2.6(a)(11) to read “Amendment of registration” and adds §§ 2.6(a)(11)(i) and (ii) to set out the fees for filing an amendment to a registration on paper and through TEAS or ESTTA, respectively. The paper filing fee is increased from $100 to $200.

    The USPTO revises § 2.6(a)(12) to read “Affidavit under section 8” and adds §§ 2.6(a)(12)(i) and (ii) to set out the fees for filing an affidavit under section 8 of the Act on paper and through TEAS, respectively. The paper filing fee is increased from $100 to $225 per class and the electronic filing fee is increased from $100 to $125 per class.

    The USPTO revises § 2.6(a)(13) to read “Affidavit under section 15” and adds §§ 2.6(a)(13)(i) and (ii) to set out the fees for filing an affidavit under section 15 of the Act on paper and through TEAS, respectively. The paper filing fee is increased from $200 to $300 per class.

    The USPTO revises § 2.6(a)(14) to read “Filing section 8 affidavit during grace period” and adds §§ 2.6(a)(14)(i) and (ii) to set out the fees for filing an affidavit under section 8 of the Act during the grace period on paper and through TEAS, respectively. The paper filing fee is increased from $100 to $200 per class.

    The USPTO revises § 2.6(a)(15) to read “Petitions to the Director” and adds §§ 2.6(a)(15)(i) and (ii) to set out the fees for filing a petition to the Director on paper and through TEAS. The paper filing fee is increased from $100 to $200.

    The USPTO revises § 2.6(a)(16) to read “Petition to cancel” and adds §§ 2.6(a)(16)(i) and (ii) to set out the fees for filing a petition to cancel on paper and through ESTTA. The paper filing fee is increased from $300 to $500 per class and the electronic filing fee is increased from $300 to $400 per class.

    The USPTO revises § 2.6(a)(17) to read “Notice of opposition” and adds §§ 2.6(a)(17)(i) and (ii) to set out the fees for filing a notice of opposition on paper and through ESTTA, respectively. The paper filing fee is increased from $300 to $500 per class and the electronic filing fee is increased from $300 to $400 per class.

    The USPTO revises § 2.6(a)(18) to read “Ex parte appeal” and adds §§ 2.6(a)(18)(i) and (ii) to set out the fees for filing an ex parte appeal on paper and through ESTTA, respectively. The paper filing fee is increased from $100 to $300 per class and the electronic filing fee is increased from $100 to $200 per class.

    The USPTO revises § 2.6(a)(19) to read “Dividing an application” and adds §§ 2.6(a)(19)(i) and (ii) to set out the fees for filing a request to divide an application on paper and through TEAS, respectively. The proposed paper filing fee is increased from $100 to $200 per new application created.

    The USPTO revises § 2.6(a)(20) to read “Correcting deficiency in section 8 affidavit” and adds §§ 2.6(a)(20)(i) and (ii) to set out the fees for filing a correction in a section 8 affidavit on paper and through TEAS, respectively. The paper filing fee is increased from $100 to $200.

    The USPTO revises § 2.6(a)(21) to read “Correcting deficiency in renewal application” and adds §§ 2.6(a)(21)(i) and (ii) to set out the fees for filing a correction in a renewal application on paper and through TEAS, respectively. The paper filing fee is increased from $100 to $200.

    The USPTO adds § 2.6(a)(22) to read “Extension of time for filing notice of opposition under § 2.102(c)(1)(ii) or (c)(2)” and §§ 2.6(a)(22)(i) and (ii) to set out the fees for filing a request for an extension of time to file a notice of opposition pursuant to § 2.102(c)(1)(ii) or (c)(2) on paper and through ESTTA, respectively. The paper filing fee is set at $200 and the electronic filing fee is set at $100.

    The USPTO adds § 2.6(a)(23) to read “Extension of time for filing notice of opposition under § 2.102(c)(3)” and §§ 2.6(a)(23)(i) and (ii) to set out the fees for filing a request for an extension of time to file a notice of opposition pursuant to § 2.102(c)(3) on paper and through ESTTA, respectively. The paper filing fee is set at $300 and the electronic filing fee is set at $200.

    The USPTO deletes the current § 2.6(b)(8).

    The USPTO redesignates § 2.6(b)(9) as § 2.6(b)(8) and deletes the current fee for self-service copies and replaces it with a fee of $40 for overnight delivery.

    The USPTO redesignates § 2.6(b)(10) as § 2.6(b)(9) and deletes the current fee for labor charges and replaces it with a fee of $160 for expedited service.

    The USPTO deletes the current § 2.6(b)(11) and redesignates the current § 2.6(b)(12) as § 2.6(b)(10).

    The USPTO deletes the current §§ 2.6(b)(13) and § 2.6(b)(13)(i), redesignates the current § 2.6(b)(13)(ii) as § 2.6(b)(11), and adds the wording “Deposit account” at the beginning of the paragraph.

    The USPTO revises § 2.200(b) to delete the reference to the extra charge in § 2.6(b)(10), pursuant to the proposed change to § 2.6(b)(10) set forth above.

    The USPTO revises § 2.208(a) to delete the reference to the fee for establishing a deposit account and amend the reference regarding the service charge to § 2.6(b)(11), pursuant to the proposed changes to §§ 2.6(b)(13)-(13)(ii) set forth above.

    The USPTO revises § 7.6(a)(1) to read “Certification of international application based on single application or registration” and adds §§ 7.6(a)(1)(i) and (ii) to set out the fees for certifying an international application based on a single basic application or registration on paper and through TEAS, respectively. The paper filing fee is increased from $100 to $200, per class.

    The USPTO revises § 7.6(a)(2) to read “Certification of international application based on more than one application or registration” and adds §§ 7.6(a)(2)(i) and (ii) to set out the fees for certifying an international application based on a more than one application or registration on paper and through TEAS, respectively. The paper filing fee is increased from $150 to $250 per class.

    The USPTO revises § 7.6(a)(3) to read “Transmission of subsequent designation” and adds §§ 7.6(a)(3)(i) and (ii) to set out the fees for transmitting a subsequent designation under § 7.21 on paper and through TEAS, respectively. The paper filing fee is increased from $100 to $200.

    The USPTO revises § 7.6(a)(4) to read “Transmission of request to record an assignment or restriction” and adds §§ 7.6(a)(4)(i) and (ii) to set out the fees for transmitting a request to record an assignment or restriction under § 7.23 or § 7.24 on paper and through TEAS, respectively. The paper filing fee is increased from $100 to $200.

    The USPTO revises § 7.6(a)(5) to read “Notice of replacement” and adds §§ 7.6(a)(5)(i) and (ii) to set out the fees for filing a notice of replacement under § 7.28 on paper and through TEAS, respectively. The fee for filing a notice of replacement on paper is increased from $100 to $200 per class.

    The USPTO revises § 7.6(a)(6) to read “Affidavit under section 71” and to add §§ 7.6(a)(6)(i) and (ii) to set out the fees for filing an affidavit under section 71 of the Act on paper and through TEAS, respectively. The paper filing fee is increased from $100 to $225 per class, and the electronic filing fee is increased from $100 to $125 per class.

    The USPTO revises § 7.6(a)(7) to read “Filing affidavit under section 71 during grace period” and adds §§ 7.6(a)(7)(i) and (ii) to set out the surcharge for filing an affidavit under section 71 of the Act during the grace period on paper and through TEAS, respectively. The surcharge for filing an affidavit during the grace period on paper is increased from $100 to $200 per class.

    The USPTO revises § 7.6(a)(8) to read “Correcting deficiency in section 71 affidavit” and adds §§ 7.6(a)(8)(i) and (ii) to set out the fees for correcting a deficiency in a section 71 affidavit on paper and through TEAS, respectively. The fee for filing the correction on paper is increased from $100 to $200.

    Rulemaking Requirements America Invents Act

    This rulemaking sets and adjusts fees under Section 10(a) of the AIA. Section 10(a) of the AIA authorizes the Director to set or adjust by rule any trademark fee established, authorized, or charged under the Trademark Act for any services performed by, or materials furnished by the Office. See Section 10 of the AIA, Public Law 112-29, 125 Stat. 284, 316-17. Section 10(e) of the AIA sets forth the general requirements for rulemakings that set or adjust fees under this authority. In particular, Section 10(e)(1) requires the Director to publish in the Federal Register any proposed fee change under Section 10, and include in such publication the specific rationale and purpose for the proposal, including the possible expectations or benefits resulting from the proposed change. For such rulemakings, the AIA requires that the Office provide a public comment period of not less than 45 days.

    The TPAC advises the Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of the USPTO on the management, policies, goals, performance, budget, and user fees of Trademark operations. When adopting fees under Section 10, the AIA requires the Director to provide the TPAC with the proposed fees at least 45 days prior to publishing the proposed fees in the Federal Register. The TPAC then has at least 30 days within which to deliberate, consider, and comment on the proposal, as well as hold public hearing(s) on the proposed fees. The TPAC must make a written report available to the public of the comments, advice, and recommendations of the committee regarding the proposed fees before the Office issues any final fees. The Office will consider and analyze any comments, advice, or recommendations received from the TPAC before finally setting or adjusting fees. Fees set or adjusted under Section 10 may not become effective before the end of the 45-day period beginning on the day after the date on which the final rule setting or adjusting the fees is published in the Federal Register.

    Consistent with the requirements of the AIA, on October 14, 2015, the Director notified the TPAC of the Office's intent to set or adjust trademark fees and submitted a preliminary trademark fee proposal with supporting materials. The preliminary trademark fee proposal and associated materials are available at: http://www.uspto.gov/about-us/performance-and-planning/fee-setting-and-adjusting. The revenue estimate for the fee proposal considered by the TPAC was included in the USPTO FY 2017 President's Budget request. The fee schedule associated with the original proposal is presented as Alternative 4—Original Proposal to TPAC.

    The TPAC held a public hearing in Alexandria, Virginia on November 3, 2015. Transcripts of this hearing and comments submitted to the TPAC in writing are available for review at http://www.uspto.gov/about-us/performance-and-planning/fee-setting-and-adjusting. The TPAC released its report regarding the preliminary proposed fees on November 30, 2015. The report can be found online at http://www.uspto.gov/about-us/performance-and-planning/fee-setting-and-adjusting. The proposed rule was published in the Federal Register on May 27, 2016 and the public was provided with a 45-day comment period. After consideration of public comments, the USPTO publishes this final rule, which is effective on January 14, 2017.

    Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

    The USPTO publishes this Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (FRFA) as required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) to examine the impact of the Office's proposed changes to trademark fees on small entities. Under the RFA, whenever an agency is required by 5 U.S.C. 553 (or any other law) to publish a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM), the agency must prepare and make available for public comment a FRFA, unless the agency certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that the proposed rule, if implemented, will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. 5 U.S.C. 603, 605. The USPTO published an Initial Flexibility Analysis (IRFA), along with the NPRM, on May 27, 2016 (81 FR 33619). The USPTO received no comments from the public directly applicable to the IFRA, as stated below in Item 2.

    Items 1-6 below discuss the six items specified in 5 U.S.C. 604(a)(1)-(6) to be addressed in a FRFA. Item 6 below discusses alternatives considered by the Office.

    1. Succinct statement of the need for, and objectives of, the rule:

    The USPTO is setting and adjusting certain trademark fees as authorized by Section 10 of the AIA. The fee schedule implemented under Section 10 in this rulemaking will further key policy considerations to: (1) Better align fees with full costs; (2) protect the integrity of the register; and (3) promote the efficiency of the trademark process; and recover the aggregate estimated trademark costs of the Office to achieve strategic and operational goals, such as maintaining an operating reserve, implementing measures to maintain trademark pendency and high trademark quality, modernizing the trademark IT systems, continuing programs for stakeholder and public outreach, and enhancing operations of the TTAB. Aggregate costs are estimated through the USPTO budget-formulation process with the annual preparation of a five-year performance-based budget request. Revenues are estimated based on the projected demand for trademark products and services and fee rates.

    As to the legal basis for the final rule, Section 10 of the AIA provides the authority for the Director to set or adjust by rule any fee established, authorized, or charged under the Trademark Act of 1946, 15 U.S.C. 1051 et seq., as amended. See also Section 31 of the Trademark Act, 15 U.S.C. 1113.

    2. A statement of the significant issues raised by the public comments in response to the initial regulatory flexibility analysis, a statement of the assessment of the agency of such issues, and a statement of any changes made in the proposed rule as a result of such comments:

    The USPTO did not receive any public comments in response to the IRFA. However, the Office received comments about fees in general, as well as particular fees, and their impact on small entities, which are further discussed in the preamble.

    3. The response of the agency to any comments filed by the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration in response to the proposed rule, and a detailed statement of any change made to the proposed rule in the final rule as a result of the comments:

    The USPTO did not receive any comments filed by the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration in response to the proposed rule.

    4. Description of and an estimate of the number of small entities to which the rule will apply or an explanation of why no such estimate is available:

    The USPTO does not collect or maintain statistics in trademark cases on small-versus large-entity applicants, and this information would be required in order to determine the number of small entities that would be affected by the final rule. The USPTO believes that the overall impact of the fee structure implemented herein on applicants and registrants will be positive, because it promotes the more cost-effective electronic filing system. There will be little or no impact for the majority of applicants and registrants that file electronically and communicate on a timely basis.

    The final rule applies to any entity filing with USPTO. The USPTO estimates that during the first fiscal year under the rules, assuming an expected implementation date of January 2017, the USPTO would expect to collect approximately $9.5 million more in trademark processing, service, and TTAB fees. The USPTO would receive an additional $0.7 million in fees from paper-filed applications and $8.8 million more from electronically filed applications, including $3 million from TEAS applications for the registration of a mark, $3.2 million from requests for extension of protection and subsequent designations, $0.3 million for additional fees for applications failing to meet the TEAS Plus or TEAS RF requirements, $4 million for affidavits of use under sections 8 and 71, and $5 million less for extensions of time for filing a statement of use. Total TTAB filing fees would increase by $3.6 million; $2.1 million is expected from the newly established fees for filing extensions of time to file an opposition.

    Trademark fee category Estimated
  • collections with current fees
  • Estimated
  • collections with final rule fees
  • Change
    Total Trademark Fees $307,468,600 $316,957,100 $9,488,500 Paper-Filed Applications 1,752,750 2,418,550 665,800 Electronically Filed Applications 294,063,575 302,875,475 8,811,900 TEAS Applications for the Registration of a Mark 17,787,900 20,763,600 2,975,700 Request for Extension of Protection and Subsequent Designations 19,384,950 22,567,950 3,183,000 Failing to Meet the TEAS Plus or TEAS RF Requirements 320,800 663,200 342,400 Affidavit under § 8 and § 71 of the Act 21,654,300 25,604,400 3,950,100 Extension of Time to File a Statement of Use 37,705,400 32,741,300 (4,964,100) Total TTAB Fees 4,742,000 8,310,700 3,568,700 New TTAB Fees 0 2,142,300 2,142,300 Trademark Service Fees 11,652,240 11,663,440 11,200
    5. Description of the reporting, recordkeeping, and other compliance requirements of the final rule, including an estimate of the classes of small entities which will be subject to the requirement and the type of professional skills necessary for preparation of the report or record:

    The final rule imposes no new reporting or recordkeeping requirements.

    The final rule sets and adjusts trademark fees. The USPTO does not anticipate that the final rule would have a disproportionate impact upon any particular class of small or large entities.

    6. Description of the steps the agency has taken to minimize the significant economic impact on small entities consistent with the stated objectives of applicable statutes, including a statement of the factual, policy, and legal reasons for selecting the alternative adopted in the final rule and why each one of the other significant alternatives to the rule considered by the agency which affect the impact on small entities was rejected:

    The USPTO considered a total of five alternatives for setting fee rates before enacting this rule. A full list of current and proposed fees for each of the alternatives is available in the FRFA Tables and the Trademark Fee Aggregate Revenue Tables at http://www.uspto.gov/about-us/performance-and-planning/fee-setting-and-adjusting. The alternatives are explained here with additional information regarding how each proposal was developed and the aggregate revenue was estimated. A description of the Aggregate Revenue Estimating Methodologies is available at: http://www.uspto.gov/about-us/performance-and-planning/fee-setting-and-adjusting.

    The USPTO chose the alternative implemented herein because it will enable the Office to achieve its goals effectively and efficiently without unduly burdening small entities, erecting barriers to entry, or stifling incentives to innovate. This alternative furthers key policy considerations of better aligning fees with full costs, protecting the integrity of the register, and promoting the efficiency of the trademark process while continuing to secure the Office's required revenue to meet its aggregate costs. The increased efficiencies realized through the final rule will benefit all applicants and registrants by allowing registrations to be granted sooner and more efficiently removing unused marks from the register, thus allowing mark owners to more quickly and assuredly register their marks. The fee schedule for this alternative (labeled Final Rule) is available at: http://www.uspto.gov/about-us/performance-and-planning/fee-setting-and-adjusting.

    One alternative to setting and increasing the proposed fees would be to take no action at this time regarding trademark fees and to leave all trademark fees as currently set. This alternative was rejected because it will not assist in protecting the integrity of the register by incentivizing more timely filing of applications and other filings and more efficient resolution of appeals and trials, will not promote the efficiency of the process by, in part, increasing the affordability of electronic filing options relative to paper filings, and will not better align fees with the full cost of products and services. In addition, it does not sufficiently recover aggregate costs. The fee schedule for this alternative (labeled Alternative 1—No Change) is available at: http://www.uspto.gov/about-us/performance-and-planning/fee-setting-and-adjusting.

    Another alternative to setting and increasing the fees that was considered was to tie all trademark fees to the Consumer Price Index (CPI), applying a 9.956%, multi-year, across-the-board inflationary increase to all trademark fees. The 9.956% represents the estimated cumulative inflationary adjustment from FY 2017 through FY 2021. As estimated by the Congressional Budget Office, projected inflationary rates by fiscal year are: 2.17% in FY 2017, 2.39% in FY 2018, 2.38% in FY 2019, 2.42% in FY 2020, and 2.42% in FY 2021. This alternative was rejected because, unlike the fee structure implemented herein, fee increases would be in excess of aggregate costs and there would be no improvements in fee design to accomplish the stated objectives of protecting the integrity of the register by incentivizing more timely filing of applications and other filings and more efficient resolution of appeals and trials. In addition, it was determined that adjusting trademark fees in accordance with increases or decreases in the CPI would likely lead to user confusion as fees would be adjusted by what could be viewed as non-traditional or unpredictable increments. The fee schedule for this alternative (labeled Alternative 2—CPI Increase) is available at: http://www.uspto.gov/about-us/performance-and-planning/fee-setting-and-adjusting.

    Another alternative that was considered was full cost recovery per fee. This would require USPTO to set each trademark fee at 100% of unit cost to allow the USPTO to recover full cost per fee based on the most recent fee unit cost trends. The USPTO uses Activity Based Information to determine the historical costs of activities related to each fee. Additional information about the methodology is available at: http://www.uspto.gov/about-us/performance-and-planning/fee-setting-and-adjusting.

    It is common practice in the Federal Government to set a particular fee at a level to recover the cost of a given good or service. In OMB Circular A-25: User Charges, the OMB states that user charges (fees) should be sufficient to recover the full cost to the Federal Government of providing the particular service, resource, or good, when the government is acting in its capacity as sovereign. This alternative was rejected because it was determined that the costs for any given product or service can vary from year to year, such that a yearly review of all, and adjustment to many, trademark fees would be required, and could also lead to stakeholder confusion regarding what any given trademark fee was currently set at and what the relevant fee would be in the future. This alternative would have increased revenue by more than the final rule in part because workloads are expected to increase. In addition, it was determined that setting the trademark fees to recover 100% of all costs associated with each product or service would not properly promote the efficiency of the process. The fee schedule for this alternative (labeled Alternative 3—Individual Cost Recovery) is available at: http://www.uspto.gov/about-us/performance-and-planning/fee-setting-and-adjusting.

    For purposes of this discussion, the preliminary trademark fee proposal presented to the TPAC is identified as Alternative 4 in the Trademark Fee Aggregate Revenue Tables available at: http://www.uspto.gov/about-us/performance-and-planning/fee-setting-and-adjusting. The revenue estimate for the preliminary proposal considered by the TPAC was included in the USPTO FY 2017 President's Budget request. That proposal, as addressed in the preamble, was modified based on the feedback from the TPAC report received November 30, 2015 and feedback received from public comments. The preliminary proposal included an increase in the fee to file a request for an extension of time to file a statement of use that would apply only to U.S.-based applicants that filed an application based on a future intention to use the mark. The final rule no longer includes an increase to that fee unless it is filed on paper, consistent with the increase in all paper-filed requests. Instead, the final rule includes a reduction in the fee for electronically filing a request for an extension of time to file a statement of use and an increase in the fee for filing an affidavit under section 8 and 71, which apply to the continued maintenance of a registration. The final rule also increases the fee for filing a TEAS application. The fee schedule for this alternative (labeled Alternative 4—Original Proposal to TPAC (FY 17 PB)) is available at: http://www.uspto.gov/about-us/performance-and-planning/fee-setting-and-adjusting.

    Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review): This rule has been determined to be significant, but not economically significant, for purposes of Executive Order 12866 (Sept. 30, 1993).

    Executive Order 13563 (Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review): The USPTO has complied with Executive Order 13563 (Jan. 18, 2011). Specifically, the USPTO has, to the extent feasible and applicable: (1) Made a reasoned determination that the benefits justify the costs of the rule; (2) tailored the rule to impose the least burden on society consistent with obtaining the regulatory objectives; (3) selected a regulatory approach that maximizes net benefits; (4) specified performance objectives; (5) identified and assessed available alternatives; (6) provided the public with a meaningful opportunity to participate in the regulatory process, including soliciting the views of those likely affected prior to issuing a notice of proposed rulemaking, and provided online access to the rulemaking docket; (7) attempted to promote coordination, simplification, and harmonization across government agencies and identified goals designed to promote innovation; (8) considered approaches that reduce burdens and maintain flexibility and freedom of choice for the public; and (9) ensured the objectivity of scientific and technological information and processes, to the extent applicable.

    Executive Order 13132 (Federalism): This rule does not contain policies with federalism implications sufficient to warrant preparation of a Federalism Assessment under Executive Order 13132 (Aug. 4, 1999).

    Congressional Review Act: Under the Congressional Review Act provisions of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.), prior to issuing any final rule, the USPTO will submit a report containing the final rule and other required information to the United States Senate, the United States House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the Government Accountability Office. The changes in this notice are not expected to result in an annual effect on the economy of 100 million dollars or more, a major increase in costs or prices, or significant adverse effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or the ability of United States-based enterprises to compete with foreign-based enterprises in domestic and export markets. Therefore, this notice is not expected to result in a “major rule” as defined in 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

    Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995: The changes set forth in this rulemaking do not involve a Federal intergovernmental mandate that will result in the expenditure by State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, of 100 million dollars (as adjusted) or more in any one year, or a Federal private sector mandate that will result in the expenditure by the private sector of 100 million dollars (as adjusted) or more in any one year, and will not significantly or uniquely affect small governments. Therefore, no actions are necessary under the provisions of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995. See 2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.

    Paperwork Reduction Act: This rule involves information collection requirements that are subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). The collection of information involved in this rule has been reviewed and previously approved by OMB under control numbers 0651-0009, 0651-0040, 0651-0050, 0651-0051, 0651-0054, and 0651-0055.

    Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person is required to respond to nor shall a person be subject to a penalty for failure to comply with a collection of information subject to the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act unless that collection of information displays a currently valid OMB control number.

    List of Subjects 37 CFR Part 2

    Administrative practice and procedure, Trademarks.

    37 CFR Part 7

    Administrative practice and procedure, Trademarks, International registration.

    For the reasons stated in the preamble and under the authority contained in Section 10(a) of the AIA, 15 U.S.C. 1113, 15 U.S.C. 1123, and 35 U.S.C. 2, as amended, the USPTO amends parts 2 and 7 of title 37 as follows:

    PART 2—RULES OF PRACTICE IN TRADEMARK CASES 1. The authority citation for 37 CFR part 2 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    15 U.S.C. 1113, 15 U.S.C. 1123, 35 U.S.C. 2, Section 10 of Pub. L. 112-29, unless otherwise noted.

    2. Revise § 2.6 to read as follows:
    § 2.6 Trademark fees.

    (a) Trademark process fees.

    (1) Application filing fees.

    (i) For filing an application on paper, per class—$600.00 (ii) For filing an application through TEAS, per class—$400.00 (iii) For filing a TEAS Reduced Fee (RF) application through TEAS under § 2.23, per class—$275.00 (iv) For filing a TEAS Plus application through TEAS under § 2.22, per class—$225.00 (v) Additional processing fee under §§ 2.22(c) or 2.23(c), per class—$125.00

    (2) Amendment to allege use.

    (i) For filing an amendment to allege use under section 1(c) of the Act on paper, per class—$200.00 (ii) For filing an amendment to allege use under section 1(c) of the Act through TEAS, per class—$100.00

    (3) Statement of use.

    (i) For filing a statement of use under section 1(d)(1) of the Act on paper, per class—$200.00 (ii) For filing a statement of use under section 1(d)(1) of the Act through TEAS, per class—$100.00

    (4) Extension of time for filing statement of use.

    (i) For filing a request under section 1(d)(2) of the Act for a six-month extension of time for filing a statement of use under section 1(d)(1) of the Act on paper, per class—$225.00 (ii) For filing a request under section 1(d)(2) of the Act for a six-month extension of time for filing a statement of use under section 1(d)(1) of the Act through TEAS, per class—$125.00

    (5) Application for renewal of a registration fees.

    (i) For filing an application for renewal of a registration on paper, per class—$500.00 (ii) For filing an application for renewal of a registration through TEAS, per class—$300.00

    (6) Renewal during grace period.

    (i) Additional fee for filing a renewal application during the grace period on paper, per class—$200.00 (ii) Additional fee for filing a renewal application during the grace period through TEAS, per class—$100.00

    (7) Publishing mark under section 12(c).

    (i) For filing to publish a mark under section 12(c) on paper, per class—$200.00 (ii) For filing to publish a mark under section 12(c) through TEAS, per class—$100.00

    (8) New certificate of registration.

    (i) For issuing a new certificate of registration upon request of registrant, request filed on paper—$200.00 (ii) For issuing a new certificate of registration upon request of registrant, request filed through TEAS—$100.00

    (9) Certificate of correction of registrant's error.

    (i) For a certificate of correction of registrant's error, request filed on paper—$200.00 (ii) For a certificate of correction of registrant's error, request filed through TEAS—$100.00

    (10) Disclaimer to a registration.

    (i) For filing a disclaimer to a registration, on paper—$200.00 (ii) For filing a disclaimer to a registration, through TEAS or ESTTA—$100.00

    (11) Amendment of registration.

    (i) For filing an amendment to a registration, on paper—$200.00 (ii) For filing an amendment to a registration, through TEAS or ESTTA—$100.00

    (12) Affidavit under section 8.

    (i) For filing an affidavit under section 8 of the Act on paper, per class—$225.00 (ii) For filing an affidavit under section 8 of the Act through TEAS, per class—$125.00

    (13) Affidavit under section 15.

    (i) For filing an affidavit under section 15 of the Act on paper, per class—$300.00 (ii) For filing an affidavit under section 15 of the Act through TEAS, per class—$200.00

    (14) Filing section 8 affidavit during grace period.

    (i) Additional fee for filing a section 8 affidavit during the grace period on paper, per class—$200.00 (ii) Additional fee for filing a section 8 affidavit during the grace period through TEAS, per class—$100.00

    (15) Petitions to the Director.

    (i) For petitions to the Director filed on paper—$200.00 (ii) For petitions to the Director filed through TEAS—$100.00

    (16) Petition to cancel.

    (i) For filing a petition to cancel on paper, per class—$500.00 (ii) For filing a petition to cancel through ESTTA, per class—$400.00

    (17) Notice of opposition.

    (i) For filing a notice of opposition on paper, per class—$500.00 (ii) For filing a notice of opposition through ESTTA, per class—$400.00

    (18) Ex parte appeal.

    (i) For ex parte appeal to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board filed on paper, per class—$300.00 (ii) For ex parte appeal to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board filed through ESTTA, per class—$200.00

    (19) Dividing an application.

    (i) Request to divide an application filed on paper, per new application created—$200.00 (ii) Request to divide an application filed through TEAS, per new application created—$100.00

    (20) Correcting deficiency in section 8 affidavit.

    (i) For correcting a deficiency in a section 8 affidavit via paper filing—$200.00 (ii) For correcting a deficiency in a section 8 affidavit via TEAS filing—$100.00

    (21) Correcting deficiency in renewal application.

    (i) For correcting a deficiency in a renewal application via paper filing—$200.00 (ii) For correcting a deficiency in a renewal application via TEAS filing—$100.00

    (22) Extension of time for filing notice of opposition under § 2.102(c)(1)(ii) or (c)(2).

    (i) For filing a request for an extension of time to file a notice of opposition under § 2.102(c)(1)(ii) or (c)(2) on paper—$200.00 (ii) For filing a request for an extension of time to file a notice of opposition under § 2.102(c)(1)(ii) or (c)(2) through ESTTA—$100.00

    (23) Extension of time for filing notice of opposition under § 2.102(c)(3).

    (i) For filing a request for an extension of time to file a notice of opposition under § 2.102(c)(3) on paper—$300.00 (ii) For filing a request for an extension of time to file a notice of opposition under § 2.102(c)(3) through ESTTA—$200.00

    (b) Trademark service fees.

    (1) For printed copy of registered mark, copy only. Service includes preparation of copies by the Office within two to three business days and delivery by United States Postal Service; and preparation of copies by the Office within one business day of receipt and delivery to an Office Box or by electronic means (e.g., facsimile, electronic mail)—$3.00 (2) Certified or uncertified copy of trademark application as filed processed within seven calendar days—$15.00 (3) Certified or uncertified copy of a trademark-related official record—$50.00 (4) Certified copy of a registered mark, showing title and/or status: (i) Regular service—$15.00 (ii) Expedited local service—$30.00 (5) Certified or uncertified copy of trademark records, per document except as otherwise provided in this section—$25.00 (6) For recording each trademark assignment, agreement or other document relating to the property in a registration or application (i) First property in a document—$40.00 (ii) For each additional property in the same document—$25.00 (7) For assignment records, abstract of title and certification, per registration—$25.00 (8) Additional Fee for Overnight Delivery—$40.00 (9) Additional Fee for Expedited Service—$160.00 (10) For processing each payment refused (including a check returned “unpaid”) or charged back by a financial institution—$50.00 (11) Deposit account service charge for each month when the balance at the end of the month is below $1,000—$25.00
    3. Amend § 2.200 to revise paragraph (b) to read as follows:
    § 2.200 Assignment records open to public inspection.

    (b) An order for a copy of an assignment or other document should identify the reel and frame number where the assignment or document is recorded.

    4. Amend § 2.208 to revise paragraph (a) to read as follows:
    § 2.208 Deposit accounts.

    (a) For the convenience of attorneys, and the general public in paying any fees due, in ordering copies of records, or services offered by the Office, deposit accounts may be established in the Office. A minimum deposit of $1,000 is required for paying any fees due or in ordering any services offered by the Office. The Office will issue a deposit account statement at the end of each month. A remittance must be made promptly upon receipt of the statement to cover the value of items or services charged to the account and thus restore the account to its established normal deposit. An amount sufficient to cover all fees, copies, or services requested must always be on deposit. Charges to accounts with insufficient funds will not be accepted. A service charge (§ 2.6(b)(11)) will be assessed for each month that the balance at the end of the month is below $1,000.

    PART 7—RULES OF PRACTICE IN FILINGS PURSUANT TO THE PROTOCOL RELATING TO THE MADRID AGREEMENT CONCERNING THE INTERNATIONAL REGISTRATION OF MARKS 5. The authority citation for 37 CFR Part 7 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    15 U.S.C. 1123, 35 U.S.C. 2, unless otherwise noted.

    6. Revise § 7.6 to read as follows:
    § 7.6 Schedule of U.S. process fees.

    (a) The Office requires the following process fees:

    (1) Certification of international application based on single application or registration.

    (i) For certifying an international application based on a single basic application or registration, filed on paper, per class—$200.00 (ii) For certifying an international application based on a single basic application or registration, filed through TEAS, per class—$100.00

    (2) Certification of international application based on more than one application or registration.

    (i) For certifying an international application based on more than one basic application or registration filed on paper, per class—$250.00 (ii) For certifying an international application based on more than one basic application or registration filed through TEAS, per class—$150.00

    (3) Transmission of subsequent designation.

    (i) For transmitting a subsequent designation under § 7.21, filed on paper—$200.00 (ii) For transmitting a subsequent designation under § 7.21, filed through TEAS—$100.00

    (4) Transmission of request to record an assignment or restriction.

    (i) For transmitting a request to record an assignment or restriction, or release of a restriction, under § 7.23 or § 7.24 filed on paper—$200.00 (ii) For transmitting a request to record an assignment or restriction, or release of a restriction, under § 7.23 or § 7.24 filed through TEAS—$100.00

    (5) Notice of replacement.

    (i) For filing a notice of replacement under § 7.28 on paper, per class—$200.00 (ii) For filing a notice of replacement under § 7.28 through TEAS, per class—$100.00

    (6) Affidavit under section 71.

    (i) For filing an affidavit under section 71 of the Act on paper, per class—$225.00 (ii) For filing an affidavit under section 71 of the Act through TEAS, per class—$125.00

    (7) Filing affidavit under section 71 during grace period.

    (i) Surcharge for filing an affidavit under section 71 of the Act during the grace period on paper, per class—$200.00 (ii) Surcharge for filing an affidavit under section 71 of the Act during the grace period through TEAS, per class—$100.00

    (8) Correcting deficiency in section 71 affidavit.

    (i) For correcting a deficiency in a section 71 affidavit filed on paper—$200.00 (ii) For correcting a deficiency in a section 71 affidavit filed through TEAS—$100.00

    (b) The fees required in paragraph (a) of this section must be paid in U.S. dollars at the time of submission of the requested action. See § 2.207 of this chapter for acceptable forms of payment and § 2.208 of this chapter for payments using a deposit account established in the Office.

    Dated: October 17, 2016. Michelle K. Lee, Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office.
    [FR Doc. 2016-25506 Filed 10-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-16-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R03-OAR-2016-0335; FRL-9954-29-Region 3] Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Virginia; Adoption of Control Techniques Guidelines for Control of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving three state implementation plan (SIP) revisions submitted by the Commonwealth of Virginia (Virginia). These revisions include amendments to the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality's (VADEQ) regulations and address the requirement to adopt reasonably available control technology (RACT) for sources covered by EPA's Control Techniques Guidelines (CTG) standards for the following categories: Offset lithographic printing and letterpress printing, industrial solvent cleaning operations, miscellaneous industrial adhesives, and miscellaneous metal and plastic parts coatings. EPA is approving these revisions to the Virginia SIP in accordance with the requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA).

    DATES:

    This final rule is effective on November 21, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID Number EPA-R03-OAR-2016-0335. All documents in the docket are listed on the http://www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., confidential business information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available through http://www.regulations.gov, or please contact the person identified in the “For Further Information Contact” section for additional availability information.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Leslie Jones Doherty, (215) 814-3409, or by email at [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background

    On August 23, 2016 (87 FR 57531), EPA published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPR) for the Commonwealth of Virginia. In the NPR, EPA proposed approval of three revisions to the Virginia SIP concerning the adoption of EPA CTGs for offset lithographic printing and letterpress printing, industrial solvent cleaning operations, miscellaneous industrial adhesives, and miscellaneous metal and plastic parts coatings sources in the specific portion of Virginia known as the Northern Virginia Volatile Organic Compound Emissions Control Area.1 The formal SIP revision was submitted by Virginia, through VADEQ, on February 1, 2016.

    1 The northern portion of Virginia is defined as the Northern Virginia Volatile Organic Compound Emissions Control Area in 9VAC5-20-206 (General Provisions).

    The ozone transport region (OTR) was established under section 184(a) of the CAA to address interstate transport of ozone and includes the northern portion of Virginia that is part of the Metropolitan Statistical Area of the District Columbia, which Virginia refers to as the “Northern Virginia Volatile Organic Compound Emissions Control Area.” Pursuant to section 184(b)(1)(B) of the CAA, all areas in the OTR must implement RACT with respect to sources of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in the state covered by CTGs. Thus, Virginia must implement RACT with respect to sources of VOCs covered by CTGs in the Northern Virginia Volatile Organic Compound Emissions Control Area. CAA section 184(b)(1)(B) and (2). States can follow the CTGs and adopt state regulations to implement the recommendations contained therein, or they can adopt alternative approaches. In either case, states must submit their RACT rules to EPA for review and approval as part of the SIP process.

    In 2006 and 2008, EPA published new CTGs entitled Control Techniques Guidelines for Offset Lithographic and Letterpress Printing (Publication No. EPA 453/R-06-002; September 2006); Control Techniques Guidelines for Industrial Cleaning Solvents (Publication No. EPA 453/R-06-001; September 2006); Control Techniques Guidelines for Miscellaneous Industrial Adhesives (Publication No. EPA 453/R-08-005; September 2008); and Control Techniques Guidelines for Miscellaneous Metal and Plastic Parts Coatings (Publication No. EPA 453/R-08-003; September 2008). EPA developed new CTGs for these industries after reviewing existing state and local VOC emission reduction approaches, new source performance standards (NSPS), previously issued CTGs, and national emission standards for hazardous air pollutants (NESHAP) for these source categories.

    II. Summary of SIP Revision

    On February 1, 2016, Virginia, through VADEQ, submitted amended and new regulations for inclusion in the Virginia SIP concerning the adoption of the EPA CTGs for offset lithographic printing and letterpress printing, industrial solvent cleaning operations, miscellaneous industrial adhesives, and miscellaneous metal and plastic parts coatings in the Northern Virginia Volatile Organic Compound Emissions Control Area. Virginia has adopted EPA's CTG standards for these industries by amending regulation 9VAC5, chapter 40, Existing Stationary Sources, articles 34 and 53 and adding articles 56, 56.1, 57, 58, and 59 to 9VAC5, chapter 40. Additionally, Virginia has amended supporting definitions in 9VAC5, chapter 20, General Provisions, which relate to the new CTG standards. The Virginia regulations adopt the equivalent of the specific EPA CTG recommendations and address CAA requirements for RACT (for sources covered by CTGs) in sections 172 and 182 as referenced by section 184. Other specific requirements and the rationale for EPA's proposed action are explained in the NPR and technical support document (TSD) and will not be restated here. No public comments were received on the NPR.

    III. Final Action

    EPA is approving VADEQ's February 1, 2016 SIP submittal as a revision to the Virginia SIP. The SIP submittal being approved consists of amendments to regulation 9VAC5 chapter 40, Existing Stationary Sources, and 9VAC5 chapter 20, General Provisions, and addresses the requirement to adopt RACT for sources located in the Northern Virginia VOC Emissions Control Area covered by EPA's CTG standards in accordance with CAA requirements in sections 172, 182 and 184 for the following categories: Offset lithographic printing and letterpress printing, industrial cleaning solvent operations, miscellaneous industrial adhesives, and miscellaneous metal and plastic parts coatings.

    IV. General Information Pertaining to SIP Submittals From the Commonwealth of Virginia

    In 1995, Virginia adopted legislation that provides, subject to certain conditions, for an environmental assessment (audit) “privilege” for voluntary compliance evaluations performed by a regulated entity. The legislation further addresses the relative burden of proof for parties either asserting the privilege or seeking disclosure of documents for which the privilege is claimed. Virginia's legislation also provides, subject to certain conditions, for a penalty waiver for violations of environmental laws when a regulated entity discovers such violations pursuant to a voluntary compliance evaluation and voluntarily discloses such violations to the Commonwealth and takes prompt and appropriate measures to remedy the violations. Virginia's Voluntary Environmental Assessment Privilege Law, Va. Code Sec. 10.1-1198, provides a privilege that protects from disclosure documents and information about the content of those documents that are the product of a voluntary environmental assessment. The Privilege Law does not extend to documents or information that: (1) Are generated or developed before the commencement of a voluntary environmental assessment; (2) are prepared independently of the assessment process; (3) demonstrate a clear, imminent and substantial danger to the public health or environment; or (4) are required by law.

    On January 12, 1998, the Commonwealth of Virginia Office of the Attorney General provided a legal opinion that states that the Privilege law, Va. Code Sec. 10.1-1198, precludes granting a privilege to documents and information “required by law,” including documents and information “required by federal law to maintain program delegation, authorization or approval,” since Virginia must “enforce federally authorized environmental programs in a manner that is no less stringent than their federal counterparts. . . .” The opinion concludes that “[r]egarding § 10.1-1198, therefore, documents or other information needed for civil or criminal enforcement under one of these programs could not be privileged because such documents and information are essential to pursuing enforcement in a manner required by federal law to maintain program delegation, authorization or approval.”

    Virginia's Immunity law, Va. Code Sec. 10.1-1199, provides that “[t]o the extent consistent with requirements imposed by federal law,” any person making a voluntary disclosure of information to a state agency regarding a violation of an environmental statute, regulation, permit, or administrative order is granted immunity from administrative or civil penalty. The Attorney General's January 12, 1998 opinion states that the quoted language renders this statute inapplicable to enforcement of any federally authorized programs, since “no immunity could be afforded from administrative, civil, or criminal penalties because granting such immunity would not be consistent with federal law, which is one of the criteria for immunity.”

    Therefore, EPA has determined that Virginia's Privilege and Immunity statutes will not preclude the Commonwealth from enforcing its program consistent with the federal requirements. In any event, because EPA has also determined that a state audit privilege and immunity law can affect only state enforcement and cannot have any impact on federal enforcement authorities, EPA may at any time invoke its authority under the CAA, including, for example, sections 113, 167, 205, 211 or 213, to enforce the requirements or prohibitions of the state plan, independently of any state enforcement effort. In addition, citizen enforcement under section 304 of the CAA is likewise unaffected by this, or any, state audit privilege or immunity law.

    V. Incorporation by Reference

    In this rule, EPA is finalizing regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, EPA is finalizing the incorporation by reference of the VADEQ regulations regarding control of VOC emissions from offset lithographic printing and letterpress printing, industrial solvent cleaning operations, miscellaneous industrial adhesives, and miscellaneous metal and plastic parts coatings in the Northern Virginia Volatile Organic Compound Emissions Control Area as well as related definitions as described in section II of this rulemaking action. Therefore, these materials have been approved by EPA for inclusion in the SIP, have been incorporated by reference by EPA into that plan, are fully federally enforceable under sections 110 and 113 of the CAA as of the effective date of the final rulemaking of EPA's approval, and will be incorporated by reference by the Director of the Federal Register in the next update to the SIP compilation.2 EPA has made, and will continue to make, these materials generally available through http://www.regulations.gov and/or at the EPA Region III Office (please contact the person identified in the For Further Information Contact section of this preamble for more information).

    2 62 FR 27968 (May 22, 1997).

    VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews A. General Requirements

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    The SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land as defined in 18 U.S.C. 1151 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 and will not impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).

    B. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General

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

    C. Petitions for Judicial Review

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by December 20, 2016. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action. This action approving RACT rules for sources in northern Virginia 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, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: September 29, 2016. Shawn M. Garvin, Regional Administrator, Region III.

    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 VV—Virginia 2. In § 52.2420: a. In the table in paragraph (c): i. Revise the entries “5-40-4760” and “5-40-7800”. ii. Add the heading “Article 56, Emission Standards for Letterpress Printing Operations in the Northern Virginia Volatile Organic Compound Emissions Control Area, 8-hour Ozone Standard (Rule 4-56)” and the entries “5-40-8380”; “5-40-8382”; “5-40-8384”; “5-40-8386”; “5-40-8388”; “5-40-8396”; “5-40-8398”; “5-40-8400”; “5-40-8410”; “5-40-8412”; “5-40-8414”; and “5-40-8418”; the heading “Article 56.1 Emission Standards for Offset Lithographic Printing Operations in the Northern Virginia Volatile Organic Compound Emissions Control Area, 8-hour Ozone Standard (Rule 4-56.1)” and the entries “5-40-8420”; “5-40-8422”; “5-40-8424”; “5-40-8426”; “5-40-8428”; “5-40-8434”; “5-40-8436”; “5-40-8438”; “5-40-8440”; “5-40-8450”; “5-40-8460”; the heading “Article 57 Emission Standards for Industrial Solvent Cleaning Operations in the Northern Virginia Volatile Organic Compound Emissions Control Area, 8-hour Ozone Standard (Rule 4-57)” and the entries “5-40-8510”; “5-40-8520”; “5-40-8530”; “5-40-8540”; “5-40-8550”; “5-40-8580”; “5-40-8590”; “5-40-8600”; “5-40-8610”; “5-40-8620”; “5-40-8630”; “5-40-8650”; the heading “Article 58 Emission Standards for Miscellaneous Industrial Adhesive Application Processes in the Northern Virginia Volatile Organic Compound Emissions Control Area, 8-hour Ozone Standard (Rule 4-58)” and the entries “5-40-8660”; “5-40-8670”; “5-40-8680”; “5-40-8690”; “5-40-8700”; “5-40-8730”; “5-40-8740”; “5-40-8750”; “5-40-8760”; “5-40-8770”; “5-40-8780”; “5-40-8800”; the heading “Article 59 Emission Standards for Miscellaneous Metal Parts and Products Coating Application Systems in the Northern Virginia Volatile Organic Compound Emissions Control Area, 8-hour Ozone Standard (Rule 4-58)” and the entries “5-40-8810”; “5-40-8820”; “5-40-8830”; “5-40-8840”; “5-40-8850”; “5-40-8880”; “5-40-8890”; “5-40-8900”; “5-40-8910”; “5-40-8920”; “5-40-8930”; and “5-40-8950”. b. In the table in paragraph (e), add the entry “Documents incorporated by reference”.

    The additions and revisions read as follows:

    § 52.2420 Identification of plan.

    (c) * * *

    EPA-Approved Virginia Regulations and Statutes State citation Title/subject State effective date EPA approval date Explanation [former SIP citation] *         *         *         *         *         *         * 9 VAC 5, Chapter 40 Existing Stationary Sources [Part IV] *         *         *         *         *         *         * Part II Emission Standards *         *         *         *         *         *         * Article 34 Emission Standards for Miscellaneous Metal Parts and Products Coating Application Systems (Rule 4-34) 5-40-4760 Applicability and Designation of Affected Facility 02/01/16 10/21/16, [Insert Federal Register citation] Amended to refer Northern VA VOC emission control area to Article 59. *         *         *         *         *         *         * Article 53 Emission Standards for Lithographic Printing Processes (Rule 4-53) [Formerly Article 45] 5-40-7800 Applicability and Designation of Affected Facility 02/01/16 10/21/16, [Insert Federal Register citation] Amended to refer Northern VA VOC emission control area to Article 56.1. *         *         *         *         *         *         * Article 56, Emission Standards for Letterpress Printing Operations in the Northern Virginia Volatile Organic Compound Emissions Control Area, 8-hour Ozone Standard (Rule 4-56) 5-40-8380 Applicability and Designation of Affected Facility 02/01/16 10/21/16, [Insert Federal Register citation] Added. 5-40-8382 Definitions 02/01/16 10/21/16, [Insert Federal Register citation] Added. 5-40-8384 Standard for volatile organic compounds 02/01/16 10/21/16, [Insert Federal Register citation] Added. 5-40-8386 Standard for visible emissions 02/01/16 10/21/16, [Insert Federal Register citation] Added. 5-40-8388 Standard for fugitive/dust emissions 02/01/16 10/21/16, [Insert Federal Register citation] Added. 5-40-8396 Compliance 02/01/16 10/21/16, [Insert Federal Register citation] Added. 5-40-8398 Compliance schedule 02/01/16 10/21/16, [Insert Federal Register citation] Added. 5-40-8400 Test methods and procedures 02/01/16 10/21/16, [Insert Federal Register citation] Added. 5-40-8410 Monitoring 02/01/16 10/21/16, [Insert Federal Register citation] Added. 5-40-8412 Notification, records, and reporting 02/01/16 10/21/16, [Insert Federal Register citation] Added. 5-40-8414 Registration 02/01/16 10/21/16, [Insert Federal Register citation] Added. 5-40-8418 Permits 02/01/16 10/21/16, [Insert Federal Register citation] Added. Article 56.1 Emission Standards for Offset Lithographic Printing Operations in the Northern Virginia Volatile Organic Compound Emissions Control Area, 8-hour Ozone Standard (Rule 4-56.1) 5-40-8420 Applicability and Designation of Affected Facility 02/01/16 10/21/16, [Insert Federal Register citation] Added. 5-40-8422 Definitions 02/01/16 10/21/16, [Insert Federal Register citation] Added. 5-40-8424 Standard for volatile organic compounds 02/01/16 10/21/16, [Insert Federal Register citation] Added. 5-40-8426 Standard for visible emissions 02/01/16 10/21/16, [Insert Federal Register citation] Added. 5-40-8428 Standard for fugitive/dust emissions 02/01/16 10/21/16, [Insert Federal Register citation] Added. 5-40-8434 Compliance 02/01/16 10/21/16, [Insert Federal Register citation] Added. 5-40-8436 Compliance schedule 02/01/16 10/21/16, [Insert Federal Register citation] Added. 5-40-8438 Test methods and procedures 02/01/16 10/21/16, [Insert Federal Register citation] Added. 5-40-8440 Monitoring 02/01/16 10/21/16, [Insert Federal Register citation] Added. 5-40-8450 Notification, records, and reporting 02/01/16 10/21/16, [Insert Federal Register citation] Added. 5-40-8460 Registration 02/01/16 10/21/16, [Insert Federal Register citation] Added. 5-40-8480 Permits 02/01/16 10/21/16, [Insert Federal Register citation] Added. Article 57 Emission Standards for Industrial Solvent Cleaning Operations in the Northern Virginia Volatile Organic Compound Emissions Control Area, 8-hour Ozone Standard (Rule 4-57) 5-40-8510 Applicability and Designation of Affected Facility 02/01/16 10/21/16, [Insert Federal Register citation] Added. 5-40-8520 Definitions 02/01/16 10/21/16, [Insert Federal Register citation] Added. 5-40-8530 Standard for volatile organic compounds 02/01/16 10/21/16, [Insert Federal Register citation] Added. 5-40-8540 Standard for visible emissions 02/01/16 10/21/16, [Insert Federal Register citation] Added. 5-40-8550 Standard for fugitive/dust emissions 02/01/16 10/21/16, [Insert Federal Register citation] Added. 5-40-8580 Compliance 02/01/16 10/21/16, [Insert Federal Register citation] Added. 5-40-8590 Compliance schedule 02/01/16 10/21/16, [Insert Federal Register citation] Added. 5-40-8600 Test methods and procedures 02/01/16 10/21/16, [Insert Federal Register citation] Added. 5-40-8610 Monitoring 02/01/16 10/21/16, [Insert Federal Register citation] Added. 5-40-8620 Notification, records, and reporting 02/01/16 10/21/16, [Insert Federal Register citation] Added. 5-40-8630 Registration 02/01/16 10/21/16, [Insert Federal Register citation] Added. 5-40-8650 Permits 02/01/16 10/21/16, [Insert Federal Register citation] Added. Article 58 Emission Standards for Miscellaneous Industrial Adhesive Application Processes in the Northern Virginia Volatile Organic Compound Emissions Control Area, 8-hour Ozone Standard (Rule 4-58) 5-40-8660 Applicability and Designation of Affected Facility 02/01/16 10/21/16, [Insert Federal Register citation] Added. 5-40-8670 Definitions 02/01/16 10/21/16, [Insert Federal Register citation] Added. 5-40-8680 Standard for volatile organic compounds 02/01/16 10/21/16, [Insert Federal Register citation] Added. 5-40-8690 Standard for visible emissions 02/01/16 10/21/16, [Insert Federal Register citation] Added. 5-40-8700 Standard for fugitive/dust emissions 02/01/16 10/21/16, [Insert Federal Register citation] Added. 5-40-8730 Compliance 02/01/16 10/21/16, [Insert Federal Register citation] Added. 5-40-8740 Compliance schedule 02/01/16 10/21/16, [Insert Federal Register citation] Added. 5-40-8750 Test methods and procedures 02/01/16 10/21/16, [Insert Federal Register citation] Added. 5-40-8760 Monitoring 02/01/16 10/21/16, [Insert Federal Register citation] Added. 5-40-8770 Notification, records, and reporting 02/01/16 10/21/16, [Insert Federal Register citation] Added. 5-40-8780 Registration 02/01/16 10/21/16, [Insert Federal Register citation] Added. 5-40-8800 Permits 02/01/16 10/21/16, [Insert Federal Register citation] Added. Article 59 Emission Standards for Miscellaneous Metal Parts and Products Coating Application Systems in the Northern Virginia Volatile Organic Compound Emissions Control Area, 8-hour Ozone Standard (Rule 4-58) 5-40-8810 Applicability and Designation of Affected Facility 02/01/16 10/21/16, [Insert Federal Register citation] Added. 5-40-8820 Definitions 02/01/16 10/21/16, [Insert Federal Register citation] Added. 5-40-8830 Standard for volatile organic compounds 02/01/16 10/21/16, [Insert Federal Register citation] Added. 5-40-8840 Standard for visible emissions 02/01/16 10/21/16, [Insert Federal Register citation] Added. 5-40-8850 Standard for fugitive/dust emissions 02/01/16 10/21/16, [Insert Federal Register citation] Added. 5-40-8880 Compliance 02/01/16 10/21/16, [Insert Federal Register citation] Added. 5-40-8890 Compliance schedule 02/01/16 10/21/16, [Insert Federal Register citation] Added. 5-40-8900 Test methods and procedures 02/01/16 10/21/16, [Insert Federal Register citation] Added. 5-40-8910 Monitoring 02/01/16 10/21/16, [Insert Federal Register citation] Added. 5-40-8920 Notification, records, and reporting 02/01/16 10/21/16, [Insert Federal Register citation] Added. 5-40-8930 Registration 02/01/16 10/21/16, [Insert Federal Register citation] Added. 5-40-8950 Permits 02/01/16 10/21/16, [Insert Federal Register citation] Added. *         *         *         *         *         *         *

    (e) * * *

    Name of nonregulatory SIP revision Applicable geographic area State submittal date EPA approval date Additional explanation Documents incorporated by reference Northern Virginia VOC emissions control area 02/01/16 10/21/16, [Insert Federal Register citation] Section 15 added
    [FR Doc. 2016-25441 Filed 10-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R10-OAR-2013-0004; FRL-9954-32-Region 10] Partial Approval and Partial Disapproval of Attainment Plan for Oakridge, Oregon PM2.5 Nonattainment Area AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    On December 12, 2012, the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (ODEQ) submitted, on behalf of the Governor of Oregon, a State Implementation Plan (SIP) submission to address violations of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter of less than or equal to a nominal 2.5 micrometers (PM2.5) for the Oakridge PM2.5 nonattainment area (2012 SIP submission). The Lane Regional Air Protection Agency (LRAPA), in coordination with the ODEQ, developed the 2012 SIP submission for purposes of attaining the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. On February 22, 2016, the ODEQ withdrew certain provisions of the 2012 SIP submission (2016 SIP withdrawal). The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has evaluated whether the remaining portions of the 2012 SIP submission meet the applicable Clean Air Act (CAA) requirements. Based on this evaluation, the EPA is finalizing partial approval and partial disapproval of the remaining portions of the 2012 SIP submission.

    DATES:

    This final rule is effective November 21, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    The EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID No. EPA-R10-OAR-2013-0004. All documents in the docket are listed on the http://www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, i.e., Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information the disclosure of which is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically through http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Air Planning Unit, Office of Air and Waste, EPA Region 10, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle, WA, 98101. The EPA requests that, if at all possible, you contact the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to view the hard copy of the docket. You may view the hard copy of the docket Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding Federal holidays.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Christi Duboiski at (360) 753-9081, [email protected] or by using the above EPA, Region 10 address.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Table of Contents I. Background Information II. Final Action III. Consequences of a Disapproved SIP IV. Incorporation by Reference V. Statutory and Executive Orders Review I. Background Information

    On July 28, 2016, the EPA proposed to partially approve and partially disapprove the attainment plan submitted by the ODEQ on December 12, 2012 (81 FR 49592). An explanation of the CAA attainment planning requirements, a detailed analysis of the submittal, and the EPA's reasons for proposing partial approval and partial disapproval were provided in the notice of proposed rulemaking, and will not be restated here. The public comment period for the proposed rule ended on August 29, 2016. The EPA received no comments on the proposal.

    II. Final Action

    The EPA is finalizing approval of the following elements of the 2012 SIP submission:

    • Description of the Oakridge PM2.5 nonattainment area and listing of the area as nonattainment, and

    • The base year 2008 emission inventory submitted to meet the CAA section 172(c)(3) requirement for emissions inventories.

    The EPA is finalizing disapproval of the following elements of the 2012 SIP submission:

    • The attainment year emission inventory submitted to meet the CAA section 172(c)(3) requirement for emissions inventories,

    • the reasonably available control measures (RACM), including reasonably available control technology (RACT), submitted to meet the CAA sections 172(c)(1) and 189(a)(1)(C) requirements for control measures for moderate nonattainment areas,

    • the attainment demonstration submitted to meet the CAA section 189(a)(1)(B) requirement for a demonstration that the plan will provide for attainment by the applicable attainment date,

    • the motor vehicle emissions budget (MVEB) submitted to meet CAA section 176 requirement for transportation conformity,

    • the demonstration of reasonable further progress (RFP) and quantitative milestones submitted to meet section 172(c)(2) and 189(c) requirements for RFP and quantitative milestones, and

    • the contingency measures submitted to meet the section 172(c)(9) requirement for the implementation of measures to be undertaken, without further action by the state or EPA, if the area fails to make RFP or attain the NAAQS by the applicable attainment date.

    III. Consequences of a Disapproved SIP

    This section explains the consequences of a disapproved SIP submission required under the CAA. The Act provides for the imposition of sanctions and the promulgation of a federal implementation plan (FIP) if a state fails to submit, and the EPA approve, a plan revision that corrects the deficiencies identified by the EPA in its disapproval.

    The Act's Provisions for Sanctions

    Once the EPA finalizes disapproval of a required SIP submission, such as an attainment plan submission, or a portion thereof, CAA section 179(a) provides for the imposition of sanctions, unless the deficiency is corrected within 18 months of the final rulemaking of disapproval. The first sanction would apply 18 months after the EPA disapproves the SIP submission, or portion thereof. Under the EPA's sanctions regulations at 40 CFR 52.31, the first sanction imposed would be 2:1 offsets for sources subject to the new source review requirements under section 173 of the CAA. If the state has still failed to submit a SIP submission to correct the identified deficiencies for which the EPA proposes full or conditional approval 6 months after the first sanction is imposed, the second sanction will apply. The second sanction is a prohibition on the approval or funding certain highway projects.1

    1 On April 1, 1996 the US Department of Transportation published a notice in the Federal Register describing the criteria to be used to determine which highway projects can be funded or approved during the time that the highway sanction is imposed in an area. (See 61 FR 14363)

    Federal Implementation Plan Provisions That Apply if a State Fails To Submit an Approvable Plan

    In addition to sanctions, once the EPA finds that a state failed to submit the required SIP revision, or finalizes disapproval of the required SIP revision or a portion thereof, the EPA must promulgate a FIP no later than two years from the date of the finding—if the deficiency has not been corrected within that time period.

    Ramifications Regarding Conformity

    One consequence of the EPA's action finalizing disapproval of a control strategy SIP submission is a conformity freeze.2 If the EPA finalizes disapproval of the attainment demonstration SIP without a protective finding, a conformity freeze will be in place as of the effective date of the disapproval (40 CFR 93.120(a)(2)).3 The Oakridge PM2.5 nonattainment area is an isolated rural area as defined in the transportation conformity rule (40 CFR 93.101). As such, it does not have a metropolitan planning organization (MPO), and there is no long range transportation plan or TIP that would be subject to a freeze. However, the freeze does mean that no projects in the Oakridge PM2.5 nonattainment area may be found to conform until another attainment demonstration SIP is submitted, and the motor vehicle emissions budgets are found adequate, or the attainment demonstration is approved.

    2 Control strategy SIP revisions as defined in the transportation conformity rules include reasonable further progress plans and attainment demonstrations (40 CFR 93.101).

    3 The EPA would give a protective finding if the submitted control strategy SIP contains adopted control measures, or written commitments to adopt enforceable control measures, that fully satisfy the emissions reductions requirements relevant to the statutory provision for which the implementation plan revision was submitted, such as reasonable further progress or attainment (40 CFR 93.101 and 93.120(a)(2) and (3)). The submitted attainment plan for the Oakridge NAA does not contain all necessary controls to attain the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS and therefore is not eligible for a protective finding.

    IV. Incorporation by Reference

    In this rule, the EPA is finalizing regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is finalizing the incorporation by reference of the regulations described in the amendments to 40 CFR part 52 set forth below. The EPA has made, and will continue to make, these documents generally available electronically through http://www.regulations.gov and/or in hard copy at the appropriate EPA office (see the ADDRESSES section of this preamble for more information).

    V. Statutory and Executive Orders Review

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by December 20, 2016. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2) of the CAA).

    List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

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

    Dated: October 6, 2016. Dennis J. McLerran, Regional Administrator, Region 10.

    For the reasons stated in the preamble, 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 MM—Oregon 2. In 52.1970 (c), amend Table 4—EPA Approved Lane Regional Air Protection Agency (LRAPA) Rules for Oregon by: A. Revising the heading for Title 29; and B. Revising entries 29-0010 and 29-0030.

    The revisions read as follows:

    § 52.1970 Identification of plan.

    (c) * * *

    Table 4—EPA Approved Lane Regional Air Protection Agency (LRAPA) Rules for Oregon LRAPA
  • citation
  • Title/subject State
  • effective date
  • EPA approval date Explanations
    *         *         *         *         *         *         * Title 29—Designation of Air Quality Areas 29-0010 Definitions 10/18/2012 10/21/2016, [Insert Federal Register citation] Except 1-5, 7-9, and 11-15. 29-0030 Designation of Nonattainment Areas 10/18/2012 10/21/2016, [Insert Federal Register citation] *         *         *         *         *         *         *
    [FR Doc. 2016-25296 Filed 10-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R08-OAR-2013-0145; FRL-9954-15-Region 8] Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; North Dakota; Revisions to Air Pollution Control Rules AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving State Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions submitted by the State of North Dakota on January 28, 2013 and April 22, 2014. The revisions are to Article 33-15 Air Pollution Control rules of the North Dakota Administrative Code. The revisions include amendments to update the Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) rules and the definition of “volatile organic compounds”; to add particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in diameter (PM2.5) methods of measurement; to modify the PM2.5 state ambient air quality standard, permissible open burning rule, and permit fee processes; and, to remove permitting fees for sources that operate an air monitoring site. The revisions also make clarifying changes. This action is being taken under section 110 of the Clean Air Act (CAA).

    DATES:

    This rule is effective on November 21, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    The EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID No. EPA-R08-OAR-2013-0145. All documents in the docket are listed on the http://www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available through http://www.regulations.gov, or please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section for additional availability information.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Jaslyn Dobrahner, Air Program, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8, Mail Code 8P-AR, 1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado 80202-1129, (303) 312-6252, [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Background

    In our notice of proposed rulemaking published on August 25, 2016 (81 FR 53438), EPA proposed to approve revisions to Article 33-15 Air Pollution Control rules of the North Dakota Administrative Code submitted by the State of North Dakota on January 28, 2013 and April 22, 2014. In this rulemaking, we are taking final action on revisions submitted in the January 28, 2013 submittal to update the PSD rules; add PM2.5 methods of measurement; revise permit fee processing; remove permitting fees for sources that operate an air monitoring site; and make clarifying changes. The North Dakota State Health Council adopted those amendments on August 14, 2012 (effective January 1, 2013). In addition, we are also taking final action on revisions submitted in the April 22, 2014 submittal to update the PSD rules and the definition of “volatile organic compounds”; revise the PM2.5 state ambient air quality standard and permissible open burning rule; and clarify excess emissions reporting requirements. The North Dakota State Health Council adopted those amendments on February 11, 2014 (effective April 1, 2014). The reasons for our approval are provided in detail in the proposed rule.

    II. Response to Comments

    We received no comments on our proposed rule.

    III. Final Action

    For the reasons expressed in the proposed rule, EPA is approving revisions to sections of the State's Air Pollution Control rules from the January 28, 2013 and April 22, 214 submittals. A comprehensive summary of the revisions in North Dakota's Air Pollution Control rules organized by the EPA's action, reason for “no action” and submittal date are provided in Table 1 and Table 2 below.

    Table 1—List of North Dakota Revisions That the EPA Is Approving Revisions in January 28, 2013 and April 22, 2014 Submittals That EPA Is Approving January 28, 2013 submittal: 33-15-01-05; 33-15-01-13.3; 33-15-03-04.5; 33-15-05-04.3; 33-15-14-02.13.c(4); 33-15-15-01.2 ; 33-15-17-02.4; 33-15-17-02.6; 33-15-23-02.2.c; 33-15-23-03.1 April 22, 2014 submittal: 33-15-01-04; 33-15-02, Table 1.; 33-15-04-02.2.a; 33-15-06-05.1; 33-15-15-01.2; 33-15-23-03  Except for the incorporation by reference date in the first paragraph and the revision associated with 40 CFR 52.21(l)(1). Table 2—List of North Dakota Revisions That the EPA Is Taking No Action on Revised section Reason for “No Action” Revision
  • superseded by
  • April 22, 2014
  • submittal
  • Revision
  • acted on in
  • 79 FR 63045
  • Revision
  • will be acted on in a future
  • submittal
  • Revisions in January 28, 2013 and April 22, 2014 Submittals That EPA Is Taking No Action on January 28, 2013 Submittal: 33-15-01-04 x 33-15-03-04.4 x 33-15-05-01.2a(1) x 33-15-14-02.1 x 33-15-14-02.5.a x 33-15-15-01.2  x 33-15-15-01.2 § x April 22, 2014 Submittal: 33-15-03-05 x  Only the revision to the incorporation by reference date in the first paragraph. § Only the revision associated with 40 CFR 52.21(l)(1).
    IV. Incorporation by Reference

    In this rule, the EPA is finalizing regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is finalizing the incorporation by reference of North Dakota Air Pollution Control rules described in the amendments set forth to 40 CFR part 52 below. Therefore, these materials have been approved by the EPA for inclusion in the State implementation plan, have been incorporated by reference by the EPA into that plan, are fully federally enforceable under sections 110 and 113 of the CAA as of the effective date of the final rulemaking of the EPA's approval, and will be incorporated by reference by the Director of the Federal Register in the next update to the SIP compilation.1 The EPA has made, and will continue to make, these materials generally available through www.regulations.gov and/or at the EPA Region 8 Office (please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this preamble for more information).

    1 62 FR 27968 (May 22, 1997).

    V. Statutory and Executive Orders Review

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

    • Is not a “significant regulatory action” subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, Oct. 4, 1993);

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

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

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

    • Does not have federalism implications as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, Aug. 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 the EPA with the discretionary authority to address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, Feb. 16, 1994).

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

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

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by December 20, 2016. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See CAA section 307(b)(2).)

    List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

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

    Authority:

    42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    Dated: September 29, 2016. Shaun L. McGrath, Regional Administrator, Region 8.

    40 CFR part 52 is amended to read 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 JJ—North Dakota 2. Section 52.1820 (c) is amended as follows: a. Under “33-15-01. General Provisions” by revising entries “33-15-01-04”, “33-15-01-05”, and “33-15-01-13”; b. Under “33-15-02. Ambient Air Quality Standards” by revising entry “Table 1”; c. Under “33-15-03. Restriction of Emission of Visible Air Contaminants” by revising entry “33-15-03-04”; d. Under “33-15-04. Open Burning Restrictions” by revising entry “33-15-04-02”; e. Under “33-15-05. Emissions of Particulate Matter Restricted” by revising entry “33-15-05-04”; f. Under “33-15-06. Emissions of Sulfur Compounds Restricted” by revising entry “33-15-06-05”; g. Under “33-15-14. Designated Air Contaminant Sources Permit to Construct Minor Source Permit to Operate Title V Permit to Operate” by revising entry “33-15-14-02”; h. Under “33-15-15. Prevention of Significant Deterioration of Air Quality” by revising entry “33-15-15-01.2”; i. Under “33-15-17. Restriction of Fugitive Emissions” by revising entry “33-15-17-02”; and j. Under “33-15-23. Fees” by revising entries “33-15-23-02” and “33-15-23-03.”

    The revisions read as follows:

    § 52.1820 Identification of plan.

    (c) * * *

    Rule No. Rule title State effective date EPA effective date Final rule citation/date Comments 33-15-01. General Provisions *         *         *         *         *         *         * 33-15-01-04 Definitions 4/1/2014 11/21/16 [Insert Federal Register citation], 10/21/16 33-15-01-05 Abbreviations 1/1/2013 11/21/16 [Insert Federal Register citation], 10/21/16 *         *         *         *         *         *         * 33-15-01-13 Shutdown and malfunction of an installation—Requirement for notification 1/1/2013 11/21/16 [Insert Federal Register citation], 10/21/16 *         *         *         *         *         *         * 33-15-02. Ambient Air Quality Standards *         *         *         *         *         *         * Table 1 Ambient Air Quality Standards 4/1/2014 11/21/16 [Insert Federal Register citation], 10/21/16 *         *         *         *         *         *         * 33-15-03. Restriction of Emission of Visible Air Contaminants *         *         *         *         *         *         * 33-15-03-04 Exceptions 1/1/2013 11/21/16 [Insert Federal Register citation], 10/21/16 *         *         *         *         *         *         * 33-15-04. Open Burning Restrictions *         *         *         *         *         *         * 33-15-04-02 Permissible open burning 4/1/2014 11/21/16 [Insert Federal Register citation], 10/21/16 33-15-05. Emissions of Particulate Matter Restricted *         *         *         *         *         *         * 33-15-05-04 Methods of measurement 1/1/2013 11/21/16 [Insert Federal Register citation], 10/21/16 33-15-06. Emissions of Sulfur Compounds Restricted *         *         *         *         *         *         * 33-15-06-05 Reporting and recordkeeping requirements 4/1/2014 11/21/16 [Insert Federal Register citation], 10/21/16 *         *         *         *         *         *         * 33-15-14. Designated Air Contaminant Sources Permit to Construct Minor Source Permit to Operate Title V Permit to Operate *         *         *         *         *         *         * 33-15-14-02 Permit to construct 1/1/2013 11/21/16 [Insert Federal Register citation], 10/21/16 Excluding subsections 1, 12, 13, 3.c., 13.b.1., 5, 13.c., 13.i(5), 13.o., and 19 (one sentence) which were subsequently revised and approved. See 57 FR 28619 (6/26/92), regarding State's commitment to meet requirements of EPA's “Guideline on Air Quality Models (revised).” *         *         *         *         *         *         * 33-15-15. Prevention of Significant Deterioration of Air Quality *         *         *         *         *         *         * 33-15-15-01.2 Scope 1/1/2013
  • 4/1/2014
  • 11/21/16 [Insert Federal Register citation], 10/21/16 Except for the revision associated with 40 CFR 52.21(l)(1).
    *         *         *         *         *         *         * 33-15-17. Restriction of Fugitive Emissions *         *         *         *         *         *         * 33-15-17-02 Restriction of fugitive particulate emissions 1/1/2013 11/21/16 [Insert Federal Register citation], 10/21/16 *         *         *         *         *         *         * 33-15-23. Fees *         *         *         *         *         *         * 33-15-23-02 Permit to construct fees 1/1/2013 11/21/16 [Insert Federal Register citation], 10/21/16 33-15-23-03 Minor source permit to operate fees 1/1/2013
  • 4/1/2014
  • 11/21/16 [Insert Federal Register citation], 10/21/16
    *         *         *         *         *         *         *
    § 52.1829 [Amended]
    3. Section 52.1829 is amended by removing paragraphs (c) and (d).
    [FR Doc. 2016-25302 Filed 10-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R08-OAR-2016-0016; FRL-9954-16-Region 8] Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; State of Colorado; Motor Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance, Clean Screen Program and the Low Emitter Index, On-Board Diagnostics, and Associated Revisions AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency.

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving three State Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions submitted by the State of Colorado. The revisions involve amendments to Colorado's Regulation Number 11 “Motor Vehicle Emissions Inspection Program.” The revisions address the implementation of the Low Emitter Index (LEI) component of Regulation No. 11's Clean Screen Program, the implementation of the On-Board Diagnostics (OBD) component of Regulation No. 11, and several other associated revisions. The EPA is approving these SIP revisions in accordance with the requirements of section 110 of the Clean Air Act (CAA).

    DATES:

    This final rule is effective on November 21, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket Identification Number EPA-R08-OAR-2016-0016. All documents in the docket are listed on the http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some information may not be publicly available, e.g., Confidential Business Information or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy. Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically through http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Air Program, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8, 1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado, 80202-1129. EPA requests that you contact the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to view the hard copy of the docket. You may view the hard copy of the docket Monday through Friday, 8 a.m. to 4 p.m., excluding federal holidays.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Tim Russ, Air Program, EPA, Region 8, Mailcode 8P-AR, 1595 Wynkoop, Denver, Colorado 80202-1129, (303) 312-6479, [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Background

    In this action, the EPA is approving SIP revisions to Colorado's Regulation No. 11 (hereafter “Reg. No. 11”) contained in three submittals from Colorado. The State's submittals were dated June 11, 2008, March 15, 2013, and March 3, 2014. Much of the content of the revisions involved minor updates to several sections of Reg. No. 11 and deletion of obsolete language. Those revisions of greater significance involved: (1) Colorado's 2007 revisions to Reg. No. 11 for the implementation of the LEI portion of the Clean Screen Program contained in Reg. No. 11; (2) Colorado's 2012 revisions to Reg. No. 11 for the implementation of the OBD test requirements contained in Reg. No. 11 along with the Seven Model Year Emissions Test Exemption provisions; and (3) Colorado's 2013 revisions to Reg. No. 11, Appendix A, Incorporation by Reference of Technical Materials, the addition of new Technical Information/Requirements, and minor revisions to Appendix B.

    On August 12, 2016, the EPA published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPR) which proposed to approve the State's three Reg. No. 11 SIP revision requests and in addition, provided a thorough evaluation of the changes, additions, and deletions to Reg. No. 11 contained in each of the three SIP revision submittals. See 81 FR 53370. The details of Colorado's three SIP submittals and the rationale for the EPA's proposed action to approve the SIP revision materials are explained in the NPR and will not be restated here. The EPA notes that the NPR's public comment period closed on September 12, 2016 and we did not receive any comments.

    II. Final Action

    The EPA is taking final action to approve the following revisions to Reg. No. 11 that were discussed in our August 12, 2016 NPR (81 FR 53370) and as provided below:

    a.) The sections of Reg. No. 11 that were revised with the State's June 11, 2008 submittal:

    1.) Part A, section II: Modify definition number 15 “Clean Screened Vehicle” to reflect the addition of the LEI; modify definition number 17 “Colorado `94” to clarify the use of the BAR 90 test analyzer systems for use after 1994; and add a new definition “Low Emitting Vehicle Index.” Renumber definitions number 18 and higher.

    2.) Part C, section XII: Modify section XIIA.3 regarding the requirements and procedures to clean screen an eligible vehicle and add section XIIE.4 regarding low emitting vehicles and the LEI.

    3.) Part F, section VI: Renumber section VI.B as VI.C; add new section VI.B.1 which requires the development of the LEI each year; add new section VI.B.2 which establishes the 98% minimum passing criteria for the LEI; and add new section VI.B.3 which allows the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE) to use a greater than 98% passing criteria if needed to equate to a second remote sensing device reading.

    4.) Appendix A, Technical Specifications, Attachment 1: Sections of Attachment 1 of the Technical Specifications contain the specifications for the PDF 1000 Scanner; some sections were unreadable and a full, retyped PDF 1000 Scanner section was provided.

    5.) Appendix A, Technical Specifications, Attachment 2: Sections of Attachment 2 of the Technical Specifications contain the specifications for the Thermal Transfer Printer; some sections were unreadable and a full, retyped Thermal Transfer Printer section was provided.

    The EPA notes that Part F, section III.A.2 of Reg. No. 11 was also provided with the State's June 11, 2008 submittal. This section contains IM240 1 test light duty vehicle emissions cutpoints for 1996 and newer vehicles (all in grams per mile). The carbon monoxide (CO), hydrocarbon (HC), and nitrogen oxides (NOX) entries for calendar year 2006 are incorrect as the State had previously provided an August 8, 2006 SIP revision submittal to remove these 2006 cutpoints (i.e., HC 0.6, CO 10.0, and NOX 1.5). The EPA approved the removal of these 2006 cutpoints on December 20, 2012 (77 FR 75388).

    1 See 40 CFR part 51, subpart S for a complete description of EPA's IM240 test. The IM240 test is essentially an enhanced motor vehicle emissions test to measure mass tailpipe emissions while the vehicle follows a computer generated driving cycle trace for 240 seconds and while the vehicle is on a dynamometer.

    b.) The sections of Reg. No. 11 that were revised with the State's March 15, 2013 submittal:

    1.) Part A, section I: Minor wording changes to add new language and remove obsolete language in sections I.B, I.C.3, I.C.3.a, I.C.3.b, I.C.3.c, I.C.4, I.C.7, I.C.7.c, I.C.8, and I.C.9.b.

    2.) Part A, section II: A new definition number 20 was added entitled “Colorado On-Board Diagnostic (OBD) Test Analyzer System;” a new definition number 22 was added entitled “Diagnostic Trouble Code (DTC);” and definitions number 23 to 43 were renumbered. A new definition number 44 was added and entitled “On-Board Diagnostics II (OBD or OBDII) Test” and definitions numbered 45 to 52 were renumbered.

    3.) Part A, section IV: Section IV.D was removed which involved obsolete language and section IV.E was renumbered IV.D and also had obsolete language removed.

    4.) Part B, section IX: Section IX was added and is entitled “Approval of the Colorado On-Board Diagnostic (OBD) Test Analyzer System.” Also, Part B, section X was added and is entitled “The Colorado On-Board Diagnostic (OBD) Test Analyzer System.”

    5.) Part C, title: The title was modified by removing “Chlorofluorocarbon Leak Detection” and adding “On-Board Diagnostics (OBD).”

    6.) Part C, section I.C.3: This involved minor language changes to clarify data transmission and analyzer requirements.

    7.) Part C, section II.A: This section was renumbered from II.A through II.F to instead become II.A.1 through II.A.11. Minor clarification language was added along with revised references to sections in Part C.

    8.) Part C, section II.G: This section was renumbered to II.B and clarifying language was added regarding OBD testing. Sections II.G.1 through II.G.6 were renumbered II.B.1 through II.B.6. Section II.B.4 had clarifying language added regarding applicable vehicles that were unable to be tested with the IM240 test would then be OBD tested.

    9.) Part C, section II.C: A new section II.C (II.C 1 through II.C.9) was added which specifies which vehicles are to be OBD tested and the requirements and testing procedures for an OBD test.

    10.) Part C, section III.A: This section had clarifying language added and sections III.B and III.C were removed as they addressed the model year 1996 and newer visual inspection procedures. The remaining applicable portions of section III.C were then renumbered III.B. Sections III.D and III.E were renumbered to III.C and III.D.

    11.) Part C, section IV: The prior section IV was renumbered section V and the provisions of the existing section V were deleted. The new section IV addressed the requirements for applicable vehicles (1996 through those vehicles that had reached their 11th model year of age) to be evaluated with and OBD test.

    12.) Part C, prior section IV: The existing section IV was renumbered section V and also modified with clarifying language regarding the requirement for a full retest of vehicles which previously had a missing or malfunctioning gas cap.

    13.) Part C, section VIII.A.2: A new section VIII.A.2 was added which states that vehicles in their model years seven through ten need to meet the OBD passing criteria in Part F, section VII. Sections VIII.A.2 through VIII.A.4 were renumbered VIII.A.3 through VIII.A.5.

    14.) Part C, sections VIII.B.1, VIII.B.2, and VIII.B.3: These sections had minor wording changes and deletion of obsolete language.

    15.) Part C, sections VIII.D.A through VIII.D.E: These sections were renumbered VIII.D.1 through VIII.D.5.

    16.) Part C, sections IX.G and X.A: These sections had minor clarifying language added.

    17.) Part F, section V: This section was retitled “Visible Smoke.”

    18.) Part F, section VII: A new section VII was added (sections VII.A through VII.F) which stated the required OBD diagnostic inspection test passing criteria.

    19.) Part G: This part had previously contained obsolete high-emitting vehicle identification pilot project language which was removed and Part G was retitled “Reserved.”

    c.) The sections of Reg. No. 11 that were revised with the State's March 3, 2014 submittal:

    1.) Part A, section I.C.3.c: This section was revised to clarify that the seven year new vehicle exemption, which excused vehicles from an emissions test for seven years and was previously adopted by the Colorado Air Quality Control Commission (AQCC) in December 2012, would take effect on January 1, 2015. Also, this exemption would apply retroactively to existing vehicles in their fourth, fifth, and sixth years of service.

    2.) Part A, sections I.C.8, I.C.9, and I.C.10: These sections were revised to clarify ambiguous, contradictory and obsolete Reg. No. 11 language concerning the issuance of and duration periods for “Verification of Emissions Test” exemption windshield stickers issued by motor vehicle dealers. Part A, section I.C.8 was further clarified to note that vehicles in their fourth, fifth, and sixth years of service would have the seven year exemption applied retroactively.

    3.) Part A, section I.C.3 and Part C, sections III and IV: These sections were revised to clarify that the seven-year new vehicle exemption from emissions testing, OBD testing requirements and procedures, and other changes made to Reg. No. 11 by the AQCC in December 2012, would go into effect January 1, 2015. In addition, the visual inspection procedures for 1996 and newer vehicles would be retained through December 2014.

    4.) Part C, section C VIII.B.3: This section was revised to codify in Reg. No. 11 the vehicle emissions repair cost waiver amount of $715. The AQCC has previously directed the CDPHE to change the amount from $450 to $715 in November 2002, which was done. However, at that time, the AQCC had declined to note the changed repair amount in the text of Reg. No. 11.

    5.) Part C, section VIII.D.4: This section was revised regarding the qualifying criteria for an economic hardship waiver for a vehicle failing its emissions test. Section VIII.D.4 was further revised to allow the economic hardship waiver to apply to households owning two vehicles rather than restricting hardship waivers to households owning only one vehicle.

    6.) Appendix A of Reg. No. 11 was revised as follows:

    a.) Appendix A was revised to remove the text of three technical document attachments and to note that the documents are available at CDPHE's Emissions Technical Center Procedures Manual. The technical documents are incorporated by reference into Reg. No. 11. Appendix A. The technical documents that are incorporated by reference into Reg. No. 11 are: Attachment I “PDF 1000 Scanner,” Attachment II “Thermal Transfer Printer,” and Attachment III “Colorado Automobile Dealers Transient Mode Test Analyzer System.”

    b.) Updated Attachment IV, entitled “Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment Specification for Colorado 97 Analyzer,” to reflect technological changes to data specifications, communications protocols, and forms generation.

    c.) To include a new Attachment V “Test Analyzer Specification for On-board Diagnostics” for licensed fleets who self-inspect their own vehicles. Note: Part B section X required this Test Analyzer Specification to be in place by December 31, 2013.

    7.) Appendix B of Reg. No. 11 was revised as follows: Attachment II; the “Calibration Span Gas” labels were updated to reflect the current version of the State-official labels.

    8.) Overall revised formatting and other non-substantive changes were made throughout Reg. No. 11.

    III. Incorporation by Reference

    In this rule, the EPA is finalizing regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is finalizing the incorporation by reference of the Colorado Air Quality Control Commission, Regulation Number 11 revisions as discussed in section II, Final Action, of this preamble. Therefore, these materials have been approved by the EPA for inclusion in the State Implementation Plan, have been incorporated by reference by the EPA into that plan, are fully federally enforceable under sections 110 and 113 of the CAA as of the effective date of the final rulemaking of the EPA's approval, and will be incorporated by reference by the Director of the Federal Register in the next update to the SIP compilation. The EPA has made, and will continue to make, these materials generally available through www.regulations.gov and/or at the EPA Region 8 Office (please contact the person identified in the “For Further Information Contact” section of this preamble for more information).

    IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

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

    • Is not a “significant regulatory action” subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, Oct. 4, 1993);

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

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

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

    • Does not have federalism implications as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, Aug. 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 the EPA with the discretionary authority to address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, Feb. 16, 1994).

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

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

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by December 20, 2016. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See CAA section 307(b)(2).)

    List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

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

    Authority:

    42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    Dated: September 21, 2016. Shaun L. McGrath, Regional Administrator, Region 8.

    40 CFR part 52 is amended to read 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 G—Colorado 2. In § 52.320, the table in paragraph (c) is amended by: a. Revising the entries “I. Applicability”; “II. Definitions”; “IV. Clean Screen/Remote Emissions Sensing”; and “IX. Approval of the Colorado On-Board Diagnostic (OBD) Test Analyzer System”. b. Adding the entry “X. The Colorado On-Board Diagnostic (OBD) Test Analyzer System” in numerical order. c. Revising the center heading to “5 CCR 1001-13, Regulation Number 11, Motor Vehicle Emissions Inspection Program—Part C, Inspection Procedures and Requirements for Exhaust Emissions, Fuel Evaporation Control, Visible Smoke Emissions, Emissions Control Systems, On-Board Diagnostics (OBD); and Practices to Ensure Proper Emissions Related Adjustments and Repairs” and the entries “I. Pre-inspection Requirements”; “II. Exhaust Emissions Inspection Procedures”; “III. Emissions Control Systems Inspection Procedures”; “IV. On-Board Diagnostic Inspection Procedures”; “V. Evaporative Fuel Control Inspection Procedures”; “VIII. Certification of Emissions Control”; “IX. Adjustment Procedures”; “X. Emissions Related Repairs”; and “XII. Clean Screen Inspection Program Procedures”. d. Revising the entries “V. Visible Smoke” and “VI. Clean Screen Program Maximum Allowable Emissions Limits”. e. Adding the entry “VII. On-Board Diagnostic Inspection Passing Criteria” in numerical order. f. Revising the entries “Appendix A, Specifications for Colorado 94 Analyzer” and “Appendix B, Standards and Specifications for the Suppliers of Span and Calibration Gases”.

    The additions and revisions read as follows:

    § 52.320 Identification of plan.

    (c) * * *

    Title State
  • effective
  • date
  • EPA
  • effective
  • date
  • Final rule
  • citation/date
  • Comments
    *         *         *         *         *         *         * 5 CCR 1001-13, Regulation Number 11, Motor Vehicle Emissions Inspection Program—Part A, General Provisions, Area of Applicability, Schedules for Obtaining Certification of Emissions Control, Definitions, Exemptions, and Clean Screening/Remote Sensing I. Applicability 2/15/2013
  • 12/30/2013
  • 11/21/2016 [Insert Federal Register citation], 10/21/2016
    II. Definitions 8/30/2007
  • 2/15/2013
  • 11/21/2016 [Insert Federal Register citation], 10/21/2016
    *         *         *         *         *         *         * IV. Clean Screen/Remote Emissions Sensing 2/15/2013 11/21/2016 [Insert Federal Register citation], 10/21/2016 5 CCR 1001-13, Regulation Number 11, Motor Vehicle Emissions Inspection Program—Part B, Standards and Procedures for the Approval, Operation, Gas Span Adjustment, Calibration and Certification of the Division Approved Test Analyzer Systems for Use in the Basic and Enhanced Areas and Test Analyzer Systems for Licensed Dealers in the Enhanced Area *         *         *         *         *         *         * IX. Approval of the Colorado On-Board Diagnostic (OBD) Test Analyzer System 2/15/2013 11/21/2016 [Insert Federal Register citation], 10/21/2016 X. The Colorado On-Board Diagnostics (OBD) Test Analyzer System 2/15/2013 11/21/2016 [Insert Federal Register citation], 10/21/2016 5 CCR 1001-13, Regulation Number 11, Motor Vehicle Emissions Inspection Program—Part C, Inspection Procedures and Requirements for Exhaust Emissions, Fuel Evaporation Control, Visible Smoke Emissions, Emissions Control Systems, On-Board Diagnostics (OBD); and Practices to Ensure Proper Emissions Related Adjustments and Repairs I. Pre-inspection Requirements 2/15/2013 11/21/2016 [Insert Federal Register citation], 10/21/2016 II. Exhaust Emissions Inspection Procedures 2/15/2013 11/21/2016 [Insert Federal Register citation], 10/21/2016 III. Emissions Control Systems Inspection Procedures 2/15/2013 11/21/2016 [Insert Federal Register citation], 10/21/2016 IV. On-Board Diagnostic II Inspection Procedures 2/15/2013 11/21/2016 [Insert Federal Register citation], 10/21/2016 V. Evaporative Fuel Control Inspection Procedures 2/15/2013 11/21/2016 [Insert Federal Register citation], 10/21/2016 *         *         *         *         *         *         * VIII. Certification of Emissions Control 2/15/2013
  • 12/30/2013
  • 11/21/2016 [Insert Federal Register citation], 10/21/2016
    IX. Adjustment Procedures 2/15/2013 11/21/2016 [Insert Federal Register citation], 10/21/2016 X. Emissions Related Repairs 2/15/2013 11/21/2016 [Insert Federal Register citation], 10/21/2016 *         *         *         *         *         *         * XII. Clean Screen Inspection Program Procedures 8/30/2007 11/21/2016 [Insert Federal Register citation], 10/21/2016 *         *         *         *         *         *         * 5 CCR 1001-13, Regulation Number 11, Motor Vehicle Emissions Inspection Program—Part F, Maximum Allowable Emissions Limits for Motor Vehicle Exhaust, Evaporative and Visible Emissions for Light-Duty and Heavy-Duty Vehicles *         *         *         *         *         *         * V. Visible Smoke 2/15/2013 11/21/2016 [Insert Federal Register citation], 10/21/2016 VI. Clean Screen Program Maximum Allowable Emissions Limits 8/30/2007 11/21/2016 [Insert Federal Register citation], 10/21/2016 VII. On-Board Diagnostic Inspection Passing Criteria 2/15/2013 11/21/2016 [Insert Federal Register citation], 10/21/2016 5 CCR 1001-13, Regulation Number 11, Appendices Appendix A, Specifications for Colorado 94 Analyzer 8/30/2007
  • 12/30/2013
  • 11/21/2016 [Insert Federal Register citation], 10/21/2016
    Appendix B, Standards and Specifications for the Suppliers of Span and Calibration Gases 12/30/2013 11/21/2016 [Insert Federal Register citation], 10/21/2016 *         *         *         *         *         *         *
    [FR Doc. 2016-25295 Filed 10-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R03-OAR-2016-0308; FRL-9954-18-Region 3] Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Virginia; Removal of Stage II Gasoline Vapor Recovery Requirements for Gasoline Dispensing Facilities AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Direct final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking direct final action to approve revisions to the Commonwealth of Virginia's state implementation plan (SIP). The revision serves to remove requirements for vapor recovery equipment (also referred to as Stage II vapor recovery, or simply as Stage II) from subject gasoline stations in areas of Virginia that were formerly required to install and operate Stage II under the prior approved SIP. In 2012, EPA determined that new, gasoline-powered vehicles equipped with onboard vapor recovery systems (beginning with those manufactured in model year 1998) were in widespread use and have, in great part, supplanted emission reductions formerly controlled via Stage II vapor recovery on gasoline dispensers at service stations. In two prior rulemakings, EPA has already approved Virginia's demonstrations showing that the emission benefits generated by Stage II vapor recovery have been fully offset, without impacting the affected Virginia areas' ability to attain and maintain any national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS). Virginia amended its existing rules to remove Stage II as a required measure by January 2017 and added decommissioning procedures for stations electing to opt out of the program. EPA is approving this SIP revision to amend the Virginia Stage II vapor recovery program in accordance with the requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA).

    DATES:

    This rule is effective on December 20, 2016 without further notice, unless EPA receives adverse written comment by November 21, 2016. If EPA receives such comments, it will publish a timely withdrawal of the direct final rule in the Federal Register and inform the public that the rule will not take effect.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R03-OAR-2016-0308 at http://www.regulations.gov, or via email to [email protected] For comments submitted at Regulations.gov, follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. For either manner of submission, 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, please contact the person identified in the For Further Information Contact section. For the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Brian Rehn, (215) 814-2176, or by email at [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Background

    Stage II vapor recovery is a means of capturing volatile organic compounds (VOCs) emitted as vapors displaced from a vehicle's gas tank during refueling operations, via vapor controls equipped on a gasoline pump at a gasoline dispensing facility (GDF). Stage II vapor recovery uses special refueling nozzles and coaxial hoses on the gasoline dispenser to capture these vapors that might otherwise be emitted to the atmosphere during vehicle fueling. These gasoline vapors contain toxic air emissions and serve as precursors to the formation of ground-level ozone—an ambient air pollutant regulated under the CAA. Under section 182(b)(3) of the CAA, areas classified as moderate or worse ozone nonattainment were required to adopt a Stage II vapor recovery program. Areas in the Ozone Transport Region (OTR) were required under section 184(a) and (b)(2) to adopt Stage II, or a comparable measure that could achieve similar emission reductions.

    Virginia has three areas that have approved Stage II SIPs meeting Stage II requirements under the 1990 amendments to the CAA. The Richmond area was designated as moderate nonattainment under the 1-hour ozone NAAQS, and again under the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. On July 26, 1996, Virginia submitted a request to redesignate the Richmond area to attainment of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS. EPA's approval of this request was published in the November 17, 1997 Federal Register (62 FR 61237). On September 26, 2006, Virginia requested redesignation of the Richmond area to attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. EPA approved that redesignation request in the June 1, 2007 Federal Register (72 FR 30485). However, Virginia's plans for maintenance of the respective NAAQS relied upon the emissions reductions from Stage II as a means to ensure continued maintenance of the ozone NAAQS. Although the 1-hour ozone NAAQS was revoked June 15, 2005, EPA's implementation rule for the 1997 ozone NAAQS retained Stage II as a required measure to prevent backsliding under the NAAQS.

    The Virginia portion of the Washington, DC-MD-VA ozone nonattainment area (hereafter referred to as the Washington area) was subject to Stage II not only because of its designation as nonattainment for the ozone NAAQS, but also because this area lies in a CAA-established OTR. The area was designated serious nonattainment under the 1-hour ozone NAAQS. Under the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, both the Northern Virginia area and the neighboring Fredericksburg area were designated as moderate nonattainment. On November 13, 2002, EPA reclassified the Virginia portion of the Washington, DC-MD-VA area as severe nonattainment under the 1-hour ozone NAAQS. 67 FR 68805. Virginia subsequently submitted and EPA approved attainment plans for the 1-hour and 1997 8-hour NAAQS for the Washington area, and approved a redesignation and maintenance plan for the Fredericksburg area. Although the 1-hour ozone NAAQS was revoked effective June 2005, EPA's implementation rule for the 1997 ozone NAAQS retained Stage II-related requirements under CAA section 182(b)(3) for certain areas. Therefore, Stage II continued to apply in the Washington, DC nonattainment area as an anti-backsliding measure (for the revoked 1-hour ozone NAAQS) and in the Fredericksburg area as a maintenance measure (under the 1997 ozone NAAQS) pending EPA determination that onboard refueling vapor recovery (ORVR) was in widespread use and Virginia could demonstrate that Stage II was no longer a necessary component of its air quality plans.

    Virginia adopted Stage II regulations in the November 2, 1992 edition of the Virginia Register of Regulations (Vol. 9, Issue 3) effective January 1, 1993. Stage II applicability was limited to the to the Northern Virginia volatile organic compound (VOC) Emission Control Area (comprised of Arlington, Alexandria, Fairfax, Loudon, Prince William and Stafford Counties, plus the cities of Alexandria, Fairfax, Falls Church, Manassas, and Stafford) and to the Richmond VOC Emission Control Area (comprised of the Counties of Charles City, Chesterfield, Hanover, and Henrico, plus the cities of Colonial Heights, Hopewell, and Richmond). Virginia submitted its Stage II regulation to EPA as a SIP revision on November 5, 1992. EPA approved Virginia's Stage II SIP revision on June 23, 1993 (59 FR 32353).

    ORVR is an emissions control system equipped on new, gasoline-powered vehicles (beginning with model year 1998 vehicles) for the purpose of capturing refueling gasoline vapors before they escape the vehicle gas tank and to store them in an underhood canister for later engine combustion. Section 202(a)(6) of the CAA directed that Stage II requirements under 182(b)(3) would no longer apply to moderate ozone nonattainment areas upon promulgation of standards for ORVR systems as part of the emission control system on newly manufactured vehicles. Section 202(a)(6) further directs that Stage II requirements no longer apply to ozone nonattainment areas designated serious or worse upon EPA's determination that ORVR technology is in “widespread use.” EPA issued its widespread use determination on May 16, 2012 (77 FR 28772), indicating that ORVR was in widespread use throughout the U.S. vehicle fleet, and that at that time ORVR vehicles were essentially equal to and would soon surpass the emissions reductions achieved by Stage II alone.

    Virginia has examined whether Stage II vapor recovery continues to be necessary for ozone control purposes, given the prevalence of ORVR-equipped gasoline-powered vehicles and the redundancy between ORVR and Stage II systems in reducing gasoline tank displacement emissions associated with refueling. Additionally, Virginia has analyzed the interference effect between certain Stage II systems and ORVR systems. As a result, Virginia determined that Stage II vapor recovery is no longer necessary as a control measure to address ambient ozone in the Washington, Fredericksburg, and Richmond areas.

    On November 12, 2013 and March 18, 2014, Virginia submitted SIP revisions to EPA that evaluate and address the emissions impacts to each of those affected areas associated with removal of the Stage II program. These plans serve to amend the ozone maintenance plan for the Richmond area and the attainment plan for the Washington area to demonstrate that removal of the Stage II programs will not interfere with those areas' ability to attain and maintain any NAAQS. On May 26, 2015 (80 FR 29959), EPA approved the Commonwealth's March 18, 2014 SIP revision amending the approved ozone attainment plan for the Virginia portion of Washington nonattainment area and the approved ozone maintenance plan for the Fredericksburg area to remove the Stage II program. On August 11, 2014, EPA approved Virginia's November 12, 2013 SIP revision amending the approved ozone maintenance plan SIP for the Richmond area to remove the Stage II program.

    II. Summary of SIP Revision and EPA Analysis

    On October 15, 2015, the Commonwealth of Virginia submitted a formal revision to remove the requirements for Stage II vapor recovery controls in Virginia ozone nonattainment areas from the approved Virginia SIP (Revision C14). This October 2015 SIP revision contains the amended Stage II vapor recovery regulatory provisions of Virginia Rule 4-37, entitled “Emission Standards for Volatile Organic Compounds from Petroleum Liquid Storage and Transfer Operations.” The October 2015 SIP revision includes Virginia's regulatory amendments listed at 9VAC5-20 and 9VAC5-40 that were adopted by Virginia in June of 2014, and published in the Virginia Register of Regulations on June 15, 2015. The purpose of the Commonwealth's 2015 SIP revision submittal is to remove Stage II vapor recovery requirements applicable in covered areas in Virginia from the Commonwealth's rule provisions governing petroleum liquid storage and transfer operations. Under Virginia's amended Rule 4-37, gasoline stations in the Washington and Fredericksburg areas were no longer required to employ Stage II systems as of January 2014, and Richmond area stations will no longer be required to employ Stage II vapor recovery systems as of January 2017. Virginia's amendment to Rule 4-37 also requires facilities electing to decommission Stage II to meet established decommissioning procedures and those electing to continue to operate Stage II to continue to properly operate and maintain their Stage II systems.

    As described in the Background section of this action, EPA has already approved Virginia's SIP revisions submitted on November 12, 2013 and March 18, 2014 demonstrating that removal of Stage II as a control measure from the SIP will not interfere with the Washington, Fredericksburg, and Richmond areas' ability to attain and maintain any applicable NAAQS.

    Virginia's Department of Environmental Quality (VA DEQ) examined whether Stage II vapor recovery is necessary for ozone control purposes, and determined this program is no longer beneficial to air quality of the Commonwealth, given EPA's widespread use determination for ORVR equipment in new vehicles manufactured since 1998 and the inherent redundancies between Stage II vapor recovery equipment and vehicle-based ORVR systems, as well as the known incompatibilities between certain types of Stage II vapor recovery equipment and vehicle-based, ORVR systems.

    EPA has evaluated the regulatory amendments adopted by Virginia to its Rule 4-37 to rescind Stage II vapor recovery requirements for new and existing stations, to adopt decommissioning procedures and requirements for GDFs electing to no longer operate existing Stage II systems, and to require the continued operation and maintenance of Stage II equipment for stations that elect to continue participation in the program. Virginia's regulatory changes meet EPA guidance and the related requirements of sections 182 and 202 of the CAA with respect to the applicability of Stage II requirements after EPA's issuance of its widespread use policy of ORVR determination in 2012, as described in the Background section of this document. Virginia has properly analyzed the impact of removal of the Stage II program in adherence with EPA's “Guidance on Removing Stage II Gasoline Vapor Control Programs from State Implementation Plans and Assessing Comparable Measures,” dated August 7, 2012 (EPA-457/B-12-001), including applicability of Stage II or comparable measures in the OTR, per section 184 of the CAA. As previously found by EPA, Virginia has demonstrated that removal of the Stage II requirement does not interfere with any affected area's ability to attain or maintain a NAAQS, under section 110(l) of the CAA.

    For further information on Virginia's analysis of the impacts of removal of the Stage II programs in the Washington and Fredericksburg areas, please refer to EPA's May 26, 2015 approval of the SIP demonstration applicable to those areas. See 80 FR 29959. For further information with respect to Virginia's analysis of the removal of Stage II in the Richmond area, please refer to EPA's August 11, 2014 approval of the Commonwealth's demonstration applicable to Richmond. See 79 FR 4671.

    III. Final Action

    EPA is approving Virginia's revision to its SIP to include revised Stage II vapor recovery provisions to remove the requirement for Virginia area GDFs to operate Stage II in areas formerly subject to Stage II under CAA sections 182 and 184, and to add provisions setting requirements for GDFs opting to decommission existing Stage II systems. As described previously, EPA previously approved two earlier, related Virginia SIP revisions demonstrating that Virginia's Stage II-affected areas (i.e., the Virginia portion of Washington, DC, Fredericksburg, and Richmond ozone nonattainment areas) will not be adversely affected by the removal of the Stage II vapor recovery requirement. EPA is publishing this rule without prior proposal because EPA views this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipates no adverse comment.

    However, in the “Proposed Rules” section of today's Federal Register, EPA is publishing a separate document that will serve as the proposal to approve the SIP revision if adverse comments are filed. This rule will be effective on December 20, 2016 without further notice unless EPA receives adverse comment by November 21, 2016. If EPA receives adverse comment, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal Register informing the public that the rule will not take effect. EPA will address all public comments in a subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule. EPA will not institute a second comment period on this action. Any parties interested in commenting must do so at this time.

    IV. General Information Pertaining to SIP Submittals From the Commonwealth of Virginia

    In 1995, Virginia adopted legislation that provides, subject to certain conditions, for an environmental assessment (audit) “privilege” for voluntary compliance evaluations performed by a regulated entity. The legislation further addresses the relative burden of proof for parties either asserting the privilege or seeking disclosure of documents for which the privilege is claimed. Virginia's legislation also provides, subject to certain conditions, for a penalty waiver for violations of environmental laws when a regulated entity discovers such violations pursuant to a voluntary compliance evaluation and voluntarily discloses such violations to the Commonwealth and takes prompt and appropriate measures to remedy the violations. Virginia's Voluntary Environmental Assessment Privilege Law, Va. Code Sec. 10.1-1198, provides a privilege that protects from disclosure documents and information about the content of those documents that are the product of a voluntary environmental assessment. The Privilege Law does not extend to documents or information that: (1) Are generated or developed before the commencement of a voluntary environmental assessment; (2) are prepared independently of the assessment process; (3) demonstrate a clear, imminent and substantial danger to the public health or environment; or (4) are required by law.

    On January 12, 1998, the Commonwealth of Virginia Office of the Attorney General provided a legal opinion that states that the Privilege Law, Va. Code § 10.1-1198, precludes granting a privilege to documents and information “required by law,” including documents and information “required by federal law to maintain program delegation, authorization or approval,” since Virginia must “enforce federally authorized environmental programs in a manner that is no less stringent than their federal counterparts . . . .” The opinion concludes that “[r]egarding § 10.1-1198, therefore, documents or other information needed for civil or criminal enforcement under one of these programs could not be privileged because such documents and information are essential to pursuing enforcement in a manner required by federal law to maintain program delegation, authorization or approval.” Virginia's Immunity law, Va. Code Sec. 10.1-1199, provides that “[t]o the extent consistent with requirements imposed by federal law,” any person making a voluntary disclosure of information to a state agency regarding a violation of an environmental statute, regulation, permit, or administrative order is granted immunity from administrative or civil penalty. The Attorney General's January 12, 1998 opinion states that the quoted language renders this statute inapplicable to enforcement of any federally authorized programs, since “no immunity could be afforded from administrative, civil, or criminal penalties because granting such immunity would not be consistent with federal law, which is one of the criteria for immunity.”

    Therefore, EPA has determined that Virginia's Privilege and Immunity statutes will not preclude the Commonwealth from enforcing its program consistent with the federal requirements. In any event, because EPA has also determined that a state audit privilege and immunity law can affect only state enforcement and cannot have any impact on federal enforcement authorities, EPA may at any time invoke its authority under the CAA, including, for example, sections 113, 167, 205, 211 or 213, to enforce the requirements or prohibitions of the state plan, independently of any state enforcement effort. In addition, citizen enforcement under section 304 of the CAA is likewise unaffected by this, or any, state audit privilege or immunity law.

    V. Incorporation by Reference

    In this rule, EPA is finalizing regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, EPA is finalizing the incorporation by reference of Virginia's amendments to Article 37 of 9VAC5-40, relating also to amendments to Virginia's general provisions at 9VAC5-20-21, reflecting the addition of a new source of documents incorporated by reference, effective on July 20, 2015. Additionally, Virginia amended its Rule 4-37 governing petroleum liquid and transfer operations applicable to existing stationary sources. Specifically, Virginia modified requirements for the Commonwealth's Stage II vapor recovery program in 9-VAC5-5220 and 9VAC5-5270, effective July 20, 2015. These materials have been approved by EPA for inclusion in the SIP, have been incorporated by reference by EPA into that plan, are fully federally enforceable under sections 110 and 113 of the CAA as of the effective date of the final rulemaking of EPA's approval, and will be incorporated by reference by the Director of the Federal Register in the next update of the SIP compilation.1 EPA has made, and will continue to make, these materials generally available through www.regulations.gov and/or at the EPA Region III Office (please contact the person identified in the “For Further Information Contact” section of this preamble for more information).

    1 62 FR 27968 (May 22, 1997).

    VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews A. General Requirements

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    The SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land as defined in 18 U.S.C. 1151 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 and will not impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).

    B. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General

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

    C. Petitions for Judicial Review

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by December 20, 2016. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action. Parties with objections to this direct final rule are encouraged to file a comment in response to the parallel notice of proposed rulemaking for this action published in the proposed rules section of today's Federal Register, rather than file an immediate petition for judicial review of this direct final rule, so that EPA can withdraw this direct final rule and address the comment in the proposed rulemaking action. This action to amend Virginia's approved Stage II vapor recovery SIP to amend the Commonwealth's requirements for the Stage II vapor recovery program may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)

    List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

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

    Dated: September 29, 2016. Shawn M. Garvin, Regional Administrator, Region III.

    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 VV—Virginia 2. Amend § 52.2420: a. In the table in paragraph (c) by revising the entry “5-40-5220” and adding in numerical order an entry for “5-40-5270”: and b. In the table in paragraph (e) by revising an entry “Documents Incorporated by Reference (9 VAC 5-20-21, Section B.)” and adding “Documents Incorporated by Reference (9 VAC 5-20-21, Section E.15.)” at the end of the table.

    The revised and added text reads as follows:

    § 52.2420 Identification of plan.

    (c) * * *

    EPA-Approved Virginia Regulations and Statutes State citation Title/Subject State
  • effective
  • date
  • EPA Approval date Explanation [former SIP citation]
    *         *         *         *         *         *         * 9 VAC 5, Chapter 40 Existing Stationary Sources[Part IV] *         *         *         *         *         *         * Part II Emissions Standards *         *         *         *         *         *         * Article 37 Emission Standards for Petroleum Liquid Storage and Transfer Operations (Rule 4-37) *         *         *         *         *         *         * 5-40-5220 Standard for Volatile Organic Compounds 07/30/2015 10/21/2016 [Insert Federal Register Citation] *         *         *         *         *         *         * 5-40-5270 Standard for Toxic Pollutants 07/30/2015 10/21/2016 [Insert Federal Register Citation] *         *         *         *         *         *         *

    (e) * * *

    Name of non-regulatory SIP revision Applicable geographic area State
  • submittal
  • date
  • EPA Approval date Additional explanation
    *         *         *         *         *         *         * Documents Incorporated by Reference (9 VAC 5-20-21, Section B.) Northern Virginia (Metropolitan Washington) Ozone Nonattainment Area, Fredericksburg Ozone Maintenance Area, Richmond-Petersburg Ozone Maintenance Area 10/1/2015 10/21/2016 [Insert Federal Register Citation] State effective date is 7/30/15. *         *         *         *         *         *         * Documents Incorporated by Reference (9 VAC 5-20-21, Section E.15.) Northern Virginia (Metropolitan Washington) Ozone Nonattainment Area, Fredericksburg Ozone Maintenance Area, Richmond-Petersburg Ozone Maintenance Area 10/1/2015 10/21/2016 [Insert Federal Register Citation] State effective date is 7/30/15. *         *         *         *         *         *         *
    [FR Doc. 2016-25301 Filed 10-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 60 [EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0734; FRL-9954-38-OAR] Reconsideration of Standards of Performance for New Residential Wood Heaters, New Residential Hydronic Heaters and Forced-Air Furnaces AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Notice of final action denying petition for reconsideration.

    SUMMARY:

    This action provides notice that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator, Gina McCarthy, denied a petition for reconsideration of the final Standards of Performance for New Residential Wood Heaters, New Residential Hydronic Heaters and Forced-Air Furnaces published in the Federal Register on March 16, 2015.

    DATES:

    This action is effective on October 21, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ms. Amanda Aldridge, Outreach and Information Division (C304-05), Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711; telephone number: (919) 541-5268; fax number (919) 541-2664; email address: [email protected].

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. General Information A. How can I get copies of this document and other related information?

    This Federal Register notice, the petition for reconsideration and the EPA's letter addressing the petition for reconsideration are available in the docket under Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0734.

    Docket. The EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0734. Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically through http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA WJC West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC. The EPA Docket Center 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 Air Docket is (202) 566-1742. This action, the petition for reconsideration and the EPA's letter addressing the petition can also be found on the EPA's Web site at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg.

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

    II. Judicial Review

    Section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act (CAA) indicates which Federal Court of Appeals have venue over petitions for review of final EPA actions. This section provides, in part, that the petitions for review must be filed in the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit if: (i) The agency action consists of “nationally applicable regulations promulgated, or final action taken, by the Administrator;” or (ii) such actions are locally or regionally applicable, if “such action is based on a determination of nationwide scope or effect and if in taking such action the Administrator finds and publishes that such action is based on such a determination.”

    The EPA has determined that its action denying the petition for reconsideration is nationally applicable for purposes of CAA section 307(b)(1) because the action directly affects the final Standards of Performance for New Residential Wood Heaters, new Residential Hydronic Heaters and Forced-Air Furnaces published on March 16, 2015, (“2015 New Source Performance Standards (NSPS)”), which are nationally applicable regulations. Thus, any petitions for review of the EPA's decision to deny the petition for reconsideration described in this document must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit by December 20, 2016.

    III. Description of Action

    The 2015 NSPS finalizes amendments to the 1988 Standards of Performance for New Residential Wood Heaters (40 CFR part 60, subpart AAA), i.e., the 1988 NSPS, and adds one new subpart: Standards of Performance for the New Residential Hydronic Heaters and Forced-Air Furnaces (40 CFR part 60, subpart QQQQ). The 2015 NSPS was developed following a CAA section 111(b)(1)(B) review of the 1988 NSPS (53 FR 5860, February 26, 1988). This information is contained in the docket, which is available at http://www.regulations.gov. On February 3, 2014, the EPA proposed Standards of Performance for New Residential Wood Heaters, New Residential Hydronic Heaters and Forced-Air Furnaces (79 FR 6373). The EPA received additional data and comments during the public comment period. These data and comments were considered and analyzed and, where appropriate, the EPA revised the proposed rule. The final rule was published on March 16, 2015 (80 FR 13671).

    On June 2, 2015, Richard S. Burns & Company, Inc. (“Burns”) submitted a petition for reconsideration of the 2015 NSPS (80 FR 13671, March 16, 2015). In its petition, Burns asks the EPA to reconsider aspects of the final rule's pellet fuel requirements in 40 CFR 60.532(f). Specifically, Burns asked that the EPA reconsider the ban on pellet fuels made from construction and demolition waste and the ban on pellet fuels made from “prohibited fuels” which includes construction or demotion debris and allow certain wood that has been sorted from construction or demolition waste to be used in the manufacture of pellet fuels for residential wood heaters.

    Burns' reconsideration petition was submitted under Section 307(d)(7)(B) of the CAA, which sets forth the criteria for reconsideration. That section states that “(o)nly an objection to a rule or procedure which was raised with reasonable specificity during the period for public comment (including any public hearing) may be raised during judicial review. If the person raising an objection can demonstrate to the Administrator that it was impractical to raise such objection within such time or if the grounds for such objection arose after the period for public comment (but within the time specified for judicial review) and if such objection is of central relevance to the outcome of the rule, the Administrator shall convene a proceeding for reconsideration of the rule and provide the same procedural rights as would have been afforded had the information been available at the time the rule was proposed.”

    The EPA has carefully considered the petition and supporting information and evaluated whether the petition meets the CAA section 307(d)(7)(B) criteria for reconsideration. The EPA has concluded that the petition does not meet the criteria for reconsideration. Thus, in a letter to the petitioner, the EPA Administrator, Gina McCarthy, denied the Richard S. Burns & Company, Inc.'s petition, and explained the reasons for the denial. This letter is available in the docket for this action.

    IV. Conclusion

    For the reasons discussed in the letter to the petitioner, their petition to reconsider the final Standards of Performance for New Residential Wood Heaters, New Residential Hydronic Heaters and Forced-Air Furnaces is denied.

    List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 60

    Environmental protection, Administrative practices and procedures, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: October 14, 2016. Gina McCarthy, Administrator.
    [FR Doc. 2016-25512 Filed 10-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Parts 271 and 272 [EPA-R06-RCRA-2015-0664; FRL-9951-21-Region 6] Louisiana: Final Authorization of State-Initiated Changes and Incorporation by Reference of Approved State Hazardous Waste Management Program AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Direct final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    During a review of Louisiana's regulations, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) identified a variety of State-initiated changes to its hazardous waste program under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). The EPA has determined that these changes are minor and satisfy all requirements needed to qualify for final authorization and is authorizing the State-initiated changes through this direct final action.

    The Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended, commonly referred to as the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), allows the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to authorize States to operate their hazardous waste management programs in lieu of the Federal program. The EPA uses the regulations entitled “Approved State Hazardous Waste Management Programs” to provide notice of the authorization status of State programs and to incorporate by reference those provisions of the State statutes and regulations that will be subject to the EPA's inspection and enforcement. The rule codifies in the regulations the prior approval of Louisiana's hazardous waste management program and incorporates by reference authorized provisions of the State's statutes and regulations.

    The EPA is publishing this rule to authorize the State-initiated changes and incorporate by reference the State's hazardous waste program without a prior proposal because we believe these actions are not controversial and do not expect comments that oppose them. Unless we receive written comments which oppose the authorization in this codification document during the comment period, the decision to authorize Louisiana's State-initiated changes to its hazardous waste program will take effect. If we receive comments that oppose the authorization, we will publish a document in the Federal Register withdrawing this rule before it takes effect, and a separate document in the proposed rules section of this Federal Register will serve as a proposal to authorize the State-initiated changes.

    DATES:

    This regulation will be effective December 20, 2016, unless the EPA receives adverse written comment by November 21, 2016. If the EPA receives such comment, it will publish a timely withdrawal of this direct final rule in the Federal Register and inform the public that this rule will not take effect. The Director of the Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference as of December 20, 2016 in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit any comments identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R06-RCRA-2015-0664, by one of the following methods:

    1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.

    2. Email: [email protected] or [email protected]

    3. Mail: Alima Patterson, Region 6, Regional Authorization Coordinator, or Julia Banks, Codification Coordinator, Permit Section (RPM), Multimedia Planning and Permitting Division, EPA Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733.

    4. Hand Delivery or Courier: Deliver your comments to Alima Patterson, Region 6, Regional Authorization Coordinator, or Julia Banks, Codification Coordinator, Permit Section (RPM), Multimedia Planning and Permitting Division, EPA Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733.

    Instructions: Do not submit information that you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or otherwise protected through http://www.regulations.gov, or email. Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R06-RCRA-2015-0664. The Federal http://www.regulations.gov Web site is an “anonymous access” system, which means the EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email comment directly to the EPA without going through http://www.regulations.gov, your email address will be automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, the EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If the EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, the EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.

    You can view and copy the documents that form the basis for this authorization and codification and associated publicly available materials from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m. Monday through Friday at the following location: EPA Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733, phone number: (214) 665-8533 or (214) 665-8178. Interested persons wanting to examine these documents should make an appointment with the office at least two weeks in advance.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Alima Patterson, Region 6, Regional Authorization Coordinator, or Julia Banks, Codification Coordinator, Permit Section (RPM), Multimedia Planning and Permitting Division, EPA Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733, Phone number: (214) 665-8533 or (214) 665-8178, and Email address: [email protected] or [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Authorization of State-Initiated Changes A. Why are revisions to State programs necessary?

    States which have received final authorization from the EPA under RCRA section 3006(b), 42 U.S.C. 6926(b), must maintain a hazardous waste program that is equivalent to, consistent with, and no less stringent than the Federal hazardous waste program. As the Federal program changes, the States must change their programs and ask the EPA to authorize the changes. Changes to State hazardous waste programs may be necessary when Federal or State statutory or regulatory authority is modified or when certain other changes occur. Most commonly, States must change their programs because of changes to the EPA's regulations in 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) parts 124, 260 through 268, 270, 273 and 279. States can also initiate their own changes to their hazardous waste program and these changes must then be authorized.

    B. What decisions have we made in this rule?

    We conclude that Louisiana's revisions to its authorized program meet all of the statutory and regulatory requirements established by RCRA. We found that the State-initiated changes make Louisiana's rules more clear or conform more closely to the Federal equivalents and are so minor in nature that a formal application is unnecessary. Therefore, we grant Louisiana final authorization to operate its hazardous waste program with the changes described in the table at Section G below. Louisiana has responsibility for permitting Treatment, Storage, and Disposal Facilities (TSDFs) within its borders (except in Indian Country) and for carrying out all authorized aspects of the RCRA program, subject to the limitations of the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984 (HSWA). New Federal requirements and prohibitions imposed by Federal regulations that EPA promulgates under the authority of HSWA take effect in authorized States before they are authorized for the requirements. Thus, the EPA will implement those requirements and prohibitions in Louisiana, including issuing permits, until the State is granted authorization to do so.

    C. What is the effect of this authorization decision?

    The effect of this decision is that a facility in Louisiana subject to RCRA will now have to comply with the authorized State requirements instead of the equivalent Federal requirements in order to comply with RCRA. Louisiana has enforcement responsibilities under its State hazardous waste program for violations of such program, but the EPA retains its authority under RCRA sections 3007, 3008, 3013, and 7003, which include, among others, authority to:

    • Do inspections, and require monitoring, tests, analyses, or reports;

    • Enforce RCRA requirements and suspend or revoke permits; and

    • Take enforcement actions regardless of whether the State has taken its own actions.

    This action does not impose additional requirements on the regulated community because the statutes and regulations for which Louisiana is being authorized by this direct action are already effective and are not changed by this action.

    D. Why wasn't there a proposed rule before this rule?

    The EPA did not publish a proposal before this rule because we view this as a routine program change and do not expect comments that oppose this approval. We are providing an opportunity for public comment now. In addition to this rule, in the proposed rules section of this Federal Register, we are publishing a separate document that proposes to authorize the State program changes.

    E. What happens if the EPA receives comments that oppose this action?

    If the EPA receives comments that oppose the authorization of the State-initiated changes in this codification document, we will withdraw this rule by publishing a document in the Federal Register before the rule becomes effective. The EPA will base any further decision on the authorization of the State program changes on the proposal mentioned in the previous paragraph. We will then address all public comments in a later final rule. You may not have another opportunity to comment. If you want to comment on this authorization, you must do so at this time. If we receive comments that oppose only the authorization of a particular change to the State hazardous waste program we may withdraw only that part of this rule, but the authorization of the program changes that the comments do not oppose will become effective on the date specified above. The Federal Register withdrawal document will specify which part of the authorization of the State program will become effective and which part is being withdrawn.

    In addition to the authorization of the rules described above in this document, the purpose of this Federal Register document is to codify Louisiana's base hazardous waste management program and its revisions to that program. The EPA has already provided notices and opportunity for comments on the Agency's decisions to authorize the Louisiana program, and the EPA is not now reopening the decisions, nor requesting comments, on the Louisiana authorizations as published in the Federal Register documents specified in Section I.F of this preamble.

    F. For what has Louisiana previously been authorized?

    The State of Louisiana initially received final authorization on January 24, 1985, effective February 7, 1985 (50 FR 3348), to implement its base Hazardous Waste Management Program. We granted authorization for changes to their program on November 28, 1989 (54 FR 48889) effective January 29, 1990; August 26, 1991 (56 FR 41958), as corrected October 15, 1991 (56 FR 51762) effective October 25, 1991; November 7, 1994 (59 FR 55368) effective January 23, 1995 (Note: On January 23, 1995 (60 FR 4380), the EPA responded to adverse public comments and affirmed the effective date for the November 7, 1994 final rule. Then on April 11, 1995 (60 FR 18360); the EPA also made administrative corrections for the January 23, 1995 Federal Register document); December 23, 1994 (59 FR 66200) effective March 8, 1995; October 17, 1995 (60 FR 53704 and 60 FR 53707) effective January 2, 1996; March 28, 1996 (61 FR 13777) effective June 11, 1996; December 29, 1997 (62 FR 67572) effective March 16, 1998; October 23, 1998 (63 FR 56830) effective December 22, 1998; August 25, 1999 (64 FR 46302) effective October 25, 1999; September 2, 1999 (64 FR 48099) effective November 1, 1999; February 28, 2000 (65 FR 10411) effective April 28, 2000; January 2, 2001 (66 FR 23) effective March 5, 2001; December 9, 2003 (68 FR 68526) effective February 9, 2004; June 10, 2005 (70 FR 33852) effective August 9, 2005; November 13, 2006 (71 FR 66116) effective January 12, 2007; August 16, 2007 (72 FR 45905) effective October 15, 2007; May 20, 2009 (74 FR 23645) effective July 20, 2009; August 5, 2010 (75 FR 47223) effective October 4, 2010; June 24, 2011 (76 FR 37021) effective August 23, 2011; June 28, 2011 (77 FR 38530) effective August 27, 2012; July 13, 2012 (77 FR 41292) effective September 11, 2012; and September 14, 2015 (80 FR 55032) effective November 13, 2015.

    G. What changes are we authorizing with this action?

    The State has made amendments to the provisions listed in the table which follows. These amendments clarify the State's regulations and make the State's regulations more internally consistent. The State's laws and regulations, as amended by these provisions, provide authority which remains equivalent to and, no less stringent than the Federal laws and regulations. These State-initiated changes satisfy the requirements of 40 CFR 271.21(a). We are granting Louisiana final authorization to carry out the following provisions of the State's program in lieu of the Federal program. These provisions are analogous to the indicated RCRA regulations found at 40 CFR as of July 1, 2012. The Louisiana provisions are from the Louisiana Administrative Code (LAC), Title 33, Part V dated September 2014.

    State requirement Analogous federal
  • requirement
  • 705.B.2 40 CFR 124.15 4999, Appendix E 40 CFR part 261, Appendix IX
    H. Who handles permits after the authorization takes effect?

    This authorization does not affect the status of State permits and those permits issued by the EPA because no new substantive requirements are a part of these revisions.

    I. How does this action affect Indian Country (18 U.S.C. 1151) in Louisiana?

    Louisiana is not authorized to carry out its Hazardous Waste Program in Indian Country within the State. This authority remains with EPA. Therefore, this action has no effect in Indian Country.

    II. Incorporation-by-Reference A. What is codification?

    Codification is the process of placing a State's statutes and regulations that comprise the State's authorized hazardous waste management program into the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). Section 3006(b) of RCRA, as amended, allows the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to authorize State hazardous waste management programs to operate in lieu of the Federal hazardous waste management regulatory program. The EPA codifies its authorization of State programs in 40 CFR part 272 and incorporates by reference State statutes and regulations that the EPA will enforce under sections 3007 and 3008 of RCRA and any other applicable statutory provisions.

    The incorporation by reference of State authorized programs in the CFR should substantially enhance the public's ability to discern the current status of the authorized State program and State requirements that can be Federally enforced. This effort provides clear notice to the public of the scope of the authorized program in each State.

    B. What is the history of the codification of Louisiana's hazardous waste management program?

    The EPA incorporated by reference Louisiana's then authorized hazardous waste management program effective March 16, 1998 (62 FR 67578), October 4, 2010 (75 FR 47223), September 11, 2012 (77 FR 41292), and November 25, 2013 (78 FR 58890).

    In this document, the EPA is revising Subpart T of 40 CFR part 272 to include the authorization revision actions effective November 13, 2015 (80 FR 55032).

    C. What codification decisions has EPA made in this rule?

    In this rule, the EPA is finalizing regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is finalizing the incorporation by reference of the Louisiana rules described in the amendments to 40 CFR part 272 set forth below. The EPA has made, and will continue to make, these documents available electronically through http://www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at the appropriate EPA office (see the ADDRESSES section of this preamble for more information).

    The purpose of this Federal Register document is to codify Louisiana's base hazardous waste management program and its revisions to that program. This document incorporates by reference Louisiana's hazardous waste statutes and regulations and clarifies which of these provisions are included in the authorized and Federally enforceable program. By codifying Louisiana's authorized program and by amending the Code of Federal Regulations, the public will be more easily able to discern the status of Federally approved requirements of the Louisiana hazardous waste management program.

    The EPA is incorporating by reference the Louisiana authorized hazardous waste management program in subpart T of 40 CFR part 272. Section 272.951 incorporates by reference Louisiana's authorized hazardous waste statutes and regulations. Section 272.951 also references the statutory provisions (including procedural and enforcement provisions) which provide the legal basis for the State's implementation of the hazardous waste management program, the Memorandum of Agreement, the Attorney General's Statements and the Program Description, which are approved as part of the hazardous waste management program under Subtitle C of RCRA.

    D. What is the effect of Louisiana's codification on enforcement?

    The EPA retains its authority under statutory provisions, including but not limited to, RCRA sections 3007, 3008, 3013, and 7003, and other applicable statutory and regulatory provisions to undertake inspections and enforcement actions and to issue orders in authorized States. With respect to these actions, the EPA will rely on Federal sanctions, Federal inspection authorities, and Federal procedures rather than any authorized State analogues to these provisions. Therefore, the EPA is not incorporating by reference such particular, approved Louisiana procedural and enforcement authorities. Section 272.951(c)(2) of 40 CFR lists the statutory and regulatory provisions which provide the legal basis for the State's implementation of the hazardous waste management program, as well as those procedural and enforcement authorities that are part of the State's approved program, but these are not incorporated by reference.

    E. What state provisions are not part of the codification?

    The public needs to be aware that some provisions of Louisiana's hazardous waste management program are not part of the Federally authorized State program. These non-authorized provisions include:

    (1) Provisions that are not part of the RCRA subtitle C program because they are “broader in scope” than RCRA subtitle C (see 40 CFR 271.1(i));

    (2) Federal rules adopted by Louisiana but for which the State is not authorized;

    (3) Unauthorized amendments to authorized State provisions;

    (4) New unauthorized State requirements; and

    (5) Federal rules for which Louisiana is authorized but which were vacated by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (D.C. Cir. No. 98-1379 and 98-1379; June 27, 2014).

    State provisions that are “broader in scope” than the Federal program are not part of the RCRA authorized program and the EPA will not enforce them. Therefore, they are not incorporated by reference in 40 CFR part 272. For reference and clarity, 40 CFR 272.951(c)(3) lists the Louisiana regulatory provisions which are “broader in scope” than the Federal program and which are not part of the authorized program being incorporated by reference. “Broader in scope” provisions cannot be enforced by the EPA; the State, however, may enforce such provisions under State law.

    Additionally, Louisiana's hazardous waste regulations include amendments which have not been authorized by the EPA. Since the EPA cannot enforce a State's requirements which have not been reviewed and authorized in accordance with RCRA section 3006 and 40 CFR part 271, it is important to be precise in delineating the scope of a State's authorized hazardous waste program. Regulatory provisions that have not been authorized by the EPA include amendments to previously authorized State regulations as well as certain Federal rules and new State requirements.

    Federal rules Louisiana has adopted but is not authorized for include those published in the Federal Register on August 8, 1986 (51 FR 28664); December 1, 1987 (52 FR 45788; Post-Closure Permits requirements); April 12, 1996 (61 FR 16290); and December 17, 2010 (75 FR 78915). In those instances where Louisiana has made unauthorized amendments to previously authorized sections of State code, the EPA is identifying in 40 CFR 272.951(c)(4) any regulations which, while adopted by the State and incorporated by reference, include language not authorized by the EPA. Those unauthorized portions of the State regulations are not Federally enforceable. Thus, notwithstanding the language in Louisiana hazardous waste regulations incorporated by reference at 40 CFR 272.951(c)(1), the EPA will only enforce those portions of the State regulations that are actually authorized by the EPA. For the convenience of the regulated community, the actual State regulatory text authorized by the EPA for the citations listed at 272.951(c)(4) (i.e., without the unauthorized amendments) is compiled as a separate document, Addendum to the EPA Approved Louisiana Regulatory Requirements Applicable to the Hazardous Waste Management Program, dated November 2015. This document is available from EPA Region 6, Sixth Floor, 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733, Phone number: (214) 665-8533, and also Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality, 602 N. Fifth Street, Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70884-2178, phone number (225) 219-3559.

    State regulations that are not incorporated by reference in this rule at 40 CFR 272.951(c)(1), or that are not listed in 40 CFR 272.951(c)(2) (“legal basis for the State's implementation of the hazardous waste management program”), 40 CFR 272.951(c)(3) (“broader in scope”) or 40 CFR 272.951(c)(4) (“unauthorized state amendments”), are considered new unauthorized State requirements. These requirements are not Federally enforceable.

    With respect to any requirement pursuant to the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984 (HSWA) for which the State has not yet been authorized, the EPA will continue to enforce the Federal HSWA standards until the State is authorized for these provisions.

    F. What will be the effect of federal HSWA requirements on the codification?

    The EPA is not amending 40 CFR part 272 to include HSWA requirements and prohibitions that are implemented by the EPA. Section 3006(g) of RCRA provides that any HSWA requirement or prohibition (including implementing regulations) takes effect in authorized and not authorized States at the same time. A HSWA requirement or prohibition supersedes any less stringent or inconsistent State provision which may have been previously authorized by the EPA (50 FR 28702, July 15, 1985). The EPA has the authority to implement HSWA requirements in all States, including authorized States, until the States become authorized for such requirement or prohibition. Authorized States are required to revise their programs to adopt the HSWA requirements and prohibitions, and then to seek authorization for those revisions pursuant to 40 CFR part 271.

    Instead of amending the 40 CFR part 272 every time a new HSWA provision takes effect under the authority of RCRA section 3006(g), the EPA will wait until the State receives authorization for its analog to the new HSWA provision before amending the State's 40 CFR part 272 incorporation by reference. Until then, persons wanting to know whether a HSWA requirement or prohibition is in effect should refer to 40 CFR 271.1(j), as amended, which lists each such provision.

    Some existing State requirements may be similar to the HSWA requirement implemented by the EPA. However, until the EPA authorizes those State requirements, the EPA can only enforce the HSWA requirements and not the State analogs. The EPA will not codify those State requirements until the State receives authorization for those requirements.

    Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted this action from the requirements of Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), and therefore this action is not subject to review by OMB. This rule incorporates by reference Louisiana's authorized hazardous waste management regulations and imposes no additional requirements beyond those imposed by State law. Accordingly, I certify that this action will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this rule merely incorporates by reference certain existing State hazardous waste management program requirements which the EPA already approved under 40 CFR part 271, and with which regulated entities must already comply, it 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).

    This action will not have substantial direct effects 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, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999), because it merely incorporates by reference existing State hazardous waste management program requirements without altering the relationship or the distribution of power and responsibilities established by RCRA. This action also does not have Tribal implications within the meaning of Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 6, 2000).

    This action also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not economically significant and it does not make decisions based on environmental health or safety risks. This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211, “Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use” (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) because it is not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.

    The requirements being codified are the result of Louisiana's voluntary participation in the EPA's State program authorization process under RCRA Subtitle C. Thus, the requirements of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. As required by section 3 of Executive Order 12988 (61 FR 4729, February 7, 1996), in issuing this rule, the EPA has taken the necessary steps to eliminate drafting errors and ambiguity, minimize potential litigation, and provide a clear legal standard for affected conduct. The EPA has complied with Executive Order 12630 (53 FR 8859, March 15, 1988) by examining the takings implications of the rule in accordance with the “Attorney General's Supplemental Guidelines for the Evaluation of Risk and Avoidance of Unanticipated Takings” issued under the executive order. This rule does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).

    Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, Feb. 16, 1994) establishes federal executive policy on environmental justice. Its main provision directs federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and permitted by law, to make environmental justice part of their mission by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs, policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income populations in the United States. Because this rule authorizes pre-existing State rules which are at least equivalent to, and no less stringent than existing federal requirements, and imposes no additional requirements beyond those imposed by State law, and there are no anticipated significant adverse human health or environmental effects, the rule is not subject to Executive Order 12898.

    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United States. The EPA will submit a report containing this document 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 in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal Register. This action is not a “major rule” as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). This action will be effective December 20, 2016.

    List of Subjects 40 CFR Part 271

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, Confidential business information, Hazardous waste, Hazardous waste transportation, Indian lands, Intergovernmental relations, Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    40 CFR Part 272

    Environmental protection, Hazardous materials transportation, Hazardous waste, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Water pollution control, Water supply.

    Authority:

    This rule is issued under the authority of Sections 2002(a), 3006 and 7004(b) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act as amended, 42 U.S.C. 6912(a), 6926, 6974(b).

    Dated: August 1, 2016. Ron Curry, Regional Administrator,Region 6.

    For the reasons set forth in the preamble, under the authority at 42 U.S.C. 6912(a), 6926, and 6974(b), the EPA is granting final authorization under part 271 to the State of Louisiana for revisions to its hazardous waste program under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act and is amending 40 CFR part 272 as follows.

    PART 272—APPROVED STATE HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS 1. The authority citation for part 272 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    Sections 2002(a), 3006, and 7004(b) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 6912(a), 6926, and 6974(b).

    2. Revise § 272.951 to read as follows:
    § 272.951 Louisiana State-administered program: Final authorization.

    (a) Pursuant to section 3006(b) of RCRA, 42 U.S.C. 6926(b), the EPA granted Louisiana final authorization for the following elements as submitted to EPA in Louisiana's base program application for final authorization which was approved by EPA effective on February 7, 1985. Subsequent program revision applications were approved effective on January 29, 1990, October 25, 1991 as corrected October 15, 1991; January 23, 1995 as corrected April 11, 1995; March 8, 1995; January 2, 1996; June 11, 1996, March 16, 1998, December 22, 1998, October 25, 1999, November 1, 1999, April 28, 2000, March 5, 2001, February 9, 2004, August 9, 2005, January 12, 2007, October 15, 2007, July 20, 2009, October 4, 2010, August 23, 2011, August 27, 2012, September 11, 2012, November 25, 2013, November 13, 2015 and December 20, 2016.

    (b) The State of Louisiana has primary responsibility for enforcing its hazardous waste management program. However, EPA retains the authority to exercise its inspection and enforcement authorities in accordance with sections 3007, 3008, 3013, 7003 of RCRA, 42 U.S.C. 6927, 6928, 6934, 6973, and any other applicable statutory and regulatory provisions, regardless of whether the State has taken its own actions, as well as in accordance with other statutory and regulatory provisions.

    (c) State Statutes and Regulations. (1) The Louisiana statutes and regulations cited in paragraph (c)(1)(i) of this section are incorporated by reference as part of the hazardous waste management program under subtitle C of RCRA, 42 U.S.C. 6921 et seq. The Director of the Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. You may obtain copies of the Louisiana regulations that are incorporated by reference in this paragraph from the Office of the State Register, P.O. Box 94095, Baton Rouge, LA 70804-9095; Phone number: (225) 342-5015; Web site: http://doa.louisiana.gov/osr/lac/lac.htm. The statutes are available from West Publishing Company, 610 Opperman Drive, P.O. Box 64526, St. Paul, Minnesota 55164 0526; Phone: 1-800-328-4880; Web site: http://west.thomson.com. You may inspect a copy at EPA Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202 (Phone number (214) 665-8533), or 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.

    (i) The binder entitled “EPA-Approved Louisiana Statutory and Regulatory Requirements Applicable to the Hazardous Waste Management Program,” dated November, 2015.

    (ii) [Reserved]

    (2) The following provisions provide the legal basis for the State's implementation of the hazardous waste management program, but they are not being incorporated by reference and do not replace Federal authorities:

    (i) Louisiana Statutes Annotated, Revised Statutes, 2000 Main Volume (effective August 15, 1999), Volume 17B, Subtitle II of Title 30, Louisiana Environmental Quality Act, 2000: Chapter 1, Section 2002; Chapter 2, Sections 2013, 2014.2, 2020, 2021, 2022.1(B), 2024, 2026 through 2029, 2033.A-D; Chapter 2-A, Section 2050.8; Chapter 9, Sections 2172, 2174, 2175, 2181, 2183.1.B, 2183.2, 2184.B, 2187, 2188.A and C, 2189.A and B, 2190.A-D, 2191.A-C, 2192, 2193, 2196, 2200, 2203.B and C, 2204.A(2), A(3) and B; Chapter 13, Sections 2294(6), 2295.C; Chapter 16, Section 2369.

    (ii) Louisiana Statutes Annotated, Revised Statutes, 2014 (effective August 1, 2013) Cumulative Annual Pocket Part, Volume 17B, Subtitle II of Title 30, Louisiana Environmental Quality Act: Chapter 2, 2011.A(1), 2011.B and C (except 2011.C(1)(b)), 2011.D (except 2011.D(4), (10)-(12), (16), (19), (20), (23) and (25)), 2011.E-G, 2012, 2014.A (except 2014.A.3), 2017, 2019.A-C, 2022.A (except the first sentence of 2022.A(1)), 2022.B and C, 2023 (except 2023.A(2) and phrase “Except as otherwise provided in this Subsection,” in 2023.A(1)), 2025 (except 2025.D, .F(3), .H and .K); Chapter 3, Sections 2054.B(1), 2054.B(2)(a); Chapter 9, Sections 2180.A-C, 2183.C, and .F-.H, 2186.A-C, 2199; Chapter 18, Section 2417.A.

    (iii) Louisiana Administrative Code, Title 33, Part I, Office of The Secretary Part I, Subpart 1: Departmental Administrative Procedures: Chapter 5, Sections 501.A, effective October 20, 2007, 501.B, effective October 20, 2005, 502, effective September 20, 2008, and 503 through 511, effective October 20, 2005; Chapter 7, Section 705, effective October 20, 2006; Chapter 19, Sections 1901 through 1909, effective November 20, 2010; Chapter 23, Sections 2303 through 2309, effective October 20, 2009.

    (iv) Louisiana Administrative Code, Title 33, Part V, Hazardous Waste and Hazardous Materials, Louisiana Hazardous Waste Regulations, dated September 2014, unless otherwise specified: Chapter 1, Sections 101, 107.A.-C; Chapter 3, Sections 301, 311.A, 311.C, 315 introductory paragraph, 323.B.3; 323.B.4.d and e; Chapter 5, Section, 503; Chapter 7, Sections 703, 705, 707, 709 through 721; and Chapter 22, Sections 2201.A, 2201.E, 2201.F.

    (3) The following statutory and regulatory provisions are broader in scope than the Federal program, are not part of the authorized program, and are not incorporated by reference:

    (i) Louisiana Statutes Annotated, Revised Statutes, 2000 Main Volume (effective August 15, 1999), Volume 17B, Subtitle II of Title 30, Louisiana Environmental Quality Act, 2000: Chapter 9, Sections 2178 and 2197.

    (ii) Louisiana Statutes Annotated, Revised Statutes, 2014 (effective August 1, 2013) Cumulative Annual Pocket Part, Volume 17B, Subtitle II of Title 30, Louisiana Environmental Quality Act: Chapter 2, Sections 2014.B and D.

    (iii) Louisiana Administrative Code, Title 33, Part I, Office of The Secretary Part I, Subpart 1: Departmental Administrative Procedures: Chapter 19, Section 1911, effective November 20, 2010.

    (iv) Louisiana Administrative Code, Title 33, Part V, Hazardous Waste And Hazardous Materials, Louisiana Hazardous Waste Regulations, dated September 2014, unless otherwise specified: Chapter 1, Section, 108.G.5; Chapter 3, Section 327; Chapter 11, Sections 1101.G and 1109.E.7.f ; Chapter 13, Section 1313; Chapter 51.

    (4) Unauthorized State Amendments. (i) Louisiana has adopted but is not authorized to implement the HSWA rules that are listed in the Table in lieu of the EPA. The EPA will enforce the Federal HSWA standards for which Louisiana is not authorized until the State receives specific authorization from EPA.

    Federal requirement Federal Register reference Publication date Exports of Hazardous Waste (HSWA) 51 FR 28664 August 8, 1986. HSWA Codification Rule 2: Post-Closure Permits (HSWA) 52 FR 45788 December 1, 1987. Imports and Exports of Hazardous Waste: Implementation of OECD Council Decision (HSWA) 61 FR 16290 April 12, 1996.

    (ii)(A) The following authorized provisions of the Louisiana regulations include amendments published in the Louisiana Register that are not approved by EPA. Such unauthorized amendments are not part of the State's authorized program and are, therefore, not Federally enforceable. Thus, notwithstanding the language in the Louisiana hazardous waste regulations incorporated by reference at paragraph (c)(1)(i) of this section, EPA will enforce the State provisions that are actually authorized by EPA. The effective dates of the State's authorized provisions are listed in the following Table.

    State provision Effective date of
  • authorized provision
  • LAC 1111.B.1.c March 20, 1984. LAC 1113 March 20, 1984. LAC 4407.A.12 March 20, 1984.

    (B) The actual State regulatory text authorized by EPA (i.e., without the unauthorized amendments) is available as a separate document, Addendum to the EPA-Approved Louisiana Regulatory and Statutory Requirements Applicable to the Hazardous Waste Management Program, dated November 2015. Copies of the document can be obtained from U.S. EPA Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, TX 75202 or Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality, 602 N. Fifth Street, Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70884-2178.

    (5) Vacated Federal Rules. Louisiana adopted and was authorized for the following Federal rules which have since been vacated by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (D.C. Cir. No. 98-1379 and 08-1144, respectively; June 27, 2014):

    Federal requirement Federal Register reference Publication date Hazardous Waste Combustors; Revised Standards (HSWA) (Checklist 168—40 CFR 261.4(a)(16) and 261.38 only) 63 FR 33782 June 19, 1998. Exclusion of Oil-Bearing Secondary Materials Processed in a Gasification System to Produce Synthesis Gas (Checklist 216—Definition of “Gasification” at 40 CFR 260.10 and amendment to 40 CFR 261.4(a)(12)(i)) 73 FR 57 January 2, 2008. Withdrawal of the Emission Comparable Fuel Exclusion under RCRA (Checklist 224—amendments to 40 CFR 261.4(a)(16) and 261.38) 7 FR 33712 June 15, 2010.

    (6) Memorandum of Agreement. The Memorandum of Agreement between EPA Region 6 and the State of Louisiana, signed by the Secretary of the State of Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality (LDEQ) on October 30, 2014 and the EPA Regional Administrator on August 21, 2015 is referenced as part of the authorized hazardous waste management program under subtitle C of RCRA, 42 U.S.C. 6921 et seq.

    (7) Statement of Legal Authority. “Attorney General's Statement for Final Authorization”, signed by the Attorney General of Louisiana on December, 13, 1996 and revisions, supplements and addenda to that Statement dated January 13, 1998, January 13, 1999, January 27, 1999, August 19, 1999, August 29, 2000, October 17, 2001, February 25, 2003, October 20, 2004, December 19, 2005, September 5, 2006, October 9, 2008, January 14, 2010, April 18, 2012, and June 11, 2014 are referenced as part of the authorized hazardous waste management program under subtitle C of RCRA, 42 U.S.C. 6921 et seq.

    (8) Program Description. The Program Description and any other materials submitted as part of the original application or as supplements thereto are referenced as part of the authorized hazardous waste management program under subtitle C of RCRA, 42 U.S.C. 6921 et seq.

    3. Appendix A to part 272 is amended by revising the listing for “Louisiana” to read as follows: Appendix A to Part 272—State Requirements Louisiana

    The statutory provisions include:

    Louisiana Statutes Annotated, Revised Statutes, 2000 Main Volume (effective August 15, 1999), Volume 17B, Subtitle II of Title 30, Louisiana Environmental Quality Act, 2000: Chapter 2, Section 2022.1(A); Chapter 8, Section 2153(1); Chapter 9, Sections 2173 (except 2173(9)), 2183.1.A, 2184.A, 2188.B, 2189.C, 2202, 2203.A, 2204.A(1) and C; Chapter 13, Sections 2295.A and B.

    Louisiana Statutes Annotated, Revised Statutes, 2014 (effective August 1, 2013) Cumulative Annual Pocket Part, Volume 17B, Subtitle II of Title 30, Louisiana Environmental Quality Act: Chapter 1, Sections 2003, 2004 introductory paragraph, 2004(2)-(4), 2004(7)-(10), 2004(13), 2004(14) (except 2004(14)(b)-(d)), 2004(15), 2004(18); Chapter 2, Section 2022.A(1), first sentence; Chapter 9, Sections 2183.A, B, D, E, and I; Chapter 18, Section 2417.E(5).

    Copies of the Louisiana statutes that are incorporated by reference are available from West Publishing Company, 610 Opperman Drive, Eagan, Minnesota 55123; Phone: 1-800-328-4880; Web site: http://west.thomson.com.

    The regulatory provisions include:

    Louisiana Administrative Code, Title 33, Part V, Hazardous Waste and Hazardous Materials, Louisiana Hazardous Waste Regulations, Part V, Subpart 1: Department of Environmental Quality—Hazardous Waste, dated September 2014. Please note that for some provisions, the authorized version is found in the LAC, Title 33, Part V, dated September 2011, December 31, 2009 or June 1995.

    Chapter 1—General Provisions And Definitions, Sections 103; 105 (except the phrase “, gasification (as defined in LAC 33:V.109)” in 105.D.1.l.i, 105.D.1.q, and 105.P); 108 (except 108.G.5); 109 (except “Batch tank”, “Competent Authorities”, “Concerned Countries”, “Continuous flow tank”, “Country of Export”, “Country of Import”, “Country of Transit”, “EPA Acknowledgement of Consent”, “Exporter”, “Exporting Country”, “Gasification”, “Importer”, “Importing Country”, “OECD”, “Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) Area”, “Primary Exporter”, “Receiving Country”, “Recognized Trader”, “Recovery Facility”, “Recovery Operations”, “Transboundary Movement”, “Transit Country”); 110 (except 110.G.1 and reserved provisions); 111;

    Chapter 3—General Conditions for Treatment, Storage, and Disposal Facility Permits, Sections 303; 305 (except 305.F and .G); 307; 309; 311 (except 311.A and .C); 313; 315.A-.D; 317; 319; 321.A (except the phrase “and in accordance with LAC 33.I.Chapter 15”); 321.B and .C; 322 (except 322.D.1.g); 323 (except 323.B.3, .B.4.d and .e); 325; 329;

    Chapter 5—Permit Application Contents, Sections 501; 505 through 516; 517 (except the following phrases in 517.V: “or 2271, or a determination made under LAC 33:V.2273,” and, “or a determination”); 519 through 528; 529 (except 529.E); 530 through 536; 537 (except 537.B.2.f and .B.2.l); 540 through 699;

    Chapter 7—Administrative Procedures for Treatment, Storage, and Disposal Facility Permits, Sections 701; 706; 708;

    Chapter 11—Generators, Sections 1101 (except 1101.B and .G); 1103; 1105; 1107 (except reserved provision); 1109 (except 1109.E.1 introductory paragraph, .E.1.a.ii, .E.1.a.iv, .E.1.b, .E.1.c, .E.7.f, and reserved provision); 1109.E.1 introductory paragraph (September 2011); 1109.E.1.a.ii (December 31, 2009); 1109.E.1.a.iv, .E.1.b, and .E.1.c (September 2011); 1111.A; 1111.B.1 introductory paragraph (except the phrase “to a treatment, storage, or disposal facility within the United States”); 1111.B.1.a.-.c; 1111.B.1.d (except the phrase “within the United States”); 1111.B.1.e (except the phrase “within the United States”); 1111.B.1.f.-.h; 1111.B.2 (except the phrase “for a period of at least three years from the date of the report” and the third and fourth sentences); 1111.C-.E; 1113; 1121; 1199 Appendix A;

    Chapter 13—Transporters, Sections 1301 (except 1301.F); 1303; 1305; 1307.A introductory paragraph (except the third sentence); 1307.B; 1307.C (except the last sentence); 1307.D; 1307.E (except the phrase “and, for exports, an EPA Acknowledgment of Consent” at .E.2); 1307.F (except the phrase “and, for exports, an EPA Acknowledgment of Consent” at 1307.F.2); 1307.G (except 1307.G.4); 1307.H; 1309; 1311; 1315 through 1323;

    Chapter 15—Treatment, Storage, and Disposal Facilities, Sections 1501 (except reserved provision); 1503 through 1529; 1531 (except 1531.B); 1533; 1535;

    Chapter 17—Air Emission Standards, Sections 1701 through 1799; Appendix Table 1;

    Chapter 18—Containment Buildings, Sections 1801; 1802; 1803 (except 1803.B.2);

    Chapter 19—Tanks, Sections 1901 (December 31, 2009); 1903; 1905; 1907.A-.D; 1907.E (December 31, 2009); 1907.F-.I; 1909.A-.C; 1911 through 1921;

    Chapter 20—Integration With Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT), Section 2001;

    Chapter 21—Containers, Sections 2101 through 2119;

    Chapter 22—Prohibitions On Land Disposal, Sections 2201.B-.D; 2201.G (except 2201.G.3); 2201.H; 2201.I; 2203.A (except “Cone of Influence”, “Confining Zone”, “Formation”, “Injection Interval”, “Injection Zone”, “Mechanical Integrity”, “Transmissive Fault or Fracture”, “Treatment”, “Underground Source of Drinking Water”); 2203.B; 2205 (except the phrase “or a determination made under LAC 33:V.2273,” in 2205.D); 2207; 2208; 2209 (except the phrase “or a determination made under LAC 33:V.2273,” in 2209.D.1); 2211; 2213; 2215; 2216 (except the phrase “or 2271” in 2216.E.2); 2218 (except the phrase “or 2271” in 2218.B.2); 2219; 2221.D-.F; 2223; 2227 (except 2227.B), 2230, 2231.G-.M, 2233, 2236, 2237, 2245.A-I.; 2246; 2247 (except 2247.G and .H); 2299 Appendix (except Tables 4 and 12);

    Chapter 23—Waste Piles, Sections 2301 through 2313; 2315 (except the word “either” at the end of 2315.B introductory paragraph; the word “or” at the end of 2315.B.1; and 2315.B.2); 2317;

    Chapter 24—Hazardous Waste Munitions And Explosives Storage, Sections 2401 through 2405;

    Chapter 25—Landfills, Sections 2501 through 2523;

    Chapter 26—Corrective Action Management Units And Temporary Units, Sections 2601 through 2607;

    Chapter 27—Land Treatment, Sections 2701 through 2723;

    Chapter 28—Drip Pads, Sections 2801 through 2807; 2809 (except the word “either” at the end of 2809.B introductory paragraph; the word “or” at the end of 2809.B.1; and 2809.B.2);

    Chapter 29—Surface Impoundments, Sections 2901 through 2909; 2911 (except the word “either” at end of 2911.B introductory paragraph and 2911.B.1); 2913 through 2919;

    Chapter 30—Hazardous Waste Burned In Boilers And Industrial Furnaces, Sections 3001 through 3007; 3009 (except reserved provision); 3011 through 3025; 3099 Appendices A through L;

    Chapter 31—Incinerators, Sections 3101 through 3121;

    Chapter 32—Miscellaneous Units, Sections 3201; 3203; 3205; 3207 (except 3207.C.2);

    Chapter 33—Groundwater Protection, Sections 3301 through 3321; 3322 (except 3322.D); 3323; 3325;

    Chapter 35—Closure and Post-Closure, Sections 3501 through 3505; 3507 (except 3507.B); 3509 through 3519; 3521 (except 3521.A.3); 3523 through 3527;

    Chapter 37—Financial Requirements, Sections 3701 through 3719;

    Chapter 38—Universal Wastes, Sections 3801 through 3811; 3813 (except “Mercury-containing Lamp”); 3815 through 3833; 3835 (except the phrase “, other than to those OECD countries . . . requirements of LAC 33:V.Chapter 11.Subchapter B),” at 3835.A introductory paragraph); 3837 through 3855; 3857 (except the phrase “, other than to those OECD countries . . . requirements of LAC 33:V.Chapter 11.Subchapter B),” at 3857.A introductory paragraph); 3859 through 3869; 3871 (except the phrase “other than to those OECD countries . . . requirements of LAC 33:V.Chapter 11.Subchapter B)” at 3871.A introductory paragraph); 3873 through 3877; 3879 (except 3879.B); 3881; 3883;

    Chapter 40—Used Oil, Sections 4001 through 4093;

    Chapter 41—Recyclable Materials, Sections 4101; 4105 (except.A.1.a.i and ii, and .A.4); 4139; 4141; 4143 (except the word “and” at the end of 4143.B.4; and 4143.B.5); 4145;

    Chapter 42—Conditional Exemption for Low-Level Mixed Waste Storage and Disposal, Sections 4201 through 4243;

    Chapter 43—Interim Status, Sections 4301.A; 4301.B (June 1995); 4301.B; 4301.C (June 1995); 4301.C -.I; 4302 through 4371; 4373 (except the last two sentences “The administrative authority . . . as demonstrated in accordance with LAC 33:I.Chapter 13.” in 4373.K.1); 4375; 4377; 4379 (except 4379.B); 4381 through 4387; 4389 (except 4389.C); 4391 through 4397; 4399 (except 4399.A.6.i); 4401 through 4413; 4417 through 4435; 4437 (except 4437.E.1, 4437.E.2, and 4437.J); 4437.E.1 and .E.2 (December 31, 2009); 4438 through 4456; 4457.A (except 4457.A.2); 4457.B (except the phrase: “If the owner or operator . . . he must” in the introductory paragraph); 4457.C; 4459 through 4474; 4475 (except the word “either” at the end of 4475.B introductory paragraph; the word “or” at the end of 4475.B.1; and 4475.B.2); 4476 through 4499; 4501 (except 4501.D.3); 4502 through 4703; 4705 (except the word “either” at the end of 4705.B introductory paragraph; the word “or” at the end of 4705.B.1; and 4705.B.2); 4707 through 4739;

    Chapter 49—Lists Of Hazardous Wastes, Sections 4901; 4903; 4907; 4911 through 4915; 4999 Appendices C through E;

    Chapter 53—Military Munitions, Sections 5301 through 5311;

    Louisiana Administrative Code, Title 33, Part VII, Solid Waste, as amended through June 2011; Sections 301.A.2.a and 315.J.

    Copies of the Louisiana Administrative Code as published by the Office of the State Register, P. O. Box 94095, Baton Rouge, LA 70804-9095; Phone: (225) 342-5015; Web site: http://doa.louisiana.gov/osr/lac/lac.htm.

    [FR Doc. 2016-25318 Filed 10-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 46 CFR Part 106 [Docket No. USCG-2015-0086] RIN 1625-AC23 Requirements for Vessels With Registry Endorsements or Foreign-Flagged Vessels That Perform Certain Aquaculture Support Operations AGENCY:

    Coast Guard, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Final rule; information collection approval.

    SUMMARY:

    The Coast Guard announces that it has received approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for an information collection request associated with the Requirements for Vessels with Registry Endorsements or Foreign-Flagged Vessels that Perform Certain Aquaculture Support Operations final rule we published in the Federal Register on September 15, 2016. In that rule, we stated the final rule will impose a new information collection requirement and that we would submit this new information collection requirement to OMB for its review. OMB approved this new collection of information on September 28, 2016, and assigned it OMB Control Number 1625-0126.

    DATES:

    On September 28, 2016, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) approved the Coast Guard's collection of information request associated with the Requirements for Vessels with Registry Endorsements or Foreign-Flagged Vessels that Perform Certain Aquaculture Support Operations final rule published on September 15, 2016 at 81 FR 63420. OMB's approval for this collection of information expires on September 30, 2019.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    If you have questions on this rule, call or email Mr. David Belliveau, Fishing Vessels Division (CG-CVC-3), U.S. Coast Guard; telephone 202-372-1247, email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Viewing Items Associated With This Document

    To view OMB's approval memo or the Requirements for Vessels with Registry Endorsements or Foreign-Flagged Vessels that Perform Certain Aquaculture Support Operations final rule, go to www.regulations.gov, type the docket number, USCG-2015-0086, in the “SEARCH” box and click “SEARCH.” Click on “Open Docket Folder” in the first item listed. Use the following link to go directly to the docket: http://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=USCG-2015-0086.

    Background

    On September 15, 2016, the Coast Guard published a final rule (81 FR 63420) that implemented Requirements for Vessels with Registry Endorsements or Foreign-Flagged Vessels that Perform Certain Aquaculture Support Operations. Section 46 CFR 106.115 in that rule contains a collection-of-information provision that requires approval by OMB under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3501-3520. On September 28, 2016, OMB approved the Coast Guard's collection of information request for this final rule and assigned OMB Control Number 1625-0126 to the collection. The approval for this collection of information expires on September 30, 2019.

    This document is issued under the authority of 5 U.S.C. 552(a).

    Dated: October 15, 2016. V.B. Gifford, Jr., Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Director of Inspections and Compliance.
    [FR Doc. 2016-25364 Filed 10-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION 48 CFR Part 52 [FAC 2005-91; FAR Case 2014-018; Corrections; Docket 2014-0018; Sequence No. 1] Federal Acquisition Regulation; Contractors Performing Private Security Functions; Corrections AGENCY:

    Department of Defense (DoD), General Services Administration (GSA), and National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA).

    ACTION:

    Final rule; correction.

    SUMMARY:

    DoD, GSA, and NASA are issuing a correction to FAC 2005-91; FAR Case 2014-018; Contractors Performing Private Security Functions; (Item IX), which was published in the Federal Register at 81 FR 67776, on September 30, 2016. This correction corrects paragraph designations.

    DATES:

    Effective: October 31, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Mr. Michael O. Jackson, Procurement Analyst, at 202-208-4949, for clarification of content. For information pertaining to status or publication schedules, contact the Regulatory Secretariat at 202-501-4755. Please cite FAC 2005-91, FAR Case 2014-018; Corrections.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Corrections

    In rule FR Doc. 2016-23203, published in the Federal Register at 81 FR 67776, on September 30, 2016, make the following corrections:

    52.212-5 [Corrected]
    1. On page 67777, in the center column, correct amendatory instruction number 6.b. by removing from paragraph 3. “paragraph (e)(1)(ii)(T)” and adding “paragraph (e)(1)(ii)(O)” in its place; and 2. On page 67777, in the third column, in Alternate II, redesignate paragraph “(e)(1)(ii)(T)” as paragraph “(e)(1)(ii)(O)”. Authority:

    40 U.S.C. 121(c); 10 U.S.C. chapter 137; and 51 U.S.C. 20113.

    Dated: October 17, 2016. William Clark, Director, Office of Government-wide Acquisition Policy, Office of Acquisition Policy, Office of Government-wide Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-25548 Filed 10-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6820-EP-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Defense Acquisition Regulations System 48 CFR Parts 204, 246, and 252 [Docket DARS-2016-0023] Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement; Technical Amendments AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

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

    DATES:

    Effective October 21, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

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

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This final rule amends the DFARS as follows—

    1. Provides direction to contracting officers at DFARS 204.270-2(c) to follow the procedures at DFARS Procedures, Guidance, and Information (PGI) 204.270-2(c) regarding the creation and processing of contract deficiency reports;

    2. Corrects a reference at DFARS 246.870-2(a)(2) to the clause at 252.246-7008, Sources of Electronic Parts; and

    3. Corrects a reference at DFARS 252.246-7008(b)(3)(i) to another paragraph of the clause.

    List of Subjects in 48 CFR 204, 246, and 252

    Government procurement.

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

    Therefore, 48 CFR parts 204, 246, and 252 are amended as follows:

    1. The authority citation for 48 CFR parts 204, 246, and 252 continues to read as follows: Authority:

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

    PART 204—ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS
    204.270 [Amended]
    2. Amend section 204.270-2 by— a. Redesignating the introductory text as paragraph (b); b. In the newly redesignated paragraph (b), removing “contract documents” and adding “contract documents and data” in its place; and c. Adding paragraph (c).

    The addition reads as follows:

    204.270-2 Procedures

    (c) The procedures at PGI 204.270-2(c) provide details on the creation and processing of contract deficiency reports, which are used to correct problems with contracts distributed in EDA.

    PART 246—QUALITY ASSURANCE
    246.870-2 [Amended]
    3. Amend section 204.870-2(a)(2) introductory text by removing “(b)(3)(ii) through (b)(3)(iv)” and adding “(b)(3)(ii)” in its place. PART 252—SOLICITATION PROVISIONS AND CONTRACT CLAUSES
    252.246-7008 [Amended]
    4. Amend section 252.246-7008 by— a. Removing the clause date “(AUG 2016)” and adding “(OCT 2016)” in its place; and b. In paragraph (b)(3)(i) introductory text, removing “paragraphs (b)(3)(ii) through (b)(3)(iv)” and adding “paragraph (b)(3)(ii)” in its place.
    [FR Doc. 2016-25425 Filed 10-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001-06-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration 49 CFR Part 192 [Docket No. PHMSA-2011-0009; Amdt. No 192-121] RIN 2137-AE71 Pipeline Safety: Expanding the Use of Excess Flow Valves in Gas Distribution Systems to Applications Other Than Single-Family Residences Correction

    In rule document 2016-24817, appearing on pages 70987 through 71002 in the issue of Friday, October 14, 2016, make the following correction:

    § 192.383 Excess flow valve installation.
    On page 71001, in the third column, in paragraph § 192.383 (b), on the fourth line, “April 17, 2016” should read “April 14, 2017”.
    [FR Doc. C1-2016-24817 Filed 10-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 1301-00-D
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 50 CFR Part 679 [Docket No. 150916863-6211-02] RIN 0648-XE950 Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Pacific Ocean Perch in the Bering Sea Subarea of the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Management Area AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Temporary rule; modification of a closure.

    SUMMARY:

    NMFS is opening directed fishing for Pacific ocean perch in the Bering Sea subarea of the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands management area. This action is necessary to fully use the 2016 total allowable catch of Pacific ocean perch specified for the Bering Sea subarea of the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands management area.

    DATES:

    Effective 1200 hrs, Alaska local time (A.l.t.), October 20, 2016, through 1200 hrs, A.l.t., December 31, 2016. Comments must be received at the following address no later than 4:30 p.m., A.l.t., November 4, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments on this document, identified by FDMS Docket Number 2015-0118 by any of the following methods:

    Electronic Submission: Submit all electronic public comments via the Federal e-Rulemaking Portal. Go to http://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=NOAA-NMFS-2015-0118, click the “Comment Now!” icon, complete the required fields, and enter or attach your comments.

    Mail: Submit written comments to Glenn Merrill, Assistant Regional Administrator, Sustainable Fisheries Division, Alaska Region NMFS, Attn: Ellen Sebastian. Mail comments to P.O. Box 21668, Juneau, AK 99802-1668.

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

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Josh Keaton, 907-586-7228.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

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

    NMFS closed directed fishing for Pacific ocean perch (POP) in the Bering Sea subarea of the BSAI under § 679.20(d)(1)(iii) (81 FR 14773; March 18, 2016).

    NMFS has determined that approximately 4,280 metric tons of POP remain in the directed fishing allowance. Therefore, in accordance with § 679.25(a)(1)(i), (a)(2)(i)(C), and (a)(2)(iii)(D), and to fully utilize the 2016 total allowable catch of POP in the Bering Sea subarea of the BSAI, NMFS is terminating the previous closure and is opening directed fishing for POP in Bering Sea subarea of the BSAI, effective 1200 hrs, A.l.t., October 20, 2016, through 1200 hrs, A.l.t., December 31, 2016. This will enhance the socioeconomic well-being of harvesters dependent on POP in this area.

    The Administrator, Alaska Region considered the following factors in reaching this decision: (1) The current catch of POP in the BSAI and, (2) the harvest capacity and stated intent on future harvesting patterns of vessels participating in this fishery.

    Classification

    This action responds to the best available information recently obtained from the fishery. The Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, NOAA (AA), finds good cause to waive the requirement to provide prior notice and opportunity for public comment pursuant to the authority set forth at 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), as such requirement is impracticable and contrary to the public interest. This requirement is impracticable and contrary to the public interest as it would prevent NMFS from responding to the most recent fisheries data in a timely fashion and would delay the opening of POP directed fishing in the Bering Sea subarea of the BSAI. NMFS was unable to publish a notice providing time for public comment because the most recent, relevant data only became available as of October 17, 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.

    Without this inseason adjustment, NMFS could not allow the fishery for POP in the Bering Sea subarea of the BSAI to be harvested in an expedient manner and in accordance with the regulatory schedule. Under § 679.25(c)(2), interested persons are invited to submit written comments on this action to the above address until November 4, 2016.

    This action is required by §§ 679.20 and 679.25 and is exempt from review under Executive Order 12866.

    Authority:

    16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

    Dated: October 18, 2016. Emily H. Menashes, Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2016-25505 Filed 10-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 50 CFR Part 679 [Docket No. 150916863-6211-02] RIN 0648-XE969 Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Exchange of Flatfish in the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Management Area AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Temporary rule; reallocation.

    SUMMARY:

    NMFS is exchanging unused flathead sole and rock sole Community Development Quota (CDQ) for yellowfin sole CDQ acceptable biological catch (ABC) reserves in the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands management area. This action is necessary to allow the 2016 total allowable catch of yellowfin sole in the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands management area to be harvested.

    DATES:

    Effective October 21, 2016 through December 31, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Steve Whitney, 907-586-7228.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

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

    The 2016 flathead sole, rock sole, and yellowfin sole CDQ reserves specified in the BSAI are 1,537 metric tons (mt), 5,215 mt, and 17,013 mt as established by the final 2016 and 2017 harvest specifications for groundfish in the BSAI (81 FR 14773, March 18, 2016) and following revision (81 FR 69442, October 6, 2016). The 2016 flathead sole, rock sole, and yellowfin sole CDQ ABC reserves are 5,552 mt, 12,023 mt, and 5,639 mt as established by the final 2016 and 2017 harvest specifications for groundfish in the BSAI (81 FR 14773, March 18, 2016) and following revision (81 FR 69442, October 6, 2016).

    The Bristol Bay Economic Development Corporation has requested that NMFS exchange 304 mt of flathead sole and 245 mt of rock sole CDQ reserves for 549 mt of yellowfin sole CDQ ABC reserves under § 679.31(d). Therefore, in accordance with § 679.31(d), NMFS exchanges 304 mt of flathead sole, 245 mt of rock sole CDQ reserves for 549 mt of yellowfin sole CDQ ABC reserves in the BSAI. This action also decreases and increases the TACs and CDQ ABC reserves by the corresponding amounts. Tables 11 and 13 of the final 2016 and 2017 harvest specifications for groundfish in the BSAI (81 FR 14773, March 18, 2016), and following revision (81 FR 69442, October 6, 2016), are revised as follows:

    Table 11—Final 2016 Community Development Quota (CDQ) Reserves, Incidental Catch Amounts (ICAS), and Amendment 80 Allocations of the Aleutian Islands Pacific Ocean Perch, and BSAI Flathead Sole, Rock Sole, and Yellowfin Sole TACS [Amounts are in metric tons] Sector Pacific ocean perch Eastern
  • Aleutian
  • District
  • Central
  • Aleutian
  • District
  • Western
  • Aleutian
  • District
  • Flathead sole BSAI Rock sole BSAI Yellowfin sole BSAI
    TAC 7,900 7,000 9,000 16,086 54,935 151,079 CDQ 845 749 963 1,233 4,970 17,562 ICA 200 75 10 5,000 6,000 3,500 BSAI trawl limited access 685 618 161 0 0 14,979 Amendment 80 6,169 5,558 7,866 9,853 43,965 115,038 Alaska Groundfish Cooperative 3,271 2,947 4,171 1,411 11,129 43,748 Alaska Seafood Cooperative 2,898 2,611 3,695 8,442 32,836 71,290 Note: Sector apportionments may not total precisely due to rounding.
    Table 13—Final 2016 and 2017 ABC Surplus, Community Development Quota (CDQ) ABC Reserves, and Amendment 80 ABC Reserves in the BSAI for Flathead Sole, Rock Sole, and Yellowfin Sole [Amounts are in metric tons] Sector 2016
  • Flathead sole
  • 2016
  • Rock sole
  • 2016
  • Yellowfin sole
  • 2017
  • Flathead sole
  • 2017
  • Rock sole
  • 2017
  • Yellowfin sole
  • ABC 66,250 161,100 211,700 64,580 145,000 203,500 TAC 16,086 54,935 151,079 21,000 57,100 144,000 ABC surplus 50,164 106,165 60,621 43,580 87,900 59,500 ABC reserve 50,164 106,165 60,621 43,580 87,900 59,500 CDQ ABC reserve 5,856 12,268 5,090 4,663 9,405 6,367 Amendment 80 ABC reserve 44,308 93,897 55,531 38,917 78,495 53,134 Alaska Groundfish Cooperative for 2016 1 4,145 22,974 24,019 n/a n/a n/a Alaska Seafood Cooperative for 2016 1 40,163 70,923 31,512 n/a n/a n/a 1 The 2017 allocations for Amendment 80 species between Amendment 80 cooperatives and the Amendment 80 limited access sector will not be known until eligible participants apply for participation in the program by November 1, 2016.
    Classification

    This action responds to the best available information recently obtained from the fishery. The Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, NOAA (AA), finds good cause to waive the requirement to provide prior notice and opportunity for public comment pursuant to the authority set forth at 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B) as such requirement is impracticable and contrary to the public interest. This requirement is impracticable and contrary to the public interest as it would prevent NMFS from responding to the most recent fisheries data in a timely fashion and would delay the flatfish exchange by the Bristol Bay Economic Development Corporation in the BSAI. Since these fisheries are currently open, it is important to immediately inform the industry as to the revised allocations. Immediate notification is necessary to allow for the orderly conduct and efficient operation of this fishery, to allow the industry to plan for the fishing season, and to avoid potential disruption to the fishing fleet as well as processors. NMFS was unable to publish a notice providing time for public comment because the most recent, relevant data only became available as of October 12, 2016.

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

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

    Authority:

    16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

    Dated: October 17, 2016. Emily H. Menashes, Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2016-25446 Filed 10-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    81 204 Friday, October 21, 2016 Proposed Rules DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2016-9254; Directorate Identifier 2015-CE-030-AD] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Piper Aircraft, Inc. Airplanes AGENCY:

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

    SUMMARY:

    We propose to supersede Airworthiness Directive (AD) 95-26-13, which applies to certain Piper Aircraft, Inc. Models PA-28-140, PA-28-150, PA-28-151, PA-28-161, PA-28-160, PA-28-180, PA-28-181, PA-28-235, PA-28-236, PA-28R-180, PA-28R-200, PA-28R-201, PA-28S-160, PA-28S-180, PA-32-260, PA-32-300, PA-32-301, PA-32-301T, PA-32R-300, PA-32R-301 (SP), PA-32R-301 (HP), PA-32R-301T, PA-32RT-300, PA-32RT-300T, and PA-32S-300 airplanes equipped with oil cooler hose assemblies that do not meet certain technical standard order (TSO) requirements. AD 95-26-13 requires inspections, replacement, and adjustment of the oil cooler hose assemblies, as well as providing for a terminating action. Since we issued AD 95-26-13, the FAA has received requests to clarify the intent of AD 95-26-13. This proposed AD would maintain all of the actions required by AD 95-26-13 and add language to clarify those requirements. We are proposing this AD to prevent rupture or failure of the oil cooler hose assemblies, which could result in engine stoppage with consequent loss of control.

    DATES:

    We must receive comments on this proposed AD by December 5, 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.

    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-2016-9254; 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:

    Gary Wechsler, Aerospace Engineer, FAA, Atlanta Aircraft Certification Office, 1701 Columbia Avenue, College Park, Georgia 30337; telephone: (404) 474-5575; fax: (404) 474-5606; email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include “Docket No. FAA-2016-9254; Directorate Identifier 2015-CE-030-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

    On December 19, 1995, we issued AD 95-26-13, Amendment 39-9472 (60 FR 67321, December 29, 1995) (“AD 95-26-13”), for certain Piper Aircraft, Inc. Models PA-28-140, PA-28-150, PA-28-151, PA-28-161, PA-28-160, PA-28-180, PA-28-181, PA-28-235, PA-28-236, PA-28R-180, PA-28R-200, PA-28R-201, PA-28S-160, PA-28S-180, PA-32-260, PA-32-300, PA-32-301, PA-32-301T, PA-32R-300, PA-32R-301 (SP), PA-32R-301 (HP), PA-32R-301T, PA-32RT-300, PA-32RT-300T, and PA-32S-300 airplanes equipped with oil cooler hose assemblies that do not meet TSO-C53a Type D requirements. AD 95-26-13 requires repetitive inspections of the oil cooler hose assemblies for deterioration; replacement of the hose assemblies if damage is found; inspection for a minimum clearance between the oil cooler assemblies and the front exhaust stacks, depending on oil cooler location; and adjustment of the clearance if minimum clearance is not found. AD 95-26-13 also provides the option of installing TSO-C53a Type D oil cooler hose assemblies as a terminating action for the repetitive inspections. AD 95-26-13 resulted from numerous incidents/accidents caused by rupture or failure of the oil cooler hose assemblies. We issued AD 95-26-13 to prevent rupture or failure of the oil cooler hose assemblies, which could result in engine stoppage with consequent loss of control.

    Actions Since AD 95-26-13 Was Issued

    The FAA received several recent inquiries repeatedly asking for clarification of the AD's applicability and compliance requirements. For example, the AD did not apply to airplanes equipped with TSO-C53a Type D specification oil cooler hoses, yet, callers repeatedly asked whether the AD applied to airplanes with such hoses. It became apparent that a rewrite of the AD was necessary to stem the mounting time engineers were spending researching and responding to the inquiries. The FAA believes that the proposed NPRM will provide the level of clarification necessary to prevent similar inquiries in the future.

    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 retain all of the requirements of AD 95-26-13 and add language to clarify those requirements.

    Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD affects 23,643 airplanes of U.S. registry.

    This proposed AD retains the same actions as AD 95-26-13 and the proposed costs do not add any cost burden than that already in effect by AD 95-26-13. The difference in the Costs of Compliance with the proposed AD and AD 95-26-13 is that we use $85 an hour as a labor rate in 2016 as opposed to $60 per hour in 1995.

    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
    Inspection of the oil cooler hose assembly 1 work-hour × $85 per hour = $85 Not applicable $85 $2,009,655. Inspection of the clearance between the oil cooler hose assembly and the front exhaust stacks .5 work-hour × $85 per hour = $42.50 Not applicable $42.50 $1,004,827.50 See note 1 to Cost of Compliance. Replacement of the oil cooler hose assembly 1 work-hour × $85 per hour = $85 $430 $515 $12,176,145.

    Note to Costs of Compliance: The estimated cost of the inspection of the clearance between the oil cooler hose assembly and the front exhaust stacks is for all airplanes affected by this proposed AD; however, the inspection applies only to airplanes with the oil cooler mounted in a location other than at or aft of the rear of the engine. We have no way of knowing how many affected airplanes have that particular installation.

    We estimate the following costs to do any necessary adjustments that would be required based on the results of the proposed inspection. We have no way of determining the number of aircraft that might need these adjustments:

    On-Condition Costs Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per
  • product
  • Adjustment of the clearance between the oil cooler hose assembly and the front exhaust stacks 1 work-hour × $85 per hour = $85 Not applicable $85
    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 have 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 that the proposed regulation:

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

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

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

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

    List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

    The Proposed Amendment

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

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

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

    § 39.13 [Amended]
    2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by removing Airworthiness Directive (AD) 95-26-13, Amendment 39-9472 (60 FR 67321, December 29, 1995), and adding the following new AD: Piper Aircraft, Inc.: Docket No. FAA-2016-9254; Directorate Identifier 2015-CE-030-AD. (a) Comments Due Date

    The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by December 5, 2016.

    (b) Affected ADs

    This AD replaces AD 95-26-13, Amendment 39-9472 (60 FR 67321, December 29, 1995) (“AD 95-26-13”).

    (c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Piper Aircraft, Inc. Models PA-28-140, PA-28-150, PA-28-151, PA-28-161, PA-28-160, PA-28-180, PA-28-181, PA-28-235, PA-28-236, PA-28R-180, PA-28R-200, PA-28R-201, PA-28S-160, PA-28S-180, PA-32-260, PA-32-300, PA-32-301, PA-32-301T, PA-32R-300, PA-32R-301 (SP), PA-32R-301 (HP), PA-32R-301T, PA-32RT-300, PA-32RT-300T, and PA-32S-300 airplanes, all serial numbers, that are:

    (1) Equipped with oil cooler hose assemblies that do not meet TSO-C53a, Type D requirements; and

    (2) Certificated in any category.

    (d) Subject

    Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC)/Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 79, Engine Oil.

    (e) Unsafe Condition

    AD 95-26-13 was prompted by numerous incidents/accidents caused by rupture or failure of the oil cooler hose assemblies. This AD action was prompted by requests to clarify the intent of AD 95-26-13. We are issuing this AD to prevent rupture or failure of the oil cooler hose assemblies, which could result in engine stoppage with consequent loss of control.

    (f) Compliance

    Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified, unless already done. You may review the flow chart found in appendix 1 to assist you in complying with the actions of this AD.

    (g) Oil Cooler Mounted at or Aft of the Rear of the Engine

    For applicable airplanes with the oil cooler mounted at or aft of the rear of the engine (See figure 1 to paragraphs (g) and (h)): Within the next 100 hours time-in-service (TIS) after February 5, 1996 (the effective date retained from AD 95-26-13), and repetitively thereafter at intervals not to exceed 100 hours TIS, inspect the oil cooler hose assembly for oil soaked in the fire sleeve of the oil hose assembly, a brownish or whitish color of the fire sleeve of the oil hose assembly, and any evidence of brittleness or deterioration of the fire sleeve of the oil hose assembly as a result of heat or oil seepage.

    EP21OC16.000

    (1) If any of the conditions described in paragraph (g) of this AD are found on the oil cooler hose assembly during the inspection required in paragraph (g) of this AD, before further flight, replace the oil cooler hose assembly with TSO-C53a Type D oil cooler hose assembly or TSO-C53a Type C oil cooler hose assembly that has been inspected following paragraph (g) of this AD and found to be airworthy.

    (2) Replacement of the oil cooler hose assembly with TSO-C53a Type D oil cooler hose assembly is terminating action for this AD.

    Note 1 to paragraphs (g) and (h)(1) of this AD:

    Although not required by this AD, the FAA recommends that an oil cooler assembly flexibility test be done at 100-hour TIS intervals. Oil cooler hose assembly flexibility may be determined by gently lifting each oil cooler hose assembly in several places from the bottom of its downward arc to the oil cooler. If the oil cooler hose assembly moves slightly either from side-to-side or upward, with the hand at the center of an even arc, then some flexibility remains. If the oil cooler hose assembly appears hardened or inflexible, replacement is recommended.

    Note 2 to paragraphs (g)(1), (h)(1)(i), and (i) of this AD:

    If one of the oil cooler hose assemblies requires replacing, the FAA recommends replacing both of the oil cooler hose assemblies to simplify tracking the TIS of the assemblies.

    (h) Oil Cooler Mounted in Location Other Than Aft of the Rear of the Engine

    (1) For applicable airplanes with the oil cooler mounted in a location other than at or aft of the rear of the engine (See figure 1 to paragraphs (g) and (h)): Within the next 100 hours TIS after February 5, 1996 (the effective date retained from AD 95-26-13), and repetitively thereafter at intervals not to exceed 100 hours TIS, inspect the oil cooler hose assembly for oil soaked in the fire sleeve of the oil hose assembly, a brownish or whitish color of the fire sleeve of the oil hose assembly, and any evidence of brittleness or deterioration of the fire sleeve of the oil hose assembly as a result of heat or oil seepage.

    (2) If any of the conditions described in paragraph (h)(1) of this AD are found on the oil cooler hose assembly during the inspection required in paragraph (h)(1) of this AD, before further flight, replace the oil cooler hose assembly with TSO-C53a Type D oil cooler hose assembly or TSO-C53a Type C oil cooler hose assembly that has been inspected following paragraph (h)(1) of this AD and found to be airworthy.

    (3) Within the next 100 hours TIS after February 5, 1996 (the effective date retained from AD 95-26-13) and each time the oil cooler hose assembly is replaced for any reason or inspected following paragraph (h)(1) inspect to ensure the installation conditions in paragraphs (h)(3)(i) through (iii) of this AD are met. If the conditions listed in paragraphs (h)(3)(i) through (iii) of this AD are not met, before further flight, make any necessary adjustments. Please see figure 2 to paragraph (h) of this AD for additional information.

    (i) The oil cooler hose assemblies pass underneath and behind the electrical ground cable and in front of the lower of the two engine mount.

    (ii) The oil cooler hose assemblies are secured to the engine mount strut and a clearance of at least 2 inches exists between the oil cooler hose assemblies and the exhaust stack.

    (iii) Oil cooler hose assemblies with a minimum outer diameter of 0.75 inch are installed with a bend radius of at least 6.5 inches.

    EP21OC16.001

    (3) Replacement of the oil cooler hose assembly with TSO-C53a Type D oil cooler hose assembly and meeting the installation conditions listed in paragraphs (h)(3)(i) through (iii) of this AD terminate the requirements of this AD.

    (i) Replacement of Oil Cooler Hose Assembly

    For all applicable airplanes installed with a TSO-C53a Type C oil cooler hose assembly: When the oil cooler hose assembly accumulates 8 years or 1,000 hours TIS, whichever occurs first, replace the oil cooler hose assembly. If the oil cooler is mounted in a location other than at or aft of the rear of the engine, before further flight after replacement, you must do the actions required in paragraph (h)(3) of this AD.

    (1) Replacement of the oil cooler hose assembly with TSO-C53a Type D oil cooler hose assembly terminates the requirements of this AD provided it meets the installation conditions listed in paragraph (h)(3)(i) through (iii) of this AD.

    (2) You may at any time before 8 years or 1,000 hours TIS, whichever occurs first, replace the oil cooler hose assembly with TSO-C53a Type D oil cooler hose assembly to terminate the requirements of this AD provided it meets the installation conditions listed in paragraph (h)(3)(i) through (iii) of this AD.

    (j) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Atlanta 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 (k) of this AD.

    (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) AMOCs approved for AD 95-26-13 (60 FR 67321, December 29, 1995) are approved as AMOCs for the corresponding provisions of this AD.

    (k) Related Information

    For more information about this AD, contact Gary Wechsler, Aerospace Engineer, FAA, Atlanta Aircraft Certification Office, 1701 Columbia Avenue, College Park, Georgia 30337; telephone: (404) 474-5575; fax: (404) 474-5606; email: [email protected].

    BILLING CODE 4910-13-P EP21OC16.002
    Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on October 7, 2016. Pat Mullen, Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
    [FR Doc. 2016-24857 Filed 10-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-C
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2015-7526; Directorate Identifier 2014-NM-217-AD] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Airplanes AGENCY:

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (SNPRM); reopening of comment period.

    SUMMARY:

    We are revising an earlier proposed airworthiness directive (AD) for all Airbus Model A318, A319, A320, and A321 series airplanes. This action revises the notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) by requiring an additional action for sealant application on some nuts and bolts on the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics (NACA) duct assembly and adding a grace period to the compliance time. We are proposing this SNPRM to detect and correct corroded circlips. Such corrosion could lead to failure of the circlips and consequent movement of the FVP and result in a reduction of the flame protector capability of the FVP cartridge. Such a condition could result in damage to the airplane in case of lightning impact or fire on the ground. Since the additional actions impose an additional burden over those proposed in the NPRM, we are reopening the comment period to allow the public the chance to comment on these proposed changes.

    DATES:

    The comment period for the NPRM published in the Federal Register on December 23, 2015 (80 FR 79742), is reopened.

    We must receive comments on this SNPRM by December 5, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

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

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

    Fax: 202-493-2251.

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

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

    For service information identified in this SNPRM, contact Airbus, Airworthiness Office—EIAS, 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96; fax +33 5 61 93 44 51; email [email protected]; Internet http://www.airbus.com. You may view this referenced service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 425-227-1221.

    Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2015-7526; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street address for the Docket Office (telephone: 800-647-5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Sanjay Ralhan, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; telephone 425-227-1405; fax 425-227-1149.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include “Docket No. FAA-2015-7526; Directorate Identifier 2014-NM-217-AD” at the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this proposed AD based on those comments.

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

    Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to all Airbus Model A318, A319, A320, and A321 series airplanes. The NPRM published in the Federal Register on December 23, 2015 (80 FR 79742) (“the NPRM”). The NPRM was prompted by the discovery of corroded circlips in FVPs having a certain part number. The NPRM proposed to require an inspection to determine the part number and serial number of the FVP, and replacement if necessary.

    Actions Since the NPRM Was Issued

    Since we issued the NPRM, Airbus has issued revised service information to include an additional action to apply sealant on nuts and bolts of the NACA duct assembly. Airplanes on which the installation in the original service information was done would be required to do this additional action. In addition, we determined that a grace period is needed so operators have sufficient time to comply with the requirements in this proposed AD.

    In addition, the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) superseded EASA Airworthiness Directive 2014-0234R1, dated December 11, 2014 (which was referred to in the NPRM), and issued EASA Airworthiness Directive 2016-0114, dated June 15, 2016; corrected June 23, 2016; which retains the requirements of EASA AD 2014-0234R1 and includes an additional action.

    The EASA, which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued Airworthiness Directive 2016-0114, dated June 15, 2016; corrected June 23, 2016 (referred to after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or “the MCAI”), to correct an unsafe condition for all Airbus Model A318, A319, A320, and A321 series airplanes. The MCAI states:

    On each aeroplane wing, a NACA duct assembly is installed, including a Fuel Vent Protector (FVP) which is used as flame arrestor. This FVP is maintained in its NACA duct assembly by a circlip (also known as C-clip). Following a wing water pressure test, the FVP is removed and dried with heat. During an inspection after this test, several circlips were reported to be discoloured. Investigation revealed that a batch of circlips fitted on some FVP Part Number (P/N) 786073-1-0 have an increased risk of corrosion due to a manufacturing quality issue.

    This condition, if not detected and corrected, could lead to circlip failure and consequent FVP movement, reducing the flame protector capability of the FVP cartridge, possibly resulting in damage to the aeroplane in case of lightning impact or fire on ground.

    Airbus issued Service Bulletin (SB) A320-28-1221, providing instructions for identification by serial number (s/n) and removal from service of the affected FVP P/N 786073-1-0, and EASA issued AD 2014-0234, later revised, to require those actions and to implement installation requirements for the FVP.

    After that [EASA] AD was issued, one step in the FVP re-installation instructions was identified as missing. Consequently, Airbus revised SB A320-28-1221 to provide instructions for sealant installation on some nuts and bolts on the NACA duct assembly.

    For the reasons described above, this [EASA] AD retains the requirements of EASA AD 2014-0234R1, which is superseded, and requires additional work for aeroplanes already modified in accordance with Airbus SB A320-28-1221 original issue or Revision 01.

    You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2015-7526.

    Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    Airbus has issued Service Bulletin A320-28-1221, Revision 02, dated January 11, 2016. The service information describes procedures for inspecting the FVP to determine the part number and serial number, replacing any affected FVP, and applying sealant to the nuts and bolts of the FVP. 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.

    Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing this proposed AD. We considered the comments received.

    Request To Refer to Revised Service Information

    Airbus requested that the service information referred to in the NPRM be revised. Since the NPRM was published, Airbus issued Service Bulletin A320-28-1221, Revision 02, dated January 11, 2016, which includes an additional action (i.e., the application of sealant to the nuts and bolts of a FVP after installation). The additional action was not included in the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A320-28-1221, Revision 01, dated June 23, 2015, which was referred to as the appropriate source of service information for accomplishing the required actions proposed in the NPRM.

    We agree with the commenter's request to refer to the revised service information in this SNPRM. We have revised paragraphs (g) and (i) of this proposed AD to refer to the revised service information, Airbus Service Bulletin A320-28-1221, Revision 02, dated January 11, 2016.

    Request To Extend the Compliance Time

    American Airlines (AAL) requested that the compliance time in paragraph (h) of the proposed AD be changed from “at the earliest of the times” to “at the latest of the times,” or be simplified to “within 6 months after the effective date.” AAL stated that its 4 affected airplanes would be out of compliance when the NPRM became a final rule because the airplanes have already accumulated approximately 9,000 flight hours and 4,000 flight cycles, and have been in service for 34 months.

    We partially agree with the commenter's request. We revised paragraph (h) of this proposed AD to include a grace period of 30 days from the effective date of the AD to accomplish the required actions. In regard to the compliance times in paragraphs (h)(1), (h)(2), and (h)(3) of this AD, we do not agree to change “at the earliest of the times” to “at the latest of the times,” or to simplify the compliance time to “within 6 months after the effective date of this AD.” In developing an appropriate compliance time, we considered the safety implications and the time necessary to do the inspection to determine the part number and serial number of the FVP, and any necessary replacements. In light of these items, we have determined that the compliance times specified in paragraphs (h)(1), (h)(2), and (h)(3) of this proposed AD are appropriate. However, under the provisions of paragraph (k)(1) of this proposed AD, we will consider requests for approval of an extension of the compliance time if sufficient data are submitted to substantiate that the extension would provide an acceptable level of safety. We have not changed this AD regarding this issue.

    Request To Revise Costs of Compliance

    AAL requested that the “Costs of Compliance” section of the NPRM be revised to increase the number of work-hours from 5 to 12. AAL stated that there are multiple positions on each airplane that need to be inspected and may need corrective actions.

    We agree with the commenter's request. Based on the reason provided by the commenter, and the new additional action included in this SNPRM, we have revised the “Costs of Compliance” section to increase the work-hours from 5 to 19.

    FAA's Determination and Requirements of This SNPRM

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

    Certain changes described above expand the scope of the NPRM. As a result, we have determined that it is necessary to reopen the comment period to provide additional opportunity for the public to comment on this SNPRM.

    Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this SNPRM affects 7 airplanes of U.S. registry.

    We also estimate that it would take about 19 work-hours per product to comply with the new basic requirements of this SNPRM. The average labor rate is $85 per work-hour. Required parts would cost about $25,640 per product. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of this SNPRM on U.S. operators to be $190,785, or $27,255 per product.

    Authority for This Rulemaking

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

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

    Regulatory Findings

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

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

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

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

    3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska; and

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

    List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

    The Proposed Amendment

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

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

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

    § 39.13 [Amended]
    2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): Airbus: Docket No. FAA-2015-7526; Directorate Identifier 2014-NM-217-AD. (a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by December 5, 2016.

    (b) Affected ADs

    None.

    (c) Applicability

    This AD applies to the airplanes specified in paragraphs (c)(1), (c)(2), (c)(3), and (c)(4) of this AD, certificated in any category, all manufacturer serial numbers.

    (1) Airbus Model A318-111, -112, -121, and -122 airplanes.

    (2) Airbus Model A319-111, -112, -113, -114, -115, -131, -132, and -133 airplanes.

    (3) Airbus Model A320-211, -212, -214, -231, -232, and -233 airplanes.

    (4) Airbus Model A321-111, -112, -131, -211, -212, -213, -231, and -232 airplanes.

    (d) Subject

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

    (e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by the discovery of corroded circlips in fuel vent protectors (FVP) having a certain part number. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct corroded circlips. Such corrosion could lead to failure of the circlips and consequent movement of the FVP and result in a reduction of the flame protector capability of the FVP cartridge, which could result in damage to the airplane in case of lightning impact or fire on the ground.

    (f) Compliance

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

    (g) Inspection of FVP and Corrective Action

    For airplanes having a manufacturer serial number specified in figure 1 to paragraphs (g) and (i) of this AD: At the time specified in paragraph (h) of this AD, do an inspection to determine the part number and serial number of the FVP. If the FVP has part number (P/N) 786073-1-0 with a serial number that is specified in figure 2 to paragraphs (g) and (i) of this AD, and the FVP is not marked “Amdt B,” replace the FVP with a serviceable part, at the time specified in paragraph (h) of this AD, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A320-28-1221, Revision 02, dated January 11, 2016. A review of airplane maintenance records is acceptable in lieu of this inspection if the part number and serial number of the FVP can be conclusively determined from that review.

    Figure 1 to Paragraphs (g) and (i) of This AD—Affected Airplane Manufacturer Serial Numbers 5438 5441 5444 5445 5447 5457 5459 5460 5461 5463 5464 5469 5473 through 5478 inclusive 5481 5482 5483 5485 through 5488 inclusive 5490 through 5493 inclusive 5495 through 5505 inclusive 5507 through 5515 inclusive 5517 5518 5520 through 5527 inclusive 5530 5536 5539 5541 5544 5547 5551 5553 5556 Figure 2 to Paragraphs (g) and (i) of This AD—Affected Serial Numbers for Part Number 786073-1-0 [Manufactured during August 2012] Serial number 786073IN0xxxx (xxxx indicates the last four digits) 3752 3821 3868 3911 3966 4010 3753 3826 3871 3914 3967 4011 3754 3827 3874 3922 3969 4013 3755 3829 3877 3925 3971 4017 3756 3830 3878 3927 3972 4019 3757 3833 3882 3930 3977 4023 3758 3834 3893 3937 3978 4024 3759 3836 3897 3938 3980 4025 3760 3839 3898 3940 3981 4026 3761 3840 3899 3945 3982 4039 3787 3848 3900 3946 3983 4048 3788 3849 3901 3947 3984 4065 3810 3850 3904 3948 3985 4066 3812 3851 3905 3951 3986 4068 3814 3853 3906 3961 3987 4070 3817 3859 3907 3962 3996 4184 3819 3860 3908 3964 3997 4187 3820 3867 3910 3965 4009 None (h) Compliance Times for the Requirements of Paragraph (g) of This AD

    Do the actions required by paragraph (g) of this AD at the earliest of the times specified in paragraphs (h)(1), (h)(2), and (h)(3) of this AD, or within 30 days after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later.

    (1) Before the accumulation of 5,000 total flight cycles after the date of manufacture of the airplane.

    (2) Before the accumulation of 7,500 total flight hours after the date of manufacture of the airplane.

    (3) Within 30 months after the date of manufacture of the airplane.

    (i) Exclusion From Actions Required by Paragraph (g) of This AD

    An airplane that does not have a manufacturer serial number specified in figure 1 to paragraphs (g) and (i) of this AD is excluded from the requirements of paragraph (g) of this AD, provided that, a FVP having P/N 786073-1-0 with a serial number specified in figure 2 to paragraphs (g) and (i) of this AD has not been installed on that airplane after July 2012. If a FVP having P/N 786073-1-0 with a serial number specified in figure 2 to paragraphs (g) and (i) of this AD is installed, or the serial number cannot be identified: Within 12 months after the effective date of this AD, replace the FVP with a serviceable part, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A320-28-1221, Revision 02, dated January 11, 2016. A review of airplane maintenance records is acceptable if it can be conclusively determined from that review that a FVP having a serial number specified in figure 2 to paragraphs (g) and (i) of this AD has not been installed on that airplane after July 2012.

    (j) Parts Installation Limitation

    As of the effective date of this AD, a FVP having P/N 786073-1-0 and a serial number listed in figure 2 to paragraphs (g) and (i) of this AD may be installed on any airplane, provided the FVP is marked with “Amdt B.”

    (k) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:

    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information directly to the International Branch, send it to ATTN: Sanjay Ralhan, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; telephone 425-227-1405; fax 425-227-1149. Information may be emailed to: [email protected] Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding district office.

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

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

    (l) Related Information

    (1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information (MCAI) EASA Airworthiness Directive 2016-0114, dated June 15, 2016; corrected June 23, 2016; for related information. This MCAI may be found in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2015-7526.

    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact Airbus, Airworthiness Office—EIAS, 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96; fax +33 5 61 93 44 51; email [email protected]; Internet http://www.airbus.com. You may view this referenced service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 425-227-1221.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on September 26, 2016. Dionne Palermo, Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
    [FR Doc. 2016-23787 Filed 10-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Internal Revenue Service 26 CFR Part 1 [REG-130314-16] RIN 1545-BN68 Treatment of Certain Interests in Corporations as Stock or Indebtedness AGENCY:

    Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury.

    ACTION:

    Notice of proposed rulemaking by cross-reference to temporary regulation.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of the Treasury (Treasury Department) and the IRS are issuing temporary regulations that affect corporations and partnerships that issue purported indebtedness to related corporations or partnerships in the Rules and Regulations section of this issue of the Federal Register. The temporary regulations provide rules addressing the treatment of instruments issued by partnerships, consolidated groups, and certain transactions involving qualified cash-management arrangements. The text of the temporary regulations also serves as the text of these proposed regulations.

    DATES:

    Written or electronic comments and requests for a public hearing must be received by January 19, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Send submissions to: CC:PA:LPD:PR (REG-130314-16), Room 5203, Internal Revenue Service, P.O. Box 7604, Ben Franklin Station, Washington, DC 20224. Submissions may be hand-delivered Monday through Friday between the hours of 8 a.m. and 4 p.m. to CC:PA:LPD:PR (REG-130314-16), Courier's Desk, Internal Revenue Service, 1111 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20224, or sent electronically via the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov (IRS REG-130314-16).

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Concerning the proposed regulations, Austin M. Diamond-Jones, (202) 317-5363, or Joshua G. Rabon, (202) 317-6937; concerning submissions of comments or requests for a public hearing, Regina Johnson, (202) 317-5177 (not toll-free numbers).

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background

    The temporary regulations in the Rules and Regulations section of this issue of the Federal Register contain rules under sections 385 and 752 of the Internal Revenue Code (Code) that establish requirements that ordinarily must be satisfied in order for certain related-party interests in a corporation to be treated as indebtedness for federal tax purposes. The text of the temporary regulations also serves as the text of the proposed regulations herein. The preamble to the temporary regulations explains the temporary regulations and the corresponding proposed regulations.

    Special Analyses I. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 13563 and 12866 direct agencies to assess costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public health and safety effects, distributive impacts, and equity). Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting flexibility. Related rules in the final and temporary regulations under section 385 in TD 9790, published in the Rules and Regulations section of this issue of the Federal Register, have been designated a “significant regulatory action” under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866. For a discussion of the economic impact of those final and temporary regulations, as well as these proposed regulations, please see the Regulatory Assessment accompanying TD 9790, published in the Rules and Regulations section of this issue of the Federal Register.

    II. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. Chapter 6), it is hereby certified that the final and temporary regulations in TD 9790, published in the Rules and Regulations section of this issue of the Federal Register, and accordingly, these proposed regulations proposed by cross-reference to the temporary regulations, will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Accordingly, a regulatory flexibility analysis is not required.

    To facilitate the federal tax analysis of an interest in a corporation, taxpayers are required under existing law to substantiate their classification of an interest as stock or indebtedness for federal tax purposes. Section 1.385-3 provides that certain interests in a corporation that are held by a member of the corporation's expanded group and that otherwise would be treated as indebtedness for federal tax purposes are treated as stock. Section 1.385-3T provides that for certain debt instruments issued by a controlled partnership, the holder is deemed to transfer all or a portion of the debt instrument to the partner or partners in the partnership in exchange for stock in the partner or partners. Section 1.385-4T provides rules regarding the application of §§ 1.385-3 and 1.385-3T to members of a consolidated group. Sections 1.385-3 and 1.385-3T include multiple exceptions that limit their application. In particular, the threshold exception provides that the first $50 million of expanded group debt instruments that otherwise would be reclassified as stock or deemed to be transferred to a partner in a controlled partnership under § 1.385-3 or § 1.385-3T will not be reclassified or deemed transferred under § 1.385-3 or § 1.385-3T. Although it is possible that the classification rules in §§ 1.385-3, 1.385-3T, and 1.385-4T could have an effect on small entities, the threshold exception of the first $50 million of debt instruments otherwise subject to recharacterization or deemed transfer under §§ 1.385-3, 1.385-3T, and 1.385-4T makes it unlikely that a substantial number of small entities will be affected by §§ 1.385-3T or 1.385-4T.

    Pursuant to section 7805(f) of the Code, the final regulations in TD 9790, published in the Rules and Regulations section of this issue of the Federal Register, have been submitted to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration for comment on their impact on small business. Comments were received requesting that the monetary thresholds contained in proposed §§ 1.385-2, 1.385-3, and 1.385-4 be increased in order to mitigate the impact on small businesses. These comments are addressed in Parts IV.B.1.d and V.E.4 of the Summary of Comments and Explanation of Revisions in the preamble of TD 9790, published in the Rules and Regulations section of this issue of the Federal Register. No comments were received concerning the economic impact on small entities from the Small Business Administration.

    Comments and Requests for Public Hearing

    Before these proposed regulations are adopted as final regulations, consideration will be given to any comments that are submitted timely to the IRS as prescribed in this preamble under the “Addresses” heading. Treasury and the IRS request comments on all aspects of the proposed rules. All comments will be available at www.regulations.gov or upon request. A public hearing will be scheduled if requested in writing by any person that timely submits electronic or written comments. If a public hearing is scheduled, notice of the date, time, and place for the public hearing will be published in the Federal Register.

    Drafting Information

    The principal authors of these regulations are Austin M. Diamond-Jones of the Office of Associate Chief Counsel (Corporate) and Joshua G. Rabon of the Office of Associate Chief Counsel (International). However, other personnel from the Treasury Department and the IRS participated in their development.

    List of Subjects in 26 CFR Part 1

    Income taxes, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Proposed Amendments to the Regulations

    Accordingly, 26 CFR part 1 is proposed to be amended as follows:

    PART 1—INCOME TAXES Paragraph 1. The authority citation for part 1 is amended by adding an entry in numerical order to read in part as follows: Authority:

    26 U.S.C. 7805 * * *

    Section 1.385-4 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 385 and 1502.

    Par. 2. Section 1.385-3 is amended by: 1. Revising paragraph (b)(3)(vii). 2. Revising paragraph (d)(4). 3. Revising paragraph (f). 4. Revising paragraphs (g)(5)-(8), (15)-(17), and (22)-(23). 5. Revising Example 12 through Example 19 in paragraph (h)(3). 6. Adding paragraph (k).

    The revisions and additions read as follows:

    § 1.385-3 Transactions in which debt proceeds are distributed or that have a similar effect.

    (b) * * *

    (3) * * *

    (vii) [The text of the proposed amendment to § 1.385-3(b)(3)(vii) is the same as the text of § 1.385-3T(b)(3)(vii) published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register.]

    (d) * * *

    (4) [The text of the proposed amendment to § 1.385-3(d)(4) is the same as the text of § 1.385-3T(d)(4) published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register.]

    (f) [The text of the proposed amendment to § 1.385-3(f) is the same as the text of § 1.385-3T(f) published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register.]

    (g) * * *

    (5) [The text of the proposed amendment to § 1.385-3(g)(5) is the same as the text of § 1.385-3T(g)(5) published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register.]

    (6) [The text of the proposed amendment to § 1.385-3(g)(6) is the same as the text of § 1.385-3T(g)(6) published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register.]

    (7) [The text of the proposed amendment to § 1.385-3(g)(7) is the same as the text of § 1.385-3T(g)(7) published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register.]

    (8) [The text of the proposed amendment to § 1.385-3(g)(8) is the same as the text of § 1.385-3T(g)(8) published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register.]

    (15) [The text of the proposed amendment to § 1.385-3(g)(15) is the same as the text of § 1.385-3T(g)(15) published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register.]

    (16) [The text of the proposed amendment to § 1.385-3(g)(16) is the same as the text of § 1.385-3T(g)(16) published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register.]

    (17) [The text of the proposed amendment to § 1.385-3(g)(16) is the same as the text of § 1.385-3T(g)(17) published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register.]

    (22) [The text of the proposed amendment to § 1.385-3(g)(22) is the same as the text of § 1.385-3T(g)(22) published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register.]

    (23) [The text of the proposed amendment to § 1.385-3(g)(23) is the same as the text of § 1.385-3T(g)(23) published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register.]

    (h) * * *

    (3) * * *

    Example 12.

    [The text of the proposed amendment to § 1.385-3(h)(3), Example 12 is the same as the text of § 1.385-3T(h)(3), Example 12 published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register.]

    Example 13.

    [The text of the proposed amendment to § 1.385-3(h)(3), Example 13 is the same as the text of § 1.385-3T(h)(3), Example 13 published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register.]

    Example 14.

    [The text of the proposed amendment to § 1.385-3(h)(3), Example 14 is the same as the text of § 1.385-3T(h)(3), Example 14 published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register.]

    Example 15.

    [The text of the proposed amendment to § 1.385-3(h)(3), Example 15 is the same as the text of § 1.385-3T(h)(3), Example 15 published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register.]

    Example 16.

    [The text of the proposed amendment to § 1.385-3(h)(3), Example 16 is the same as the text of § 1.385-3T(h)(3), Example 16 published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register.]

    Example 17.

    [The text of the proposed amendment to § 1.385-3(h)(3), Example 17 is the same as the text of § 1.385-3T(h)(3), Example 17 published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register.]

    Example 18.

    [The text of the proposed amendment to § 1.385-3(h)(3), Example 18 is the same as the text of § 1.385-3T(h)(3), Example 18 published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register.]

    Example 19.

    [The text of the proposed amendment to § 1.385-3(h)(3), Example 19 is the same as the text of § 1.385-3T(h)(3), Example 19 published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register.]

    (k) [The text of the proposed amendment to § 1.385-3(k) is the same as the text of § 1.385-3T(k) published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register.]

    Par. 3. Section 1.385-4 is added to read as follows:
    § 1.385-4 Treatment of consolidated groups.

    [The text of proposed § 1.385-4 is the same as the text of § 1.385-4T published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register.]

    Par. 4. Section 1.752-2 is amended by: 1. Revising paragraph (c)(3). 2. Revising paragraph (l)(4).

    The addition and revision read as follows

    § 1.752-2 Partner's share of recourse liabilities.

    (c) * * *

    (3) [The text of the proposed amendment to § 1.752-2(c)(3) is the same as the text of § 1.752-2T(c)(3) published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register.]

    (l) * * *

    (4) [The text of the proposed amendment to § 1.752-2(l)(4) is the same as the text of § 1.752-2T(l)(4) published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register.]

    John Dalrymple, Deputy Commissioner for Services and Enforcement.
    [FR Doc. 2016-25104 Filed 10-13-16; 5:00 pm] BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 165 [Docket Number USCG-2016-0929] RIN 1625-AA00 Safety Zone; Willamette River, Portland, OR AGENCY:

    Coast Guard, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice of proposed rulemaking.

    SUMMARY:

    The Coast Guard proposes to establish a temporary safety zone for certain waters of the Willamette River. This action is necessary to provide for the safety of life on these navigable waters during a fireworks display on November 13, 2016. This proposed rulemaking would prohibit persons and vessels from being in the safety zone unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Sector Columbia River or a designated representative. We invite your comments on this proposed rulemaking.

    DATES:

    Comments and related material must be received by the Coast Guard on or before November 4, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-2016-0929 using the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. See the “Public Participation and Request for Comments” portion of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for further instructions on submitting comments.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    If you have questions about this proposed rulemaking, call or email Mr. Kenneth Lawrenson, Waterways Management Division, 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, Purpose, and Legal Basis

    On September 22, 2016, Western Display Fireworks, Ltd., notified the Coast Guard that it will be conducting a fireworks display from 7 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. on November 13, 2016, for a celebration of life of recently deceased Donald W. Gardner. The fireworks are to be launched from a barge in the Willamette River between the Burnside and Steel Bridges. Hazards from firework displays include accidental discharge of fireworks, dangerous projectiles, and falling hot embers or other debris. The Captain of the Port Sector Columbia River (COTP) has determined that potential hazards associated with the fireworks to be used in this display would be a safety concern for anyone within a 450-yard radius of the barge.

    The purpose of this rulemaking is to ensure the safety of vessels and the navigable waters within a 450-yard radius of the fireworks barge before, during, and after the scheduled event. The Coast Guard proposes this rulemaking under authority in 33 U.S.C. 1231.

    III. Discussion of Proposed Rule

    The COTP proposes to establish a safety zone from 6 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. on November 13, 2016. The safety zone would cover all navigable waters within 450 yards of the barge being used to launch the fireworks display in the Willamette River located between the Burnside and Steel Bridges in Portland, OR. The safety zone would be in effect for the duration of the event, which is scheduled to take place from 7 p.m. to 7:30 p.m., and one hour prior to and one hour after the event concludes, in order to ensure the safety of vessels and these navigable waters. No vessel or person would be permitted to enter the safety zone without obtaining permission from the COTP or his designated representative. The regulatory text we are proposing appears at the end of this document.

    IV. Regulatory Analyses

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

    A. Regulatory Planning and Review

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

    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 Willamette River for two and a half hours during the evening when vessel traffic is normally low. 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 certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

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

    If you think that your business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this rule would have a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to what degree this rule would economically affect it.

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small entities in understanding this proposed rule. If the rule would affect your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that question or complain about this proposed rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard.

    C. Collection of Information

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

    D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

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

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

    E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

    F. Environment

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Department of Homeland Security Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have made a preliminary determination that this action is one of a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This proposed rule involves a safety zone lasting two and one half hours that would prohibit entry within 450 yards of a fireworks barge. Normally such actions are categorically excluded from further review under paragraph 34(g) of Figure 2-1 of Commandant Instruction M16475.lD. A preliminary environmental analysis checklist and 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 proposed rule.

    G. Protest Activities

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

    V. Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We view public participation as essential to effective rulemaking, and will consider all comments and material received during the comment period. Your comment can help shape the outcome of this rulemaking. If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this rulemaking, indicate the specific section of this document to which each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or recommendation. If we issue a final rule in this rulemaking, because of the closeness of the event, we would made it effective less than 30 days after publication in the Federal Register, and we would explain our good cause for doing so in the final rule, as required by 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3).

    We encourage you to submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. If your material cannot be submitted using http://www.regulations.gov, contact the person in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document for alternate instructions.

    We accept anonymous comments. All comments received will be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov and will include any personal information you have provided. For more about privacy and the docket, you may review a Privacy Act notice regarding the Federal Docket Management System in the March 24, 2005, issue of the Federal Register (70 FR 15086).

    Documents mentioned in this NPRM as being available in the docket, and all public comments, will be in our online docket at http://www.regulations.gov and can be viewed by following that Web site's instructions. Additionally, if you go to the online docket and sign up for email alerts, you will be notified when comments are posted or a final rule is published.

    List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

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

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

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

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

    2. Add § 165.T13-0929 to read as follows:
    § 165.T13-0929 Safety Zone; Willamette River, Portland, OR.

    (a) Safety zone. The following area is designated a safety zone: Waters of the Willamette River, within a 450-yard radius of the fireworks barge located between the Burnside and Steel Bridges in Portland, OR.

    (b) Regulations. In accordance with § 165.23, no person may enter or remain in this safety zone unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Columbia River or his designated representative. Also in accordance with § 165.23, no person may bring into, or allow to remain in this safety zone any vehicle, vessel, or object unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Columbia River or his designated representative.

    (c) Enforcement period. This section will be enforced from 6 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. on November 13, 2016.

    Dated: October 17, 2016. D. F. Berliner, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Alternate Captain of the Port, Sector Columbia River.
    [FR Doc. 2016-25511 Filed 10-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R04-OAR-2016-0526; FRL-9954-34-Region 4] Air Plan Approval; KY; RACM Determination for the KY Portion of the Louisville Area 1997 Annual PM2.5 AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Proposed rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the Commonwealth of Kentucky, through the Kentucky Division for Air Quality (KDAQ) on August 9, 2016, that addresses reasonably available control measures (RACM) for the Kentucky portion of the Louisville, KY-IN, nonattainment area for the 1997 Annual fine particulate matter (PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) (hereinafter referred to as the “bi-state Louisville Area” or “Area”).

    DATES:

    Comments must be received on or before November 21, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R04-OAR-2016-0526 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. Ms. Sanchez can be reached by telephone at (404) 562-9644 or via electronic mail at [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background

    In 1997, EPA promulgated the first air quality standards for PM2.5. EPA promulgated an annual standard at a level of 15 micrograms per cubic meter (μg/m3) (based on a 3-year average of annual mean PM2.5 concentrations) and a 24-hour standard of 65 μg/m3 (based on a 3-year average of the 98th percentile of 24-hour concentrations). See 62 FR 38652 (July 18, 1997). On January 5, 2005 (70 FR 944), and supplemented on April 14, 2005 (70 FR 19844), EPA designated the bi-state Louisville Area as nonattainment for the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS. In that action, EPA defined the bi-state Louisville Area to include Bullitt and Jefferson Counties in Kentucky as well as Clark and Floyd Counties and a portion of Jefferson County (Madison Township) in Indiana. Designation of an area as nonattainment for PM2.5 starts the process for a state to develop and submit to EPA a SIP revision under title I, part D of the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act). This SIP revision must include, among other elements, a demonstration of how the NAAQS will be attained in the nonattainment area as expeditiously as practicable, but no later than the attainment date required by the CAA.

    Originally, EPA designated all 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS areas under title I, part D, subpart 1 (hereinafter “Subpart 1”). Subpart 1, comprised of CAA sections 171-179B, sets forth the basic nonattainment requirements applicable to all nonattainment areas. Section 172(c) contains the general SIP requirements for these areas, including RACM requirements under section 172(c)(1). On April 25, 2007 (72 FR 20586), EPA promulgated a rule, codified at 40 CFR part 51, subpart Z, to implement the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS under Subpart 1 (hereinafter referred to as the “1997 PM2.5 Implementation Rule”).1 On December 3, 2008, Kentucky submitted an attainment demonstration SIP revision for the Area that addressed RACM and certain other section 172(c) elements including a reasonable further progress (RFP) plan, base-year and attainment-year emissions inventories, and contingency measures for the Area. This SIP revision included a section 172(c)(1) RACM determination that there were no potential emissions control measures that, if considered collectively, would advance the attainment date by one year or more.

    1 On January 4, 2013, in Natural Resources Defense Council v. EPA, 706 F.3d 428 (D.C. Cir. 2013), the United State Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (D.C. Circuit) found that EPA erred in implementing the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS pursuant solely to the general implementation provisions of Subpart 1 rather than the particulate matter-specific provisions in title I, part D, subpart 4. The court remanded both the 1997 PM2.5 Implementation Rule and the final rule entitled “Implementation of the New Source Review (NSR) Program for Particulate Matter Less than 2.5 Micrometers (PM2.5)” (73 FR 28321, May 16, 2008) to EPA to address this error. In 2014, EPA finalized a rule classifying areas previously designated nonattainment for the 1997 and/or 2006 fine particle pollution standards under Subpart 1, including the bi-state Louisville Area, as “Moderate” nonattainment areas under subpart 4 and setting deadlines for SIP submissions addressing the requirements of subpart 4. See 79 FR 31566 (June 2, 2014) [hereinafter 2014 Rule].

    In 2011, EPA determined that the bi-state Louisville Area had attained the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS based upon complete, quality-assured, and certified ambient air monitoring data for the 2007-2009 period. See 76 FR 55544 (September 7, 2011); 40 CFR 52.929(b). As a result of this determination and in accordance with 40 CFR 51.1004(c), the requirements for the Area to submit attainment demonstrations and associated RACM, RFP plans, contingency measures, and other planning SIP revisions related to attainment of the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS are suspended for so long as: The area is redesignated to attainment, at which time the requirements no longer apply; or EPA determines that the area has violated the PM2.5 NAAQS, at which time the area is again required to submit such plans. Therefore, Kentucky withdrew the aforementioned PM2.5 attainment demonstration SIP revision except for the portion addressing emissions inventory requirements under section 172(c)(3). EPA later approved Kentucky's 2002 base-year emissions inventory for the Louisville Area pursuant to section 172(c)(3) on August 2, 2012 (77 FR 45956).

    On March 5, 2012, Kentucky submitted a request to redesignate the Kentucky portion of the bi-state Louisville Area to attainment for the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS.2 As the result of a 2015 decision from the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit (Sixth Circuit) in Sierra Club v. EPA, 793 F.3d 656 (6th Cir. 2015) requiring a SIP-approved Subpart 1 RACM determination prior to the redesignation of a 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS nonattainment area, Kentucky submitted a SIP revision on August 9, 2016, to address the section 172(c)(1) RACM requirements and to support the Commonwealth's March 5, 2012, redesignation request. In that SIP revision, the Commonwealth determined that no additional control measures are necessary in the Area to satisfy the CAA section 172(c)(1) RACM requirements. Kentucky's determination and the Sixth Circuit's decision are discussed in further detail below.

    2 Kentucky submitted its redesignation request prior to the aforementioned ruling in Natural Resources Defense Council v. EPA. As discussed in the 2014 Rule, EPA's position is that this ruling does not apply retroactively. See 79 FR at 31568.

    II. What action is EPA proposing to take?

    EPA is proposing to determine that Kentucky's Subpart 1 RACM determination meets the requirements of section 172(c)(1) of the CAA and is proposing to approve this RACM determination into the SIP for the reasons discussed in Section III below.

    III. What is EPA's analysis of the Commonwealth's RACM submittal? A. Relationship Between Subpart I RACM and Redesignation Criteria

    EPA does not believe that Subpart 1 nonattainment planning requirements designed to provide for attainment, including RACM, are “applicable” for purposes of CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii) once an area is attaining the NAAQS and, therefore, does not believe that these planning requirements must be approved before EPA can redesignate an area to attainment. See, e.g., 57 FR 13498, 13564 (April 16, 1992); “Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to Attainment,” Memorandum from John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality Management Division (September 4, 1992). However, the aforementioned Sixth Circuit decision in Sierra Club v. EPA is inconsistent with this longstanding interpretation regarding section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii). In its decision, the Court vacated EPA's redesignation of the Indiana and Ohio portions of the Cincinnati-Hamilton nonattainment area to attainment for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS because EPA had not yet approved Subpart 1 RACM for the Cincinnati Area into the Indiana and Ohio SIPs. The Court concluded that “a State seeking redesignation `shall provide for the implementation' of RACM/RACT [reasonably available control technology], even if those measures are not strictly necessary to demonstrate attainment with the PM2.5 NAAQS. . . . If the State has not done so, EPA cannot `fully approve' the area's SIP, and redesignation to attainment status is improper.” Sierra Club, 793 F.3d at 670.

    EPA is bound by the Sixth Circuit's decision in Sierra Club v. EPA within the Court's jurisdiction.3 Although EPA continues to believe that Subpart 1 RACM is not an applicable requirement under section 107(d)(3)(E) for an area that has already attained the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS, EPA is proposing to approve Kentucky's RACM determination into the SIP pursuant to the Court's decision.4

    3 The states of Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio, and Tennessee are located within the Sixth Circuit's jurisdiction.

    4 The EPA Region 4 Regional Administrator signed a memorandum on July 20, 2015, seeking concurrence from the Director of EPA's Air Quality Policy Division (AQPD) in the Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards to act inconsistent with EPA's interpretation of CAA sections 107(d)(3)(E) and 172(c)(1) when taking action on pending and future redesignation requests in Kentucky and Tennessee because the Region is bound by the Sixth Circuit's decision in Sierra Club v. EPA. The AQPD Director issued her concurrence on July 22, 2015. This memorandum is not required to satisfy EPA's regional consistency regulations. See 40 CFR 56.5(b)(1); 81 FR 51102 (August 3, 2016).

    B. Subpart 1 RACM Requirements

    Subpart 1 requires that each attainment plan “provide for the implementation of all reasonably available control measures as expeditiously as practicable (including such reductions in emission from the existing sources in the area as may be obtained through the adoption, at a minimum, of reasonably available control technology), and shall provide for attainment of the national primary ambient air quality standards.” See CAA section 172(c)(1). EPA has consistently interpreted this provision to require only implementation of potential RACM measures that could advance attainment.5 Thus, when an area is already attaining the standard, no additional RACM measures are required. EPA's interpretation that Subpart 1 requires only the implementation of RACM measures that would advance attainment was upheld by the United States Court of Appeals in the Fifth Circuit 6 and by the United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.7

    5 This interpretation was adopted in the General Preamble, see 57 FR 13498 (April 16, 1992), and has been upheld as applied to the Clean Data Policy, as well as to nonattainment SIP submissions. See NRDC v. EPA, 571 F.3d 1245 (D.C. Cir. 2009); Sierra Club v. EPA, 294 F.3d 155 (D.C. Cir. 2002).

    6Sierra Club v. EPA, 314 F.3d 735, 743-745 (5th Cir. 2002).

    7Sierra Club v. EPA, 294 F.3d 155, 162-163 (D.C. Cir. 2002); NRDC v. EPA, 571 F.3d 1245, 1252 (D.C. Cir. 2009).

    C. Proposed Action

    In its August 9, 2016, SIP submission, the Commonwealth determined that no additional control measures are necessary in the Area to satisfy the CAA section 172(c)(1) RACM requirement because the Area has attained the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS. As noted above, EPA has determined that the Area attained the standard by the April 5, 2010, attainment date and that no additional measures are required to satisfy Subpart 1 RACM when an area is attaining the standard. Therefore, EPA proposes to agree with the Commonwealth's analysis, to approve Kentucky's SIP revision, and to incorporate the section 172(c)(1) RACM determination into the SIP.

    IV. 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 proposes to approve state law as meeting federal requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that reason, this proposed action:

    • Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive 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, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.

    Authority:

    42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    Dated: October 11, 2016. Heather McTeer Toney, Regional Administrator, Region 4.
    [FR Doc. 2016-25433 Filed 10-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R03-OAR-2016-0308; FRL-9954-17-Region 3] Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Virginia; Removal of Stage II Gasoline Vapor Recovery Requirements for Gasoline Dispensing Facilities AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Proposed rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposes to approve the state implementation plan (SIP) revision submitted by the Commonwealth of Virginia for the purpose of removing the requirement for gasoline vapor recovery equipment on gasoline dispensing pumps (otherwise referred to as Stage II vapor recovery, or simply as Stage II) in Virginia area facilities formerly required to have installed and operated Stage II vapor recovery controls under the prior, approved Virginia SIP. In the Rules and Regulations section of this Federal Register, EPA is approving the Commonwealth's SIP submittal as a direct final rule without prior proposal because the Agency views this as a noncontroversial submittal and anticipates no adverse comments. A detailed rationale for EPA's approval of Virginia's Stage II-related SIP revision with amended regulations addressing vapor recovery is set forth in the direct final rule. If no adverse comments are received in response to this action, no further activity is contemplated. If EPA receives adverse comments, the direct final rule will be withdrawn and all public comments received will be addressed in a subsequent final rule based on this proposed rule. EPA will not institute a second comment period. Any parties interested in commenting on this action should do so at this time.

    DATES:

    Comments must be received in writing by November 21, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R03-OAR-2016-0308 at http://www.regulations.gov, or via email to [email protected] For comments submitted at Regulations.gov, follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. For either manner of submission, the EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be confidential business information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional submission methods, please contact the person identified in the “For Further Information Contact” section. For the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Brian Rehn, (215) 814-2176, or by email at [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    For further information, please see the information provided in the direct final action, with the same title, that is located in the Rules and Regulations section of this issue of the Federal Register.

    Dated: September 29, 2016. Shawn M. Garvin, Regional Administrator, Region III.
    [FR Doc. 2016-25297 Filed 10-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Parts 271 and 272 [EPA-R06-RCRA-2015-0664; FRL-9951-20-Region 6] Louisiana: Final Authorization of State-Initiated Changes and Incorporation by Reference of State Hazardous Waste Management Program AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Proposed rule.

    SUMMARY:

    During a review of Louisiana's regulations, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) identified a variety of State-initiated changes to Louisiana's hazardous waste program under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), as amended, for which the State had not previously sought authorization. EPA proposes to authorize the State for the program changes. In addition, EPA proposes to codify in the regulations entitled “Approved State Hazardous Waste Management Programs”, Louisiana's authorized hazardous waste program. The EPA will incorporate by reference into the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) those provisions of the State regulations that are authorized and that EPA will enforce under RCRA.

    DATES:

    Send written comments by November 21, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit any comments identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R06-RCRA-2015-0664, by one of the following methods:

    1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.

    2. Email: [email protected] or [email protected]

    3. Mail: Alima Patterson, Region 6, Regional Authorization Coordinator, or Julia Banks, Codification Coordinator, Permit Section (RPM), Multimedia Planning and Permitting Division, EPA Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733.

    4. Hand Delivery or Courier: Deliver your comments to Alima Patterson, Region 6, Regional Authorization Coordinator, or Julia Banks, Codification Coordinator, Permit Section (RPM), Multimedia Planning and Permitting Division, EPA Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733.

    Instructions: Do not submit information that you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or otherwise protected through regulations.gov, or email. Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R06-RCRA-2015-0664. The Federal regulations.gov Web site is an “anonymous access” system, which means the EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email comment directly to the EPA without going through regulations.gov, your email address will be automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, the EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If the EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, the EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. You can view and copy the documents that form the basis for this authorization and codification and associated publicly available materials from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m. Monday through Friday at the following location: EPA Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733, phone number: (214) 665-8533 or (214) 665-8178. Interested persons wanting to examine these documents should make an appointment with the office at least two weeks in advance.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Alima Patterson, Region 6, Regional Authorization Coordinator or Julia Banks, Codification Coordinator, Permit Section (RPM), Multimedia Planning and Permitting Division, EPA Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733, Phone number: (214) 665-8533 or (214) 665-8178, and Email address: [email protected] or [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    For additional information, please see the direct final rule published in the “Rules and Regulations” section of this Federal Register. EPA did not make a proposal prior to the direct final rule because we believe this action is not controversial and do not expect comments that oppose it. We have explained the reasons for this authorization in the preamble to the direct final rule. Unless we get written comments which oppose this authorization during the comment period, the direct final rule will become effective 60 days after publication and we will not take further action on this proposal. If we receive comments that oppose this action, we will withdraw the direct final rule and it will not take effect. We will then respond to public comments in a later final rule based on this proposal. You may not have another opportunity for comment. If you want to comment on this action, you must do so at this time.

    The purpose of this Federal Register document is to codify Louisiana's base hazardous waste management program and its revisions to that program through RCRA Clusters XXI, XXII including RCRA Cluster XXIII Checklist 229 Exclusions for Solvent Contaminated Wipes. (See 80 FR 55032) September 14, 2015. The EPA provided notices and opportunity for comments on the Agency's decisions to authorize the Louisiana program, and the EPA is not now reopening the decisions, nor requesting comments, on the Louisiana authorizations as published in FR notices specified in Section I.F of the direct final rule FR document.

    This document incorporates by reference Louisiana's hazardous waste statutes and regulations and clarifies which of these provisions are included in the authorized and federally enforceable program. By codifying Louisiana's authorized program and by amending the Code of Federal Regulations, the public will be more easily able to discern the status of federally approved requirements of the Louisiana's hazardous waste management program.

    Authority:

    This action is issued under the authority of sections 2002(a), 3006, and 7004(b) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 6912(a), 6926, and 6974(b).

    Dated: August 1, 2016. Ron Curry, Regional Administrator, Region 6.
    [FR Doc. 2016-25313 Filed 10-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Parts 720, 721, and 723 [EPA-HQ-OPPT-2014-0650; FRL-9952-69] Significant New Uses of Chemical Substances; Updates to the Hazard Communication Program and Regulatory Framework; Minor Amendments To Reporting Requirements for Premanufacture Notices; Reopening of Comment Period AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Proposed rule; Reopening of comment period.

    SUMMARY:

    In the Federal Register of July 28, 2016, EPA proposed to amend the hazard communication program and aspects of the regulatory framework for significant new uses of chemical substances and reporting requirements for premanufacture notices under the Toxic Substances Control Act. This document reopens the comment period for 30 days. A commenter requested additional time to submit written comments for the proposed rule. EPA believes that the request is reasonable and is therefore reopening the comment period in order to give all interested persons the opportunity to comment fully.

    DATES:

    The comment period for the proposed rule published on July 28, 2016 (81 FR 49598) (FRL-9944-47) is reopened. Comments, identified by docket identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPPT-2014-0650 must be received on or before November 21, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    As specified in the Federal Register document of July 28, 2016 (81 FR 49598) (FRL-9944-47), submit your comments, identified by docket identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPPT-2014-0650, 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: Document Control Office (7407M), Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics (OPPT), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001.

    Hand Delivery: To make special arrangements for hand deliver 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 technical information contact: Jim Alwood, Chemical Control Division, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number: (202) 564-8974; email address: [email protected]

    For general information contact: The TSCA-Hotline, ABVI-Goodwill, 422 South Clinton Ave., Rochester, NY 14620; telephone number: (202) 554-1404; email address: [email protected]

    For general information contact: The TSCA-Hotline, ABVI-Goodwill, 422 South Clinton Ave., Rochester, NY 14620; telephone number: (202) 554-1404; email address: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This document reopens the public comment period established in the Federal Register document of July 28, 2016 (81 FR 49598) (FRL-9944-47). In that document, EPA proposed amendments to the hazard communication program and regulatory framework for significant new uses of chemical substances and reporting requirements for premanufacture notices. EPA is hereby reopening the comment period for 30 days.

    To submit comments, or access the docket, please follow the detailed instructions provided under ADDRESSES in the Federal Register document of July 28, 2016. If you have questions, consult the technical person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

    List of Subjects in 40 CFR Parts 720, 721, and 723

    Environmental protection, Chemicals, Hazardous materials, Recordkeeping, and Reporting requirements.

    Dated: October 7, 2016. Jeff Morris, Acting Director, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics.
    [FR Doc. 2016-25440 Filed 10-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 50 CFR Parts 223 and 224 [Docket No. 160809713-6909-01] RIN 0648-XE804 Revisions to Hatchery Programs Included as Part of Pacific Salmon and Steelhead Species Listed Under the Endangered Species Act AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Proposed rule.

    SUMMARY:

    We, NMFS, announce proposed revisions to the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) to update the descriptions of Pacific salmon and steelhead (Oncorhynchus spp.) species currently listed as threatened or endangered under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA). Revisions include the addition or removal of specific hatchery programs, as well as clarifying changes to the names of specific hatchery programs included as part of the listings of certain Pacific salmon and steelhead species. These proposed changes are informed by our recently completed 5-year reviews under ESA. We do not propose to change the ESA-listing status of any species under NMFS' jurisdiction, or modify any critical habitat designation.

    DATES:

    Comments and information regarding the proposed revisions must be received by December 20, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments, information, or data, identified by the code NOAA-NMFS-2016-0110 by either of the following methods:

    Electronic Submissions: Submit all electronic comments via the Federal eRulemaking Portal. Go to www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=NOAA-NMFS-2016-0110. Click the “Comment Now” icon, complete the required fields, and enter or attach your comments.

    Mail: Send comments, identified with “Proposed Changes to Listed Salmon and Steelhead Hatchery Programs” to Chris Yates, Assistant Regional Administrator, Protected Resources Division, NMFS, West Coast Regional Office, Attn: Claire McGrath, 1201 NE. Lloyd Blvd., Suite 1100, Portland, OR 97232.

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

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Claire McGrath, NMFS, West Coast Region, Protected Resources Division, at the above address, by phone at (503) 230-5433, or by email at [email protected] You may also contact Maggie Miller, NMFS, Office of Protected Resources, (301) 427-8403. Copies of the documents supporting this proposed rule can be found on our West Coast Region Web site at: www.westcoast.fisheries.gov.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background

    Section 4 of the ESA provides for both NMFS and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) to make determinations as to the endangered or threatened status of “species” in response to petitions or on their own initiative. In accordance with the ESA, we (NMFS) make determinations as to the threatened or endangered status of species by regulation. These regulations provide the text for each species' listing and include the content required by the ESA section 4(c)(1). We enumerate and maintain a list of species under our jurisdiction which we have determined to be threatened or endangered at 50 CFR 223.102 (threatened species) and 50 CFR 224.101 (endangered species) (hereafter referred to as the “NMFS Lists”). The FWS maintains two master lists of all threatened and endangered species, i.e., both species under NMFS' jurisdiction and species under FWS' jurisdiction (the “FWS Lists”) at 50 CFR 17.11 (threatened and endangered animals) and 50 CFR 17.12 (threatened and endangered plants). The term “species” for listing purposes under the ESA includes the following entities: Species, subspecies, and, for vertebrates only, “distinct population segments (DPSs).” Pacific salmon are listed as “evolutionarily significant units (ESUs),” which are essentially equivalent to DPSs for the purpose of the ESA. For West Coast salmon and steelhead, many of the ESU and DPS descriptions include fish originating from specific artificial propagation programs (e.g., hatcheries) that, along with their naturally-produced counterparts, are included as part of the listed species.

    The ESA requires regular review of listed species to determine whether a species should be delisted, reclassified, or retain its current classification (16 U.S.C. 1533(c)(2)). Recently, we completed a 5-year review of the status of ESA-listed salmon ESUs and steelhead DPSs in California, Oregon, Idaho, and Washington (81 FR 33468, May 26, 2016). As part of the 5-year review, we reviewed the classification of all West Coast salmonid hatchery programs, taking into consideration the origin for each hatchery stock, the location of release of hatchery fish, and the degree of known or inferred genetic divergence between the hatchery stock and the local natural population(s). We used criteria in NMFS' Policy on the Consideration of Hatchery-Origin Fish in Endangered Species Act Listing Determinations for Pacific Salmon and Steelhead (“Hatchery Listing Policy”) (70 FR 37204, June 28, 2005) to guide our review. The Hatchery Listing Policy states that hatchery stocks will be considered part of an ESU/DPS if they exhibit a level of genetic divergence relative to the local natural population(s) that is not more than what occurs within the ESU/DPS.

    In a NMFS internal memorandum, Jones (2015) summarizes the results of our most recent hatchery program review. We identified 28 hatchery programs for which we recommend a change in classification, i.e., adding the program to or removing it from an ESU/DPS. We propose to remove 5 hatchery programs because they have been terminated and the last cohort of adult hatchery-origin fish has returned. We propose to add 23 hatchery programs to the relevant listed ESU/DPS because our 5-year review and hatchery program evaluation (Jones 2015) concluded that the program exhibits a level of genetic divergence relative to the local natural population(s) that is not more than what occurs within the ESU/DPS. Consistent with the Hatchery Listing Policy, such programs should be included and listed as part of the ESU/DPS. The reader is referred to the 5-year review reports and Jones (2015) for a more detailed explanation of the proposed changes summarized below.

    We identified 26 hatchery programs for which we propose a name change. These name changes reflect an effort to standardize conventions for naming hatchery programs (e.g., we recommend removing Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) hatchery stock identification numbers from hatchery program names) or otherwise clarify the specific hatchery program that is included in a listing. In addition, we recommend minor changes in terminology used to describe three ESU/DPSs for which there are no other proposed revisions in order to standardize species descriptions. We summarize the proposed revisions below and provide the full text of proposed updates to the listed species' descriptions at 50 CFR parts 223 and 224 in the regulatory text at the end of this Federal Register notice. After considering public comments on these proposed revisions, we will finalize this proposed rule and then coordinate with the FWS to ensure that the changes are reflected in the FWS Lists at 50 CFR 17.11.

    Endangered Species at 50 CFR 224.101 Revisions to Endangered Species Descriptions

    Below we summarize proposed revisions to the descriptions of our endangered species listed in 50 CFR 224.101. Based on our recently completed 5-year reviews of the status of ESA-listed salmon ESUs and steelhead DPSs in California, Oregon, Idaho, and Washington, and our evaluation of West Coast salmon and steelhead hatchery programs in Jones (2015) (see http://www.westcoast.fisheries.noaa.gov/publications/status_reviews/salmon_steelhead/2016_status_review.html for these supporting documents), the description of two endangered species must be revised to account for changes in the classification of specific artificial propagation programs considered part of the respective ESUs. The addition or termination of an artificial propagation program does not constitute a listing or delisting of an ESU, but simply a revision to reflect the actual current composition of the listed ESU. We also propose minor changes in the description terminology of two other endangered species to standardize species descriptions.

    Salmon, Chinook (Sacramento River Winter-Run ESU)

    We propose to revise this description to read: “Naturally spawned winter-run Chinook salmon originating from the Sacramento River and its tributaries. Also, winter-run Chinook salmon from the following artificial propagation programs: The Livingston Stone National Fish Hatchery (supplementation and captive broodstock).” The change proposed for this DPS is to add the captive broodstock component of the Livingston Stone National Fish Hatchery Program, which was restarted in 2015 after being implemented from 1991 to 2007 and then discontinued. The source of fish for both the captive broodstock and supplementation programs is local, natural-origin winter Chinook salmon in the upper Sacramento River.

    Salmon, Chinook (Upper Columbia River Spring-Run ESU)

    We propose to revise this description to read: “Naturally spawned spring-run Chinook salmon originating from Columbia River tributaries upstream of the Rock Island Dam and downstream of Chief Joseph Dam (excluding the Okanogan River subbasin). Also, spring-run Chinook salmon from the following artificial propagation programs: The Twisp River Program; Methow Program; Winthrop National Fish Hatchery Program; Chiwawa River Program; White River Program; and the Nason Creek Program.” The changes proposed for this ESU include: (1) Removing the Chewuch River Program as an artificial propagation program included in this ESU because it is now considered part of the Methow Program; and (2) adding the new Nason Creek Program because the source for these fish is local, natural-origin fish from Nason Creek.

    Salmon, Coho (Central California Coast ESU)

    We propose to revise this description to read: “Naturally spawned coho salmon originating from rivers south of Punta Gorda, California, to and including Aptos Creek, as well as such coho salmon originating from tributaries to San Francisco Bay. Also, coho salmon from the following artificial propagation programs: The Don Clausen Fish Hatchery Captive Broodstock Program; the Scott Creek/King Fisher Flats Conservation Program; and the Scott Creek Captive Broodstock Program.” There are no proposed changes in hatchery programs included in this ESU. We recommend minor changes in terminology to standardize species descriptions.

    Salmon, Sockeye (Snake River ESU)

    We propose to revise this description to read: “Naturally spawned anadromous and residual sockeye salmon originating from the Snake River basin. Also, sockeye salmon from the Redfish Lake Captive Broodstock Program.” There are no proposed changes in hatchery programs included in this ESU. We recommend minor changes in terminology to standardize species descriptions.

    Threatened Species at 50 CFR 223.102 Revisions to Threatened Species Descriptions

    Below we summarize proposed revisions to the descriptions of threatened species listed in 50 CFR 223.102. Based on our recently completed 5-year reviews of the status of ESA-listed salmon ESUs and steelhead DPSs in California, Oregon, Idaho, and Washington (see http://www.westcoast.fisheries.noaa.gov/publications/status_reviews/salmon_steelhead/2016_status_review.html for status review documents), the descriptions of 17 threatened species must be revised to account for changes in the classification or name of specific artificial propagation programs associated with that ESU or DPS. The addition or termination of these artificial propagation programs does not constitute a listing or delisting of an ESU or DPS, but simply a revision to the composition of the listed ESU or DPS. We also propose minor changes in the description terminology of one other threatened species to standardize species descriptions.

    Salmon, Chinook (Lower Columbia River ESU)

    We propose to revise this description to read: “Naturally spawned Chinook salmon originating from the Columbia River and its tributaries downstream of a transitional point east of the Hood and White Salmon Rivers, and any such fish originating from the Willamette River and its tributaries below Willamette Falls. Not included in this DPS are: (1) Spring-run Chinook salmon originating from the Clackamas River; (2) fall-run Chinook salmon originating from Upper Columbia River bright hatchery stocks, that spawn in the mainstem Columbia River below Bonneville Dam, and in other tributaries upstream from the Sandy River to the Hood and White Salmon Rivers; (3) spring-run Chinook salmon originating from the Round Butte Hatchery (Deschutes River, Oregon) and spawning in the Hood River; (4) spring-run Chinook salmon originating from the Carson National Fish Hatchery and spawning in the Wind River; and (5) naturally spawned Chinook salmon originating from the Rogue River Fall Chinook Program. This DPS does include Chinook salmon from the following artificial propagation programs: The Big Creek Tule Chinook Program; Astoria High School Salmon-Trout Enhancement Program (STEP) Tule Chinook Program; Warrenton High School STEP Tule Chinook Program; Cowlitz Tule Chinook Program; North Fork Toutle Tule Chinook Program; Kalama Tule Chinook Program; Washougal River Tule Chinook Program; Spring Creek National Fish Hatchery (NFH) Tule Chinook Program; Cowlitz Spring Chinook Program in the Upper Cowlitz River and the Cispus River; Friends of the Cowlitz Spring Chinook Program; Kalama River Spring Chinook Program; Lewis River Spring Chinook Program; Fish First Spring Chinook Program; Sandy River Hatchery Program; Deep River Net Pens-Washougal Program; Klaskanine Hatchery Program; Bonneville Hatchery Program; and the Cathlamet Channel Net Pens Program.” The changes proposed for this ESU include: (1) Adding the Deep River Net Pens-Washougal Program because these fish are returning hatchery-origin adults from the Washougal River Tule Chinook Program, which is included in the ESU; (2) adding the Klaskanine Hatchery Program because the source for these fish is the Big Creek Tule Chinook Program, which is included in the ESU; (3) adding the Bonneville Hatchery Program because the source for these fish is the Spring Creek NFH Tule Chinook Program, which is included in the ESU; and (4) adding the Cathlamet Channel Net Pens Program, because the source for these fish is the Cowlitz Spring Chinook Program in the Upper Cowlitz River, which is included in the ESU. Jones (2015) concluded that, given the within-ESU source of broodstock for these hatchery programs, they exhibit a level of genetic divergence relative to the local natural population(s) that is not more than what occurs within the ESU/DPS. Consistent with the Hatchery Listing Policy, Jones (2015) recommended that these hatchery programs be proposed for inclusion as part of the Lower Columbia River Chinook ESU.

    Salmon, Chinook (Puget Sound ESU)

    We propose to revise this description to read: “Naturally spawned Chinook salmon originating from rivers flowing into Puget Sound from the Elwha River (inclusive) eastward, including rivers in Hood Canal, South Sound, North Sound and the Strait of Georgia. Also, Chinook salmon from the following artificial propagation programs: the Kendall Creek Hatchery Program; Marblemount Hatchery Program (spring subyearlings and summer-run); Brenner Creek Hatchery Program (summer-run and fall-run); Whitehorse Springs Pond Program; Wallace River Hatchery Program (yearlings and subyearlings); Issaquah Hatchery Program; White River Hatchery Program; White Acclimation Pond Program; Voights Creek Hatchery Program; Diru Creek Program; Clear Creek Program; Kalama Creek Program; George Adams Hatchery Program; Hamma Hatchery Program; Dungeness/Hurd Creek Hatchery Program; Elwha Channel Hatchery Program; Skookum Creek Hatchery Spring-run Program; Bernie Kai-Kai Gobin (Tulalip) Hatchery-Cascade Program; North Fork Skokomish River Spring-run Program; the Soos Creek Hatchery Program (subyearlings and yearlings); the Fish Restoration Facility Program; the Bernie Kai-Kai Gobin (Tulalip) Hatchery-Skykomish Program; and the Hupp Springs Hatchery-Adult Returns to Minter Creek Program.” The changes proposed for this ESU include: (1) Removing the Icy Creek Hatchery Program as an artificial propagation program included in this ESU because it is now considered part of the Soos Creek Program; (2) adding the Bernie Kai-Kai Gobin (Tulalip) Hatchery-Cascade Program because the source for these fish is the Marblemount Hatchery Program (spring subyearlings), which is included in the ESU; (3) adding the new North Fork Skokomish River Spring-run Program because the source for these fish is the Marblemount Hatchery Program (spring subyearlings), which is included in the ESU; (4) removing the Rick's Pond Hatchery Program, a terminated program for which all hatchery-origin adults have returned; (5) updating the name of the Soos Creek Hatchery Program, which is included in the ESU, to the Soos Creek Hatchery Program (subyearlings and yearlings); (6) updating the name of the Keta Creek Hatchery Program, which is included in the ESU, to the Fish Restoration Facility Program; (7) updating the name of the Tulalip Bay Program, which is included in the ESU, to the Bernie Kai-Kai Gobin (Tulalip) Hatchery-Skykomish Program; (8) updating the name of the Hupp Springs Hatchery Program, which is included in the ESU, to the Hupp Springs Hatchery-Adult Returns to Minter Creek Program; and (9) updating the name of the Harvey Creek Hatchery Program, which is included in the ESU, to the Brenner Creek Hatchery Program.

    Salmon, Chinook (Snake River Fall-Run ESU)

    We propose to revise this description to read: “Naturally spawned fall-run Chinook salmon originating from the mainstem Snake River below Hells Canyon Dam and from the Tucannon River, Grande Ronde River, Imnaha River, Salmon River, and Clearwater River subbasins. Also, fall-run Chinook salmon from the following artificial propagation programs: the Lyons Ferry Hatchery Program; Fall Chinook Acclimation Ponds Program; Nez Perce Tribal Hatchery Program; and the Idaho Power Program.” The change proposed for this ESU is to update the name of the Oxbow Hatchery Program, which is included in the ESU, to the Idaho Power Program.

    Salmon, Chinook (Snake River Spring/Summer-Run ESU)

    We propose to revise this description to read: “Naturally spawned spring/summer-run Chinook salmon originating from the mainstem Snake River and the Tucannon River, Grande Ronde River, Imnaha River, and Salmon River subbasins. Also, spring/summer-run Chinook salmon from the following artificial propagation programs: The Tucannon River Program; Lostine River Program; Catherine Creek Program; Lookingglass Hatchery Program; Upper Grande Ronde Program; Imnaha River Program; McCall Hatchery Program; Johnson Creek Artificial Propagation Enhancement Program; Pahsimeroi Hatchery Program; Sawtooth Hatchery Program; Yankee Fork Program; Dollar Creek Program; Panther Creek Program; and the Big Sheep Creek-Adult outplanting from Imnaha Program.” The changes proposed for this ESU include: (1) Adding the Yankee Fork Program because the source for these fish is the Sawtooth Hatchery Program, which are included in the ESU; (2) adding the Dollar Creek Program because the source for these fish is the McCall Hatchery Program, which is included in the ESU; (3) adding the Panther Creek Program because the source for these fish is the Pahsimeroi Hatchery Program, which is included in the ESU; and (4) updating the name of the Big Sheep Creek Program, which is included in the ESU, to the Big Sheep Creek-Adult outplanting from Imnaha Program.

    Salmon, Chinook (Upper Willamette River ESU)

    We propose to revise this description to read: “Naturally spawned spring-run Chinook salmon originating from the Clackamas River and from the Willamette River and its tributaries above Willamette Falls. Also, spring-run Chinook salmon from the following artificial propagation programs: The McKenzie River Hatchery Program; Willamette Hatchery Program; Clackamas Hatchery Program; North Santiam River Program; South Santiam River Program; and the Mollala River Program.” The changes proposed for this ESU include: (1) Updating the name of the Marion Forks Hatchery/North Fork Santiam Hatchery Program (ODFW Stock #21), which is included in the ESU, to the North Santiam River Program; (2) separating the South Santiam Hatchery Program (ODFW Stock #24) in the South Fork Santiam River and Mollala River, which is included in the ESU, into two programs named the South Santiam River Program and the Mollala River Program; and (3) removing Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) stock numbers from the names of the McKenzie River Hatchery Program, Willamette Hatchery Program, and Clackamas Hatchery Program.

    Salmon, Chum (Columbia River ESU)

    We propose to revise this description to read: “Naturally spawned chum salmon originating from the Columbia River and its tributaries in Washington and Oregon. Also, chum salmon from the following artificial propagation programs: The Grays River Program; Washougal River Hatchery/Duncan Creek Program; and the Big Creek Hatchery Program.” The change proposed for this ESU is to add the new Big Creek Hatchery Program because the source for these fish is local, natural-origin fish from the Grays River, which is included in the ESU.

    Salmon, Chum (Hood Canal Summer-Run ESU)

    We propose to revise this description to read: “Naturally spawned summer-run chum salmon originating from Hood Canal and its tributaries as well as from Olympic Peninsula Rivers between Hood Canal and Dungeness Bay (inclusive). Also, summer-run chum salmon from the following artificial propagation programs: The Lilliwaup Creek Fish Hatchery Program; and the Tahuya River Program.” The changes proposed for this ESU include removing two terminated programs for which all hatchery-origin adults have returned: (1) The Hamma Fish Hatchery Program; and (2) the Jimmycomelately Creek Fish Hatchery Program.

    Salmon, Coho (Lower Columbia River ESU)

    We propose to revise this description to read: “Naturally spawned coho salmon originating from the Columbia River and its tributaries downstream from the Big White Salmon and Hood Rivers (inclusive) and any such fish originating from the Willamette River and its tributaries below Willamette Falls. Also, coho salmon from the following artificial propagation programs: The Grays River Program; Peterson Coho Project; Big Creek Hatchery Program; Astoria High School Salmon-Trout Enhancement Program (STEP) Coho Program; Warrenton High School STEP Coho Program; Cowlitz Type-N Coho Program in the Upper and Lower Cowlitz Rivers; Cowlitz Game and Anglers Coho Program; Friends of the Cowlitz Coho Program; North Fork Toutle River Hatchery Program; Kalama River Type-N Coho Program; Kalama River Type-S Coho Program; Lewis River Type-N Coho Program; Lewis River Type-S Coho Program; Fish First Wild Coho Program; Fish First Type-N Coho Program; Syverson Project Type-N Coho Program; Washougal River Type-N Coho Program; Eagle Creek National Fish Hatchery Program; Sandy Hatchery Program; Bonneville/Cascade/Oxbow Complex Hatchery Program; Clatsop County Fisheries Net Pen Program; and the Clatsop County Fisheries/Klaskanine Hatchery Program.” The changes proposed for this ESU include: (1) Adding the Clatsop County Fisheries Net Pen Program because the broodstock origin is Tanner Creek, which is included in the ESU; (2) adding the Clatsop County Fisheries/Klaskanine Hatchery Program because the source for these fish is the Big Creek Hatchery Program, which is included in the ESU; and (3) removing ODFW stock numbers from the names of the Big Creek Hatchery Program, Sandy Hatchery Program, and Bonneville/Cascade/Oxbow Complex Hatchery Program.

    Salmon, Coho (Oregon Coast ESU)

    We propose to revise this description to read: “Naturally spawned coho salmon originating from coastal rivers south of the Columbia River and north of Cape Blanco. Also, coho salmon from the Cow Creek Hatchery Program.” The change proposed for this ESU is to remove the ODFW stock number from the name of the Cow Creek Hatchery Program.

    Salmon, Coho (Southern Oregon/Northern California Coast ESU)

    We propose to revise this description to read: “Naturally spawned coho salmon originating from coastal streams and rivers between Cape Blanco, Oregon, and Punta Gorda, California. Also, coho salmon from the following artificial propagation programs: The Cole Rivers Hatchery Program; Trinity River Hatchery Program; and the Iron Gate Hatchery Program.” The change proposed for this ESU is to remove the ODFW stock number from the name of the Cole Rivers Hatchery Program.

    Salmon, Sockeye (Ozette Lake ESU)

    We propose to revise this description to read: “Naturally spawned sockeye salmon originating from the Ozette River and Ozette Lake and its tributaries. Also, sockeye salmon from the Umbrella Creek/Big River Hatchery Program.” The change proposed for this ESU is to combine the Umbrella Creek Hatchery Program and Big River Hatchery Program, which are included in the ESU, into one program called the Umbrella Creek/Big River Hatchery Program. This integrated program uses broodstock from Umbrella Creek that were derived from natural-origin fish from Ozette Lake, and releases fish into Umbrella Creek and Big River.

    Steelhead (California Central Valley DPS)

    We propose to revise this description to read: “Naturally spawned anadromous O. mykiss (steelhead) originating below natural and manmade impassable barriers from the Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers and their tributaries; excludes such fish originating from San Francisco and San Pablo Bays and their tributaries. This DPS includes steelhead from the following artificial propagation programs: The Coleman National Fish Hatchery Program; Feather River Fish Hatchery Program; and the Mokelumne River Hatchery Program.” The change proposed for this DPS is to add the Mokelumne River Hatchery Program because fish in this program are genetically most similar to Feather River Fish Hatchery Program steelhead, which are included in the DPS.

    Steelhead (Central California Coast DPS)

    We propose to revise this description to read: “Naturally spawned anadromous O. mykiss (steelhead) originating below natural and manmade impassable barriers from the Russian River to and including Aptos Creek, and all drainages of San Francisco and San Pablo Bays eastward to Chipps Island at the confluence of the Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers. Also, steelhead from the following artificial propagation programs: the Don Clausen Fish Hatchery Program and the Kingfisher Flat Hatchery Program (Monterey Bay Salmon and Trout Project).” There are no proposed changes in hatchery programs included in this ESU. We recommend minor changes in terminology to standardize species descriptions.

    Steelhead (Lower Columbia River DPS)

    We propose to revise this description to read: “Naturally spawned anadromous O. mykiss (steelhead) originating below natural and manmade impassable barriers from rivers between the Cowlitz and Wind Rivers (inclusive) and the Willamette and Hood Rivers (inclusive); excludes such fish originating from the upper Willamette River basin above Willamette Falls. This DPS includes steelhead from the following artificial propagation programs: The Cowlitz Trout Hatchery Late Winter-run Program (Lower Cowlitz); Kalama River Wild Winter-run and Summer-run Programs; Clackamas Hatchery Late Winter-run Program; Sandy Hatchery Late Winter-run Program; Hood River Winter-run Program; Lewis River Wild Late-run Winter Steelhead Program; Upper Cowlitz Wild Program; and the Tilton River Wild Program.” The changes proposed for this DPS include: (1) Adding the recently initiated Upper Cowlitz Wild Program because the source for these fish is local, natural-origin fish from the Upper Cowlitz River, which is included in the DPS; (2) adding the recently initiated Tilton River Wild Program because the source for these fish is local, natural-origin fish from the Tilton River; and (3) removing ODFW stock numbers from the names of the Clackamas Hatchery Late Winter-run Program, Sandy Hatchery Late Winter-run Program, and Hood River Winter-run Program.

    Steelhead (Middle Columbia River DPS)

    We propose to revise this description to read: “Naturally spawned anadromous O. mykiss (steelhead) originating below natural and manmade impassable barriers from the Columbia River and its tributaries upstream of the Wind and Hood Rivers (exclusive) to and including the Yakima River; excludes such fish originating from the Snake River basin. This DPS includes steelhead from the following artificial propagation programs: The Touchet River Endemic Program; Yakima River Kelt Reconditioning Program (in Satus Creek, Toppenish Creek, Naches River, and Upper Yakima River); Umatilla River Program; and the Deschutes River Program. This DPS does not include steelhead that are designated as part of an experimental population.” The change proposed for this DPS is to remove ODFW stock numbers from the names of the Umatilla River Program and the Deschutes River Program.

    Steelhead (Puget Sound DPS)

    We propose to revise this description to read: “Naturally spawned anadromous O. mykiss (steelhead) originating below natural and manmade impassable barriers from rivers flowing into Puget Sound from the Elwha River (inclusive) eastward, including rivers in Hood Canal, South Sound, North Sound, and the Strait of Georgia. Also, steelhead from the following artificial propagation programs: The Green River Natural Program; White River Winter Steelhead Supplementation Program; Hood Canal Steelhead Supplementation Off-station Projects in the Dewatto, Skokomish, and Duckabush Rivers; Lower Elwha Fish Hatchery Wild Steelhead Recovery Program; and the Fish Restoration Facility Program.” The change proposed for this DPS is to add the new Fish Restoration Facility Program because the source for these fish is the local, natural-origin population within the Duwamish/Green River, which is included in the DPS.

    Steelhead (Snake River Basin DPS)

    We propose to revise this description to read: “Naturally spawned anadromous O. mykiss (steelhead) originating below natural and manmade impassable barriers from the Snake River basin. Also, steelhead from the following artificial propagation programs: The Tucannon River Program; Dworshak National Fish Hatchery Program; Lolo Creek Program; North Fork Clearwater Program; East Fork Salmon River Natural Program; Little Sheep Creek/Imnaha River Hatchery Program; Little Salmon River (B-run) Program; Squaw Creek Program; Yankee Fork Program; Pahsimeroi River Program; and the South Fork Clearwater Hatchery Program.” The changes proposed for this DPS include: (1) Adding the Little Salmon River (B-run) Program and three Upper Salmon River (B-run) Programs (Squaw Creek Program, Yankee Fork Program, and Pahsimeroi River Program), because these fish are B-run steelhead from the Dworshak National Fish Hatchery Program and North Fork Clearwater Program, which are included in the DPS; (2) adding the South Fork Clearwater Hatchery Program because the source for these fish is the Dworshak National Fish Hatchery Program and North Fork Clearwater Program, which are included in the DPS and, based on the best available scientific information, likely have similar life history and genetics to the local, natural population in the SF Clearwater River; and (3) removing the ODFW stock number from the name of the Little Sheep Creek/Imnaha River Hatchery Program.

    Steelhead (Upper Columbia River DPS)

    We propose to revise this description to read: “Naturally spawned anadromous O. mykiss (steelhead) originating below natural and manmade impassable barriers from the Columbia River and its tributaries upstream of the Yakima River to the U.S.-Canada border. Also, steelhead from the following artificial propagation programs: The Wenatchee River Program; Wells Hatchery Program (in the Methow and Okanogan Rivers); Winthrop National Fish Hatchery Program; Ringold Hatchery Program; and the Okanogan River Program.” The change proposed for this DPS is to update the name of the Omak Creek Program, which is included in the DPS, to the Okanogan River Program.

    References

    Copies of previous Federal Register notices and related reference materials are available on the Internet at http://www.westcoast.fisheries.noaa.gov/publications/frn/federal_register_notices.html, or upon request (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section).

    Classification Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Flexibility Act, and Paperwork Reduction Act

    As noted in the Conference Report on the 1982 amendments to the ESA, economic impacts cannot be considered when assessing the status of a species. Therefore, the economic analysis requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act are not applicable to the listing process. In addition, this proposed rule is exempt from review under Executive Order 12866. This proposed rule does not contain a collection of information requirement for the purposes of the Paperwork Reduction Act.

    Federalism

    In accordance with Executive Order 13132, we determined that this proposed rule does not have significant Federalism effects and that a Federalism assessment is not required. In keeping with the intent of the Administration and Congress to provide continuing and meaningful dialogue on issues of mutual state and Federal interest, this proposed rule will be shared with the relevant state agencies.

    National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA)

    The 1982 amendments to the ESA, in section 4(b)(1)(A), restrict the information that may be considered when assessing species for listing. Based on this limitation of criteria for a listing decision and the opinion in Pacific Legal Foundation v. Andrus, 657 F. 2d 829 (6th Cir. 1981), we have concluded that NEPA does not apply to ESA listing actions.

    Government-to-Government Relationship With Tribes

    Executive Order 13084 requires that if NMFS issues a regulation that significantly or uniquely affects the communities of Indian tribal governments and imposes substantial direct compliance costs on those communities, NMFS must consult with those governments or the Federal government must provide the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance costs incurred by the tribal governments. This proposed rule does not impose substantial direct compliance costs on Indian tribal governments or communities. Accordingly, the requirements of section 3(b) of E.O. 13084 do not apply to this final rule. Nonetheless, during our 5-year review of salmon and steelhead we solicited information from the tribes, met with several tribal governments and associated tribal fisheries commissions, and provided the opportunity for all interested tribes to comment on the proposed changes to the species' status and descriptions and discuss any concerns they may have. We will continue to inform potentially affected tribal governments, solicit their input, and coordinate on future management actions pertaining to the listed species addressed in this proposed rule.

    List of Subjects 50 CFR Part 223

    Endangered and threatened species, Exports, Imports, Transportation.

    50 CFR Part 224

    Administrative practice and procedure, Endangered and threatened species, Exports, Imports, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Transportation.

    Dated: October 17, 2016. Samuel D. Rauch III, Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine Fisheries Service.

    For the reasons set out in the preamble, we propose to amend 50 CFR parts 223 and 224 as follows:

    PART 223—THREATENED MARINE AND ANADROMOUS SPECIES 1. The authority citation for part 223 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    16 U.S.C. 1531-1543; subpart B, § 223.201-202 also issued under 16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.; 16 U.S.C. 5503(d) for § 223.206(d)(9).

    2. In § 223.102, amend the table in paragraph (e) by revising the entries for “Salmon, Chinook (Lower Columbia River ESU);” “Salmon, Chinook (Puget Sound ESU);” “Salmon, Chinook (Snake River fall-run ESU);” “Salmon, Chinook (Snake River spring/summer-run ESU);” “Salmon, Chinook (Upper Willamette River ESU);” “Salmon, chum (Columbia River ESU);” “Salmon, chum (Hood Canal summer-run ESU);” “Salmon, coho (Lower Columbia River ESU);” “Salmon, coho (Oregon Coast ESU);” “Salmon, coho (Southern Oregon/Northern California Coast ESU);” “Salmon, sockeye (Ozette Lake ESU);” “Steelhead (California Central Valley DPS);” “Steelhead (Central California Coast DPS);” “Steelhead (Lower Columbia River DPS);” “Steelhead (Middle Columbia River DPS);” “Steelhead (Puget Sound DPS);” “Steelhead (Snake River Basin DPS);” and “Steelhead (Upper Columbia River DPS)” to read as follows:
    § 223.102 Enumeration of threatened marine and anadromous species.

    (e) * * *

    Species 1 Common name Scientific name Description of listed entity Citation(s)
  • for listing
  • determination(s)
  • Critical habitat ESA rules
    *         *         *         *         *         *         * Fishes *         *         *         *         *         *         * Salmon, Chinook (Lower Columbia River ESU) Oncorhynchus tshawytscha Naturally spawned Chinook salmon originating from the Columbia River and its tributaries downstream of a transitional point east of the Hood and White Salmon Rivers, and any such fish originating from the Willamette River and its tributaries below Willamette Falls. Not included in this DPS are: 70 FR 37160, Jun 28, 2005 226.212 223.203 (1) Spring-run Chinook salmon originating from the Clackamas River; (2) fall-run Chinook salmon originating from Upper Columbia River bright hatchery stocks, that spawn in the mainstem Columbia River below Bonneville Dam, and in other tributaries upstream from the Sandy River to the Hood and White Salmon Rivers; (3) spring-run Chinook salmon originating from the Round Butte Hatchery (Deschutes River, Oregon) and spawning in the Hood River; (4) spring-run Chinook salmon originating from the Carson National Fish Hatchery and spawning in the Wind River; and (5) naturally spawned Chinook salmon originating from the Rogue River Fall Chinook Program. This DPS does include Chinook salmon from the following artificial propagation programs: The Big Creek Tule Chinook Program; Astoria High School Salmon-Trout Enhancement Program (STEP) Tule Chinook Program; Warrenton High School STEP Tule Chinook Program; Cowlitz Tule Chinook Program; North Fork Toutle Tule Chinook Program; Kalama Tule Chinook Program; Washougal River Tule Chinook Program; Spring Creek National Fish Hatchery (NFH) Tule Chinook Program; Cowlitz Spring Chinook Program in the Upper Cowlitz River and the Cispus River; Friends of the Cowlitz Spring Chinook Program; Kalama River Spring Chinook Program; Lewis River Spring Chinook Program; Fish First Spring Chinook Program; Sandy River Hatchery Program; Deep River Net Pens-Washougal Program; Klaskanine Hatchery Program; Bonneville Hatchery Program; and the Cathlamet Channel Net Pens Program Salmon, Chinook (Puget Sound ESU) Oncorhynchus tshawytscha Naturally spawned Chinook salmon originating from rivers flowing into Puget Sound from the Elwha River (inclusive) eastward, including rivers in Hood Canal, South Sound, North Sound and the Strait of Georgia. Also, Chinook salmon from the following artificial propagation programs: The Kendall Creek Hatchery Program; Marblemount Hatchery Program (spring subyearlings and summer-run); Brenner Creek Hatchery Program (summer-run and fall-run); Whitehorse Springs Pond Program; Wallace River Hatchery Program (yearlings and subyearlings); Issaquah Hatchery Program; White River Hatchery Program; White Acclimation Pond Program; Voights Creek Hatchery Program; Diru Creek Program; Clear Creek Program; Kalama Creek Program; George Adams Hatchery Program; Hamma Hamma Hatchery Program; Dungeness/Hurd Creek Hatchery Program; Elwha Channel Hatchery Program; Skookum Creek Hatchery Spring-run Program; Bernie Kai-Kai Gobin (Tulalip) Hatchery-Cascade Program; North Fork Skokomish River Spring-run Program; the Soos Creek Hatchery Program (subyearlings and yearlings); the Fish Restoration Facility Program; the Bernie Kai-Kai Gobin (Tulalip) Hatchery-Skykomish Program; and the Hupp Springs Hatchery-Adult Returns to Minter Creek Program 70 FR 37160, Jun 28, 2005 226.212 223.203 Salmon, Chinook (Snake River fall-run ESU) Oncorhynchus tshawytscha Naturally spawned fall-run Chinook salmon originating from the mainstem Snake River below Hells Canyon Dam and from the Tucannon River, Grande Ronde River, Imnaha River, Salmon River, and Clearwater River subbasins. Also, fall-run Chinook salmon from the following artificial propagation programs: The Lyons Ferry Hatchery Program; Fall Chinook Acclimation Ponds Program; Nez Perce Tribal Hatchery Program; and the Idaho Power Program 70 FR 37160, Jun 28, 2005 226.205 223.203 Salmon, Chinook (Snake River spring/summer-run ESU) Oncorhynchus tshawytscha Naturally spawned spring/summer-run Chinook salmon originating from the mainstem Snake River and the Tucannon River, Grande Ronde River, Imnaha River, and Salmon River subbasins. Also, spring/summer-run Chinook salmon from the following artificial propagation programs: The Tucannon River Program; Lostine River Program; Catherine Creek Program; Lookingglass Hatchery Program; Upper Grande Ronde Program; Imnaha River Program; McCall Hatchery Program; Johnson Creek Artificial Propagation Enhancement Program; Pahsimeroi Hatchery Program; Sawtooth Hatchery Program; Yankee Fork Program; Dollar Creek Program; Panther Creek Program; and the Big Sheep Creek-Adult outplanting from Imnaha Program 70 FR 37160, Jun 28, 2005 226.205 223.203 Salmon, Chinook (Upper Willamette River ESU) Oncorhynchus tshawytscha Naturally spawned spring-run Chinook salmon originating from the Clackamas River and from the Willamette River and its tributaries above Willamette Falls. Also, spring-run Chinook salmon from the following artificial propagation programs: The McKenzie River Hatchery Program; Willamette Hatchery Program; Clackamas Hatchery Program; North Santiam River Program; South Santiam River Program; and the Mollala River Program 70 FR 37160, Jun 28, 2005 226.212 223.203 *         *         *         *         *         *         * Salmon, chum (Columbia River ESU) Oncorhynchus keta Naturally spawned chum salmon originating from the Columbia River and its tributaries in Washington and Oregon. Also, chum salmon from the following artificial propagation programs: The Grays River Program; Washougal River Hatchery/Duncan Creek Program; and the Big Creek Hatchery Program 70 FR 37160, Jun 28, 2005 226.212 223.203 Salmon, chum (Hood Canal summer-run ESU) Oncorhynchus keta Naturally spawned summer-run chum salmon originating from Hood Canal and its tributaries as well as from Olympic Peninsula rivers between Hood Canal and Dungeness Bay (inclusive). Also, summer-run chum salmon from the following artificial propagation programs: the Lilliwaup Creek Fish Hatchery Program; and the Tahuya River Program 70 FR 37160, Jun 28, 2005 226.212 223.203 Salmon, coho (Lower Columbia River ESU) Oncorhynchus kisutch Naturally spawned coho salmon originating from the Columbia River and its tributaries downstream from the Big White Salmon and Hood Rivers (inclusive) and any such fish originating from the Willamette River and its tributaries below Willamette Falls. Also, coho salmon from the following artificial propagation programs: The Grays River Program; Peterson Coho Project; Big Creek Hatchery Program; Astoria High School Salmon-Trout Enhancement Program (STEP) Coho Program; Warrenton High School STEP Coho Program; Cowlitz Type-N Coho Program in the Upper and Lower Cowlitz Rivers; Cowlitz Game and Anglers Coho Program; Friends of the Cowlitz Coho Program; North Fork Toutle River Hatchery Program; Kalama River Type-N Coho Program; Kalama River Type-S Coho Program; Lewis River Type-N Coho Program; Lewis River Type-S Coho Program; Fish First Wild Coho Program; Fish First Type-N Coho Program; Syverson Project Type-N Coho Program; Washougal River Type-N Coho Program; Eagle Creek National Fish Hatchery Program; Sandy Hatchery Program; Bonneville/Cascade/Oxbow Complex Hatchery Program; Clatsop County Fisheries Net Pen Program; and the Clatsop County Fisheries/Klaskanine Hatchery Program 70 FR 37160, Jun 28, 2005 226.212 223.203 Salmon, coho (Oregon Coast ESU) Oncorhynchus kisutch Naturally spawned coho salmon originating from coastal rivers south of the Columbia River and north of Cape Blanco. Also, coho salmon from the Cow Creek Hatchery Program 76 FR 35755, Jun 20, 2011 226.212 223.203 Salmon, coho (Southern Oregon/Northern California Coast ESU) Oncorhynchus kisutch Naturally spawned coho salmon originating from coastal streams and rivers between Cape Blanco, Oregon, and Punta Gorda, California. Also, coho salmon from the following artificial propagation programs: The Cole Rivers Hatchery Program; Trinity River Hatchery Program; and the Iron Gate Hatchery Program 70 FR 37160, Jun 28, 2005 226.210 223.203 Salmon, sockeye (Ozette Lake ESU) Oncorhynchus nerka Naturally spawned sockeye salmon originating from the Ozette River and Ozette Lake and its tributaries. Also, sockeye salmon from the Umbrella Creek/Big River Hatchery Program 70 FR 37160, Jun 28, 2005 226.212 223.203 *         *         *         *         *         *         * Steelhead (California Central Valley DPS) Oncorhynchus mykiss Naturally spawned anadromous O. mykiss (steelhead) originating below natural and manmade impassable barriers from the Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers and their tributaries; excludes such fish originating from San Francisco and San Pablo Bays and their tributaries. This DPS includes steelhead from the following artificial propagation programs: The Coleman National Fish Hatchery Program; Feather River Fish Hatchery Program; and the Mokelumne River Hatchery Program 71 FR 834, Jan 5, 2006 226.211 223.203 Steelhead (Central California Coast DPS) Oncorhynchus mykiss Naturally spawned anadromous O. mykiss (steelhead) originating below natural and manmade impassable barriers from the Russian River to and including Aptos Creek, and all drainages of San Francisco and San Pablo Bays eastward to Chipps Island at the confluence of the Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers. Also, steelhead from the following artificial propagation programs: The Don Clausen Fish Hatchery Program and the Kingfisher Flat Hatchery Program (Monterey Bay Salmon and Trout Project) 71 FR 834, Jan 5, 2006 226.211 223.203 Steelhead (Lower Columbia River DPS) Oncorhynchus mykiss Naturally spawned anadromous O. mykiss (steelhead) originating below natural and manmade impassable barriers from rivers between the Cowlitz and Wind Rivers (inclusive) and the Willamette and Hood Rivers (inclusive); excludes such fish originating from the upper Willamette River basin above Willamette Falls. This DPS includes steelhead from the following artificial propagation programs: The Cowlitz Trout Hatchery Late Winter-run Program (Lower Cowlitz); Kalama River Wild Winter-run and Summer-run Programs; Clackamas Hatchery Late Winter-run Program; Sandy Hatchery Late Winter-run Program; Hood River Winter-run Program; Lewis River Wild Late-run Winter Steelhead Program; Upper Cowlitz Wild Program; and the Tilton River Wild Program 71 FR 834, Jan 5, 2006 226.212 223.203 Steelhead (Middle Columbia River DPS) Oncorhynchus mykiss Naturally spawned anadromous O. mykiss (steelhead) originating below natural and manmade impassable barriers from the Columbia River and its tributaries upstream of the Wind and Hood Rivers (exclusive) to and including the Yakima River; excludes such fish originating from the Snake River basin. This DPS includes steelhead from the following artificial propagation programs: The Touchet River Endemic Program; Yakima River Kelt Reconditioning Program (in Satus Creek, Toppenish Creek, Naches River, and Upper Yakima River); Umatilla River Program; and the Deschutes River Program. This DPS does not include steelhead that are designated as part of an experimental population 71 FR 834, Jan 5, 2006 226.212 223.203 *         *         *         *         *         *         * Steelhead (Puget Sound DPS) Oncorhynchus mykiss Naturally spawned anadromous O. mykiss (steelhead) originating below natural and manmade impassable barriers from rivers flowing into Puget Sound from the Elwha River (inclusive) eastward, including rivers in Hood Canal, South Sound, North Sound and the Strait of Georgia. Also, steelhead from the following artificial propagation programs: The Green River Natural Program; White River Winter Steelhead Supplementation Program; Hood Canal Steelhead Supplementation Off-station Projects in the Dewatto, Skokomish, and Duckabush Rivers; Lower Elwha Fish Hatchery Wild Steelhead Recovery Program; and the Fish Restoration Facility Program 72 FR 26722, May 11, 2007 226.212 223.203 Steelhead (Snake River Basin DPS) Oncorhynchus mykiss Naturally spawned anadromous O. mykiss (steelhead) originating below natural and manmade impassable barriers from the Snake River basin. Also, steelhead from the following artificial propagation programs: The Tucannon River Program; Dworshak National Fish Hatchery Program; Lolo Creek Program; North Fork Clearwater Program; East Fork Salmon River Natural Program; Little Sheep Creek/Imnaha River Hatchery Program; Little Salmon River (B-run) Program; Squaw Creek Program; Yankee Fork Program; Pahsimeroi River Program; and the South Fork Clearwater Hatchery Program 71 FR 834, Jan 5, 2006 226.212 223.203 *         *         *         *         *         *         * Steelhead (Upper Columbia River DPS) Oncorhynchus mykiss Naturally spawned anadromous O. mykiss (steelhead) originating below natural and manmade impassable barriers from the Columbia River and its tributaries upstream of the Yakima River to the U.S.-Canada border. Also, steelhead from the following artificial propagation programs: The Wenatchee River Program; Wells Hatchery Program (in the Methow and Okanogan Rivers); Winthrop National Fish Hatchery Program; Ringold Hatchery Program; and the Okanogan River Program 71 FR 834, Jan 5, 2006 226.212 223.203 *         *         *         *         *         *         * 1 Species includes taxonomic species, subspecies, distinct population segments (DPSs) (for a policy statement, see 61 FR 4722, February 7, 1996), and evolutionarily significant units (ESUs) (for a policy statement, see 56 FR 58612, November 20, 1991).
    PART 224—ENDANGERED MARINE AND ANADROMOUS SPECIES 3. The authority citation for part 224 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    16 U.S.C. 1531-1543 and 16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.

    4. In § 224.101, amend the table in paragraph (h) by revising the entries for “Salmon, Chinook (Sacramento River winter-run ESU)” and “Salmon, Chinook (Upper Columbia River spring-run ESU)” to read as follows:
    § 224.101 Enumeration of endangered marine and anadromous species.

    (h) * * *

    Species 1 Common name Scientific name Description of listed entity Citation(s)
  • for listing
  • determination(s)
  • Critical habitat ESA rules
    *         *         *         *         *         *         * Fishes *         *         *         *         *         *         * Salmon, Chinook (Sacramento River winter-run ESU) Oncorhynchus tshawytscha Naturally spawned winter-run Chinook salmon originating from the Sacramento River and its tributaries. Also, winter-run Chinook salmon from the following artificial propagation programs: The Livingston Stone National Fish Hatchery (supplementation and captive broodstock) 70 FR 37160, June 28, 2005 226.204 NA Salmon, Chinook (Upper Columbia River spring-run ESU) Oncorhynchus tshawytscha Naturally spawned spring-run Chinook salmon originating from Columbia River tributaries upstream of the Rock Island Dam and downstream of Chief Joseph Dam (excluding the Okanogan River subbasin). Also, spring-run Chinook salmon from the following artificial propagation programs: The Twisp River Program; Methow Program; Winthrop National Fish Hatchery Program; Chiwawa River Program; White River Program; and the Nason Creek Program 70 FR 37160, June 28, 2005 226.212 NA Salmon, coho (Central California Coast ESU) Oncorhynchus kisutch Naturally spawned coho salmon originating from rivers south of Punta Gorda, California to and including Aptos Creek, as well as such coho salmon originating from tributaries to San Francisco Bay. Also, coho salmon from the following artificial propagation programs: The Don Clausen Fish Hatchery Captive Broodstock Program; the Scott Creek/King Fisher Flats Conservation Program; and the Scott Creek Captive Broodstock Program 70 FR 37160, June 28, 2005; 77 FR 19552, Apr 2, 2012 226.210 NA Salmon, sockeye (Snake River ESU) Oncorhynchus nerka Naturally spawned anadromous and residual sockeye salmon originating from the Snake River basin. Also, sockeye salmon from the Redfish Lake Captive Broodstock Program 70 FR 37160, June 28, 2005 226.205 NA *         *         *         *         *         *         * 1 Species includes taxonomic species, subspecies, distinct population segments (DPSs) (for a policy statement, see 61 FR 4722, February 7, 1996), and evolutionarily significant units (ESUs) (for a policy statement, see 56 FR 58612, November 20, 1991).
    [FR Doc. 2016-25438 Filed 10-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    81 204 Friday, October 21, 2016 Notices DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Agricultural Marketing Service [AMS-CN-16-0096] Cotton Classification and Market News Service: Notice of Request for an Extension and Revision of a Currently Approved Information Collection AGENCY:

    Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA

    ACTION:

    Notice and request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35), this notice announces the Agricultural Marketing Service's (AMS) intention to request approval from the Office of Management and Budget for an extension of and revision to the currently approved information collection Cotton Classification and Market News Service.

    DATES:

    Comments received by December 20, 2016 will be considered.

    ADDRESSES:

    Written comments may be submitted to the addresses specified below. All comments will be made available to the public. Please do not include personally identifiable information (such as name, address, or other contact information) or confidential business information that you do not want publically disclosed. All comments may be posted on the Internet and can be retrieved by most Internet search engines. Comments may be submitted anonymously.

    Comments, identified by AMS-CN-16-0095, may be submitted electronically through the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. Please follow the instructions for submitting comments. In addition, comments may be submitted by mail or hand delivery to Cotton Research and Promotion, Cotton and Tobacco Program, AMS, USDA, 100 Riverside Parkway, Suite 101, Fredericksburg, Virginia 22406. Comments should be submitted in triplicate. All comments received will be made available for public inspection at Cotton and Tobacco Program, AMS, USDA, 100 Riverside Parkway, Suite 101, Fredericksburg, Virginia 22406. A copy of this document may be found at: www.regulations.gov.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Shethir M. Riva, Director, Research and Promotion, Cotton and Tobacco Program, AMS, USDA, 100 Riverside Parkway, Suite 101, Fredericksburg, Virginia 22406, telephone (540) 361-2726, facsimile (540) 361-1199, or email at [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Title: Cotton Classification and Market News Service.

    OMB Number: 0581-0009.

    Expiration Date of Approval: February 28, 2017.

    Type of Request: Extension and Revision of a Currently Approved Information Collection.

    Abstract: The Cotton Classification and Market News Service program provides market information on cotton prices, quality, stocks, demand and supply to growers, ginners, merchandisers, textile mills and the public for their use in making sound business decisions. The Cotton Statistics and Estimates Act (7 U.S.C. 471-476), authorizes and directs the Secretary of Agriculture to: (a) Collect and publish annually, statistics or estimates concerning the grades and staple lengths of stocks of cotton, known as the carryover, on hand on the 1st of August each year in warehouses and other establishments of every character in the continental U.S., and following such publication each year, to publish at intervals, in his/her discretion, his/her estimate of the grades and staple length of cotton of the current crop (7 U.S.C. 471) and (b) Collect, authenticate, publish and distribute by radio, mail, or otherwise, timely information of the market supply, demand, location, and market prices of cotton (7 U.S.C. 473b). The Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946 (7 U.S.C. 1621-1627) authorizes and directs the Secretary of Agriculture to collect and disseminate marketing information, including adequate outlook information on a market-area basis, for the purpose of anticipating and meeting consumer requirements, aiding in the maintenance of farm income, and bringing about a balance between production and utilization of agricultural products.

    The information collection requirements in this request are essential to carry out the intent of the Acts and to provide the cotton industry the type of information they need to make sound business decisions. The information collected is the minimum required. Information is requested from growers, cooperatives, merchants, manufacturers, and other government agencies. This includes information on cotton, cottonseed and cotton linters.

    The information collected is used only by authorized employees of the USDA, AMS. The cotton industry is the primary user of the compiled information and AMS and other government agencies are secondary users.

    Estimate of Burden: Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 0.13 hours per response.

    Respondents: Cotton Merchandisers, Textile Mills, Ginners.

    Estimated Number of Respondents: 752.

    Estimated Number of Responses per Respondent: 6.45.

    Estimated Number of Responses: 4,854.

    Estimated Total Annual Burden on Respondents: 617.75.

    Comments are invited on: (1) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Comments may be sent to Shethir M. Riva, Director, Research and Promotion, Cotton and Tobacco Program, AMS, USDA, 100 Riverside Parkway, Suite 101, Fredericksburg, Virginia 22406, telephone (540) 361-2726, facsimile (540) 361-1199, or email at [email protected] All responses to this notice will be summarized and included in the request for OMB approval. All comments will become a matter of public record.

    Dated: October 18, 2016. Elanor Starmer, Administrator.
    [FR Doc. 2016-25499 Filed 10-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-02-P
    DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Agricultural Marketing Service [AMS-CN-16-0098] Tobacco Inspection and Grading Services: Notice of Request for an Extension of a Currently Approved Information Collection AGENCY:

    Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA.

    ACTION:

    Notice and request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35), this notice announces the Agricultural Marketing Service's (AMS) intention to request approval from the Office of Management and Budget, for an extension to the currently approved information collection in support of the Fair and Equitable Tobacco Reform Act of 2004 (U.S.C. Chapter 518), the Rural Development, Food and Drug Administrative, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act for 2002 (Appropriations Act), and the Tobacco Inspection Act and Regulations Governing the Tobacco Standards.

    DATES:

    Comments received by December 20, 2016 will be considered.

    ADDRESSES:

    Written comments may be submitted to the addresses specified below. All comments will be made available to the public. Please do not include personally identifiable information (such as name, address, or other contact information) or confidential business information that you do not want publically disclosed. All comments may be posted on the Internet and can be retrieved by most Internet search engines. Comments may be submitted anonymously.

    Comments, identified by AMS-CN-16-0098, may be submitted electronically through the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. Please follow the instructions for submitting comments. In addition, comments may be submitted by mail or hand delivery to Cotton Research and Promotion, Cotton and Tobacco Program, AMS, USDA, 100 Riverside Parkway, Suite 101, Fredericksburg, Virginia, 22406. Comments should be submitted in triplicate. All comments received will be made available for public inspection at Cotton and Tobacco Program, AMS, USDA, 100 Riverside Parkway, Suite 101, Fredericksburg, Virginia, 22406. A copy of this document may be found at: www.regulations.gov.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Shethir M. Riva, Director, Research and Promotion, Cotton and Tobacco Program, AMS, USDA, 100 Riverside Parkway, Suite 101, Fredericksburg, Virginia, 22406, telephone (540) 361-2726, facsimile (540) 361-1199, or email at [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Title: Reporting and Recording Requirements for 7 CFR part 29.

    OMB Number: 0581-0056.

    Expiration Date of Approval: February 28, 2017.

    Type of Request: Extension of a currently approved information collection.

    Abstract: The Tobacco Inspection Act (7 U.S.C. 511-511s) requires that all tobacco sold at designated auction markets in the U.S. be inspected and graded. The Appropriations Act (7 U.S.C. 511s note) requires that all tobacco eligible for price support in the U.S. be inspected and graded. The Fair and Equitable Tobacco Reform Act of 2004 (7 U.S.C. 518-519a) eliminated price supports and marketing quotas for all tobacco beginning with the 2005 crop year. Mandatory inspection and grading of domestic and imported tobacco was eliminated as well as the mandatory pesticide testing of imported tobacco and the tobacco market news program. The Tobacco Inspection Act also provides for interested parties to request inspection, pesticide testing, and grading services on a permissive basis. The information collection requirements authorized for the programs under the Tobacco Inspection Act and the Appropriations Act include: Application for inspection of tobacco, application and other information used in the approval of new auction markets or the extension of services to designated tobacco markets, and the information required to be provided in connection with auction and nonauction sales.

    Estimate of Burden: Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1.60 hours per response.

    Respondents: Primarily tobacco companies, tobacco manufacturers, import inspectors, and small businesses or organizations.

    Estimated Number of Respondents: 50.

    Estimated Number of Responses per Respondent: 48.

    Estimated Number of Responses: 2,415.

    Estimated Total Annual Burden on Respondents: 3,851.

    Comments are invited on: (1) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Comments may be sent to Shethir M. Riva, Director, Research and Promotion, Cotton and Tobacco Program, AMS, USDA, 100 Riverside Parkway, Suite 101, Fredericksburg, Virginia, 22406, telephone (540) 361-2726, facsimile (540) 361-1199, or email at [email protected] All responses to this notice will be summarized and included in the request for OMB approval. All comments will become a matter of public record. All responses to this notice will be summarized and included in the request for OMB approval. All comments will become a matter of public record.

    Dated: October 18, 2016. Elanor Starmer, Administrator.
    [FR Doc. 2016-25502 Filed 10-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-02-P
    DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Agricultural Marketing Service [Document No. AMS-ST-16-0099] Plant Variety Protection Board; Open Meeting AGENCY:

    Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA.

    ACTION:

    Notice of meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    Pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), the Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) is announcing a meeting of the Plant Variety Protection Board (Board). The meeting is being held to discuss a variety of topics including, but not limited to, work and outreach plans, subcommittee activities, and proposals for procedure changes. The meeting is open to the public. This notice sets forth the schedule and location for the meeting.

    DATES:

    Monday, December 5, 2016, from 1:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. and Tuesday, December 6, 2016, from 8:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m.

    ADDRESSES:

    The Board meeting will be held at the Hyatt Regency Chicago Hotel at the Randolph 1A and 1B Rooms, at 151 East Wacker Drive, Chicago, IL, 60601.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Maria Pratt, Program Analyst, U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), AMS, Science and Technology Programs, 1400 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20250. Telephone number (202) 720-1104, fax (202) 260-8976, or Email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Pursuant to the provisions of section 10(a) of the FACA (5 U.S.C., Appendix 2), this notice informs the public that the Plant Variety Protection Office (PVPO) is having a Board meeting earlier than the 15 day requirement of the FACA. The Plant Variety Protection Act (PVPA) (7 U.S.C. 2321 et seq.) provides legal protection in the form of intellectual property rights to developers of new varieties of plants, which are reproduced sexually by seed or are tuber-propagated. A certificate of Plant Variety Protection (PVP) is awarded to an owner of a crop variety after an examination shows that it is new, distinct from other varieties, genetically uniform and stable through successive generations. The term of protection is 20 years for most crops and 25 years for trees, shrubs, and vines. The PVPA also provides for a statutory Board (7 U.S.C. 2327). The PVPA Board is composed of 14 individuals who are experts in various areas of development and represent the private or seed industry sector, academia and government. The duties of the Board are to: (1) Advise the Secretary concerning the adoption of rules and regulations to facilitate the proper administration of the FACA; (2) provide advisory counsel to the Secretary on appeals concerning decisions on applications by the PVP Office and on requests for emergency public-interest compulsory licenses; and (3) advise the Secretary on any other matters under the Regulations and Rules of Practice and on all questions under Section 44 of the FACA, “Public Interest in Wide Usage” (7 U.S.C. 2404).

    The purpose of the meeting will be to discuss the PVPO 2016 achievements, the electronic application system, report of the molecular techniques subcommittee, PVP cooperation with other countries, and PVP's 2017 business plan.

    Agenda Items: The agenda will include, welcome and introductions, discussions on program activities that encourage the development of new plant varieties and also address appeals to the Secretary. There will be presentations on 2016 accomplishments, the electronic PVP application system, PVP outreach activities, the use of molecular markers for PVP applications, PVP cooperation with other countries, and the 2017 business plan. The meeting will be open to the public. Those wishing to participate are encouraged to pre-register by November 28, 2016 by contacting Maria Pratt, Program Analyst; Telephone: (202) 720-1104; Email: [email protected]

    Meeting Accommodation: The meeting hotel is ADA compliant, and the USDA provides reasonable accommodations to individuals with disabilities where appropriate. If you need a reasonable accommodation to participate in this public meeting, please notify Maria Pratt at: Email: [email protected] or (202) 720-1104. Determinations for reasonable accommodation will be made on a case-by-case basis. Minutes of the meeting will be available for public review 30 days following the meeting at the internet Web site http://www.ams.usda.gov/PVPO.

    Dated: October 18, 2016. Elanor Starmer, Administrator, Agricultural Marketing Service.
    [FR Doc. 2016-25501 Filed 10-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-02-P
    DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Agricultural Marketing Service [AMS-CN-16-0095] Cotton Classing, Testing and Standards: Notice of Request for an Extension and Revision to a Currently Approved Information Collection AGENCY:

    Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA.

    ACTION:

    Notice and request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35), this notice announces the Agricultural Marketing Service's (AMS) intention to request approval from the Office of Management and Budget, for an extension and revision to the currently approved information collection entitled Cotton Classing, Testing, and Standards.

    DATES:

    Comments received by December 20, 2016 will be considered.

    ADDRESSES:

    Written comments may be submitted to the addresses specified below. All comments will be made available to the public. Please do not include personally identifiable information (such as name, address, or other contact information) or confidential business information that you do not want publically disclosed. All comments may be posted on the Internet and can be retrieved by most Internet search engines. Comments may be submitted anonymously.

    Comments, identified by AMS-CN-16-0095, may be submitted electronically through the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. Please follow the instructions for submitting comments. In addition, comments may be submitted by mail or hand delivery to Cotton Research and Promotion, Cotton and Tobacco Program, AMS, USDA, 100 Riverside Parkway, Suite 101, Fredericksburg, Virginia, 22406. Comments should be submitted in triplicate. All comments received will be made available for public inspection at Cotton and Tobacco Program, AMS, USDA, 100 Riverside Parkway, Suite 101, Fredericksburg, Virginia, 22406. A copy of this document may be found at: www.regulations.gov.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Shethir M. Riva, Director, Research and Promotion, Cotton and Tobacco Program, AMS, USDA, 100 Riverside Parkway, Suite 101, Fredericksburg, Virginia, 22406, telephone (540) 361-2726, facsimile (540) 361-1199, or email at [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Title: Cotton Classing, Testing, and Standards.

    OMB Number: 0581-0008.

    Expiration Date of Approval: February 28, 2017.

    Type of Request: Extension and Revision of a Currently Approved Information Collection.

    Abstract: Information solicited is used by the USDA to administer and supervise activities associated with the classification or grading of cotton, cotton linters, and cottonseed based on official USDA Standards. The information requires personal data, such as name, type of business, address, and description of classification services requested. These programs are conducted under the United States Cotton Standards Act (7 U.S.C. 51b), the Cotton Statistics and Estimates Act of 1927 (7 U.S.C. 473c), and the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946 (7 U.S.C. 1622h) and regulations appear at 7 CFR part 28.

    The information collection requirements in this request are essential to carry out the intent of the Acts and to provide the cotton industry the type of information they need to make sound business decisions. The information collected is the minimum required. Information is requested from growers, cooperatives, merchants, manufacturers, and other government agencies.

    The information collected is used only by authorized employees of the USDA, AMS. The cotton industry is the primary user of the compiled information and AMS and other government agencies are secondary users.

    Estimate of Burden: Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 0.07 hours per response.

    Respondents: Cotton merchants, warehouses, and gins.

    Estimated Number of Respondents: 993.

    Estimated Number of Responses per Respondent: 1.91.

    Estimated Number of Responses: 1,893.

    Estimated Total Annual Burden on Respondents: 141.30.

    Comments are invited on: (1) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Comments may be sent to Shethir M. Riva, Director, Research and Promotion, Cotton and Tobacco Program, AMS, USDA, 100 Riverside Parkway, Suite 101, Fredericksburg, Virginia, 22406, telephone (540) 361-2726, facsimile (540) 361-1199, or email at [email protected] All responses to this notice will be summarized and included in the request for OMB approval. All comments will become a matter of public record.

    Dated: October 18, 2016. Elanor Starmer, Administrator.
    [FR Doc. 2016-25500 Filed 10-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-02-P
    DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE National Agricultural Statistics Service Notice of the Advisory Committee on Agriculture Statistics Meeting AGENCY:

    National Agricultural Statistics Service, USDA.

    ACTION:

    Notice of public meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act, the National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS) announces a meeting of the Advisory Committee on Agriculture Statistics.

    DATES:

    The Committee meeting will be held from 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. on Tuesday, November 8, 2016, and from 8 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. on Wednesday, November 9, 2016. There will be an opportunity for public questions and comments at 3:45 p.m. on Tuesday, November 8, 2016. All times mentioned herein refer to Eastern Standard Time.

    ADDRESSES:

    The Committee meeting will take place at the United States Department of Agriculture, 1400 Independence Ave. SW., Washington, DC 20250. On Tuesday November 8, 2016 the meeting will be held in the Jamie L. Whitten Federal Building, Room 107A. On Wednesday, November 9, 2016 the meeting will be held in the South Building, Room 3109. Written comments may be filed before or up to two weeks after the meeting with the contact person identified herein at: U.S. Department of Agriculture, National Agricultural Statistics Service, 1400 Independence Avenue SW., Room 5029, South Building, Washington, DC 20250-2000.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Hubert Hamer, Administrator, National Agricultural Statistics Service, telephone: 202-720-2707, eFax: 855-493-0445, or email: [email protected] General information about the committee can also be found at www.nass.usda.gov/about_nass.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Advisory Committee on Agriculture Statistics, which consists of 20 members appointed from 7 categories covering a broad range of agricultural disciplines and interests, has scheduled a meeting on November 8 and 9, 2016. During this time the Advisory Committee will discuss topics including the status of NASS programs, Census of Agriculture Updates, Census of Agriculture Program Plans, Country Estimates and Farm Structure panels, and Respondent Relation Issues.

    The Committee meeting is open to the public. The public is asked to pre-register for the meeting at least 10 business days prior to the meeting. Your pre-registration must state the names of each person in your group, organization, or interest represented; the number of people planning to give oral comments, if any; and whether anyone in your group requires special accommodations. Submit registrations to Executive Secretary, Advisory Committee on Agriculture Statistics, via eFax: 855-493-0445, or email: [email protected] Members of the public who request to give oral comments to the Committee must arrive at the meeting site by 2:45 p.m. on Tuesday, November 8, 2016. Written comments by attendees or other interested stakeholders will be welcomed for the public record before and up to two weeks following the meeting. The public may file written comments by mail to the Executive Director, Advisory Committee on Agriculture Statistics, U.S. Department of Agriculture, National Agricultural Statistics Service, 1400 Independence Avenue SW., Room 5029 South Building, Washington, DC, 20250-2000. Written comments can also be sent via eFax: 855-493-0445, or email: [email protected] All statements will become a part of the official records of the USDA Advisory Committee on Agriculture Statistics and will be kept on file for public review in the office of the Executive Director, Advisory Committee on Agriculture Statistics, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC 20250.

    Signed at Washington, DC, October 5, 2016. R. Renee Picanso, Associate Administrator, National Agricultural Statistics Service.
    [FR Doc. 2016-25447 Filed 10-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-20-P
    DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE National Institute of Food and Agriculture Notice of Intent To Revise a Currently Approved Information Collection AGENCY:

    National Institute of Food and Agriculture, USDA.

    ACTION:

    Notice and request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 and Office of Management and Budget (OMB) regulations, this notice announces the National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA) intention to renew a currently approved information collection entitled, “4-H Youth Enrollment Report”.

    DATES:

    Written comments on this notice must be received by December 20, 2016, to be assured of consideration. Comments received after that date will be considered to the extent practicable.

    ADDRESSES:

    Written comments concerning this notice and requests for copies of the information collection may be submitted by any of the following methods: Email: [email protected]; Fax: 202-720-0857; Mail: Office of Information Technology (OIT), NIFA, USDA, STOP 2216, 1400 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20250-2216

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Robert Martin, eGovernment Program Leader; Email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Title: 4-H Youth Enrollment.

    OMB Number: 0524-0045.

    Expiration Date of Current Approval: December 31, 2016.

    Type of Request: Intent to seek approval for the extension of a currently approved information collection for three years.

    Abstract: The mission of 4-H National Headquarters; National Institute of Food and Agriculture; United States Department of Agriculture (USDA); is to advance knowledge for agriculture, the environment, human health and well-being, and communities by creating opportunities for youth. 4-H is a complex national organization, led by 4-H National Headquarters, NIFA, USDA, with hundreds of educational curricula, activities, and events for youth ages 5 to 18. Programs originate at 106 land-grant universities (LGUs), and local programs are conducted and managed by some 3,000 professional Extension staff in 3,150 counties, with nearly 6 million youth enrolled each year. Over 500,000 volunteer leaders work directly with the 4-H youth.

    The 1914 Smith-Lever Act created the Cooperative Extension System (CES) of the LGUs and their Federal partner, the Extension Service, now the National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA), USDA. 4-H was already well-established and became the first operating part of the new extension work. The Smith-Lever Act stipulated that “It shall be the duty of said colleges, annually, on or about the first day of January, to make to the Governor of the State in which it is located a full and detailed report of its operations in extension work as defined in this Act . . . a copy of which report shall be sent to the Secretary of Agriculture.” As a result of this requirement, annually each county sends their state 4-H office an electronic aggregated summary of their 4-H enrollment.

    Information collected in the 4-H Youth Enrollment Report includes youth enrollment totals by delivery mode, youth enrollment totals by type of 4-H activity, youth enrollment totals by school grade, youth enrollment totals by gender, youth enrollment totals by place of residence, adult volunteer totals, youth volunteer totals, and youth enrollment totals by race and ethnicity.

    Need and Use of the Information: The Annual 4-H Enrollment Report is the principal means by which the 4-H movement can keep track of its progress, as well as emerging needs, potential problems, and opportunities.

    The information from this collection is used to report, as requested by the Congress or the Administration, on rural versus urban outreach, enrollment by race, youth participation in leadership, community service, etc. It also is used to determine market share or percentage of the youth of each state by age and place of residence who are enrolled in the 4-H youth development program. The annual 4-H Youth Enrollment Report also allows oversight of all reasonable efforts by staff and volunteers to reach underserved and minority groups.

    Information also is available at http://frwebgate.access.thefederalregister.org/cgi-bin/leaving.cgi?from=leavingFR.html&log=linklog&to=http://www.national4-hheadquarters.gov/library/4h_stats.htm.

    Estimate of Burden: The hour burden estimates have not been modified from the previous approval because there have been no significant changes to the collection.

    Estimated Number of Respondents: 75.

    Estimated Number of Responses per Respondent: 1.

    Estimated Time per Response: 1 hour.

    Estimated Total Annual Burden on Respondents: 75 hours.

    Comments: Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

    All responses to this notice will be summarized and included in the request to OMB for approval. All comments will become a matter of public record.

    Done at Washington, DC, this day of October 12, 2016. Jake Caldwell, Chief of Staff, Research, Education, and Economics.
    [FR Doc. 2016-25498 Filed 10-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Economic Development Administration Notice of Petitions by Firms for Determination of Eligibility To Apply for Trade Adjustment Assistance AGENCY:

    Economic Development Administration, Commerce.

    ACTION:

    Notice and opportunity for public comment.

    Pursuant to Section 251 of the Trade Act 1974, as amended (19 U.S.C. 2341 et seq.), the Economic Development Administration (EDA) has received petitions for certification of eligibility to apply for Trade Adjustment Assistance from the firms listed below. Accordingly, EDA has initiated investigations to determine whether increased imports into the United States of articles like or directly competitive with those produced by each of these firms contributed importantly to the total or partial separation of the firm's workers, or threat thereof, and to a decrease in sales or production of each petitioning firm.

    List of Petitions Received by EDA for Certification Eligibility To Apply for Trade Adjustment Assistance [10/1/2016 through 10/14/2016] Firm name Firm address Date accepted for
  • investigation
  • Product(s)
    Circle Systems, Inc 479 West Lincoln Avenue, Hinckley, IL 60520 10/3/2016 The firm manufactures magnetic particles utilized in non-destructive product testing. Micron Optics, Inc 1852 Century Place Northeast, Atlanta, GA 30345 10/6/2016 The firm designs and manufactures optical instruments and laser-based equipment. APDC, LLC 100 American Way, Cuba, MO 65453 10/12/2016 The firm manufactures aluminum die castings and parts.

    Any party having a substantial interest in these proceedings may request a public hearing on the matter. A written request for a hearing must be submitted to the Trade Adjustment Assistance for Firms Division, Room 71030, Economic Development Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, Washington, DC 20230, no later than ten (10) calendar days following publication of this notice.

    Please follow the requirements set forth in EDA's regulations at 13 CFR 315.9 for procedures to request a public hearing. The Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance official number and title for the program under which these petitions are submitted is 11.313, Trade Adjustment Assistance for Firms.

    Miriam Kearse, Lead Program Analyst.
    [FR Doc. 2016-25486 Filed 10-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-WH-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-570-981] Utility Scale Wind Towers From the People's Republic of China: Notice of Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2015-2016 AGENCY:

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

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Commerce (“the Department”) is rescinding its administrative review of utility scale wind towers (“wind towers”) from the People's Republic of China (“PRC”) for the period or review (“POR”) February 1, 2015 through January 31, 2016, based on the withdrawal of request for review.

    DATES:

    Effective October 21, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Trisha Tran, AD/CVD Operations, Office IV, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-4852.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background

    On February 3, 2016, the Department published the notice of opportunity to request an administrative review of the antidumping duty order on wind towers from the PRC for the above POR.1 On February 23, 2016, in accordance with section 751(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the “Act”), and 19 CFR 351.213(b), the Department received a timely request from the Wind Tower Trade Coalition (“Petitioner”) to conduct an administrative review.2

    1See Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Order, Finding, or Suspended Investigation; Opportunity to Request Administrative Review, 81 FR 5712 (February 3, 2016).

    2See Letter from Petitioner, “Utility Scale Wind Towers from the People's Republic of China: Request for Administrative Review,” dated February 23, 2016.

    Pursuant to this request and in accordance with 19 CFR 351.221(c)(1)(i), on April 7, 2016, the Department published a notice of initiation of an administrative review of the antidumping duty order on wind towers from the PRC.3 On July 6, 2016, Petitioner withdrew its request for an administrative review.4

    3See Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews, 81 FR 20324 (April 7, 2016) (“Initiation Notice”).

    4See Letter from Petitioner, “Utility Scale Wind Towers from the People's Republic of China: Withdrawal of Request for Administrative Review,” dated July 6, 2016.

    Rescission of Review

    Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), the Department will rescind an administrative review, in whole or in part, if the party that requested a review withdraws the request within 90 days of the publication date of the notice of initiation of the requested review. As noted above, Petitioner withdrew its request for review within 90 days of the publication date of the Initiation Notice. No other parties requested an administrative review of the order. Therefore, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), we are rescinding this review in its entirety.

    Assessment

    The Department will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”) to assess antidumping duties on all appropriate entries of wind towers from the PRC. 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)(1)(i). The Department intends to issue appropriate assessment instructions to CBP 15 days after the date of publication of this notice of rescission of administrative review.

    Notifications

    This notice also serves as a final reminder to importers for whom this review is being rescinded of their responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate regarding the reimbursement of antidumping duties prior to liquidation of the relevant entries during this review period. Failure to comply with this requirement could result in the Secretary's presumption that reimbursement of the antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of double antidumping duties.

    This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to administrative protective orders (“APO”) of their responsibility concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305, which continues to govern business proprietary information in this segment of the proceeding. Timely written notification of the return/destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and terms of an APO is a violation which is subject to sanction.

    This notice is published in accordance with section 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.213(d)(4).

    Dated: October 17, 2016. Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations.
    [FR Doc. 2016-25550 Filed 10-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-570-042] Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip From the People's Republic of China: Postponement of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value Investigation AGENCY:

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

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Commerce (Department) is postponing the deadline for issuing final determination in the less than fair value (LTFV) investigation of stainless steel sheet and strip from the People's Republic of China (PRC) and is extending the provisional measures from a four-month period to a period not more than six months.

    DATES:

    Effective October 21, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Toni Page at (202) 482-1398 or Lingjun Wang at (202) 482-2316, Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, Office VII, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background

    On March 10, 2016, the Department published a notice of initiation of the LTFV investigation of the stainless steel sheet and strip from the PRC.1 The period of investigation is July 1, 2015, through December 31, 2015. On September 9, 2016, the Department issued its affirmative Preliminary Determination.2 On September 14, 2016, Shanxi Taigang Stainless Steel Co., Ltd. (Taigang), a mandatory respondent in this investigation, requested that the Department fully extend the deadline for the final determination, and extend the application of the provisional measures from a four-month period to a period not more than six months.3 On September 19, 2016, the Department published the Preliminary Determination.4

    1See Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip From the People's Republic of China: Initiation of Less Than Fair Value Investigation, 81 FR 12711 (March 10, 2016).

    2See Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip from the People's Republic of China: Preliminary Affirmative Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Preliminary Affirmative Determination of Critical Circumstances, 81 FR 64135 (September 19, 2016) (Preliminary Determination).

    3See Taigang's September 14, 2016 letter.

    4See Preliminary Determination.

    Postponement of Final Determination

    Section 735(a)(2)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), and 19 CFR 351.210(b)(2)(ii), provide that a final determination may be postponed until not later than 135 days after the date of the publication of the preliminary determination if, in the event of an affirmative preliminary determination, a request for such postponement is made by exporters who account for a significant proportion of exports of the subject merchandise. Further, 19 CFR 351.210(e)(2) requires that such postponement requests by exporters be accompanied by a request for extension of provisional measures from a four-month period to a period not more than six months, in accordance with section 733(d) of the Act.

    In accordance with section 735(a)(2)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.210(b)(2)(ii), because (1) our preliminary determination was affirmative; (2) the requesting producer/exporter, Taigang, accounts for a significant proportion of exports of the subject merchandise from the PRC; and (3) no compelling reasons for denial exist, we are postponing the final determination until no later than 135 days after the date of the publication of the Preliminary Determination and extending the provisional measures from a four-month period to a period not more than six months. Accordingly, we will issue our final determination no later than February 1, 2017.

    This determination is issued and published pursuant to section 735(a)(2)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.210(g).

    Dated: October 14, 2016. Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
    [FR Doc. 2016-25552 Filed 10-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-552-814] Utility Scale Wind Towers From the Socialist Republic of Vietnam: Notice of Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2015-2016 AGENCY:

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

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Commerce (“the Department”) is rescinding its administrative review of utility scale wind towers (“wind towers”) from the Socialist Republic of Vietnam (“Vietnam”) for the period or review (“POR”) February 1, 2015 through January 31, 2016, based on the withdrawal of request for review.

    DATES:

    Effective October 21, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Trisha Tran, AD/CVD Operations, Office IV, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-4852.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background

    On February 3, 2016, the Department published the notice of opportunity to request an administrative review of the antidumping duty order on wind towers from Vietnam for the above POR.1 On February 23, 2016 and February 29, 2016, in accordance with section 751(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the “Act”), and 19 CFR 351.213(b), the Department received a timely request from the Wind Tower Trade Coalition (“Petitioner”) and CS Wind Vietnam Co., Ltd. (“CS Wind”), respectively, to conduct an administrative review.2

    1See Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Order, Finding, or Suspended Investigation; Opportunity to Request Administrative Review, 81 FR 5712 (February 3, 2016).

    2See Letter from Petitioner, “Utility Scale Wind Towers from the Socialist Republic of Vietnam: Request for Administrative Review,” dated February 23, 2016; see also Letter from CS Wind, “Request for Administrative Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on Utility Wind Towers from the Socialist Republic of Vietnam,” dated February 29, 2016.

    Pursuant to these requests and in accordance with 19 CFR 351.221(c)(1)(i), on April 7, 2016, the Department published a notice of initiation of an administrative review of the antidumping duty order on wind towers from Vietnam.3 On July 6, 2016, Petitioner and CS Wind withdrew their requests for an administrative review.4

    3See Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews, 81 FR 20324 (April 7, 2016) (“Initiation Notice”).

    4See Letter from Petitioner, “Utility Scale Wind Towers from the Socialist Republic of Vietnam: Withdrawal of Request for Administrative Review,” dated July 6, 2016; see also Letter from CS Wind, “Withdrawal of Review Request: Administrative Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on Utility Scale Wind Towers from the Socialist Republic of Vietnam,” dated July 6, 2016.

    Rescission of Review

    Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), the Department will rescind an administrative review, in whole or in part, if the party that requested the review withdraws the request within 90 days of the publication date of the notice of initiation of review. As noted above, all parties withdrew their requests for review within 90 days of the publication date of the Initiation Notice. No other parties requested an administrative review of the order. Therefore, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), we are rescinding this review in its entirety.

    Assessment

    The Department will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”) to assess antidumping duties on all appropriate entries of wind towers from Vietnam. 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)(1)(i). The Department intends to issue appropriate assessment instructions to CBP 15 days after the date of publication of this notice of rescission of administrative review.

    Notifications

    This notice also serves as a final reminder to importers for whom this review is being rescinded of their responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate regarding the reimbursement of antidumping duties prior to liquidation of the relevant entries during this review period. Failure to comply with this requirement could result in the Secretary's presumption that reimbursement of the antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of double antidumping duties.

    This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to administrative protective orders (“APO”) of their responsibility concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305, which continues to govern business proprietary information in this segment of the proceeding. Timely written notification of the return/destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and terms of an APO is a violation which is subject to sanction.

    This notice is published in accordance with section 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.213(d)(4).

    Dated: October 17, 2016. Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations.
    [FR Doc. 2016-25526 Filed 10-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration Environmental Technologies Trade Advisory Committee, Notice of Reestablishment AGENCY:

    International Trade Administration, Commerce.

    ACTION:

    Notice of reestablishment of the Environmental Technologies Trade Advisory Committee (ETTAC).

    SUMMARY:

    Pursuant to provisions under Title IV of the Jobs Through Trade Expansion Act, 22. U.S.C. 2151, and under the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. 2, the Department of Commerce announces the reestablishment of the Environmental Technologies Trade Advisory Committee (the Committee). ETTAC was first chartered on May 31, 1994. ETTAC serves as an advisory body to the Environmental Trade Working Group of the Trade Promotion Coordinating Committee (TPCC), reporting directly to the Secretary of Commerce in his/her capacity as Chairman of the TPCC. ETTAC advises on the development and administration of policies and programs to expand U.S. exports of environmental technologies, goods, and services.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ms. Maureen Hinman, Office of Energy & Environmental Industries (OEEI), International Trade Administration, Room 4053, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230. (Phone: 202-482-0627; Fax: 202-482-5665; email: [email protected]).

    Dated: October 17, 2016. Edward A. O'Malley, Director, Office of Energy and Environmental Industries.
    [FR Doc. 2016-25524 Filed 10-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DR-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-570-929] Small Diameter Graphite Electrodes From the People's Republic of China: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2015-2016 AGENCY:

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

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Commerce (the Department) is conducting an administrative review of the antidumping duty order on small diameter graphite electrodes (graphite electrodes) from the People's Republic of China (PRC), covering the period February 1, 2015, through January 31, 2016. The Department has preliminarily determined that three companies, the Fangda Group, Fushun Jinly Petrochemical Co., Ltd. (Fushun Jinly), and Jilin Carbon Import and Export Company (Jilin Carbon), had no shipments of subject merchandise during the period of review (POR).

    DATES:

    Effective October 21, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Dmitry Vladimirov, AD/CVD Operations Office I, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-0665.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background

    On February 3, 2016, we published a notice of opportunity to request an administrative review of the antidumping duty order on graphite electrodes from the PRC for the POR February 1, 2015, through January 31, 2016.1 On April 7, 2016, in response to a timely request from the petitioners,2 and in accordance with section 751(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), and 19 CFR 351.221(c)(1)(i), we initiated an administrative review of the antidumping duty order on graphite electrodes from the PRC with respect to 196 companies.3 On August 19, 2016, in response to a timely withdrawal request from the petitioners, we rescinded the administrative review for 193 companies.4

    1See Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Order, Finding, or Suspended Investigation; Opportunity to Request Administrative Review, 81 FR 5712 (February 3, 2016).

    2 SGL Carbon LLC and Superior Graphite Co (collectively, the petitioners).

    3See Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews, 81 FR 20324 (April 7, 2016).

    4See Small Diameter Graphite Electrodes from the People's Republic of China: Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review in Part; 2015-2016, 81 FR 55434 (August 19, 2016).

    Scope of the Order

    The merchandise covered by the order includes all small diameter graphite electrodes of any length, whether or not finished, of a kind used in furnaces, with a nominal or actual diameter of 400 millimeters (16 inches) or less, and whether or not attached to a graphite pin joining system or any other type of joining system or hardware. The merchandise covered by the order also includes graphite pin joining systems for small diameter graphite electrodes, of any length, whether or not finished, of a kind used in furnaces, and whether or not the graphite pin joining system is attached to, sold with, or sold separately from, the small diameter graphite electrode. Small diameter graphite electrodes and graphite pin joining systems for small diameter graphite electrodes are most commonly used in primary melting, ladle metallurgy, and specialty furnace applications in industries including foundries, smelters, and steel refining operations. Small diameter graphite electrodes and graphite pin joining systems for small diameter graphite electrodes that are subject to the order are currently classified under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) subheadings 8545.11.0010,5 3801.10,6 and 8545.11.0020.7 The HTSUS numbers are provided for convenience and customs purposes, but the written description of the scope is dispositive.

    5 The scope described in the order refers to the HTSUS subheading 8545.11.0000. We note that, starting in 2010, imports of small diameter graphite electrodes are classified in the HTSUS under subheading 8545.11.0010 and imports of large diameter graphite electrodes are classified under subheading 8545.11.0020.

    6 HTSUS subheading 3801.10 was added to the scope of the graphite electrodes order based on a determination in Small Diameter Graphite Electrodes From the People's Republic of China: Affirmative Final Determination of Circumvention of the Antidumping Duty Order, 77 FR 47596 (August 9, 2012) (first circumvention determination). The products covered by the first circumvention determination are graphite electrodes (or graphite pin joining system) that were (1) produced by UK Carbon and Graphite Co., Ltd. (UKCG) from PRC-manufactured artificial/synthetic graphite forms, of a size and shape (e.g., blanks, rods, cylinders, billets, blocks, etc.), (2) which required additional machining processes (i.e., tooling and shaping) that UKCG performed in the United Kingdom (UK), and (3) were re-exported to the United States as UK-origin merchandise.

    7 HTSUS subheading 8545.11.0020 was added to the scope of the graphite electrodes order based on a determination in Small Diameter Graphite Electrodes from the People's Republic of China: Affirmative Final Determination of Circumvention of the Antidumping Duty Order and Rescission of Later-Developed Merchandise Anticircumvention Inquiry, 78 FR 56864 (September 16, 2013) (second circumvention determination). The products covered by the second circumvention determination are graphite electrodes produced and/or exported by Jilin Carbon Import and Export Company with an actual or nominal diameter of 17 inches.

    Preliminary Determination of No Shipments

    On April 11, 2016, we requested the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) data during the POR for all entries of graphite electrodes produced or exported by the companies for which we initiated the administrative review and released that information to the parties. We received timely submissions from the Fangda Group,8 Fushun Jinly, and Jilin Carbon reporting that they did not have sales, shipments, or exports of the subject merchandise during the POR.9 For each of these companies, we transmitted a “No Shipments Inquiry” to CBP.10 Pursuant to these inquiries, we received no notification from CBP of any entries of subject merchandise concerning these companies. Accordingly, based on record evidence, we preliminarily determine that the Fangda Group, Fushun Jinly, and Jilin Carbon had no shipments and, therefore, no reviewable transactions during the POR. Further, consistent with our practice, we find that it is not appropriate to rescind the review with respect to these companies but, rather, to complete the review and issue appropriate instructions to CBP based on the final results of review.11

    8 We refer to the Fangda Group as a single entity pursuant to 19 CFR 351.401(f)(1). See Small Diameter Graphite Electrodes From the People's Republic of China: Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, Postponement of Final Determination, and Affirmative Preliminary Determination of Critical Circumstances, in Part, 73 FR 49408, 49411-12 (August 21, 2008) (where we collapsed the individual members of the Fangda Group: Beijing Fangda Carbon Tech Co., Ltd., Chengdu Rongguang Carbon Co., Ltd., Fangda Carbon New Material Co., Ltd., Fushun Carbon Co., Ltd., and Hefei Carbon Co., Ltd.), unchanged in Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Affirmative Determination of Critical Circumstances: Small Diameter Graphite Electrodes from the People's Republic of China, 74 FR 2049 (January 14, 2009).

    9See the Fangda Group's Letter dated May 6, 2016, Fushun Jinly's Letter dated May 5, 2016, and Jilin Carbon's Letter dated May 9, 2016.

    10See CBP messages 6197311, 6197312, and 6197313, all dated July 15, 2016.

    11See, e.g., Wooden Bedroom Furniture from the People's Republic of China: Final Results and Final Rescission, In Part, of Administrative Review and Final Results of New Shipper Review; 2013, 80 FR 34619 (June 17, 2015).

    Public Comment

    Interested parties may submit case briefs no later than 30 days after the date of publication of this notice.12 Rebuttal briefs, limited to issues raised in the case briefs, may be filed not later than five days after the date for filing case briefs.13 Parties who submit case or rebuttal briefs in this proceeding are encouraged to submit with each argument (1) a statement of the issue; (2) a brief summary of the argument; and (3) a table of authorities.14

    Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.310(c), interested parties who wish to request a hearing must submit a written request to the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, U.S. Department of Commerce. All documents must be filed electronically using Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS). ACCESS is available to registered users at https://access.trade.gov, and to all parties in the Central Records Unit, Room B8024 of the main Department of Commerce building. 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.15 Hearing requests should contain: (1) The party's name, address and telephone number; (2) the number of participants; and (3) a list of issues to be discussed. Issues raised in the hearing will be limited to those issues raised in the respective case briefs. If a request for a hearing is made, parties will be notified of the time and date of the hearing which will be held at the U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington DC 20230.

    Unless extended, we intend to issue the final results in this administrative review, including the results of our analysis of the issues raised in any written briefs, not later than 120 days after the date of publication of this notice, pursuant to section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act.

    12See 19 CFR 351.309(c)(1)(ii).

    13See 19 CFR 351.309(d).

    14See 19 CFR 351.309(c)(2) and (d)(2).

    15See 19 CFR 351.310(c).

    Assessment Rates

    Upon issuance of the final results, the Department will determine, and CBP shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries covered by this review.16 We intend to issue assessment instructions to CBP 15 days after the publication date of the final results of this review. Pursuant to the Department's practice in non-market economy cases, if we continue to determine in the final results that the Fangda Group, Fushun Jinly, and Jilin Carbon had no shipments of subject merchandise, any suspended entries of subject merchandise during the POR from these companies will be liquidated at the PRC-wide rate.17

    16See 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1).

    17 For a full discussion of this practice, see Non-Market Economy Antidumping Proceedings: Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 76 FR 65694 (October 24, 2011).

    Cash Deposit Requirements

    The following cash deposit requirements will be effective upon publication of the final results of this administrative review for all shipments of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date of the final results of review, as provided by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) For previously investigated or reviewed PRC and non-PRC exporters that received a separate rate in a prior segment of this proceeding, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the existing exporter-specific rate; (2) for all PRC exporters of subject merchandise that have not been found to be entitled to a separate rate, the cash deposit rate will be the PRC-wide rate of 159.64 percent; and (3) for all non-PRC exporters of subject merchandise which have not received their own rate, the cash deposit rate will be the rate applicable to the PRC exporter that supplied that non-PRC exporter. These deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice.

    Notifications to Importers

    This notice serves as a preliminary reminder to importers of their responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate regarding the reimbursement of antidumping duties prior to liquidation of the relevant entries during this review period. Failure to comply with this requirement may result in the Department's presumption that reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of doubled antidumping duties.

    This notice is issued and published in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.221(b)(4).

    Dated: October 14, 2016. Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
    [FR Doc. 2016-25553 Filed 10-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Proposed Information Collection; Comment Request; Marine Recreational Fishing Expenditure Survey AGENCY:

    National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Commerce, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing information collections, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

    DATES:

    Written comments must be submitted on or before December 20, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Direct all written comments to Jennifer Jessup, Departmental Paperwork Clearance Officer, Department of Commerce, Room 6616, 14th and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230 (or via the Internet at [email protected]).

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Requests for additional information or copies of the information collection instrument and instructions should be directed to Sabrina Lovell, (301) 427-8153 or [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Abstract

    This request is for revision and extension of an existing data collection.

    The objective of the survey is to collect information on both trip expenditures and annual durable good expenditures made by marine recreational anglers. The survey will be conducted in two parts. One part will ask anglers about the expenses incurred on their most recent marine recreational fishing trip. The other part of the survey will ask anglers about their purchases of durable goods such as fishing gear, boats, vehicles, and second homes. As specified in the Magnuson-Stevenson Fishery Conservation and Management Act of 1996 (and reauthorized in 2007), NMFS is required to enumerate the economic impacts of the policies it implements on fishing participants and coastal communities. The expenditure data collected in this survey will be used to estimate the economic contributions and impacts of marine recreational fishing to each coastal state and nationwide. Slight revisions will be made to the existing trip expenditure questions to clarify certain types of expenditures, and two questions on the trip expenditure instrument will be dropped.

    II. Method of Collection

    The survey will be conducted using a combination of four modes: Phone, in-person interviews, mail, and electronic (Internet and/or mobile app).

    III. Data

    OMB Control Number: 0648-0693.

    Form Number(s): None.

    Type of Review: Regular submission (revision and extension of a currently approved information collection).

    Affected Public: Individual anglers or households.

    Estimated Number of Respondents: 100,200: 14,200 for durable goods and 86,000 for trip expenditure surveys.

    Estimated Time per Response: Durable goods survey, 15 minutes; trip expenditures survey, 5-8 minutes.

    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 3,816.

    Estimated Total Annual Cost to Public: $0 in recordkeeping/reporting costs.

    IV. Request for Comments

    Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden (including hours and cost) of the proposed collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

    Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and/or included in the request for OMB approval of this information collection; they also will become a matter of public record.

    Dated: October 17, 2016. Sarah Brabson, NOAA PRA Clearance Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2016-25454 Filed 10-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XE975 South Atlantic Fishery Management Council—Public Meetings AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Notice of informational Webinars.

    SUMMARY:

    The South Atlantic Fishery Management Council (Council) will hold two informational Webinars pertaining to the Council's 2016-2020 Vision Blueprint for the Snapper Grouper Fishery.

    DATES:

    The Webinars will be held on November 21, 2016, to view the agenda see SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.

    ADDRESSES:

    Council address: South Atlantic Fishery Management Council, 4055 Faber Place Drive, Suite 201, N. Charleston, SC 29405.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Kim Iverson, Public Information Officer, SAFMC; phone 843/571-4366 or toll free 866/SAFMC-10; FAX 843/769-4520; email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Agenda

    The Council will hold two Webinars to inform the public on progress to date on implementation of priority items in the 2016-2020 Vision Blueprint for the Snapper Grouper Fishery. The Vision Blueprint is a long-term strategic plan for managing the snapper grouper fishery, and has been developed with stakeholder input. The Vision Blueprint identifies the goals, objectives, strategies, and actions that support the Vision for the snapper grouper fishery and centers around four goal areas: (1) Science; (2) Management; (3) Communication; and (4) Governance. The informal Webinars are being held as part of an annual evaluation of the Vision Blueprint and are designed to let the public know what the Council accomplished during the year in terms of addressing priority items within the Blueprint.

    The Webinars will be conducted at 10 a.m. and at 6 p.m. The Webinars will be accessible via the Internet from the “Other Meetings” page of Council's Web site, at www.safmc.net. Registration for the Webinars is required. Register for the 10 a.m. Webinar, at https://attendee.gotowebinar.com/register/6323613905978491652. Register for the 6 p.m. Webinar, at https://attendee.gotowebinar.com/register/5214638781622248964. Additional information about the Council's Vision Blueprint is available from the “Vision Project” page of the Council's Web site, at www.safmc.net.

    Special Accommodations

    These Webinars are physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for auxiliary aids should be directed to the SAFMC office (see ADDRESSES) at least 5 business days prior to the meeting.

    Note:

    The times and sequence specified in this agenda are subject to change.

    Authority:

    16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

    Dated: October 18, 2016. Tracey L. Thompson, Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2016-25488 Filed 10-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XE841 Notice of Availability of a Final Environmental Impact Statement for Effects of Oil and Gas Activities in the Arctic Ocean AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Notice of availability of a Final Environmental Impact Statement; request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    NMFS announces the availability of the “Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) for the Effects of Oil and Gas Activities in the Arctic Ocean.” The purpose of the FEIS is to evaluate, in compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the potential direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts of implementing the alternative approaches for authorizing take of marine mammals incidental to oil and gas activities in the Arctic Ocean pursuant to the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA). The U.S. Department of the Interior's Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) was a cooperating agency on this FEIS, and as such, this FEIS also evaluates the potential direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts of implementing the alternative approaches for authorizing geological and geophysical (G&G) surveys and concurring on ancillary activities under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (OCSLA) in the Arctic Ocean. The North Slope Borough (NSB) was also a cooperating agency on this FEIS. The Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service were consulting agencies, and NMFS coordinated with the Alaska Eskimo Whaling Commission pursuant to our co-management agreement under the MMPA.

    DATES:

    Federal, State, and local agencies, as well as other interested parties, are invited to review this FEIS. Comments must be received on or before November 21, 2016, to be considered for our Record of Decision. The Record of Decision will include information on the alternatives considered, the preferred alternative and why we chose it, and required mitigation and monitoring.

    ADDRESSES:

    The FEIS is available for review online at: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/eis/arctic.htm. You may submit comments on this document by:

    Email: [email protected].

    Fax: (301) 713-0376, Attn: Jolie Harrison.

    Mail: NOAA, NMFS, Office of Protected Resources, 1315 East-West Highway, Room 13805, Silver Spring, MD 20910, Attn: Jolie Harrison.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Candace Nachman, Office of Policy, NMFS at (301) 427-8031, or Jolie Harrison, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS at (301) 427-8401.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background

    Sections 101 (a)(5)(A) and (D) of the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.) direct the Secretary of Commerce to allow, upon request, the incidental, but not intentional taking of small numbers of marine mammals by U.S. citizens who engage in a specified activity (other than commercial fishing) within a specified geographical region if certain findings are made and either regulations are issued or, if the taking is limited to harassment, a notice of proposed authorization is provided to the public for review. The term “take” under the MMPA means “to harass, hunt, capture or kill, or attempt to harass, hunt, capture, or kill.” Except with respect to certain activities not pertinent here, the MMPA defines “harassment” as “any act of pursuit, torment, or annoyance which (i) has the potential to injure a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild (Level A harassment); or (ii) has the potential to disturb a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild by causing disruption of behavioral patterns, including, but not limited to, migration, breathing, nursing, breeding, feeding, or sheltering (Level B harassment).”

    Authorization for incidental takings shall be granted if NMFS finds that the taking will have a negligible impact on the species or stock(s), will not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of the species or stock(s) for subsistence uses (where relevant), and if the permissible methods of taking and requirements pertaining to the mitigation, monitoring and reporting of such takings are set forth. NMFS has defined “negligible impact” in 50 CFR 216.103 as “. . . an impact resulting from the specified activity that cannot be reasonably expected to, and is not reasonably likely to, adversely affect the species or stock through effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival.”

    NMFS, as the lead federal agency, prepared this FEIS to evaluate a broad range of reasonably foreseeable levels of exploration activities and associated mitigation measures that may occur in the U.S. Beaufort and Chukchi Seas. The FEIS presents the potential impacts associated with the issuance of incidental take authorizations (ITAs) under section 101(a)(5) of the MMPA for seismic surveys, ancillary activities, and exploratory drilling. NMFS recognizes that the current level of oil and gas exploration activities is lower than what previously occurred and what was projected when the scoping process for this EIS began in February 2010. However, NMFS still receives requests for MMPA ITAs in the U.S. Beaufort and Chukchi Seas, and this FEIS provides decision-makers and the public with an evaluation of the environmental, social, and economic effects of the proposed action and alternatives.

    On December 30, 2011, NMFS published a Notice of Availability of the Draft EIS in the Federal Register (76 FR 82275). The 2011 Draft EIS includes an analysis of the proposed actions identified in the 2010 Notice of Intent (i.e., NMFS' issuance of MMPA ITAs for take of marine mammals incidental to G&G surveys, ancillary activities, and exploratory drilling in the Chukchi and Beaufort Seas and BOEM's issuance of G&G permits and concurrence on ancillary activities in the Chukchi and Beaufort Seas), the anticipated environmental impacts, and measures to minimize the impacts associated with these activities. On March 29, 2013, NMFS published a Notice of Availability of a Supplemental Draft EIS in the Federal Register (78 FR 19212). The Supplemental Draft EIS included one new alternative not contained in the 2011 Draft EIS and a few other substantive changes. Please refer to the Notices of Availability for the Draft and Supplemental Draft EISs for that information.

    Alternatives

    NMFS evaluated a preferred alternative (Alternative 2) and five others in the FEIS. Each alternative includes an analysis of a suite of standard and additional mitigation measures that have been identified to help reduce impacts to marine mammals and to ensure no unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of marine mammals for subsistence uses. Each alternative also considers a reasonable range of oil and gas exploration activities for which MMPA ITAs could be issued. Table 1 outlines the activity levels considered in each alternative. Activity levels noted are a maximum for each alternative.

    Table 1—Levels of G&G, Ancillary, and Exploratory Drilling Activities Proposed for Consideration in the Alternatives in the FEIS on the Effects of Oil and Gas Activities in the Arctic Ocean. Activity Levels Noted are a Maximum, and Any Combination Up to That Amount Could Be Allowed Under Each Alternative 2D/3D Seismic
  • surveys
  • Site clearance and shallow hazards
  • surveys
  • On-ice seismic
  • surveys
  • Exploratory drilling
    Alternative 1 (No Action) 0 0 0 0. Alternative 2—Preferred Alternative (Level 1) 4 in Beaufort
  • 3 in Chukchi
  • 3 in Beaufort
  • 3 in Chukchi
  • 1 in Beaufort
  • 0 in Chukchi
  • 1 in Beaufort
  • 1 in Chukchi.
  • Alternative 3 (Level 2) 6 in Beaufort
  • 5 in Chukchi
  • 5 in Beaufort
  • 5 in Chukchi
  • 1 in Beaufort
  • 0 in Chukchi
  • 2 in Beaufort
  • 2 in Chukchi.
  • Alternative 4 (Level 3) 6 in Beaufort
  • 5 in Chukchi
  • 5 in Beaufort
  • 5 in Chukchi
  • 1 in Beaufort
  • 0 in Chukchi
  • 4 in Beaufort
  • 4 in Chukchi.
  • Alternative 5 (Level 3 with required time/area closures) 6 in Beaufort
  • 5 in Chukchi
  • 5 in Beaufort
  • 5 in Chukchi
  • 1 in Beaufort
  • 0 in Chukchi
  • 4 in Beaufort
  • 4 in Chukchi.
  • Alternative 6 (any level with required use of alternative technologies) 6 in Beaufort
  • 5 in Chukchi
  • 5 in Beaufort
  • 5 in Chukchi
  • 1 in Beaufort
  • 0 in Chukchi
  • Any level up to the maximum, as the technology only relates to seismic surveys.

    Alternatives 5 and 6 differ from Alternatives 2, 3, and 4 in the fact that each one considers required mitigation measures not contemplated in the other action alternatives. Certain time/area closures considered for mitigation on a case-by-case basis under the other action alternatives would be required under Alternative 5. The time/area closures would be for specific areas important to biological productivity, life history functions for specific species of concern, and subsistence activities. Activities would not be permitted to occur in any of the time/area closures during the specific identified periods. Additionally, buffer zones around these time/area closures could potentially be included.

    In addition to contemplating the same suite of standard and additional mitigation measures analyzed in the other action alternatives, Alternative 6 also includes specific additional mitigation measures that focus on the use of alternative technologies that have the potential to augment or replace traditional airgun-based seismic exploration activities in the future.

    Dated: October 17, 2016. Donna S. Wieting, Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2016-25475 Filed 10-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XE859 Taking and Importing Marine Mammals; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to U.S. Navy Operations of Surveillance Towed Array Sensor System Low Frequency Active Sonar AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Notice; receipt of application for letter of authorization; request for comments and information.

    SUMMARY:

    NMFS has received a request from the U.S. Navy (Navy) for authorization to take, by harassment, marine mammals incidental to conducting operations of Surveillance Towed Array Sensor System (SURTASS) Low Frequency Active (LFA) sonar for the period beginning August 2017 and ending August 2022. Pursuant to the implementing regulations of the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA), NMFS is announcing our receipt of the Navy's request for regulations governing the incidental taking of marine mammals and inviting information, suggestions, and comments on the Navy's application and request.

    DATES:

    Comments and information must be received no later than November 21, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Comments on the application should be addressed to Jolie Harrison, Chief, Permits, Conservation and Education Division, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service, 1315 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910-3225. The mailbox address for providing email comments is [email protected] NMFS is not responsible for email comments sent to addresses other than the one provided here. Comments sent via email, including all attachments, must not exceed a 10-megabyte file size.

    Instructions: All comments received are a part of the public record and will generally be posted to http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental.htm#applications without change. All Personal Identifying Information (for example, name, address, etc.) voluntarily submitted by the commenter may be publicly accessible. Do not submit Confidential Business Information or otherwise sensitive or protected information.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Dale Youngkin, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS; phone: (301) 427-8401.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Availability

    An electronic copy of the Navy's application may be obtained online at: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental.htm#applications. The Navy released a draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (DSEIS) for the employment of SURTASS LFA sonar on August 26, 2016. A copy of the DSEIS, which would also support NMFS' proposed rulemaking under the MMPA, is available at http://www.surtass-lfa-eis.com.

    Background

    Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972, as amended (MMPA; 16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.) direct the Secretary of Commerce (Secretary) to allow, upon request, the incidental, but not intentional taking of marine mammals by U.S. citizens who engage in a specified activity (other than commercial fishing) if certain findings are made and regulations are issued or, if the taking is limited to harassment, notice of a proposed authorization is provided to the public for review.

    Authorization for incidental takings shall be granted if NMFS finds that the taking will have a negligible impact on the species or stock(s), will not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of the species or stock(s) for subsistence uses (where relevant), and if the permissible methods of taking and requirements pertaining to the mitigation, monitoring and reporting of such taking are set forth.

    NMFS has defined “negligible impact” in 50 CFR 216.103 as “. . . an impact resulting from the specified activity that cannot be reasonably expected to, and is not reasonably likely to, adversely affect the species or stock through effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival.”

    With respect to military readiness activities, the MMPA defines “harassment” as:

    (i) Any act that injures or has the significant potential to injure a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild [Level A Harassment]; or (ii) any act that disturbs or is likely to disturb a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild by causing disruption of natural behavioral patterns, including, but not limited to, migration, surfacing, nursing, breeding, feeding, or sheltering, to a point where such behavioral patterns are abandoned or significantly altered [Level B Harassment].

    Summary of Request

    On August 26, 2016, NMFS received an application from the Navy requesting authorization to take individuals of 104 species of marine mammals (75 cetaceans and 29 pinnipeds), by harassment, incidental to training, testing, and routine military operations (all categorized as military readiness activities) using SURTASS LFA sonar over the course of five years between August 15, 2017 and August 15, 2022.

    The Navy states that these training, testing, and routine military activities may expose some of the marine mammals present in the operational areas to sound from low-frequency active sonar sources. Because marine mammals may be harassed due to noise disturbance incidental to the use of SURTASS LFA sonar during training, testing, and routine military operations, the Navy utilized the most recent NMFS acoustic Technical Guidance (NMFS 2016) to analyze potential takes of marine mammals. The Navy requests authorization to take individuals of 104 species of marine mammals by Level B Harassment. Further, the Navy states that the probability of taking marine mammals by Level A Harassment is less than 0.001 percent. However, because the probability is not zero, the Navy has included a small number of Level A harassment in its authorization request as a precautionary measure.

    This will be NMFS' fourth rule making for SURTASS LFA sonar operations under the MMPA. NMFS published the first rule effective from August 2002 through August 2007 on July 16, 2002 (67 FR 46712); the second rule effective from August 2007 through August 2012 on August 21, 2007 (72 FR 46846); and the third rule effective from August 2012 through August 2012 (77 FR 50290). For this fourth rule making, the Navy is proposing to conduct the same types of sonar activities in the proposed rulemaking as they have conducted over the past fourteen years in the previous three rule makings with the exceptions of updating the LFA sonar duty cycle from 20 percent to 7.5-10 percent based on historical data. In addition, the Navy is proposing a Preferred Alternative (Alternative 2) in their DSEIS that would transmit a maximum number of 255 hours of LFA sonar per vessel per year, as opposed to the previously authorized 432 hours of LFA sonar per vessel per year.

    Description of the Specified Activity

    The Navy proposes to deploy the system on a maximum of four U.S. Naval ships: The USNS ABLE, the USNS EFFECTIVE, the USNS IMPECCABLE and the USNS VICTORIOUS) in certain areas of the Pacific, Atlantic, and Indian Oceans and the Mediterranean Sea. Nominal at-sea missions for each vessel using SURTASS LFA sonar would last up to 294 days, with 240 days of active sonar transmissions and 54 days of transit. The maximum number of actual transmission hours per vessel would not exceed 255 hours annually under the Preferred Alternative. The application describes the activity types, the equipment and platforms involved, and the duration and potential locations of the specified activities.

    A suite of proposed mitigation measures for marine mammals that could potentially be affected during SURTASS LFA sonar operations includes restricting the use of SURTASS LFA sonar such that it will not operate in Arctic and Antarctic waters; sound pressure levels (SPL) will not exceed 180 decibels (dB) re 1 μPa (rms) within 12 nautical miles of any emerged features of any coastline, or within designated offshore biologically important areas (OBIAs) for marine mammals; and the Navy will minimize exposure of marine mammals to SURTASS LFA sonar signal received levels of 180 dB re 1 μPa (rms) by monitoring for their presence and suspending transmission when animals enter the mitigation zone.

    Information Solicited

    Interested persons may submit information, suggestions, and comments concerning the Navy's request (see ADDRESSES). NMFS will consider all information, suggestions, and comments related to the Navy's request and NMFS' potential development and implementation of regulations governing the incidental taking of marine mammals by the Navy's SURTASS LFA sonar activities.

    Dated: October 4, 2016. Donna S. Wieting, Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2016-25532 Filed 10-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XE901 International Fisheries; Pacific Tuna Fisheries; Well Volume in the Regional Vessel Register of the Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Notice to the U.S. purse seine fleet fishing for tuna and tuna-like species in the Eastern Pacific Ocean.

    SUMMARY:

    The intent of this notice is to inform the U.S. purse seine fleet fishing for tuna or tuna-like species in the Eastern Pacific Ocean (EPO) about Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission (IATTC) Resolution C-15-02 (Resolution on the Deadline Applicable to Revisions of Well Volume in Paragraph 6 of Resolution C-02-03).

    DATES:

    IATTC Resolution C-15-02 will become effective January 1, 2017.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Chris Fanning, West Coast Region, NMFS, at [email protected], or at (562) 980-4198.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background on the IATTC

    The United States is a member of the IATTC, which was established under the 1949 Convention for the Establishment of an Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission. In 2003, the IATTC adopted the Convention for the Strengthening of the IATTC Established by the 1949 Convention between the United States of America and the Republic of Costa Rica (Antigua Convention), which entered into force in 2010. The United States acceded to the Antigua Convention on February 24, 2016. The full text of the Antigua Convention is available at: https://www.iattc.org/PDFFiles2/Antigua_Convention_Jun_2003.pdf.

    The IATTC consists of 21 member nations and four cooperating non-member nations and facilitates scientific research into, as well as the conservation and management of, highly migratory species of fish in the IATTC Convention Area. The IATTC Convention Area is defined as the waters of the EPO within the area bounded by the west coast of the Americas and by 50° N. latitude, 150° W. longitude, and 50° S. latitude. The IATTC has maintained a scientific research and fishery monitoring program for many years, which includes a Regional Vessel Register (Register) to maintain a record of vessels that are authorized to fish for tuna and tuna-like species in the Convention Area.

    International Obligations of the United States Under the Convention

    As a member of the IATTC, the United States is legally bound to implement decisions of the IATTC. The Tuna Conventions Act (16 U.S.C. 951-962) provides that the Secretary of Commerce, in consultation with the Secretary of State and, with respect to enforcement measures, the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, may promulgate such regulations as may be necessary to carry out the United States' international obligations under the Convention, including recommendations and decisions adopted by the IATTC. The Secretary's authority to promulgate such regulations has been delegated to NMFS.

    IATTC Resolution C-15-02

    Resolution C-02-03 was agreed to at the 69th meeting of the IATTC in Manzanillo, Mexico in 2002. Among other things, the Resolution stated that, “the well volume of each purse-seine vessel, once confirmed. . ., shall be reflected in the Register.” This Resolution was implemented domestically through regulations at 50 CFR 300.22(b). At the 89th meeting of the IATTC in Guayaquil, Ecuador in 2015, Resolution C-02-03 was amended to Resolution C-15-02. This Resolution required that a deadline be set for all purse seine well volumes (identified as “Fish Hold Volume (m3)” in the Register) to be confirmed. Resolution C-15-02 states that on January 1, 2017, all purse seine well volumes in the Register will be considered confirmed, and the well volume of any new purse seine vessel added to the Register after that date will be considered confirmed at the time they are added to the Register.

    Impact on the U.S. Purse Seine Fleet

    For purse seine vessels currently listed on the Register, the well volume listed in the Register on January 1, 2017, will be considered confirmed, even if documentation (e.g., blueprints, marine survey) verifying well volume has never been submitted. Additionally, if a new purse seine vessel is added to the Register, the well volume submitted at the time it is added will be considered confirmed whether or not it is accompanied by documentation.

    If the owner of a vessel currently listed on the Register would like to submit documentation to verify the vessel's well volume and update it before January 1, 2017, please submit any such documentation no later than December 15, 2016 (See FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).

    Authority:

    16 U.S.C. 951 et seq.

    Dated: October 18, 2016. Emily H. Menashes, Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2016-25540 Filed 10-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Proposed Information Collection; Comment Request; Alaska Region Gear Identification AGENCY:

    National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Commerce, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing information collections, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

    DATES:

    Written comments must be submitted on or before December 20, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Direct all written comments to Jennifer Jessup, Departmental Paperwork Clearance Officer, Department of Commerce, Room 6616, 14th and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230 (or via the Internet at [email protected]).

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Requests for additional information or copies of the information collection instrument and instructions should be directed to Patsy A. Bearden, telephone 907-586-7008, or [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Abstract

    Regulations specify that all hook-and-line, longline pot, and pot-and-line marker buoys carried on board or used by any vessel must be marked with Federal Fisheries Permit number or State of Alaska Department of Fish and Game vessel registration number. Regulations that marker buoys be marked with identification information are essential to facilitate fisheries enforcement and actions concerning damage, loss, and civil proceedings. The ability to link fishing gear to the vessel owner or operator is crucial to enforcement of regulations.

    This collection also provides a voluntary opportunity for Gulf of Alaska (GOA) individual fishing quota (IFQ) sablefish fishermen to use a gear that physically protects caught sablefish from depredation by whales. That option, the use of pot longline gear, currently exists in sablefish IFQ fisheries in the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands management areas. Potential benefits of pot longline gear for sablefish fishing include: Mitigation of whale interaction with fishing gear, reduced mortality of seabirds, reduced bycatch of non-target fish species, reduced overall halibut mortality when targeting sablefish, and better accounting of total sablefish fishing mortality.

    Whales are able to strip hooked fish from hook-and-line gear, which reduces the amount of sablefish caught by fishermen. As such, whale depredation represents undocumented fishing mortality.

    Many seabird species are attracted to fishing vessels in order to forage on bait, offal, discards, and other prey made available by fishing operations. These interactions can result in direct mortality for seabirds if they become entangled in fishing gear or strike the vessel or fishing gear while flying.

    Each vessel must use mandatory logbooks (see OMB Control No. 0648-0213 and 0648-0515) when participating in a longline pot fishery. When the number of pots deployed by a vessel is self-reported through logbooks, the use of pot tags provides an additional enforcement tool to ensure that the pot limits are not exceeded. The use of pot tags requires a uniquely identified tag to be securely affixed to each pot. This allows at-sea enforcement and post-trip verification of the number of pots fished.

    II. Method of Collection

    Information will be collected using paper or electronic logbooks. Marker buoys are marked with identification information.

    III. Data

    OMB Control Number: 0648-0353.

    Form Number(s): None.

    Type of Review: Extension of a current information collection.

    Affected Public: Individuals or households; Business or other for-profit organizations.

    Estimated Number of Respondents: 990.

    Estimated Time per Response: 15 minutes each for Request for IFQ Sablefish Pot Gear Tags, Request for Replacement of IFQ Sablefish Pot Gear Tags or Lost Gear, Marking of longline pot gear; and Groundfish Hook-and-line marker buoys.

    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 1800 hr.

    Estimated Total Annual Cost to Public: $ 11,310.

    IV. Request for Comments

    Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden (including hours and cost) of the proposed collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

    Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and/or included in the request for OMB approval of this information collection; they also will become a matter of public record.

    Dated: October 17, 2016. Sarah Brabson, NOAA PRA Clearance Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2016-25452 Filed 10-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    COMMITTEE FOR PURCHASE FROM PEOPLE WHO ARE BLIND OR SEVERELY DISABLED Procurement List; Proposed Deletions AGENCY:

    Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled.

    ACTION:

    Proposed deletions from the Procurement List.

    SUMMARY:

    The Committee is proposing to delete products previously furnished by the nonprofit agency employing persons who are blind or have other severe disabilities.

    DATES:

    Comments must be received on or before: November 20, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled, 1401 S. Clark Street, Suite 715, Arlington, Virginia, 22202-4149.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For further information or to submit comments contact: Barry S. Lineback, Telephone: (703) 603-7740, Fax: (703) 603-0655, or email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This notice is published pursuant to 41 U.S.C. 8503 (a)(2) and 41 CFR 51-2.3. Its purpose is to provide interested persons an opportunity to submit comments on the proposed actions.

    Deletions

    The following products are proposed for deletion from the Procurement List:

    Products NSN(s)—Product Name(s): MR 764—Pillow, Fiber Fill MR 765—Pillow, Fiber Fill Mandatory Source(s) of Supply: Georgia Industries for the Blind, Bainbridge, GA Contracting Activity: Defense Commissary Agency Barry S. Lineback, Director, Business Operations.
    [FR Doc. 2016-25530 Filed 10-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6353-01-P
    COMMITTEE FOR PURCHASE FROM PEOPLE WHO ARE BLIND OR SEVERELY DISABLED Procurement List; Deletions AGENCY:

    Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled.

    ACTION:

    Deletions from the procurement list.

    SUMMARY:

    This action deletes products and services from the Procurement List previously furnished by nonprofit agencies employing persons who are blind or have other severe disabilities.

    DATES:

    Effective November 20, 2016

    ADDRESSES:

    Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled, 1401 S. Clark Street, Suite 715, Arlington, Virginia, 22202-4149.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Barry S. Lineback, Telephone: (703) 603-7740, Fax: (703) 603-0655, or email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Deletions

    On 9/2/2016 (81 FR 60681-60683), 9/9/2016 (81 FR 62481-62482), and 9/16/2016 (81 FR 63744-63745), the Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled published notices of proposed deletions from the Procurement List.

    After consideration of the relevant matter presented, the Committee has determined that the products and services listed below are no longer suitable for procurement by the Federal Government under 41 U.S.C. 8501-8506 and 41 CFR 51-2.4.

    Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification

    I certify that the following action will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. The major factors considered for this certification were:

    1. The action will not result in additional reporting, recordkeeping or other compliance requirements for small entities.

    2. The action may result in authorizing small entities to furnish the products and services to the Government.

    3. There are no known regulatory alternatives which would accomplish the objectives of the Javits-Wagner-O'Day Act (41 U.S.C. 8501-8506) in connection with the products and services deleted from the Procurement List.

    End of Certification

    Accordingly, the following products and services are deleted from the Procurement List:

    Products Product Name(s)—NSN(s): 8415-01-519-7867—Jacket, Level 3, PCU, Marine Corps, Brown, L 8415-01-519-7868—Jacket, Level 3, PCU, Marine Corps, Brown, M 8415-01-519-8079—Jacket, Level 3, PCU, Marine Corps, Brown, L-L 8415-01-519-8083—Jacket, Level 3, PCU, Marine Corps, Brown, S 8415-01-519-8084—Jacket, Level 3, PCU, Marine Corps, Brown, XL-L 8415-01-519-8087—Jacket, Level 3, PCU, Marine Corps, Brown, XL Contracting Activities: Commander, Quantico, VA, Army Contracting Command—Aberdeen Proving Ground, Natick Contracting Division. 8415-01-535-7954—Shirt, Level 3, PCU, Army, Brown, XXL 8415-01-542-8541—Jacket, Lightweight Extreme Cold Weather Insulating Level 3, PCU, Army, Brown, XXLL 8415-01-542-8544—Jacket, Lightweight Extreme Cold Weather Insulating, Level 3, PCU, Army, Brown, S 8415-01-542-8548—Jacket, Lightweight Extreme Cold Weather Insulating, Level 3, PCU, Army, Brown, M 8415-01-542-8551—Jacket, Lightweight Extreme Cold Weather Insulating, Level 3, PCU, Army, Brown, L 8415-01-542-8554—Jacket, Lightweight Extreme Cold Weather Insulating, Level 3, PCU, Army, Brown, L-L 8415-01-542-8557—Jacket, Lightweight Extreme Cold Weather Insulating, Level 3, PCU, Army, Brown, XL-L 8415-01-542-8558—Jacket, Lightweight Extreme Cold Weather Insulating, Level 3, PCU, Army, Brown, XL 8415-01-542-8560—Jacket, Lightweight Extreme Cold Weather Insulating, Level 3, PCU, Army, Brown, XXL 8415-01-542-8561—Jacket, Lightweight Extreme Cold Weather Insulating, Level 3, PCU, Army, Brown, XS 8415-01-543-7040—Jacket, Extreme Cold Weather Level 3, PCU, Army, Brown, M-L 8415-01-544-6756—Jacket, Extreme Cold Weather Level 3, PCU, Army, Brown, XXXL 8415-01-544-6759—Jacket, Extreme Cold Weather Level 3, PCU, Army, Brown, XXXLL Contracting Activity: Army Contracting Command—Aberdeen Proving Ground, Natick Contracting Division Mandatory Source(s) of Supply: Unknown Product Name(s)—NSN(s): 7530-01-354-2327—Envelope, Translucent, 41/2 x 11″ 7530-01-354-3982—Envelope, Translucent, 4 x 7″ 7530-01-354-3983—Envelope, Translucent, 91/2 x 11″ Mandatory Source(s) of Supply: Industries for the Blind, Inc., West Allis, WI Contracting Activity: General Services Administration, New York, NY Product Name(s)—NSN(s): 6530-01-163-3704—Cup, Specimen Contracting Activity: Department of Veterans Affairs Product Name(s)—NSN(s): 6532-00-914-3069—Shirt, Operating, Surgical 6532-00-914-3070—Shirt, Operating, Surgical 6532-00-914-3071—Shirt, Operating, Surgical Contracting Activity: Defense Logistics Agency Troop Support Product Name(s)—NSN(s): 7350-01-138-0022—Pitcher, Water Contracting Activity: Department of Veterans Affairs NSN(s)—Product Name(s): 7510-00-NIB-0432—Business Card Case, Fold-Up, Rosewood Mandatory Source(s) of Supply: Tarrant County Association for the Blind, Fort Worth, TX Contracting Activity: General Services Administration, New York, NY NSN(s)—Product Name(s): MR 10468—Set, Saver, Salad MR 10674—Funnel, Collapsible MR 10635—Serving Platter, Heavy Duty, Raised Surface, Fall Themed, White MR 10627—Garden Seed Packets, Assorted, 4PK MR 10623—Container, Frozen Waffle, Expandable MR 10618—Stickers, Easter Themed, Assorted, 200ct MR 10626—Poster Book, Coloring, Assorted, 36 × 42 MR 10609—Bowl, Insulated Thermal, Toddler, 8oz MR 380—Set, Baking Cups and Picks, Holiday, 24PC MR 382—Duct Tape, Holiday Themed, Assorted Colors Mandatory Source(s) of Supply: Winston-Salem Industries for the Blind, Inc., Winston-Salem, NC Contracting Activity: Defense Commissary Agency NSN(s)—Product Name(s): MR 1120—Bag, Storage, Vacuum Sealed, 6PG MR 365—Serving Set, Stand and Bowl, Halloween Themed, 16oz MR 371—Serving Set, Stand and Bowl, Holiday Themed, 16oz MR 1146—Serving Set, Stand and Bowl, 16oz MR 349—Containers, Storage, 6PG MR 370—Serving Bowl, Holiday, Plastic 7Qt MR 373—Chip and Dip Bowl, Holiday, Plastic MR 301—Silicone Spatula MR 355—Set, Serving Set, Party Travelling MR 1183—Set, Mixing Bowl, Melamine, 4PC MR 1159—Set, Bakeware, Cake Pop MR 383—Server, Beverage, w Spout, 1.25G Mandatory Source(s) of Supply: Industries for the Blind, Inc., West Allis, WI Contracting Activity: Defense Commissary Agency NSN(s)—Product Name(s): 6515-00-NIB-0770—Gloves, Surgical, Powder-free, OR Classic, White, Size 8″ 6515-00-NIB-0771—Gloves, Surgical, Powder-free, OR Classic, White, Size 8.5″ 6515-00-NIB-0772—Gloves, Surgical, Powder-free, OR Classic, White, Size 9″ 6515-00-NIB-0773—Gloves, Surgical, Powder free, Sensicare Ortho, White, Size 5.5″ 6515-00-NIB-0765—Gloves, Surgical, Powder-free, OR Classic, White, Size 5.5″ 6515-00-NIB-0766—Gloves, Surgical, Powder-free, OR Classic, White, Size 6″ 6515-00-NIB-0767—Gloves, Surgical, Powder-free, OR Classic, White, Size 6.5″ 6515-00-NIB-0768—Gloves, Surgical, Powder-free, OR Classic, White, Size 7″ 6515-00-NIB-0769—Gloves, Surgical, Powder-free, OR Classic, White, Size 7.5″ 6515-00-NIB-0680—Gloves, Surgical, Powder-free, Derma Prene, Isotouch Hydrasoft, Green, Size 8.5″ 6515-00-NIB-0681—Gloves, Surgical, Powder-free, Derma Prene, Isotouch Hydrasoft, Green, Size 9″ 6515-00-NIB-0674—Gloves, Surgical, Powder-free, Derma Prene, Isotouch Hydrasoft, Green, Size 5.5″ 6515-00-NIB-0675—Gloves, Surgical, Powder-free, Derma Prene, Isotouch Hydrasoft, Green, Size 6″ 6515-00-NIB-0676—Gloves, Surgical, Powder-free, Derma Prene, Isotouch Hydrasoft, Green, Size 6.5″ 6515-00-NIB-0677—Gloves, Surgical, Powder-free, Derma Prene, Isotouch Hydrasoft, Green, Size 7″ 6515-00-NIB-0678—Gloves, Surgical, Powder-free, Derma Prene, Isotouch Hydrasoft, Green, Size 7.5″ 6515-00-NIB-0679—Gloves, Surgical, Powder-free, Derma Prene, Isotouch Hydrasoft, Green, Size 8″ Mandatory Source(s) of Supply: Bosma Industries for the Blind, Inc., Indianapolis, IN Contracting Activity: Strategic Acquisition Center, Fredericksburg, VA NSN(s)—Product Name(s): 6515-00-NIB-8015—Gloves, Exam, Nitrile, Latex-Free, Powder-Free, W/Inner Aloe coating, 5.5 mil (palm), Green, x-Small Mandatory Source(s) of Supply: Bosma Industries for the Blind, Inc., Indianapolis, IN Contracting Activity: Department of Veterans Affairs NSN(s)—Product Name(s): 6515-00-NIB-0531—Glove Powder Free, aloetouch micro 6515-00-NIB-0532—Glove Powder Free, aloetouch micro 6515-00-NIB-0533—Glove Powder Free, aloetouch micro 6515-00-NIB-0534—Glove Powder Free, aloetouch micro 6515-00-NIB-0535—Glove Powder Free, aloetouch micro 6515-00-NIB-0536—Glove Powder Free, aloetouch micro 6515-00-NIB-0537—Glove Powder Free, aloetouch micro 6515-00-NIB-0538—Glove Powder Free, aloetouch micro 6515-00-NIB-0481—Glove Powdered, Perry Orthopaedic 6515-00-NIB-0482—Glove Powdered, Perry Orthopaedic 6515-00-NIB-0483—Glove Powdered, Perry Orthopaedic 6515-00-NIB-0477—Glove Powdered, Perry Orthopaedic 6515-00-NIB-0478—Glove Powdered, Perry Orthopaedic 6515-00-NIB-0479—Glove Powdered, Perry Orthopaedic 6515-00-NIB-0461—Glove Powdered, Original Perry Style 42 6515-00-NIB-0462—Glove Powdered, Original Perry Style 42 6515-00-NIB-0463—Glove Powdered, Original Perry Style 42 6515-00-NIB-0464—Glove Powdered, Original Perry Style 42 6515-00-NIB-0465—Glove Powdered, Original Perry Style 42 6515-00-NIB-0466—Glove Powdered, Original Perry Style 42 6515-00-NIB-0467—Glove Powdered, Original Perry Style 42 6515-00-NIB-0468—Glove Powdered, Original Perry Style 42 6515-00-NIB-0208—Glove, Surgeon, Biogel Neotech, Size 5.5 6515-00-NIB-0209—Glove, Surgeon, Biogel Neotech, Size 6.0 6515-00-NIB-0210—Glove, Surgeon, Biogel Neotech, Size 6.5 6515-00-NIB-0211—Glove, Surgeon, Biogel Neotech, Size 7.0 6515-00-NIB-0212—Glove, Surgeon, Biogel Neotech, Size 7.5 6515-00-NIB-0213—Glove, Surgeon, Biogel Neotech, Size 8.0 6515-00-NIB-0214—Glove, Surgeon, Biogel Neotech, Size 8.5 6515-00-NIB-0215—Glove, Surgeon, Biogel Neotech, Size 9.0 6515-00-NIB-0192—Glove, Surgeon, Biogel Orthopaedic, Size 5.5 Mandatory Source(s) of Supply: Bosma Industries for the Blind, Inc., Indianapolis, IN Contracting Activity: Department of Veterans Affairs NSN(s)—Product Name(s): 7220-00-NIB-0143—Safety-Walk, Tapes & Treads—310 Black Medium Resilient Mandatory Source(s) of Supply: Louisiana Association for the Blind, Shreveport, LA Contracting Activity: General Services Administration, New York, NY NSN(s)—Product Name(s): 8030-01-596-4258—Lubricant, 5-in-1 Penetrating Multipurpose oil, Biobased, Aerosol, 11 oz. net. Mandatory Source(s) of Supply: The Lighthouse for the Blind, St. Louis, MO Contracting Activity: Defense Logistics Agency Troop Support Services Service Type: Administrative/General Support Service Mandatory for: GSA, Southwest Supply Center, 819 Taylor Street, Fort Worth, TX Mandatory Source(s) of Supply: Lighthouse for the Blind of Houston, Houston, TX, West Texas Lighthouse for the Blind, San Angelo, TX, South Texas Lighthouse for the Blind, Corpus Christi, TX Contracting Activity: General Services Administration, FPDS Agency Coordinator Service Type: Administrative/General Support Service Mandatory for: GSA, Northeast Distribution Center, Federal Supply Service (3FS), Burlington, NJ Mandatory Source(s) of Supply: Bestwork Industries for the Blind, Inc., Cherry Hill, NJ Contracting Activity: General Services Administration, FPDS Agency Coordinator Service Type: Administrative/General Support Service Mandatory for: GSA, Southwest Supply Center, 819 Taylor Street, Fort Worth, TX Mandatory Source(s) of Supply: Travis Association for the Blind, Austin, TX Contracting Activity: General Services Administration, FPDS Agency Coordinator Service Type: Medical Transcription Service Mandatory for: Veterans Affairs Medical Center, 150 S. Huntington Avenue, Boston, MA Mandatory Source(s) of Supply: Massachusetts Commission for the Blind Ferguson Industries for the Blind (Deleted), Malden, MA Contracting Activity: Department of Veterans Affairs Service Type: Electronic Service Customer Representative Service Mandatory for: Securities & Exchange Commission Library, 2100 2nd St. SW., Rm. 110, Washington, DC Mandatory Source(s) of Supply: Columbia Lighthouse for the Blind, Washington, DC Contracting Activity: Securities and Exchange Commission Service Type: Fulfillment Service Mandatory for: Veterans Affairs Blind Rehabilitation Center, 1 Freedom Way, Augusta, GA Mandatory Source(s) of Supply: Columbia Lighthouse for the Blind, Washington, DC Contracting Activity: Department of Veterans Affairs Service Type: Administrative/General Support Service Mandatory for: Office of Personnel Management: Inspector General Office, 1900 E Street NW., Washington, DC Mandatory Source(s) of Supply: Columbia Lighthouse for the Blind, Washington, DC Contracting Activity: Office of Personnel Management Service Type: Employment Placement Service Mandatory for: Defense Logistics Agency: National Human Resource Offices, 8725 John J Kingman Rd #2545, Fort Belvoir, VA Mandatory Source(s) of Supply: Columbia Lighthouse for the Blind, Washington, DC Contracting Activity: Defense Logistics Agency Aviation Service Type: Duplicating Service Mandatory for: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 10 S Howard St, Baltimore, MD Mandatory Source(s) of Supply: North Central Sight Services, Inc., Williamsport, PA Contracting Activity: Dept of the Army, W40M NORTHEREGION Contract Ofc Service Type: Administrative Service Mandatory for: General Services Administration, 100 Penn Square East, Philadelphia, PA Mandatory Source(s) of Supply: Center for the Blind and Visually Impaired, Chester, PA Contracting Activity: General Services Administration, FPDS Agency Coordinator Service Type: Administrative/General Support Service Mandatory for: GSA, Southwest Supply Center, 819 Taylor Street, Fort Worth, TX Mandatory Source(s) of Supply: NewView Oklahoma, Inc., Oklahoma City, OK Contracting Activity: General Services Administration, FPDS Agency Coordinator Service Type: Customer Service Representatives Mandatory for: GSA, Philadelphia Region 3: Federal Supply Service Bureau, Philadelphia, PA Mandatory Source(s) of Supply: Center for the Blind and Visually Impaired, Chester, PA Contracting Activity: General Services Administration, FPDS Agency Coordinator Service Type: Parts Machining Service Mandatory for: Mare Island Naval Shipyard, Vallejo, CA Mandatory Source(s) of Supply: West Texas Lighthouse for the Blind, San Angelo, TX Contracting Activity: DOD/DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY Service Type: Medical Transcription Service Mandatory for: Patuxent River Naval Air Station: U.S. Naval Hospital, 47149 Buse Road, Unit 1370, Patuxent River, MD Mandatory Source(s) of Supply: Lighthouse for the Blind of Houston, Houston, TX Contracting Activity: DOD/DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY Service Type: Order Processing Service Mandatory for: Federal Prison Industries, Lexington, KY Mandatory Source(s) of Supply: Clovernook Center for the Blind and Visually Impaired, Cincinnati, OH Contracting Activity: Federal Prison System, Central Office Service Type: Photocopying Service Mandatory for: James E. Van Zandt Veterans Affairs Medical Center, 2907 Pleasant Valley Blvd., Altoona, PA Mandatory Source(s) of Supply: North Central Sight Services, Inc., Williamsport, PA Contracting Activity: Department of Veterans Affairs Service Type: HTML Coding of Forest Health Monitoring Service Mandatory for: USDA, Forest Service, North Central Forest Experiment Station, St. Paul, MN Mandatory Source(s) of Supply: North Central Sight Services, Inc., Williamsport, PA Contracting Activity: Dept of Agriculture, Procurement Operations Division Service Type: Duplicating Service Mandatory for: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 100 Liberty Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA Mandatory Source(s) of Supply: North Central Sight Services, Inc., Williamsport, PA Contracting Activity: Dept of the Army, W40M NORTHEREGION Contract Ofc Barry S. Lineback, Director, Business Operations.
    [FR Doc. 2016-25531 Filed 10-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6353-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers Intent To Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement for the Jasper Ocean Terminal in Jasper County, South Carolina AGENCY:

    Department of the Army, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, DOD.

    ACTION:

    Notice of intent.

    SUMMARY:

    The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps), Charleston District intends to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) to assess the potential social, economic, and environmental effects of the proposed construction and operation of a marine container terminal by the Jasper Ocean Terminal (JOT) Joint Venture, a partnership between the Georgia Ports Authority (GPA) and the South Carolina Ports Authority (SCPA). In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the Corps is the lead Federal agency responsible for the preparation of the EIS. Information included in the EIS will serve as the basis for the Corps' evaluation of the proposed marine container terminal pursuant to Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA). The EIS will assess the potential effects of the proposed project and a range of reasonable project alternatives on impacts to navigable waters and other waters of the United States. The EIS will also provide information for Federal, State, and local agencies having other jurisdictional responsibility.

    DATES:

    Public Scoping Meeting: A public scoping meeting has not been scheduled; however, a local public notice will be issued by the Charleston District, and a meeting announcement will be published in local newspapers once the date and location for the scoping meeting has been determined. Individuals and organizations that are interested in the proposed JOT or whose interests may be affected by the proposed work are encouraged to attend the scoping meeting to submit oral and/or written comments to the Charleston District.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For further information and/or questions about the proposed project or the NEPA process, please contact Mr. Nat Ball, the Corps Project Manager, by telephone: 843-329-8044 or toll-free 1-866-329-8187, or by mail: Mr. Nat Ball, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 69-A Hagood Avenue, Charleston, South Carolina 29403.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Corps is evaluating a proposal from the JOT Joint Venture in accordance with Section 404 of the CWA, Section 10 of the RHA, and NEPA. Based on the available information, the Corps has determined that the proposed JOT has the potential to significantly affect the quality of the human and natural environment, and therefore warrants the preparation of an EIS. Additional information about the proposed project and the NEPA process is available on the project Web site at: www.JasperOceanTerminalEIS.com.

    1. Description of the Proposed Project. According to the JOT Joint Venture, the Ports of Charleston and Savannah are expected to experience limitations and inefficiencies as a result of the forecasted growth in demand for containerized cargo within the region served by the two existing ports over the next 35 years. As a result, the JOT Joint Venture has proposed to construct and operate a state of the art marine container terminal on an approximately 1,500-acre site in Jasper County, South Carolina. The proposed JOT would be located across the Savannah River from Elba Island, Georgia, and would increase the region's capacity to efficiently handle the forecasted cargo.

    The proposed JOT would include a pile supported wharf designed to accommodate Neo-Panamax containerships, a container storage yard, an intermodal rail yard, gate facilities to process entering and existing over the road truck traffic, administrative buildings, and equipment service facilities. The proposed JOT would also include elements common to other types of industrial sites, such as a water tower, underground utilities, electrical substations, backup generators, high-mast lighting, stormwater management facilities, perimeter fencing, and parking areas for employees and other personal vehicles.

    Proposed transportation and utility improvements that would serve the proposed JOT include a 4-lane divided highway to connect the JOT to U.S. Highway 17, a double track rail corridor to connect the JOT's intermodal rail yard to existing CSX Transportation and Norfolk Southern rail lines, a new rail bridge across the Savannah River, and utility lines and intermediary facilities to connect to existing services (water, sewer, electricity, etc). Likewise, navigation improvements associated with the proposed JOT include new work and maintenance dredging of berths, an access channel, and a turning basin to provide vessel access to the terminal, and shoreline stabilization, bulkhead, and wharf construction adjacent to the existing Savannah Harbor federal navigation channel.

    According to the JOT Joint Venture, a separate feasibility study will evaluate the costs and benefits of modifications to the existing Savannah Harbor Federal navigation channel. Should this feasibility study or the Corps' analysis of the proposed JOT determine that modifications to the federal navigation channel are required to operate the proposed marine container terminal, potential impacts to the human and natural environment (e.g., aquatic resources) associated with any navigational improvements will be evaluated and included in the EIS for the proposed JOT.

    2. Alternatives. A range of reasonable alternatives to the proposed action will be identified, and fully evaluated in the EIS, including: The No-Action Alternative, the applicant's proposed alternative, and alternatives that may result in avoidance and minimization of impacts; however, this list in not exclusive and additional alternatives may be considered for inclusion.

    3. Scoping and Public Involvement Process. A scoping meeting will be conducted to gather information on the scope of the project and the alternatives to be addressed in the EIS. Additional public and agency involvement will be sought through the implementation of a public involvement plan and agency coordination.

    4. Significant issues. Issues and potential impacts associated with the proposed JOT that are likely to be given detailed analysis in the EIS include, but are not necessarily limited to: Existing and proposed transportation infrastructure (roadways and railways), waters of the United States, air quality, noise, light, Environmental Justice, visual resources/aesthetics, general environmental concerns, cultural resources, fish and wildlife values, protected species, flood hazards, floodplain values, land use, recreation, water quality, hazardous materials and solid waste, socioeconomics, safety, and in general, the needs and welfare of the people.

    5. Additional Review and Consultation. Additional review and consultation, which will be incorporated into the preparation of the EIS, will include, but will not necessarily be limited to, Section 14 of the RHA; Section 401 of the CWA; Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) consultation requirements of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act; the Endangered Species Act; Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act; National Historic Preservation Act; and the South Carolina Coastal Zone Management Act.

    6. Availability of the Draft EIS. At this time, the Corps expects the Draft EIS to be made available to the public in late fall/winter 2020. A Public Hearing will be held during the public comment period for the Draft EIS.

    Matthew W. Luzzatto, Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Charleston District.
    [FR Doc. 2016-25519 Filed 10-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3720-58-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Department of the Army, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Reclamation Notice of Availability of the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Lower Yellowstone Intake Diversion Dam Fish Passage Project, Dawson County, Montana AGENCY:

    Department of the Army, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, DoD; Bureau of Reclamation, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) and Reclamation, as joint lead agencies, have prepared and made available the Lower Yellowstone Intake Diversion Dam Fish Passage Project Final Environmental Impact Statement (Final EIS). The Final EIS analyzes and discloses potential effects associated with the proposed Federal action to improve passage for endangered pallid sturgeon and other native fish at Intake Diversion Dam in the lower Yellowstone River while continuing the effective and viable operation of the Lower Yellowstone Project.

    DATES:

    The Corps and Reclamation will not issue a final decision on the proposed action until at least 30 days after the date that the Environmental Protection Agency publishes notice of availability of the Final EIS. After the Final EIS has been available for 30 days, the Corps and Reclamation may complete a Record of Decision. The Record of Decision will state the action that the Corps and Reclamation select for implementation and will discuss factors considered in the decision.

    ADDRESSES:

    The Final EIS may be viewed on Reclamation's Web site at www.usbr.gov/gp/mtao/loweryellowstone. Send requests for copies of the Final EIS to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Omaha District, ATTN: CENWO-PM-AA, 1616 Capitol Ave. Omaha, NE 68102; or email to [email protected] See the Supplementary Information section for locations where copies of the Final EIS are available for public review.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ms. Tiffany Vanosdall, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1616 Capitol Ave. Omaha, NE 68102, or [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Corps and Reclamation are issuing this notice pursuant to section 102(2)(c) of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), as amended, 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.; the Council on Environmental Quality's (CEQ) regulations for implementing the procedural provisions of NEPA, 43 CFR parts 1500 through 1508; the Department of the Interior's NEPA regulations, 43 CFR part 46.

    Background Information

    Reclamation's Lower Yellowstone Project is located in eastern Montana and western North Dakota. Intake Diversion Dam is located approximately 70 miles upstream of the confluence of the Yellowstone and Missouri rivers near Glendive, Montana. The Lower Yellowstone Project was authorized by the Secretary of the Interior on May 10, 1904. Construction of the Lower Yellowstone Project began in 1905 and included Intake Diversion Dam (also known as Yellowstone River Diversion Dam)—a wood and stone diversion dam that spans the Yellowstone River and diverts water into the Main Canal for irrigation. The Lower Yellowstone Project was authorized to provide a dependable water supply sufficient to irrigate approximately 54,000 acres of land on the benches above the west bank of the Yellowstone River. Water is also supplied to irrigate approximately 830 acres in the Intake Irrigation Project and 2,200 acres in the Savage Unit. The average annual volume of water diverted for these projects is 327,046 acre-feet.

    The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) listed the pallid sturgeon as endangered under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) in 1990. Best available science suggests Intake Diversion Dam impedes upstream migration of pallid sturgeon and their access to spawning and larval drift habitats. The lower Yellowstone River is considered by the Service to provide one of the best opportunities for recovery of pallid sturgeon.

    Section 7(a)(2) requires each Federal agency to consult on any action authorized, funded, or carried out by the agency to ensure it does not jeopardize the continued existence of any endangered or threatened species. Reclamation has been in formal consultation with the Service to identify potential conservation measures to minimize adverse effects to pallid sturgeon associated with continued operation of the Lower Yellowstone Project. The Pallid Sturgeon Recovery Plan specifically identifies providing passage at Intake Diversion Dam to protect and restore pallid sturgeon populations. By providing passage at Intake Diversion Dam, approximately 165 river miles of spawning and larval drift habitat would become accessible in the Yellowstone River.

    Section 3109 of the 2007 Water Resources Development Act authorizes the Corps to use funding from the Missouri River Recovery and Mitigation Program to assist Reclamation in the design and construction of Reclamation's Lower Yellowstone Project at Intake, Montana for the purpose of ecosystem restoration. Planning and construction of the Intake Project is a Reasonable and Prudent Alternative for the Corps in the 2003 Missouri River Amended Biological Opinion as amended by letter exchange in 2009, 2010, and 2013. The Reclamation Act/Newlands Act of 1902 (Pub. L. 161) authorizes Reclamation to construct and maintain the facilities associated with the Lower Yellowstone Project, which includes actions or modifications necessary to comply with Federal law such as the ESA.

    Analysis in the Final EIS serves to support a decision on the selection of an alternative. Current and past project information and analyses can be accessed at: www.usbr.gov/gp/mtao/loweryellowstone.

    The Corps and Reclamation are joint lead Federal agencies for the NEPA analysis process and preparation of the Final EIS. The Corps is the administrative lead for NEPA compliance activities during the preparation of the Final EIS. State, Federal, and local agencies with specialized expertise or jurisdictional responsibilities are participating as cooperating agencies. Cooperating agencies include the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; Western Area Power Administration; Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks; Montana Department of Natural Resources and Conservation; and the Lower Yellowstone Irrigation Project.

    The purpose of the Lower Yellowstone Intake Diversion Dam Fish Passage Project is to improve passage for the endangered pallid sturgeon while continuing the effective and viable operation of the Lower Yellowstone Project, and contribute to ecosystem restoration. The Final EIS discloses the analysis of six alternatives, including a No Action Alternative.

    The No Action Alternative would continue the ongoing operations, maintenance, and rehabilitation of the Lower Yellowstone Project including diversion up to 1,374 cubic feet per second (cfs) of water through the screened headworks; rocking of the weir as needed to continue diversions during low flow periods; routine maintenance of the headworks, weir, and irrigation distribution facilities and pumps; rehabilitation of the trolley; and associated activities to comply with state and Federal law.

    The Rock Ramp Alternative includes abandonment of the existing weir in place; construction of a new concrete weir and shallow sloped rock ramp to improve instream fish passage; maintenance of the new weir and rock ramp, continued diversion up to 1,374 cfs through the screened headworks; and continued operation and maintenance of the irrigation distribution facilities and supplemental pumps.

    The Bypass Channel Alternative (Preferred Alternative) includes abandonment of the existing weir in place; construction of a new concrete weir; construction, operation, and maintenance of a two-mile long bypass channel for fish passage around the weir; placement of fill in the upstream portion of existing side channel for stabilization; continued diversion up to 1,374 cfs through the screened headworks; and continued operation and maintenance of the irrigation distribution facilities and supplemental pumps.

    The Modified Side Channel Alternative includes operation, maintenance, and rehabilitation of the existing weir and trolley; construction, operation, and maintenance of a 4.5-mile long bypass channel created by modifying the existing high-flow channel for fish passage around the weir; continued diversion up to 1,374 cfs through the screened headworks; construction, operation, and maintenance of an access bridge spanning the high-flow bypass channel; and continued operation and maintenance of the irrigation distribution facilities and supplemental pumps.

    The Multiple Pump Alternative includes the construction, operation, and maintenance of 5 screened surface pumping stations; removal of the existing weir; improved power infrastructure to increase capacity; land acquisition as necessary for power infrastructure and pump stations; continued diversion up to 1,374 cfs through the screened headworks and pumps as needed; and continued operation and maintenance of the irrigation distribution facilities and supplemental pumps.

    The Multiple Pumps with Conservation Measures Alternative includes the construction, operation, and maintenance of seven pumping stations each with six Ranney Wells (total of 42 Ranney Wells); removal of the existing weir; construction, operation, and maintenance of wind turbines and infrastructure to provide power to pumping stations; land acquisition as necessary for power infrastructure and pump stations; diversion up to 608 cfs through the screened headworks or by pumping depending upon river flow; reconstruction of the Main Canal; installation of water conservation measures such as conversion of flood irrigation to sprinkler, lining canals, and piping laterals; and continued operation and maintenance of the irrigation distribution facilities and supplemental pumps.

    A Notice of Availability for the Draft EIS was published in the Federal Register on June 3, 2016 (81 FR 35754). The comment period for the Draft EIS ended on July 28, 2016. Public meetings on the Draft EIS were held on Tuesday, June 28, 2016, from 5:30 to 9 p.m., in Sidney, MT; Wednesday, June 29, 2016, from 5:30 to 9 p.m., in Glendive, MT; and Thursday, June 30, 2016, from 5:30 to 9 p.m., in Billings, MT. The Final EIS contains responses to all comments received and reflects comments and any additional information received during the review period.

    Copies of the Final EIS are available for public review at the following locations:

    1. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1616 Capitol Ave., Omaha, NE 68102.

    2. Bureau of Reclamation, Great Plains Region, 2021 4th Avenue North, Billings, MT 59101.

    3. Bureau of Reclamation, Montana Area Office, 2900 4th Avenue North, #303, Billings, MT 59101.

    4. Sidney Public Library, 121 3rd Avenue NW., Sidney, MT 59270.

    5. Glendive Public Library, 200 S. Kendrick Avenue, Glendive, MT 59330.

    6. Billings Public Library, 510 N. Broadway, Billings, MT 59101.

    Public Disclosure Statement

    Before including your address, phone number, email address, or any other personal identifying information in any communication, you should be aware that your entire communication—including your personal identifying information—may be made publicly available at any time. While you can request in your communication to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.

    John W. Henderson, Colonel, Corps of Engineers, District Commander. Michael J. Ryan, Regional Director, Great Plains Region, Bureau of Reclamation.
    [FR Doc. 2016-25375 Filed 10-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3720-58-P
    DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION [Docket No.: ED-2016-ICCD-0110] Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to the Office of Management and Budget for Review and Approval; Comment Request; Application for New Grants Under the Ronald E. McNair Postbaccalaureate Achievement Program (1890-0001) AGENCY:

    Office of Postsecondary Education (OPE), Department of Education (ED).

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. chapter 3501 et seq.), ED is proposing a reinstatement of a previously approved information collection.

    DATES:

    Interested persons are invited to submit comments on or before November 21, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    To access and review all the documents related to the information collection listed in this notice, please use http://www.regulations.gov by searching the Docket ID number ED-2016-ICCD-0110. Comments submitted in response to this notice should be submitted electronically through the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov by selecting the Docket ID number or via postal mail, commercial delivery, or hand delivery. Please note that comments submitted by fax or email and those submitted after the comment period will not be accepted. Written requests for information or comments submitted by postal mail or delivery should be addressed to the Director of the Information Collection Clearance Division, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., LBJ, Room 2E-347, Washington, DC 20202-4537.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For specific questions related to collection activities, please contact Carmen Gordon, 202-453-7311.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Department of Education (ED), in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)), provides the general public and Federal agencies with an opportunity to comment on proposed, revised, and continuing collections of information. This helps the Department assess the impact of its information collection requirements and minimize the public's reporting burden. It also helps the public understand the Department's information collection requirements and provide the requested data in the desired format. ED is soliciting comments on the proposed information collection request (ICR) that is described below. The Department of Education is especially interested in public comment addressing the following issues: (1) Is this collection necessary to the proper functions of the Department; (2) will this information be processed and used in a timely manner; (3) is the estimate of burden accurate; (4) how might the Department enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (5) how might the Department minimize the burden of this collection on the respondents, including through the use of information technology. Please note that written comments received in response to this notice will be considered public records.

    Title of Collection: Application for New Grants Under the Ronald E. McNair Postbaccalaureate Achievement Program.

    OMB Control Number: 1840-0619.

    Type of Review: A reinstatement of a previously approved information collection.

    Respondents/Affected Public: State, Local, and Tribal Governments.

    Total Estimated Number of Annual Responses: 350.

    Total Estimated Number of Annual Burden Hours: 13,960.

    Abstract: The Department of Education is requesting a reinstatement with change of a previously approved collection of information entitled Application for New Awards under the Ronald E. McNair Postbaccalaureate Achievement (McNair) Program. This application will be used to award new grants and collect data under the McNair program. which provides grants to institutions of higher education and combinations of such institutions to prepare low-income, first-generation college students, and students from groups underrepresented in graduate education, for doctoral study. Two of the three previously used competitive preference priorities have been removed while one remains unchanged in anticipation of the FY 2017 competition. The cost burden to the Federal Government, which was reported as $1,155,449 in the previously approved collection, has also been updated to better reflect actual costs.

    Dated: October 18, 2016. Kate Mullan, Acting Director, Information Collection Clearance Division, Office of the Chief Privacy Officer, Office of Management.
    [FR Doc. 2016-25483 Filed 10-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4000-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION [Docket No.: ED-2016-ICCD-0114] Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to the Office of Management and Budget for Review and Approval; Comment Request; Fast Response Survey System (FRSS) 108: Career and Technical Education (CTE) Programs in Public School Districts AGENCY:

    National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), Department of Education (ED).

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. chapter 3501 et seq.), ED is proposing a new generic information collection under an approved generic information collection request clearance.

    DATES:

    Interested persons are invited to submit comments on or before November 21, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    To access and review all the documents related to the information collection listed in this notice, please use http://www.regulations.gov by searching the Docket ID number ED-2016-ICCD-0114. Comments submitted in response to this notice should be submitted electronically through the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov by selecting the Docket ID number or via postal mail, commercial delivery, or hand delivery. Please note that comments submitted by fax or email and those submitted after the comment period will not be accepted. Written requests for information or comments submitted by postal mail or delivery should be addressed to the Director of the Information Collection Clearance Division, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., LBJ, Room 2E-347, Washington, DC 20202-4537.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For specific questions related to collection activities, please contact NCES Information Collections at [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Department of Education (ED), in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)), provides the general public and Federal agencies with an opportunity to comment on proposed, revised, and continuing collections of information. This helps the Department assess the impact of its information collection requirements and minimize the public's reporting burden. It also helps the public understand the Department's information collection requirements and provide the requested data in the desired format. ED is soliciting comments on the proposed information collection request (ICR) that is described below. The Department of Education is especially interested in public comment addressing the following issues: (1) Is this collection necessary to the proper functions of the Department; (2) will this information be processed and used in a timely manner; (3) is the estimate of burden accurate; (4) how might the Department enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (5) how might the Department minimize the burden of this collection on the respondents, including through the use of information technology. Please note that written comments received in response to this notice will be considered public records.

    Title of Collection: Fast Response Survey System (FRSS) 108: Career and Technical Education (CTE) Programs in Public School Districts.

    OMB Control Number: 1850-0733.

    Type of Review: A new generic information collection.

    Respondents/Affected Public: Individuals.

    Total Estimated Number of Annual Responses: 4,785.

    Total Estimated Number of Annual Burden Hours: 826.

    Abstract: This request is to conduct the Fast Response Survey System (FRSS) survey #108 on career and technical education (CTE) programs in public school districts. The Office of Career, Technical, and Adult Education (OCTAE) requested that NCES conduct this FRSS survey. About 95 percent of 9th grade students in 2009 attended a school that offered CTE instruction, either on campus or at a partnering school; 85 percent of public high school graduates had completed one or more occupational CTE courses; and 19 percent were CTE concentrators who had earned at least three credits in the same CTE field. Effective, high-quality CTE programs are aligned with college- and career-readiness standards as well as the needs of employers, industry, and labor, providing students with a curriculum that combines integrated academic and technical content and strong employability skills, as well as work-based learning opportunities that enable students to connect what they are learning to real-life career scenarios and choices. The students participating in effective CTE programs graduate with industry certifications or licenses and postsecondary certificates or degrees that prepare them for in-demand careers within high-growth industry sectors. The purpose of the FRSS 108 survey is to collect nationally representative data from public school districts about CTE programs offered by the districts, whether offered at district facilities or in a partnering off-site location, such as area CTE facilities or postsecondary institutions. The sample will focus on school districts with high schools because CTE programs are generally designed for high school students. The survey topics will focus on the extent to which districts provide high-quality CTE programs and how these programs are developed, designed, and implemented.

    Dated: October 18, 2016. Kate Mullan, Acting Director, Information Collection Clearance Division, Office of the Chief Privacy Officer, Office of Management.
    [FR Doc. 2016-25508 Filed 10-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4000-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Applications for New Awards; Minority Science and Engineering Improvement Program AGENCY:

    Office of Postsecondary Education, Department of Education

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    Overview Information: Minority Science and Engineering Improvement Program Notice inviting applications for new awards for fiscal year (FY) 2017.

    Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number: 84.120A.

    Dates:

    Applications Available: October 21, 2016.

    Date of Pre-Application Webinar: The Department of Education (Department) intends to hold a Webinar to provide technical assistance to interested applicants. Detailed information regarding this Webinar will be provided on the Web site for the Minority Science and Engineering Improvement Program (MSEIP) at http://www2.ed.gov/programs/iduesmsi/index.html. A recording of this Webinar will be available on the Web site following the session.

    Deadline for Transmittal of Applications: December 20, 2016.

    Deadline for Intergovernmental Review: February 21, 2017.

    Full Text of Announcement I. Funding Opportunity Description

    Purpose of Program: The MSEIP is designed to effect long-range improvement in science and engineering education at predominantly minority institutions and to increase the flow of underrepresented ethnic minorities, particularly minority women, into scientific and technological careers.

    Priority: This notice contains one competitive preference priority. The competitive preference priority is from the Department's notice of final supplemental priorities and definitions for discretionary grant programs, published in the Federal Register on December 10, 2014 (79 FR 73425) (Supplemental Priorities).

    Competitive Preference Priority: For FY 2017 and any subsequent year in which we make awards from the list of unfunded applications from this competition, this priority is a competitive preference priority. Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i), we award an additional two points to an application that meets this priority.

    The priority is:

    Competitive Preference Priority—Promoting Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Education (2 additional points).

    Projects that are designed to improve student achievement or other related outcomes by identifying and implementing instructional strategies, systems, and structures that improve postsecondary learning and retention, resulting in completion of a degree in a STEM field.

    Note:

    We recognize that the definition of “student achievement” from the Secretary's Supplemental Priorities is not relevant in the context of this competition because that definition pertains to elementary and secondary grades and subjects that are covered by the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, as amended. In responding to this priority, however, applicants may propose projects that are designed to improve “other related outcomes,” which could include, for example, end-of-course grades, or improvement in research or laboratory skills, among other outcomes.

    Note:

    Applicants must indicate in the one-page abstract and on the MSEIP Eligibility Certification Form in the application package whether they intend to address the competitive preference priority.

    Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1067-1067k.

    Applicable Regulations: (a) The Education Department General Administrative Regulations (EDGAR) in 34 CFR parts 75, 77, 79, 81, 82, 84, 86, 97, 98, and 99. (b) The OMB Guidelines to Agencies on Governmentwide Debarment and Suspension (Nonprocurement) in 2 CFR part 180, as adopted and amended as regulations of the Department in 2 CFR part 3485. (c) The Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards as adopted in 2 CFR part 3474. (d) The regulations for this program in 34 CFR part 646. (e) The Supplemental Priorities.

    Note:

    The regulations in 34 CFR part 86 apply to institutions of higher education only.

    II. Award Information

    Type of Award: Discretionary grants.

    Estimated Available Funds: The Administration has requested $9,648,000 for MSEIP for FY 2017, of which we intend to use an estimated $2,597,607 for new awards. The actual level of funding, if any, depends on final congressional action. However, we are inviting applications to allow enough time to complete the grant process if Congress appropriates funds for this program.

    Contingent upon the availability of funds and the quality of applications, we may make additional awards in FY 2018 from the list of unfunded applications from this competition.

    Estimated Range of Awards

    Institutional Project Grants: $150,000-$250,000.

    Special Project Grants: $100,000-$250,000.

    Cooperative Project Grants: $250,000-$300,000.

    Estimated Average Size of Awards

    Institutional Project Grants: $230,000.

    Special Project Grants: $175,000.

    Cooperative Project Grants: $275,000.

    Maximum Awards

    Institutional Project Grants: $250,000.

    Special Project Grants: $250,000.

    Cooperative Project Grants: $300,000.

    We will reject any application that proposes a budget exceeding the maximum award amount listed for a single budget period of 12 months.

    Estimated Number of Awards

    Institutional Project Grants: 9.

    Special Project Grants: 1.

    Cooperative Project Grants: 1.

    Note:

    The Department is not bound by any estimates in this notice.

    Project Period: Up to 36 months.

    III. Eligibility Information

    1. Eligible Applicants: An applicant's eligibility depends on the type of MSEIP grant the applicant seeks. There are four types of MSEIP grants: institutional project, special project, cooperative project, and design project.

    Institutional project grants are grants that support the implementation of a comprehensive science improvement plan, which may include any combination of activities for improving the preparation of minority students for careers in science.

    There are two types of special project grants. First, there are special project grants for which only minority institutions are eligible. These special project grants support activities that: (1) Improve quality training in science and engineering at minority institutions; or (2) enhance the minority institutions' general scientific research capabilities. There also are special project grants for which all applicants are eligible. These special project grants support activities that: (1) Provide a needed service to a group of eligible minority institutions; or (2) provide in-service training for project directors, scientists, and engineers from eligible minority institutions.

    Cooperative project grants assist groups of nonprofit accredited colleges and universities to work together to conduct a science improvement program.

    Design project grants assist minority institutions that do not have their own appropriate resources or personnel to plan and develop long-range science improvement programs. We will not award design project grants in the FY 2017 competition.

    (a) For institutional project grants, eligible applicants are limited to:

    (1) Public and private nonprofit institutions of higher education that (i) award baccalaureate degrees; and (ii) are minority institutions;

    (2) Public or private nonprofit institutions of higher education that (i) award associate degrees; and (ii) are minority institutions that (A) have a curriculum that includes science or engineering subjects; and (B) enter into a partnership with public or private nonprofit institutions of higher education that award baccalaureate degrees in science and engineering.

    (b) For special project grants for which only minority institutions are eligible, eligible applicants are described in paragraph (a).

    (c) For special project grants for which all applicants are eligible, eligible applicants include those described in paragraph (a), and—

    (1) Nonprofit science-oriented organizations, professional scientific societies, and institutions of higher education that award baccalaureate degrees that: (i) Provide a needed service to a group of minority institutions; or (ii) provide in-service training to project directors, scientists, and engineers from minority institutions; or

    (2) A consortium of organizations that provide needed services to one or more minority institutions, the membership of which may include (i) institutions of higher education that have a curriculum in science or engineering; (ii) institutions of higher education that have a graduate or professional program in science or engineering; (iii) research laboratories of, or under contract with, the Department of Energy, the Department of Defense, or the National Institutes of Health; (iv) relevant offices of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Science Foundation, and National Institute of Standards and Technology; (v) quasi-governmental entities that have a significant scientific or engineering mission; or (vi) institutions of higher education that have State-sponsored centers for research in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics.

    (d) For cooperative project grants, eligible applicants are groups of nonprofit accredited colleges and universities whose primary fiscal agent is an eligible minority institution as defined in 34 CFR 637.4(b).

    Note:

    As defined in 34 CFR 637.4(b), “minority institution” means an accredited college or university whose enrollment of a single minority group or a combination of minority groups exceeds 50 percent of the total enrollment.

    2. Cost Sharing or Matching: This program does not require cost sharing or matching.

    IV. Application and Submission Information

    1. Address to Request Application Package: You can obtain an application via the Internet at Grants.gov. If you do not have access to the Internet, please contact Dr. Bernadette Hence, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., Room 4C115, Washington, DC 20202. Telephone: (202) 453-7913 or by email: [email protected].

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

    Individuals with disabilities can obtain a copy of the application package in an accessible format (e.g., braille, large print, audiotape, or compact disc) by contacting the program contact person listed in this section.

    2. Content and Form of Application Submission: Requirements concerning the content and form of an application, together with the forms you must submit, are in the application package for this competition.

    Page Limit: The application narrative (Part III of the application) is where you, the applicant, address the selection criteria that reviewers use to evaluate your application. We have established a mandatory page limit for the application narrative of each type of MSEIP grant project application as follows:

    Institutional project grant: 40 pages.

    Special project grant: 35 pages.

    Cooperative project grant: 50 pages.

    You must limit the application narrative (Part III) to these established page limits, using the following standards:

    • A “page” is 8.5″ x 11″, on one side only, with 1″ margins at the top, bottom, and both sides. Page numbers and an identifier may be within the 1″ margin.

    • Double space (no more than three lines per vertical inch) all text in the application narrative, including charts, tables, figures, and graphs. Titles, headings, footnotes, quotations, references, and captions may be singled spaced.

    • Use a font that is either 12 point or larger, or no smaller than 10 pitch (characters per inch).

    • Use one of the following fonts: Times New Roman, Courier, Courier New, or Arial. An application submitted in any other font (including Times Roman and Arial Narrow) will not be accepted.

    If you use some but not all of the allowable space on a page, it will be counted as a full page in determining compliance with the page limit.

    The page limit does not apply to Part I, the cover sheet; Part II, the budget section, including the budget justification; Part III, the one-page abstract, the table of contents, the MSEIP Eligibility Certification Form, required letter(s) of commitment, evidence of partnerships; and Part IV, the assurances and certifications. If you include any attachments or appendices not specifically requested, these items will be counted as part of the application narrative for purposes of the page limit requirement. You must include your complete responses to the selection criteria in the application narrative.

    We will reject your application if you exceed the page limit. We will also reject your application if you fail to provide the MSEIP Eligibility Certification Form.

    3. Submission Dates and Times:

    Applications Available: October 21, 2016.

    Date of Pre-Application Webinar: The Department intends to hold a Webinar to provide technical assistance to interested applicants. Detailed information regarding this Webinar will be provided on the MSEIP Web site at http://www2.ed.gov/programs/iduesmsi/index.html. A recording of this Webinar will be available on the Web site following the session.

    Deadline for Transmittal of Applications: December 20, 2016.

    Applications for grants under this program must be submitted electronically using the Grants.gov Apply site (Grants.gov). For information (including dates and times) about how to submit your application electronically, or in paper format by mail or hand delivery if you qualify for an exception to the electronic submission requirement, please refer to Other Submission Requirements in section IV of this notice.

    We do not consider an application that does not comply with the deadline requirements.

    Individuals with disabilities who need an accommodation or auxiliary aid in connection with the application process should contact the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT in section VII of this notice. If the Department provides an accommodation or auxiliary aid to an individual with a disability in connection with the application process, the individual's application remains subject to all other requirements and limitations in this notice.

    Deadline for Intergovernmental Review: February 21, 2017.

    4. Intergovernmental Review: This program is subject to Executive Order 12372 and the regulations in 34 CFR part 79. Information about Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs under Executive Order 12372 is in the application package for this competition.

    5. Funding Restrictions: We reference regulations outlining funding restrictions in the Applicable Regulations section of this notice.

    6. Data Universal Numbering System Number, Taxpayer Identification Number, and System for Award Management: To do business with the Department of Education, you must—

    a. Have a Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number and a Taxpayer Identification Number (TIN);

    b. Register both your DUNS number and TIN with the System for Award Management (SAM), the Government's primary registrant database;

    c. Provide your DUNS number and TIN on your application; and

    d. Maintain an active SAM registration with current information while your application is under review by the Department and, if you are awarded a grant, during the project period.

    You can obtain a DUNS number from Dun and Bradstreet at the following Web site: http://fedgov.dnb.com/webform. A DUNS number can be created within one to two business days.

    If you are a corporate entity, agency, institution, or organization, you can obtain a TIN from the Internal Revenue Service. If you are an individual, you can obtain a TIN from the Internal Revenue Service or the Social Security Administration. If you need a new TIN, please allow two to five weeks for your TIN to become active.

    The SAM registration process can take approximately seven business days, but may take upwards of several weeks, depending on the completeness and accuracy of the data you enter into the SAM database. Thus, if you think you might want to apply for Federal financial assistance under a program administered by the Department, please allow sufficient time to obtain and register your DUNS number and TIN. We strongly recommend that you register early.

    Note: Once your SAM registration is active, it may be 24 to 48 hours before you can access the information in, and submit an application through, Grants.gov.

    If you are currently registered with SAM, you may not need to make any changes. However, please make certain that the TIN associated with your DUNS number is correct. Also note that you will need to update your registration annually. This may take three or more business days.

    Information about SAM is available at www.SAM.gov. To further assist you with obtaining and registering your DUNS number and TIN in SAM or updating your existing SAM account, we have prepared a SAM.gov Tip Sheet, which you can find at: www2.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/sam-faqs.html.

    In addition, if you are submitting your application via Grants.gov, you must (1) be designated by your organization as an Authorized Organization Representative (AOR); and (2) register yourself with Grants.gov as an AOR. Details on these steps are outlined at the following Grants.gov Web page: www.grants.gov/web/grants/register.html.

    7. Other Submission Requirements: Applications for grants under this competition must be submitted electronically unless you qualify for an exception to this requirement in accordance with the instructions in this section.

    a. Electronic Submission of Applications

    Applications for grants under the MSEIP, CFDA number 84.120A, must be submitted electronically using the Governmentwide Grants.gov Apply site at www.Grants.gov. Through this site, you will be able to download a copy of the application package, complete it offline, and then upload and submit your application. You may not email an electronic copy of a grant application to us.

    We will reject your application if you submit it in paper format unless, as described elsewhere in this section, you qualify for one of the exceptions to the electronic submission requirement and submit, no later than two weeks before the application deadline date, a written statement to the Department that you qualify for one of these exceptions. Further information regarding calculation of the date that is two weeks before the application deadline date is provided later in this section under Exception to Electronic Submission Requirement.

    You may access the electronic grant application for the MSEIP at www.Grants.gov. You must search for the downloadable application package for this competition by the CFDA number. Do not include the CFDA number's alpha suffix in your search (e.g., search for 84.120, not 84.120A).

    Please note the following:

    • When you enter the Grants.gov site, you will find information about submitting an application electronically through the site, as well as the hours of operation.

    Applications received by Grants.gov are date and time stamped. Your application must be fully uploaded and submitted and must be date and time stamped by the Grants.gov system no later than 4:30:00 p.m., Washington, DC time, on the application deadline date. Except as otherwise noted in this section, we will not accept your application if it is received—that is, date and time stamped by the Grants.gov system—after 4:30:00 p.m., Washington, DC time, on the application deadline date. We do not consider an application that does not comply with the deadline requirements. When we retrieve your application from Grants.gov, we will notify you if we are rejecting your application because it was date and time stamped by the Grants.gov system after 4:30:00 p.m., Washington, DC time, on the application deadline date.

    • The amount of time it can take to upload an application will vary depending on a variety of factors, including the size of the application and the speed of your Internet connection. Therefore, we strongly recommend that you do not wait until the application deadline date to begin the submission process through Grants.gov.

    • You should review and follow the Education Submission Procedures for submitting an application through Grants.gov that are included in the application package for this competition to ensure that you submit your application in a timely manner to the Grants.gov system. You can also find the Education Submission Procedures pertaining to Grants.gov under News and Events on the Department's G5 system home page at www.G5.gov. In addition, for specific guidance and procedures for submitting an application through Grants.gov, please refer to the Grants.gov Web site at: www.grants.gov/web/grants/applicants/apply-for-grants.html.

    • You will not receive additional point value because you submit your application in electronic format, nor will we penalize you if you qualify for an exception to the electronic submission requirement, as described elsewhere in this section, and submit your application in paper format.

    • You must submit all documents electronically, including all information you typically provide on the following forms: The Application for Federal Assistance (SF 424), the Department of Education Supplemental Information for SF 424, Budget Information—Non-Construction Programs (ED 524), and all necessary assurances and certifications.

    • You must upload any narrative sections and all other attachments to your application as files in a read-only, non-modifiable Portable Document Format (PDF). Do not upload an interactive or fillable PDF file. If you upload a file type other than a read-only, non-modifiable PDF (e.g., Word, Excel, WordPerfect, etc.) or submit a password-protected file, we will not review that material. Please note that this could result in your application not being considered for funding because the material in question—for example, the application narrative—is critical to a meaningful review of your proposal. For that reason it is important to allow yourself adequate time to upload all material as PDF files. The Department will not convert material from other formats to PDF. Additional, detailed information on how to attach files is in the application instructions.

    • Your electronic application must comply with any page-limit requirements described in this notice.

    • After you electronically submit your application, you will receive from Grants.gov an automatic notification of receipt that contains a Grants.gov tracking number. This notification indicates receipt by Grants.gov only, not receipt by the Department. Grants.gov will also notify you automatically by email if your application met all the Grants.gov validation requirements or if there were any errors (such as submission of your application by someone other than a registered Authorized Organization Representative, or inclusion of an attachment with a file name that contains special characters). You will be given an opportunity to correct any errors and resubmit, but you must still meet the deadline for submission of applications.

    Once your application is successfully validated by Grants.gov, the Department will retrieve your application from Grants.gov and send you an email with a unique PR/Award number for your application.

    These emails do not mean that your application is without any disqualifying errors. While your application may have been successfully validated by Grants.gov, it must also meet the Department's application requirements as specified in this notice and in the application instructions. Disqualifying errors could include, for instance, failure to upload attachments in read-only, non-modifiable PDF; failure to submit a required part of the application; or failure to meet applicant eligibility requirements. It is your responsibility to ensure that your submitted application has met all of the Department's requirements.

    • We may request that you provide us original signatures on forms at a later date.

    Application Deadline Date Extension in Case of Technical Issues with the Grants.gov System: If you are experiencing problems submitting your application through Grants.gov, please contact the Grants.gov Support Desk, toll free, at 1-800-518-4726. You must obtain a Grants.gov Support Desk Case Number and must keep a record of it.

    If you are prevented from electronically submitting your application on the application deadline date because of technical problems with the Grants.gov system, we will grant you an extension until 4:30:00 p.m., Washington, DC time, the following business day to enable you to transmit your application electronically or by hand delivery. You also may mail your application by following the mailing instructions described elsewhere in this notice.

    If you submit an application after 4:30:00 p.m., Washington, DC time, on the application deadline date, please contact the person listed under For Further Information Contact in section VII of this notice and provide an explanation of the technical problem you experienced with Grants.gov, along with the Grants.gov Support Desk Case Number. We will accept your application if we can confirm that a technical problem occurred with the Grants.gov system and that the problem affected your ability to submit your application by 4:30:00 p.m., Washington, DC time, on the application deadline date. We will contact you after we determine whether your application will be accepted.

    Note:

    The extensions to which we refer in this section apply only to the unavailability of, or technical problems with, the Grants.gov system. We will not grant you an extension if you failed to fully register to submit your application to Grants.gov before the application deadline date and time or if the technical problem you experienced is unrelated to the Grants.gov system.

    Exception to Electronic Submission Requirement: You qualify for an exception to the electronic submission requirement, and may submit your application in paper format, if you are unable to submit an application through the Grants.gov system because—

    • You do not have access to the Internet; or

    • You do not have the capacity to upload large documents to the Grants.gov system;

    and

    • No later than two weeks before the application deadline date (14 calendar days or, if the fourteenth calendar day before the application deadline date falls on a Federal holiday, the next business day following the Federal holiday), you mail or fax a written statement to the Department, explaining which of the two grounds for an exception prevents you from using the Internet to submit your application.

    If you mail your written statement to the Department, it must be postmarked no later than two weeks before the application deadline date. If you fax your written statement to the Department, we must receive the faxed statement no later than two weeks before the application deadline date.

    Address and mail or fax your statement to: Dr. Bernadette Hence, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., Room 4C115, Washington, DC 20202. Fax: (202) 502-7861.

    Your paper application must be submitted in accordance with the mail or hand delivery instructions described in this notice.

    b. Submission of Paper Applications by Mail

    If you qualify for an exception to the electronic submission requirement, you may mail (through the U.S. Postal Service or a commercial carrier) your application to the Department. You must mail the original and two copies of your application, on or before the application deadline date, to the Department at the following address: U.S. Department of Education, Application Control Center, Attention: (CFDA Number 84.120A), LBJ Basement Level 1, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20202-4260.

    You must show proof of mailing consisting of one of the following:

    (1) A legibly dated U.S. Postal Service postmark.

    (2) A legible mail receipt with the date of mailing stamped by the U.S. Postal Service.

    (3) A dated shipping label, invoice, or receipt from a commercial carrier.

    (4) Any other proof of mailing acceptable to the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Education.

    If you mail your application through the U.S. Postal Service, we do not accept either of the following as proof of mailing:

    (1) A private metered postmark.

    (2) A mail receipt that is not dated by the U.S. Postal Service.

    Note:

    The U.S. Postal Service does not uniformly provide a dated postmark. Before relying on this method, you should check with your local post office.

    We will not consider applications postmarked after the deadline date.

    c. Submission of Paper Applications by Hand Delivery

    If you qualify for an exception to the electronic submission requirement, you (or a courier service) may deliver your paper application to the Department by hand. You must deliver the original and two copies of your application by hand, on or before the application deadline date, to the Department at the following address: U.S. Department of Education, Application Control Center, Attention: (CFDA Number 84.120A), 550 12th Street SW., Room 7039, Potomac Center Plaza, Washington, DC 20202-4260.

    The Application Control Center accepts hand deliveries daily between 8:00 a.m. and 4:30:00 p.m., Washington, DC time, except Saturdays, Sundays, and Federal holidays. Note for Mail or Hand Delivery of Paper Applications:

    If you mail or hand deliver your application to the Department—

    (1) You must indicate on the envelope and—if not provided by the Department—in Item 11 of the SF 424 the CFDA number, including suffix letter, if any, of the competition under which you are submitting your application; and

    (2) The Application Control Center will mail to you a notification of receipt of your grant application. If you do not receive this notification within 15 business days from the application deadline date, you should call the U.S. Department of Education Application Control Center at (202) 245-6288.

    V. Application Review Information

    1. Selection Criteria: The selection criteria for this program are from 34 CFR 637.32(a) through (j). Applicants should address each of the selection criteria. The total weight of the selection criteria is 100 points; the weight of each criterion is noted in parentheses. Please see the application package for a detailed explanation of these criteria. The selection criteria are as follows:

    (a) Identification of need for the project (Total 5 points).

    (b) Plan of operation (Total 20 points).

    (c) Quality of key personnel (Total 5 points).

    (d) Budget and cost effectiveness (Total 10 points).

    (e) Evaluation plan (Total 15 points).

    (f) Adequacy of resources (Total 5 points).

    (g) Potential institutional impact of the project (Total 15 points).

    (h) Institutional commitment to the project (Total 5 points).

    (i) Expected outcomes (Total 10 points).

    (j) Scientific and educational value of the proposed project (Total 10 points).

    2. Review and Selection Process: We remind potential applicants that in reviewing applications in any discretionary grant competition, the Secretary may consider, under 34 CFR 75.217(d)(3), the past performance of the applicant in carrying out a previous award, such as the applicant's use of funds, achievement of project objectives, and compliance with grant conditions. The Secretary may also consider whether the applicant failed to submit a timely performance report or submitted a report of unacceptable quality.

    In addition, in making a competitive grant award, the Secretary also requires various assurances including those applicable to Federal civil rights laws that prohibit discrimination in programs or activities receiving Federal financial assistance from the Department of Education (34 CFR 100.4, 104.5, 106.4, 108.8, and 110.23).

    Tiebreaker for Institutional, Special Project, and Cooperative Grants. If there are insufficient funds for all applications with the same total scores, applications will receive preference in the following manner. The Secretary gives priority to applicants that have not previously received funding from the program and to previous grantees with a proven record of success, as well as to applications that contribute to achieving balance among funded projects with respect to: (1) Geographic region; (2) Academic discipline; and (3) Project type.

    3. Risk Assessment and Special Conditions: Consistent with 2 CFR 200.205, before awarding grants under this competition the Department conducts a review of the risks posed by applicants. Under 2 CFR 3474.10, the Secretary may impose special conditions and, in appropriate circumstances, high-risk conditions on a grant if the applicant or grantee is not financially stable; has a history of unsatisfactory performance; has a financial or other management system that does not meet the standards in 2 CFR part 200, subpart D; has not fulfilled the conditions of a prior grant; or is otherwise not responsible.

    4. Integrity and Performance System: If you are selected under this competition to receive an award that over the course of the project period may exceed the simplified acquisition threshold (currently $150,000), under 2 CFR 200.205(a)(2) we must make a judgment about your integrity, business ethics, and record of performance under Federal awards—that is, the risk posed by you as an applicant—before we make an award. In doing so, we must consider any information about you that is in the integrity and performance system (currently referred to as the Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS)), accessible through SAM. You may review and comment on any information about yourself that a Federal agency previously entered and that is currently in FAPIIS.

    Please note that, if the total value of your currently active grants, cooperative agreements, and procurement contracts from the Federal Government exceeds $10,000,000, the reporting requirements in 2 CFR part 200, Appendix XII, require you to report certain integrity information to FAPIIS semiannually. Please review the requirements in 2 CFR part 200, Appendix XII, if this grant plus all the other Federal funds you receive exceed $10,000,000.

    VI. Award Administration Information

    1. Award Notices: If your application is successful, we notify your U.S. Representative and U.S. Senators and send you a Grant Award Notification (GAN); or we may send you an email containing a link to access an electronic version of your GAN. We may notify you informally, also.

    If your application is not evaluated or not selected for funding, we notify you.

    2. Administrative and National Policy Requirements: We identify administrative and national policy requirements in the application package and reference these and other requirements in the Applicable Regulations section of this notice.

    We reference the regulations outlining the terms and conditions of an award in the Applicable Regulations section of this notice and include these and other specific conditions in the GAN. The GAN also incorporates your approved application as part of your binding commitments under the grant.

    3. Reporting: (a) If you apply for a grant under this competition, you must ensure that you have in place the necessary processes and systems to comply with the reporting requirements in 2 CFR part 170 should you receive funding under the competition. This does not apply if you have an exception under 2 CFR 170.110(b).

    (b) At the end of your project period, you must submit a final performance report, including financial information, as directed by the Secretary. If you receive a multiyear award, you must submit an annual performance report that provides the most current performance and financial expenditure information as directed by the Secretary under 34 CFR 75.118. The Secretary may also require more frequent performance reports under 34 CFR 75.720(c). For specific requirements on reporting, please go to www.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/appforms/appforms.html.

    (c) Under 34 CFR 75.250(b), the Secretary may provide a grantee with additional funding for data collection analysis and reporting. In this case the Secretary establishes a data collection period.

    4. Performance Measures: The Secretary has established the following key performance measures for assessing the effectiveness of the MSEIP: (1) The percentage of change in the number of full-time, degree-seeking minority undergraduate students at the grantee's institution enrolled in the fields of engineering or physical or biological sciences, compared to the average minority enrollment in the same fields in the three-year period immediately prior to the beginning of the current grant; and (2) the percentage of minority students enrolled at four-year minority institutions in the fields of engineering or physical or biological sciences who graduate within six years of enrollment. Please see the application package for details of data collection and reporting requirements for these measures.

    5. Continuation Awards: In making a continuation award under 34 CFR 75.253, the Secretary considers, among other things: Whether a grantee has made substantial progress in achieving the goals and objectives of the project; whether the grantee has expended funds in a manner that is consistent with its approved application and budget; and, if the Secretary has established performance measurement requirements, the performance targets in the grantee's approved application.

    In making a continuation grant, the Secretary also considers whether the grantee is operating in compliance with the assurances in its approved application, including those applicable to Federal civil rights laws that prohibit discrimination in programs or activities receiving Federal financial assistance from the Department (34 CFR 100.4, 104.5, 106.4, 108.8, and 110.23).

    VII. Agency Contacts FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Dr. Bernadette Hence, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., Room 4C115, Washington, DC 20202. Telephone: (202) 453-7913 or by email: [email protected]

    If you use a TDD or a TTY, call the FRS, toll free, at 1-800-877-8339.

    VIII. Other Information

    Accessible Format: Individuals with disabilities can obtain this document and a copy of the application package in an accessible format (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, or compact disc) on request to the program contact person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT in section VII of this notice.

    Electronic Access to This Document: The official version of this document is the document published in the Federal Register. Free Internet access to the official edition of the Federal Register and the Code of Federal Regulations is available via the Federal Digital System at: www.thefederalregister.org/fdsys. At this site you can view this document, as well as all other documents of this Department published in the Federal Register, in text or Portable Document Format. To use PDF you must have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available free at the site.

    You may also access documents of the Department published in the Federal Register by using the article search feature at www.federalregister.gov. Specifically, through the advanced search feature at this site, you can limit your search to documents published by the Department.

    Dated: October 18, 2016. Lynn B. Mahaffie, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy, Planning, and Innovation, Delegated the Duties of the Assistant Secretary for Postsecondary Education.
    [FR Doc. 2016-25539 Filed 10-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4000-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Nevada 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), Nevada. The Federal Advisory Committee Act requires that public notice of this meeting be announced in the Federal Register.

    DATES:

    Wednesday, November 9, 2016—4:00 p.m.

    ADDRESSES:

    Clark County Government Center, 500 South Grand Central Parkway, Las Vegas, Nevada 89155.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Barbara Ulmer, Board Administrator, 232 Energy Way, M/S 167, North Las Vegas, Nevada 89030. Phone: (702) 630-0522; Fax (702) 295-2025 or Email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Purpose of the Board: The purpose of the Board is to make recommendations to DOE-EM and site management in the areas of environmental restoration, waste management, and related activities.

    Tentative Agenda 1. Briefing and Recommendation Development for Clean Slate II Path Forward—Work Plan Item #2 2. Election of Vice-Chair

    Public Participation: The EM SSAB, Nevada, 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 Barbara Ulmer 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 presentations pertaining to agenda items should contact Barbara Ulmer at the telephone number listed above. The request 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 can do so during the 15 minutes allotted for public comments.

    Minutes: Minutes will be available by writing to Barbara Ulmer at the address listed above or at the following Web site: http://www.nnss.gov/NSSAB/pages/MM_FY16.htm.

    Authority:

    Pub. L. 92-463, 86 Stat. 770.

    Issued at Washington, DC on October 17, 2016. LaTanya R. Butler, Deputy Committee Management Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2016-25462 Filed 10-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Proposed Agency Information Collection Extension With Changes AGENCY:

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), U.S. Department of Energy.

    ACTION:

    Notice and request for OMB review and comment.

    SUMMARY:

    EIA has submitted an information collection request to the OMB for extension with changes, under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, for the Electric Power and Renewable Electricity Surveys (OMB Control Number 1905-0129) information collection. EIA requests a three-year clearance with changes for the following forms:

    Form EIA-63B, “Photovoltaic Module Shipments Report” Form EIA-411, “Coordinated Bulk Power Supply Program Report” Form EIA-826, “Monthly Electric Utility Sales and Revenue Report with State Distributions” (will be replaced by EIA-861M) Form EIA-860, “Annual Electric Generator Report” Form EIA-860M, “Monthly Update to the Annual Electric Generator Report” Form EIA-861, “Annual Electric Power Industry Report” Form EIA-861S, “Annual Electric Power Industry Report (Short Form)” Form EIA-861M, “Monthly Electric Power Industry Report” (will replace EIA-826) Form EIA-923, “Power Plant Operations Report” Form EIA-930, “Balancing Authority Operations Report”
    DATES:

    Comments regarding this collection must be received 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, please advise the DOE Desk Officer at OMB of your intention to make a submission as soon as possible. The Desk Officer may be telephoned at 202-395-4718 or contacted by email at [email protected]

    ADDRESSES:

    Written comments should be sent to the:

    DOE Desk Officer, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, New Executive Office Building, Room 10102, 735 17th Street NW., Washington, DC 20503, [email protected] And to Rebecca Peterson, [email protected], U.S. Energy Information Administration, Mail Stop EI-23, Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585, (Email is preferred)
    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Direct any requests for additional information or copies of the information collection instruments and instructions to Rebecca Peterson at [email protected] or at 202-586-4509. The collection instruments and instructions are also available on the Internet at: http://www.eia.gov/survey/changes/electricity/solar/.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This information collection request contains:

    (1) OMB No.: 1905-0129;

    (2) Information Collection Request Title: Electricity and Renewables Power Surveys;

    (3) Type of Request: Extension, with changes of a currently approved collection;

    (4) Purpose: The electricity and renewables surveys collect data from entities involved in the production, transmission, delivery, and sale of electricity, and in maintaining the reliable operation of the power system. The data collected are the primary source of information on the nation's electric power industry. EIA uses the data collected on the electric power surveys to answer queries from the U.S. Congress, other federal and state agencies, the electric power industry, and the public; and as input to the National Energy Modeling System (NEMS) and to EIA's other forecasting and analytical activities. Other users of the data include policy makers, regulators, energy market analysts, and the energy industries.

    Changes to the currently approved forms in this package can be summarized as follows:

    Form EIA-63B: Change from a monthly only to an annual and monthly collection and eliminate questions about photovoltaic cells which will result in a significant decrease in burden;

    Form EIA-411: Discontinue the collection of historical information associated with demand, capacity, transactions, and reserve margins;

    Form EIA-826: Discontinue this form and replace it with Form EIA-861M (see further below);

    Form EIA-860: Require plants in Puerto Rico to begin reporting and add questions concerning storage capacity, solar generators, virtual net metering agreements, and planned retirement dates of environmental equipment;

    Form EIA-860M: Add questions regarding net metering agreements involving newly operable solar generators;

    Form EIA-861: Add questions regarding small scale storage and virtual net metered capacity;

    Form EIA-861 M (which replaces the Form EIA-826): Add questions regarding capacity;

    Form EIA-923: Reduce the current monthly sample via a more efficient model-based cutoff design; require plants in Puerto Rico to begin reporting, remove data protection for coal and petroleum stocks, collect the mercury removal rate for environmental equipment, collect data from plants that are operating under test conditions;

    Form EIA-930: Require respondents to report hourly sub-regional demand, hourly net generation by standard fuel type, and their hourly total actual demand within 30 minutes (instead of the current 60 minutes) of the end of the data hour.

    (5) Annual Estimated Number of Respondents: The annual estimated number of respondents on the electric and solar surveys is 16,770;

    (6) Annual Estimated Number of Total Responses: The annual estimated number of total responses is 65,716;

    (7) Annual Estimated Number of Burden Hours: The annual estimated number of burden hours is 152,120 which represents an increase of 10,975 burden hours from the prior renewal of this collection. Most of the overall change is driven by an overall 17-percent increase in survey respondents due to rapid growth in the electric power industry. To a smaller extent, the increase is due to additional questions that are needed on certain surveys to optimize data coverage while adding only a minimal increase in burden and to the requirement for plants in Puerto Rico to begin reporting on the Forms EIA-860 and EIA-923.

    (8) Annual Estimated Reporting and Recordkeeping Cost burden: New respondents will incur a one-time total startup cost of $14,400. This will apply to the 25 power companies in Puerto Rico that will be new respondents (25 companies times 8 hours times $72.02 per hour, the current hourly rate for an EIA employee). EIA estimates that for each of these companies it will take 8 hours to configure their reporting systems, review instructions, search their data systems and receive authentication for EIA's Single Sign-on Internet Data Collection System in order to report electronically. Additional costs to respondents are not anticipated beyond costs associated with response burden. This information is maintained in the normal course of business. The total annual cost of burden hours to the respondents for all nine surveys is estimated to be $10,955,682 (152,120 burden hours times $72.02 per hour). Other than the cost of burden hours, EIA estimates that there are no additional costs for generating, maintaining, and providing the information.

    Statutory Authority:

    Section 13(b) of the Federal Energy Administration Act of 1974, Pub. L. 93-275, codified at 15 U.S.C. 772(b).

    Issued in Washington, DC, October 14, 2016. Nanda Srinivasan, Director, Office of Survey Development and Statistical Integration, U.S. Energy Information Administration.
    [FR Doc. 2016-25504 Filed 10-20-16; 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.

    DATES:

    Wednesday, November 9, 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; E-Mail: [email protected] Or visit the Web site at www.energy.gov/orssab.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    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.

    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: Excess Contaminated Facilities • Additions/Approval of Agenda • Motions/Approval of October 12, 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 October 17, 2016. LaTanya R. Butler, Deputy Committee Management Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2016-25463 Filed 10-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-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: CP16-503-000.

    Applicants: UGI Storage Company and UGI Central Penn Gas, Inc.

    Description: Abbreviated Joint Application of UGI Storage Company and UGI Central Penn Gas, Inc. to Abandon Capacity Lease and Amend Certificate.

    Filed Date: 9/22/16.

    Accession Number: 20160922-5054.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/13/16.

    Docket Numbers: RP16-1242-000.

    Applicants: Kern River Gas Transmission Company.

    Description: § 4(d) Rate Filing: 2016 Misc Updates Third Rev Col 1 to be effective 10/24/2016.

    Filed Date: 9/22/16.

    Accession Number: 20160922-5059.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/4/16.

    Docket Numbers: RP16-1243-000.

    Applicants: ANR Storage Company.

    Description: Compliance filing Compliance to RP16-1030-000 to be effective 7/1/2016.

    Filed Date: 9/22/16.

    Accession Number: 20160922-5074.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/4/16.

    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: RP16-1168-001.

    Applicants: Midcontinent Express Pipeline LLC.

    Description: Compliance filing Buy Out Language Filing Compliance to be effective 9/10/2016.

    Filed Date: 9/20/16.

    Accession Number: 20160920-5051.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/3/16.

    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 22, 2016. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-25456 Filed 10-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Combined Notice of Filings #2

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2179-032.

    Applicants: Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant, LLC.

    Description: Notice of Non-Material Change in Status of Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant, LLC.

    Filed Date: 10/17/16.

    Accession Number: 20161017-5082.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/7/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2756-006; ER10-2757-006.

    Applicants: Arlington Valley, LLC, Griffith Energy LLC.

    Description: Supplement to June 30, 2016 Triennial Market Power Update for the Southwest Region of Arlington Valley, LLC, et al.

    Filed Date: 10/17/16.

    Accession Number: 20161017-5109.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/7/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER13-1641-003; ER15-1045-003.

    Applicants: Chestnut Flats Lessee, LLC, Pilot Hill Wind, LLC.

    Description: Notice of Non-Material Change in Status of Chestnut Flats Lessee, LLC, et al.

    Filed Date: 10/17/16.

    Accession Number: 20161017-5105.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/7/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-2589-000.

    Applicants: CPV Shore, LLC.

    Description: Report Filing: Refund Report to be effective N/A.

    Filed Date: 10/17/16.

    Accession Number: 20161017-5113.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/7/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-896-001; ER16-899-001.

    Applicants: Orange and Rockland Utilities, Inc.

    Description: Notification of Completion of Transaction and Effective Date of Cancellation of Orange and Rockland Utilities, Inc., et al.

    Filed Date: 9/29/16.

    Accession Number: 20160929-5203.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/7/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-1483-004.

    Applicants: California Independent System Operator Corporation.

    Description: Compliance filing: 2016-10-17 Compliance Filing with Sept. 16 Order Frequency Response to be effective 8/15/2016.

    Filed Date: 10/17/16.

    Accession Number: 20161017-5138.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/7/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-2643-001.

    Applicants: Panda Stonewall LLC.

    Description: Tariff Amendment: Supplement to Market-Based Rate Application to be effective 11/21/2016.

    Filed Date: 10/17/16.

    Accession Number: 20161017-5084.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/7/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-116-000.

    Applicants: ISO New England Inc.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: 2017 Capital Budget and Revised Tariff Sheets for Recovery of 2017 Admin. Costs to be effective 1/1/2017.

    Filed Date: 10/17/16.

    Accession Number: 20161017-5052.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/7/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-117-000.

    Applicants: Wisconsin Electric Power Company.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: Wisconsin Electric—UMERC Formula Rate Service Agreement No 3 to be effective 1/1/2017.

    Filed Date: 10/17/16.

    Accession Number: 20161017-5070.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/7/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-118-000.

    Applicants: Wisconsin Public Service Corporation.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: WPS Corp Filing of Rate Schedule No. 94 for Wholesale Distribution Service to be effective 1/1/2017.

    Filed Date: 10/17/16.

    Accession Number: 20161017-5071.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/7/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-119-000.

    Applicants: Wisconsin Public Service Corporation.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: WPS Corp Filing of Service Agreement No. 12 under its Rate Schedule W-1A to be effective 1/1/2017.

    Filed Date: 10/17/16.

    Accession Number: 20161017-5072.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/7/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-120-000.

    Applicants: Upper Michigan Energy Resources Corporation.

    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: UMERC to Wisconsin Electric Rate Schedule No. 1 to be effective 1/1/2017.

    Filed Date: 10/17/16.

    Accession Number: 20161017-5080.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/7/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-121-000.

    Applicants: Upper Michigan Energy Resources Corporation.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: UMERC to Wisconsin Public Service Rate Schedule No. 2 to be effective 1/1/2017.

    Filed Date: 10/17/16.

    Accession Number: 20161017-5081.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/7/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-122-000.

    Applicants: ISO New England Inc.

    Description: ISO New England Inc. submits Third Quarter 2016 Capital Budget Report.

    Filed Date: 10/17/16.

    Accession Number: 20161017-5083.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/7/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-123-000.

    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: Queue Position AA1-121, Original Service Agreement No. 4565 to be effective 9/15/2016.

    Filed Date: 10/17/16.

    Accession Number: 20161017-5086.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/7/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-124-000.

    Applicants: Tucson Electric Power Company.

    Description: Compliance filing: Order 819 Compliance Filing to be effective 2/25/2016.

    Filed Date: 10/17/16.

    Accession Number: 20161017-5107.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/7/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-125-000.

    Applicants: UniSource Energy Development Company.

    Description: Compliance filing: Order No. 819 Compliance Filing to be effective 2/25/2016.

    Filed Date: 10/17/16.

    Accession Number: 20161017-5108.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/7/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-126-000.

    Applicants: UNS Electric, Inc.

    Description: Compliance filing: Order No. 819 Compliance Filing to be effective 2/25/2016.

    Filed Date: 10/17/16.

    Accession Number: 20161017-5110.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/7/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-127-000.

    Applicants: Portal Ridge Solar B, LLC.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: SFA and CTA Agreement to be effective 11/4/2016.

    Filed Date: 10/17/16.

    Accession Number: 20161017-5121.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/7/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-128-000.

    Applicants: Portal Ridge Solar C, LLC.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: SFA Concurrence filing to be effective 11/4/2016.

    Filed Date: 10/17/16.

    Accession Number: 20161017-5127.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/7/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-129-000.

    Applicants: Portal Ridge Solar C, LLC.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: CTA Concurrence filing to be effective 11/4/2016.

    Filed Date: 10/17/16.

    Accession Number: 20161017-5130.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/7/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-130-000.

    Applicants: Northampton Generating Company, L.P.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: Northampton Generating Co. Change in Status supplemental filing—Clone to be effective 9/16/2016.

    Filed Date: 10/17/16.

    Accession Number: 20161017-5140.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/7/16.

    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: October 17, 2016. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-25515 Filed 10-20-16; 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 Number: PR17-2-000.

    Applicants: Eagle Ford Midstream, LP.

    Description: Tariff filing per 284.123(b)(2) + (g): Petition for NGPA Section 311 Rate Approval to be effective 10/11/2016; Filing Type: 1310.

    Filed Date: 10/11/2016.

    Accession Number: 20161011-5302.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/1/16.

    284.123(g) Protests Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/12/16.

    Docket Numbers: RP17-20-000.

    Applicants: Chesapeake Energy Marketing, L.L.C., Core Appalachia Midstream, LLC.

    Description: Joint Petition of Chesapeake Energy Marketing, L.L.C. and Core Appalachia Midstream LLC for Limited Waiver and Request for Expedited Action.

    Filed Date: 10/11/16.

    Accession Number: 20161011-5327.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/18/16.

    Docket Numbers: RP17-21-000.

    Applicants: Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC.

    Description: § 4(d) Rate Filing: AIM In-Service Compliance Filing CP14-96-000 to be effective 11/1/2016.

    Filed Date: 10/12/16.

    Accession Number: 20161012-5131.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/24/16.

    Docket Numbers: RP17-22-000.

    Applicants: Viking Gas Transmission Company.

    Description: § 4(d) Rate Filing: Update Non-Conforming Agreements—November 2016 to be effective 11/1/2016.

    Filed Date: 10/12/16.

    Accession Number: 20161012-5154.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/24/16.

    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 date(s). Protests may be considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the proceeding.

    Filings in Existing Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP16-1205-001.

    Applicants: Florida Gas Transmission Company, LLC.

    Description: Compliance filing Compliance with RP16-1205-000 Order.

    Filed Date: 10/12/16.

    Accession Number: 20161012-5142.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/24/16.

    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 October 13, 2016. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-25457 Filed 10-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Combined Notice of Filings #1

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric corporate filings:

    Docket Numbers: EC17-13-000.

    Applicants: ITC Midwest LLC.

    Description: Application of ITC Midwest LLC for Approval of Acquisition of Assets Pursuant to Section 203 of the Federal Power Act.

    Filed Date: 10/17/16.

    Accession Number: 20161017-5036.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/7/16.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following exempt wholesale generator filings:

    Docket Numbers: EG17-13-000.

    Applicants: ESS Snook Project, LLC.

    Description: Notice of Self-Certification of Exempt Wholesale Generator Status of ESS Snook Project, LLC.

    Filed Date: 10/14/16.

    Accession Number: 20161014-5145.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/4/16.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER16-1637-001.

    Applicants: UIL Distributed Resources, LLC.

    Description: Report Filing: Supplement to Refund Report to be effective N/A.

    Filed Date: 10/14/16.

    Accession Number: 20161014-5165.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/4/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-79-001.

    Applicants: Portland General Electric Company.

    Description: Compliance filing: Errata to Combined Order 827 and 828 Compliance Filing to be effective 10/14/2016.

    Filed Date: 10/14/16.

    Accession Number: 20161014-5118.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/4/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-96-001.

    Applicants: ISO New England Inc.

    Description: Tariff Amendment: Part 2 of Two-Part Filing to Update Eff Date of Accepted Demand Response Changes to be effective 6/1/2018.

    Filed Date: 10/14/16.

    Accession Number: 20161014-5116.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/4/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-104-000.

    Applicants: Broadview Energy KW, LLC.

    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Application for Market-Based Rate Tariff and Waivers to be effective 12/1/2016.

    Filed Date: 10/14/16.

    Accession Number: 20161014-5154.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/4/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-105-000.

    Applicants: Broadview Energy JN, LLC.

    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Application for Market-Based Rate Tariff and Waivers to be effective 12/1/2016.

    Filed Date: 10/14/16.

    Accession Number: 20161014-5157.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/4/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-106-000.

    Applicants: Broadview Energy KW, LLC.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: Common Facilities Agreement to be effective 12/1/2016.

    Filed Date: 10/14/16.

    Accession Number: 20161014-5162.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/4/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-107-000.

    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.

    Description: Compliance filing: Orders 827 and 828 Compliance Filing Revising GIA Proforma to be effective 9/21/2016.

    Filed Date: 10/14/16.

    Accession Number: 20161014-5175.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/4/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-108-000.

    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.

    Description: Compliance filing: PJM Submits Compliance Filing re: RM16-1-000 and RM16-8-000 Order 827 and 828 to be effective 11/1/2016.

    Filed Date: 10/14/16.

    Accession Number: 20161014-5178.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/4/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-109-000.

    Applicants: Alcoa Power Generating Inc.

    Description: Compliance filing: Yadkin Division Order Nos. 827 and 828 Compliance Filing to be effective 10/14/2016.

    Filed Date: 10/14/16.

    Accession Number: 20161014-5180.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/4/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-110-000.

    Applicants: California Independent System Operator Corporation.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: 2016-10-14 Aliso Canyon Phase 2 Enhancements to be effective 11/30/2016.

    Filed Date: 10/14/16.

    Accession Number: 20161014-5183.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/24/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-111-000.

    Applicants: Black Hills Power, Inc.

    Description: Compliance filing: Order Nos. 827 and 828 Compliance Filing to be effective 10/14/2016.

    Filed Date: 10/14/16.

    Accession Number: 20161014-5188.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/4/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-112-000.

    Applicants: Black Hills/Colorado Electric Utility Company, LP.

    Description: Compliance filing: Order Nos. 827 and 828 Compliance Filing to be effective 10/14/2016.

    Filed Date: 10/14/16.

    Accession Number: 20161014-5189.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/4/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-113-000.

    Applicants: Cheyenne Light, Fuel and Power Company.

    Description: Compliance filing: Order Nos. 827 and 828 Compliance Filing to be effective 10/14/2016.

    Filed Date: 10/14/16.

    Accession Number: 20161014-5191.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/4/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-114-000.

    Applicants: California Independent System Operator Corporation.

    Description: Compliance filing: 2016-10-14 Compliance Order No. 827 and 828 to be effective 9/21/2016.

    Filed Date: 10/14/16.

    Accession Number: 20161014-5193.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/4/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-115-000.

    Applicants: Wisconsin Electric Power Company.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: Wisconsin Electric—UMERC Wholesale Distribution Agreement Rate Schedule 136 to be effective 1/1/2017.

    Filed Date: 10/17/16.

    Accession Number: 20161017-5044.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/7/16.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric securities filings:

    Docket Numbers: ES17-4-000.

    Applicants: Mid-Atlantic Interstate Transmission, LLC.

    Description: Application of Mid-Atlantic Interstate Transmission, LLC for Authorization Under Section 204 of the Federal Power Act, et al.

    Filed Date: 10/14/16.

    Accession Number: 20161014-5210.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/4/16.

    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 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: October 17, 2016. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-25514 Filed 10-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. ER16-1518-000] Supplemental Notice of Agenda and Discussion Topics for Staff Technical Conference; California Independent System Operator Corporation

    This notice establishes the agenda and topics for discussion at the technical conference to be held on October 28, 2016 to discuss the technical challenges California Independent System Operator Corporation (CAISO) has described related to the implementation of economic bidding at Energy Imbalance Market (EIM) external interties.1 The conference will be held on October 28, 2016, at the Commission's offices at 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426 from 10 a.m. to approximately 4 p.m. (Eastern Time). The conference will be led by Commission staff and Commissioners might attend.

    1See Cal. Indep. Sys. Operator Corp., 155 FERC ¶ 61,329, at P 38 (2016) (June 30 Order).

    The purpose of the technical conference is to provide Commission staff and interested parties an opportunity to discuss impediments to and solutions for implementing economic bidding at the EIM external interties. The topics to be discussed during this conference are attached.

    This conference will be transcribed. Transcripts will be available for a fee from Ace Reporting Company (202-347-3700). Advance registration is not required but is encouraged. Attendees may register, indicating attendance in person or via listen-only telephone line, at the following Web page: https://www.ferc.gov/whats-new/registration/10-28-16-form.asp. If you require a telephone line, please register no later than October 24, 2016 to be emailed the call-in information one day before the conference. Information on this event will be posted on the Calendar of Events on the Commission's Web site, www.ferc.gov, prior to the event.

    Commission conferences are accessible under section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. For accessibility accommodations, please send an email to [email protected] or call toll free 1-866-208-3372 (voice) or 202-502-8659 (TTY), or send a FAX to 202-208-2106 with the required accommodations.

    For more information about this conference, please contact:

    Sarah McKinley, Office of External Affairs,(202) 502-8368, [email protected], Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426. Linda Kizuka Office of the General Counsel, 202-502-8773, [email protected], Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426. Jennifer Shipley, Office of Energy Market Regulation, (202) 502-6822, [email protected], Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. Dated: October 17, 2016. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-25516 Filed 10-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ER-FRL-9029-7] Environmental Impact Statements; Notice of Availability

    Responsible Agency: Office of Federal Activities, General Information (202) 564-7146 or http://www.epa.gov/nepa.

    Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact Statements (EISs) Filed 10/10/2016 Through 10/14/2016 Pursuant to 40 CFR 1506.9. Notice

    Section 309(a) of the Clean Air Act requires that EPA make public its comments on EISs issued by other Federal agencies. EPA's comment letters on EISs are available at: http://www.epa.gov/compliance/nepa/eisdata.html.

    EIS No. 20160237, Final, USFS, FL, Beasley Pond Analysis Area, Review Period Ends: 12/05/2016, Contact: Branden Tolver 850-926-3561. EIS No. 20160238, Final, NPS, NY, Fire Island National Seashore General Management Plan, Review Period Ends: 11/21/2016, Contact: Kaetlyn Jackson 631-687-4770. EIS No. 20160239, Draft, USFS, OR, Ten Cent Community Wildfire Protection Project, Comment Period Ends: 12/05/2016, Contact: Andrew Stinchfield 541-427-5397. EIS No. 20160240, Draft, BR, CA, Long-Term Plan to Protect Adult Salmon in the Lower Klamath River, Comment Period Ends: 12/05/2016, Contact: Julia Long 530-276-2044. EIS No. 20160241, Final, BLM, WA, Vantage to Pomona Heights 230kV Transmission Line Project, Review Period Ends: 11/21/2016, Contact: Robin Estes 541-416-6728. EIS No. 20160242, Draft, NMFS, NAT, Amendment 5b to the 2006 Consolidated Atlantic Highly Migratory Species Fishery Management Plan, Comment Period Ends: 12/22/2016, Contact: Margo Schulze-Haugen 301-427-8503. EIS No. 20160243, Draft, USFWS, CA, Otay River Estuary Restoration Project San Diego Bay National Wildlife Refuge, Comment Period Ends: 12/05/2016, Contact: Brian Collins 619-575-2704, extension 302. EIS No. 20160244, Final, NOAA, AK, Effects of Oil and Gas Activities in the Arctic Ocean, Review Period Ends: 11/21/2016, Contact: Jolie Harrison 301-427-8401. EIS No. 20160245, Final, BR, MT, Lower Yellowstone Intake Diversion Dam Fish Passage Project, Montana, Review Period Ends: 11/21/2016, Contact: Tiffany Vanosdall 402-995-2695. Amended Notices EIS No. 20160197, Draft, NOAA, HI, Heeia National Estuarine Research Reserve, Comment Period Ends: 10/30/2016, Contact: Jean Tanimoto 808-725-5253. Revision to the FR Notice Published 09/02/2016; Extending Comment Period from 10/17/2016 to 10/30/2016. Dated: October 18, 2016. Dawn Roberts, Management Analyst, NEPA Compliance Division, Office of Federal Activities.
    [FR Doc. 2016-25533 Filed 10-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [EPA-HQ-OAR-2013-0119; FRL-9951-58-OEI] Information Collection Request Submitted to OMB for Review and Approval; Comment Request; Motor Vehicle and Engine Compliance Program Fees (Renewal) AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency has submitted an information collection request (ICR), “Motor Vehicle and Engine Compliance Program Fees (Renewal)” (EPA ICR No. 2080.06, OMB Control No. 2060-0545) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). This is a proposed extension of the ICR, which is currently approved through October 31, 2016. Public comments were previously requested via the Federal Register (81 FR 19604) on April 5, 2016 during a 60-day comment period. This notice allows for an additional 30 days for public comments. A fuller description of the ICR is given below, including its estimated burden and cost to the public. An Agency may not conduct or sponsor and a person is not required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

    DATES:

    Additional comments may be submitted on or before November 21, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-OAR-2013-0019, to (1) EPA online using www.regulations.gov (our preferred method), by email to [email protected], or by mail to: EPA Docket Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460, and (2) OMB via email to [email protected] Address comments to OMB Desk Officer for EPA.

    EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Lynn Sohacki, Compliance Division, Office of Transportation and Air Quality, Environmental Protection Agency, 2000 Traverwood, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48105; telephone number: 734-214-4851; email address: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Supporting documents, which explain in detail the information that the EPA will be collecting, are available in the public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at www.regulations.gov or in person at the EPA Docket Center, WJC West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC. The telephone number for the Docket Center is 202-566-1744. For additional information about EPA's public docket, visit http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

    Abstract: As required by the Clean Air Act, EPA has regulations establishing emission standards and other requirements for various classes of vehicles, engines, and evaporative emissions. These regulations require that compliance be demonstrated prior to EPA granting a “Certificate of Conformity.” EPA charges fees for administering this certification program. In 2004 the fees program was expanded to include non-road categories of vehicles and engines, such as several categories of marine engines, locomotives, non-road recreational vehicles, and many non-road compression-ignition and spark-ignition engines. Manufacturers and importers of covered vehicles, engines and components are required to pay the applicable certification fees prior to their certification applications being reviewed. Under section 208 of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7542(c)) all information, other than trade secret processes or methods, must be publicly available. Information about fee payments is treated as confidential information prior to certification.

    Form Numbers: 3520-29.

    Respondents/affected entities: Manufacturers or importers of motor vehicles and engines.

    Respondent's obligation to respond: Required to obtain or retain a benefit (40 CFR part 1027).

    Estimated number of respondents: 597 (total).

    Frequency of response: Annually, On occasion.

    Total estimated burden: 927 hours (per year). Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.03(b).

    Total estimated cost: $59,683 (per year), includes $9,965 annualized capital or operation & maintenance costs.

    Changes in the Estimates: There is a decrease of 586 hours in the total estimated respondent burden compared with the ICR currently approved by OMB. This decrease is due to an increase in the number of online fee forms from manufacturers.

    Courtney Kerwin, Director, Regulatory Support Division.
    [FR Doc. 2016-25494 Filed 10-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [EPA-HQ-OGC-2016-0613; FRL-9954-39-OGC] Proposed Settlement Agreement, Clean Air Act Citizen Suit AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Notice of proposed settlement agreement; request for public comment.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with section 113(g) of the Clean Air Act, as amended (“CAA” or the “Act”), notice is hereby given of a proposed settlement agreement to address a lawsuit filed by the Center for Biological Diversity, Association of Irritated Residents, and Sierra Club (Plaintiffs), in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California: Center For Biological Diversity et al. v. United States Environmental Protection Agency et al. No. 4:16-cv-01946-SBA (N.D. Cal.). On April 14, 2016, Plaintiffs filed a complaint alleging that Gina McCarthy, in her official capacity as Administrator of the United States Environmental Protection Agency, and Jared Blumenfeld, in his official capacity as Regional Administrator of the United States Environmental Protection Agency (collectively, “EPA”), failed to perform a nondiscretionary duty to grant or deny within 60 days a petition submitted by Plaintiffs on December 16, 2014, requesting that EPA object to an Authority to Construct/Certificate of Conformity issued by the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District to the Alon USA—Bakersfield, California Refinery Facility. The proposed settlement agreement would establish two deadlines for EPA to take specified action.

    DATES:

    Written comments on the proposed settlement agreement must be received by November 21, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID number EPA-HQ-OGC-2016-0613, online at www.regulations.gov. For comments submitted at www.regulations.gov, follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from www.regulations.gov. 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 generally will not consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional submission methods, please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Dan Conrad, Air and Radiation Law Office (2344A), Office of General Counsel, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone: (202) 564-0903; email address: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Additional Information About the Proposed Settlement Agreement

    The proposed settlement agreement would resolve a lawsuit filed by the Plaintiffs seeking to compel the Administrator to take actions under CAA section 505(b)(2). Under the terms of the proposed settlement agreement, EPA would agree to sign its response granting or denying one specified section of the petition filed by Plaintiffs regarding the Alon USA—Bakersfield, California Refinery Facility on or before December 30, 2016. Additionally, EPA would agree to sign its response granting or denying two other specified sections of the petition filed by Plaintiffs regarding the Alon USA—Bakersfield, California Refinery Facility on or before July 31, 2016.

    Under the terms of the proposed settlement agreement, EPA would expeditiously deliver notice of EPA's responses to the Office of the Federal Register for review and publication following signature of each response. In addition, the proposed settlement agreement sets out a framework for resolving any request for costs of litigation, including attorney fees.

    For a period of thirty (30) days following the date of publication of this notice, the Agency will accept written comments relating to the proposed settlement agreement from persons who are not named as parties or intervenors to the litigation in question. EPA or the Department of Justice may withdraw or withhold consent to the proposed settlement agreement if the comments disclose facts or considerations that indicate that such agreement is inappropriate, improper, inadequate, or inconsistent with the requirements of the Act. Unless EPA or the Department of Justice determines that consent to this settlement agreement should be withdrawn, the terms of the settlement agreement will be affirmed.

    II. Additional Information About Commenting on the Proposed Settlement Agreement A. How can I get a copy of the settlement agreement?

    The official public docket for this action (identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OGC-2016-0613) contains a copy of the proposed settlement agreement. The official public docket is available for public viewing at the Office of Environmental Information (OEI) Docket in the EPA Docket Center, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC. The EPA Docket Center 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 OEI Docket is (202) 566-1752.

    An electronic version of the public docket is available through www.regulations.gov. You may use www.regulations.gov to submit or view public comments, access the index listing of the contents of the official public docket, and access those documents in the public docket that are available electronically. Once in the system, key in the appropriate docket identification number then select “search.”

    It is important to note that EPA's policy is that public comments, whether submitted electronically or in paper, will be made available for public viewing online at www.regulations.gov without change, unless the comment contains copyrighted material, confidential business information (CBI), or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Information claimed as CBI and other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute is not included in the official public docket or in the electronic public docket. EPA's policy is that copyrighted material, including copyrighted material contained in a public comment, will not be placed in EPA's electronic public docket but will be available only in printed, paper form in the official public docket. Although not all docket materials may be available electronically, you may still access any of the publicly available docket materials through the EPA Docket Center.

    B. How and to whom do I submit comments?

    You may submit comments as provided in the ADDRESSES section. Please ensure that your comments are submitted within the specified comment period. Comments received after the close of the comment period will be marked “late.” EPA is not required to consider such late comments.

    If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name, mailing address, and an email address or other contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. This ensures that you can be identified as the submitter of the comment and allows EPA to contact you in case EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties or needs further information on the substance of your comment. Any identifying or contact information provided in the body of a comment will be included as part of the comment that is placed in the official public docket, and made available in EPA's electronic public docket. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment.

    Use of the www.regulations.gov Web site to submit comments to EPA electronically is EPA's preferred method for receiving comments. The electronic public docket system is an “anonymous access” system, which means EPA will not know your identity, email address, or other contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. In contrast to EPA's electronic public docket, EPA's electronic mail (email) system is not an “anonymous access” system. If you send an email comment directly to the Docket without going through www.regulations.gov, your email address is automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is placed in the official public docket, and made available in EPA's electronic public docket.

    Dated: October 15, 2016. Gautam Srinivasan, Acting Associate General Counsel.
    [FR Doc. 2016-25513 Filed 10-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION Sunshine Act Meeting

    Pursuant to the provisions of the “Government in the Sunshine Act” (5 U.S.C. 552b), notice is hereby given that at 10:29 a.m. on Wednesday, October 19, 2016, the Board of Directors of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation met in closed session to consider matters related to the Corporation's supervision and resolution activities.

    In calling the meeting, the Board determined, on motion of Director Thomas J. Curry (Comptroller of the Currency), seconded by Director Richard Cordray (Director, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau), concurred in by Vice Chairman Thomas M. Hoenig and Chairman Martin J. Gruenberg, that Corporation business required its consideration of the matters which were to be the subject of this meeting on less than seven days' notice to the public; that no earlier notice of the meeting was practicable; that the public interest did not require consideration of the matters in a meeting open to public observation; and that the matters could be considered in a closed meeting by authority of subsections (c)(2), (c)(4), (c)(6), (c)(8), (c)(9)(A)(ii), and (c)(9)(B) of the “Government in the Sunshine Act” (5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(2), (c)(4), (c)(6), (c)(8), (c)(9)(A)(ii), and (c)(9)(B).

    Dated: October 19, 2016. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. Robert E. Feldman, Executive Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-25652 Filed 10-19-16; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE 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 November 15, 2016.

    A. Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta (Chapelle Davis, Assistant Vice President) 1000 Peachtree Street NE., Atlanta, Georgia 30309. Comments can also be sent electronically to [email protected]:

    1. Clayton HC, Inc., Knoxville, Tennessee; and its subsidiaries, Apex Bancorp and Apex Bank, both in Camden, Tennessee; to acquire American Patriot Bank, Greeneville, Tennessee.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, October 17, 2016. Michele Taylor Fennell, Assistant Secretary of the Board.
    [FR Doc. 2016-25439 Filed 10-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6210-01-P
    FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Holding Companies

    The companies listed in this notice have applied to the Board for approval, pursuant to the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 1841 et seq.) (BHC Act), Regulation Y (12 CFR part 225), and all other applicable statutes and regulations to become a bank holding company and/or to acquire the assets or the ownership of, control of, or the power to vote shares of a bank or bank holding company and all of the banks and nonbanking companies owned by the bank holding company, including the companies listed below.

    The applications listed below, as well as other related filings required by the Board, are available for immediate inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The applications will also be available for inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their views in writing on the standards enumerated in the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1842(c)). If the proposal also involves the acquisition of a nonbanking company, the review also includes whether the acquisition of the nonbanking company complies with the standards in section 4 of the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1843). Unless otherwise noted, nonbanking activities will be conducted throughout the United States.

    Unless otherwise noted, comments regarding each of these applications must be received at the Reserve Bank indicated or the offices of the Board of Governors not later than November 16, 2016.

    A. Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis (David L. Hubbard, Senior Manager) P.O. Box 442, St. Louis, Missouri 63166-2034. Comments can also be sent electronically to [email protected]:

    1. First Community Bancshares, Inc., Batesville, Arkansas; to merge with Little River Bancshares, Inc., and thereby indirectly acquire Little River Bank, both in Lepanto, Arkansas.

    B. Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City (Dennis Denney, Assistant Vice President) 1 Memorial Drive, Kansas City, Missouri 64198-0001:

    1. First York Ban Corp, York Nebraska; to acquire Swedlund Management Company, and thereby indirectly acquire Murray State Bank, both in Murray, Nebraska; and merge Murray State Bank with Cornerstone Bank, York, Nebraska.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, October 18, 2016. Michele Taylor Fennell, Assistant Secretary of the Board.
    [FR Doc. 2016-25510 Filed 10-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6210-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Advisory Committee to the Director (ACD), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)

    Correction: This notice was published in the Federal Register on August 30, 2016, Volume 81, Number 168, Page 59626. The meeting location should read as follows:

    Place: CDC, Building 24, Conference Room 01103A/B, 1600 Clifton Road NE., Atlanta, Georgia 30329.

    Contact Person for More Information: Carmen Villar, MSW, Designated Federal Officer, ACD, CDC, 1600 Clifton Road NE., M/S D-14, Atlanta, Georgia 30329. Telephone (404) 498-6482, Email: [email protected]

    The Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, has been delegated the authority to sign Federal Register notices pertaining to announcements of meetings and other committee management activities, for both the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry.

    Elaine L. Baker, Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
    [FR Doc. 2016-25453 Filed 10-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4163-18-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services [Document Identifier: CMS-10635] Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection; Comment Request AGENCY:

    Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) is announcing an opportunity for the public to comment on CMS' intention to collect information from the public. Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (the PRA), federal agencies are required to publish notice in the Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information (including each proposed extension or reinstatement of an existing collection of information) and to allow 60 days for public comment on the proposed action. Interested persons are invited to send comments regarding our burden estimates or any other aspect of this collection of information, including any of the following subjects: (1) The necessity and utility of the proposed information collection for the proper performance of the agency's functions; (2) the accuracy of the estimated burden; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology to minimize the information collection burden.

    DATES:

    Comments must be received by December 20, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    When commenting, please reference the document identifier or OMB control number. To be assured consideration, comments and recommendations must be submitted in any one of the following ways:

    1. Electronically. You may send your comments electronically to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for “Comment or Submission” or “More Search Options” to find the information collection document(s) that are accepting comments.

    2. By regular mail. You may mail written comments to the following address: CMS, Office of Strategic Operations and Regulatory Affairs, Division of Regulations Development, Attention: Document Identifier/OMB Control Number __, Room C4-26-05, 7500 Security Boulevard, Baltimore, Maryland 21244-1850.

    To obtain copies of a supporting statement and any related forms for the proposed collection(s) summarized in this notice, you may make your request using one of following:

    1. Access CMS' Web site address at http://www.cms.hhs.gov/PaperworkReductionActof1995.

    2. Email your request, including your address, phone number, OMB number, and CMS document identifier, to [email protected]

    3. Call the Reports Clearance Office at (410) 786-1326.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Reports Clearance Office at (410) 786-1326.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Contents

    This notice sets out a summary of the use and burden associated with the following information collections. More detailed information can be found in each collection's supporting statement and associated materials (see ADDRESSES).

    CMS-10635 Montana Health and Economic Livelihood Partnership (HELP) Federal Evaluation

    Under the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), federal agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for each collection of information they conduct or sponsor. The term “collection of information” is defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR 1320.3(c) and includes agency requests or requirements that members of the public submit reports, keep records, or provide information to a third party. Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA requires federal agencies to publish a 60-day notice in the Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information, including each proposed extension or reinstatement of an existing collection of information, before submitting the collection to OMB for approval. To comply with this requirement, CMS is publishing this notice.

    Information Collection

    1. Type of Information Collection Request: New collection (Request for a new OMB control number); Title of Information Collection: Montana Health and Economic Livelihood Partnership (HELP) Federal Evaluation; Use: CMS approved the Montana Health and Economic Livelihood Partnership (HELP) demonstration in November 2015. The demonstration provides flexibility for the expanded Medicaid population under the Affordable Care Act for individuals in the state of Montana (hereinafter, “State” or “Montana”).

    Montana expects to achieve the following: (1) Premiums and copayment liability that will encourage HELP Program enrollees to be discerning health care purchasers, take personal responsibility for their health care decisions and develop health-conscious behaviors as consumers of health care services; (2) 12 month continuous eligibility to improve continuity of care. The State also seeks to demonstrate the following over the life of the demonstration: (1) Premiums will not pose a barrier to accessing care for HELP Program beneficiaries; (2) HELP Program enrollees will exhibit health-conscious health care behaviors without harming beneficiary health; and (3) 12 month continuous eligibility will promote continuity of coverage and reduce churning rates.

    The demonstration includes the authority to charge premiums of 2 percent of household income to individuals in the new adult group with incomes between 50 and 133 percent of the FPL. The state will credit such individuals' premium obligation towards copayments due. Non-payment of premiums may result in disenrollment for individuals with incomes above 100 percent of the FPL after notice and a grace period. Individuals at or below 100 percent who stop paying premiums will not be disenrolled.

    To adequately inform CMS decision-making regarding Section 1115 Demonstrations, this federal evaluation of Montana's HELP demonstration includes surveys and associated focus groups, and informational interviews conducted during site visits and via phone.

    Form Number: CMS-10635 (OMB control number: 0938—New); Frequency: Once and on occasion; Affected Public: Individuals and Households, Business or other for-profits and Not-for-profits institutions, and State, Local, or Tribal Governments; Number of Respondents: 1,458; Total Annual Responses: 1,458; Total Annual Hours: 497. (For policy questions regarding this collection contact Serge King at 410-786-6052.)

    Dated: October 18, 2016. William N. Parham, III, Director, Paperwork Reduction Staff, Office of Strategic Operations and Regulatory Affairs.
    [FR Doc. 2016-25547 Filed 10-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4120-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Administration for Children and Families [CFDA Number: 93.576] Announcement of the Award of 38 Single-Source Low-Cost Extension Supplement Grants Under the Refugee School Impact Grant Program AGENCY:

    Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR), Administration for Children and Families (ACF), U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

    ACTION:

    Notice of award of 38 single-source low-cost extension supplement grants under the Refugee School Impact Grant Program.

    SUMMARY:

    ACF, ORR announces the award of 38 single-source low-cost extension supplement grants for a total of 2,500,000 under the Refugee School Impact Grant Program.

    State Grantee Amount Alaska Catholic Social Services $25,736 Arizona Arizona Department of Social Security 102,972 California California Department of Social Services 171,426 Colorado Colorado Department of Human Services 67,332 Connecticut Connecticut Department of Social Services 25,736 Florida Florida Department of Children and Families 171,426 Georgia Georgia Department of Human Services 108,709 Idaho Jannus Inc. 32,098 Illinois Illinois Department of Human Services 77,224 Indiana Indiana Division of Disability & Rehabilitation 49,713 Iowa Iowa Department of Human Services 25,736 Kentucky Catholic Charities of Louisville 67,784 Maine Maine Department of Health and Human Services 25,736 Maryland Maryland Department of Human Resources 51,296 Massachusetts Massachusetts Office for Refugees and Immigrants 69,049 Michigan Michigan Department of Human Services 116,658 Minnesota Minnesota Department of Human Services 86,304 Missouri Missouri Department of Social Services 42,081 Nebraska Nebraska Dept. of Health and Human Services 30,969 Nevada Clark County School District 25,736 New Hampshire NH. Dept. of Health & Human Services 25,736 New Jersey New Jersey Department of Human Services 25,736 New Mexico New Mexico Human Services Department 25,736 New York NY Office of Temporary and Disability Assistance 171,426 North Carolina North Caroline Dept. of Health & Human Services 84,000 North Dakota North Dakota Department of Public Instruction 25,736 Ohio Ohio Department of Job and Family Services 73,746 Oregon Lutheran Community Services Northwest 39,822 Pennsylvania Commonwealth of Pennsylvania 100,488 Rhode Island Rhode Island Department of Human Services 25,736 South Dakota Lutheran Social Services of South Dakota 25,736 Tennessee Catholic Charities of Tennessee, Inc. 56,671 Texas Texas Health and Human Services Commission 171,426 Utah Utah Department of Workforce Services 43,797 Vermont Vermont Agency of Human Services 25,736 Virginia Virginia Department of Social Services 66,428 Washington WA State Department of Social & Health Services 107,083 Wisconsin Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction 31,240 Total 2,500,000

    ORR provides 28 States and ten Wilson-Fish agencies with Refugee School Impact funding to undertake a comprehensive statewide approach supporting local school systems that are impacted by significant numbers of newly arrived refugee children. As currently awarded, the FY14-16 Refugee School Impact funding period concludes on August 14, 2016. Beginning in FFY17, ORR will award Refugee School Impact funding as a formula set-aside within the Refugee Social Services funding awarded to all States and Wilson-Fish programs coordinating refugee resettlement. This change in timing for Refugee School Impact funding will create a gap in Refugee School Impact program services between August 15, 2016 and October 1, 2016. The low-cost extensions will support refugee access to services critical to refugee student success at the beginning of the school year, when such services are greatest and most urgent.

    DATES:

    Low-cost extension supplement grants will support activities from August 15, 2016, through September 30, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Carl Rubenstein, Director, Division of Refugee Assistance, Office of Refugee Resettlement, 330 C Street SW., Washington, DC 20201. Email: [email protected]

    Statutory Authority:

    This program is authorized by Section 412(c)(1)(A)(iii) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), 8 U.S.C. 1522(c)(1)(A)(iii).

    Christopher Beach, Senior Grants Policy Specialist, Office of Administration, Office of Financial Services, Division of Grants Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-25496 Filed 10-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4184-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2010-D-0319] Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for Office of Management and Budget Review; Comment Request; Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff on Dear Health Care Provider Letters: Improving Communication of Important Safety Information AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or we) is announcing that a proposed collection of information has been submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and clearance under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (the PRA).

    DATES:

    Fax written comments on the collection of information by November 21, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    To ensure that comments on the information collection are received, OMB recommends that written comments be faxed to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, OMB, Attn: FDA Desk Officer, FAX: 202-395-7285, or emailed to [email protected] All comments should be identified with the OMB control number 0910-0754. Also include the FDA docket number found in brackets in the heading of this document.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    FDA PRA Staff, Office of Operations, Food and Drug Administration, Three White Flint North, 10A63, 11601 Landsdown St., North Bethesda, MD 20852, [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    In compliance with 44 U.S.C. 3507, FDA has submitted the following proposed collection of information to OMB for review and clearance.

    Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff on Dear Health Care Provider Letters: Improving Communication of Important Safety Information—OMB Control Number 0910-0754—Extension

    This final Guidance for Industry and FDA staff entitled “Dear Health Care Provider Letters: Improving Communication of Important Safety Information” offers specific guidance to industry and FDA staff on the content and format of Dear Health Care Provider (DHCP) letters. These letters are sent by manufacturers or distributors to health care providers to communicate an important drug warning, a change in prescribing information, or a correction of misinformation in prescription drug promotional labeling or advertising.

    This guidance gives specific instruction on what should and should not be included in DHCP letters. To date, some DHCP letters have been too long, have contained promotional material, or otherwise have not met the goals set forth in the applicable regulation (21 CFR 200.5). In some cases, health care providers have not been aware of important new information and have been unable to communicate it to patients because the letters' content and length have made it difficult to find the relevant information. In addition, letters have sometimes been sent for the wrong reasons.

    In addition to content and format recommendations for each type of DHCP letter, the guidance also includes advice on consulting with FDA to develop a DHCP letter, when to send a letter, what type of letter to send, and conducting an assessment of the letter's impact.

    Based on a review of FDA's Document Archiving, Reporting and Regulatory Tracking System for 2012 to 2015, we identified DHCP letters that were sent and the identity of each sponsor sending out a DHCP letter for each year. We estimate that we will receive approximately 25 DHCP Letters annually from approximately 18 application holders. FDA professionals familiar with DHCP letters and with the recommendations in the guidance estimate that it should take an application holder approximately 100 hours to prepare and send DHCP letters in accordance with the guidance.

    In the Federal Register of March 10, 2016 (81 FR 12734), we published a 60-day notice requesting public comment on the proposed extension of this collection of information. No comments were received.

    FDA estimates the annual reporting burden of this collection of information as follows:

    Table 1—Estimated Annual Reporting Burden 1 Activity Number of respondents Number of responses per respondent Total annual responses Average burden per response (hours) Total hours Annual average 18 1.4 25 100 2,500 1 There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of information. Dated: October 17, 2016. Leslie Kux, Associate Commissioner for Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-25481 Filed 10-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2016-N-0001] Request for Nominations for Voting Members on a Public Advisory Committee; Food Advisory Committee AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is requesting nominations for voting members to serve on the Food Advisory Committee (the Committee), Office of Regulations, Policy, and Social Sciences, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition.

    FDA seeks to include the views of women and men, members of all racial and ethnic groups, and individuals with and without disabilities on its advisory committees and, therefore, encourages nominations of appropriately qualified candidates from these groups.

    DATES:

    Nominations received on or before December 20, 2016, will be given first consideration for membership on the Food Advisory Committee. Nominations received after December 20, 2016, will be considered for nomination to the committee as later vacancies occur.

    ADDRESSES:

    All nominations for membership should be sent electronically by logging into the FDA Advisory Committee Membership Nomination Portal: https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/FACTRSPortal/FACTRS/index.cfm or by mail to Advisory Committee Oversight and Management Staff, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 32, Rm. 5103, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Regarding all nomination questions for membership, the primary contact is: Karen Strambler, 5001 Campus Drive, Rm. 1C-008, College Park, MD 20740, email: [email protected], 240-402-2589, Fax: 301-436-2367.

    Information about becoming a member on an FDA advisory committee can also be obtained by visiting FDA's Web site by using the following link: http://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/default.htm.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    FDA is requesting nomination for voting members on the Committee.

    I. General Description of the Committee Duties

    The Committee reviews and evaluates emerging food safety, nutrition, and other food- or cosmetic-related health issues that FDA considers of primary importance for its food and cosmetics programs. The Committee may be charged with reviewing and evaluating available data and making recommendations on matters such as those relating to: (1) Broad scientific and technical food- or cosmetic-related issues, (2) the safety of food ingredients and new foods, (3) labeling of foods and cosmetics, (4) nutrient needs and nutritional adequacy, and (5) safe exposure limits for food contaminants. The Committee may also be asked to provide advice and make recommendations on ways of communicating to the public the potential risks associated with these issues and on approaches that might be considered for addressing the issues.

    II. Criteria for Voting Members

    The Committee consists of a core of 15 voting members including the Chair. Members and the Chair are selected by the Commissioner of Food and Drugs (the Commissioner) designee from among authorities knowledgeable in the fields of physical sciences, biological and life sciences, food science, risk assessment, nutrition, food technology, molecular biology, epidemiology and other relevant scientific and technical disciplines. Members will be invited to serve for overlapping terms of up to 4 years. Almost all non-Federal members of this Committee serve as Special Government Employees. The core of voting members may include two technically qualified member(s), selected by the Commissioner or designee, who are identified with consumer interests and are recommended by either a consortium of consumer-oriented organizations or other interested persons. In addition to the voting members, the Committee may include two non-voting member(s) who are identified with industry interests.

    III. Nomination Procedures

    Any interested person may nominate one or more qualified individuals for membership on the advisory committee. Self-nominations are also accepted. Nominations must include a current, complete résumé or curriculum vitae for each nominee, including current business address and/or home address, telephone number, and email address if available. Nominations must also specify the advisory committee for which the nominee recommended. Nominations must also acknowledge that the nominee is aware of the nomination unless self-nominated. FDA will ask potential candidates to provide detailed information concerning such matters related to financial holdings, employment, and research grants and/or contracts to permit evaluation of possible sources of conflicts of interest.

    This notice is issued under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. app. 2) and 21 CFR part 14, relating to advisory committees.

    Dated: October 18, 2016. Janice M. Soreth, Acting Associate Commissioner, Special Medical Programs.
    [FR Doc. 2016-25497 Filed 10-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2010-N-0600] Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Animal Drug User Fee Cover Sheet AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing an opportunity for public comment on the proposed collection of certain information by the Agency. Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (the PRA), Federal Agencies are required to publish notice in the Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information, including each proposed extension of an existing collection of information, and to allow 60 days for public comment in response to the notice. This notice solicits comments on the information collection requirements of the Animal Drug User Fee cover sheet.

    DATES:

    Submit either electronic or written comments on the collection of information by December 20, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments as follows:

    Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:

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

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

    Written/Paper Submissions

    Submit written/paper submissions as follows:

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

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

    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket No. FDA-2010-N-0600 for “Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Animal Drug User Fee Cover Sheet.” Received comments will be placed in the docket and, except for those submitted as “Confidential Submissions,” publicly viewable at http://www.regulations.gov or at the Division of Dockets Management between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.

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

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

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    FDA PRA Staff, Office of Operations, Food and Drug Administration, Three White Flint North, 10A63, 11601 Landsdown St., North Bethesda, MD 20852, [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Under the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), Federal Agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for each collection of information they conduct or sponsor. “Collection of information” is defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR 1320.3(c) and includes Agency requests or requirements that members of the public submit reports, keep records, or provide information to a third party. Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)) requires Federal Agencies to provide a 60-day notice in the Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information, including each proposed extension of an existing collection of information, before submitting the collection to OMB for approval. To comply with this requirement, FDA is publishing notice of the proposed collection of information set forth in this document.

    With respect to the following collection of information, FDA invites comments on these topics: (1) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of FDA's functions, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of FDA's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques, when appropriate, and other forms of information technology.

    Animal Drug User Fee Cover Sheet—OMB Control Number 0910-0539—Extension

    Under section 740 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the FD&C Act) (21 U.S.C. 379j-12), FDA has the authority to assess and collect application fees from each person who submits certain new animal drug applications or certain supplemental animal drug applications. The Animal Drug User Fee cover sheet (Form FDA 3546) is designed to collect the minimum necessary information to determine whether a fee is required for the review of an application or supplement or whether an application fee waiver was granted, to determine the amount of the fee required, and to assure that each animal drug user fee payment is appropriately linked to the animal drug application for which payment is made. The form, when completed electronically, will result in the generation of a unique payment identification number used by FDA to track the payment. FDA's Center for Veterinary Medicine and FDA's Office of Management will use the information collected to initiate the administrative screening of new animal drug applications and supplements to determine whether the payment has been received.

    Description of Respondents: Respondents to this collection of information are new animal drug applicants.

    FDA estimates the burden of this collection of information as follows:

    Table 1—Estimated Annual Reporting Burden 1 FD&C Act section;
  • description
  • FDA form No. Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • responses
  • per
  • respondent
  • Total
  • annual
  • responses
  • Average
  • burden per
  • response
  • Total hours
    740(a)(1); Animal Drug User Fee cover sheet FDA 3546 21 1 21 1 21 1 There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of information.

    The estimates in table 1 are based on our experience with new animal drug applications and supplemental animal drug applications and the average number of Animal Drug User Fee cover sheets submitted during fiscal years 2013-2015. We estimate 21 respondents will each submit a cover sheet (Form FDA 3546), for a total of 21 responses. We calculate a reporting burden of 1 hour per response, for a total of 21 hours.

    Dated: October 17, 2016. Leslie Kux, Associate Commissioner for Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-25482 Filed 10-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Office of the Secretary Notice of Interest Rate on Overdue Debts

    Section 30.18 of the Department of Health and Human Services' claims collection regulations (45 CFR part 30) provides that the Secretary shall charge an annual rate of interest, which is determined and fixed by the Secretary of the Treasury after considering private consumer rates of interest on the date that the Department of Health and Human Services becomes entitled to recovery. The rate cannot be lower than the Department of Treasury's current value of funds rate or the applicable rate determined from the “Schedule of Certified Interest Rates with Range of Maturities” unless the Secretary waives interest in whole or part, or a different rate is prescribed by statute, contract, or repayment agreement. The Secretary of the Treasury may revise this rate quarterly. The Department of Health and Human Services publishes this rate in the Federal Register.

    The current rate of 95/8%, as fixed by the Secretary of the Treasury, is certified for the quarter ended September 30, 2016. This rate is based on the Interest Rates for Specific Legislation, “National Health Services Corps Scholarship Program (42 U.S.C. 254o(b)(1)(A))” and “National Research Service Award Program (42 U.S.C. 288(c)(4)(B)).” This interest rate will be applied to overdue debt until the Department of Health and Human Services publishes a revision.

    Dated: October 13, 2016. David C. Horn, Director, Office of Financial Policy and Reporting.
    [FR Doc. 2016-25459 Filed 10-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4150-04-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Meeting Announcement for the Technical Advisory Panel on Medicare Trustee Reports AGENCY:

    Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

    ACTION:

    Notice of public meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice announces the meeting dates for the Technical Advisory Panel on Medicare Trustee Reports on Monday, October 31, 2016 and Tuesday, November 1, 2016 in Washington, DC.

    DATES:

    The meeting will be held on Monday, October 31, 2016 from 9:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. and Tuesday, November 1, 2016, from 9:00 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. Eastern Daylight Time (EDT) and it is open to the public.

    ADDRESSES:

    The meeting will be held at the Hubert Humphrey Building, 200 Independence Ave. SW., Washington, DC, 20201 Room 738G.3.

    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 nine 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 a presentation by a representative of the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission. Additional presentations regarding long range growth, sustainability of provider payments under Affordable Care Act (ACA) and Medicare Access and Chip Reauthorization Act (MACRA), methods for transitioning from short term (10 year) to long term (75 year) projections and methods and the presentation of uncertainty in the report may follow. 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 Monday, October 31, 2016 and Tuesday, November 1, 2016 meetings are open to the public; however, in-person attendance is limited to space available.

    Meeting Registration:

    The public may attend the meeting in-person. Space is limited and registration is required in order to attend in-person. 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.

    If sign language interpretation or other reasonable accommodation for a disability is needed, please contact Dr. Oellerich, no later than October 26, 2016 by sending an email message to [email protected] or calling 202-690-8410.

    Persons wishing to attend this meeting must register by following the instructions in the “Meeting Registration” section of this notice. A confirmation email will be sent to the registrants shortly after completing the registration process.

    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: October 13, 2016. Kathryn E. Martin, Acting Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation.
    [FR Doc. 2016-25458 Filed 10-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4150-05-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, Interagency Pain Research Coordinating Committee Call for Committee Membership Nominations SUMMARY:

    The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) (Department) has created the Interagency Pain Research Coordinating Committee (IPRCC) and is seeking nominations for this committee.

    DATES:

    Nominations are due by 5 p.m. on November 21, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Nominations must be submitted through the web form on the IPRCC Web site: http://iprcc.nih.gov/about/IPRCC-Nomination.htm.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Linda Porter, [email protected].

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    As specified in Public Law 111-148 (“Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act”) the Committee will: (a) Develop a summary of advances in pain care research supported or conducted by the Federal agencies relevant to the diagnosis, prevention, and treatment of pain and diseases and disorders associated with pain; (b) identify critical gaps in basic and clinical research on the symptoms and causes of pain; (c) make recommendations to ensure that the activities of the National Institutes of Health and other Federal agencies are free of unnecessary duplication of effort; (d) make recommendations on how best to disseminate information on pain care; and (e) make recommendations on how to expand partnerships between public entities and private entities to expand collaborative, cross-cutting research.

    Membership on the committee will include six (6) non-Federal members from among scientists, physicians, and other health professionals and six (6) non-Federal members of the general public who are representatives of leading research, advocacy, and service organizations for individuals with pain-related conditions. Members will serve overlapping three year terms. It is anticipated that the committee will meet at least once a year.

    The Department strives to ensure that the membership of HHS Federal advisory committees is fairly balanced in terms of points of view represented and the committee's function. Every effort is made to ensure that the views of diverse ethnic and racial groups and people with disabilities are represented on HHS Federal advisory committees, and the Department therefore, encourages nominations of qualified candidates from these groups. The Department also encourages geographic diversity in the composition of the Committee. Appointment to this Committee shall be made without discrimination on the basis of age, race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, disability, and cultural, religious, or socioeconomic status.

    The Department is soliciting nominations for three non-federal members from among scientists, physicians, and other health professionals and for three non-federal members of the general public who represent a leading research, advocacy, or service organization for people with pain-related conditions. These candidates will be considered to fill positions opened through completion of current member terms. Nominations are due by 5 p.m. on November 21, 2016, using the IPRCC nomination web form: http://iprcc.nih.gov/about/IPRCC-Nomination.htm.

    Dated: October 14, 2016. Walter J. Koroshetz, Director, National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, National Institutes of Health.
    [FR Doc. 2016-25522 Filed 10-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism; Notice of Closed Meetings

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following meetings.

    The meetings will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism Special Emphasis Panel; NIAAA AA-2 & AA-3 Member Conflict Applications.

    Date: November 16, 2016.

    Time: 11:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, 5635 Fishers Lane, Conference Room 2098, Rockville, MD 20892 (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: Ranga V. Srinivas, Ph.D., Chief Extramural Project Review Branch, National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, National Institutes of Health, 5635 Fishers Lane, Room 2085 Rockville, MD 20852, (301) 451-2067, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism Special Emphasis Panel; NIAAA Member Conflict Applications—Behavioral and Clinical Studies.

    Date: November 22, 2016.

    Time: 1:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, 5635 Fishers Lane, Conference Room 2098, Rockville, MD 20892 (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: Ranga V. Srinivas, Ph.D., Chief Extramural Project Review Branch, National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, National Institutes of Health, 5635 Fishers Lane, Room 2085, Rockville, MD 20852, (301) 451-2067, [email protected]

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.271, Alcohol Research Career Development Awards for Scientists and Clinicians; 93.272, Alcohol National Research Service Awards for Research Training; 93.273, Alcohol Research Programs; 93.891, Alcohol Research Center Grants; 93.701, ARRA Related Biomedical Research and Research Support Awards, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: October 17, 2016. Melanie J. Gray, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-25471 Filed 10-20-16; 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: AIDS and Related Research Integrated Review Group; AIDS Molecular and Cellular Biology Study Section.

    Date: November 14, 2016.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Residence Inn Bethesda, 7335 Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20814.

    Contact Person: Kenneth A. Roebuck, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5214, MSC 7852, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435-1166, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel; Implementation Science.

    Date: November 15, 2016.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Sheraton Suites Old Town Alexandria, 801 N. St. Asaph Street, Alexandria, VA 22314.

    Contact Person: Jose H. Guerrier, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5218, MSC 7852, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-435-1137, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel; Fellowships: AIDS and AIDS-related Applications.

    Date: November 17, 2016.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Bethesda Marriott, 5151 Pooks Hill Road, Bethesda, MD 20814.

    Contact Person: Jingsheng Tuo, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 3196, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-451-5953, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel; Small Business: Respiratory Sciences.

    Date: November 17-18, 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 (Virtual Meeting).

    Contact Person: Ghenima Dirami, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4122, MSC 7814, Bethesda, MD 20892, 240-498-7546, [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: October 17, 2016. Sylvia L. Neal, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-25469 Filed 10-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases; Notice of Closed Meetings

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following meetings.

    The meetings will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases Initial Review Group; Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases Clinical Trials Review Committee.

    Date: October 25-26, 2016.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Bethesda Marriott Suites, 6711 Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20817.

    Contact Person: Kathy Salaita, SCD, Scientific Review Officer, Scientific Review Branch, National Institute of Arthritis, Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases, NIH, 6701 Democracy Blvd., Building One, Room 818, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-594-5033, [email protected]

    This notice is being published less than 15 days prior to the meeting due to the timing limitations imposed by the review and funding cycle.

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases Special Emphasis Panel; NIAMS Institutional Training Grants (T32) Review Meeting.

    Date: October 28, 2016.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: 6701 Democracy Boulevard, Building One, Conference Room 807, Bethesda, MD 20892.

    Contact Person: Yin Liu, Ph.D., MD, Scientific Review Officer, Scientific Review Branch, National Institute of Arthritis, Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases, NIH, 6701 Democracy Blvd., Building One, Room 824, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-594-8919, [email protected]

    This notice is being published less than 15 days prior to the meeting due to the timing limitations imposed by the review and funding cycle.

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.846, Arthritis, Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: October 17, 2016. Sylvia L. Neal, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-25472 Filed 10-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health Notice of Availability of License; Mutant IHD1 Inhibitors Useful for Treating Cancer AGENCY:

    National Institutes of Health, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The invention Mutant IHD1 Inhibitors Useful for Treating Cancer is owned by an agency of the U.S. Government and is available for licensing and/or co-development in the U.S.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Information on licensing and co-development research collaborations, and copies of the U.S. patent applications listed below may be obtained by contacting: Attn: Sury Vepa, Ph.D., J.D., Senior Licensing and Patenting Manager, National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, NIH, 9800 Medical Center Drive, Rockville, MD 20850, Phone: 301-217-9197, Fax: 301-217-5736, or email [email protected] A signed Confidential Disclosure Agreement may be required to receive copies of the patent applications.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This notice is made in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 209 and 37 CFR part 404 to achieve expeditious commercialization of results of federally-funded research and development.

    Intellectual Property

    Description of Technology: Isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 (IDH1) is an enzyme whose normal function is to convert isocitrate to α-ketoglutarate. Mutated forms of this enzyme (mIDH1) are common in a variety of cancers including acute myeloid leukemia (AML), glioma, cholangiocarcinoma, chondrosarcoma and melanoma. The IDH1 mutation at position 132 and similar IDH1 mutations result in the enzyme gaining the ability to catalyze the NADPH-dependent reduction of the wild type enzyme's product, α-ketoglutarate to R-2-hydroxyglutarate (2-HG). 2-HG is an oncometabolite, and its elevated levels have been shown to lead to de-differentiation of cells. Mutant IDH1 is an attractive target for anti-cancer therapeutics as inhibition reduces levels of 2-HG. It is expected that lower 2-HG levels will result in fewer undifferentiated cancer cells. Furthermore, inhibition of mutant IDH1 is expected to have little effect on non-cancerous cells, as these cells do not express the IDH1 mutation resulting in lower toxicity than typical cytotoxic anticancer agents.

    In collaboration with the University of North Carolina, the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS) investigators have discovered a series of novel compounds that potently and selectively inhibit mIDH1. These compounds reduce 2-HG levels in cell lines in vitro as well as in human cancer cells grown in mouse xenografts in vivo. These compounds show greater than 250-fold selectivity for the mutant enzyme over the wild-type, show favorable in vitro stability (in mouse, rat, dog and human hepatocyte exposure studies), are AMES negative, and exhibit no significant metabolic CYP liabilities. These compounds possess very favorable in vivo rodent pharmacokinetics and bioavailability and are well tolerated in rodents, even when dosed at high levels.

    Potential Commercial Applications

    • Potential treatment of cancer (AML or other solid tumors listed above).

    • Potential treatment of rare diseases including Maffucci Syndrome and Ollier Disease.

    Value Proposition

    • Novel mutant IDH1 inhibitors are effective at lowering the oncometabolite, 2-HG in in vivo mouse proof-of-concept studies and are well suited for IND enabling studies.

    Development Stage: Pre-clinical (in vivo validation).

    Inventor(s): Matt Boxer, Kyle Brimacombe, Mindy Davis, Rajan Pragani, Jason Rohde, Li Liu, Surendra Karavadhi, Daniel Urban, Min Shen, Anton Simeonov, Ajit Jadhav (NCATS) Xiaodong Wang and Andrew McIver (Univ. of North Carolina at Chapel Hill)

    Intellectual Property:

    1. International Application No. PCT/US15/067406 filed on 12/22/2015 which is entitled “Mutant IDH1 Inhibitors Useful for Treating Cancer” (HHS Ref. No: E-243-2014/0-PCT-02), and

    2. U.S. Provisional Application No. 62/353298 filed on 06/22/2016 which is entitled “Mutant IDH1 Inhibitors Useful for Treating Cancer” (HHS Ref. No. E-189-2016/0-US-01).

    Dated: October 5, 2016. Pamela McInnes, Deputy Director, Office of the Director, National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences.
    [FR Doc. 2016-25468 Filed 10-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases; Notice of Closed Meetings

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following meetings.

    The meetings will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases Special Emphasis Panel; Ancillary Studies Review Meeting.

    Date: November 9, 2016.

    Time: 9:30 a.m. to 12:30 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications

    Place: National Institutes of Health, One Democracy Plaza, 6701 Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Virtual Meeting).

    Contact Person: Xincheng Zheng, MD, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Scientific Review Branch, National Institute of Arthritis, Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases, NIH, 6701 Democracy Boulevard, Suite 820, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-451-4838, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases Special Emphasis Panel; AMS Member Conflict Meeting.

    Date: November 9, 2016.

    Time: 2:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: Kan Ma, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Scientific Review Branch, National Institute of Arthritis, Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases, NIH, 6701 Democracy Boulevard, Suite 814, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-451-4838,[email protected]

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.846, Arthritis, Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: October 17, 2016. Sylvia L. Neal, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-25473 Filed 10-20-16; 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; Physical Activity and Leukocyte Activation: Harnessing the Molecular Pathways of Exercise Adaptation.

    Date: November 28, 2016.

    Time: 2:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, 6710B Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20817 (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: Rita Anand, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Division of Scientific Review, National Institute of Child Health And Human Development, NIH, 6710B Rockledge Drive, Room 2131C, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-496-1487, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Special Emphasis Panel.

    Date: December 7, 2016.

    Time: 11:00 a.m. to 2:30 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Rockledge 6700, 6700B Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20817 (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: Carla T. Walls, Ph.D., Scientific Review Administrator, Scientific Review Branch, National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, NIH, 6710B Rockledge Drive, Room 2131C, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435-6898, [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: October 17, 2016. Michelle Trout, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-25474 Filed 10-20-16; 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 Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel; Member Conflict: Autism, Epilepsy, other Neurological Disorders.

    Date: November 8, 2016.

    Time: 11:00 a.m. to 1:30 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: Samuel C. Edwards, Ph.D., IRG CHIEF, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5210, MSC 7846, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435-1246, [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: October 17, 2016. Sylvia L. Neal, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-25470 Filed 10-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard [Docket No. USCG-2016-0937] Lower Mississippi River Waterway Safety Advisory Committee AGENCY:

    Coast Guard, Department of Homeland Security.

    ACTION:

    Notice of Federal advisory committee meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    The Lower Mississippi River Waterway Safety Advisory Committee will meet on November 8, 2016 in New Orleans, LA to discuss committee matters relating to the safe transit of vessels and cargoes to and from the ports of the Lower Mississippi River. The meeting will be open to the public.

    DATES:

    The Lower Mississippi River Waterway Safety Advisory Committee will meet on Tuesday, November 8, 2016 from 9 a.m. to 1 p.m. CST. However, on Tuesday, November 8, 2016 from 9 a.m. to 9:30 a.m., administrative items and issues will be discussed with the Committee members only. The public meeting will commence at 9:30 a.m. Please note that the meeting may close early if the Committee has completed its business.

    ADDRESSES:

    The meeting will be held at the US Army Corps of Engineers New Orleans District office, 7400 Leake Avenue, New Orleans, LA.

    All visitors to US Army Corps of Engineers New Orleans District office will have to pre-register to be admitted to the building. Please provide your name, telephone number, and citizenship status by close of business on November 1, 2016, to the contact person listed in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

    For information on facilities or services for individuals with disabilities or to request special assistance at the meeting, contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT as soon as possible.

    Instructions: To facilitate public participation, written comments on the issues in the “Agenda” section below must be submitted no later than November 1, 2016, if you want Committee members to review your comment prior to the meeting. You must include “Department of Homeland Security” and the docket number (USCG-2016-0937). Written comments may also be submitted using Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. For technical difficulties, contact the person listed in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. 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 to read documents or comments related to this notice, go to http://www.regulations.gov, and use “USCG-2016-0937” in the “Search” box, press Enter, and then click on the item you wish to view.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Lieutenant Brian Porter, Alternate Designated Federal Officer, U.S. Coast Guard Sector New Orleans, 200 Hendee Street, New Orleans, LA 70114; telephone 504-365-2375, fax 504-365-2287, or email at [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Notice of this meeting is in compliance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Title 5 U.S.C. Appendix). The Lower Mississippi River Waterway Safety Advisory Committee is an advisory committee authorized in Section 19 of the Coast Guard Authorization Act of 1991, (Public Law 102-241), as amended by section 621(d) of the Coast Guard Authorization Act of 2010, (Public Law 111-281) and chartered under the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act. The Lower Mississippi River Waterway Safety Advisory Committee provides advice and recommendations to the Department of Homeland Security on matters relating to communications, surveillance, traffic management, anchorages, development and operation of the New Orleans Vessel Traffic Service, and other related topics dealing with navigation safety on the Lower Mississippi River as required by the U.S. Coast Guard.

    Agenda

    At 9 a.m., the Lower Mississippi River Waterway Safety Advisory Committee will meet to review, discuss, deliberate, and formulate recommendations, as appropriate, on the topics contained in the agenda, as follows: 9 a.m. to 9:30 a.m.: (Open to Committee members only). Federal Advisory Committee Act administrative matters to include Lower Mississippi River Waterway Safety Advisory Committee member training.

    At 9:30 a.m., the meeting will open to the public.

    (1) Introduction and swearing-in of new members.

    (2) Status of Action Items from March 2015 meeting.

    (a) Mile Marker 73 Memorandum of Understanding.

    (b) Anchorage Establishment and Amendments.

    (c) Systematic Port Planning.

    (d) Lower Mississippi River Waterway Safety

    Advisory Committee Vacancy Notice

    (3) Further development of systematic port planning principles and procedures.

    (4) Public Comment Period.

    (5) Adjournment of meeting.

    Public comments or questions will be taken throughout the meeting as the Committee discusses the issues and prior to deliberations and voting. There will also be a public comment period at the end of the meeting. Speakers are requested to limit their comments to 3 minutes. Please note that the public comment period may end before the period allotted, following the last call for comments. Contact the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to register as a speaker.

    D.R. Callahan, Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Eighth Coast Guard District.
    [FR Doc. 2016-25477 Filed 10-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT [Docket No. FR-5907-N-43] Federal Property Suitable as Facilities to Assist the Homeless AGENCY:

    Office of the Assistant Secretary for Community Planning and Development, HUD.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    This Notice identifies unutilized, underutilized, excess, and surplus Federal property reviewed by HUD for suitability for possible use to assist the homeless.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Juanita Perry, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 Seventh Street SW., Room 7266, Washington, DC 20410; telephone (202) 402-3970; TTY number for the hearing- and speech-impaired (202) 708-2565 (these telephone numbers are not toll-free), call the toll-free Title V information line at 800-927-7588 or send an email to [email protected].

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    In accordance with the December 12, 1988 court order in National Coalition for the Homeless v. Veterans Administration, No. 88-2503-OG (D.D.C.), HUD publishes a Notice, on a weekly basis, identifying unutilized, underutilized, excess and surplus Federal buildings and real property that HUD has reviewed for suitability for use to assist the homeless. Today's Notice is for the purpose of announcing that no additional properties have been determined suitable or unsuitable this week.

    Dated: October 13, 2016. Brian P. Fitzmaurice, Director, Division of Community Assistance, Office of Special Needs Assistance Programs.
    [FR Doc. 2016-25149 Filed 10-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4210-67-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service [FWS-R8-R-2016-N117; FF08RSDC00-167-F1611MD-FXRS12610800000] Otay River Estuary Restoration Project, South San Diego Bay Unit of the San Diego Bay National Wildlife Refuge, California; Draft Environmental Impact Statement AGENCY:

    Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice of availability, request for public comment.

    SUMMARY:

    We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce the availability of a draft environmental impact statement (EIS) for a proposed project to restore coastal wetlands at the south end of San Diego Bay. The Otay River Estuary Restoration Project (ORERP) is located within the South San Diego Bay Unit of the San Diego Bay National Wildlife Refuge (Refuge or NWR), in San Diego County, California. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is participating in the process as a cooperating agency. This notice advises the public that the draft EIS is available for public review and comment. The draft EIS, which we prepared in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), describes the alternatives identified to restore two portions of the South San Diego Bay Unit of the San Diego Bay NWR to coastal wetlands to benefit native fish, wildlife, and plant species.

    DATES:

    We will accept comments received or postmarked on or before December 5, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Document Availability: You may obtain copies of the documents in the following places:

    Internet: https://www.fws.gov/refuge/San_Diego_Bay/what_we_do/Resource_Management/Otay_Restoration.html.

    In Person:

    ○ San Diego Bay National Wildlife Refuge Complex Headquarters, 1080 Gunpowder Point Drive, Chula Vista, CA 91910; telephone: 619-476-9150, extension 103.

    ○ Chula Vista Public Library, Civic Center Branch, 365 F Street, Chula Vista, CA 91910; telephone: 619-691-5069.

    ○ San Diego County Library, Imperial Beach Branch Library, 847 Encina Avenue (temporary location), Imperial Beach, CA 91932; telephone: 619-424-6981.

    ○ Chula Vista Public Library, South Chula Vista Branch, 389 Orange Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 91911; telephone: 619-585-5755.

    Submitting Comments: You may submit written comments by one of the following methods:

    Email: [email protected] Include “Otay Estuary EIS” in the subject line of the message.

    Fax: Attn: Brian Collins, 619-476-9149.

    U.S. mail: Brian Collins, USFWS, San Diego National Wildlife Refuge Complex, P.O. Box 2358, Chula Vista, CA 91912.

    In-Person Drop-off: You may drop off comments at the San Diego National Wildlife Refuge Complex Headquarters between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m.; please call 619-476-9150, extension 103, for directions.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Brian Collins, Refuge Manager, San Diego Bay National Wildlife Refuge at 619-575-2704, extension 302 (telephone) or [email protected] (email); or Andy Yuen, Project Leader, 619-476-9150, extension 100 (telephone), or [email protected] (email). For any issues specific to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, please send comments by one of the methods described in ADDRESSES, as the agencies will coordinate comment review.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Project Location

    The proposed action site is located at the south end of San Diego Bay, San Diego County, California, within the South San Diego Bay Unit of the San Diego Bay National Wildlife Refuge. Restoration activities will occur at two separate locations within the Refuge: the Otay River Floodplain Site and the Pond 15 Site. Specifically, the approximately 33.5-acre Otay River Floodplain Site is located west of Interstate 5 (I-5) between Main Street to the north and Palm Avenue to the south in San Diego. The Pond 15 Site consists of an approximately 90.9-acre solar salt pond located in the northeast portion of the Refuge, to the northwest of the intersection of Bay Boulevard and Palomar Street in Chula Vista.

    The DEIS, which we prepared in accordance with the NEPA, describes and analyzes the alternatives identified for the Otay River Estuary Restoration Project. In addition to our publication of this notice, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is publishing a notice announcing the draft EIS, as required under section 309 of the Clean Air Act (CAA) (42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.). The publication date of EPA's notice of availability is the start of the public comment period for the draft EIS. Under the CAA, EPA also must subsequently announce the final EIS via the Federal Register.

    EPA's Role in the EIS Process

    The EPA is charged, under section 309 of the CAA (42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.), to review all Federal agencies' environmental impact statements (EISs) and to comment on the adequacy and the acceptability of the environmental impacts of proposed actions in the EISs.

    EPA also serves as the repository (EIS database) for EISs prepared by Federal agencies and provides notice of their availability in the Federal Register. The Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) Database provides information about EISs prepared by Federal agencies, as well as EPA's comments concerning the EISs. All EISs are filed with EPA, which publishes a notice of availability on Fridays in the Federal Register.

    The notice of availability is the start of the public comment period for draft EISs, and the start of the 30-day “wait period” for final EISs, during which agencies are generally required to wait 30 days before making a decision on a proposed action. For more information, see https://www.epa.gov/nepa. You may search for EPA comments on EISs, along with EISs themselves, at https://cdxnodengn.epa.gov/cdx-enepa-public/action/eis/search.

    Background

    In 2006, we completed a comprehensive conservation plan (CCP) and EIS/Record of Decision (ROD) to guide the management of the San Diego Bay NWR over a 15-year period (71 FR 64552, November 2, 2006). The wildlife and habitat management goal of the selected management alternative in the CCP for the South San Diego Bay Unit is to “Protect, manage, enhance, and restore . . . coastal wetlands