Federal Register Vol. 81, No.239,

Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 239 (December 13, 2016)

Page Range89831-90184
FR Document

81_FR_239
Current View
Page and SubjectPDF
81 FR 90183 - Presidential Determination and Waiver Pursuant to Section 2249a of Title 10, United States Code, and Sections 40 and 40A of the Arms Export Control Act to Support U.S. Special Operations to Combat Terrorism in SyriaPDF
81 FR 90181 - Relating to the Implementation of the Convention on the International Recovery of Child Support and Other Forms of Family MaintenancePDF
81 FR 89926 - Sunshine Act Meeting NoticePDF
81 FR 89935 - Clearing Target of 84 Megahertz Set for Stage 4 of the Broadcast Television Spectrum Incentive Auction; Stage 4 Bidding in the Reverse Auction Will Start on December 13, 2016PDF
81 FR 90038 - Sunshine Act MeetingPDF
81 FR 89994 - Sunshine Act Meeting NoticePDF
81 FR 89940 - Sunshine Act MeetingPDF
81 FR 89862 - Safety Zone; United Illuminating Company Housatonic River Crossing Project; Housatonic River, Milford and Stratford, CTPDF
81 FR 89911 - Applications for New Awards; Magnet Schools Assistance ProgramPDF
81 FR 89992 - Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993-National Armaments ConsortiumPDF
81 FR 89978 - Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research And Production Act of 1993-Telemanagement ForumPDF
81 FR 89998 - Proposed Collection; Comment RequestPDF
81 FR 89890 - Radio Broadcasting Services; Pima, ArizonaPDF
81 FR 89992 - Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993-Pistoia Alliance, Inc.PDF
81 FR 89920 - Tests Determined To Be Suitable for Use in the National Reporting System for Adult EducationPDF
81 FR 89957 - Privacy Act of 1974; Department of Homeland Security/U.S. Customs and Border Protection-007 Border Crossing Information (BCI) System of RecordsPDF
81 FR 90039 - Request for Information for the 2017 Trafficking in Persons ReportPDF
81 FR 89904 - Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; North Pacific Observer Program Standard Ex-Vessel PricesPDF
81 FR 90060 - Waiver Request for Aquaculture Support Operations for the 2017 Calendar Year: M/V COLBY PERCE and M/V RONJA CARRIERPDF
81 FR 89876 - Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico, and South Atlantic; Re-Opening of the Commercial Sector for South Atlantic Vermilion SnapperPDF
81 FR 89941 - Application of the RFI/C(D) Rating System to Savings and Loan Holding CompaniesPDF
81 FR 89954 - Proposed Collection; 60-Day Comment Request; Generic Clearance for the Collection of Qualitative Feedback on Agency Service Delivery (National Cancer Institute)PDF
81 FR 89930 - Receipt of Information Under the Toxic Substances Control ActPDF
81 FR 89930 - State Program Requirements; Approval of Program Revisions to Michigan's Clean Water Act Section 404 ProgramPDF
81 FR 89933 - Pesticide Product Registrations; Receipt of Applications for New Active IngredientsPDF
81 FR 89929 - Public Water Supply Supervision Program; Program Revision for the State of OregonPDF
81 FR 89979 - United States v. Alaska Air Group, Inc., et al.; Proposed Final Judgment and Competitive Impact StatementPDF
81 FR 90062 - Pipeline Safety: High Consequence Area Identification Methods for Gas Transmission PipelinesPDF
81 FR 89900 - Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; North Pacific Halibut and Sablefish Individual Fishing Quota Cost Recovery ProgramsPDF
81 FR 89963 - Intent To Request Approval From OMB of One New Public Collection of Information: TSA Canine Training Center Adoption ApplicationPDF
81 FR 89991 - Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993-Members of SGIP 2.0, Inc.PDF
81 FR 89977 - Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993-Cooperative Research Group on Automotive Consortium for Embedded SecurityTMPDF
81 FR 89846 - Production or Disclosure of Records, Information and Employee Testimony in Legal ProceedingsPDF
81 FR 89991 - Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993-Cooperative Research Group on Advanced Engine FluidsPDF
81 FR 89978 - Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993-Medical CBRN Defense ConsortiumPDF
81 FR 90069 - Notice of Availability of a Draft Environmental Impact Statement for a Replacement Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Louisville, Kentucky; Comment Period ExtensionPDF
81 FR 89892 - Proposed Information Collection; Comment Request; Annual Survey of EntrepreneursPDF
81 FR 89994 - Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS) Meeting of the ACRS Subcommittee on Reliability and PRA; Notice of MeetingPDF
81 FR 89995 - Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS) Meeting of the ACRS Subcommittee on Metallurgy & Reactor Fuels; Notice of MeetingPDF
81 FR 89994 - Meeting of the ACRS Subcommittee on Metallurgy & Reactor Fuels; Notice of MeetingPDF
81 FR 89878 - Provisions for Removing Commodity Research and Promotion Board Members and StaffPDF
81 FR 89940 - Agency Information Collection Activities: 60-Day Public Comment RequestPDF
81 FR 89940 - FDIC Advisory Committee on Economic Inclusion; Notice of Charter RenewalPDF
81 FR 89892 - Notice of Proposed New Fee Site; Federal Lands Recreation Enhancement Act (Title VIII. Pub. L. 108-447)PDF
81 FR 89895 - Drawn Stainless Steel Sinks From the People's Republic of China: Partial Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2015-2016PDF
81 FR 89888 - Safety Standard for Portable Generators; Notice of Extension of Comment PeriodPDF
81 FR 89896 - Chlorinated Isocyanurates From the People's Republic of China: Preliminary Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review, and Preliminary Intent To Rescind Review, in Part; 2014PDF
81 FR 89897 - Potassium Permanganate From the People's Republic of China: Preliminary Results of the 2015 Antidumping Duty Administrative ReviewPDF
81 FR 89887 - Proposed Amendment to the Puerto Rico Coastal Zone Management ProgramPDF
81 FR 89831 - Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program: Photo Electronic Benefit Transfer (EBT) Card Implementation RequirementsPDF
81 FR 89865 - Safety Zone; James River, Newport News, VAPDF
81 FR 89947 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for Office of Management and Budget Review; Comment Request; Animal Feed Regulatory Program StandardsPDF
81 FR 89946 - Determination of Regulatory Review Period for Purposes of Patent Extension; NUCALAPDF
81 FR 90064 - Notice of Funding Availability for the Small Business Transportation Resource Center ProgramPDF
81 FR 90050 - Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; VisionPDF
81 FR 90053 - Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; VisionPDF
81 FR 89939 - Information Collection Being Reviewed by the Federal Communications CommissionPDF
81 FR 89938 - Information Collections Being Reviewed by the Federal Communications CommissionPDF
81 FR 89890 - Petition for Partial Reconsideration of Action in Rulemaking ProceedingPDF
81 FR 90048 - Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; VisionPDF
81 FR 90054 - Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Diabetes MellitusPDF
81 FR 90046 - Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; VisionPDF
81 FR 90045 - Buy America Waiver NotificationPDF
81 FR 89888 - National Standards for Traffic Control Devices; the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways; Request for Information Related to Use of Clearview FontPDF
81 FR 89971 - Notice of Filing of Plats of Survey; ColoradoPDF
81 FR 89970 - Renewing an Expired Golden-Cheeked Warbler Incidental Take Permit in Travis County, TexasPDF
81 FR 89949 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for Office of Management and Budget Review; Comment Request; Donor Risk Assessment Questionnaire for the Food and Drug Administration/National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute-Sponsored Transfusion-Transmissible Infections Monitoring System-Risk Factor ElicitationPDF
81 FR 90061 - Hazardous Materials: Use of DOT Specification 39 Cylinders for Liquefied Flammable Compressed GasPDF
81 FR 89977 - Hearings of the Judicial Conference Advisory Committee on the Federal Rules of Criminal ProcedurePDF
81 FR 89952 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Public Comment RequestPDF
81 FR 89862 - Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Columbia River, Kennewick, WAPDF
81 FR 90035 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Investors Exchange LLC; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change to: (i) Amend Rules 11.190(a)(3) and 11.190(b)(8) To Modify the Operation of the Primary Peg Order Type; (ii) Amend Rule 11.190(h)(C)(ii) and (D)(ii) Regarding Price Sliding in Locked and Crossed Markets To Simplify the Price Sliding Process for Both Primary Peg Orders and Discretionary Peg Orders Resting on or Posting to the Order Book; and (iii) Make Minor Housekeeping Changes To Conform Certain TerminologyPDF
81 FR 90009 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Bats EDGX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change to Fees for Use of the Exchange's Equities PlatformPDF
81 FR 90030 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Miami International Securities Exchange LLC; Notice of Filing of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend Rule 515A, MIAX Price Improvement Mechanism (“PRIME”) and PRIME Solicitation MechanismPDF
81 FR 90012 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated; Notice of Filing of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend Exchange Rules Related to the Automated Improvement MechanismPDF
81 FR 90026 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Withdrawal of a Proposed Rule Change Relating to Listing and Trading of Shares of the BlackRock Government Collateral Pledge Unit Under NYSE Arca Equities Rule 8.600PDF
81 FR 90011 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Bats EDGX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change Related to Fees for Use of the Exchange's Equities Options PlatformPDF
81 FR 90015 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Bats BZX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change Related to Fees for Use of the Exchange's Equity Options PlatformPDF
81 FR 90033 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Extend the Pilot Period for the Exchange's Retail Liquidity ProgramPDF
81 FR 90019 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Extend the Pilot Period for the Exchange's Retail Liquidity ProgramPDF
81 FR 90021 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC; Notice of Withdrawal of Proposed Rule Change Related to the Payment of a Credit by Execution Access, LLC Based on Volume Thresholds Met on the NASDAQ Options MarketPDF
81 FR 90001 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Fixed Income Clearing Corporation; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change To Implement a Change to the Methodology Used in the MBSD VaR ModelPDF
81 FR 90021 - Goldman Sachs BDC, Inc., et al.; Notice of ApplicationPDF
81 FR 90026 - Fidus Investment Corporation, et al.; Notice of ApplicationPDF
81 FR 89999 - Stifel, Nicolaus & Company, Inc., et al.; Notice of Application and Temporary OrderPDF
81 FR 89900 - Record of Decision for the Kalamazoo River Natural Resources Damage Assessment: Final Restoration Plan and Programmatic Environmental Impact StatementPDF
81 FR 89992 - Notice of Lodging of Proposed Consent Decree Under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability ActPDF
81 FR 89929 - BREG Aggregator LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 AuthorizationPDF
81 FR 89923 - Combined Notice of FilingsPDF
81 FR 89925 - Combined Notice of FilingsPDF
81 FR 89924 - Combined Notice of Filings #2PDF
81 FR 89928 - Combined Notice of Filings #1PDF
81 FR 89993 - Veterans' Employment and Training Service; Advisory Committee on Veterans' Employment, Training and Employer Outreach (ACVETEO): MeetingPDF
81 FR 89997 - Market Dominant Price AdjustmentPDF
81 FR 89977 - Certain Personal Transporters, Components Thereof, and Packaging and Manuals Therefor and Certain Personal Transporters and Components Thereof; Commission Determination Not To Review an Initial Determination Granting Complainants' Motion To Amend the Complaint and Notice of InvestigationPDF
81 FR 90045 - Petition for Exemption; Summary of Petition Received; Drone Seed, Co.PDF
81 FR 89899 - Proposed Information Collection; Comment Request; Building for Environmental and Economic Sustainability (BEES) PleasePDF
81 FR 89995 - Florida Power and Light Company; Turkey Point, Units 6 and 7PDF
81 FR 89950 - Registration and Product Listing for Owners and Operators of Domestic Tobacco Product Establishment; Guidance for Industry; AvailabilityPDF
81 FR 89861 - Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Willamette River, Portland, ORPDF
81 FR 89848 - Requirements for Foreign and Domestic Establishment Registration and Listing for Human Drugs, Including Drugs That Are Regulated Under a Biologics License Application, and Animal Drugs; CorrectionPDF
81 FR 90043 - Public Notice for Waiver of Aeronautical Land-Use AssurancePDF
81 FR 90044 - Airport Privatization Pilot Program: Preliminary Application for Westchester County Airport, White Plains, NYPDF
81 FR 89943 - Granting of Request for Early Termination of the Waiting Period Under the Premerger Notification RulesPDF
81 FR 90122 - Enforcement Policy Statement on Marketing Claims for OTC Homeopathic DrugsPDF
81 FR 89843 - Special Conditions: DAHER-SOCATA, Model TBM 700; Inflatable Four-Point Restraint Safety Belt With an Integrated Airbag DevicePDF
81 FR 89997 - Cancellation of Submission for Review: Presidential Management Fellows (PMF) Application, 3206-0082PDF
81 FR 89955 - Proposed Collection; 60-Day Comment Request; CTEP Support Contracts Forms and Surveys (National Cancer Institute)PDF
81 FR 89954 - National Institute of General Medical Sciences; Notice of MeetingPDF
81 FR 89953 - National Institute on Aging; Notice of Closed MeetingPDF
81 FR 89954 - National Institute on Aging; Notice of Closed MeetingPDF
81 FR 89953 - National Cancer Institute; Notice of Closed MeetingsPDF
81 FR 89952 - Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health & Human Development (NICHD); Notice of MeetingPDF
81 FR 89867 - Notice and Recordkeeping for Use of Sound Recordings Under Statutory License; Technical AmendmentPDF
81 FR 90042 - Twenty Seventh RTCA SC-225 Rechargeable Lithium Batteries and Battery Systems PlenaryPDF
81 FR 90043 - Twenty Sixth RTCA SC-214 Standards for Air Traffic Data Communications Services PlenaryPDF
81 FR 89965 - Announcement of Funding Awards; Fair Housing Initiatives Program Fiscal Year 2016PDF
81 FR 89964 - 60-Day Notice of Proposed Information Collection: Comment Request Implementation of the Housing for Older Persons Act of 1995 (HOPA)PDF
81 FR 89868 - Determination of Attainment of the 2012 Annual Fine Particulate Matter Standard; Pennsylvania; Delaware County Nonattainment AreaPDF
81 FR 89923 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Comment Request; International Early Learning Study (IELS) 2018 Field Test RecruitmentPDF
81 FR 89889 - Determination of Attainment of the 2012 Annual Fine Particulate Matter Standard; Pennsylvania; Delaware County Nonattainment AreaPDF
81 FR 89974 - Announcement of Requirements and Registration for a Prize Competition Titled: More Water Less Concentrate- Stage 1.PDF
81 FR 89971 - Announcement of Requirements and Registration for a Prize Competition Titled: Arsenic Sensor Challenge-Stage 1PDF
81 FR 89849 - Treatment of Certain Domestic Entities Disregarded as Separate From Their Owners as Corporations for Purposes of Section 6038APDF
81 FR 89885 - Proposed Amendment of Class D and Class E Airspace; Elmira, NYPDF
81 FR 89852 - Regulation Regarding Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Race, Color, or National Origin in Programs or Activities Receiving Federal Financial Assistance From the Department of the TreasuryPDF
81 FR 89870 - Air Quality Designations for the 2010 Sulfur Dioxide (SO2PDF
81 FR 90072 - Energy Conservation Program: Energy Conservation Standards for Residential DishwashersPDF
81 FR 90126 - Revisions to Operational Requirements for the Use of Enhanced Flight Vision Systems (EFVS) and to Pilot Compartment View Requirements for Vision SystemsPDF
81 FR 89881 - Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier, Inc. AirplanesPDF
81 FR 89878 - Airworthiness Directives; BAE Systems (Operations) Limited AirplanesPDF

Issue

81 239 Tuesday, December 13, 2016 Contents Agricultural Marketing Agricultural Marketing Service PROPOSED RULES Provisions for Removing Commodity Research and Promotion Board Members and Staff, 89878 2016-29852 Agriculture Agriculture Department See

Agricultural Marketing Service

See

Food and Nutrition Service

See

Forest Service

Antitrust Division Antitrust Division NOTICES Membership Changes under National Cooperative Research and Production Act: Medical CBRN Defense Consortium, 89978-89979 2016-29873 National Armaments Consortium, 89992 2016-29906 Pistoia Alliance, Inc., 89992 2016-29901 SGIP 2.0, Inc., 89991-89992 2016-29877 Southwest Research Institute: Cooperative Research Group on Advanced Engine Fluids, 89991 2016-29874 Southwest Research Institute: Cooperative Research Group on Automotive Consortium for Embedded Security, 89977-89978 2016-29876 TeleManagement Forum, 89978 2016-29905 Proposed Final Judgments and Competitive Impact Statements: United States v. Alaska Air Group, Inc., et al., 89979-89991 2016-29883 Census Bureau Census Bureau NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Annual Survey of Entrepreneurs, 89892-89895 2016-29866 Coast Guard Coast Guard RULES Drawbridge Operations: Columbia River, Kennewick, WA, 89862 2016-29809 Willamette River, Portland, OR, 89861-89862 2016-29775 Safety Zones: James River, Newport News, VA, 89865-89867 2016-29840 United Illuminating Co. Housatonic River Crossing Project; Housatonic River, Milford and Stratford, CT, 89862-89865 2016-29909 Commerce Commerce Department See

Census Bureau

See

International Trade Administration

See

National Institute of Standards and Technology

See

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

Consumer Product Consumer Product Safety Commission PROPOSED RULES Safety Standard for Portable Generators, 89888 2016-29845 Copyright Royalty Board Copyright Royalty Board RULES Recordkeeping for Use of Sound Recordings under Statutory License; Technical Amendment, 89867-89868 2016-29761 Education Department Education Department NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: International Early Learning Study 2018 Field Test Recruitment, 89923 2016-29749 Applications for New Awards: Magnet Schools Assistance Program, 89911-89920 2016-29907 Tests Determined to be Suitable for Use in National Reporting System for Adult Education, 89920-89922 2016-29899 Energy Department Energy Department See

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

RULES Energy Conservation Programs: Energy Conservation Standards for Residential Dishwashers, 90072-90120 2016-29328
Environmental Protection Environmental Protection Agency RULES Air Quality Designations: 2010 Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) Primary National Ambient Air Quality Standard—Supplement to Round 2 for Four Areas in Texas: Freestone and Anderson Counties, Milam County, Rusk and Panola Counties, and Titus County, 89870-89876 2016-29561 Air Quality State Implementation Plans; Approvals and Promulgations: Pennsylvania; Delaware County Nonattainment Area; Attainment of 2012 Annual Fine Particulate Matter Standard, 89868-89870 2016-29751 PROPOSED RULES Air Quality State Implementation Plans; Approvals and Promulgations: Pennsylvania; Delaware County Nonattainment Area; Attainment of 2012 Annual Fine Particulate Matter Standard, 89889-89890 2016-29747 NOTICES Pesticide Product Registrations: Applications for New Active Ingredients, 89933-89935 2016-29887 Public Water Supply Supervision Program: Program Revision for State of Oregon, 89929 2016-29885 Receipt of Information under Toxic Substances Control Act, 89930 2016-29889 State Program Requirements under Clean Water Act: Michigan's Section 404 Program, Revisions; Approval, 89930-89933 2016-29888 Federal Aviation Federal Aviation Administration RULES Operational Requirements for Use of Enhanced Flight Vision Systems; Pilot Compartment View Requirements for Vision Systems, 90126-90177 2016-28714 Special Conditions DAHER-SOCATA, Model TBM 700; Inflatable Four-Point Restraint Safety Belt with Integrated Airbag Device, 89843-89846 2016-29769 PROPOSED RULES Airworthiness Directives: BAE Systems (Operations) Limited Airplanes, 89878-89881 2016-28060 Bombardier, Inc. Airplanes, 89881-89885 2016-28622 Amendment of Class D and Class E Airspace: Elmira, NY, 89885-89887 2016-29632 NOTICES Aeronautical Land-Use Assurances; Waivers: Bowman Municipal Airport, BPP, Bowman, ND, 90043-90044 2016-29773 Airport Privatization Pilot Program: Preliminary Application for Westchester County Airport, White Plains, NY, 90044-90045 2016-29772 Meetings: Twenty Seventh RTCA SC-225 Rechargeable Lithium Batteries and Battery Systems Plenary, 90042-90043 2016-29760 Twenty Sixth Radio Technical Commission for Aeronautics SC-214 Standards for Air Traffic Data Communications Services Plenary, 90043 2016-29759 Petitions for Exemption; Summaries: Drone Seed, Co., 90045 2016-29780 Federal Communications Federal Communications Commission PROPOSED RULES Petitions for Partial Reconsideration of Action in Rulemaking Proceeding, 89890 2016-29827 Radio Broadcasting Services: Pima, AZ; Dismissal, 89890-89891 2016-29903 NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 89938-89940 2016-29828 2016-29829 Broadcast Television Spectrum Incentive Auctions: Stage 4 Clearing Target of 84 Megahertz and Reverse Auction, 89935-89938 2016-30000 Federal Deposit Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation NOTICES Charter Renewals: Advisory Committee on Economic Inclusion, 89940 2016-29850 Federal Election Federal Election Commission NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 89940 2016-29944 Federal Energy Federal Energy Regulatory Commission NOTICES Combined Filings, 89923-89926, 89928-89929 2016-29785 2016-29786 2016-29787 2016-29788 Initial Market-Based Rate Filings Including Requests for Blanket Section 204 Authorizations: BREG Aggregator, LLC, 89929 2016-29789 Meetings; Sunshine Act, 89926-89928 2016-30066 Federal Highway Federal Highway Administration PROPOSED RULES National Standards for Traffic Control Devices: Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways, 89888-89889 2016-29819 NOTICES Buy American Waivers, 90045-90046 2016-29820 Federal Maritime Federal Maritime Commission NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 89940-89941 2016-29851 Federal Motor Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration NOTICES Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications: Diabetes Mellitus, 90054-90060 2016-29825 Vision, 90046-90054 2016-29824 2016-29826 2016-29832 2016-29833 Federal Reserve Federal Reserve System NOTICES Requests for Comments: Application of RFI/C(D) Rating System to Savings and Loan Holding Companies, 89941-89943 2016-29891 Federal Trade Federal Trade Commission NOTICES Early Terminations of Waiting Periods under Premerger Notification Rules, 89943-89946 2016-29771 Enforcement Policy Statement on Marketing Claims for Over-the-Counter Homeopathic Drugs, 90122-90123 2016-29770 Fish Fish and Wildlife Service NOTICES Endangered and Threatened Species: Renewing an Expired Golden-Cheeked Warbler Incidental Take Permit in Travis County, TX, 89970-89971 2016-29817 Food and Drug Food and Drug Administration RULES Requirements for Foreign and Domestic Establishment Registration and Listing for Human Drugs, Including Drugs Regulated under Biologics License Application, and Animal Drugs, 89848-89849 2016-29774 NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Animal Feed Regulatory Program Standards, 89947-89949 2016-29839 Donor Risk Assessment Questionnaire for Food and Drug Administration/National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute-Sponsored Transfusion-Transmissible Infections Monitoring System--Risk Factor Elicitation, 89949-89950 2016-29814 Determinations of Regulatory Review Periods for Purposes of Patent Extensions: NUCALA, 89946-89947 2016-29838 Guidance: Registration and Product Listing for Owners and Operators of Domestic Tobacco Product Establishment, 89950-89951 2016-29776 Food and Nutrition Food and Nutrition Service RULES Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program: Photo Electronic Benefit Transfer Card Implementation Requirements, 89831-89843 2016-29841 Forest Forest Service NOTICES New Fee Sites: Manti-La Sal National Forest, 89892 2016-29847 Health and Human Health and Human Services Department See

Food and Drug Administration

See

National Institutes of Health

NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 89952 2016-29810
Homeland Homeland Security Department See

Coast Guard

See

Transportation Security Administration

NOTICES Privacy Act; Systems of Records, 89957-89963 2016-29898
Housing Housing and Urban Development Department NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Implementation of Housing for Older Persons Act of 1995, 89964-89965 2016-29754 Funding Awards: Fair Housing Initiatives Program Fiscal Year 2016, 89965-89970 2016-29756 Interior Interior Department See

Fish and Wildlife Service

See

Land Management Bureau

See

Reclamation Bureau

Internal Revenue Internal Revenue Service RULES Treatment of Certain Domestic Entities Disregarded as Separate from Their Owners as Corporations for Purposes of Section 6038A, 89849-89852 2016-29641 International Trade Adm International Trade Administration NOTICES Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Investigations, Orders, or Reviews: Chlorinated Isocyanurates from People's Republic of China; Preliminary Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review, and Preliminary Intent to Rescind Review, in Part; 2014, 89896-89897 2016-29844 Drawn Stainless Steel Sinks from People's Republic of China; Partial Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2015-2016, 89895-89896 2016-29846 Potassium Permanganate from People's Republic of China; Preliminary Results of 2015 Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 89897-89899 2016-29843 International Trade Com International Trade Commission NOTICES Investigations; Determinations, Modifications, and Rulings, etc.: Certain Personal Transporters, Components Thereof, and Packaging and Manuals Therefor, 89977 2016-29781 Judicial Conference Judicial Conference of the United States NOTICES Hearings: Advisory Committee on Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure; Cancellation, 89977 2016-29812 Justice Department Justice Department See

Antitrust Division

NOTICES Consent Decrees under CERCLA, 89992-89993 2016-29790
Labor Department Labor Department NOTICES Meetings: Advisory Committee on Veterans' Employment, Training and Employer Outreach, 89993 2016-29783 Land Land Management Bureau NOTICES Plats of Surveys: Colorado, 89971 2016-29818 Library Library of Congress See

Copyright Royalty Board

Maritime Maritime Administration NOTICES Waiver Requests for Aquaculture Support Operations for 2017 Calendar Year: Vessels COLBY PERCE and RONJA CARRIER, 90060-90061 2016-29894 National Institute National Institute of Standards and Technology NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Building for Environmental and Economic Sustainability Please, 89899-89900 2016-29778 National Institute National Institutes of Health NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: CTEP Support Contracts Forms and Surveys, National Cancer Institute, 89955-89957 2016-29767 Generic Clearance for Collection of Qualitative Feedback on Agency Service Delivery, National Cancer Institute, 89954-89955 2016-29890 Meetings: National Advisory Child Health and Human Development Council, 89952-89953 2016-29762 National Advisory General Medical Sciences Council, 89954 2016-29766 National Cancer Institute, 89953-89954 2016-29763 National Institute on Aging, 89953-89954 2016-29764 2016-29765 National Oceanic National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RULES Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico, and South Atlantic: Re-opening of Commercial Sector for South Atlantic Vermilion Snapper, 89876-89877 2016-29893 PROPOSED RULES Puerto Rico Coastal Zone Management Program, 89887-89888 2016-29842 NOTICES Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc.: Kalamazoo River Natural Resources Damage Assessment, 89900 2016-29792 Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska: North Pacific Halibut and Sablefish Individual Fishing Quota Cost Recovery Programs, 89900-89903 2016-29879 North Pacific Observer Program Standard Ex-Vessel Prices, 89904-89911 2016-29895 Nuclear Regulatory Nuclear Regulatory Commission NOTICES Combined License; Applications: Florida Power and Light Co.; Turkey Point, Units 6 and 7, 89995-89997 2016-29777 Meetings: Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards Subcommittee on Metallurgy and Reactor Fuels, 89994-89995 2016-29854 2016-29855 Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards Subcommittee on Reliability and PRA, 89994-89995 2016-29857 Meetings; Sunshine Act, 89994 2016-29959 Personnel Personnel Management Office NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Presidential Management Fellows Application, 89997 2016-29768 Pipeline Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration NOTICES Hazardous Materials: Use of DOT Specification 39 Cylinders for Liquefied Flammable Compressed Gas, 90061-90062 2016-29813 Pipeline Safety: High Consequence Area Identification Methods for Gas Transmission Pipelines, 90062-90064 2016-29880 Postal Regulatory Postal Regulatory Commission NOTICES Market Dominant Price Adjustments, 89997-89998 2016-29782 Presidential Documents Presidential Documents EXECUTIVE ORDERS Child Support and Other Forms of Family Maintenance, Hague Convention on the International Recovery of; Implementation Efforts (EO 13752), 90179-90182 2016-30101 ADMINISTRATIVE ORDERS Syria; Arms Export Control Act Waiver to Support U.S. Special Operations to Combat Terrorism (Presidential Determination No. 2017-05 of December 8, 2016), 90183-90184 2016-30107 Railroad Retirement Railroad Retirement Board NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 89998-89999 2016-29904 Reclamation Reclamation Bureau NOTICES Prize Competitions; Requirements and Registrations: Arsenic Sensor Challenge—Stage 1, 89971-89974 2016-29722 More Water Less Concentrate—Stage 1, 89974-89977 2016-29723 Securities Securities and Exchange Commission NOTICES Applications: Fidus Investment Corp., et al., 90026-90030 2016-29795 Goldman Sachs BDC, Inc., et al., 90021-90025 2016-29796 Stifel, Nicolaus and Co, Inc., et al., 89999-90001 2016-29793 Meetings; Sunshine Act, 90038-90039 2016-29965 Self-Regulatory Organizations; Proposed Rule Changes: Bats BZX Exchange, Inc., 90015-90019 2016-29801 Bats EDGX Exchange, Inc., 90009-90012 2016-29802 2016-29806 Chicago Board Options Exchange, Inc., 90012-90015 2016-29804 Fixed Income Clearing Corp., 90001-90009 2016-29797 Investors Exchange, LLC, 90035-90038 2016-29807 Miami International Securities Exchange, LLC, 90030-90033 2016-29805 NASDAQ Stock Market, LLC, 90021 2016-29798 New York Stock Exchange, LLC, 90019-90020 2016-29799 NYSE Arca, Inc., 90026, 90033-90035 2016-29800 2016-29803 State Department State Department NOTICES Requests for Information: 2017 Trafficking in Persons Report, 90039-90042 2016-29897 Trade Representative Trade Representative, Office of United States RULES Production or Disclosure of Records, Information and Employee Testimony in Legal Proceedings, 89846-89848 2016-29875 Transportation Department Transportation Department See

Federal Aviation Administration

See

Federal Highway Administration

See

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

See

Maritime Administration

See

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration

NOTICES Funding Availabilities: Small Business Transportation Resource Center Program, 90064-90069 2016-29836
Security Transportation Security Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Canine Training Center Adoption Application, 89963-89964 2016-29878 Treasury Treasury Department See

Internal Revenue Service

RULES Nondiscrimination on Basis of Race, Color, or National Origin in Programs or Activities Receiving Federal Financial Assistance from Department of Treasury, 89852-89861 2016-29629
Veteran Affairs Veterans Affairs Department NOTICES Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc.: Replacement Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Louisville, KY; Comment Period Extension, 90069-90070 2016-29871 Separate Parts In This Issue Part II Energy Department, 90072-90120 2016-29328 Part III Federal Trade Commission, 90122-90123 2016-29770 Part IV Transportation Department, Federal Aviation Administration, 90126-90177 2016-28714 Part V Presidential Documents, 90179-90184 2016-30101 2016-30107 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.

81 239 Tuesday, December 13, 2016 Rules and Regulations DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Food and Nutrition Service 7 CFR Parts 271, 272, 273, 274, and 278 [FNS-2016-0003] RIN 0584-AE45 Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program: Photo Electronic Benefit Transfer (EBT) Card Implementation Requirements AGENCY:

Food and Nutrition Service (FNS), USDA.

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

The Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) is updating the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP or “Program”) regulations to set implementation parameters, prerequisites and operational standards required of State agencies that intend to implement the photo Electronic Benefit Transfer (EBT) card option provided under Section 7(h)(9) of the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 (“the Act”). The updated regulations establish procedures to ensure State implementation is consistent with all Federal requirements as they relate to photo EBT cards, including establishing procedures to ensure: Any other appropriate member of the household or authorized representative (including any individual permitted by the household to purchase food on its behalf) who is not pictured on the photo EBT card may use the card; placing photos on EBT cards does not affect the eligibility process and does not impose additional conditions of eligibility or adversely impact the ability of appropriate household members to access the nutrition assistance they need. Failure by a State agency to adhere to the provisions of this rule may result in penalties, including loss of federal funding. The rule will also codify several other program updates to reflect the current operations of the program.

DATES:

This rule is effective January 12, 2017.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Vicky T. Robinson, Chief, Retailer Management and Issuance Branch, Retailer Policy and Management Division, Food and Nutrition Service, USDA, 3101 Park Center Drive, Alexandria, Virginia, 22302. Ms. Robinson can also be reached by telephone at 703-305-2476 or by email at [email protected] during regular business hours (8:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.), Monday through Friday.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Executive Summary Purpose of the Regulatory Action

This rule finalizes the provisions of a proposed rule published on January 6, 2016 (81 FR 398). With this final rule, FNS is amending the SNAP regulations at 7 CFR parts 271, 272, 273, 274 and 278 to codify and expand guidance that was issued December 29, 2014, requiring State agencies that intend to implement the photo EBT card option under Section 7(h)(9) of the Act, 7 U.S.C. 2016(h)(9), to submit a comprehensive Implementation Plan that addresses certain operational issues to ensure State implementation is consistent with all Federal requirements and that program access is protected for participating households.

In particular, this rule clarifies that the State option to place a photograph on an EBT card is a function of issuance. Pursuant to this, State agencies are prohibited from having photo EBT card requirements that affect the household's eligibility or the certification process. Moreover, this rule clarifies the right of all household members and any other individual permitted by the household to use the EBT card to purchase food or meals on behalf of the household, regardless of whether their photo is on the card, and further defines the responsibility of State agencies to ensure that retailers understand photo EBT requirements when processing transactions involving SNAP.

Summary of the Major Provisions

The final rule removes the provision concerning multiple card usage at the point of sale and incorporates the following minor modifications for clarity:

• Language added to clarify that States must issue both the benefits and EBT card without delay in accordance with SNAP application processing standards, whether or not a photo is on the card.

• Language added to clarify that expedited households are exempt from a mandatory photo EBT card policy until the next recertification.

• Language added to clarify that States may not charge households card replacement fees for any card issued as part of the implementation of the photo EBT card option.

• Language added to clarify that households have the right to permit other individuals to use the household's EBT card on an ad hoc basis for the purpose of attaining assistance with purchasing food, whether or not the State has a photo EBT requirement.

• Language added to specify that Implementation Plans must also include the text that will be added to EBT cards to state that anyone with a valid PIN may use the card even if he/she is not pictured on the card; the procedures for opting into a voluntary photo EBT card policy and documenting that a household voluntarily chose to have a photo on its EBT; and communication plans for educating and notifying clients and retailers of the State's photo EBT card policy.

• Language added to clarify that State agencies shall provide FNS additional information upon request or as may be required by other guidelines established by the Secretary to conduct ongoing evaluations.

• Clarified in preamble that State responsibilities for retailer education on photo EBT cards is limited to the implementation phase. For newly authorized retailers, FNS will update retailer training materials as the agency would for any new requirements affecting SNAP retailer operations.

• Removal of the provision requiring SNAP retailers to ask for identification from SNAP customers using three or more EBT cards at once for purchases and to report that information to the USDA Office of Inspector General (OIG) Fraud Hotline if fraud is suspected.

II. Background

The Act and SNAP regulations give states the option to require that EBT cards contain a photo of one or more household members. However, implementation involves complex legal, operational, and civil rights considerations; if not well planned, it can inhibit benefit access for eligible participants which could violate federal law.

There have been significant issues with recent attempts to place photos on EBT cards, including confusion at stores where clients have been turned away because of misunderstanding/misapplication of policy; confusion among clients regarding who can use the card in the household because of the photo on the card; and confusion among State workers regarding proper policy for certain cases such as child only cases. As a result, FNS issued guidance to State agencies in December 2014 to provide clear parameters for implementation and ongoing operation of the photo EBT card option. On January 6, 2016, FNS published a proposed rule in the Federal Register (81 FR 398), in which the Agency proposed to amend SNAP regulations at 7 CFR parts 271, 272, 273, 274 and 278 to codify the FNS guidance.

The rule proposed that States submit a comprehensive Implementation Plan to FNS for approval prior to implementing the photo EBT card option, and that the Implementation Plan include certain operational components to ensure State implementation is consistent with all Federal requirements and that program access is not inhibited. Because implementation of the photo EBT card option requires substantial resources, FNS proposed that State agencies also demonstrate that they meet minimum performance standards so FNS could evaluate whether SNAP households receive timely, accurate, and fair service before the State could implement the photo EBT card option. The rule also proposed to clarify that the State option to place photos on EBT cards is a function of issuance and not a condition of eligibility. In addition, the proposed rule included point-of-sale verification provisions to address recently identified violations by retailers and others buying and using multiple cards and Personal Identification Numbers (PINs) to stock their shelves.

FNS solicited comments on the proposed rule for 60 days, ending March 7, 2016. The Agency received 84 comments from various entities, including: 56 advocacy organizations; 11 individuals that identified as SNAP participants; 8 individuals that did not identify with a State agency or organization; 4 grocer associations; 3 State/local government agencies; and 2 Electronic Funds Transfer (EFT) organizations.

III. Summary of Comments and Explanation of Revisions

The comments FNS received were overwhelmingly supportive of the proposed rule, in general, and, in particular, of the recognition that photo EBT is a function of issuance that cannot impact households' SNAP eligibility. With regards to the photo EBT card implementation and monitoring provisions in the proposed rule, respondents expressed appreciation for the effort taken by FNS to protect SNAP participants' access to benefits, to prevent challenges in photo EBT implementation in the future, and to ensure that Federal reimbursement dollars are not wasted in the administrative costs of implementing a complex State option. Many respondents provided suggestions for strengthening client protections even further and for imposing stricter requirements on State agencies wishing to implement the photo EBT card option, such as requiring additional client exemptions from the photo, establishing a specific level for each performance metric that reflects a State's commitment and ability to provide timely assistance to eligible households, establishing clearer requirements for client and retailer education, and requiring the State agency to seek input from key stakeholders prior to and after implementation.

At the same time, some of the respondents supporting the rule expressed opposition to the general principle of placing photos on EBT cards because they believe it stigmatizes people receiving government assistance, subjects them to unequal and greater scrutiny by store clerks, wastes taxpayer dollars, and is at odds with the rules of the commercial payments world, which EBT is intended to follow. Some respondents also felt that allowing States to withhold benefits is inconsistent with the statutory intent that photo EBT cards are a function of issuance, not certification.

Four respondents expressed overall opposition to the rule, believing that the rule both in form and in effect restricts States' ability to exercise the photo EBT card option and supported, instead, requiring mandatory placement of photos on EBT cards and/or not restricting States' ability to do so. Furthermore, several other respondents expressed significant concerns with the proposed verification and reporting requirements of retailers for customers paying with multiple EBT cards at the point-of-sale.

Because of the strong support for the rule and based on FNS' authority under Section 11 of the Act for monitoring and oversight of SNAP, FNS is largely adopting the proposed rule as a final rule, with some clarifying changes regarding the photo EBT card provisions in response to comments. Also, in response to comments, FNS is eliminating the verification requirement with respect to multiple card usage at the point-of-sale. Below is further discussion of the most illustrative comments FNS received.

State Agency Requirements for Photo EBT Card Implementation

Minimum requirements—Several respondents, which included nine advocates and seven clients, requested that FNS not allow a State to commence with photo EBT plans if they cannot process household applications and issue benefits on time. The proposed rule specified that, prior to implementation, State agencies must demonstrate successful administration of SNAP based on SNAP performance standards, including application processing timeliness for both the 7-day expedited processing and the 30-day processing standards. Pursuant to the proposed provision at 7 CFR 274.8(f)(1), which remains unchanged in the final rule, States must demonstrate to FNS successful administration of SNAP based on SNAP performance standards to be eligible to implement the photo EBT card option, including successfully processing household benefits within the required timeframes.

Nine advocacy organizations also wanted FNS to establish specific benchmarks for the performance metrics States must meet in order to implement the photo EBT card option. The respondents suggested it is critical that there be a specific performance level that must be established and maintained for each metric, one that reflects a State's commitment to providing timely assistance to eligible households, and its ability to do so. Respondents also wanted FNS to clarify that the performance metrics will be based on performance and not on improvement in order to best protect SNAP applicants and participants. One respondent suggested that the final rule should require positive performance in each of the three years preceding approval and implementation of the photo EBT system.

While FNS understands advocates' desire for specific thresholds with the intent of being able to readily exclude poor performing States from being allowed to implement the photo EBT card option, FNS has come to the conclusion that such a narrowly defined approach could unduly limit FNS' ability to evaluate a State's overall capacity for properly implementing the photo EBT card option. Instead, FNS believes that assessing the State's overall program performance would result in a more effective and accurate determination of a State's capability to implement a photo EBT card option with minimal adverse impacts to clients. The overall picture would, of course, take into account individual measurements, such as those already established through current FNS policy and the Quality Control (QC) process. The Agency will use many of these same standards, as specified at 7 CFR 274.8(f)(1), to measure State performance levels for the purpose of approving photo EBT card implementation. However, it's possible a State could be meeting such standards and still be performing poorly overall or in other areas not included in current standard measurements. For this reason, it is important for FNS to maintain some flexibility to be able to address situations in which unforeseen performance issues would inhibit proper photo EBT card implementation.

The final rule at 7 CFR 274.8(f)(1) remains unchanged.

Voluntary program—Four advocacy organizations wanted FNS to require States to memorialize any agreement to “opt-in” to a voluntary photo EBT card policy with written documentation signed by the household that makes clear that it understood it had a choice and decided to opt-in. The provisions at 7 CFR 274.8(f)(14)(iii) list general types of information FNS expects in the Implementation Plans, including a description of the card issuance procedures and how the State will obtain photographs. Although FNS is not specifying in regulations how State agencies must meet the requirement to have households opt in rather than opt out of a voluntary photo EBT card policy, FNS is adding, in response to comments, language in 7 CFR 274.8(f)(14)(iii) to require that the Implementation Plan include a description of the proposed procedures for opting into a voluntary photo EBT card policy and documenting that a household voluntarily chose to have a photo on its EBT card. Specifically, States will need to show how the opt-in process will protect clients' right to not have a photo on the card in voluntary programs. 7 CFR 274.8(f)(14)(iii) is changed accordingly.

Serving clients with hardship—Several respondents, including 26 advocacy organizations and 8 clients, wanted FNS to expand the minimum required exemption criteria for mandatory photo EBT programs in the proposed 7 CFR 274.8(f)(4). In particular, many respondents wanted FNS to mandate hardship and “good cause” exemptions to address applicants residing in rural areas, applicants that have a hardship that makes it difficult for them to travel to have their photo taken for the card, applicants with caregiving duties, as well as veterans, applicants with refugee or asylee status and those who face low-literacy barriers. Based on the experiences of the other States with existing photo EBT policies, FNS determined that there is sufficient basis to mandate exemptions for the most vulnerable populations. However, with respect to more general hardship or “good cause” exemptions, FNS has decided to remain consistent with mandatory exemptions required for other areas of the Program. For hardship cases that are not already exempt under State policy, FNS is clarifying at 7 CFR 274.8(f)(5) that State agencies must have a process in place to address such situations on a case-by-case basis. Therefore, in the final rule, FNS is maintaining States' discretion to establish their own hardship exemptions beyond the minimum required exemptions for a mandatory photo EBT program based on State-specific needs and 7 CFR 274.8(f)(4) is adopted as is.

Issuance of the photo EBT card—One advocacy organization wanted FNS to specify that if a household meets expedited criteria, a “photo-less” card must be issued to the entire household without delay. FNS agrees that the proposed language at 7 CFR 274.8(f)(6) does not sufficiently reflect the preamble language to make expedited households exempt from mandatory photo EBT card policies until the next recertification. In other words, States must not issue a photo EBT card to expedited households even if they can do so within 7 days. Therefore, FNS is revising the regulatory language at 7 CFR 274.8(f)(6)(ii) to clarify that States must issue without delay benefits and a card without the photo to households that meet expedited criteria. A nonexempt household member may be required to comply at the next recertification.

One advocacy organization wanted FNS to clarify that States must issue both the benefits and card without delay for expedited households. In line with SNAP regulations at 7 CFR 274.2(b), benefits are not considered available until the State provides the household with an active EBT card and PIN, and benefits have been posted to the household's EBT account and are available for spending. Accordingly, FNS is adding clarifying language at 7 CFR 274.8(f)(6)(iii).

Card replacement fees—Five advocates suggested FNS clarify that State agencies may not charge households a replacement card fee when replacing non-photo EBT cards with photo EBT cards during implementation or for putting additional text on the card related to the use of photo EBT cards. State agencies are currently permitted to charge card replacement fees when a card has been lost, stolen, or damaged and the requirements of 7 CFR 274.6(b) have been met. The issuance of a photo EBT card is not a replacement of a lost, stolen or damaged card, so replacement fees would not apply. However, FNS will clarify in 7 CFR 274.8(f)(6)(vi) that States are prohibited from counting any card issued as part of the implementation of the photo EBT card option against the household with respect to both the card replacement threshold and replacement fees under 7 CFR 274.6(b).

Prorating household benefits—Four advocacy organizations and one individual viewed withholding benefits for noncompliance with a photo EBT card requirement as a violation of the Act since photo EBT cards are a function of issuance, not certification, and, therefore, should not be allowed. One State agency viewed the proration and withholding requirement for mandatory photo EBT cards unduly burdensome, making it impractical to compel compliance. The Act clearly provides States with the option to mandate a photo on EBT cards. FNS has determined that States may enforce a mandatory policy by withholding issuance of the non-complying household member share of benefits only, but not by denying certification or withholding benefits for the entire household.

Household compliance—Sixteen respondents, including advocacy organizations and clients, expressed concern that households be given sufficient time to comply with a photo EBT card requirement. Respondents suggested that FNS consider applying a standard for missed photo appointments similar to the regulatory requirements at 7 CFR 273.2(h)(1)(i)(D), relating to missed interviews, to households that do not comply with the first appointment to get their photograph taken. FNS does not believe that the requirements surrounding missed eligibility interviews are appropriate for the purposes of allowing clients sufficient time to obtain a photo for the EBT card because those requirements do not provide the flexibility that must be part of a State's photo EBT card policy. States must describe the process for obtaining the photos in the Implementation Plan. The language in 7 CFR 274.8(f)(6)(i) requires that the time provided to households to come in to take a photo be sufficient and reasonable, and also specifies that obtaining the photo must not impact processing standards at 7 CFR 273.2(g) and (i). The process should be flexible with multiple opportunities for providing a photo, such as allowing clients to come in on a drop-in basis. If the non-exempt, non-compliant household member does not provide a photo within 30 days of applying, the State must still issue the EBT card and provide a pro-rated amount of benefits for the other exempt, or compliant household members as provided in 7 CFR 274.8(f)(7). When the non-exempt household member comes into compliance with the photo requirement, the household gets the remaining benefits back for all previous months as provided in 7 CFR 274.8(f)(8). As mentioned, expedited households are exempt from the photo EBT card policy until the next recertification. As stated in 7 CFR 274.8(f)(8), withheld benefits are expunged after one year in accordance with 7 CFR 274.2(h)(2). With one year to come into compliance, FNS believes the proposed regulations already protect households from being negatively impacted if circumstances delay the head of household's ability to provide a photo. It is also important to highlight that this only applies to mandatory implementation as voluntary participants cannot be required to be photographed under any circumstance. 7 CFR 274.8(f)(6) remains unchanged with respect to providing households sufficient time to comply with a photo EBT card requirement.

Expungement—One advocacy organization wanted FNS to exempt benefits withheld for noncompliance from expungement until the household becomes compliant. Because it is possible that some households may never come into compliance, FNS does not believe it is practical to require States to hold the benefits and maintain them as a SNAP obligation in perpetuity. FNS continues to believe that one year is sufficient time for the household to come into compliance before the State can start expunging withheld benefits. Furthermore, all withheld benefits cannot be expunged at once. Benefits must be expunged at the allotment level just as they are under the regular expungement process at 7 CFR 274.2(h)(2). Similarly, the noncompliant household member continues to accrue withheld benefits for as long as they are certified. For example, if a certified member of a household does not comply with a mandatory photo policy for 14 months and then becomes compliant, the State must return 12 months of benefits to that household. In other words, when a noncompliant member of a household becomes compliant, that household is entitled to all the benefits withheld in accordance with 7 CFR 274.8(f)(7), up to a maximum of 12 months' worth of benefits.

Therefore, the final rule at 7 CFR 274.8(f)(8) remains unchanged to ensure benefits withheld for noncompliance are treated in accordance with the same timeframe used for handling all expungements under 7 CFR 274.2(h)(2). If the noncompliant member comes into compliance, the non-expired benefits must be issued within two business days of when the client has their photo taken by the State agency. Any action to withhold benefits from issuance is subject to fair hearings in accordance with 7 CFR 273.15.

Household and authorized representative card usage—Two advocacy organizations would like the regulations to be more explicit in giving households the right to permit individuals on an ad hoc basis to use the household's EBT card on the household's behalf to purchase food or meals, whether or not their State has a photo EBT policy. While 7 CFR 273.2(n)(3) and 274.7(a) already allow households to select other persons to use their Program benefits to purchase eligible food, FNS agrees that making this ability more explicit in the photo EBT card regulations would be helpful in ensuring that States do not attempt to place undue burdens on households by requiring a formal authorization process to identify individuals who may help the household purchase food. Current regulations allow any household member or non-member selected by the household to purchase food with the household's EBT card on the household's behalf. These non-members are not required to be formally designated and States shall not require households to provide the State information regarding individuals making purchases permitted by the household on an adhoc basis.

However, clients also need to understand that neither the State nor FNS is responsible for any benefits lost as a result of a client freely giving out the household's PIN to another individual. Therefore, FNS is amending language at 7 CFR 274.8(f)(9) through (11) to similarly specify that individuals permitted by the household to purchase food or meals on their behalf are entitled to use the card.

As it continues to be illegal for anyone to sell, transfer, acquire, receive or possess program benefits for the purpose of defrauding the government or individuals certified to receive benefits, clients are not allowed to give their EBT card and/or PIN to another individual for any other purpose other than to purchase food or meals for the certified household only.

Client and retailer training—Several respondents, including 10 clients, six advocacy organizations and one State agency wanted to ensure that client and retailer training and education materials be written in clear and conspicuous language, with some respondents specifying font, type and reading level. Some respondents also wanted information regarding exemptions, benefits being prorated, the ability for anyone in the household to use the card, etc., added to the minimum information specified in the proposed rule. While FNS shares the respondents' concerns that clients and retailers receive all the necessary information to ensure compliance with SNAP regulations, FNS does not believe such specificity is necessary. Too much information can have the unintended consequence of overwhelming the recipient with the information, hindering both accessibility and understanding of the information. Instead, FNS will assess the clarity in wording and appearance of photo EBT card training and education materials during the overall implementation approval process. Therefore, FNS is leaving the information required for client and retailer training and education materials unchanged in the final rule at 7 CFR 274.8(f)(10) and (11).

Retailer education and responsibilities—Two advocacy organizations and two State agencies opposed the provisions in the proposed rule that would shift responsibility for retailer education and accountability from FNS to the States. They were concerned that the resources and time necessary to perform retailer outreach effectively is beyond the capacity of many State agencies, which already confront limited resources. While it is true that FNS oversees retailer policy and compliance, States implement the photo EBT process at their own option. The Act clearly requires States that choose to do so to be responsible for ensuring that any other appropriate member of the household or authorized representative of the household may utilize the card, which includes ensuring that the State photo EBT policy is understood by all stakeholders. Furthermore, States have been directly involved with retailer participation with respect to equipping retailers with point-of-sale devices, training them on EBT requirements and procedures, and providing customer service on EBT. Therefore, having States be responsible for retailer education with respect to the photo EBT cards is not inconsistent with past or current retailer involvement at the State level and fulfills the Act's requirement.

Three advocacy organizations wanted FNS to specify that States must educate not only current retailers but any new retailers that come into the Program, while respondents, in general, recommended that FNS incorporate guidance on the proper handling and acceptance of photo EBT cards into the initial training materials for newly authorized stores and any refresher training produced for stores. Because of the divergent comments regarding whether or not States should be given retailer education responsibilities, FNS is limiting State responsibilities regarding retailer education responsibilities on photo EBT cards to the implementation phase. For newly authorized retailers, FNS will maintain its current retailer education responsibilities, including updating retailer training materials as the Agency would for any new requirements affecting SNAP retailer operations. As a result, the proposed retailer education and responsibility provisions remain unchanged in the final rule at 7 CFR 274.8(f)(11).

Implementation Plan

There were several areas where respondents recommended stricter parameters and/or additional or more specific requirements. In many of these instances, FNS believes States should continue to be allowed some discretion, consistent with other areas of the Program. Furthermore, many of the comments involved general concerns with ensuring States make it clear how they would implement certain aspects of the photo EBT card option, as well as make the policies clear to clients. To that end, FNS is specifically including communication plans for educating and notifying clients and retailers to the language at 7 CFR 274.8(f)(14)(iii).

Ultimately, FNS does not believe it would be beneficial to be too specific with regard to each requirement that is included in the Implementation Plan. Comments received on the Implementation Plan provisions at 7 CFR 274.8(f)(14) are summarized as follows:

Demonstrate a genuine problem that will be rectified by the photo on the EBT card—Six advocacy organizations wanted States to be required to prove the cost effectiveness and efficiency of a photo EBT program, and/or demonstrate that the photo EBT policy will remedy a specific problem. FNS believes such a showing is not required and is unduly burdensome on a State.

Stakeholder input—Ten advocacy organizations and one grocer association wanted FNS to require States to seek and include feedback from other stakeholders, such as anti-hunger, client, or related advocacy groups, EBT vendors, and grocer associations, in the Implementation Plan. FNS agrees that it would benefit States to obtain input from organizations that might have further insight into on-the-ground operations and would highly encourage it. While States are not required to collaborate prior to or after implementation of a regulatory requirement, FNS believes obtaining feedback from stakeholder organizations and/or including them in the State's efforts to communicate effectively with clients and retailers is invaluable, and FNS's evaluation of the Implementation Plan will take into consideration any such collaboration that has influenced development of the plan. For example, as part of the communication plan, States should identify any organizations that will be assisting the State with developing and/or distributing materials and information, as well as indicate any collaboration with and input obtained from stakeholders in the development of the communication plan to clients and retailers. As a result, FNS is adding language at 7 CFR 274.8(f)(14)(iii) to indicate that States must include information regarding any stakeholder collaborations in the Implementation Plan as well.

Limited English Proficient (LEP) SNAP clients—Four advocacy organizations wanted Implementation Plans to detail the State's training plan for LEP clients. They also asked that examples of letters and other materials communicating the policy to clients and retailers should include appropriate translations. FNS agrees with the spirit of this recommendation, and notes that the photo EBT card materials and information are subject to the language requirements in 7 CFR 272.4(b) regarding translation and interpretation, and States are prohibited from unlawfully discriminating against any applicants or participants as specified in 7 CFR 272.6(b)(1). In addition, 7 CFR 274.8(f)(14)(v) requires States to demonstrate how the photo EBT card materials comply with civil rights laws. FNS will review States' Implementation Plans to ensure that SNAP recipient training, materials, and information provide meaningful access to LEP individuals and conform to the requirements of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. FNS will also obtain translations of all materials that will be used to inform clients, retailers, and other stakeholders. For clarification purposes, FNS is referencing language requirements and civil rights laws at 7 CFR 274.8(f)(14)(iii) and (v), respectively, in the final rule.

Retroactive implementation plans—Two grocer associations and two advocacy organizations wanted FNS to require States with current photo EBT programs to retroactively submit Implementation Plans. FNS is actively involved in ensuring that the current photo EBT card programs are meeting all FNS requirements. FNS believes that the efforts in those States should be focused on correcting any compliance issues rather than developing an implementation plan for a program that is already operating, so FNS will not be requiring those states to submit an Implementation Plan.

Disaster Plan—One grocer association suggested that FNS require States to address the use of photo EBT cards in their disaster plans. FNS strongly encourages States choosing to place photos on EBT cards to plan for and develop procedures for how the State will issue EBT cards in the event of a disaster. FNS is not requiring States to include processes for addressing photo EBT cards in their disaster plans because Section 5(h)(3)(B) of the Food and Nutrition Act gives the Secretary the authority to adjust issuance methods to be consistent with what is practicable under actual conditions in the affected area.

Conditional Approval of Implementation Plan—FNS is also clarifying at 7 CFR 274.8(f)(14)(i) that if a State's Implementation Plan is not sufficient for successful implementation of the photo EBT card option, FNS may issue a denial or an approval subject to conditions.

Post-Implementation Assessment

One advocacy organization specifically requested that FNS expand the data collected as part of the post-implementation assessment and evaluation to include the types of households impacted by the State's photo EBT card policy, not just the numbers or percentages, in order to help identify a group/type of household member that needs to be exempted from the policy. Other respondents more generally suggested that FNS monitor the impact on various groups as part of ongoing monitoring provided for in 7 CFR 274.8(f)(17). FNS notes that many vulnerable groups are already exempt from mandatory photo EBT card policies under 7 CFR 274.8(f)(4). These groups include, at a minimum, the elderly, the disabled, children under 18, homeless households, and victims of domestic violence. States may also establish additional exemptions. Therefore, FNS believes that the value gained from requiring States to obtain data on these groups would not be substantial. As a result, the minimum information required in the post-implementation report remains unchanged in the final rule.

Ongoing Monitoring

FNS received several comments in response to questions posed in the proposed rule asking how FNS should verify appropriate implementation on an ongoing basis, and whether there is other data that should be required from States on an ongoing basis and how frequently States should be required to report. Respondents suggested several areas for ongoing monitoring such as tracking the impact of photo EBT policies on LEP households, the elderly, individuals with disabilities, and non-applicant heads of households; tracking client complaints; seeking advocate feedback on an ongoing basis; and periodically surveying stores after implementation to validate that the photo EBT requirements are understood. Respondents also suggested annual reporting and more frequent reporting during the first year of photo EBT operations. While FNS understands the desire for more detailed data, unfortunately, such data are not readily available to the States or reliable because they are not collected in any systematic way.

Nine advocacy organizations wanted FNS to stipulate that any State agency which decides to implement the photo EBT card option must continue to meet metrics set forth by the Department or suspend photo EBT. The proposed provisions at 7 CFR 274.8(f)(17)-(18) stipulate that FNS would continue to monitor and evaluate the operation of the photo EBT card option and, should there be problems with the State's implementation, FNS may require corrective action by the State. If that were to fail, FNS would consider other possible actions, including suspension of the States' photo EBT policy. As with all SNAP statutory, regulatory, and policy provisions, FNS has established processes for ensuring States are meeting SNAP requirements, such as through the Management Evaluation (ME) reviews. FNS intends to follow these same processes with respect to the photo EBT card option. Should FNS find that a State is not meeting any of the SNAP performance standards after implementation, the State's photo EBT card policy would be examined to determine its impact on any deficiencies found and whether the photo EBT card policy and implementation should be included in the appropriate actions to remedy the situation.

Two advocacy organizations suggested FNS classify any adoption of photo EBT cards as a major systems change so that it automatically requires the State to collect the data specified at 7 CFR 272.15. Conversely, two individual respondents and one State agency expressed concern that the proposed reporting requirements were excessively burdensome to State agencies and that the rule provided seemingly unbounded discretion to the Secretary for ongoing monitoring.

FNS appreciates the thoughtful feedback respondents provided. Although Section 11 of the Act provides the Secretary with broad authority for the monitoring and oversight of SNAP, FNS understands that some specific parameters with regard to ongoing monitoring of the photo EBT option would be helpful for all stakeholders involved. FNS has determined that more specific requirements would be best addressed through separate guidance to allow for flexibility. With respect to classifying the photo EBT card option as a major change, FNS determined prior to publishing the Major Change rule (81 FR 2725 (January 19, 2016)) that it would not be the appropriate process for implementing photo EBT card operating standards because major changes, as defined in the rule, specifically relate to SNAP certification processes, and how process or technology changes impact the ability of SNAP applicants and participants to interact with the State agency or be certified for benefits. The photo EBT card option is a function of issuance, not certification, and therefore, cannot impact whether or not a household is eligible for SNAP participation.

As with comments received regarding the Implementation Plan requirements and performance standards, FNS will consider comments on the proposed rule regarding ongoing monitoring in the development of any criteria or further guidance for evaluating States' photo EBT card policies on an ongoing basis. The final rule clarifies at 7 CFR 274.8(f)(17) that State agencies will be required to provide FNS additional information upon request to conduct ongoing evaluations.

Modifying Implementation of Photo EBT Card Option

In response to FNS' specific question seeking comments on whether a State should be required to stop or suspend placing photos on EBT cards if the State agency fails to establish procedures to ensure that all members of the household or any authorized representatives are able to use the card, four advocacy organizations supported FNS taking action to suspend a State's Photo EBT card policy. One respondent urged FNS to establish and enforce a penalty that is real and meaningful when States ignore or defy Federal enforcement, and to render a State ineligible to continue its photo EBT card policy if it is found to have a negative impact on a State's ability to process SNAP applications and issue benefits in a timely manner. Another respondent suggested that review of the photo EBT card policies be added as a part of the State Agency Management Evaluation (ME).

In the absence of a concrete alternative process for assessing and imposing penalties for noncompliance with the photo EBT card requirements or for other deficiencies that may be the result of the State's photo EBT card policy, FNS will continue to follow existing procedures for evaluating and addressing situations when a State agency is not meeting standards contained in the Act, regulations, and/or the State Plan of Operation, including procedures for ME reviews, corrective actions, and suspension/disallowance of federal administrative funding. As a result, the final rule remains unchanged with regard to State noncompliance and penalties.

Provisions Regarding Public Posting of Implementation Plans, Non-Applicants, and Retailer “Testers”

In the proposed rule, FNS posed other specific questions for comment. These questions involved whether there are concerns with posting approved Implementation Plans on the FNS public Web site, whether there was a potential benefit for allowing non-applicants to have their photograph taken under a voluntary implementation, and whether stakeholders believe “testers” to be a worthwhile method for verifying appropriate implementation at authorized retailer locations. Ten advocacy organizations and two State agencies agreed with the rationale that approved Implementation Plans are public information and should be posted on the FNS Web site, and with prohibiting the taking of photos of non-applicants under a voluntary photo EBT card policy as proposed in 7 CFR 274.8(f)(3)(iii). One commenter suggested photographs of non-applicants be allowed only on alternate cards, where an alternate card is required by the state agency or requested by the household to be issued to a person who is not a member of the SNAP household. With regard to “testers,” respondents, in general, including six advocacy organizations, two grocers associations, one electronic funds association and one State agency, supported using the method to determine if any barriers have been created due to a State's photo EBT card policy. However, the two grocers associations felt that the method should be used only if retailers were not subjected to any penalties for a poor outcome, while the State agency suggested the method be a State option, given the administrative costs involved, and only if retailers faced sanctions for failing to adhere to State or Federal policies.

Based on the above comments, FNS will not require States to use “testers” to verify proper implementation of photo EBT card policies at retailer locations. However, FNS encourages States to consider such a method when developing their overall strategies to ensure benefit access is not being held up or denied in the checkout lines. Therefore, the final rule remains unchanged with respect to posting approved Implementation Plans and prohibiting States from placing non-applicant photos on EBT cards. With respect to “testers”, FNS is adding language at 7 CFR 274.8(f)(16)(i)(B) as an option for monitoring retailer compliance.

Provisions Beyond 7 CFR 274.8(f)

Card Text—Twenty-two respondents, including 10 advocacy organizations, eight clients, two grocers associations, one individual, and one State agency, commented with respect to the proposed requirement at 7 CFR 274.8(b)(5)(ii) that States with photo EBT cards add text to all of the State's EBT cards informing retailers and clients that all household members and authorized representatives, including individuals permitted by the household to purchase food or meals on its behalf, are allowed to use the EBT card even if their photo is not on the card or no photo is on the card. All respondents supported the requirements, but some wanted FNS to mandate specific wording to be placed on the cards rather than allow States to develop alternative language. Through the Implementation Plan approval process, FNS will look closely at the wording States intend to place on the cards to ensure that it is clear and conveys the appropriate information. Because the wording may be impacted by the space available on the card or may evolve over time based on subsequent State experiences, FNS is maintaining State discretion to propose their own text to place on EBT cards in the final rule. However, FNS will add language at 7 CFR 274.8(f)(14)(iii) to specify that the Implementation Plan must also include the text required by 7 CFR 274.8(b)(5)(ii).

Respondents also asked FNS to require States to place a 24-hour toll-free emergency number for retailers to call with questions about photo EBT requirements as well as a number for clients to call if they are being denied the right to use the household photo EBT card. In addition, respondents suggested requiring a Web site on the card where retailers and clients could go for information on the State's photo EBT card policy. All States already have toll-free customer service numbers for both clients and retailers, some of which operate 24 hours. Many States also have or plan to have EBT client Web sites. Furthermore, these toll-free numbers and Web sites are already on many of the State's EBT cards. Again, FNS believes States should continue to have the same discretion in this area as they do for addressing all other EBT customer service issues. However, FNS will review photo EBT card Implementation Plans to ensure States will have a process in place for clients and retailers to get their issues related to the photo EBT program addressed as well as to ensure that clients and retailers are informed of this process.

Using multiple cards for SNAP purchases—In an attempt to address the existence of violating retailers and others buying and using multiple cards and PINs to stock their shelves, the proposed rule included a provision at 7 CFR 272.8(h) to require SNAP retailers to ask for identification from SNAP customers using three or more EBT cards at once for purchases and to report that information to the USDA OIG Fraud Hotline if fraud is suspected. Many concerns with this proposed policy were raised by the three grocers associations, one State agency and one advocacy organization. FNS agrees with respondents' concerns that such a requirement would present significant challenges for SNAP retailers for a variety of reasons. In particular, FNS agrees with a respondent's comment that it would not be prudent to require clerks, who are sometimes as young as 16 years old, to enter into what could potentially be a confrontational situation with a customer.

Alternatively, one respondent suggested that multiple card use not be allowed for a single transaction or by an individual for multiple transactions. Other respondents commented that there are circumstances where an individual could be using multiple EBT cards to legally purchase food for SNAP recipients and a limitation on the number of cards an individual may use at one time may create access issues for some recipients. Based on the comments received, FNS is removing this provision in the final rule and will consider prohibiting the use of multiple cards for future rulemaking. Although customers may use multiple EBT cards at the point of sale, retailers should continue to report any suspicious activity to the USDA OIG Fraud Hotline. The final rule is modified accordingly at 7 CFR 278.2(h).

IV. Procedural Matters Executive Order 12866 and Executive Order 13563

Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess all costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public health and safety effects, distributive impacts, and equity). Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting flexibility. This final rule has been designated significant. Accordingly, the rule has been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget. A summary of the regulatory impact analysis is included below. The full analysis is available through www.regulations.gov in the docket for this rule (FNS-2016-0003).

Regulatory Impact Analysis Summary

As required for all rules that have been designated as Significant by the Office of Management and Budget, a Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA) was developed for this final rule. The full RIA is included in the supporting documents of the rule docket at www.regulations.gov. The following summarizes the conclusions of the regulatory impact analysis.

Need for Action: This final rule would incorporate into regulation and expand on guidance that was issued December 29, 2014 to certain State agencies. Based on observed implementation to date, there is cause for concern about possible negative impacts of photo EBT programs on client access and civil rights, both as programs are first implemented and over time. This guidance requires States that intend to implement the photo EBT card option to submit a comprehensive Implementation Plan for FNS approval that addresses key operational issues to ensure State implementation complies with all Federal requirements and that program access is protected for participating households. In this final rule, the Department clarifies that the State option to place a photo on an EBT card is a function of issuance. Pursuant to this, State agencies are prohibited from having photo EBT requirements that affect the eligibility process. This includes ensuring that the photo EBT option is implemented in a manner that does not impose additional conditions of eligibility or adversely impact the ability of eligible Americans to access the nutrition assistance they need.

Benefits: The Department believes the provisions in this final rule provide qualitative benefits to State agencies, SNAP participants, and authorized retailers. The Act and existing program regulations provide that States that implement a photo on the EBT card must establish procedures to ensure that any other appropriate member of the household or any authorized representative of the household may use the card. This final rule provides clear parameters for States wishing to implement photo EBT to ensure that State implementation is consistent with all Federal requirements and that program access is protected for participating households, which safeguard the rights of clients, provide training to staff, clients, and retailers, and improve program administration.

Costs: States choosing the photo EBT option may incur additional administrative costs, which may vary based on the size and scope of the State's operations and whether implementation of the photo EBT card option is mandatory or voluntary. Regardless of whether the option is mandatory or voluntary, all States that implement photo EBT cards will incur certain implementation costs to include: Preparing an Implementation Plan; communications and training for program staff, clients, and retailers; ongoing training costs to maintain an understanding of photo EBT card policies; programming costs for mandatory policies; and costs for the post implementation assessment, evaluation and on-going monitoring. States with a mandatory photo EBT policy will also incur costs associated with prorating and storing benefits for noncompliant household members that choose not to be photographed. The Department estimates the total cost to be approximately $9.3 million, shared 50/50 by the State and the Federal government, over five years, assuming six States choose to implement a mandatory photo EBT card policy. Costs would be lower if some or all of these States choose to implement voluntary, rather than mandatory, photo EBT card policies. The estimate of six States is based on information from State legislatures that are either currently considering or discussing the possibility of considering such a policy. Given the projected timelines for these legislative actions, the Department assumes that the costs of implementing a photo EBT card policy will be phased in over a five year period, as all six States are unlikely to approve and implement the policy in the same year. The States that have already implemented photo EBT as a State option will not be required to retroactively submit Implementation Plans, but may continue to incur minimal costs associated with ongoing training and monitoring required for program staff, clients, and retailers.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612) requires agencies to analyze the impact of rulemaking on small entities and consider alternatives that would minimize any significant impacts on a substantial number of small entities. Pursuant to that review, the Administrator of FNS certifies that this final rule would not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. This final rule primarily impacts State agencies. As part of the requirements, State agencies would have to educate retailers about the photo EBT card. There will not be a substantial impact on small entities such as small retailers since the treatment of clients with EBT cards and photo EBT cards do not vary. Minimal changes will be required of retailers. Retailers will need to be aware that some clients may present photo EBT cards but clients shall not be treated any differently. This is not expected to create a burden on retailers.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public Law 104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the effects of their regulatory actions on State, local and Tribal governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, the Department generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost benefit analysis, for proposed and final rules with “Federal mandates” that may result in expenditures by State, local or Tribal governments, in the aggregate, or the private sector, of $146 million or more (when adjusted for inflation; GDP deflator source: Table 1.1.9 at http://www.bea.gov/iTable) in any one year. When such a statement is needed for a rule, Section 205 of the UMRA generally requires the Department to identify and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and adopt the most cost effective or least burdensome alternative that achieves the objectives of the rule. This final rule does not contain Federal mandates (under the regulatory provisions of Title II of the UMRA) for State, local and Tribal governments or the private sector of $146 million or more in any one year. Thus, the final rule is not subject to the requirements of sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA.

Executive Order 12372

SNAP is listed in the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance under No. 10.551. For the reasons set forth in the Final Rule codified in 7 CFR part 3015, subpart V and related Notice (48 FR 29115), this Program is excluded from the scope of Executive Order 12372, which requires intergovernmental consultation with State and local officials.

Federalism Summary Impact Statement

Executive Order 13132, requires Federal agencies to consider the impact of their regulatory actions on State and local governments. Where such actions have federalism implications, agencies are directed to provide a statement for inclusion in the preamble to the regulations describing the agency's considerations in terms of the three categories called for under Section (6)(b)(2)(B) of Executive Order 13121.

The Department has determined that this rule does not have Federalism implications. This rule does not impose substantial or direct compliance costs on State and local governments. Therefore, under Section 6(b) of the Executive Order, a Federalism summary impact statement is not required.

Executive Order 12988

This final rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform. This final rule is intended to have preemptive effect with respect to any State or local laws, regulations or policies which conflict with its provisions or which would otherwise impede its full and timely implementation. This is intended to have retroactive effect in that State agencies that have already implemented a photo EBT card must meet all requirements of this final rule except the requirement to submit an Implementation Plan prior to State's planned implementation date. Prior to any judicial challenge to the provisions of the final rule, all applicable administrative procedures must be exhausted.

Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments

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.

On February 18, 2015, the Food and Nutrition Service held an information session. During the information session, no comments were received on the proposal. Reports from these sessions are part of the USDA annual reporting on Tribal Consultation and Collaboration. USDA offers these and similar opportunities, such as webinars and teleconferences, for collaborative conversations with Tribal leaders and their representatives concerning ways to improve rules with regard to their effect on Indian country on a quarterly basis as part of its yearly Tribal information sharing schedule.

The Food and Nutrition Service has assessed the impact of this rule on Indian tribes and determined that this rule does not, to our knowledge, have tribal implication that require tribal consultation under EO 13175. If a Tribe requests consultation, the Food and Nutrition Service will work with the Office of Tribal Relations to ensure meaningful consultation is provided where changes, additions and modifications identified herein are not expressly mandated by Congress.

Civil Rights Impact Analysis

FNS has reviewed this final rule in accordance with USDA Regulation 4300-4, “Civil Rights Impact Analysis,” to identify any major civil rights impacts the rule might have on program participants on the basis of religion, age, race, color, national origin, sex, political beliefs, or disability. After a careful review of the rule's intent and provisions and understanding the intent of this rule is to in part to protect the civil rights of clients, FNS has determined that this rule is not expected to adversely affect the participation of protected individuals in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. Discrimination in any aspect of the Program administration is prohibited by these regulations, according to the Act. Enforcement may be brought under any applicable Federal law. Title VI complaints shall be processed in accord with 7 CFR part 15. Where State agencies have options, and they choose to implement a certain provision, they must implement it in such a way that it complies with the regulations at 7 CFR 272.6.

Paperwork Reduction Act

The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. Chap. 35; 5 CFR 1320) requires the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to approve all collections of information by a Federal agency before they can be implemented. Respondents are not required to respond to any collection of information unless it displays a current valid OMB control number.

In accordance with PRA, this final rule does not contain information collections that are subject to review and approval by OMB.

This rule requires State agencies to submit to FNS an Implementation Plan, a post implementation evaluation of the photo EBT implementation, and related ongoing measures. As the PRA requirements are applicable to collection of information from ten or more respondents, there are no information collection requirements that are subject to OMB review at this time. Should the number of estimated respondents reach ten or more, FNS will publish a notice for comment and submit the applicable requirements to OMB for review and approval.

E-Government Act Compliance

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

List of Subjects 7 CFR Part 271

Food stamps, Grant programs—Social programs, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

7 CFR Part 272

Alaska, Civil rights, SNAP, Grant programs—social programs, Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Unemployment compensation, Wages.

7 CFR Part 273

Administrative practice and procedure, Aliens, Claims, Employment, Food stamps, Fraud, Government employees, Grant programs—social programs, Income taxes, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Students, Supplemental Security Income (SSI), Wages.

7 CFR Part 274

Food stamps, Grant programs—social programs, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

7 CFR Part 278

Banks, banking, Food stamps, Grant programs—social programs, Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Surety bonds.

Accordingly, 7 CFR parts 271, 272, 273, 274, 278 are amended as follows:

1. The authority citation for parts 271, 272, 273, 274 and 278 continues to read as follows: Authority:

7 U.S.C. 2011-2036c.

PART 271—GENERAL INFORMATION AND DEFINITIONS 2. In § 271.2, revise the definition of Identification (ID) card to read as follows:
§ 271.2 Definitions.

Identification (ID) card means a card for the purposes of 7 CFR 278.2(j).

PART 272—REQUIREMENTS FOR PARTICIPATING STATE AGENCIES
§ 272.1 [Amended]
3. In § 272.1, remove and reserve paragraphs (g)(30) and (47). PART 273—CERTIFICATION OF ELIGIBLE HOUSEHOULDS 4. In § 273.2: a. Amend paragraph (a)(1) by adding to the end of the third sentence the words, “, including in the implementation of a photo EBT card policy” and by adding a new sentence between the third and fourth sentences. b. Amend paragraph (a)(2) by adding a new sentence before the last sentence. c. Amend paragraph (e)(1) by adding a new sentence after the third sentence. d. Amend paragraph (n)(2) by removing in the third sentence the words, “and on the food stamp identification (ID) card, as provided in 7 CFR 274.10(a)(1) of this chapter” and by removing the last sentence. e. Amend the first sentence of paragraph (n)(3) by removing the words, “ID card and benefits” and adding in its place the words, “EBT card”.

The additions read as follows:

§ 273.2 Office operations and application processing.

(a) * * *

(1) * * * The State agency's photo EBT card policy must not affect the certification process for purposes of determining eligibility regardless of whether an individual has his/her photo placed on the EBT card. * * *

(2) * * * States must meet application processing timelines, regardless of whether a State agency implements a photo EBT card policy. * * *

(e) * * * State agencies may not require an in person interview solely to take a photo. * * *

PART 274—ISSUANCE AND USE OF PROGRAM BENEFITS 5. In § 274.8: a. Redesignate paragraphs (b)(5)(ii) through (iv) as paragraphs (b)(5)(iii) through (v), respectively, and add a new paragraph (b)(5)(ii). b. Add paragraph (f).

The additions read as follows:

§ 274.8 Functional and technical EBT system requirements.

(b) * * *

(5) * * *

(ii) State agencies that implement the photo EBT card option in accordance with paragraph (f) of this section must print on the EBT cards the text “Any user with valid PIN can use SNAP benefits on card and need not be pictured.” or similar alternative text approved by FNS.

(f) State agency requirements for photo EBT card implementation—(1) Minimum requirements. Prior to implementation, State agencies must be performing sufficiently well in program administration to be eligible to implement the photo EBT card option.

Prior to implementation, State agencies must demonstrate to FNS successful administration of SNAP based on SNAP performance standards. Successful program administration will take into account at a minimum the metrics related to program access, the State's payment error rate, the State's Case and Procedural Error Rate, application processing timeliness, including both the 7-day expedited processing and the 30-day processing standards, timeliness of recertification actions, and other metrics, as determined by the Secretary, that may be relevant to the State agency's implementation of photo EBT cards.

(2) Function of issuance. The photo EBT card option is a function of issuance and not a condition of eligibility. Any implementation of the option to place a photo on the EBT card must not impact the certification of households. An application will be considered complete with or without a photo and a case shall be certified regardless of the status of a photo in accordance with timeframes established under 7 CFR 273.2. If a State agency chooses to implement a voluntary photo EBT card policy, issuance shall not be impacted. If a State agency chooses to implement a mandatory photo EBT card policy, a State agency may not deny or terminate a household because a household member who is exempted by paragraph (f)(4) of this section does not comply with the requirement to place a photo on the EBT card.

(3) Mandatory vs. voluntary. (i) State agencies shall have the option to implement a photo on EBT cards on a mandatory or voluntary basis. Regardless of whether the photo is mandatory or voluntary, the certification process must not be altered in order to facilitate photos, and clients must be informed that certification will not be impacted by whether or not a photo is on the card.

(ii) Under mandatory implementation, State agencies must exempt certain clients, as stated in paragraph (f)(4) of this section. State agencies must establish which member(s) of the household would be required to be photographed and the procedures that allow eligible nonexempt household members who do not agree to the photo to come into compliance at a later time.

(iii) Under voluntary implementation, clients must be clearly informed of the voluntary nature of the option. All applicant members of households, whether or not they are in an exempted category, must opt in to have a photo on their EBT card. States shall not require a photo be taken if the State is implementing a voluntary option.

(4) Exemptions. Under a mandatory implementation, the State agency must exempt, at a minimum, the elderly, the disabled, children under 18, homeless households, and victims of domestic violence. A victim of domestic violence shall be able to self-attest and cannot be required to submit documentation to prove domestic violence. The ability to self-attest must be applied equally regardless of if the victim is a female or male. Non-applicants cannot have a photo taken for an EBT card whether or not they desire to have their photo taken. A State agency may establish additional exempted categories.

(5) Serving clients with hardship. State agencies must have sufficient capacity to issue photo EBT cards and a process or procedure in place to address, on a case-by-case basis, household hardship situations as determined by the State agency so that such household benefits are not unduly withheld. Examples of hardship conditions include, but are not limited to: Illness, transportation difficulties, care of a household member, hardships due to residency in a rural area, prolonged severe weather, or work or training hours which prevent the household from being available during the hours that photos are taken in-office. These are households that do not already fall under the mandatory exemptions or other exemptions established by the State under paragraph (f)(4) of this section .

(6) Issuance of photo EBT card. (i) States can require households to come in to be photographed, but cannot do so for the purposes of certification. The amount of time provided to households to come in and be photographed needs to be sufficient and reasonable and be documented in the Implementation Plan as required in paragraph (f)(14) of this section.

(ii) Regardless of whether the State's photo EBT card policy is voluntary or mandatory, if a household meets expedited criteria, the State must issue the EBT card without a photo and provide the full benefit allotment to the entire household without delay. The State agency may require a nonexempt head of household member to comply at the next recertification.

(iii) Card issuance procedures for new SNAP households must ensure adherence to application processing standards as required at 7 CFR 273.2(g) and (i) and benefit issuance standards at § 274.2(b).

(iv) State agencies shall not store photos that are collected in conjunction with its photo EBT card policy but are not placed on an EBT card.

(v) The process for issuing and activating photo EBT cards must not disrupt, inhibit or delay access to benefits nor cause a gap in access for ongoing benefits for eligible households.

(vi) Any card issued as part of the implementation of the photo EBT card option may not count against the household with respect to card replacement fees or the card replacement threshold defined in § 274.6(b).

(7) Prorating household benefits when photo EBT cards are mandatory. For multi-person households, State agencies shall not withhold benefits for an entire household because nonexempt household members do not comply with the photo EBT card policy. If benefits of the nonexempt household member(s) are to be withheld, a prorated share of benefits shall be issued to the household member(s) that are in compliance with or are exempt from the photo requirement. For example, if there are four household members and one household member is not in compliance with the photo requirement, 3-4 of the household's monthly benefit allotment must be issued, and 1-4 of the benefit allotment must be held in abeyance and allowed to accrue until the household member complies. For a single person household, the State agency would hold all the benefits in abeyance until the household complies.

(8) Benefits held for noncompliance. Benefits held for noncompliance with the photo EBT card requirement must be withheld from issuance in accordance with paragraph (f)(7) of this section. Benefits withheld for noncompliance shall not remain authorized for perpetuity, and States must treat such benefits in accordance with the same timeframe used for handling expungements under § 274.2(h)(2). If the noncompliant member comes into compliance, the non-expired benefits must be issued within two business days of when the State agency obtains the client photo. Any action to withhold benefits from issuance is subject to fair hearings in accordance with 7 CFR 273.15.

(9) Household and authorized representative card usage. The State agency must establish procedures to ensure that all appropriate household members and authorized representatives (including individuals permitted by the household to purchase food or meals on their behalf, as provided for in 7 CFR 273.2(n)(3) and § 274.7(a)), can access SNAP benefits for the household regardless of who is pictured on the card or if there is no picture. States shall not require households to notify or provide the State information regarding individuals making purchases permitted by the household on an ad-hoc basis.

(10) Client and staff training. State agencies must ensure staff and clients are properly trained on photo EBT card requirements. At a minimum, this training shall include: Whether the State option is voluntary or mandatory, who must comply with the photo requirement, which household members are exempt, and that all appropriate household members and authorized representatives (including individuals permitted by the household to purchase food or meals on its behalf) are able to use the card regardless of who is pictured on the card or if there is no picture.

(i) All staff and client training materials must clearly describe the following statutory and regulatory requirements:

(A) Retailers must allow all appropriate household members and authorized representatives (including individuals permitted by the household to purchase food or meals on its behalf), regardless of whether they are pictured on the card, to utilize the card without having to submit additional verification of identity as long as the transaction is secured by the use of the PIN;

(B) EBT cards with or without a photo are valid in any State; and

(C) Retailers must treat all SNAP clients in the same manner as non-SNAP clients;

(ii) State agencies may not specifically reference which categories of individuals are exempt from the photo EBT requirement in any materials to retailers.

(11) Retailer education and responsibility. State agencies must conduct sufficient education of retailers if photos are used on cards. The State agency must clearly inform all retailers in the State and contiguous areas of implementation. State agency communications with retailers must clearly state:

(i) All household members and authorized representatives (including individuals permitted by the household to purchase food or meals on its behalf) are entitled to use the EBT card regardless of the picture on the card if the EBT card is presented with the valid PIN;

(ii) Retailers must treat all SNAP clients in the same manner as non-SNAP clients in accordance with 7 CFR 278.2(b);

(iii) Retailers must not prohibit individuals who have a EBT card and valid PIN, including but not limited to authorized representatives (including individuals permitted by the household to purchase food or meals on its behalf), from using an EBT card because they are not pictured on the card or there is no picture on the card;

(iv) EBT cards from any State are valid with or without a photo.

(12) Interoperability. Interoperability of EBT cards will remain the same regardless of whether or not there is a photo and regardless of which State issued the card. State agencies must conduct sufficient education of clients and retailers, including retailers in contiguous areas, to inform them that the photo EBT cards remain interoperable and authorized retailers must accept EBT cards from all States as long as the user has a valid PIN.

(13) Advance Planning Document. Appropriate implementation and administration of the photo EBT card consistent with all applicable requirements is an allowable State administrative cost that FNS shall reimburse at 50 percent in accordance with 7 CFR part 277. Increased costs related to placing photos on the EBT card, whether contractual or produced from other sources, require an Implementation Advance Planning Document Update.

(14) Implementation Plan. (i) State agencies must submit an Implementation Plan for approval prior to implementation that delineates how the State agency will operationalize the photo EBT option. FNS shall review the plan and issue an approval, request modifications prior to granting approval or issue an approval subject to conditions. In cases where FNS finds that the steps outlined in the Implementation Plan are not sufficient for a successful implementation, FNS may deny the Implementation Plan or issue an approval subject to conditions, such as requiring the State agency to implement a successful pilot in a selected region of the State before a statewide implementation. Should a State be required to implement a pilot before statewide implementation, that requirement would be documented in the State's Implementation Plan approval, along with any information the State must report to FNS before expansion approval would be provided by FNS.

(ii) State agencies must demonstrate successful administration of SNAP based on SNAP performance standards as established in paragraph (f)(1) of this section. State agencies shall not issue EBT cards with photos before the State's Implementation Plan is approved and the State agency has also received FNS authorization to proceed to issue photo EBT cards.

(iii) The Implementation Plan shall include but not be limited to:

(A) A description of card issuance procedures;

(B) The text required at paragraph (b)(5)(ii) of this section;

(C) A detailed description of how client protections and ability to use SNAP benefits will be preserved;

(D) Specific information about exempted recipients, the State agency's exemption criteria, and how it will address the needs of household members with hardships;

(E) A description of how the State agency will obtain photographs for the EBT card;

(F) The procedures for opting into a voluntary photo EBT card policy and how the State agency will document that a household voluntarily chose to have a photo on its EBT card;

(G) Training materials and training plans for State agency staff;

(H) A description of any planned stakeholder assistance with implementation;

(I) Communication plans for informing clients, retailers and other stakeholders of the State agency's photo EBT card policy, including copies of letters and other materials communicating the policy to clients, retailers, and other stakeholders. Communication plans must describe compliance with language requirements at 7 CFR 272.4(b);

(J) A timeline for the implementation; and

(K) Draft memoranda of understanding if the State agency plans to share SNAP client data in accordance with 7 CFR 272.1(c) for purposes of implementing its photo EBT card option. The memoranda of understanding must state how any information collected will be securely stored and that the information can only be shared for the purpose of SNAP in accordance with 7 CFR 272.1(c).

(iv) The Implementation Plan shall also address the anticipated timetable with specific action steps for the State agency and contractors, if any, that may be involved regarding implementation of the photo EBT card option, the State agency's capacity to issue photo EBT cards, and the logistics that shall allow for activation of the photo EBT card simultaneously or followed by deactivation of the active non-photo EBT card. This shall also include the description of the capacity at the facility where the photo EBT cards will be produced, both for transition and ongoing production, and confirmation that the State agency and any contractor will continue to meet regulatory time requirements for all EBT card issuances and replacements, including for expedited households. The Implementation Plan must also include indicators related to the photo EBT card implementation that the State will collect and analyze for the post implementation evaluation required by paragraph (f)(16) of this section in addition to the State's approach for continued oversight, which may include activities as such as the use of test shoppers.

(v) The State agency shall provide all applicable proposed written policy for staff to implement the photo EBT card option to FNS for review. State agencies shall include copies of all materials that will be used to inform clients, retailers and other stakeholders regarding photo EBT card implementation. In addition, the State agencies shall provide a detailed description of how the notifications, communication, policies, and procedures regarding the implementation of any new photo EBT card option will comply with applicable civil rights laws specified at 7 CFR 272.4(b)and 272.6(a).

(vi) The State agency's Implementation Plan shall also include: (A) An education component for retailers and clients to ensure all eligible household members and authorized representatives (including individuals permitted by the household to purchase food or meals on their behalf) are able to use the EBT card, and understand the timeframes associated with the implementation and rollout.

(B) A description of the resources that will be in place to handle comments, questions and complaints from clients, retailers, and external stakeholders, and

(C) A description of procedures to address unexpected events related to the photo EBT card option.

(vii) Upon approval of the Implementation Plan by FNS, the State may proceed with tasks described in the Implementation Plan, as modified by the approval, but may not proceed to issuing actual cards until it receives FNS authorization to do so. FNS may also require the State to implement in a phased manner, which may include criteria as determined by the Secretary.

(15) Authorization to issue photo EBT cards. States agencies shall not be permitted to issue EBT cards with photos until FNS provides an explicit authorization to issue photo EBT cards. After an Implementation Plan is approved, FNS will review the State agency's actions at an appropriate time interval to ensure that the process and steps outlined by the State agency in the Implementation Plan are fulfilled. In cases where the State agency has not acted consistently with the process and steps outlined in its photo EBT card Implementation Plan, FNS may deny authorization for the State agency to issue EBT cards with photos until the State agency has done so successfully.

(16) Post implementation assessment and evaluation. State agencies must submit to FNS a post-implementation assessment that provides FNS with a report of the results of its implementation, including any issues that arose and how they were resolved, the degree to which State agency staff, clients and retailers properly understood and implemented the new provisions.

(i) This report shall be delivered to FNS within 120 days of implementation. This report shall cover the first 90 days of implementation. The Department also reserves the right to conduct its own review of the State agency's implementation. The State agency's post-implementation report shall include at a minimum:

(A) A survey of clients conducted by an independent evaluator to demonstrate the clients' clear understanding of the State agency's photo EBT policy;

(B) A survey of retailers conducted by an independent evaluator that demonstrates evidence that at least 80 percent of retailers, including smaller independent retailers, demonstrate a full understanding of the policies related to the photo EBT card, which may include the use of test shoppers;

(C) The amount and percent of benefits held for noncompliance if mandatory;

(D) The number and percent of households with photo EBT cards;

(E) The number of households affected by withholding for noncompliance, if mandatory;

(F) The number and percent of households exempt from the photo EBT card requirement if mandatory;

(G) The number and percent of exempted households who opted for photo EBT cards if mandatory;

(H) The number and scope of complaints related to the implementation of the policy;

(I) The State agency's Case and Procedural Error Rate; and

(J) SNAP performance metrics as established in paragraph (f)(1) of this section and other SNAP performance metrics that may have been adversely affected by the implementation of the State agency's photo EBT card option, as determined by the Secretary.

(ii) [Reserved]

(17) Ongoing monitoring. FNS will continue to monitor and evaluate the operation of the option. State agencies shall provide FNS additional information upon request or as may be required by other guidelines established by the Secretary to conduct such evaluations.

(18) Modifying implementation of photo EBT card option. If any review or evaluation of a State's operations, including photo EBT operation implementation, finds deficiencies, FNS may require a corrective action plan consistent with 7 CFR 275.16 to reduce or eliminate deficiencies. If a State does not take appropriate actions to address the deficiencies, FNS would consider possible actions such as requiring an updated photo EBT Implementation Plan, suspension of the photo EBT policy and/or withholding funds in accordance with 7 CFR 276.4.

PART 278—PARTICIPATION OF RETAIL FOOD STORES, WHOLESALE FOOD CONCERNS AND INSURED FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS 6. In § 278.2, revise paragraph (h) and remove and reserve paragraphs (i) and (k).

The revision reads as follows:

§ 278.2 Participation of retail food stores.

(h) Identifying benefit users. Retailers must accept payment from EBT cardholders who have a valid PIN regardless of which State the card is from or whether the individual is pictured on the card. Where photo EBT cards are in use, the person presenting the photo EBT card need not be pictured on the card, nor does the individual's name need to match the one on the card if the State includes names on the card. However, benefits may not knowingly be accepted from persons who have no right to possession of benefits. If fraud is suspected, retailers shall report the individual to the USDA OIG Fraud Hotline.

Dated: December 7, 2016. Audrey Rowe, Acting Under Secretary for Food, Nutrition, and Consumer Services.
[FR Doc. 2016-29841 Filed 12-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-30-P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 23 [Docket No. FAA-2016-9172; Special Conditions No. 23-276-SC] Special Conditions: DAHER-SOCATA, Model TBM 700; Inflatable Four-Point Restraint Safety Belt With an Integrated Airbag Device AGENCY:

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION:

Final special conditions.

SUMMARY:

These special conditions are issued for the installation of an inflatable four-point restraint safety belt with an integrated airbag device at the pilot and copilot seats on the DAHER-SOCATA, Model TBM 700 airplane. These airplanes, as modified by the installation of these inflatable safety belts, will have novel and unusual design features associated with the upper-torso restraint portions of the four-point safety belts, which contain an integrated airbag device. The applicable airworthiness regulations do not contain adequate or appropriate safety standards for this design feature. These special conditions contain the additional safety standards that the Administrator considers necessary to establish a level of safety equivalent to that established by the existing airworthiness standards.

DATES:

These special conditions are effective December 13, 2016 and are applicable on December 6, 2016.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Mr. Bob Stegeman, Federal Aviation Administration, Aircraft Certification Service, Small Airplane Directorate, ACE-111, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, MO; telephone (816)-329-4140; facsimile (816)-329-4090.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

On January 5, 2016, DAHER-SOCATA (SOCATA) applied for FAA validation for the optional installation of a four-point safety belt restraint system for the pilot and copilot seats and incorporating integrated inflatable airbags for both on the Model TBM 700 airplane. The Model TBM 700 airplane is a single-engine powering a four bladed turbopropellor. It has a maximum takeoff weight of 6578 pounds (2984 kg). In addition to a pilot and copilot, it can seat up to five passengers.

The inflatable restraint systems are four-point safety belt restraint systems consisting of a lap belt and shoulder harness with an inflatable airbag attached to the shoulder harness straps. The inflatable portion of the restraint system will rely on sensors electronically activating the inflator for deployment.

If an emergency landing occurs, the airbags will inflate and provide a protective cushion between the head of the occupant (pilot and copilot) and the structure of the airplane. This will reduce the potential for head and torso injury. The inflatable restraint behaves in a manner similar to an automotive airbag; however, the airbag is integrated into the shoulder harness straps. Airbags and inflatable restraints are standard in the automotive industry; the use of an inflatable restraint system is novel for general aviation.

The FAA has determined that this project will be accomplished on the basis of providing the same level of safety as the current certification requirements of airplane occupant restraint systems. The FAA has the following two primary safety concerns with the installation of airbags or inflatable restraints that—

1. They perform properly under foreseeable operating conditions; and

2. They do not perform in a manner or at such times as to impede the pilot's ability to maintain control of the airplane or constitute a hazard to the airplane or occupants.

The latter point has the potential to be the more rigorous of the requirements. An unexpected deployment while conducting the takeoff or landing phases of flight may result in an unsafe condition. The unexpected deployment may either startle the pilot or generate a force sufficient to cause a sudden movement of the control yoke. Both actions may result in a loss of control of the airplane. The consequences are magnified due to the low operating altitudes during these phases of flight. The FAA has considered this when establishing these special conditions.

The inflatable restraint system relies on sensors to electronically activate the inflator for deployment. These sensors could be susceptible to inadvertent activation, causing deployment in a potentially unsafe manner. The consequences of an inadvertent deployment must be considered in establishing the reliability of the system. SOCATA must show that the effects of an inadvertent deployment in flight are not a hazard to the airplane and that an inadvertent deployment is extremely improbable. In addition, general aviation aircraft are susceptible to a large amount of cumulative wear and tear on a restraint system. The potential for inadvertent deployment may increase as a result of this cumulative damage. Therefore, the impact of wear and tear resulting with an inadvertent deployment must be considered. The effect of this cumulative damage means duration of life expectations must be established for the appropriate system components in the restraint system design.

There are additional factors to be considered to minimize the chances of inadvertent deployment. General aviation airplanes are exposed to a unique operating environment, since the same airplane may be used by both experienced and student pilots. The effect of this environment on inadvertent deployment must be understood. Therefore, qualification testing of the firing hardware and software must consider the following—

1. The airplane vibration levels appropriate for a general aviation airplane; and

2. The inertial loads that result from typical flight or ground maneuvers, including gusts and hard landings.

Any tendency for the firing mechanism to activate as a result of these loads or acceleration levels is unacceptable.

Other influences on inadvertent deployment include High-Intensity Radiated Fields (HIRF) and lightning. Since the sensors that trigger deployment are electronic, they must be protected from the effects of these threats. To comply with HIRF and lightning requirements, the inflatable restraint system is considered a critical system, since its inadvertent deployment could have a hazardous effect on the airplane.

Given the level of safety of the occupant restraints currently installed, the inflatable restraint system must show that it will offer an equivalent level of protection for an emergency landing. If an inadvertent deployment occurs, the restraint must still be at least as strong as a Technical Standard Order approved belt and shoulder harnesses. There is no requirement for the inflatable portion of the restraint to offer protection during multiple impacts, where more than one impact would require protection.

Where installed, the inflatable restraint system must deploy and provide protection for each occupant under an emergency landing condition. The Model TBM 700 airplane seats are certificated to the structural requirements of § 23.562; therefore, the test emergency landing pulses identified in § 23.562 must be used to satisfy this requirement.

A wide range of occupants may use the inflatable restraint; therefore, the protection offered by this restraint should be effective for occupants that range from the fifth percentile female to the ninety-fifth percentile male. Energy absorption must be performed in a consistent manner for this occupant range.

In support of this operational capability, there must be a means to verify the integrity of this system before each flight. SOCATA may establish inspection intervals where they have demonstrated the system to be reliable between these intervals.

An inflatable restraint may be armed even though no occupant is using the seat. While there will be means to verify the integrity of the system before flight, it is also prudent to require unoccupied seats with active restraints not pose a hazard to any occupant. This will protect any individual performing maintenance inside the cockpit while the aircraft is on the ground. The restraint must also provide suitable visual warnings that would alert rescue personnel to the presence of an inflatable restraint system.

The design must also prevent the inflatable seatbelt from being incorrectly buckled or installed to avoid hindering proper deployment of the airbag. SOCATA may show that such deployment is not hazardous to the occupant and will still provide the required protection.

The cabins of the SOCATA, Model TBM 700 airplane identified in these special conditions are confined areas, and the FAA is concerned that noxious gasses may accumulate if the airbag deploys. When deployment occurs, either by design or inadvertently, there must not be a release of hazardous quantities of gas or particulate matter into the cockpit.

An inflatable restraint should not increase the risk already associated with fire. The inflatable restraint should be protected from the effects of fire to avoid creating an additional hazard such as, a rupture of the inflator, for example.

Finally, the airbag is likely to have a large volume displacement, and possibly impede the egress of an occupant. Since the bag deflates to absorb energy, it is likely that the inflatable restraint would be deflated at the time an occupant would attempt egress. However, it is appropriate to specify a time interval after which the inflatable restraint may not impede rapid egress. Ten seconds has been chosen as reasonable time. This time limit offers a level of protection throughout an impact event.

Type Certification Basis

Under the provisions of 14 CFR 21.17, SOCATA must show that the Model TBM 700 airplane continues to meet the applicable provisions of the applicable regulations in effect on the date of application for the type certificate. The regulations incorporated by reference in the type certificate are commonly referred to as the original type certification basis.

The certification basis also includes all exemptions, if any; equivalent level of safety findings, if any; and special conditions not relevant to the special conditions adopted by this rulemaking action.

If the Administrator determines that the applicable airworthiness regulations (i.e., 14 CFR part 23) do not contain adequate or appropriate safety standards for the inflatable restraint, as installed on the SOCATA, Model TBM 700 airplane because of a novel or unusual design feature, special conditions are prescribed under the provisions of § 21.16.

In addition to the applicable airworthiness regulations and special conditions, the Model TBM 700 airplane must comply with the fuel vent and exhaust emission requirements of 14 CFR part 34 and the noise certification requirements of 14 CFR part 36, and the FAA must issue a finding of regulatory adequacy under § 611 of Public Law 92-574, the Noise Control Act of 1972.

The FAA issues special conditions, as defined in § 11.19, under § 11.38 and they become part of the type certification basis under § 21.17(a)(2).

Special conditions are initially applicable to the models for which they are issued. Should the type certificate for that model be amended later to include any other model that incorporates the same novel or unusual design feature, or should any other model already included on the same type certificate be modified to incorporate the same novel or unusual design feature, the special conditions would also apply to the other model.

Novel or Unusual Design Features

The SOCATA, Model TBM 700 airplane will incorporate the following novel or unusual design feature:

Installation of inflatable four-point restraint safety belt with an integrated airbag device for the pilot and copilot seats.

Discussion

The purpose of the airbag is to reduce the potential for injury in the event of an accident. In a severe impact, an airbag will deploy from the shoulder harness in a manner similar to an automotive airbag. The airbag will deploy between the head of the occupant and airplane interior structure, which will provide some protection to the head of the occupant. The restraint will rely on sensors to electronically activate the inflator for deployment.

The Code of Federal Regulations states performance criteria for seats and restraints in an objective manner. However, none of these criteria are adequate to address the specific issues raised concerning inflatable restraints. Therefore, the FAA has determined that in addition to the requirements of part 21 and part 23, special conditions are needed to address the installation of this inflatable restraint.

Accordingly, these special conditions are adopted for the SOCATA, Model TBM 700 airplanes equipped with four-point inflatable restraints. Other conditions may be developed, as needed, based on further FAA review and discussions with the manufacturer and civil aviation authorities.

Discussion of Comments

Final special conditions number 23-276-SC 1 for the DAHER-SOCATA, Model TBM 700 airplanes and requesting comments was published in the Federal Register on September 30, 2016 (81 FR 67093). One comment was received that compared restraint safety to that of an automobile and stressed the importance considering airbag safety, the possibility of injuring or killing occupants during deployment and considerations for occupant safety for a range of occupants.

1https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=FAA-2016-9172-0001.

Aircraft accidents differ from car accidents in that they typically involve much higher speeds and also introduce a vertical impact component. The aviation regulations require an assessment of occupant safety in the horizontal and vertical planes. An airbag is normally triggered, deployed, and effective only in the horizontal plane. The special condition requires assessment for 5th percentile females to 95th percentile males. As such, very large and very small occupants are not considered in this special condition, but this is consistent with other FAA occupant safety rules.

Aircraft airbags, or inflatable restraints, (including the airbags subject to this special condition) are fundamentally different in their operation in comparison to automotive airbags. Automotive airbags normally deploy from the dashboard or steering wheel and push against the rigid structure as they powerfully deploy and engage the occupant. Inflatable restraints have the airbag deploy from the restraint and push away from the occupant and do not press on the occupant until the occupant, with significant inertia, is moving forward and impacting the interior. Smaller occupants, normally those killed by automotive airbags, are not as likely to engage the aircraft inflatable restraints against the interior.

There are no known fatalities or significant injuries from aircraft inflatable restraints that are attributable only to the airbag deployment itself. By nature, the inflatable restraints move away from the occupant, so injury to the occupant from deployment is very unlikely. Smaller occupants and children are still recommended to ride in aft seating, like in an automobile. These special conditions do consider and peripherally address a range of occupant sizes consistent with part 23 occupant safety rules.

This special condition does address the potential hazards commented upon, and the safety and effectiveness of the airbag system with consideration to a range of occupant sizes. No changes were made as a result of this comment, and the special conditions are adopted as proposed.

Applicability

As discussed above, these special conditions are applicable to the SOCATA, Model TBM 700 airplane. Should SOCATA apply at a later date for a change to the type certificate to include another model incorporating the same novel or unusual design feature, the special conditions would apply to that model as well.

Under standard practice, the effective date of final special conditions would be 30 days after the date of publication in the Federal Register; however, as the certification date for the SOCATA, Model TBM 700 airplane is imminent, the FAA finds that good cause exists to make these special conditions effective upon issuance.

Conclusion

This action affects only certain novel or unusual design features on one model of airplanes. It is not a rule of general applicability and affects only the applicant who applied to the FAA for approval of these features on the airplane.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 23

Aircraft, Aviation safety, Signs and symbols.

Citation

The authority citation for these special conditions is as follows:

Authority:

49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113 and 44701; 14 CFR 21.16 and 21.17; and 14 CFR 11.38 and 11.19.

The Special Conditions

The FAA has determined that this project will be accomplished on the basis of not lowering the current level of safety of the SOCATA, Model TBM 700 airplane occupant restraint systems. Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the following special conditions are issued as part of the type certification basis for the SOCATA, Model TBM 700 airplane.

1. Installation of Inflatable Four-Point Restraint Safety Belt With an Integrated Airbag Device

a. It must be shown that the inflatable restraint will deploy and provide protection under emergency landing conditions. Compliance will be demonstrated using the dynamic test condition specified in § 23.562(b)(2). It is not necessary to account for floor warpage, as required by § 23.562(b)(3), or vertical dynamic loads, as required by § 23.562(b)(1). The means of protection must take into consideration a range of stature from a 5th percentile female to a 95th percentile male. The inflatable restraint must provide a consistent approach to energy absorption throughout that range.

b. The inflatable restraint must provide adequate protection for the occupant. In addition, unoccupied seats that have an active restraint must not constitute a hazard to any occupant.

c. The design must prevent the inflatable restraint from being incorrectly buckled and incorrectly installed, such that the airbag would not properly deploy. It must be shown that such deployment is not hazardous to the occupant and will provide the required protection.

d. It must be shown that the inflatable restraint system is not susceptible to inadvertent deployment as a result of wear and tear or the inertial loads resulting from in-flight or ground maneuvers (including gusts and hard landings) that are likely to be experienced in service.

e. It must be extremely improbable for an inadvertent deployment of the restraint system to occur, or an inadvertent deployment must not impede the pilot's ability to maintain control of the airplane or cause an unsafe condition or hazard to the airplane. In addition, a deployed inflatable restraint must be at least as strong as a Technical Standard Order, TSO-C114, certificated belt and shoulder harness.

f. It must be shown that deployment of the inflatable restraint system is not hazardous to the occupant or will not result in injuries that could impede rapid egress. This assessment should include occupants whose restraint is loosely fastened.

g. It must be shown that an inadvertent deployment that could cause injury to a standing or sitting person is improbable. In addition, the restraint must also provide suitable visual warnings that would alert rescue personnel to the presence of an inflatable restraint system.

h. It must be shown that the inflatable restraint will not impede rapid egress of the occupants 10 seconds after its deployment.

i. To comply with HIRF and lightning requirements, the inflatable restraint system is considered a critical system since its deployment could have a hazardous effect on the airplane.

j. It must be shown that the inflatable restraints will not release hazardous quantities of gas or particulate matter into the cabin.

k. The inflatable restraint system installation must be protected from the effects of fire such that no hazard to occupants will result.

l. There must be a means to verify the integrity of the inflatable restraint activation system before each flight or it must be demonstrated to reliably operate between inspection intervals.

m. A life limit must be established for appropriate system components.

n. Qualification testing of the internal firing mechanism must be performed at vibration levels appropriate for a general aviation airplane.

Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on December 6, 2016. Kelly Broadway, Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2016-29769 Filed 12-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE 15 CFR Part 2004 [Docket Number USTR-2016-0016] RIN 0350-AA10 Production or Disclosure of Records, Information and Employee Testimony in Legal Proceedings AGENCY:

Office of the United States Trade Representative.

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

This rule adds subparts A and D to part 2004 of the Office of the United States Trade Representative's (USTR) regulations. Subpart A contains definitions used throughout part 2004. Subpart D governs how USTR responds to official demands and informal requests for records, information or employee testimony in connection with legal proceedings in which neither the United States nor USTR is a party. It includes the requirements and procedures for demanding or requesting parties to submit demands or requests, and factors for USTR to consider in determining whether USTR employees will provide records, information or testimony relating to their official duties.

DATES:

The final rule will become effective December 13, 2016.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Janice Kaye, Monique Ricker or Melissa Keppel, Office of General Counsel, United States Trade Representative, Anacostia Naval Annex, Building 410/Door 123, 250 Murray Lane SW., Washington, DC 20509, [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; 202-395-3150.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

On September 22, 2016, USTR published a proposed rule to add subparts A and D to part 2004. See 81 FR 65309. The 60-day comment period ended on November 21, 2016. USTR did not receive any comments. We have made one non-substantive change to the proposed rule. In subpart A, which contain definitions used throughout part 2004, we added a new term—“OGIS”—which means the Office of Government Information Services of the National Archives and Records Administration. OGIS, offers FOIA dispute resolution services. For convenience, the entire text of the final rule is set out below.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

USTR has considered the impact of the final rule and determined that it is not likely to have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small business entities because it is applicable only to USTR's internal operations and legal obligations. See 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.

Paperwork Reduction Act

The final rule does not contain any information collection requirement that requires the approval of the Office of Management and Budget under the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).

List of Subjects in 15 CFR Part 2004

Administrative practice and procedure, Courts, Disclosure, Exemptions, Freedom of information, Government employees, Privacy, Records, Subpoenas, Testimony.

For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Office of the United States Trade Representative is revising part 2004 of chapter XX of title 15 of the Code of Federal Regulations to read as follows: PART 2004—DISCLOSURE OF RECORDS AND INFORMATION Subpart A—Definitions Sec. 2004.0 Definitions. Subpart B—Freedom of Information Act Policies and Procedures [Reserved] 2004.1 through 2004.9 [Reserved] Subpart C—Privacy Act Policies and Procedures [Reserved] 2004.10 through 2004.29 [Reserved] Subpart D—Production or Disclosure of USTR Records, Information and Employee Testimony in Legal Proceedings 2004.30 Purpose and scope. 2004.31 Definitions. 2004.32 Production prohibited unless approved. 2004.33 Factors the General Counsel may consider. 2004.34 Submitting demands and requests. 2004.35 Processing demands and requests. 2004.36 Restrictions that apply to testimony. 2004.37 Restrictions that apply to released records or information. 2004.38 In the event of an adverse ruling. 2004.39 Fees. Subpart A—Definitions Authority:

19 U.S.C. 2171(e)(3).

§ 2004.0 Definitions.

For purposes of this part:

Days, unless otherwise indicated, means working days, and does not include Saturdays, Sundays, and legal public holidays. If the last day of a specified period falls on a Saturday, Sunday, or legal public holiday, the period will be extended until the next working day.

FOIA means the Freedom of Information Act, as amended, 5 U.S.C. 552.

Privacy Act means the Privacy Act of 1974, as amended, 5 U.S.C. 552a.

OGIS means the Office of Government Information Services of the National Archives and Records Administration, which offers FOIA dispute resolution services.

USTR means the Office of the United States Trade Representative.

Subpart B—Freedom of Information Act Policies and Procedures [Reserved]
§§ 2004.1 through 2004.9 [Reserved]
Subpart C—Privacy Act Policies and Procedures [Reserved]
§§ 2004.10 through 2004.29 [Reserved]
Subpart D—Production or Disclosure of USTR Records, Information and Employee Testimony in Legal Proceedings Authority:

5 U.S.C. 301; 19 U.S.C. 2171(e)(3).

§ 2004.30 Purpose and scope.

(a) Why are we issuing this rule? This subpart establishes the procedures USTR will follow when any federal, state or local government court or other authority seeks production of USTR records or information, or testimony relating to an employee's official duties, in the context of a legal proceeding. Parties seeking records, information or testimony must comply with these requirements when submitting demands or requests to USTR.

(b) What does this rule cover? This subpart applies to demands or requests for records, information or testimony in legal proceedings in which USTR is not a named party. It does not apply to: Demands or requests for a USTR employee to testify as to facts or events that are unrelated to his or her official duties or to USTR's functions; FOIA or Privacy Act requests; or Congressional demands or requests for records or testimony.

(c) Not a waiver. (1) By providing these policies and procedures, USTR does not waive the sovereign immunity of the United States.

(2) The production of records, information or testimony pursuant to this subpart does not constitute a waiver by USTR of any privilege.

(d) This subpart provides guidance for USTR's internal operations and does not create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, that a party may rely upon in any legal proceeding against USTR or the United States.

§ 2004.31 Definitions.

For purposes of this subpart:

Demand means a request, order, subpoena or other demand of a federal, state or local court or other authority for records, information or employee testimony in a legal proceeding in which USTR is not a named party.

Employee means any current or former employee or officer of USTR, including contractors, detailees, interns, and any individual who has served or is serving in any consulting or advisory capacity to USTR, whether formal or informal.

General Counsel means USTR's General Counsel or a person within USTR's Office of General Counsel to whom the General Counsel has delegated authority to act under this subpart.

Legal proceeding means any matter, including all phases of litigation, before a court of law, administrative board or tribunal, commission, administrative law judge, hearing officer, or other body that conducts a legal or administrative proceeding.

Records or information means all documents and materials that are USTR agency records under the FOIA; any original or copy of a record or other property, no matter what media, contained in USTR files; and any other information or materials acquired by a USTR employee in the performance of his or her official duties or because of his or her official status.

Request means any informal request, by whatever method, in connection with a legal proceeding, seeking production of records, information or testimony that has not been ordered by a court or other competent authority.

Testimony means any written or oral statements, including depositions, answers to interrogatories, affidavits, declarations and recorded interviews made by an individual about USTR information in connection with a legal proceeding.

§ 2004.32 Production prohibited unless approved.

(a) Approval required. An employee or any other person or entity in possession of records or information may not produce those records or information, or provide any testimony related to the records or information, in response to any demand or request without prior written approval from the General Counsel.

(b) Penalties. Any person or entity that fails to comply with this subpart may be subject to the penalties provided in 18 U.S.C. 641 and other applicable laws. A current employee also may be subject to administrative or disciplinary proceedings.

§ 2004.33 Factors the General Counsel may consider.

The General Counsel may grant an employee permission to testify regarding USTR matters and to produce records and information in response to a demand or request. Among the relevant factors the General Counsel may consider in making this determination are whether:

(a) The requested records, information or testimony are reasonable in scope, relevant and material to the pending action, and unavailable from other sources such as a non-USTR employee, or a USTR employee other than the employee named.

(b) Production of the records, information or testimony might result in USTR appearing to favor one litigant over another.

(c) USTR has an interest in the decision that may be rendered in the legal proceeding.

(d) Approving the demand or request would assist or hinder USTR in performing statutory duties or unduly burden USTR resources.

(e) The demand or request is unduly burdensome or otherwise inappropriate under the rules of discovery or procedure governing the case or matter in which the demand or request arose.

(f) Production of the records, information or testimony might violate or be inconsistent with a statute, Executive Order, regulation or other legal authority.

(g) Disclosure, including release in camera, is appropriate or necessary under the relevant substantive law concerning privilege.

(h) Disclosure, except when in camera and necessary to assert a claim of privilege, would reveal information properly classified or other matters exempt from unrestricted disclosure.

(i) Disclosure would interfere with ongoing enforcement proceedings, compromise constitutional rights, reveal the identity of an intelligence source or confidential informant, or disclose trade secrets or similarly confidential commercial or financial information.

(j) Any other appropriate factor.

§ 2004.34 Submitting demands and requests.

(a) Where do I send a demand or request? To make a demand or request for records, information or testimony you should write directly to the General Counsel. Heightened security delays mail delivery. To avoid mail delivery delays, we strongly suggest that you email your demand or request to [email protected] The mailing address is General Counsel, Office of the United States Trade Representative, Anacostia Naval Annex, Building 410/Door 123, 250 Murray Lane SW., Washington, DC 20509. To ensure delivery, you should mark the subject line of your email or your envelope and letter “Touhy Request.”

(b) When should I submit it? You should submit your demand or request at least 45 calendar days in advance of the date on which the records, information or testimony is needed.

(c) What must be included? (1) A demand or request must include an affidavit or, if that is not feasible, a clear and concise statement by the party or his or her counsel summarizing the legal and factual issues in the proceeding and explaining how the records, information or testimony will contribute substantially to the resolution of one or more specifically identified issues.

(2) A demand or request for testimony also must include an estimate of the amount of time that the employee will need to devote to the process of testifying (including anticipated travel time and anticipated duration of round trip travel), plus a showing that no document or the testimony of non-USTR persons, including retained experts, could suffice in lieu of the employee's testimony.

(d) Limits. The General Counsel will limit any authorization for testimony to the scope of the demand, and the scope of permissible production of records and information to that set forth in the written authorization.

(e) Failure to meet requirements and exceptions. USTR may oppose any demand or request that does not meet the requirements set forth in this subpart. The General Counsel may grant exceptions to the requirements in this subpart upon a showing of compelling need, to promote a significant interest of USTR or the United States, or for other good cause.

§ 2004.35 Processing demands and requests.

(a) The General Counsel will review a request or demand to produce or disclose records, information or testimony and determine whether, or under what conditions, to authorize the employee to testify regarding USTR matters or produce records and information. The General Counsel will notify the requester of the final determination, the reasons for the grant or denial of the demand or request, and any conditions on disclosure.

(b) When necessary, the General Counsel will coordinate with the U.S. Department of Justice to file appropriate motions, including motions to remove the matter to Federal court, to quash, or to obtain a protective order.

(c) The General Counsel will process demands and requests in the order in which they are received. Absent unusual circumstances and depending on the scope of the demand or request, the General Counsel will respond within 45 calendar days of the date USTR receives all information necessary to evaluate the demand or request.

§ 2004.36 Restrictions that apply to testimony.

(a) The General Counsel may impose conditions or restrictions on the testimony of USTR employees including, for example, limiting the scope of testimony or requiring the requester and other parties to the legal proceeding to agree that the testimony transcript will be kept under seal or will only be used or made available in the particular legal proceeding for which testimony was requested. The General Counsel also may require a copy of the testimony transcript at the requester's expense.

(b) USTR may offer the employee's written declaration in lieu of testimony.

(c) If authorized to testify pursuant to this subpart, an employee may testify as to relevant facts within his or her personal knowledge, but, unless specifically authorized to do so by the General Counsel, the employee must not:

(1) Disclose classified, confidential or privileged information; or

(2) For a current USTR employee, testify as an expert or opinion witness with regard to any matter arising out of the employee's official duties or USTR's mission or functions, unless testimony is provided on behalf of the United States. A former employee can provide expert or opinion testimony where the testimony involves only general expertise gained while employed as a USTR employee.

§ 2004.37 Restrictions that apply to released records and information.

(a) The General Counsel may impose conditions or restrictions on the release of records and information, including requiring the parties to the legal proceeding to obtain a protective order or to execute a confidentiality agreement to limit access and further disclosure. The terms of a protective order or confidentiality agreement must be acceptable to the General Counsel. In cases where protective orders or confidentiality agreements already have been executed, USTR may condition the release of records and information on an amendment to the existing protective order or confidentiality agreement.

(b) If the General Counsel so determines, USTR may present original records for examination in response to a demand or request, but the records cannot be marked or altered or presented as evidence or otherwise used in a manner by which they could lose their status as original records. In lieu of original records, certified copies will be presented for evidentiary purposes. (See 28 U.S.C. 1733).

§ 2004.38 In the event of an adverse ruling.

(a) Notwithstanding USTR's rejection of a demand or request for records, information or testimony, if a court or other competent authority orders a USTR employee to comply with the demand, the employee promptly must notify the General Counsel of the order, and must respectfully decline to comply, citing United States ex rel. Touhy v. Ragen, 340 U.S. 462 (1951).

(b) To seek reconsideration of USTR's rejection of a demand or request, or of any restrictions on receiving records, information or testimony, a requester must send a petition for reconsideration in accordance with § 2004.34(a) within 10 days of the date of the determination. The petition must contain a clear and concise statement of the basis for the reconsideration with supporting authorities. Determinations about petitions for reconsideration are within the discretion of the United States Trade Representative or his/her designee, and are final.

(c) Pursuant to section 704 of the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 704, a petition for reconsideration of a final determination under this section is a prerequisite to judicial review.

§ 2004.39 Fees.

(a) USTR may condition the production of records, information or an employee's appearance on advance payment of reasonable costs, which may include but are not limited to those associated with employee search time, copying, computer usage, and certifications.

(b) Witness fees will include fees, expenses and allowances prescribed by the rules applicable to the particular legal proceeding. If no fees are prescribed, USTR will base fees on the rule of the federal district court closest to the location where the witness will appear. Such fees may include but are not limited to time for preparation, travel and attendance at the legal proceeding.

Janice Kaye, Chief Counsel for Administrative Law, Office of the U.S. Trade Representative.
[FR Doc. 2016-29875 Filed 12-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3290-F7-P
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration 21 CFR Parts 20, 201, 207, 314, 514, 515, 601, 607, and 1271 [Docket No. FDA-2005-N-0464 (Formerly Docket No. 2005N-0403)] Requirements for Foreign and Domestic Establishment Registration and Listing for Human Drugs, Including Drugs That Are Regulated Under a Biologics License Application, and Animal Drugs; Correction AGENCY:

Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION:

Final rule; correction.

SUMMARY:

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is correcting a final rule entitled “Requirements for Foreign and Domestic Establishment Registration and Listing for Human Drugs, Including Drugs That Are Regulated Under a Biologics License Application, and Animal Drugs” that appeared in the Federal Register of August 31, 2016 (81 FR 60169). That final rule amended current regulations concerning who must register establishments and list human drugs, human drugs that are also biological products, and animal drugs. The final rule was published with an incorrect statement in the preamble about the rule's effect on establishments at which investigational drugs are manufactured. This document corrects that error.

DATES:

Effective December 13, 2016.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

David Joy, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 51, Rm. 6254, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 301-796-2242.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

In the Federal Register of August 31, 2016 (81 FR 60169), FDA published the final rule “Requirements for Foreign and Domestic Establishment Registration and Listing for Human Drugs, Including Drugs That Are Regulated Under a Biologics License Application, and Animal Drugs.” The final rule published with an incorrect statement in the preamble about the rule's effect on establishments at which investigational drugs are manufactured. Under the amended regulations, manufacturers, repackers, relabelers, or salvagers who manufacture, repack, relabel, or salvage drugs solely for use in research, teaching, or chemical analysis and not for sale are exempt from the establishment registration requirement under 21 CFR 207.13(e) if they do not engage in other activities that require them to register.

In the Federal Register of August 31, 2016, in FR Doc. 2016-20471, the following correction is made: On page 60185, in the first column, in the third paragraph under “2. When must initial registration information be provided? (§ 207.21),” the following sentence is removed: “Accordingly, an establishment at which an investigational drug is manufactured is subject to the establishment registration requirement.”

Dated: December 7, 2016. Leslie Kux, Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2016-29774 Filed 12-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Internal Revenue Service 26 CFR Parts 1 and 301 [TD 9796] RIN 1545-BM94 Treatment of Certain Domestic Entities Disregarded as Separate From Their Owners as Corporations for Purposes of Section 6038A AGENCY:

Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury.

ACTION:

Final regulations.

SUMMARY:

This document contains final regulations that treat a domestic disregarded entity wholly owned by a foreign person as a domestic corporation separate from its owner for the limited purposes of the reporting, record maintenance and associated compliance requirements that apply to 25 percent foreign-owned domestic corporations under section 6038A of the Internal Revenue Code.

DATES:

Effective date: These regulations are effective December 13, 2016.

Applicability date: For dates of applicability, see §§ 1.6038A-1(n)(1) and (2) and 301.7701-2(e)(9).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Ronald M. Gootzeit, (202) 317-6937 (not a toll-free number).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Paperwork Reduction Act

The collection of information contained in these final regulations has been previously reviewed and approved by the Office of Management and Budget in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507(d)) under control number 1545-1191. The estimated average annual recordkeeping burden per recordkeeper is 10 hours. The estimated reporting burden is being reported under Form 5472 (OMB #1545-0123).

The collection of information in these final regulations is in §§ 1.6038A-2 and 1.6038A-3. This information will enhance the United States' compliance with international standards of transparency and exchange of information for tax purposes and will strengthen the enforcement of U.S. tax laws. The likely respondents are foreign-owned domestic entities that are disregarded as separate from their owners.

An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a valid control number assigned by the Office of Management and Budget.

Books or records relating to a collection of information must be retained as long as their contents may become material in the administration of any internal revenue law. Generally, tax returns and tax return information are confidential, as required by 26 U.S.C. 6103.

Background and Explanation of Provisions

On May 10, 2016, the Department of the Treasury (Treasury Department) and the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) published in the Federal Register a notice of proposed rulemaking (REG-127199-15; 81 FR 28784) under sections 6038A and 7701 (the proposed regulations). The proposed regulations would treat a domestic disregarded entity wholly owned by a foreign person as a domestic corporation separate from its owner for the limited purposes of the reporting, record maintenance and associated compliance requirements that apply to 25 percent foreign-owned domestic corporations under section 6038A of the Internal Revenue Code. The proposed regulations would have applied to taxable years of the entities described in § 301.7701-2(c)(2)(vi) ending on or after the date that is 12 months after the date of publication of the Treasury decision adopting the proposed rules as final regulations in the Federal Register.

In addition to generally soliciting comments on all aspects of the proposed rules, the preamble to the proposed regulations specifically requested comments on possible alternative methods for reporting a domestic disregarded entity's transactions in cases in which the foreign owner of the domestic disregarded entity already has an obligation to report the income resulting from those transactions—for example, transactions resulting in income effectively connected with the conduct of a U.S. trade or business.

No written comments on the proposed regulations were received, and no public hearing was requested or held. However, these final regulations reflect a limited number of changes by the Treasury Department and the IRS to the proposed regulations.

First, it was and remains the intent of the Treasury Department and the IRS that the generally applicable exceptions to the requirements of section 6038A should not apply to a domestic disregarded entity that is wholly owned by a foreign person. Accordingly, the proposed regulations provided that the exceptions to the record maintenance requirements in § 1.6038A-1(h) and (i) for small corporations and de minimis transactions would not apply to these entities. The proposed regulations did not address the additional exception provided in § 1.6038A-2(e)(3), under which a reporting corporation is not required to file Form 5472, Information Return of a 25% Foreign-Owned U.S. Corporation or a Foreign Corporation Engaged in a U.S. Trade or Business (Under Sections 6038A and 6038C of the Internal Revenue Code), with respect to a related foreign corporation when a U.S. person that controls the related foreign corporation files a Form 5471, Information Return of U.S. Persons With Respect to Certain Foreign Corporations, containing required information with respect to reportable transactions between the reporting corporation and the related foreign corporation for the taxable year. Similarly, the proposed regulations did not address the additional exception provided in § 1.6038A-2(e)(4), under which a reporting corporation is not required to file Form 5472 with respect to a related foreign corporation that qualifies as a foreign sales corporation for a taxable year for which the foreign sales corporation files Form 1120-FSC, U.S. Income Tax Return of a Foreign Sales Corporation. Upon final consideration of the proposed regulations, the Treasury Department and the IRS have concluded that, consistent with the scope and intent of the proposed regulations, the reporting requirements of the proposed regulations should apply without regard to the exceptions generally applicable under § 1.6038A-2(e)(3) and (4). The exceptions in § 1.6038A-2(e)(3) and (4) are revised accordingly in the final regulations.

Second, to facilitate entities' compliance with the requirements of section 6038A, including the obligation of reporting corporations to file Form 5472, the final regulations provide that these entities have the same taxable year as their foreign owner if the foreign owner has a U.S. return filing obligation. If the foreign owner has no U.S. return filing obligation, then for ease of tax administration, the final regulations provide that the taxable year of these entities is the calendar year unless otherwise provided in forms, instructions, or published guidance.

Third, the Treasury Department and the IRS have concluded that for ease of administration, these regulations should apply to taxable years of entities beginning on or after January 1, 2017, and ending on or after December 13, 2017. The proposed regulations would have applied to taxable years ending on or after the date that is 12 months after the date of publication of the final regulations in the Federal Register, without regard to the date on which the taxable year began. This Treasury decision adopts the proposed regulations as so amended and with other minor clarifications for readability.

Special Analyses

Certain IRS regulations, including these, are exempt from the requirements of Executive Order 12866, as supplemented and reaffirmed by Executive Order 13563. Therefore, a regulatory assessment is not required. Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. chapter 6), it is hereby certified that these regulations will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Accordingly, a regulatory flexibility analysis is not required. This certification is based on the fact that these regulations will primarily affect a small number of foreign-owned domestic entities that do not themselves otherwise have a U.S. return filing requirement, and that the requirement to file a return for these entities will not impose a significant burden on them. Pursuant to section 7805(f), the proposed regulations were submitted to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration for comment on their impact on small entities.

Drafting Information

The principal author of these regulations is Ronald M. Gootzeit, Office of Associate Chief Counsel (International). However, other personnel from the Treasury Department and the IRS participated in their development.

List of Subjects 26 CFR Part 1

Income taxes, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

26 CFR Part 301

Employment taxes, Estate taxes, Excise taxes, Gift taxes, Income taxes, Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

Adoption of Amendments to the Regulations

Accordingly, 26 CFR parts 1 and 301 are amended as follows:

PART 1—INCOME TAXES Paragraph 1. The authority citation for part 1 is amended by revising the entries for §§ 1.6038A-1 and 1.6038A-2 to read in part as follows: Authority:

26 U.S.C. 7805 * * *

Section 1.6038A-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6001.

Section 1.6038A-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6001.

Par. 2. Section 1.6038A-0 is amended by adding an entry for § 1.6038A-2(b)(9) to read as follows:
§ 1.6038A-0 Table of contents.
§ 1.6038A-2 Requirement of return.

(b) * * *

(9) Examples.

Par. 3. Section 1.6038A-1 is amended as follows: 1. Add a sentence at the end of paragraph (c)(1). 2. Revise the first sentence of paragraph (h). 3. Revsie the first sentence of paragraph (i)(1). 4. Add a sentence at the end of paragraph (n)(1). 5. Add a sentence at the end of paragraph (n)(2).

The additions and revisions read as follows:

§ 1.6038A-1 General requirements and definitions.

(c) * * *

(1) * * * A domestic business entity that is wholly owned by one foreign person and that is otherwise classified under § 301.7701-3(b)(1)(ii) of this chapter as disregarded as an entity separate from its owner is treated as an entity separate from its owner and classified as a domestic corporation for purposes of section 6038A. See § 301.7701-2(c)(2)(vi) of this chapter.

(h) * * * A reporting corporation (other than an entity that is a reporting corporation as a result of being treated as a corporation under § 301.7701-2(c)(2)(vi) of this chapter) that has less than $10,000,000 in U.S. gross receipts for a taxable year is not subject to §§ 1.6038A-3 and 1.6038A-5 for that taxable year.* * *

(i) * * *

(1) * * * A reporting corporation (other than an entity that is a reporting corporation as a result of being treated as a corporation under § 301.7701-2(c)(2)(vi) of this chapter) is not subject to §§ 1.6038A-3 and 1.6038A-5 for any taxable year in which the aggregate value of all gross payments it makes to and receives from foreign related parties with respect to related party transactions (including monetary consideration, nonmonetary consideration, and the value of transactions involving less than full consideration) is not more than $5,000,000 and is less than 10 percent of its U.S. gross income. * * *

(n) * * *

(1) * * * However, § 1.6038A-1 as it applies to entities that are reporting corporations as a result of being treated as a corporation under § 301.7701-2(c)(2)(vi) of this chapter applies to taxable years of such reporting corporations beginning after December 31, 2016, and ending on or after December 13, 2017.

(2) * * * Section 1.6038A-2 as it applies to entities that are reporting corporations as a result of being treated as a corporation under § 301.7701-2(c)(2)(vi) of this chapter applies to taxable years of such reporting corporations beginning after December 31, 2016, and ending on or after December 13, 2017.

Par. 4. Section 1.6038A-2 is amended as follows: 1. Revise the second sentence of paragraph (a)(2). 2. Revise paragraph (b)(3)(vii). 3. Remove the word “and” at the end of paragraph (b)(3)(ix). 4. Remove the undesignated paragraph following paragraph (b)(3)(x). 5. Remove the period at the end of paragraph (b)(3)(x) and add “; and” in its place. 6. Add paragraphs (b)(3)(xi) and (b)(9). 7. Add a sentence at the end of paragraph (d). 8. Revise the first sentence of paragraph (e)(3). 9. Revise paragraph (e)(4).

The additions and revisions read as follows:

§ 1.6038A-2 Requirements of return.

(a) * * *

(2) * * * However, if neither party to the transaction is a United States person as defined in section 7701(a)(30) (which, for purposes of section 6038A, includes an entity that is a reporting corporation as a result of being treated as a corporation under § 301.7701-2(c)(2)(vi) of this chapter) and the transaction—

(b) * * *

(3) * * *

(vii) Amounts loaned and borrowed (except open accounts resulting from sales and purchases reported under other items listed in this paragraph (b)(3) that arise and are collected in full in the ordinary course of business), to be reported as monthly averages or outstanding balances at the beginning and end of the taxable year, as the form shall prescribe;

(xi) With respect to an entity that is a reporting corporation as a result of being treated as a corporation under § 301.7701-2(c)(2)(vi) of this chapter, any other transaction as defined by § 1.482-1(i)(7), such as amounts paid or received in connection with the formation, dissolution, acquisition and disposition of the entity, including contributions to and distributions from the entity.

(9) Examples. The following examples illustrate the application of paragraph (b)(3) of this section:

Example 1.

(i) In year 1, W, a foreign corporation, forms and contributes assets to X, a domestic limited liability company that does not elect to be treated as a corporation under § 301.7701-3(c) of this chapter. In year 2, W contributes funds to X. In year 3, X makes a payment to W. In year 4, X, in liquidation, distributes its assets to W.

(ii) In accordance with § 301.7701-3(b)(1)(ii) of this chapter, X is disregarded as an entity separate from W. In accordance with § 301.7701-2(c)(2)(vi) of this chapter, X is treated as an entity separate from W and classified as a domestic corporation for purposes of section 6038A. In accordance with paragraphs (a)(2) and (b)(3) of this section, each of the transactions in years 1 through 4 is a reportable transaction with respect to X. Therefore, X has a section 6038A reporting and record maintenance requirement for each of those years.

Example 2.

(i) The facts are the same as in Example 1 of this paragraph (b)(9) except that, in year 1, W also forms and contributes assets to Y, another domestic limited liability company that does not elect to be treated as a corporation under § 301.7701-3(c) of this chapter. In year 1, X and Y form and contribute assets to Z, another domestic limited liability company that does not elect to be treated as a corporation under § 301.7701-3(c) of this chapter. In year 2, X transfers funds to Z. In year 3, Z makes a payment to Y. In year 4, Z distributes its assets to X and Y in liquidation.

(ii) In accordance with § 301.7701-3(b)(1)(ii) of this chapter, Y and Z are disregarded as entities separate from each other, W, and X. In accordance with § 301.7701-2(c)(2)(vi) of this chapter, Y, Z and X are treated as entities separate from each other and W, and are classified as domestic corporations for purposes of section 6038A. In accordance with paragraph (b)(3) of this section, each of the transactions in years 1 through 4 involving Z is a reportable transaction with respect to Z. Similarly, W's contribution to Y and Y's contribution to Z in year 1, the payment to Y in year 3, and the distribution to Y in year 4 are reportable transactions with respect to Y. Moreover, X's contribution to Z in Year 1, X's funds transfer to Z in year 2, and the distribution to X in year 4 are reportable transactions with respect to X. Therefore, Z has a section 6038A reporting and record maintenance requirement for years 1 through 4; Y has a section 6038A reporting and record maintenance requirement for years 1, 3, and 4; and X has a section 6038A reporting and record maintenance requirement in years 1, 2, and 4 in addition to its section 6038A reporting and record maintenance described in Example 1 of this paragraph (b)(9).

(d) * * * In the case of an entity that is a reporting corporation as a result of being treated as a corporation under § 301.7701-2(c)(2)(vi) of this chapter, Form 5472 must be filed at such time and in such manner as the Commissioner may prescribe in forms or instructions.

(e) * * *

(3) * * * A reporting corporation (other than an entity that is a reporting corporation as a result of being treated as a corporation under § 301.7701-2(c)(2)(vi) of this chapter) is not required to make a return of information on Form 5472 with respect to a related foreign corporation for a taxable year for which a U.S. person that controls the foreign related corporation makes a return of information on Form 5471 that is required under section 6038 and this section, if that return contains information required under § 1.6038-2(f)(11) with respect to the reportable transactions between the reporting corporation and the related corporation for that taxable year.* * *

(4) Transactions with a foreign sales corporation. A reporting corporation (other than an entity that is a reporting corporation as a result of being treated as a corporation under § 301.7701-2(c)(2)(vi) of this chapter) is not required to make a return of information on Form 5472 with respect to a related corporation that qualifies as a foreign sales corporation for a taxable year for which the foreign sales corporation files Form 1120-FSC.

PART 301—PROCEDURE AND ADMINISTRATION Par. 5. The authority citation for part 301 continues to read in part as follows: Authority:

26 U.S.C. 7805 * * *

Par. 6. Section 301.7701-2 is amended by revising the last sentence of paragraph (a) and adding paragraphs (c)(2)(vi) and (e)(9) to read as follows:
§ 301.7701-2 Business entities; definitions.

(a) * * * But see paragraphs (c)(2)(iii) through (vi) of this section for special rules that apply to an eligible entity that is otherwise disregarded as an entity separate from its owner.

(c) * * *

(2) * * *

(vi) Special rule for reporting under section 6038A—(A) In general. An entity that is disregarded as an entity separate from its owner for any purpose under this section is treated as an entity separate from its owner and classified as a corporation for purposes of section 6038A if—

(1) The entity is a domestic entity; and

(2) One foreign person has direct or indirect sole ownership of the entity.

(B) Definitions—(1) Indirect sole ownership. For purposes of paragraph (c)(2)(vi)(A)(2) of this section, indirect sole ownership means ownership by one person entirely through one or more other entities disregarded as entities separate from their owners or through one or more grantor trusts, regardless of whether any such disregarded entity or grantor trust is domestic or foreign.

(2) Entity disregarded as separate from its owner. For purposes of paragraph (c)(2)(vi)(B)(1) of this section, an entity disregarded as an entity separate from its owner is an entity described in paragraph (c)(2)(i) of this section.

(3) Grantor trust. For purposes of paragraph (c)(2)(vi)(B)(1) of this section, a grantor trust is any portion of a trust that is treated as owned by the grantor or another person under subpart E of subchapter J of chapter 1 of the Code.

(C) Taxable year. The taxable year of an entity classified as a corporation for section 6038A purposes pursuant to paragraph (c)(2)(vi)(A) of this section is—

(1) The same as the taxable year of the foreign person described in paragraph (c)(2)(vi)(A)(2) of this section, if that foreign person has a U.S. income tax or information return filing obligation for its taxable year; or

(2) The calendar year, if paragraph (c)(2)(vi)(C)(1) of this section does not apply, unless otherwise provided in forms, instructions, or published guidance.

(e) * * *

(9) Reporting required under section 6038A. Paragraph (c)(2)(vi) of this section applies to taxable years of entities beginning after December 31, 2016, and ending on or after December 13, 2017.

John Dalrymple, Deputy Commissioner for Services and Enforcement. Approved: November 15, 2016. Mark J. Mazur, Assistant Secretary of the Treasury (Tax Policy).
[FR Doc. 2016-29641 Filed 12-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 31 CFR Part 22 RIN 1505-AC45 Regulation Regarding Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Race, Color, or National Origin in Programs or Activities Receiving Federal Financial Assistance From the Department of the Treasury AGENCY:

Department of the Treasury.

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

This final rule provides for the enforcement of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended (“Title VI”) to the end that no person in the United States shall on the grounds of race, color, or national origin be denied participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be otherwise subjected to discrimination under any program or activity that receives federal financial assistance from the Department of the Treasury. The promulgation of this final regulation will provide guidance to the Department's recipients of federal financial assistance in complying with the provisions of Title VI and will also promote consistent and appropriate enforcement of Title VI by the Department's components. Through this final rule, the Department also notifies beneficiaries of its programs offering financial assistance of the protections against discrimination based on race, color, and national origin.

DATES:

Effective January 12, 2017.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Mariam G. Harvey, Director, Office of Civil Rights and Diversity, Department of the Treasury, (202) 622-0316 (voice), by mail to Mariam G. Harvey, Director, Office of Civil Rights and Diversity, 1500 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20220; or facsimile (202) 622-0367.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Purpose of the Regulatory Action

The purpose of this final rule is to provide for the enforcement of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2000d, et seq.), as it applies to programs or activities receiving assistance from the Department of the Treasury. Specifically, the statute states that “[n]o person in the United States shall, on the grounds of race, color, or national origin be denied participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be otherwise subjected to discrimination under any program or activity that receives federal financial assistance.” 42 U.S.C. 2000d. Each federal agency subject to Title VI is required to issue regulations implementing Title VI. 28 CFR 42.403. The Department of the Treasury is issuing Title VI regulations for the first time. Under Treasury's Title VI implementing regulations, Treasury-funded programs are prohibited from taking acts, including permitting actions, that discriminate based on the statutorily protected classes. The regulations further provide for Treasury procedures to ensure compliance, including a hearing procedure.

Prior to this rule, the Department was requiring recipients of financial assistance to sign assurances of compliance with Title VI. With the issuance of this final rule, the Department will continue to require assurance of compliance and strengthen its civil rights compliance requirements.

II. Background A. Treasury's July 13, 2015, Proposed Rule

On July 13, 2015, at 80 FR 39977, Treasury published its proposed rule implementing Title VI. Each federal agency subject to Title VI is required to issue regulations implementing Title VI. 42 U.S.C. 2000d to 2000d-7; 28 CFR 42.403. The comment period for the proposed rule ended on September 11, 2015.

III. Public Comments and Treasury's Response A. The Public Comments Generally

The public posted six comments to the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking implementing Title VI. Three comments were from public interest groups. One comment was from a city government office. Two individuals also commented, but one of the comments was nonresponsive. All public comments can be viewed at http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketBrowser;rpp=25;po=0;dct=PS%252BPR;D=TREAS-DO-2015-0006.

The comments can be grouped in two main subjects: Data collection and coverage of Low Income Housing Credits (LIHTCs).

B. Specific Public Comments 1. Burden of Data Collection

Comment: A commenter disagreed with the collection of the ethnicity of the taxpayers receiving tax preparation services through Volunteer Income Tax Assistance (VITA), stating that the information will not help prove or disprove discrimination. The commenter opined that the best data are gained from the feedback received from bureau employees and from the taxpayers who report having issues at a VITA site. The commenter favors the current compliance practices (displaying a poster, providing information about where to file a complaint, and unannounced site visits) as a far better method for monitoring compliance with nondiscrimination regulations.

Treasury Response: Treasury agrees that the practices in place are useful, and they will continue under the final rule. Treasury disagrees with this commenter's view on data collection, however, because it is required for the appropriate enforcement of Title VI. The coordination regulations issued by the Department of Justice (DOJ) under the authority of Executive Order 12250 require agencies to “provide for the collection of data and information from applicants for and recipients of federal assistance sufficient to permit the effective enforcement of Title VI.” 28 CFR 42.406(a). Collecting information about the race and ethnicity of program beneficiaries will help the Department ensure its programs that offer financial assistance are providing equal opportunity to the eligible beneficiaries, regardless of their race and national origin. The data will also allow the Department to investigate discrimination complaints alleging a violation of Title VI adequately.

Comment: A commenter suggests the grantees should have to supplement local data and/or common knowledge regarding the actual neighborhoods that exist within each program jurisdiction, to enhance the utility of the information required to be maintained for assessing the success of Title VI enforcement.

Treasury Response: The Department plans to issue guidelines regarding data collection in accordance with the requirements in 28 CFR 42.406. The Department will collect data sufficient for the effective enforcement of Title VI. The government-wide coordination regulations state that where an agency determines that the collection of additional data, such as demographic maps, the racial composition of affected neighborhoods, or census data, is necessary or appropriate, the agency shall specify, in its guidelines or in other directives, the need to submit such data. The Department can collect such additional data only to the extent that it is readily available or can be compiled with reasonable effort.

Comment: A commenter recommends as a way to minimize the burden of complying with the proposed information collection, Treasury implement a standard form for reporting compliance to agency officials (referencing § 22.6 of the proposed rule that obligates recipients to submit compliance reports). A standard form will also promote consistency and appropriate enforcement of Title VI by the Department's components.

Treasury Response: Treasury agrees that a standard form for reporting compliance information will assist its recipients and promote consistency across the Department's components. The Department will issue guidance to its recipients and agency officials regarding data collection as required by the government-wide coordination regulations, and will consider making a data collection form part of the upcoming guidance.

Comment: A commenter asks what is to be gleaned from the data if a high number of participants opt not to answer the racial and ethnic data question. The commenter wanted to know if recipients will be asked to guess the taxpayers' ethnic backgrounds.

Treasury Response: The Department will provide guidance to its recipients regarding data collection as required by the government-wide coordination regulations, and in accordance with Office of Management and Budget (OMB) guidance, including OMB Statistical Policy Directive No. 15, as revised; and OMB Bulletin No. 00-02. Self-identification is the preferred method of data collection about race and ethnicity. OMB guidance states that respect for individual dignity should guide the processes and methods for collecting data on race and ethnicity. Respondent self-identification should be used to the greatest extent possible, but observer identification is more practical in some data collection systems.

Comment: A commenter asked if the Department will assume that if the vast majority of beneficiaries receiving benefits at a site belong to a particular ethnic background discrimination has occurred.

Treasury Response: Data showing the race and ethnicity of the program beneficiaries are relevant to determine compliance with the requirements of Title VI by the recipients of Treasury financial assistance. If the Department finds during a compliance review or investigation that a protected group in the population of the service area is not participating in the program, the Department will look at the entire record to determine the reason for the lack of participation, and whether corrective actions are needed. The Department will discuss issues of noncompliance with its recipients with the goal of achieving voluntary compliance.

Comment: Two commenters were concerned that increasing the burden on recipients of the VITA program will result in further reduction in the number of volunteers. The commenters stated they oppose any changes created by the rule that would result in additional burden to recipients of the VITA program by requiring additional documentation, reporting, and records retention. One commenter supports the information collection and is in agreement that the information collection does not subject recipients to any new substantive obligations, and that the economic burden associated with the collection of information will not significantly affect small governments or entities.

Treasury Response: The Department believes that any burden created by the requirements of the new rule, including the collection of data, is reasonable and justified by the goal of ensuring equal opportunity and nondiscrimination in the financial assistance programs. In the case of the VITA program, the recipients are already collecting data from the beneficiaries using the intake forms required by the program.

2. Inclusion of Low-Income Housing Credits in the Covered Programs

Comments: Three commenters stated that low-income housing credits (LIHTCs) should be included in the list of programs in the Appendix. These commenters stated that tax credits like LIHTCs provide a subsidy to achieve a specific public benefit and are federal financial assistance (FFA) for the purposes of Title VI. The three commenters stressed the important role LIHTCs play in the development of affordable housing, and stated that listing LIHTCs as FFA would protect millions of low-income individuals from housing discrimination.

Treasury Response: We agree with commenters regarding the importance of protecting the civil rights of individuals living in properties developed using LIHTCs. Other federal civil rights statutes, including the Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. 3601 et seq. (FHA), prohibit discrimination on the bases of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, familial status, and disability, and apply to LIHTC properties. * * * The FHA prohibits both intentional discrimination and practices that have an unjustified discriminatory effect. Treasury's commitment to ensuring that developers, owners, operators, and managers of LIHTC properties do not discriminate, consistent with tax regulations that require LIHTC buildings to comply with fair-housing requirements, includes a 2000 Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the Department of Justice and the Department of Housing and Urban Development. This MOU is aimed at ensuring that developers, owners, operators, and managers of LIHTC properties comply with the FHA. See https://www.irs.gov/businesses/small-businesses-self-employed/exhibit-13-2. Among other provisions, the MOU requires the IRS to notify owners of LIHTC properties facing allegations of housing discrimination that a finding of a violation of the FHA could result in a loss of LIHTCs. This MOU demonstrates Treasury's commitment to ensuring that LIHTC housing providers do not discriminate in violation of the FHA.

The comments also stated that Title VI coverage was important to ensure that state agencies allocate housing credit dollar amounts (that is, the eligibility to earn LIHTCs) among proposed projects consistent with civil rights goals. These state agencies allocating housing credit dollar amounts may also receive grants or other forms of FFA from another federal agency, such as the Department of Housing and Urban Development, which would result in Title VI coverage for all of the state agency's operations. Thus, if an individual or organization believes that a state agency is allocating housing credit dollar amounts in a manner inconsistent with the requirements of Title VI, that individual or organization may determine whether the state agency is otherwise receiving FFA (which may include consulting www.usaspending.gov) and may file a complaint with the appropriate federal agency. Civil rights protections thereby cover LIHTC allocations and properties receiving LIHTCs regardless of whether the credits themselves constitute FFA as a legal matter.

While tax credits are generally not considered FFA, we recognize that, as the commenters have pointed out, some aspects of LIHTCs resemble programs that constitute FFA. Though we are not including LIHTCs in the Appendix, we emphasize that the Appendix does not purport to be exhaustive, and the absence of a program or activity from the list does not by such absence limit the applicability of Title VI to that program or activity.

IV. Procedural Requirements Executive Order 12866

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. This rule has been designated a “significant regulatory action” although not economically significant, under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, the rule has been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

The Department certifies that no actions were deemed necessary under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995. Furthermore, these regulations will not result in the expenditure by State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100,000,000 or more in any one year, and they will not significantly or uniquely affect small governments.

The Regulatory Flexibility Act

The Department, in accordance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 605(b), has reviewed these Title VI regulations and by approving, certifies that these regulations will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities because all of the entities that are subject to these regulations are already subject to Title VI, and some entities already are subject to the Title VI regulations of other agencies.

This rule is not a “major rule,” nor will it have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities, in large part because these regulations do not impose any new substantive obligations on federal funding recipients. All recipients of federal funding have been bound by Title VI's antidiscrimination provision since 1964. Individual participants in the recipients' programs have thus long had the right to be free from discrimination on the basis of race, color, and national origin. This rule merely ensures that the Department and its components have regulations implementing this statute.

Executive Order 13132

These Title VI regulations 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. These Title VI regulations do not subject recipients of federal funding to any new substantive obligations because all recipients of federal funding have been bound by Title VI's antidiscrimination provision since 1964. Moreover, these Title VI regulations are required by statute; Congress specifically directed federal agencies to adopt implementing regulations when Title VI was enacted. Therefore, in accordance with section 6 of Executive Order 13132, the Department has determined that this rule does not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant the preparation of a federalism summary impact statement. No further action is required.

Executive Order 12250

The Attorney General has reviewed and approved this rule pursuant to Executive Order 12250.

Paperwork Reduction Act

Under the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. chapter 35), an agency may not conduct or sponsor and a person is not required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a valid control number issued by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). The information collections contained in this rule will be submitted and approved by OMB in connection with information collections for the applicable programs listed in appendix A to the regulations.

The information collections contained in this rule are found in §§ 22.5 (reporting), 22.6 (reporting and recordkeeping), 22.7 (reporting), and 22.10 (reporting).

The OMB control numbers that will be revised include the following:

Bureau/office Program or activity OMB Control Nos. Departmental Offices, Office of Domestic Finance, Office of Financial Institutions Community Development Financial Institutions (CDFI) Fund—Financial Component 1559-0021 Departmental Offices, Office of Domestic Finance, Office of Financial Institutions Community Development Financial Institutions (CDFI) Fund—Technical Assistance Component 1559-0021 Departmental Offices, Office of Domestic Finance, Office of Financial Institutions Bank Enterprise Award Program 1559-0032,
  • 1559-0005
  • Departmental Offices, Office of Domestic Finance, Office of Financial Institutions Native American Community Development Financial Institutions (CDFI) Assistance Program, Financial Assistance (FA) Awards 1559-0021 Departmental Offices, Office of Domestic Finance, Office of Financial Institutions Native American Community Development Financial Institutions (CDFI) Assistance (NACA) Program, Technical Assistance Grants 1559-0021 Departmental Offices, Office of Domestic Finance, Office of Financial Institutions Community Development Financial Institutions Fund, Capital Magnet Fund 1559-0043 Departmental Offices, Office of Domestic Finance, Office of Small Business, Community Development, and Housing Policy State Small Business Credit Initiative 1505-0227 Internal Revenue Service Tax Counseling for the Elderly Grant Program 1545-2222 Internal Revenue Service Volunteer Income Tax Assistance Program 1545-2222 Internal Revenue Service Volunteer Income Tax Assistance Grant Program 1545-2222 Internal Revenue Service Low Income Taxpayer Clinic Grant Program 1545-1648 United States Mint U.S. Commemorative Coin Programs TBD Departmental Offices, Treasury Executive Office for Asset Forfeiture Equitable sharing program (transfer of forfeited property to state and local law enforcement agencies) 1505-0152 Departmental Offices, Office of the Fiscal Assistant Secretary Grants under the RESTORE Act's Direct Component and Centers of Excellence program and supplemental compliance responsibilities for its Comprehensive Plan and Spill Impact Components. 1505-0250
    List of Subjects in 31 CFR Part 22

    Administrative practice and procedure, Claims, Disability benefits, Government contracts, Nondiscrimination.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Department amends 31 CFR by adding part 22 to read as follows: PART 22—NONDISCRIMINATION ON THE BASIS OF RACE, COLOR, OR NATIONAL ORIGIN IN PROGRAMS OR ACTIVITIES RECEIVING FEDERAL FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Sec. 22.1 Purpose. 22.2 Application. 22.3 Definitions. 22.4 Discrimination prohibited. 22.5 Assurances required. 22.6 Compliance information. 22.7 Conduct of investigations. 22.8 Procedure for effecting compliance. 22.9 Hearings. 22.10 Decisions and notices. 22.11 Judicial review. 22.12 Effect on other regulations, forms, and instructions. Appendix A to Part 22—Activities to Which This Part Applies Authority:

    42 U.S.C. 2000d-2000d-7.

    § 22.1 Purpose.

    The purpose of this part is to effectuate the provisions of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VI) to the end that no person in the United States shall, on the grounds of race, color, or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be otherwise subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving federal financial assistance from the Department of the Treasury.

    § 22.2 Application.

    (a) This part applies to any program for which federal financial assistance is authorized under a law administered by the Department, including the types of federal financial assistance listed in Appendix A to this part. It also applies to money paid, property transferred, or other federal financial assistance extended after the effective date of this part pursuant to an application approved before that effective date. This part does not apply to:

    (1) Any federal financial assistance by way of insurance or guaranty contracts;

    (2) Any assistance to any individual who is the ultimate beneficiary; or

    (3) Any employment practice, under any such program, of any employer, employment agency, or labor organization, except to the extent described in § 22.4(c). The fact that a type of federal financial assistance is not listed in Appendix A to this part shall not mean, if Title VI is otherwise applicable, that a program is not covered. Other types of federal financial assistance under statutes now in force or hereinafter enacted may be added to appendix A to this part.

    (b) In any program receiving federal financial assistance in the form, or for the acquisition, of real property or an interest in real property, to the extent that rights to space on, over, or under any such property are included as part of the program receiving that assistance, the nondiscrimination requirement of this part shall extend to any facility located wholly or in part in that space.

    § 22.3 Definitions.

    As used in this part:

    Applicant means a person who submits an application, request, or plan required to be approved by an official of the Department of the Treasury, or designee thereof, or by a primary recipient, as a condition to eligibility for federal financial assistance, and application means such an application, request, or plan.

    Designated agency official means the Assistant Secretary for Management and his or her designee.

    Facility includes all or any part of structures, equipment, or other real or personal property or interests therein, and the provision of facilities includes the construction, expansion, renovation, remodeling, alteration, or acquisition of facilities.

    Federal financial assistance includes:

    (1) Grants and loans of federal funds;

    (2) The grant or donation of federal property and interests in property;

    (3) The detail of federal personnel;

    (4) The sale and lease of, and the permission to use (on other than a casual or transient basis), federal property or any interest in such property without consideration or at a nominal consideration, or at a consideration which is reduced for the purpose of assisting the recipient, or in recognition of the public interest to be served by such sale or lease to the recipient; and

    (5) Any federal agreement, arrangement, or other contract which has as one of its purposes the provision of assistance.

    Primary recipient means any recipient that is authorized or required to extend federal financial assistance to another recipient.

    Program or activity and program mean all of the operations of any entity described in the following paragraphs (1) through (4) of this definition, any part of which is extended federal financial assistance:

    (1)(i) A department, agency, special purpose district, or other instrumentality of a State or of a local government; or

    (ii) The entity of such state or local government that distributes such assistance and each such department or agency to which the assistance is extended, in the case of assistance to a State or local government;

    (2)(i) A college, university, or other postsecondary institution, or a public system of higher education; or

    (ii) A local educational agency (as defined in 20 U.S.C. 7801), system of vocational education, or other school system;

    (3)(i) An entire corporation, partnership, or other private organization, or an entire sole proprietorship—

    (A) If assistance is extended to such corporation, partnership, private organization, or sole proprietorship as a whole; or

    (B) Which is principally engaged in the business of providing education, health care, housing, social services, or parks and recreation; or

    (ii) The entire plant or other comparable, geographically separate facility to which federal financial assistance is extended, in the case of any other corporation, partnership, private organization or sole proprietorship; or

    (4) Any other entity which is established by two or more of the entities described in the preceding paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of this definition.

    Recipient may mean any State, territory, possession, the District of Columbia, or Puerto Rico, or any political subdivision thereof, or instrumentality thereof, any public or private agency, institution, or organization, or other entity, or any individual, in any State, territory, possession, the District of Columbia, or Puerto Rico, to whom federal financial assistance is extended, directly or through another recipient, including any successor, assignee, or transferee thereof, but such term does not include any ultimate beneficiary.

    § 22.4 Discrimination prohibited.

    (a) General. No person in the United States shall, on the grounds of race, color, or national origin be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be otherwise subjected to discrimination under, any program to which this part applies.

    (b) Specific discriminatory actions prohibited. (1) A recipient to which this part applies may not, directly or through contractual or other arrangements, on the grounds of race, color, or national origin:

    (i) Deny a person any service, financial aid, or other benefit provided under the program;

    (ii) Provide any service, financial aid, or other benefit to a person which is different, or is provided in a different manner, from that provided to others under the program;

    (iii) Subject a person to segregation or separate treatment in any matter related to his receipt of any service, financial aid, or other benefit under the program;

    (iv) Restrict a person in any way in the enjoyment of any advantage or privilege enjoyed by others receiving any service, financial aid, or other benefit under the program;

    (v) Treat a person differently from others in determining whether he satisfies any admission, enrollment, quota, eligibility, membership, or other requirement or condition which persons must meet in order to be provided any service, financial aid, or other benefit provided under the program;

    (vi) Deny a person an opportunity to participate in the program through the provision of services or otherwise to afford him an opportunity to do so which is different from that afforded others under the program (including the opportunity to participate in the program as a volunteer or as an employee, but only to the extent set forth in paragraph (c) of this section); or

    (vii) Deny a person the opportunity to participate as a member of a planning, advisory, or similar body which is an integral part of the program.

    (2) A recipient, in determining the types of services, financial aid, or other benefits, or facilities which will be provided under any such program, or the class of persons to whom, or the situations in which, such services, financial aid, other benefits, or facilities will be provided under any such program, or the class of persons to be afforded an opportunity to participate in any such program, may not, directly or through contractual or other arrangements, use criteria or methods of administration which have the effect of subjecting persons to discrimination because of their race, color, or national origin or have the effect of defeating or substantially impairing accomplishment of the objectives of the program with respect to individuals of a particular race, color, or national origin.

    (3) In determining the site or location of facilities, a recipient or applicant may not make selections with the purpose or effect of excluding persons from, denying them the benefits of, or subjecting them to discrimination under any program to which this regulation applies, on the grounds of race, color, or national origin; or with the purpose or effect of defeating or substantially impairing the accomplishment of the objectives of Title VI or this part.

    (4) As used in this section the services, financial aid, or other benefits provided under a program receiving federal financial assistance include any service, financial aid, or other benefit provided in or through a facility provided with the aid of federal financial assistance.

    (5) The enumeration of specific forms of prohibited discrimination in this paragraph does not limit the generality of the prohibition in paragraph (a) of this section.

    (6) This part does not prohibit the consideration of race, color, or national origin if the purpose and effect are to remove or overcome the consequences of practices or impediments which have restricted the availability of, or participation in, the program or activity receiving federal financial assistance, on the grounds of race, color, or national origin. Where prior discriminatory practice or usage tends, on the grounds of race, color, or national origin to exclude individuals from participation in, to deny them the benefits of, or to subject them to discrimination under any program or activity to which this part applies, the applicant or recipient must take affirmative action to remove or overcome the effects of the prior discriminatory practice or usage. Even in the absence of prior discriminatory practice or usage, a recipient in administering a program or activity to which this part applies, may take affirmative action to assure that no person is excluded from participation in or denied the benefits of the program or activity on the grounds of race, color, or national origin.

    (c) Employment practices. (1) Where a primary objective of the federal financial assistance to a program to which this part applies is to provide employment, a recipient subject to this part shall not, directly or through contractual or other arrangements, subject a person to discrimination on the ground of race, color, or national origin in its employment practices under such program (including recruitment or recruitment advertising, hiring, firing, upgrading, promotion, demotion, transfer, layoff, termination, rates of pay or other forms of compensation or benefits, selection for training or apprenticeship, and use of facilities). Such recipient shall take affirmative action to insure that applicants are employed, and employees are treated during employment, without regard to their race, color, or national origin. The requirements applicable to construction employment under any such program shall be those specified in or pursuant to Part III of Executive Order 11246 or any Executive Order which supersedes it.

    (2) Where a primary objective of the federal financial assistance is not to provide employment, but discrimination on the grounds of race, color, or national origin in the employment practices of the recipient or other persons subject to the regulation tends, on the grounds of race, color, or national origin, to exclude individuals from participation in, deny them the benefits of, or subject them to discrimination under any program to which this regulation applies, the provisions of paragraph (c)(1) of this section shall apply to the employment practices of the recipient or other persons subject to the regulation, to the extent necessary to assure equality of opportunity to, and nondiscriminatory treatment of, beneficiaries.

    § 22.5 Assurances required.

    (a) General. Either at the application stage or the award stage, federal agencies must ensure that applications for federal financial assistance or awards of federal financial assistance contain, be accompanied by, or be covered by a specifically identified assurance from the applicant or recipient, satisfactory to the designated agency official, that each program or activity operated by the applicant or recipient and to which these Title VI regulations apply will be operated in compliance with these Title VI regulations.

    (b) Duration of obligation. (1) In the case where the federal financial assistance is to provide or is in the form of personal property, or real property or interest therein or structures thereon, the assurance shall obligate the recipient, or, in the case of a subsequent transfer, the transferee, for the period during which the property is used for a purpose for which the federal financial assistance is extended or for another purpose involving the provision of similar services or benefits, or for as long as the recipient retains ownership or possession of the property, whichever is longer. In all other cases the assurance shall obligate the recipient for the period during which federal financial assistance is extended to the program.

    (2) In the case where federal financial assistance is provided in the form of a transfer of real property, structures, or improvements thereon, or interest therein, from the federal Government, the instrument effecting or recording the transfer shall contain a covenant running with the land assuring nondiscrimination for the period during which the real property is used for a purpose for which the federal financial assistance is extended or for another purpose involving the provision of similar services or benefits. Where no transfer of property or interest therein from the federal government is involved, but property is acquired or improved with federal financial assistance, the recipient shall agree to include such covenant in any subsequent transfer of such property. When the property is obtained from the federal government, such covenant may also include a condition coupled with a right to be reserved by the Department to revert title to the property in the event of a breach of the covenant where, in the discretion of the designated agency official, such a condition and right of reverter is appropriate to the statute under which the real property is obtained and to the nature of the grant and the grantee. In such event if a transferee of real property proposes to mortgage or otherwise encumber the real property as security for financing construction of new, or improvement of existing, facilities on such property for the purposes for which the property was transferred, the designated agency official may agree, upon request of the transferee and if necessary to accomplish such financing, and upon such conditions as the designated agency official deems appropriate, to subordinate such right of reversion to the lien of such mortgage or other encumbrance.

    (c) Continuing federal financial assistance. Every application by a State or a State agency for continuing federal financial assistance to which this part applies (including the types of federal financial assistance listed in appendix A to this part) shall as a condition to its approval and the extension of any federal financial assistance pursuant to the application:

    (1) Contain, be accompanied by, or be covered by a statement that the program is (or, in the case of a new program, will be) conducted in compliance with all requirements imposed by or pursuant to this part; and

    (2) Provide, be accompanied by, or be covered by provision for such methods of administration for the program as are found by the designated agency official to give reasonable guarantee that the applicant and all recipients of federal financial assistance under such program will comply with all requirements imposed by or pursuant to this part.

    (d) Assurance from institutions. (1) In the case of any application for federal financial assistance to an institution of higher education (including assistance for construction, for research, for special training projects, for student loans or for any other purpose), the assurance required by this section shall extend to admission practices and to all other practices relating to the treatment of students.

    (2) The assurance required with respect to an institution of higher education, hospital, or any other institution, insofar as the assurance relates to the institution's practices with respect to admission or other treatment of individuals as students, patients, or clients of the institution or to the opportunity to participate in the provision of services or other benefits to such individuals, shall be applicable to the entire institution.

    (e) Form. (1) The assurances required by paragraph (a) of this section, which may be included as part of a document that addresses other assurances or obligations, shall include that the applicant or recipient will comply with all applicable federal statutes relating to nondiscrimination. This includes but is not limited to Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 2000d, et seq.

    (2) The designated agency official will specify the extent to which such assurances will be required of the applicant's or recipient's subgrantees, contractors, subcontractors, transferees, or successors in interest. Any such assurance shall include provisions which give the United States a right to seek its judicial enforcement.

    § 22.6 Compliance information.

    (a) Cooperation and assistance. The designated Agency official shall to the fullest extent practicable seek the cooperation of recipients in obtaining compliance with this part and shall provide assistance and guidance to recipients to help them comply voluntarily with this part.

    (b) Compliance reports. Each recipient shall keep such records and submit to the designated Agency official timely, complete, and accurate compliance reports at such times, and in such form and containing such information, as the designated Agency official may determine to be necessary to enable the designated Agency official to ascertain whether the recipient has complied or is complying with this part. In the case in which a primary recipient extends federal financial assistance to any other recipient, such other recipient shall also submit such compliance reports to the primary recipient as may be necessary to enable the primary recipient to carry out its obligations under this part. In general recipients should have available for the designated Agency official racial and ethnic data showing the extent to which members of minority groups are beneficiaries of programs receiving Federal financial assistance.

    (c) Access to sources of information. Each recipient shall permit access by the designated Agency official during normal business hours to such of its books, records, accounts, and other sources of information, and its facilities as may be pertinent to ascertain compliance with this part. Where any information required of a recipient is in the exclusive possession of any other agency, institution, or person and this agency, institution, or person fails or refuses to furnish this information, the recipient shall so certify in its report and shall set forth what efforts it has made to obtain the information.

    (d) Information to beneficiaries and participants. Each recipient shall make available to participants, beneficiaries, and other interested persons such information regarding the provisions of this part and its applicability to the program for which the recipient receives federal financial assistance, and make such information available to them in such manner, as the designated Agency official finds necessary to apprise such persons of the protections against discrimination assured them by Title VI and this part.

    § 22.7 Conduct of investigations.

    (a) Periodic compliance reviews. The designated Agency official shall from time to time review the practices of recipients to determine whether they are complying with this part.

    (b) Complaints. Any person who believes that he or she, or any specific class of persons, has been subjected to discrimination prohibited by this part may by himself or herself, or by a representative, file with the designated Agency official a written complaint. A complaint must be filed not later than 180 days after the date of the alleged discrimination, unless the time for filing is extended by the designated Agency official.

    (c) Investigations. The designated Agency official will make a prompt investigation whenever a compliance review, report, complaint, or any other information indicates a possible failure to comply with this part. The investigation will include, where appropriate, a review of the pertinent practices and policies of the recipient, the circumstances under which the possible noncompliance with this part occurred, and other factors relevant to a determination as to whether the recipient has failed to comply with this part.

    (d) Resolution of matters. (1) If an investigation pursuant to paragraph (c) of this section indicates a failure to comply with this part, the designated Agency official will so inform the recipient and the matter will be resolved by informal means whenever possible. If it has been determined that the matter cannot be resolved by informal means, action will be taken as provided for in § 22.8.

    (2) If an investigation does not warrant action pursuant to paragraph (d)(1) of this section the designated Agency official will so inform the recipient and the complainant, if any, in writing.

    (e) Intimidatory or retaliatory acts prohibited. No recipient or other person shall intimidate, threaten, coerce, or discriminate against any individual for the purpose of interfering with any right or privilege secured by section 601 of Title VI or this part, or because the individual has made a complaint, testified, assisted, or participated in any manner in an investigation, proceeding, or hearing under this part. The identity of complainants shall be kept confidential except to the extent necessary to carry out the purposes of this part, including the conduct of any investigation, hearing, or judicial proceeding arising thereunder.

    § 22.8 Procedure for effecting compliance.

    (a) General. If there appears to be a failure or threatened failure to comply with this part, and if the noncompliance or threatened noncompliance cannot be corrected by informal means, compliance with this part may be effected by the suspension or termination of or refusal to grant or to continue federal financial assistance or by any other means authorized by law. Such other means may include, but are not limited to:

    (1) A referral to the Department of Justice with a recommendation that appropriate proceedings be brought to enforce any rights of the United States under any law of the United States (including other titles of the Civil Rights Act of 1964), or any assurance or other contractual undertaking; and

    (2) Any applicable proceeding under State or local law.

    (b) Noncompliance with § 22.5. If an applicant fails or refuses to furnish an assurance required under § 22.5 or otherwise fails or refuses to comply with a requirement imposed by or pursuant to that section, federal financial assistance may be suspended, terminated, or refused in accordance with the procedures of paragraph (c) of this section. The Agency shall not be required to provide assistance in such a case during the pendency of the administrative proceedings under such paragraph. However, subject to § 22.12, the Agency shall continue assistance during the pendency of such proceedings where such assistance is due and payable pursuant to an application approved prior to the effective date of this part.

    (c) Termination of or refusal to grant or to continue federal financial assistance. (1) No order suspending, terminating, or refusing to grant or continue federal financial assistance shall become effective until:

    (i) The designated Agency official has advised the applicant or recipient of the applicant's or recipient's failure to comply and has determined that compliance cannot be secured by voluntary means;

    (ii) There has been an express finding on the record, after opportunity for hearing, of a failure by the applicant or recipient to comply with a requirement imposed by or pursuant to this part;

    (iii) The action has been approved by the designated Agency official pursuant to § 22.10(e); and

    (iv) The expiration of 30 days after the designated Agency official has filed with the committee of the House and the committee of the Senate having legislative jurisdiction over the program involved, a full written report of the circumstances and the grounds for such action.

    (2) Any action to suspend or terminate or to refuse to grant or to continue federal financial assistance shall be limited to the particular political entity, or part thereof, or other applicant or recipient as to whom such a finding has been made and shall be limited in its effect to the particular program, or part thereof, in which such noncompliance has been so found.

    (d) Other means authorized by law. No action to effect compliance with Title VI by any other means authorized by law shall be taken by the Department of the Treasury until:

    (1) The designated Agency official has determined that compliance cannot be secured by voluntary means;

    (2) The recipient or other person has been notified of its failure to comply and of the action to be taken to effect compliance; and

    (3) The expiration of at least 10 days from the mailing of such notice to the recipient or other person. During this period of at least 10 days, additional efforts shall be made to persuade the recipient or other person to comply with the regulation and to take such corrective action as may be appropriate.

    § 22.9 Hearings.

    (a) Opportunity for hearing. Whenever an opportunity for a hearing is required by § 22.8(c), reasonable notice shall be given by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, to the affected applicant or recipient. This notice shall advise the applicant or recipient of the action proposed to be taken, the specific provision under which the proposed action against it is to be taken, and the matters of fact or law asserted as the basis for this action, and either:

    (1) Fix a date not less than 20 days after the date of such notice within which the applicant or recipient may request of the designated agency official that the matter be scheduled for hearing; or

    (2) Advise the applicant or recipient that the matter in question has been set for hearing at a stated place and time. The time and place so fixed shall be reasonable and shall be subject to change for cause. The complainant, if any, shall be advised of the time and place of the hearing. An applicant or recipient may waive a hearing and submit written information and argument for the record. The failure of an applicant or recipient to request a hearing under this paragraph or to appear at a hearing for which a date has been set shall be deemed to be a waiver of the right to a hearing under section 602 of Title VI and § 22.8(c) and consent to the making of a decision on the basis of such information as is available.

    (b) Time and place of hearing. Hearings shall be held at the offices of the Department of the Treasury component administering the program, at a time fixed by the designated Agency official unless the designated Agency official determines that the convenience of the applicant or recipient or of the Agency requires that another place be selected. Hearings shall be held before the designated Agency official, or at designated Agency official's discretion, before a hearing examiner appointed in accordance with section 3105 of title 5, United States Code, or detailed under section 3344 of title 5, United States Code.

    (c) Right to counsel. In all proceedings under this section, the applicant or recipient and the Agency shall have the right to be represented by counsel.

    (d) Procedures, evidence, and record. (1) The hearing, decision, and any administrative review thereof shall be conducted in conformity with sections 554 through 557 of title 5, United States Code, and in accordance with such rules of procedure as are proper (and not inconsistent with this section) relating to the conduct of the hearing, giving of notices subsequent to those provided for in paragraph (a) of this section, taking of testimony, exhibits, arguments and briefs, requests for findings, and other related matters. Both the designated Agency official and the applicant or recipient shall be entitled to introduce all relevant evidence on the issues as stated in the notice for hearing or as determined by the officer conducting the hearing at the outset of or during the hearing.

    (2) Technical rules of evidence do not apply to hearings conducted pursuant to this part, but rules or principles designed to assure production of the most credible evidence available and to subject testimony to test by cross-examination shall be applied where determined reasonably necessary by the officer conducting the hearing. The hearing officer may exclude irrelevant, immaterial, or unduly repetitious evidence. All documents and other evidence offered or taken for the record shall be open to examination by the parties and opportunity shall be given to refute facts and arguments advanced on either side of the issues. A transcript shall be made of the oral evidence except to the extent the substance thereof is stipulated for the record. All decisions shall be based upon the hearing record and written findings shall be made.

    (e) Consolidated or joint hearings. In cases in which the same or related facts are asserted to constitute noncompliance with this part with respect to two or more federal statutes, authorities, or other means by which federal financial assistance is extended and to which this part applies, or noncompliance with this part and the regulations of one or more other federal departments or agencies issued under Title VI, the designated Agency official may, by agreement with such other departments or agencies, where applicable, provide for the conduct of consolidated or joint hearings, and for the application to such hearings of rules or procedures not inconsistent with this part. Final decisions in such cases, insofar as this regulation is concerned, shall be made in accordance with § 22.10.

    § 22.10 Decisions and notices.

    (a) Procedure on decisions by hearing examiner. If the hearing is held by a hearing examiner, the hearing examiner shall either make an initial decision, if so authorized, or certify the entire record including his recommended findings and proposed decision to the designated agency official for a final decision, and a copy of such initial decision or certification shall be mailed to the applicant or recipient. Where the initial decision is made by the hearing examiner the applicant or recipient may, within 30 days after the mailing of such notice of initial decision, file with the designated Agency official the applicant's or recipient's exceptions to the initial decision, with the reasons therefor. In the absence of exceptions, the designated Agency official may, on his or her own motion, within 45 days after the initial decision, serve on the applicant or recipient a notice that the designated Agency official will review the decision. Upon the filing of such exceptions or of notice of review, the designated Agency official shall review the initial decision and issue his or her own decision thereon including the reasons therefor. In the absence of either exceptions or a notice of review the initial decision shall, subject to paragraph (e) of this section, constitute the final decision of the designated Agency official.

    (b) Decisions on record or review by the designated Agency official. Whenever a record is certified to the designated Agency official for decision or he or she reviews the decision of a hearing examiner pursuant to paragraph (a) of this section, or whenever the designated Agency official conducts the hearing, the applicant or recipient shall be given reasonable opportunity to file with the designated Agency official briefs or other written statements of its contentions, and a written copy of the final decision of the designated Agency official shall be sent to the applicant or recipient and to the complainant, if any.

    (c) Decisions on record where a hearing is waived. Whenever a hearing is waived pursuant to § 22.9, a decision shall be made by the designated Agency official on the record and a written copy of such decision shall be sent to the applicant or recipient, and to the complainant, if any.

    (d) Rulings required. Each decision of a hearing examiner or the designated Agency official shall set forth his or her ruling on each finding, conclusion, or exception presented, and shall identify the requirement or requirements imposed by or pursuant to this part with which it is found that the applicant or recipient has failed to comply.

    (e) Approval by designated Agency official. Any final decision by an official of the Agency, other than the designated Agency official personally, which provides for the suspension or termination of, or the refusal to grant or continue federal financial assistance, or the imposition of any other sanction available under this part or Title VI, shall promptly be transmitted to the designated Agency official personally, who may approve such decision, may vacate it, or remit or mitigate any sanction imposed.

    (f) Content of orders. The final decision may provide for suspension or termination of, or refusal to grant or continue federal financial assistance, in whole or in part, to which this regulation applies, and may contain such terms, conditions, and other provisions as are consistent with and will effectuate the purposes of Title VI and this part, including provisions designed to assure that no federal financial assistance to which this regulation applies will thereafter be extended to the applicant or recipient determined by such decision to be in default in its performance of an assurance given by it pursuant to this part, or to have otherwise failed to comply with this part, unless and until it corrects its noncompliance and satisfies the designated Agency official that it will fully comply with this part.

    (g) Post termination proceedings. (1) An applicant or recipient adversely affected by an order issued under paragraph (f) of this section shall be restored to full eligibility to receive federal financial assistance if it satisfies the terms and conditions of that order for such eligibility or if it brings itself into compliance with this part and provides reasonable assurance that it will fully comply with this part.

    (2) Any applicant or recipient adversely affected by an order entered pursuant to paragraph (f) of this section may at any time request the designated Agency official to restore fully its eligibility to receive federal financial assistance. Any such request shall be supported by information showing that the applicant or recipient has met the requirements of paragraph (g)(1) of this section. If the designated Agency official determines that those requirements have been satisfied, he or she shall restore such eligibility.

    (3) If the designated Agency official denies any such request, the applicant or recipient may submit a request for a hearing in writing, specifying why it believes such official to have been in error. It shall thereupon be given an expeditious hearing, with a decision on the record in accordance with rules or procedures issued by the designated Agency official. The applicant or recipient will be restored to such eligibility if it proves at such a hearing that it satisfied the requirements of paragraph (g)(1) of this section. While proceedings under this paragraph are pending, the sanctions imposed by the order issued under paragraph (f) of this section shall remain in effect.

    § 22.11 Judicial review.

    Action taken pursuant to section 602 of the Title VI is subject to judicial review as provided in section 603 of the Title VI.

    § 22.12 Effect on other regulations, forms, and instructions.

    (a) Effect on other regulations. All regulations, orders, or like directions issued before the effective date of this part by any officer of the Department of the Treasury which impose requirements designed to prohibit any discrimination against individuals on the grounds of race, color, or national origin under any program to which this part applies, and which authorize the suspension or termination of or refusal to grant or to continue federal financial assistance to any applicant for a recipient of such assistance for failure to comply with such requirements, are hereby superseded to the extent that such discrimination is prohibited by this part, except that nothing in this part may be considered to relieve any person of any obligation assumed or imposed under any such superseded regulation, order, instruction, or like direction before the effective date of this part. Nothing in this part, however, supersedes any of the following (including future amendments thereof):

    (1) Executive Order 11246 (3 CFR, 1965 Supp., p. 167) and regulations issued thereunder; or

    (2) Any other orders, regulations, or instructions, insofar as such orders, regulations, or instructions prohibit discrimination on the ground of race, color, or national origin in any program or situation to which this part is inapplicable, or prohibit discrimination on any other ground.

    (b) Forms and instructions. The designated Agency official shall issue and promptly make available to all interested persons forms and detailed instructions and procedures for effectuating this part as applied to programs to which this part applies and for which the designated Agency official is responsible.

    (c) Supervision and coordination. The designated Agency official may from time to time assign to officials of the Agency, or to officials of other departments or agencies of the Government with the consent of such departments or agencies, responsibilities in connection with the effectuation of the purposes of Title VI and this part (other than responsibility for final decision as provided in § 22.10), including the achievement of effective coordination and maximum uniformity within the Agency and within the Executive Branch of the Government in the application of Title VI and this part to similar programs and in similar situations. Any action taken, determination made or requirement imposed by an official of another department or agency acting pursuant to an assignment of responsibility under this paragraph shall have the same effect as though such action had been taken by the designated Agency official of the Department.

    Appendix A to Part 22—Activities to Which This Part Applies Note:

    Failure to list a type of federal assistance in this appendix A shall not mean, if Title VI is otherwise applicable, that a program is not covered.

    Component Program or activity Authority Departmental Offices, Office of Domestic Finance, Office of Financial Institutions Community Development Financial Institutions Fund—Financial Component Riegle Community Development and Regulatory Improvement Act of 1994, 12 U.S.C. 4701 et seq. Departmental Offices, Office of Domestic Finance, Office of Financial Institutions Community Development Financial Institutions Fund—Technical Assistance Component Riegle Community Development and Regulatory Improvement Act of 1994, 12 U.S.C. 4701 et seq. Departmental Offices, Office of Domestic Finance, Office of Financial Institutions Bank Enterprise Award Program Riegle Community Development and Regulatory Improvement Act of 1994 sec. 114, 12 U.S.C. 4713. Departmental Offices, Office of Domestic Finance, Office of Financial Institutions Native American Community Development Financial Institutions Assistance Program, Financial Assistance (FA) Awards Riegle Community Development Banking and Financial Institutions Act of 1994, 12 U.S.C. 4701 et seq. Departmental Offices, Office of Domestic Finance, Office of Financial Institutions Native American Community Development Financial Institutions Assistance (NACA) Program, Technical Assistance Grants Riegle Community Development Banking and Financial Institutions Act of 1994, 12 U.S.C. 4701 et seq. Departmental Offices, Office of Domestic Finance, Office of Financial Institutions Community Development Financial Institutions Fund, Capital Magnet Fund Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 sec. 1339, 12 U.S.C. 4569. Departmental Offices, Office of Domestic Finance, Office of Small Business, Community Development, and Housing Policy State Small Business Credit Initiative Small Business Jobs Act of 2010, 12 U.S.C. 5701 et seq. Internal Revenue Service Tax Counseling for the Elderly Grant Program Revenue Act of 1978 sec. 163, Public Law 95-600, 92 Stat 2763, 2810-2811. Internal Revenue Service Volunteer Income Tax Assistance Program Tax Reform Act of 1969, Public Law 91-172, 83 Stat. 487. Internal Revenue Service Volunteer Income Tax Assistance Grant Program Consolidated Appropriations Act, Public Law 110-161, 121 Stat. 1844, 1975-76 (2007). Internal Revenue Service Low Income Taxpayer Clinic Grant Program Internal Revenue Service Restructuring and Reform Act of 1998 sec. 3601, 26 U.S.C. 7526. United States Mint U.S. Commemorative Coin Programs Specific acts of Congress that authorize United States commemorative coin and medal programs provide assistance. See, e.g., the Louis Braille Bicentennial—Braille Literacy Commemorative Coin Act, Public Law 109-247 (2006); the Boy Scouts of America Centennial Commemorative Coin Act, Public Law 110-363 (2008); the American Veterans Disabled for Life Commemorative Coin Act, Public Law 110-277 (2008); and the National September 11 Memorial & Museum Commemorative Medal Act of 2010, Public Law 111-221 (2010). Departmental Offices, Treasury Executive Office for Asset Forfeiture Equitable sharing program (transfer of forfeited property to state and local law enforcement agencies) 18 U.S.C. 981(e)(2); 21 U.S.C. 881(e)(1)(A); 31 U.S.C. 9703. Various Treasury Bureaus and Offices (including the Internal Revenue Service) Unreimbursed detail of Federal Employees through the Intergovernmental Personnel Act 5 U.S.C. 3371 through 3376. Departmental Offices, Office of the Fiscal Assistant Secretary Grants under the RESTORE Act's Direct Component and Centers of Excellence program and supplemental compliance responsibilities for its Comprehensive Plan and Spill Impact Components Resources and Ecosystems Sustainability, Tourist Opportunities, and Revived Economies of the Gulf Coast States Act of 2012, Public Law 112-141.
    Kody Kinsley, Assistant Secretary for Management.
    [FR Doc. 2016-29629 Filed 12-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4810-25-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 117 [Docket No. USCG-2016-1045] Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Willamette River, Portland, OR AGENCY:

    Coast Guard, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice of deviation from regulation.

    SUMMARY:

    The Coast Guard has issued a temporary deviation from the operating schedule that governs the upper deck and lower deck of the Steel Bridge across the Willamette River, mile 12.1, at Portland, OR. The deviation is necessary to allow work crews to upgrade the electrical power and controls system. This deviation allows both upper and lower spans of the Steel Bridge to remain in the closed-to-navigation position to allow for the safe replacement of bridge operating equipment.

    DATES:

    This deviation is effective from 5 a.m. on January 9, 2017 to 11:59 p.m. on January 18, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    The docket for this deviation, USCG-2016-1045 is available at http://www.regulations.gov. Type the docket number in the “SEARCH” box and click “SEARCH.” Click on Open Docket Folder on the line associated with this deviation.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    If you have questions on this temporary deviation, call or email Mr. Steven Fischer, Bridge Administrator, Thirteenth Coast Guard District; telephone 206-220-7282, email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Union Pacific Railroad Company (UPRR) has requested a temporary deviation from the operating schedule for the Steel Bridge across the Willamette River, at mile 12.1, at Portland, OR. The deviation is necessary to accommodate work crews to conduct timely bridge equipment upgrades and replacement. The Steel Bridge is a double-deck lift bridge with a lower lift deck and an upper lift deck which operate independent of each other. To facilitate this event, the upper deck and the lower deck will remain in closed-to-navigation position. When both decks are in the closed-to-navigation position, the bridge provides 26 feet of vertical clearance above Columbia River Datum 0.0. The deviation period is from 5 a.m. on January 9, 2017 to 11:59 p.m. on January 18, 2017. The normal operating schedule for the Steel Bridge is in accordance with 33 CFR 117.897(c)(3)(ii).

    Waterway usage on this part of the Willamette River includes vessels ranging from commercial tug and barge to small pleasure craft. Vessels able to pass through the bridge in the closed-to-navigation position may do so at any time. The bridge will not be able to open for emergencies, and there is no immediate alternate route for vessels to pass. UPRR has conducted a detailed public outreach for this ten day closure of both decks on the Steel Bridge to Multnomah County, and mariners that transit on the river. The Coast Guard has not received any objections to this temporary deviation from the operating schedule. The Coast Guard will also inform the users of the waterways through our Local and Broadcast Notices to Mariners of the change in operating schedule for the bridge so that vessel operators can arrange their transits to minimize any impact caused by the temporary deviation.

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

    Dated: December 7, 2016. Steven M Fischer, Bridge Administrator, Thirteenth Coast Guard District.
    [FR Doc. 2016-29775 Filed 12-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 117 [Docket No. USCG-2016-1043] Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Columbia River, Kennewick, WA AGENCY:

    Coast Guard, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice of deviation from drawbridge regulations.

    SUMMARY:

    The Coast Guard has issued a temporary deviation from the operating schedule that governs the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) Railroad Bridge (Kennewick-Pasco Railroad Bridge) across the Columbia River, mile 328, at Kennewick, WA. This deviation is necessary to accommodate maintenance to replace a lift motor and install span controls. This deviation allows the bridge to remain in the closed position during installation activities.

    DATES:

    This deviation is effective from 8 a.m. on January 9, 2017 to 8 p.m. on January 20, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    The docket for this deviation, USCG-2016-1043 is available at http://www.regulations.gov. Type the docket number in the “SEARCH” box and click “SEARCH.” Click on Open Docket Folder on the line associated with this deviation.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    If you have questions on this temporary deviation, call or email Mr. Steven Fischer, Bridge Administrator, Thirteenth Coast Guard District; telephone 206-220-7282, email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    BNSF requested that the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) Railroad Bridge (Kennewick-Pasco Railroad Bridge) across the Columbia River, mile 328, remain closed to vessel traffic to replace a lift motor and install span controls. The Kennewick-Pasco Railroad Bridge provides 18 feet of vertical clearance above Columbia River Datum 0.0 while in the closed position. The current operations for the bridge is in 33 CFR 117.1035. This deviation allows the span of this bridge to remain in the closed-to-navigation position, and need not open for maritime traffic from 8 a.m. on January 9, 2017 to 8 p.m. on January 20, 2017. These dates coincide with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers schedule closures of the Columbia River navigation locks. The bridge shall operate in accordance to 33 CFR 117.1035 at all other times. Waterway usage on this part of the Columbia River includes vessels ranging from commercial tug and tow vessels to recreational pleasure craft including cabin cruisers and sailing vessels.

    Vessels able to pass through the bridge in the closed position may do so at anytime. During the first week of the installation period, the span of the bridge will not be able to open for maritime emergencies; however, the span may be opened during the second week of installation work for maritime emergencies, but any emergency opening will necessitate a time extension to the approved dates. No immediate alternate route for vessels to pass is available on this part of the river.

    The Coast Guard will also inform the users of the waterways through our Local and Broadcast Notices to Mariners of the change in operating schedule for the bridge so that vessels 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 designated time period. This deviation from the operating regulations is authorized under 33 CFR 117.35.

    Dated: December 7, 2016. Steven M. Fischer, Bridge Administrator, Thirteenth Coast Guard District.
    [FR Doc. 2016-29809 Filed 12-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 165 [Docket Number USCG-2016-0825] RIN 1625-AA00 Safety Zone; United Illuminating Company Housatonic River Crossing Project; Housatonic River, Milford and Stratford, CT AGENCY:

    Coast Guard, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Temporary final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone on the Housatonic River near Milford and Stratford, CT. The safety zone is needed to protect personnel, vessels, and the marine environment from potential hazards created by the United Illuminating Company Housatonic River Crossing Project. This regulation prohibits entry of vessels or people into the safety zone unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Sector Long Island Sound.

    DATES:

    This rule is effective without actual notice from December 13, 2016 through December 21, 2016. For the purposes of enforcement, actual notice will be used from November 29, 2016, through December 13, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-2016-0825 in the “SEARCH” box and click “SEARCH.” Click on Open Docket Folder on the line associated with this rule.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    If you have questions on this rule, contact Petty Officer Jay TerVeen, Prevention Department, U.S. Coast Guard Sector Long Island Sound, telephone (203) 468-4446, email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Table of Abbreviations COTP Captain of the Port DHS Department of Homeland Security FR Federal Register LIS Long Island Sound NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking NAD 83 North American Datum 1983 II. Background Information and Regulatory History

    On August 25, 2016, United Illuminating Company notified the Coast Guard that it will conduct a project involving the installation of new electrical transmission cables over the Housatonic River near Stratford and Milford, CT. The project is scheduled to begin on November 29, 2016 and be completed by December 21, 2016. The work will require the installation of six new transmission cables and two “static wires.” A messenger line with a buoy will be shot out into the river with a propulsive devise, and then picked up by a vessel, which will pull the messenger line to the opposite side of the river. The messenger line will be routed up the tower, and used to pull the cables across the river and onto the towers. Given the six cables and two static wires, there will be a total of eight “shots.” The work area is between the eastern and western shores of the Housatonic River. The southern boundary of the work zone begins at the Metro-North Rail Bridge and extends north approximately 525 feet upstream. The Captain of the Port (COTP) Long Island Sound has determined that the potential hazards associated with the cable crossing project could be a safety concern for anyone within the work area.

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary final rule without prior notice and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section 4(a) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those procedures are “impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.” Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for not publishing an NPRM with respect to this rule because doing so would be impracticable and contrary to the public interest. The late finalization of project details did not give the Coast Guard enough time to publish an NPRM, take public comments, and issue a final rule before the cable crossing operation is set to begin. It would be impracticable and contrary to the public interest to delay promulgating this rule as it is necessary to protect the safety of the public and waterway users.

    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), and for the same reasons stated in the preceding paragraph, the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after publication in the Federal Register.

    III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The legal basis for this temporary rule is 33 U.S.C. 1231. The COTP Sector LIS has determined that potential hazards associated with the river cable crossing project starting on November 29, 2016 and continuing through December 21, 2016 will be a safety concern for anyone within the work zone. This rule is needed to protect people and vessels within the safety zone while the cable crossing project is completed.

    IV. Discussion of the Rule

    This rule establishes a safety zone from 8:00 a.m. on November 29, 2016 to 6:00 p.m. on December 21, 2016. The safety zone will cover all navigable waters of the Housatonic River near Milford and Stratford, CT contained within the following area: Beginning at a point on land in position at 41°12′17″ N., 073°06′40″ W. near the Governor John Davis Lodge Turnpike (I-95) Bridge; then northeast across the Housatonic River to a point on land in position at 41°12′20″ N., 073°06′29″ W. near the Governor John Davis Lodge Turnpike (I-95) Bridge; then northwest along the shoreline to a point on land in position at 41°12′25″ N., 073°06′31″ W.; then southwest across the Housatonic River to a point on land in position at 41°12′22″ N., 073°06′43″ W.; then southeast along the shoreline back to point of origin (NAD 83). All positions are approximate. The duration of the zone is intended to ensure the safety of people and vessels in these navigable waters during any instance that necessitates a temporary closure of the Housatonic River at the work site. No vessel or person will be permitted to enter the safety zone without obtaining permission from the COTP or a designated representative. The safety zone will only be enforced during cable installation operations or other instances, when they cause a hazard to navigation.

    The Coast Guard will notify the public and local mariners of this safety zone through appropriate means, which may include, but are not limited to, publication in the Federal Register, the Local Notice to Mariners, and Broadcast Notice to Mariners via VHF-FM marine channel 16 eight hours in advance of any scheduled enforcement period. The regulatory text we are enforcing appears at the end of this document.

    V. Regulatory Analyses

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

    A. Regulatory Planning and Review

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

    This regulatory action determination is based on the size, location, duration, and time-of-year of the safety zone. Vessel traffic will be able to safely transit around this safety zone, which will affect a small designated area of the Housatonic River for less than one hour at a time during the winter months when vessel traffic is normally low. It also may be enforced temporarily during the cable installation project if necessitated by an emergency. Moreover, the Coast Guard will issue a Broadcast Notice to Mariners via VHF-FM marine channel 16 about the zone, and the rule allows vessels to seek permission to enter the zone.

    B. Impact on Small Entities

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

    While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit this regulated area may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section V.A above, this rule will not have a significant economic impact on any vessel owner or operator. Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small entities in understanding this rule. If the rule would affect your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

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

    C. Collection of Information

    This rule calls for no new collection of information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

    D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

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

    Also, this rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, because it 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 rule has implications for federalism or Indian tribes, please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section above.

    E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

    F. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have made a 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 temporary rule involves a safety zone enforced for less than one hour at a time that would prohibit entry within the work zone during each cable installation. It also may be enforced temporarily during the cable installation project if necessitated by an emergency, such as equipment falling from the towers into the Housatonic River. Normally such actions are categorically excluded from further review under paragraph 34(g) of Figure 2-1 of Commandant Instruction M16475.lD. A 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 rule.

    G. Protest Activities

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

    List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

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

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

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

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

    2. Add § 165.T01-0825 to read as follows:
    § 165.T01-0825 Safety Zone; United Illuminating Company Housatonic River Crossing Project; Housatonic River; Milford and Stratford, CT.

    (a) Location: The following area is a safety zone: All navigable waters of the Housatonic River near Milford and Stratford, CT contained within the following area; beginning at a point on land in position at 41°12′17″ N, 073°06′40″ W near the Governor John Davis Lodge Turnpike (I-95) Bridge; then northeast across the Housatonic River to a point on land in position at 41°12′20″ N, 073°06′29″ W near the Governor John Davis Lodge Turnpike (I-95) Bridge; then northwest along the shoreline to a point on land in position at 41°12′25″ N, 073°06′31″ W; then southwest across the Housatonic River to a point on land in position at 41°12′22″ N, 073°06′43″ W; then southeast along the shoreline back to point of origin (NAD 83). All positions are approximate.

    (b) Effective and Enforcement Period: This rule will be effective from 8:00 a.m. on November 29, 2016 to 6:00 p.m. on December 21, 2016 but will only be enforced during cable installation operations or other instances which may cause a hazard to navigation, when deemed necessary by the Captain of the Port (COTP), Sector Long Island Sound. The Coast Guard will issue a Broadcast Notice to Mariners via VHF-FM marine channel 16 eight hours in advance to any scheduled period of enforcement or as soon as practicable in response to an emergency.

    (c) Definitions. The following definitions apply to this section: A “designated representative” is any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant or petty officer of the U.S. Coast Guard who has been designated by the COTP, Sector Long Island Sound, to act on his or her behalf. The designated representative may be on an official patrol vessel or may be on shore and will communicate with vessels via VHF-FM radio or loudhailer. “Official patrol vessels” may consist of any Coast Guard, Coast Guard Auxiliary, state, or local law enforcement vessels assigned or approved by the COTP Sector Long Island Sound. In addition, members of the Coast Guard Auxiliary may be present to inform vessel operators of this regulation. A “work vessel” is any vessel provided by United Illuminating Company for the Housatonic River Crossing Project and may be hailed via VHF channel 13 or 16.

    (d) Regulations. (1) The general regulations contained in 33 CFR 165.23 apply.

    (2) In accordance with the general regulations in 33 CFR 165.23, entry into or movement within this zone is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Long Island Sound.

    (3) Operators of vessels desiring to enter or operate within the safety zone should contact the COTP Sector Long Island Sound at 203-468-4401 (Sector LIS command center) and United Illuminating Company at 203-627-5526 or at 860-904-8551, or the designated representative via VHF channel 16 to obtain permission to do so. Request to enter or operate in the safety zone must be made 24 hours in advanced of the planned undertaking.

    (4) Mariners are requested to proceed with caution after passing arrangements have been made. Mariners are requested to cooperate with the United Illuminating Company work vessels for the safety of all concerned. The United Illuminating Company work vessels will be monitoring VHF channels 13 and 16. Mariners are requested to proceed with extreme caution and operate at their slowest safe speed as to not cause a wake.

    (5) Any vessel given permission to enter or operate in the safety zone must comply with all directions given to them by the COTP Sector Long Island Sound, or the designated on-scene representative.

    (6) Upon being hailed by a U.S. Coast Guard vessel by siren, radio, flashing light or other means, the operator of the vessel shall proceed as directed.

    Dated: November 15, 2016. K.B. Reed, Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Acting Captain of the Port Sector Long Island Sound.
    [FR Doc. 2016-29909 Filed 12-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 165 [Docket Number USCG-2016-0987] RIN 1625-AA00 Safety Zone; James River, Newport News, VA AGENCY:

    Coast Guard, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Temporary final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone on the navigable waters of the James River within 1500-foot radius of the M/V SS DEL MONTE, in the vicinity of the James River Reserve Fleet, in support of United States Navy explosive training on the M/V SS DEL MONTE. This action is necessary to provide for the safety of life and property on the surrounding navigable waters during the United States Navy explosives training. Entry of vessels or persons into this zone is prohibited unless specifically authorized by the Captain of the Port Hampton Roads.

    DATES:

    This rule is effective without actual notice from December 13, 2016 through 4 p.m. on December 16, 2016. For the purposes of enforcement, actual notice will be used from 8 a.m. on December 12, 2016, through December 13, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-2016-0987 in the “SEARCH” box and click “SEARCH.” Click on Open Docket Folder on the line associated with this rule.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    If you have questions on this rule, call or email LCDR Barbara Wilk, Sector Hampton Roads Waterways Management, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone 757-668-5580, email [email protected]

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

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary rule without prior notice and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section 4(a) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those procedures are “impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.” Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) with respect to this rule because information about the training starting at 8 a.m. on December 12, 2016, through 4 p.m. on December 16, 2016, was not received by the Coast Guard until October 25, 2016. Failure to conduct this required training at this time will result in a lapse in personnel qualification standards and, consequently, the inability of Navy personnel to carry out important national security functions. Due to the timing of the notification it would be impracticable for the Coast Guard to publish an NPRM because there is insufficient time to allow for an opportunity for public comment on the proposed rule. Publishing an NPRM would be contrary to the public interest since immediate action is necessary to protect the public safety by ensuring the standards of training are met. The potential hazards to mariners within the safety zone include shock waves, flying shrapnel, and loud noises. We are issuing this rule, and under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for making it effective less than 30 days after publication in the Federal Register. As noted above, failure to conduct this required training at this time will result in a lapse in personnel qualification standards and, consequently, the inability of Navy personnel to carry out important national security functions. Due to the need for immediate action, the restriction on vessel traffic is necessary to protect life, property and the environment. Delaying the effective date would be contrary to the safety zone's intended objectives of protecting persons and vessels, and enhancing public and maritime safety.

    III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 33 U.S.C. 1231. The Captain of the Port Hampton Roads (COTP) has determined that potential hazards associated with the military training starting at 8 a.m. on December 12, 2016, through 4 p.m. on December 16, 2016, will be a safety concern for anyone within a 1500-foot radius of the M/V SS DEL MONTE. This rule is needed to protect the participants, patrol vessels, and other vessels transiting the navigable waters of the James River, in the vicinity of the James River Reserve Fleet, from hazards associated with military explosives operations. The potential hazards to mariners within the safety zone include shock waves, flying shrapnel, and loud noises.

    IV. Discussion of the Rule

    This rule establishes a safety zone from 8 a.m. on December 12, 2016, through 4 p.m. on December 16, 2016. The safety zone will encompass all navigable waters within a 1500-foot radius of the M/V SS DEL MONTE located in approximate position 37°06′11″ N., 076°38′40″ W. The duration of the zone is intended to protect personnel and vessels in these navigable waters while the training is in effect. This safety zone still allows for navigation on the waterway around the safety zone. Access to the safety zone will be restricted during the effective period. Except for participants and vessels authorized by the Captain of the Port or his Representative, no person or vessel may enter or remain in the regulated area.

    V. Regulatory Analyses

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

    A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    This rule is not a “significant regulatory action,” under Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, it has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget.

    The Coast Guard expects the economic impact of this rule to be nominal. This regulatory action determination is based on the size, location, duration, and time-of-year of the safety zone. This safety zone which will impact a small designated area of the James River in Newport News, Virginia, beginning at 8 a.m. on December 12, 2016, through 4 p.m. on December 16, 2016. The safety zone will occur during a time of year when vessel traffic is normally low and vessel; traffic will be able to safety transit around the safety zone. Moreover, the Coast Guard will issue Broadcast Notice to Mariners via VHF-FM marine channel 16 about the zone and the rule allows vessels to seek permission to enter the zone.

    B. Impact on Small Entities

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

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

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

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

    C. Collection of Information

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

    D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

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

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

    E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

    F. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have determined that this action is one of a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This rule involves a safety zone lasting less than 4 days that will prohibit entry within 1500 feet of theM/V SS DEL MONTE along the James River. It is categorically excluded from further review under paragraph 34(g) of figure 2-1 of the Commandant Instruction. An environmental analysis checklist supporting this determination and a Categorical Exclusion Determination are available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES. We seek any comments or information that may lead to the discovery of a significant environmental impact from this rule.

    G. Protest Activities

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

    H. Civil Justice Reform

    This regulation meets the applicable standards set forth in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive order 12988, Civil Justice Reform to eliminate ambiguity, minimize litigation, establish clear legal standards, and reduce burden.

    List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

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

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

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

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

    2. Add § 165.T05-0987 to read as follows:
    165.T05-0987 Safety Zone, James River; Newport News, VA.

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

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

    Participants mean individuals and vessels involved in explosives training.

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

    (b) Location. The following area is a safety zone: All waters in the vicinity of the of the James River Reserve Fleet, in the James River, within a 1500-foot radius of the M/V SS DEL MONTE in approximate position 37°06′11″ N., 076°38′40″ W. (NAD 1983).

    (c) Regulations.

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

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

    (3) All vessels within this safety zone when this section becomes effective must depart the zone immediately.

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

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

    (6) This section applies to all persons or vessels except participants and vessels that are engaged in the following operations:

    (i) Enforcing laws;

    (ii) Servicing aids to navigation, and

    (iii) Emergency response vessels.

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

    (e) Enforcement Period. This rule will be enforced from 8 a.m. on December 12, 2016, through 4 p.m. on December 16, 2016.

    Richard J. Wester, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Hampton Roads.
    [FR Doc. 2016-29840 Filed 12-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
    LIBRARY OF CONGRESS Copyright Royalty Board 37 CFR Part 370 [Docket No. RM 2008-7] Notice and Recordkeeping for Use of Sound Recordings Under Statutory License; Technical Amendment AGENCY:

    Copyright Royalty Board, Library of Congress.

    ACTION:

    Final rule; amendment.

    SUMMARY:

    On August 10, 2016, the Copyright Royalty Judges (Judges) published in the Federal Register for comment proposed amendments to regulations governing reporting requirements for noncommercial webcasters, including noncommercial educational webcasters, that pay no more than the minimum fee for their use of sound recordings under the applicable statutory licenses. The Judges received three comments. The Judges hereby publish the final rule.

    DATES:

    Effective December 13, 2016.

    Applicability Date: May 19, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Kimberly Whittle at (202) 707-7658 or at [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Introduction

    In 2009, the Copyright Royalty Judges (Judges) published regulations concerning reporting requirements for webcasters streaming sound recordings under statutory licenses described in 17 U.S.C. 112 and 114. See 79 FR 25009. On June 21, 2016, the Judges published a technical amendment to the regulations. 81 FR 40190. Later that same day, the Judges received a Joint Petition of the National Association of Broadcasters and the National Religious Broadcasters Noncommercial Music License Committee (together, Broadcasters) to Amend Final Rule Regarding Reporting Requirements (Joint Motion).

    The Broadcasters contended that by removing the definition of “Minimum Fee Broadcaster” the Judges had failed to effect their intent. Joint Motion at 7. The Judges agreed that the regulation as amended on June 21, 2016, did not effect their intent because it defined the term “Eligible Minimum Fee Webcaster” too narrowly and therefore arguably excluded the webcasts of noncommercial minimum fee broadcasters, a category that the Judges had intended to include. Accordingly, on August 10, 2016, the Judges proposed a second amendment to the regulations and published it for comment. 81 FR 52782.

    The Broadcasters filed a joint comment supporting adoption of the proposed second amendment to the regulations. The Intercollegiate Broadcasting System (IBS), which had appealed the prior iterations of the regulations to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, filed a comment that included the following language.

    Given the limited scope of the Notice and without prejudice to its objections to the $500 annual fee, the $100 opt-out fee, and the reporting requirements, IBS interposes no objection to the Notice.

    IBS Comment at 2. The Judges interpret that comment as not opposing the proposed second amendment.1

    1 A third comment was filed by Adam Stein, but the Judges found it to be an unreasonable objection as Mr. Stein offered no support for his allegations, which appeared to be based upon a fundamental misunderstanding of compulsory licenses.

    List of Subjects in 37 CFR Part 370

    Copyright.

    Final regulations

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Copyright Royalty Judges amend 37 CFR part 370 as follows.

    PART 370—NOTICE AND RECORDKEEPING REQUIREMENTS FOR STATUTORY LICENSES 1. The authority citation for part 370 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    17 U.S.C. 112(e)(4), 114(f)(4)(A).

    2. Amend § 370.4 in paragraph (b) by revising the definition of “Eligible Minimum Fee Webcaster” to read as follows:
    § 370.4 Reports of use of sound recordings under statutory license for nonsubscription transmission services, preexisting satellite digital audio radio services, new subscription services and business establishment services.

    (b) * * *

    Eligible Minimum Fee Webcaster means a nonsubscription transmission service whose payments for eligible transmissions do not exceed the annual minimum fee established for licensees relying upon the statutory licenses set forth in 17 U.S.C. 112(e) and 114; and:

    (i) Is a licensee that owns and operates a terrestrial AM or FM radio station that is licensed by the Federal Communications Commission; or

    (ii) Is directly operated by, or affiliated with and officially sanctioned by, a domestically accredited primary or secondary school, college, university, or other post-secondary degree-granting institution; and

    (A) The digital audio transmission operations of which are, during the course of the year, staffed substantially by students enrolled in such institution;

    (B) Is exempt from taxation under section 501 of the Internal Revenue Code, has applied for such exemption, or is operated by a State or possession or any governmental entity or subordinate thereof, or by the United States or District of Columbia, for exclusively public purposes; and

    (C) Is not a “public broadcasting entity” (as defined in 17 U.S.C. 118(f)) qualified to receive funding from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting pursuant to the criteria set forth in 47 U.S.C. 396.

    Dated: November 15, 2016. Suzanne M. Barnett, Chief Copyright Royalty Judge.

    Approved:

    Carla D. Hayden, Librarian of Congress.
    [FR Doc. 2016-29761 Filed 12-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 1410-72-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R03-OAR-2016-0455; FRL-9956-41-Region 3] Determination of Attainment of the 2012 Annual Fine Particulate Matter Standard; Pennsylvania; Delaware County Nonattainment Area AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Direct final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is making a final determination that the Delaware County, Pennsylvania moderate nonattainment area (the Delaware County Area) has attained the 2012 annual fine particulate matter (PM2.5) national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS). This determination of attainment, also known as a clean data determination, is based upon quality assured, certified, and complete ambient air quality monitoring data showing that this area has monitored attainment of the 2012 annual PM2.5 NAAQS based on the 2013-2015 data available in EPA's Air Quality System (AQS) database. As a result of this determination, the requirements for the Delaware County Area to submit an attainment demonstration, associated reasonably available control measures (RACM), a reasonable further progress (RFP) plan, contingency measures, and other planning state implementation plan (SIP) revisions related to attainment of the standard shall be suspended for so long as the area continues to meet the 2012 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. This action is being taken under the Clean Air Act (CAA).

    DATES:

    This rule is effective on February 13, 2017 without further notice, unless EPA receives adverse written comment by January 12, 2017. 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-2016-0455 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:

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

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Background

    On December 14, 2012, EPA promulgated a revised primary annual PM2.5 NAAQS to provide increased protection of public health from fine particle pollution (the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS). 78 FR 3086 (January 15, 2013). In that action, EPA strengthened the primary annual PM2.5 standard, lowering the level from 15.0 micrograms per cubic meter (mg/m3) to 12.0 mg/m3. The 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS is attained when the 3-year average of the annual arithmetic means does not exceed 12.0 mg/m3. See 40 CFR 50.18. On December 18, 2014 (80 FR 2206), EPA made designation determinations, as required by CAA section 107(d)(1), for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. In that action, EPA designated the Delaware County Area as moderate nonattainment for the 2012 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. See 40 CFR 81.339.

    Under EPA's longstanding Clean Data Policy,1 which was codified in EPA's Clean Air Fine Particulate Implementation Rule (72 FR 20586, April 25, 2007), EPA may issue a determination of attainment after notice and comment rulemaking determining that a specific area is attaining the relevant standard. See 40 CFR 51.1004. The effect of a clean data determination is to suspend the requirement for the area to submit an attainment demonstration, RACM, RFP plan, contingency measures, and any other planning SIPs related to attainment for as long as the area continues to attain the standard.

    1 “Clean Data Policy for the Fine Particle National Ambient Air Quality Standards,” Memorandum from Stephen D. Page, December 14, 2004.

    EPA issued the Fine Particulate Matter National Ambient Air Quality Standards: State Implementation Plan Requirements on July 29, 2016 (effective October 24, 2016). 81 FR 58010 (August 24, 2016). In that rule, EPA reaffirmed the Clean Data Policy at 40 CFR 51.1015, as follows:

    Upon a determination by EPA that a moderate PM2.5 nonattainment area has attained the PM2.5 NAAQS, the requirements for the state to submit an attainment demonstration, provisions demonstrating that reasonably available control measures (including reasonably available control technology for stationary sources) shall be implemented no later than 4 years following the date of designation of the area, reasonable further progress plan, quantitative milestones and quantitative milestone reports, and contingency measures for the area shall be suspended until such time as: (1) The area is redesignated to attainment, after which such requirements are permanently discharged; or, (2) EPA determines that the area has re-violated the PM2.5 NAAQS, at which time the state shall submit such attainment plan elements for the moderate nonattainment area by a future date to be determined by EPA and announced through publication in the Federal Register at the time EPA determines the area is violating the PM2.5 NAAQS. See 40 CFR 51.1015.

    II. EPA's Evaluation

    Under EPA regulations at 40 CFR part 50, § 50.18 and appendix N, the annual primary PM2.5 standard is met when the 3-year average of PM2.5 annual mean mass concentrations for each eligible monitoring site is less than or equal to 12 μg/m3. Three years of valid annual means are required to produce a valid annual PM2.5 NAAQS design value. A year meets data completeness requirements when quarterly data capture rates for all four quarters are at least 75 percent from eligible monitoring sites. See 40 CFR part 50, appendix N. There is one PM2.5 monitor in the Delaware County Area. Table 1 shows the Delaware County Area design value for the 2012 annual PM2.5 NAAQS for the years 2013-2015 at the Delaware County monitor.

    Table 1—2013-2015 Annual PM2.5 Values for Delaware County, Pennsylvania Monitor ID Weighted mean
  • (μg/m 3)
  • 2013 2014 2015 Complete quarters 2013 2014 2015 Certified
  • annual design value
  • 2013-2015
  • (μg/m 3)
  • 420450002 11.5 12.6 10.7 4 4 4 11.6

    Consistent with the requirements contained in 40 CFR part 50, EPA has reviewed the PM2.5 ambient air quality monitoring data for the monitoring period from 2013 through 2015 for the Delaware County Area, as recorded in the AQS database. As shown from Table 1, each quarter in 2013-2015 is complete with all four quarters reporting data capture rates of at least 75 percent from the only monitor. Additionally, the certified annual design value for 2013-2015 is 11.6 μg/m3, which is below the 2012 annual primary PM2.5 standard of 12 μg/m3. Therefore, the Delaware County Area has attained the 2012 annual PM2.5 NAAQS in accordance with the requirements in 40 CFR part 50, § 50.18 and appendix N.

    III. Final Action

    EPA is determining that the Delaware County Area has attained the 2012 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. As provided in 40 CFR 51.1015, finalization of this determination, suspends the requirements for this area to submit an attainment demonstration, associated RACM, RFP plan, contingency measures, and any other planning SIP revisions related to the attainment of the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS, so long as this area continues to meet the standard. This determination of attainment does not constitute a redesignation to attainment. The Delaware County Area will remain designated nonattainment for the 2012 annual PM2.5 NAAQS until such time as EPA determines that the Delaware County Area meets the CAA requirements for redesignation to attainment, including an approved maintenance plan, pursuant to sections 107 and 175A of the CAA.

    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 this Federal Register, EPA is publishing a separate document that will serve as the proposal to approve the determination of attainment if adverse comments are filed. This rule will be effective on February 13, 2017 without further notice unless EPA receives adverse comment by January 12, 2017. 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. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews A. General Requirements

    This rulemaking action makes a determination of attainment of the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS based on air quality and does not impose additional requirements. For that reason, this determination of attainment:

    • 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).

    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).

    In addition, this rulemaking determining that the Delaware County Area has attained the 2012 annual PM2.5 NAAQS does not have tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in the state, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.

    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 February 13, 2017. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action. Parties with objections to this direct final rule are encouraged to file a comment in response to the parallel notice of proposed rulemaking for this action published in the proposed rules section of this Federal Register, rather than file an immediate petition for judicial review of this direct final rule, so that EPA can withdraw this direct final rule and address the comment in the proposed rulemaking action.

    This determination of attainment of the 2012 annual PM2.5 NAAQS for the Delaware County nonattainment area 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, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: November 22, 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 NN—Pennsylvania 2. In § 52.2059, add paragraph (u) to read as follows:
    § 52.2059 Control strategy: Particulate matter.

    (u) Determination of attainment. EPA has determined based on 2013 to 2015 ambient air quality monitoring data, that the Delaware County, Pennsylvania moderate nonattainment area has attained the 2012 annual fine particulate matter (PM2.5) primary national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS). This determination, in accordance with 40 CFR 51.1015, suspends the requirements for this area to submit an attainment demonstration, associated reasonably available control measures, a reasonable further progress plan, contingency measures, and other planning state implementation plan revisions related to attainment of the standard for as long as this area continues to meet the 2012 annual PM2.5 NAAQS.

    [FR Doc. 2016-29751 Filed 12-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 81 [EPA-HQ-OAR-2014-0464; FRL-9956-10-OAR] Air Quality Designations for the 2010 Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) Primary National Ambient Air Quality Standard—Supplement to Round 2 for Four Areas in Texas: Freestone and Anderson Counties, Milam County, Rusk and Panola Counties, and Titus County AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    This rule establishes the initial air quality designations for four areas in Texas for the 2010 primary sulfur dioxide (SO2) National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS). The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is designating three of the areas as nonattainment because they do not meet the NAAQS. One area is being designated unclassifiable because it cannot be classified on the basis of available information as meeting or not meeting the NAAQS. The designations are based on the weight of evidence for each area, including available air quality monitoring data and air quality modeling. For the areas designated nonattainment by this rule, the Clean Air Act (CAA) directs the state of Texas to undertake certain planning and pollution control activities to attain the SO2 NAAQS as expeditiously as practicable. This action is a supplement to the final rule addressing the second round of area designations for the 2010 SO2 NAAQS, which the EPA Administrator signed on June 30, 2016.

    DATES:

    The effective date of this rule is January 12, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    The EPA has established a docket for the second round of designations, including this supplemental action, under Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2014-0464. All documents in the docket are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., Confidential Business Information or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available electronically in http://www.regulations.gov.

    In addition, the EPA has established a Web site for the 2010 SO2 NAAQS designations rulemakings at: https://www.epa.gov/sulfur-dioxide-designations. The Web site includes the EPA's final SO2 designations, as well as state and tribal initial recommendation letters, the EPA's letters announcing modifications to those recommendations, technical support documents, responses to comments and other related technical information.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For general questions concerning this supplemental action, please contact Liz Etchells, U.S. EPA, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Air Quality Planning Division, C539-04, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, telephone (919) 541-0253, email at [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    U.S. EPA Regional Office Contacts: Region VI—Jim Grady, telephone (214) 665-6745, email at [email protected]

    The public may inspect the rule and area-specific technical support information at the following location: Air Planning Section, EPA Region VI, 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, TX 75202.

    Table of Contents

    The following is an outline of the preamble.

    I. Preamble Glossary of Terms and Acronyms II. What is the purpose of this supplemental action? III. What is the 2010 SO2 NAAQS and what are the health concerns that it addresses? IV. What are the CAA requirements for air quality designations and what action has the EPA taken to meet these requirements? V. What guidance did the EPA issue and how did the EPA apply the statutory requirements and applicable guidance to determine area designations and boundaries? VI. What air quality information has the EPA used for these designations? VII. How do the designations supplementing the Round 2 designations affect Indian country? VIII. Where can I find information forming the basis for this action and exchanges between the EPA, states and tribes related to this action? IX. Environmental Justice Concerns X. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (URMA) E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations K. Congressional Review Act (CRA) L. Judicial Review I. Preamble Glossary of Terms and Acronyms

    The following are abbreviations of terms used in the preamble.

    APA Administrative Procedure Act CAA Clean Air Act CFR Code of Federal Regulations DC District of Columbia EO Executive Order EPA Environmental Protection Agency FR Federal Register NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards NTTAA National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act OMB Office of Management and Budget SO2 Sulfur Dioxide SOX Sulfur Oxides RFA Regulatory Flexibility Act UMRA Unfunded Mandate Reform Act of 1995 TAR Tribal Authority Rule TAD Technical Assistance Document TSD Technical Support Document US United States II. What is the purpose of this supplemental action?

    The purpose of this final action is to announce and promulgate initial air quality designations for four areas in Texas for the 2010 primary SO2 NAAQS, in accordance with the requirements of the CAA. The EPA is designating three of these areas as nonattainment, and one area as unclassifiable. As discussed in Section IV of this document, the EPA is designating areas for the 2010 SO2 NAAQS in multiple rounds under a court-ordered schedule pursuant to a consent decree. The EPA completed the first round of SO2 designations in an action signed by the Administrator on July 25, 2013 (78 FR 47191; August 5, 2013). In that action, the EPA designated 29 areas in 16 states as nonattainment, based on air quality monitoring data.

    The court order required the EPA Administrator to sign a notice designating areas in a second round that contained sources meeting certain criteria no later than July 2, 2016. See Sierra Club and NRDC v. McCarthy, No. 3:13-cv-3953-SI (N.D. Cal.) (March 2, 2015). The four areas in Texas covered by this action met those criteria, and the EPA responded to state recommendations for Round 2 designations, including Texas' recommendations for these four areas, on February 11, 2016 (Letter from Ron Curry, EPA Region 6 Administrator, to Governor of Texas, Honorable Greg Abbott). In the second round of SO2 designations signed on June 30, 2016, the EPA designated 61 areas in 24 states (including eight other areas in Texas): four nonattainment areas, 41 unclassifiable/attainment areas and 16 unclassifiable areas (81 FR 45039; July 12, 2016). However, by a series of stipulations of the parties in Sierra Club and NRDC v. McCarthy and orders of the Court, the deadline to promulgate designations was extended to November 29, 2016, for the four areas in Texas that are the subject of this supplemental action. This action to designate four Texas areas further discharges the EPA's duty to issue the second round of SO2 designations, and uses the same administrative record as supported by the action signed on June 30, 2016, that addressed eight other Texas areas and other areas in the United States, as supplemented by additional materials further addressing these four Texas areas.

    In this supplementary designation action, the list of areas being designated in Texas and the boundaries of each area appear in the tables within the regulatory text at the end of this notice. These designations are based on the EPA's technical assessment of and conclusions regarding the weight of evidence for each area, including but not limited to available air quality monitoring data or air quality modeling. With respect to air quality monitoring data, the EPA considered data from the most recent calendar years 2012-2015. In the modeling runs conducted by industry and members of the public, the air quality impacts of the actual emissions for the 3-year periods 2012-2014 or 2013-2015 were assessed.

    For the areas being designated nonattainment, the CAA directs states to develop and submit to the EPA State Implementation Plans within 18 months of the effective date of this final rule that meet the requirements of sections 172(c) and 191-192 of the CAA and provide for attainment of the NAAQS as expeditiously as practicable, but not later than 5 years from the effective date of this final rule. We also note that under the EPA's SO2 Data Requirements Rule in 40 CFR part 51, subpart BB (80 FR 51052; August 21, 2015), the EPA expects to receive additional air quality characterization for the one area in Milam County, Texas, designated unclassifiable in this action, and the agency will consider such data, as appropriate, in future actions.

    III. What is the 2010 SO2 NAAQS and what are the health concerns that it addresses?

    The Administrator signed a final rule revising the primary SO2 NAAQS on June 2, 2010. The rule was published in the Federal Register on June 22, 2010 (75 FR 35520) and became effective on August 23, 2010. Based on the Administrator's review of the air quality criteria for oxides of sulfur and the primary NAAQS for oxides of sulfur as measured by SO2, the EPA revised the primary SO2 NAAQS to provide requisite protection of public health with an adequate margin of safety. Specifically, the EPA established a new 1-hour SO2 standard at a level of 75 parts per billion (ppb), which is met at an ambient air quality monitoring site when the 3-year average of the annual 99th percentile of 1-hour daily maximum concentrations is less than or equal to 75 ppb, as determined in accordance with Appendix T of 40 CFR part 50. 40 CFR 50.17(a)-(b). The EPA also established provisions to revoke both the existing 24-hour and annual primary SO2 standards, subject to certain conditions. 40 CFR 50.4(e).

    Additional information regarding the current scientific evidence on the health impacts of short-term exposures to SO2 is provided in the Federal Register notice containing the final rule for the second round of SO2 designations for other areas that was signed on June 30, 2016. See 81 FR 45041.

    IV. What are the CAA requirements for air quality designations and what action has the EPA taken to meet these requirements?

    After the EPA promulgates a new or revised NAAQS, the EPA is required to designate all areas of the country as either “nonattainment,” “attainment,” or “unclassifiable,” for that NAAQS pursuant to section 107(d)(1) of the CAA. Section 107(d)(1)(A)(i) of the CAA defines a nonattainment area as “any area that does not meet (or that contributes to ambient air quality in a nearby area that does not meet) the national primary or secondary ambient air quality standard for the pollutant.” If an area meets either prong of this definition, then the EPA is obligated to designate the area as “nonattainment.” This provision also defines an attainment area as any area other than a nonattainment area that meets the NAAQS and an unclassifiable area as any area that cannot be classified on the basis of available information as meeting or not meeting the NAAQS.

    Additional information regarding the process for designating areas following promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS pursuant to section 107(d) of the CAA and how the EPA is applying this process to the designation of areas under the 2010 SO2 NAAQS is provided in the final rule addressing the second round of SO2 designations for other areas signed on June 30, 2016. See 81 FR 45041. For this supplemental action, the EPA reiterates that CAA section 107(d) provides the agency with discretion to determine how best to interpret the terms in the definition of a nonattainment area (e.g., “contributes to” and “nearby”) for a new or revised NAAQS, given considerations such as the nature of a specific pollutant, the types of sources that may contribute to violations, the form of the standards for the pollutant, and other relevant information. In particular, the EPA's position is that the statute does not require the agency to establish bright line tests or thresholds for what constitutes “contribution” or “nearby” for purposes of designations.1

    1 This view was confirmed in Catawba County v. EPA, 571 F.3d 20 (D.C. Cir. 2009).

    Similarly, the EPA's position is that the statute permits the EPA to evaluate the appropriate application of the term “area” to include geographic areas based upon full or partial county boundaries, as may be appropriate for a particular NAAQS. For example, CAA section 107(d)(1)(B)(ii) explicitly provides that the EPA can make modifications to designation recommendations for an area “or portions thereof,” and under CAA section 107(d)(1)(B)(iv) a designation remains in effect for an area “or portion thereof” until the EPA redesignates it.

    As explained in more detail in the final rule addressing the second round of SO2 designations for other areas, the EPA completed the first round of SO2 designations for 29 areas on July 25, 2013 (78 FR 47191), and intends to complete up to three more rounds of designations to address all remaining areas pursuant to a schedule contained in a consent decree and enforceable order entered by the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California on March 2, 2015. See 81 FR 45042.

    The court order specifies that in this second round of SO2 designations the EPA must designate two groups of areas: (1) Areas that have newly monitored violations of the 2010 SO2 NAAQS and (2) areas that contain any stationary sources that had not been announced as of March 2, 2015, for retirement and that, according to the EPA's Air Markets Database, emitted in 2012 either (i) more than 16,000 tons of SO2, or (ii) more than 2,600 tons of SO2 with an annual average emission rate of at least 0.45 pounds of SO2 per one million British thermal units (lbs SO2/mmBTU).

    On March 20, 2015, the EPA sent letters to Governors notifying them of the schedule for completing the remaining designations for the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS. The EPA offered states, including Texas, the opportunity to submit updated recommendations and supporting information for the EPA to consider for the affected areas. The EPA also notified states that the agency had updated its March 24, 2011, SO2 designations guidance to support analysis of designations and boundaries for the next rounds of designations. All of the states, including Texas, with affected areas submitted updated designation recommendations.

    In a letter dated February 11, 2016, the EPA notified Texas of its intended designation of twelve Round 2 areas, including the four areas in Texas addressed in this final notice, as either nonattainment, unclassifiable/attainment, or unclassifiable for the SO2 NAAQS. Texas then had the opportunity to demonstrate why they believed the EPA's intended modification of their updated recommendations may be inappropriate. Although not required, as the EPA had done for the first round of SO2 designations, the EPA also provided an opportunity for members of the public to comment on the EPA's February 2016 response letters. The EPA published a notice of availability and public comment period for the intended designation on March 1, 2016 (81 FR 10563). The public comment period closed on March 31, 2016. The updated recommendations, the EPA's February 2016 responses to those letters, any modifications, and the subsequent state and public comment letters, are in the docket for the Round 2 SO2 designations at Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2014-0464 and are available on the SO2 designations Web site.

    Before taking final action, however, the parties to Sierra Club and NRDC v. McCarthy filed the first in a series of joint stipulations extending the deadline for these four areas in Texas, out to November 29, 2016.2 In the final rule signed on June 30, 2016, the EPA promulgated designations for the Round 2 areas for which no extensions in the deadline had been obtained (including the eight other Texas areas) and explained the ongoing process for completing SO2 designations for all areas of the country by December 31, 2020 (see generally 81 FR 45042-43).

    2 The parties to Sierra Club and NRDC v. McCarthy also filed a joint stipulation extending the Round 2 designation deadline for the Muskogee County Area in Oklahoma out to December 31, 2016.

    In these supplemental Round 2 designations, and consistent with the extended deadline under the consent decree, the EPA must designate the four areas in Texas associated with the following sources by November 29, 2016: The Big Brown Steam Electric Station in the Freestone and Anderson Counties Area, the Sandow Power Station in the Milam County Area, the Martin Lake Electrical Station in the Rusk and Panola Counties Area, and the Monticello Steam Electric Station in the Titus County Area.

    V. What guidance did the EPA issue and how did the EPA apply the statutory requirements and applicable guidance to determine area designations and boundaries?

    Following entry of the March 2, 2015, court order, the EPA issued updated designations guidance through a March 20, 2015, memorandum from Stephen D. Page, Director, U.S. EPA, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, to Air Division Directors, U.S. EPA Regions 1-10 titled, “Updated Guidance for Area Designations for the 2010 Primary Sulfur Dioxide National Ambient Air Quality Standard.” As explained in the final rule addressing the second round of SO2 designations for other areas signed on June 30, 2016, this guidance contains the factors the EPA intends to evaluate in determining the appropriate designations and associated boundaries for all remaining areas in the country, including: (1) Air quality characterization via ambient monitoring or dispersion modeling results; (2) emissions-related data; (3) meteorology; (4) geography and topography; and (5) jurisdictional boundaries. See 81 FR at 45043. Additional information regarding relevant guidance relied upon in designating the other second round areas and that is also used in this supplemental action is available in the previously issued final rule. See id.

    VI. What air quality information has the EPA used for these designations?

    To inform designations for the SO2 NAAQS, air agencies have the flexibility to characterize air quality using either appropriately sited ambient air quality monitors or using modeling of actual or allowable source emissions. The EPA's non-binding Monitoring Technical Assistance Document (TAD) and Modeling TAD contain scientifically sound recommendations on how air agencies should conduct such monitoring or modeling. For the SO2 designations of the four Texas areas addressed in this supplemental action, the EPA is using the same approach taken for a number of areas designated in the final rule signed on June 30, 2016, and considering available air quality monitoring data from calendar years 2012-2015, and modeling submitted by the affected emissions sources and a public interest group. See 81 FR 45043. In the modeling runs, the impacts of the actual emissions for the 3-year periods 2012-2014 or 2013-2015 were considered. The 1-hour primary SO2 standard is violated at an ambient air quality monitoring site (or in the case of dispersion modeling, at an ambient air quality receptor location) when the 3-year average of the annual 99th percentile of the daily maximum 1-hour average concentrations exceeds 75 ppb, as determined in accordance with appendix T of 40 CFR part 50. The EPA has concluded that dispersion modeling shows that three Round 2 areas in Texas (portions of Freestone and Anderson Counties, portions of Rusk and Panola Counties, and portions of Titus County) are not meeting the 1-hour primary SO2 standard and we are, therefore, designating these areas as nonattainment. Based on available information, the EPA has also concluded that it cannot determine whether one Round 2 area in Texas (Milam County) is or is not meeting the 1-hour primary SO2 standard and whether the area contributes to a violation in a nearby area. Therefore, we are designating this area as unclassifiable. Details about the available information can be found in the supplemental technical support document in the docket for the Round 2 SO2 designations at Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2014-0464.

    VII. How do the designations supplementing the Round 2 designations affect Indian country?

    For the designations in four areas of Texas for the 2010 primary SO2 NAAQS supplementing the Round 2 designations, the EPA is designating 3 state areas as nonattainment and 1 state area as unclassifiable. No areas of Indian country are being designated as part of this action.

    VIII. Where can I find information forming the basis for this action and exchanges between the EPA, states and tribes related to this action?

    Information providing the basis for this action can be found in several technical support documents (TSDs), a response to comments document (RTC) and other information in the docket. The TSDs, RTC, applicable EPA guidance memoranda and copies of correspondence regarding this process between the EPA and the states, tribes and other parties, are available for review at the EPA Docket Center listed above in the ADDRESSES section of this document and on the agency's SO2 Designations Web site at https://www.epa.gov/sulfur-dioxide-designations. Area-specific questions can be addressed by the EPA Regional office (see contact information provided at the beginning of this notice).

    IX. Environmental Justice Concerns

    When the EPA establishes a new or revised NAAQS, the CAA requires the EPA to designate all areas of the U.S. as either nonattainment, attainment, or unclassifiable. This final action addresses designation determinations for four areas in Texas for the 2010 primary SO2 NAAQS. Area designations address environmental justice concerns by ensuring that the public is properly informed about the air quality in an area. In locations where air quality does not meet the NAAQS, the CAA requires relevant state authorities to initiate appropriate air quality management actions to ensure that all those residing, working, attending school, or otherwise present in those areas are protected, regardless of minority and economic status.

    X. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Upon promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS, the CAA requires the EPA to designate areas as attaining or not attaining the NAAQS. The CAA then specifies requirements for areas based on whether such areas are attaining or not attaining the NAAQS. In this final rule, the EPA assigns designations to selected areas as required.

    A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review

    This action is exempted from the Office of Management and Budget because it responds to the CAA requirement to promulgate air quality designations after promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS.

    B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)

    This action does not impose an information collection burden under the PRA. This action responds to the requirement to promulgate air quality designations after promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS. This requirement is prescribed in the CAA section 107 of title 1. This action does not contain any information collection activities.

    C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

    This final rule is not subject to the RFA. The RFA applies only to rules subject to notice-and-comment rulemaking requirements under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), 5 U.S.C. 553, or any other statute. This rule is not subject to notice-and-comment requirements under the APA but is subject to the CAA section 107(d)(2)(B) which does not require a notice-and-comment rulemaking to take this action.

    D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)

    This action does not contain any unfunded mandates as described by URM, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not significantly or uniquely affect small governments. The action imposes no enforceable duty on any state, local or tribal governments or the private sector.

    E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    This final action does not have federalism implications. It 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.

    F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments

    This action does not have tribal implications, as specified in Executive Order 13175. This action concerns the designation of certain areas in the U.S. for the 2010 primary SO2 NAAQS. The CAA provides for states and eligible tribes to develop plans to regulate emissions of air pollutants within their areas, as necessary, based on the designations. The Tribal Authority Rule (TAR) provides tribes the opportunity to apply for eligibility to develop and implement CAA programs, such as programs to attain and maintain the SO2 NAAQS, but it leaves to the discretion of the tribe the decision of whether to apply to develop these programs and which programs, or appropriate elements of a program, the tribe will seek to adopt. This rule does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes. It does not create any additional requirements beyond those of the SO2 NAAQS. This rule establishes the designations for certain areas of the country for the SO2 NAAQS, but no areas of Indian country are being designated in this action. Furthermore, this rule does not affect the relationship or distribution of power and responsibilities between the federal government and Indian tribes. The CAA and the TAR establish the relationship of the federal government and tribes in developing plans to attain the NAAQS, and this rule does nothing to modify that relationship. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply.

    Although Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this rule, after the EPA promulgated the 2010 primary SO2 NAAQS, the EPA communicated with tribal leaders and environmental staff regarding the designations process. The EPA also sent individualized letters to all federally recognized tribes to explain the designation process for the 2010 primary SO2 NAAQS, to provide the EPA designations guidance, and to offer consultation with the EPA. The EPA provided further information to tribes through presentations at the National Tribal Forum and through participation in National Tribal Air Association conference calls. The EPA also sent individualized letters to all federally recognized tribes that submitted recommendations to the EPA about the EPA's intended designations for the SO2 standard and offered tribal leaders the opportunity for consultation. These communications provided opportunities for tribes to voice concerns to the EPA about the general designations process for the 2010 primary SO2 NAAQS, as well as concerns specific to a tribe, and informed the EPA about key tribal concerns regarding designations as the rule was under development. For this supplemental round of SO2 designations action, the EPA sent additional letters to tribes that could potentially be affected and offered additional opportunities for participation in the designations process. The communication letters to the tribes are provided in the dockets for Round 1 designations (Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2012-0233) and Round 2 designations (Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2014-0464).

    G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks

    The action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it is not an economically significant regulatory action as defined in Executive Order 12866. While not subject to the Executive Order, this final action may be especially important for asthmatics, including asthmatic children, living in SO2 nonattainment areas because respiratory effects in asthmatics are among the most sensitive health endpoints for SO2 exposure. Because asthmatic children are considered a sensitive population, the EPA evaluated the potential health effects of exposure to SO2 pollution among asthmatic children as part of the EPA's prior action establishing the 2010 primary SO2 NAAQS. These effects and the size of the population affected are summarized in the EPA's final SO2 NAAQS rules. See http://www3.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/standards/so2/fr/20100622.pdf.

    H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211, because it is not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.

    I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)

    This action does not involve technical standards.

    J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations

    The EPA believes this action does not have disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects on minority populations, low-income populations and or indigenous peoples, as specified Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). The documentation for this decision is contained in Section IX of this document.

    K. Congressional Review Act (CRA)

    The CRA, 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 U.S. 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 U.S. 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). This rule will be effective January 12, 2017.

    L. Judicial Review

    Section 307 (b) (1) of the CAA indicates which Federal Courts of Appeal have venue for petitions for review of final actions by the EPA. This section provides, in part, that petitions for review must be filed in the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit: (i) When the agency action consists of “nationally applicable regulations promulgated, or final actions taken, by the Administrator,” or (ii) when such action is 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.”

    This final action designating areas for the 2010 primary SO2 NAAQS is “nationally applicable” within the meaning of section 307(b)(1). As explained in the preamble, this final action supplements the June 30, 2016 final action taken by the EPA to issue a second round of designations for areas across the U.S. for the 2010 primary SO2 NAAQS. EPA determined the June 30, 2016 final action was “nationally applicable” within the meaning of section 307(b)(1). 81 FR 45045. The rulemaking docket, EPA-HQ-OAR-2014-0464, is the same docket for both the June 30, 2016 action and for this supplemental action, with the relevant difference being that in addition to the materials it contained regarding these four Texas areas generated through June 30, 2016—the date that action was signed by the Administrator—it now also contains the final technical support documents and responses to comments related to these four areas. Both the June 30, 2016 action and this supplemental action were proposed in a single March 1, 2016, notice announcing the EPA's intended Round 2 designations and were taken to discharge a duty under the court order to issue a round of designations of areas with sources meeting common criteria in the court order. As explained in the June 30, 2016 final rule, at the core of that final action and this supplemental final action is the EPA's interpretation of the definitions of nonattainment, attainment and unclassifiable under section 107(d)(1) of the CAA, and its application of that interpretation to areas across the country. Id. Accordingly, the Administrator has determined that this supplemental final action, which results from the same proposed action as the June 30, 2016 final action, is nationally applicable and is hereby publishing that finding in the Federal Register.

    For the same reasons, the Administrator also is finding that this supplemental final action is based on a determination of nationwide scope and effect for the purposes of section 307(b)(1). As previously explained in the June 30, 2016 final action, in the report on the 1977 Amendments that revised section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, Congress noted that the Administrator's determination that an action is of “nationwide scope or effect” would be appropriate for any action that has a scope or effect beyond a single judicial circuit. H.R. Rep. No. 95-294 at 323, 324, reprinted in 1977 U.S.C.C.A.N. 1402-03. 81 FR 45045. Here, the June 30, 2016 final action and this supplemental final action combined issue designations in 65 areas in 24 states and extend to numerous judicial circuits. In these circumstances, section 307(b)(1) and its legislative history calls for the Administrator to find the action to be of “nationwide scope or effect” and for venue to be in the D.C. Circuit. Therefore, like the June 30, 2016 final action it supplements, see 81 FR at 45045, this final action is based on a determination by the Administrator of nationwide scope or effect, and the Administrator is hereby publishing that finding in the Federal Register.

    Thus, any petitions for review of these final designations must be filed in the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit within 60 days from the date final action is published in the Federal Register.

    List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 81

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, National parks, Wilderness areas.

    Dated: November 29, 2016. Gina McCarthy, Administrator.

    For the reasons set forth in the preamble, 40 CFR part 81 is amended as follows:

    PART 81—DESIGNATIONS OF AREAS FOR AIR QUALITY PLANNING PURPOSES 1. The authority citation for part 81 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    42 U.S.C. 7401, et seq.

    Subpart C—Section 107 Attainment Status Designations
    2. Section 81.344 is amended by revising the table titled “Texas—2010 Sulfur Dioxide NAAQS (Primary)” to read as follows:
    § 81.344 Texas. Texas—2010 Sulfur Dioxide NAAQS (Primary) Designated area Designation Date Type Freestone and Anderson Counties, TX 1 1/12/17 Nonattainment. Freestone County (part) and Anderson County (part) Those portions of Freestone and Anderson Counties encompassed by the rectangle with the vertices using Universal Traverse Mercator (UTM) coordinates in UTM zone 14 with datum NAD83 as follows: (1) Vertices—UTM Easting (m) 766752.69, UTM Northing (m) 3536333.0, (2) vertices—UTM Easting (m) 784752.69, UTM Northing (m) 3536333.0, (3) vertices—UTM Easting (m) 784752.69, UTM Northing (m) 3512333.0, (4) vertices—UTM Easting (m) 766752.69, UTM Northing (m) 3512333.0 Rusk and Panola Counties, TX 1 1/12/17 Nonattainment. Rusk County (part) and Panola County (part) Those portions of Rusk and Panola Counties encompassed by the rectangle with the vertices using Universal Traverse Mercator (UTM) coordinates in UTM zone 15 with datum NAD83 as follows: (1) Vertices—UTM Easting (m) 340067.31, UTM Northing (m) 3575814.75 (2) vertices—UTM Easting (m) 356767.31, UTM Northing (m) 3575814.75 (3) vertices—UTM Easting (m) 356767.31, UTM Northing (m) 3564314.75 (4) vertices—UTM Easting (m) 340067.31, UTM Northing (m) 3564314.75 Titus County, TX 1 1/12/17 Nonattainment. Titus County (part) That portion of Titus County encompassed by the rectangle with the vertices using Universal Traverse Mercator (UTM) coordinates in UTM zone 15 with datum NAD83 as follows: (1) Vertices—UTM Easting (m) 304329.030, UTM Northing (m) 3666971.0, (2) vertices—UTM Easting (m) 311629.030, UTM Northing (m) 3666971.0, (3) vertices—UTM Easting (m) 311629.03, UTM Northing (m) 3661870.5, (4) vertices—UTM Easting (m) 304329.03, UTM Northing (m) 3661870.5 Milam County, TX 1 1/12/17 Unclassifiable. Milam County, TX Potter County, TX  1 9/12/16 Unclassifiable. Potter County, TX Atascosa County, TX 1 9/12/16 Unclassifiable/Attainment. Atascosa County, TX Fort Bend County, TX 1 9/12/16 Unclassifiable/Attainment. Fort Bend County Goliad County, TX 1 9/12/16 Unclassifiable/Attainment. Goliad County Lamb County, TX 1 9/12/16 Unclassifiable/Attainment. Lamb County Limestone County, TX 2 9/12/16 Unclassifiable/Attainment. Limestone County McLennan County, TX 2 9/12/16 Unclassifiable/Attainment. McLennan County, TX Robertson County, TX 2 9/12/16 Unclassifiable/Attainment. Robertson County 1 Excludes Indian country located in each area, if any, unless otherwise specified. 2 Includes Indian country located in each area, if any, unless otherwise specified.
    [FR Doc. 2016-29561 Filed 12-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 50 CFR Part 622 [Docket No. 130312235-3658-02] RIN 0648-XF058 Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico, and South Atlantic; Re-Opening of the Commercial Sector for South Atlantic Vermilion Snapper AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Temporary rule; re-opening.

    SUMMARY:

    NMFS announces the re-opening of the commercial sector for vermilion snapper in the exclusive economic zone (EEZ) of the South Atlantic through this temporary rule. The most recent commercial landing data for vermilion snapper indicate the commercial annual catch limit (ACL) for the July through December 2016 fishing season has not yet been reached. Therefore, NMFS re-opens the commercial sector for vermilion snapper in the South Atlantic EEZ for 2 days to allow the commercial ACL to be caught, while minimizing the risk of the commercial ACL being exceeded.

    DATES:

    This rule is effective 12:01 a.m., local time, December 14, 2016, until 12:01 a.m., local time, December 16, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Mary Vara, NMFS Southeast Regional Office, telephone: 727-824-5305, email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The snapper-grouper fishery of the South Atlantic includes vermilion snapper and is managed under the Fishery Management Plan for the Snapper-Grouper Fishery of the South Atlantic Region (FMP). The FMP was prepared by the South Atlantic Fishery Management Council and is implemented by NMFS under the authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act) by regulations at 50 CFR part 622.

    The commercial ACL (equal to the commercial quota) for vermilion snapper in the South Atlantic is divided into separate quotas for two 6-month time periods each year, January through June and July through December. For the July through December 2016 period, the commercial quota is 388,703 lb (176,313 kg, gutted weight, 431,460 lb (195,707 kg), round weight), as specified in 50 CFR 622.190(a)(4)(ii)(D).

    On July 1, 2016, the commercial fishing season opened for the second period of July through December for this fishing year. Under 50 CFR 622.191(a)(6)(ii), NMFS is required to reduce the commercial trip limit for vermilion snapper from 1,000 lb (454 kg), gutted weight, 1,110 lb (503 kg), round weight, when 75 percent of the respective fishing season commercial quota is reached or projected to be reached. Accordingly, on August 25, 2016 (81 FR 58411), NMFS published a temporary rule in the Federal Register to reduce the commercial trip limit for vermilion snapper in or from the EEZ of the South Atlantic for the July through December 2016 period to 500 lb (227 kg), gutted weight. The commercial trip limit reduction was effective at 12:01 a.m., local time, August 28, 2016.

    Under 50 CFR 622.193(f)(1), NMFS is required to close the commercial sector for vermilion snapper when the commercial quota for the July through December fishing season specified in § 622.190(a)(4)(ii)(D) is reached, or is projected to be reached, by filing a notification to that effect with the Office of the Federal Register. NMFS previously projected that the commercial quota for South Atlantic vermilion snapper for the July through December 2016 period would be reached by October 11, 2016. Therefore, NMFS published a temporary rule to close the commercial sector for South Atlantic vermilion snapper effective on October 11, 2016, through the end of the 2016 fishing year (81 FR 69008, October 5, 2016).

    NMFS has received more recent landings data for vermilion snapper that indicate the commercial quota for the July through December period has not been reached. NMFS has also determined that 845 lb (383 kg) of the commercial quota was not harvested from the January through June 2016 period. Therefore, as specified at 622.190(a)(4)(iii), this 845 lb (383 kg) was added to the commercial quota for the July through December 2016 period.

    In accordance with 50 CFR 622.8(c), NMFS temporarily re-opens the commercial sector for vermilion snapper on December 14, 2016. The commercial sector will remain open for 2 days to allow for the commercial quota to be reached. During the re-opening, the trip limit of 500 lb (227 kg), gutted weight, is in effect. The commercial sector will close at 12:01 a.m., local time, December 16, 2016, and remain closed until January 1, 2017, the start of the next fishing year. NMFS has determined that this re-opening will allow for an additional opportunity to commercially harvest vermilion snapper while minimizing the risk of exceeding the July through December 2016 commerical quota.

    The operator of a vessel with a valid commercial vessel permit for South Atlantic snapper-grouper having vermilion snapper onboard must have landed and bartered, traded, or sold such vermilion snapper prior to 12:01 a.m., local time, December 16, 2016. During the subsequent closure, the bag limit specified in 50 CFR 622.187(b)(5) and the possession limits specified in 50 CFR 622.187(c)(1), apply to all harvest or possession of vermilion snapper in or from the South Atlantic EEZ. During the subsequent closure, the sale or purchase of vermilion snapper taken from the EEZ is prohibited. As specified in 50 CFR 622.190(c)(1)(i), the prohibition on sale or purchase does not apply to the sale or purchase of vermilion snapper that were harvested, landed ashore, and sold prior to 12:01 a.m., local time, December 16, 2016, and were held in cold storage by a dealer or processor. For a person onboard a vessel for which a Federal commercial or charter vessel/headboat permit for the South Atlantic snapper-grouper fishery has been issued, the bag and possession limits and the prohibition on sale and purchase apply regardless of whether the fish are harvested in state or Federal waters, as specified in 50 CFR 622.190(c)(1)(ii).

    Classification

    The Regional Administrator, NMFS Southeast Region, has determined this temporary rule is necessary for the conservation and management of vermilion snapper and the South Atlantic snapper-grouper fishery and is consistent with the Magnuson-Stevens Act and other applicable laws.

    This action is taken under 50 CFR 622.8(c) and is exempt from review under Executive Order 12866.

    These measures are exempt from the procedures of the Regulatory Flexibility Act because the temporary rule is issued without opportunity for prior notice and comment.

    This action responds to the best scientific information available. The Assistant Administrator for NOAA Fisheries (AA), finds that the need to immediately implement this action to temporarily re-open the commercial sector for vermilion snapper constitutes good cause to waive the requirements to provide prior notice and opportunity for public comment pursuant to the authority set forth in 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), as such procedures are unnecessary and contrary to the public interest. Such procedures are unnecessary because the rule implementing the commercial quota and AMs has been subject to notice and comment, and all that remains is to notify the public of the re-opening. Such procedures are contrary to the public interest because of the need to immediately implement this action to allow commercial fishers to harvest the commercial quota of vermilion snapper from the EEZ, while minimizing the risk of exceeding the commercial quota. Prior notice and opportunity for public comment would be contrary to the public interest because it would not allow for the re-opening of the commercial sector before the end of the fishing season.

    For the aforementioned reasons, the AA also finds good cause to waive the 30-day delay in the effectiveness of this action under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3).

    Authority:

    16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

    Dated: December 8, 2016. Emily H. Menashes, Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2016-29893 Filed 12-8-16; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    81 239 Tuesday, December 13, 2016 Proposed Rules DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Agricultural Marketing Service 7 CFR Parts 1150, 1160, 1205, 1206, 1207, 1208, 1209, 1210, 1212, 1214, 1215, 1216, 1217, 1218, 1219, 1222, 1230, 1250, and 1260 [Document Number AMS-DA-16-0101] Provisions for Removing Commodity Research and Promotion Board Members and Staff AGENCY:

    Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA.

    ACTION:

    Extension of comment period.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given that the comment period on proposed amendments to the provisions for removal of board and council members or staff of the research and promotion orders—or the regulations under the orders—overseen by the Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) is extended to December 23, 2016. The proposed rule would provide uniform authority for the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to initiate action to remove board members and staff who fail to perform their duties or who engage in dishonest actions or willful misconduct. Such action is necessary to ensure the boards can continue to fulfill their intended purposes with minimal disruption.

    DATES:

    Comments must be received by December 23, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Interested persons are invited to submit written comments concerning this proposed rule. Comments should be submitted on the internet at: http://www.regulations.gov. Written comments may also be sent to Laurel L. May, Senior Marketing Specialist, Order Formulation and Enforcement Division, USDA/AMS/Dairy Program, 1400 Independence Avenue SW., Room 2967-S—Stop 0231, Washington, DC 20250-0231; facsimile: 202-690-0552. All comments should reference the document number and the date and page number of this issue and the November 23, 2016, issue of the Federal Register, and will be made available for public inspection in the above office during regular business hours, or may be viewed at: http://www.regluations.gov. Please be advised that the identity of the individuals or entities submitting the comments will be made public on the internet at the address provided above.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Laurel L. May, Senior Marketing Specialist, USDA/AMS/Dairy Program, telephone 202-690-1366, or email [email protected]; or Whitney Rick, Director; Promotion, Research, and Planning Division; USDA/AMS/Dairy Program; telephone 202-720-6961; or email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    A proposed rule was published in the Federal Register on November 23, 2016 (81 FR 84510). The proposed rule would amend the orders and/or rules and regulations for 19 of the 22 national commodity research and promotion programs overseen by AMS by providing uniform authority for USDA to initiate action as necessary to remove board and council members or their staff employees to preserve program integrity and mitigate damage from illegal or inappropriate behavior. Currently, most of AMS's 22 research and promotion programs specify provisions for removing board and council members or their staff employees when they are unwilling or unable to perform their duties properly or when they engage in prohibited or illegal activities or other willful misconduct. However, removal authority is inconsistent across all of the programs, which impairs AMS's ability to provide uniform oversight of the programs and their assets. The 15-day comment period provided in the proposed rule closes December 8, 2016.

    USDA received letters from several of the affected programs requesting that the comment period be extended. The letters expressed concern that the original comment period was insufficient to allow commenters to adequately evaluate the impacts of the proposal and develop appropriate comments.

    Authority:

    This document is issued under 19 of the commodity research and promotion orders established under the following acts: Beef Promotion and Research Act of 1985 (7 U.S.C. 2901-2911); Commodity Promotion, Research, and Information Act of 1996 (7 U.S.C. 7411-7425); Cotton Research and Promotion Act of 1966 (7 U.S.C. 2101-2118); Dairy Production Stabilization Act of 1983 (7 U.S.C. 4501-4514); Egg Research and Consumer Information Act of 1974 (7 U.S.C. 2701-2718); Fluid Milk Promotion Act of 1990 (7 U.S.C. 6401-6417); Hass Avocado Promotion, Research, and Information Act of 2000 (U.S.C. 7801-7813); Mushroom Promotion, Research, and Consumer Information Act of 1990 (7 U.S.C. 6101-6112); Popcorn Promotion, Research, and Consumer Information Act of 1996 (7 U.S.C. 7481-7491); Pork Promotion, Research, and Consumer Information Act of 1985 (7 U.S.C. 4801-4819); Potato Research and Promotion Act of 1971 (7 U.S.C. 2611-2627); and Watermelon Research and Promotion Act (7 U.S.C. 4901-4916). These acts are collectively referred to as “commodity research and promotion laws” or “acts.”

    Dated: December 7, 2016. Bruce Summers, Associate Administrator, Agricultural Marketing Service.
    [FR Doc. 2016-29852 Filed 12-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-02-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2016-4220; Directorate Identifier 2015-NM-076-AD] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; BAE Systems (Operations) Limited Airplanes AGENCY:

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (SNPRM); reopening of comment period.

    SUMMARY:

    We are revising an earlier proposal to supersede Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2011-24-06. AD 2011-24-06 applies to all BAE Systems (Operations) Limited Model Bae 146-100A, -200A, and -300A airplanes; and Model Avro 146-RJ70A, 146-RJ85A, and 146-RJ100A airplanes. This action revises the NPRM by adding airplanes to the applicability. We are proposing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products. Since these 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:

    We must receive comments on this SNPRM by January 27, 2017.

    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 BAE Systems (Operations) Limited, Customer Information Department, Prestwick International Airport, Ayrshire, KA9 2RW, Scotland, United Kingdom; telephone +44 1292 675207; fax +44 1292 675704; email [email protected]; Internet http://www.baesystems.com/Businesses/RegionalAircraft/index.htm. 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-2016-4220; 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:

    Todd Thompson, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; telephone 425-227-1175; 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-2016-4220; Directorate Identifier 2015-NM-076-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

    On November 8, 2011, we issued AD 2011-24-06, Amendment 39-16870 (76 FR 73477, November 29, 2011) (“AD 2011-24-06”). AD 2011-24-06 requires actions intended to address an unsafe condition on all BAE Systems (Operations) Limited Model BAe 146 series airplanes; and Model Avro 146-RJ series airplanes.

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR part 39 by adding an AD to supersede AD 2011-24-06 that would apply to all BAE Systems (Operations) Limited Model Avro 146-RJ series airplanes. The NPRM published in the Federal Register on March 8, 2016 (81 FR 12044) (“the NPRM”). The NPRM was prompted by a determination that new or revised structural inspection requirements are necessary. The NPRM proposed to require revising the maintenance or inspection program, as applicable, to incorporate new or revised structural inspection requirements.

    Actions Since Previous NPRM Was Issued

    Since we issued the NPRM, we have determined that the applicability should include BAE Systems (Operations) Limited Model BAe 146 series airplanes.

    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA Airworthiness Directive 2014-0071, dated March 19, 2014 (referred to after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or “the MCAI”), to correct an unsafe condition for all BAE Systems (Operations) Limited Model BAe 146 series and Avro 146-RJ series airplanes. The MCAI states:

    The BAe 146/AVRO 146-RJ Aircraft Maintenance Manual (AMM) includes the Chapters as listed in Appendix 1 of this [EASA] AD. Compliance with these chapters has been identified as a mandatory action for continued airworthiness and EASA AD 2012-0004 was issued to require operators to comply with those instructions.

    Since that [EASA] AD was issued, BAE Systems (Operations) Ltd revised the AMM (Revision 107), introducing a new defined life limit for the Fire Bottle Cartridge Firing Unit into Chapter 05-10-15. Subsequently, Revision 108 of the AMM introduced in Chapter 05-20-00 inspection tasks for repairs applied to fatigue critical structures and also introduced a new Chapter 05-20-07 to provide Structural Repair Manual (SRM) references for these tasks, applicable to repairs accomplished after the publication of AMM Revision 108. Finally, AMM Revision 111 introduced safe life limitations into Chapter 05-10-15 for rollers of main landing gear and door up-locks.

    Furthermore, Section 6 of the Maintenance Review Board Report (MRBR) Document MRB 146-01, Issue 2, Revision 18 was published (as referenced in Chapter 05-20-01 of the AMM) to correct discrepancies in inspection tasks for a number of Structurally Important Items (SIIs). Grace periods for these revised inspection tasks are included in BAE Systems (Operations) Ltd Inspection Service Bulletin (ISB) ISB.53-237.

    Failure to comply with the new and more restrictive tasks and limitations referenced above could result in an unsafe condition.

    For the reasons described above, this [EASA] AD retains the requirements of EASA AD 2012-0004, which is superseded, and requires implementation of the maintenance tasks and/or airworthiness limitations as specified in the defined parts of Chapter 05 of the AMM at Revision 112.

    The unsafe condition is fatigue cracking of certain structural elements, which could adversely affect the structural integrity of the airplane. You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-4220.

    Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing this proposed AD. We considered the comment received.

    Request To Revise the Applicability

    Neptune Aviation Services requested that we revise the applicability to include BAE Systems (Operations) Limited Model BAe 146-100A, -200A, and -300A airplanes. The commenter stated that these airplanes are in the applicability of AD 2011-24-06.

    We agree that BAE Systems (Operations) Limited BAe 146-100A, -200A, and -300A airplanes should be in the applicability in order to address the identified unsafe condition for those airplanes. We have revised paragraph (c) of this proposed AD accordingly.

    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.

    This proposed AD requires revisions to certain operator maintenance documents to include new actions (e.g., inspections) and critical design configuration control limitations (CDCCLs). Compliance with these actions and CDCCLs is required by 14 CFR 91.403(c). For airplanes that have been previously modified, altered, or repaired in the areas addressed by this proposed AD, the operator may not be able to accomplish the actions described in the revisions. In this situation, to comply with 14 CFR 91.403(c), the operator must request approval for an alternative method of compliance according to paragraph (k)(1) of this proposed AD. The request should include a description of changes to the required actions that will ensure the continued damage tolerance of the affected structure.

    Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this SNPRM affects 2 airplanes of U.S. registry.

    The actions required by AD 2011-24-06 and retained in this proposed AD take about 3 work-hours per product, at an average labor rate of $85 per work-hour. Based on these figures, the estimated cost of the actions that are required by AD 2011-24-06 is $255 per product.

    We also estimate that it would take about 1 work-hour per product to comply with the basic requirements of this proposed AD. The average labor rate is $85 per work-hour. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of this proposed AD on U.S. operators to be $170, or $85 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 removing Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2011-24-06, Amendment 39-16870 (76 FR 73477, November 29, 2011), and adding the following new AD: BAE Systems (Operations) Limited: Docket No. FAA-2016-4220; Directorate Identifier 2015-NM-076-AD. (a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by January 27, 2017.

    (b) Affected ADs

    This AD replaces AD 2011-24-06, Amendment 39-16870 (76 FR 73477, November 29, 2011) (“AD 2011-24-06”).

    (c) Applicability

    This AD applies to BAE Systems (Operations) Limited Model BAe 146-100A, -200A, and -300A airplanes; and Model Avro 146-RJ70A, 146-RJ85A, and 146-RJ100A airplanes; certificated in any category; all serial numbers.

    (d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 05, Periodic Inspections.

    (e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by a determination that new or revised structural inspection requirements are necessary. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct fatigue cracking of certain structural elements, which could adversely affect the structural integrity of the airplane.

    (f) Compliance

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

    (g) Retained Airworthiness Limitations Revisions of the Shock Absorber Assemblies, With No Changes

    This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (j) of AD 2011-24-06, with no changes. Within 90 days after January 3, 2012 (the effective date of AD 2011-24-06), revise the maintenance program, by incorporating Subject 05-10-15, “Aircraft Equipment Airworthiness Limitations” of Chapter 05, “Time Limits/Maintenance Checks,” of the BAE Systems (Operations) Limited BAe 146 Series/Avro 146-RJ Series Aircraft Maintenance Manual (AMM), Revision 104, dated April 15, 2011, to remove life limits on shock absorber assemblies, but not the individual shock absorber components, amend life limits on main landing gear (MLG) up-locks and door up-locks, and to introduce and amend life limits on MLG components. Accomplishing the actions required by paragraph (i) of this AD terminates the actions required by this paragraph.

    (h) Retained No Alternative Actions, Intervals, and/or Critical Design Configuration Control Limitations (CDCCLs), With No Changes

    This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (k) of AD 2011-24-06, with no changes. Except as specified in paragraph (i) of this AD: After accomplishing the revision required by paragraph (g) of this AD, no alternative actions (e.g., inspections), intervals, and/or CDCCLs may be used, unless the actions, intervals, and/or CDCCLs are approved as an alternative method of compliance (AMOC) in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (k)(1) of this AD.

    (i) New Revise Maintenance Program or Inspection Program

    Within 90 days after the effective date of this AD: Revise the maintenance or inspection program, as applicable, to incorporate new and revised limitations, tasks, thresholds, and intervals using a method approved by the Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA. Accomplishing the actions required by this paragraph terminates the actions required by paragraph (g) of this AD.

    Note 1 to paragraph (i) of this AD:

    An additional source of guidance for the actions specified in paragraph (i) of this AD can be found in BAe 146/AVRO 146-RJ Airplane Maintenance Manual, Revision 112, dated October 15, 2013.

    Note 2 to paragraph (i) of this AD:

    An additional source of guidance for the actions specified in paragraph (i) of this AD can be found in Corrosion Prevention Control Program (CPCP) Document No. CPCP-146-01, Revision 4, dated September 15, 2010.

    Note 3 to paragraph (i) of this AD:

    An additional source of guidance for the actions specified in paragraph (i) of this AD can be found in Supplemental Structural Inspections Document (SSID) Document No. SSID-146-01, Revision 2, dated August 15, 2012.

    Note 4 to paragraph (i) of this AD:

    An additional source of guidance for the actions specified in paragraph (i) of this AD can be found in Maintenance Review Board Report Document No. MRB 146-01, Issue 2, Revision 19, dated August 2012.

    Note 5 to paragraph (i) of this AD:

    An additional source of guidance for the actions specified in paragraph (i) of this AD can be found in BAE Systems (Operations) Limited Inspection Service Bulletin ISB.53-237, Revision 1, dated April 2, 2013.

    (j) New No Alternative Actions, Intervals, and/or CDCCLs

    After accomplishment of the revision required by paragraph (i) of this AD, no alternative actions (e.g., inspections), intervals, and/or CDCCLs may be used, unless the actions, intervals, and/or CDCCLs are approved as an AMOC in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (k)(1) of this AD.

    (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: Todd Thompson, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; telephone 425-227-1175; 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: As of the effective date of this AD, 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 BAE Systems (Operations) Limited's EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA). If approved by the DOA, the approval must include the DOA-authorized signature.

    (l) Related Information

    (1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information (MCAI) EASA Airworthiness Directive 2014-0071, dated March 19, 2014, for related information. This MCAI may be found in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-4220.

    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact BAE Systems (Operations) Limited, Customer Information Department, Prestwick International Airport, Ayrshire, KA9 2RW, Scotland, United Kingdom; telephone +44 1292 675207; fax +44 1292 675704; email [email protected]; Internet http://www.baesystems.com/Businesses/RegionalAircraft/index.htm. You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 425-227-1221.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on November 10, 2016. Michael Kaszycki, Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
    [FR Doc. 2016-28060 Filed 12-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2015-7529; Directorate Identifier 2014-NM-207-AD] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier, Inc. Airplanes AGENCY:

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (SNPRM); reopening of comment period.

    SUMMARY:

    We are revising an earlier proposal to supersede Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2014-16-02 for certain Bombardier, Inc. Model CL-600-1A11 (CL-600) airplanes. This action revises the notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) by reducing the compliance time to modify the thrust reversers, and adding new modification procedures. We are proposing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products. Since these 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:

    We must receive comments on this SNPRM by January 27, 2017.

    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 Bombardier, Inc., 400 Côte-Vertu Road West, Dorval, Québec H4S 1Y9, Canada; Widebody Customer Response Center North America; toll-free telephone number 1-866-538-1247 or direct-dial telephone number 1-514-855-2999; fax 514-855-7401; email [email protected]; Internet http://www.bombardier.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-2015-7529; 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:

    Cesar Gomez, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe and Mechanical Systems Branch, ANE-171, FAA, New York Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone: 516-228-7318; fax: 516-794-5531; 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-2015-7529; Directorate Identifier 2014-NM-207-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 an NPRM to amend 14 CFR part 39 to supersede AD 2014-16-02, Amendment 39-17926 (79 FR 46968, August 12, 2014) (“AD 2014-16-02”). AD 2014-16-02 applies to certain Bombardier, Inc. Model CL-600-1A11 (CL-600) airplanes. The NPRM published in the Federal Register on December 24, 2015 (80 FR 80293) (“the NPRM”). The NPRM was prompted by a determination that it is necessary to add a requirement to repair or modify the thrust reversers, which would terminate the requirements of AD 2014-16-02. The NPRM proposed to continue to require the actions specified in AD 2014-16-02. The NPRM also proposed to require repair or modification of the thrust reversers. This action revises the NPRM by reducing the compliance time to modify the thrust reversers, and adding new modification procedures.

    Actions Since Previous NPRM Was Issued

    Since we issued the NPRM, Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA), which is the aviation authority for Canada, issued Canadian Airworthiness Directive CF-2014-19R1, dated March 14, 2016 (referred to after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or “the MCAI”), to correct an unsafe condition for certain Bombardier, Inc. Model CL-600-1A11 (CL-600) airplanes. The MCAI states:

    There have been two reported incidents of partial deployment of an engine thrust reverser in-flight, caused by a failure of the translating sleeve at the thrust reverser actuator attachment points. Inspection of the same area on some other thrust reversers revealed cracks emanating from the holes under the nut plates.

    In both incidents, the affected aeroplane landed safely without any noticeable controllability issues, however structural failure of thrust reverser actuator attachment points resulting in thrust reverser deployment or dislodgment in flight is a safety hazard warranting an immediate mitigating action.

    To help in mitigating any immediate safety hazard, Bombardier Inc. has revised the Aircraft Flight Manual (AFM) through Temporary Revisions (TR) 600/29, 600/30, 600-1/24 and 600-1/26, to prohibit the thrust reverser operation on affected aeroplanes. Additionally, as an interim corrective action, Bombardier Inc. has issued alert service bulletin (ASB) A600-0769 requiring an inspection and/or a mechanical lock out of the thrust reverser to prevent it from moving out of forward thrust mode.

    Original [TCCA] Emergency AD CF-2014-19 was issued 20 June 2014 to mandate the incorporation of above mentioned revised AFM procedures and compliance with ASB A600-0769. This [TCCA] AD is now being revised to include the terminating action in accordance with Part C of the ASB A600-0769 Rev 02 dated 22 February 2016.

    We reduced the compliance time for modification of the thrust reversers specified in paragraph (k) of this SNPRM to match the compliance time specified in the MCAI. We also added new procedures in paragraph (k) of this SNPRM for modifying the thrust reversers.

    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-2015-7529.

    Related Service Information Under1 CFR Part 51

    We reviewed Bombardier Alert Service Bulletin A600-0769, Revision 02, dated February 22, 2016. The service information describes procedures for modifying the thrust reversers on both engines. The modification includes inspections for cracks and elongated holes.

    We also reviewed the following TRs, which introduce procedures to prohibit thrust reverser operation. These documents are distinct since they apply to different airplane configurations.

    • Canadair TR 600/29-2, dated January 18, 2016, to the Canadair CL-600-1A11 AFM.

    • Canadair TR 600-1/24-2, dated January 18, 2016, to the Canadair CL-600-1A11 AFM (Winglets).

    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 Cite Most Recent Service Information

    Bombardier, Inc. requested that we revise the proposed AD (in the NPRM) to cite the most recent AFMs. Bombardier, Inc. explained that the AFM TRs mentioned in paragraph (g) of the proposed AD (in the NPRM) have been revised to include AFM TRs 600/30-2, 600-1/26-2, 600/29-2, and 600-1/24-2, all dated January 18, 2016.

    We agree to refer to the revised AFM TRs that apply to U.S.-registered airplanes in paragraphs (g)(1) and (g)(2) of this proposed AD. Those TRs are Canadair TR 600/29-2, dated January 18, 2016, to the Canadair CL-600-1A11 AFM; and Canadair TR 600-1/24-2, dated January 18, 2016, to the Canadair CL-600-1A11 AFM (Winglets).

    Bombardier, Inc. also requested that we refer to Bombardier Alert Service Bulletin A600-0769, Revision 02, dated February 22, 2016, as described previously.

    We agree with the commenter's request. We revised the introductory text of paragraph (h) and paragraphs (h)(2), (i), and (k) of this proposed AD to refer to Bombardier Alert Service Bulletin A600-0769, Revision 02, dated February 22, 2016. We also clarified the actions specified in paragraphs (h)(2) and (i) of this proposed AD by referring to Part B of Bombardier Alert Service Bulletin A600-0769, Revision 02, dated February 22, 2016, for the modification specified in those paragraphs.

    In addition, paragraph (k) of the proposed AD (in the NPRM) specified doing a repair or modification using a method approved by the Manager, New York Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), ANE-170, FAA; or Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA); or Bombardier, Inc.'s TCCA Design Approval Organization (DAO). Because Part C of Bombardier Alert Service Bulletin A600-0769, Revision 02, dated February 22, 2016, is the appropriate source of service information for doing the terminating action (i.e., modifying the thrust reversers), we have revised paragraph (k) of this proposed AD to refer to that service information. However, under the provisions of paragraph (n)(1) of this proposed AD, we will consider requests for approval of other repairs or modifications if sufficient data are submitted to substantiate that the repair or modification would provide an acceptable level of safety.

    Request To Specify Terminating Action

    Bombardier, Inc. requested that we revise paragraph (k) of the proposed AD (in the NPRM) to specify that doing the actions specified in that paragraph terminates the requirements of paragraph (g) of the proposed AD.

    We agree with the commenter's request. The MCAI states that accomplishing the modification in Part C of Bombardier Alert Service Bulletin A600-0769, Revision 02, dated February 22, 2016, terminates the inspections and interim modification. However, we have determined that accomplishing the actions in Part C of Bombardier Alert Service Bulletin A600-0769, Revision 02, dated February 22, 2016, also terminates the requirement for the AFM revisions specified in paragraph (g) of this proposed AD. The TRs specified in paragraph (g) of this proposed AD only apply to airplanes on which the actions specified in Part C of Bombardier Alert Service Bulletin A600-0769, Revision 02, dated February 22, 2016, have not been done. We have revised paragraph (k) of this proposed AD accordingly.

    Request To Revise Phone Number and Email

    Bombardier, Inc. requested that we revise the NPRM to include revised contact information for the widebody customer response center.

    We agree and have revised the ADDRESSES section of this SNPRM and paragraph (o)(2) of this proposed AD accordingly.

    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.

    Differences Between This SNPRM and the MCAI or Service Information

    Part C of Bombardier Alert Service Bulletin A600-0769, Revision 02, dated February 22, 2016, specifies to do certain inspections for cracks and elongated holes, but does not specify corrective actions for airplanes on which any crack or elongated hole is found. Paragraph (l) of this proposed AD would require that for any cracking or elongated hole, a repair be done using a method approved by the Manager, New York ACO, ANE-170, FAA; or TCCA; or Bombardier, Inc.'s TCCA DAO.

    Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD would affect 18 airplanes of U.S. registry.

    We estimate the following costs to comply with this proposed AD:

    Estimated Costs Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per
  • product
  • Cost on U.S. operators
    AFM revision; inspection [retained actions from AD 2014-16-02] 29 work-hours × $85 per hour = $2,465 N/A $2,465 $44,370 New modification 100 work-hours × $85 per hour = $8,500 $509 9,009 162,162

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

    On-Condition Costs Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per
  • product
  • Modification 36 work-hours × $85 per hour = $3,060 $509 $3,569

    We have received no definitive data that would enable us to provide cost estimates for the on-condition actions for the inspections that are part of the new modification specified in this proposed AD.

    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 removing Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2014-16-02, Amendment 39-17926 (79 FR 46968, August 12, 2014), and adding the following new AD: Bombardier, Inc.: Docket No. FAA-2015-7529; Directorate Identifier 2014-NM-207-AD. (a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by January 27, 2017.

    (b) Affected ADs

    This AD replaces AD 2014-16-02, Amendment 39-17926 (79 FR 46968, August 12, 2014) (“AD 2014-16-02”).

    (c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Bombardier, Inc. Model CL-600-1A11 (CL-600) airplanes, certificated in any category, serial numbers 1004 through 1085 inclusive.

    (d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 78, Engine Exhaust.

    (e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by reports of partial deployment of an engine thrust reverser in flight caused by a failure of the translating sleeve at the thrust reverser attachment points. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct cracks of the translating sleeve at the thrust reverser actuator attachment points, which could result in deployment or dislodgement of an engine thrust reverser in flight and subsequent reduced control of the airplane.

    (f) Compliance

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

    (g) Retained Airplane Flight Manual (AFM) Revision With Revised Service Information

    This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (g) of AD 2014-16-02, with revised service information. Within 1 calendar day after August 12, 2014 (the effective date of AD 2014-16-02): Revise the applicable sections of the AFM to include the information specified in the temporary revisions (TRs) identified in paragraphs (g)(1) and (g)(2) of this AD, as applicable. These TRs introduce procedures to prohibit thrust reverser operation. Operate the airplane according to the limitations and procedures in the TRs identified in paragraphs (g)(1) and (g)(2) of this AD, as applicable. The revision required by paragraph (g) of this AD may be done by inserting copies of the applicable TRs identified in paragraphs (g)(1) and (g)(2) of this AD into the AFM. When these TRs have been included in the general revisions of the AFM, the general revisions may be inserted in the AFM, provided the relevant information in the general revision is identical to that in the applicable TRs, and the TRs may be removed.

    (1) Canadair TR 600/29-2, dated June 20, 2014, to the Canadair CL-600-1A11 AFM; or Canadair TR 600/29-2, dated January 18, 2016, to the Canadair CL-600-1A11 AFM. As of the effective date of this AD, use only Canadair TR 600/29-2, dated January 18, 2016, to the Canadair CL-600-1A11 AFM.

    (2) Canadair TR 600-1/24, dated June 20, 2014, to the Canadair CL-600-1A11 AFM (Winglets), including Erratum, Publication No. PSP 600-1AFM (US), TR No. 600-1/24, June 20, 2014; or Canadair TR 600-1/24-2, dated January 18, 2016, to the Canadair CL-600-1A11 AFM (Winglets). As of the effective date of this AD, use only Canadair TR 600-1/24-2, dated January 18, 2016, to the Canadair CL-600-1A11 AFM (Winglets).

    (h) Retained Repetitive Inspections and Modifications, With Revised Service Information

    This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (h) of AD 2014-16-02, with revised service information. Within 25 flight cycles or 90 days, whichever occurs first, after August 12, 2014 (the effective date of AD 2014-16-02), do detailed inspections (including a borescope inspection) of both engine thrust reversers for cracks, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Alert Service Bulletin A600-0769, Revision 01, dated June 26, 2014; or Bombardier Alert Service Bulletin A600-0769, Revision 02, dated February 22, 2016. As of the effective date of this AD, use only Bombardier Alert Service Bulletin A600-0769, Revision 02, dated February 22, 2016.

    (1) If no cracking is found during any inspection required by paragraph (h) of this AD, repeat the inspection required by paragraph (h) of this AD thereafter at intervals not to exceed 100 flight cycles until the repair or modification specified in paragraph (i) or (k) of this AD is done.

    (2) If any cracking is found during any inspection required by paragraph (h) of this AD, before further flight, modify the thrust reversers on both engines, in accordance with Part B of the Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Alert Service Bulletin A600-0769, Revision 01, dated June 26, 2014; or Bombardier Alert Service Bulletin A600-0769, Revision 02, dated February 22, 2016. As of the effective date of this AD, use only Bombardier Alert Service Bulletin A600-0769, Revision 02, dated February 22, 2016.

    (i) Retained Optional Terminating Modification, With Revised Service Information

    This paragraph restates the optional terminating action specified in paragraph (i) of AD 2014-16-02, with revised service information. Modifying the thrust reversers on both engines, in accordance with Part B of the Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Alert Service Bulletin A600-0769, Revision 01, dated June 26, 2014; or Bombardier Alert Service Bulletin A600-0769, Revision 02, dated February 22, 2016; terminates the inspections required by paragraph (h) of this AD. As of the effective date of this AD, use only Bombardier Alert Service Bulletin A600-0769, Revision 02, dated February 22, 2016.

    (j) Retained Credit for Previous Actions, With No Changes

    This paragraph restates the credit provided in paragraph (j) of AD 2014-16-02, with no changes. This paragraph provides credit for actions required by paragraphs (h) and (i) of this AD, if those actions were performed before August 12, 2014 (the effective date of AD 2014-16-02), using Bombardier Alert Service Bulletin A600-0769, dated June 19, 2014.

    (k) New Requirement of This AD: Modification and Inspections

    Within 24 months after the accomplishing the modification specified in paragraph (h)(2) of this AD, or within 48 months after accomplishing the initial inspection required by paragraph (h) of this AD, whichever occurs later: Modify the thrust reversers on both engines, including doing the inspections specified in paragraphs (k)(1) through (k)(6) of this AD, in accordance with Part C of the Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Alert Service Bulletin A600-0769, Revision 02, dated February 22, 2016, except as required by paragraphs (m)(1) and (m)(2) of this AD. Modification of all thrust reversers terminates the requirements of paragraphs (g), (h), and (i) of this AD.

    (1) Do general visual inspections of the flipper doors for cracks.

    (2) Do a general visual inspection of the thrust reverser skin, frames, joints, splices, and fasteners for cracks.

    (3) Do a general visual inspection of the thrust reverser for cracks.

    (4) Do liquid penetrant or eddy current inspections, as applicable, of the frames for cracks.

    (5) Do a detailed visual inspection of the frames for cracks and elongated holes, and do a liquid penetrant inspection of the frames for cracks.

    (6) Do a liquid penetrant or an eddy current inspection of the translating sleeve skin for cracks.

    (l) New Requirement of This AD: Repair

    If, during any inspection required by paragraph (k) of this AD, any cracking or elongated hole is found, before further flight, repair using a method approved by the Manager, New York Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), ANE-170, FAA; or Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA); or Bombardier, Inc.'s TCCA Design Approval Organization (DAO).

    (m) New Exceptions to Service Information

    (1) If is not possible to follow all instructions specified in Bombardier Alert Service Bulletin A600-0769, Revision 02, dated February 22, 2016, during accomplishment of the actions required by paragraph (k) of this AD, before further flight, repair using a method approved by the Manager, New York ACO, ANE-170, FAA; or TCCA; or Bombardier, Inc.'s TCCA DAO.

    (2) Where Bombardier Alert Service Bulletin A600-0769, Revision 02, dated February 22, 2016, specifies to contact Bombardier if shim thickness is over the applicable thicknesses identified in Bombardier Alert Service Bulletin A600-0769, Revision 02, dated February 22, 2016, before further flight, repair using a method approved by the Manager, New York ACO, ANE-170, FAA; or TCCA; or Bombardier, Inc.'s TCCA DAO.

    (n) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:

    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, New York ACO, ANE-170, 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 New York ACO, send it to ATTN: Program Manager, Continuing Operational Safety, FAA, New York ACO, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone: 516-228-7300; fax: 516-794-5531. 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: As of the effective date of this AD, 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, New York ACO, ANE-170, FAA; or TCCA; or Bombardier, Inc.'s TCCA DAO. If approved by the DAO, the approval must include the DAO-authorized signature.

    (o) Related Information

    (1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information (MCAI) Canadian AD CF-2014-19R1, dated March 14, 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-2015-7529.

    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact Bombardier, Inc., 400 Côte-Vertu Road West, Dorval, Québec H4S 1Y9, Canada; Widebody Customer Response Center North America; toll-free telephone number 1-866-538-1247 or direct-dial telephone number 1-514-855-2999; fax 514-855-7401; email [email protected]; Internet http://www.bombardier.com. You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 425-227-1221.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on November 18, 2016. Michael Kaszycki, Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
    [FR Doc. 2016-28622 Filed 12-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 71 [Docket No. FAA-2015-8128; Airspace Docket No. 15-AEA-14] Proposed Amendment of Class D and Class E Airspace; Elmira, NY AGENCY:

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

    SUMMARY:

    This action proposes to amend Class E Airspace designated as an extension to a Class D surface area at Elmira/Corning Regional Airport, Elmira, NY, as the ERINN Outer Marker has been decommissioned, requiring airspace reconfiguration at the airport. This action also would eliminate the Notice to Airmen (NOTAM) part time status of this Class E Airspace area. Additionally, this action would update the geographic coordinates of the airport for the Class D and Class E airspace areas listed in this proposal, and would enhance the safety and management of Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) operations.

    DATES:

    Comments must be received on or before January 27, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Send comments on this rule to: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Bldg. Ground Floor, Rm. W12-140, Washington, DC 20591-0001; Telephone: 1-800-647-5527; Fax: 202-493-2251. You must identify the Docket Number FAA-2015-8128; Airspace Docket No. 15-AEA-14, at the beginning of your comments. You may also submit and review received comments through the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any comments received, and any final disposition in person in the Dockets Office between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The Docket Office (telephone 1-800-647-5527), is on the ground floor of the building at the above address.

    FAA Order 7400.11A, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, and subsequent amendments can be viewed online at http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. For further information, you can contact the Airspace Policy Group, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591; telephone: 202-267-8783. The Order is also available for inspection at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of FAA Order 7400.9Z at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal-regulations/ibr_locations.html.

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

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

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

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Authority for This Rulemaking

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

    Comments Invited

    Interested persons are invited to comment on this rule by submitting such written data, views, or arguments, as they may desire. Comments that provide the factual basis supporting the views and suggestions presented are particularly helpful in developing reasoned regulatory decisions on the proposal. Comments are specifically invited on the overall regulatory, aeronautical, economic, environmental, and energy-related aspects of the proposal.

    Communications should identify both docket numbers (FAA Docket No. FAA-2015-8128; Airspace Docket No. 15-AEA-14) and be submitted in triplicate to the Docket Management System (see ADDRESSES section for address and phone number). You may also submit comments through the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov.

    Persons wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments on this action must submit with those comments a self-addressed stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: “Comments to Docket No. FAA-2015-8128; Airspace Docket No. 15-AEA-14.” The postcard will be date/time stamped and returned to the commenter.

    All communications received before the specified closing date for comments will be considered before taking action on the proposed rule. The proposal contained in this notice may be changed in light of the comments received. A report summarizing each substantive public contact with FAA personnel concerned with this rulemaking will be filed in the docket.

    Availability of NPRMs

    An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded from and comments submitted through http://www.regulations.gov. Recently published rulemaking documents can also be accessed through the FAA's Web page at http://www.faa.gov/airports_airtraffic/air_traffic/publications/airspace_amendments/.

    You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any comments received, and any final disposition in person in the Dockets Office (see the ADDRESSES section for address and phone number) between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal Holidays. An informal docket may also be examined between 8:00 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal Holidays at the office of the Eastern Service Center, Federal Aviation Administration, Room 350, 1701 Columbia Avenue, College Park, Georgia 30337.

    Persons interested in being placed on a mailing list for future NPRM's should contact the FAA's Office of Rulemaking, (202) 267-9677, to request a copy of Advisory circular No. 11-2A, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking distribution System, which describes the application procedure.

    Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

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

    The Proposal

    The FAA is considering an amendment to Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) Part 71 to amend Class E Airspace designated as an extension to a Class D surface area at Elmira/Corning Regional Airport, Elmira, NY. The ERINN Outer Marker has been decommissioned, requiring airspace reconfiguration for the safety and management of IFR operations at the airport. This action also proposes to eliminate the NOTAM information that reads, “This Class E airspace area is effective during the specific dates and times established in advance by Notice to Airmen. The effective date and time will thereafter be continuously published in the Airport/Facility Directory.” From the regulatory text of the above airspace as it is not needed to supplement the existing part-time Class D airspace surrounding the airport. The geographic coordinates of the airport would be amended for Class D and Class E airspace to be in concert with the FAAs aeronautical database.

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

    Regulatory Notices and Analyses

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

    Environmental Review

    This proposal would be subject to an environmental analysis in accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F, “Environmental Impacts: Policies and Procedures” prior to any FAA final regulatory action.

    Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

    The Proposed Amendment

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

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

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

    § 71.1 [Amended]
    2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.11A, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 3, 2016, effective September 15, 2016, is amended as follows: Paragraph 5000 Class D Airspace. AEA NY D Elmira, NY [Amended] Elmira/Corning Regional Airport, NY (Lat. 42°09′35″ N., long 76°53′30″ W.)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface to and including 3,500 MSL within a 4.2-mile radius of the Elmira/Corning Regional Airport. This Class D airspace area is effective during the specific dates and times established in advance by a Notice to Airmen. The effective date and time will thereafter be continuously published in the Airport/Facility Directory.

    Paragraph 6002 Class E Surface Area Airspace. AEA NY E2 Elmira, NY [Amended] Elmira/Corning Regional Airport, NY (Lat. 42°09′35″ N., long 76°53′30″ W.)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface within a 4.2-mile radius of the Elmira/Corning Regional Airport. This Class E airspace area is effective during the specific dates and times established in advance by a Notice to Airmen. The effective date and time will thereafter be continuously published in the Airport/Facility Directory.

    Paragraph 6004 Class E Airspace Designated as an Extension to a Class D Surface Area. AEA NY E4 Elmira, NY [Amended] Elmira/Corning Regional Airport, NY (Lat. 42°09′35″ N., long 76°53′30″ W.)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface within 1.8 miles each side of the 062° bearing from the airport extending from the 4.2-mile radius of Elmira/Corning Regional Airport to 6 miles northeast of the airport, and within 1.8 miles each side of the 101° bearing from the airport extending from the 4.2-mile radius to 1.2 miles east of the airport, and within 1.8 miles each side of the 248° bearing from the airport extending from the 4.2-mile radius to 7 miles southwest of the airport, and within 1.8 miles each side of the 282° bearing from the airport extending from the 4.2-mile radius to 8 miles northwest of the airport.

    Issued in College Park, Georgia, on December 1, 2016. Ryan W. Almasy, Manager Operations Support Group, Eastern Service Center, Air Traffic Organization.
    [FR Doc. 2016-29632 Filed 12-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 15 CFR Part 923 Proposed Amendment to the Puerto Rico Coastal Zone Management Program AGENCY:

    National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Office for Coastal Management, National Ocean Service, Department of Commerce.

    ACTION:

    Request for Comments on preliminary findings and draft EA.

    SUMMARY:

    The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA) Office for Coastal Management is requesting comments on the preliminary findings and draft environmental assessment for a request from the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico for approval of amendments to the Puerto Rico Coastal Zone Management Program (PRCZMP). NOAA has determined that the amendments to the PRCZMP do not meet the requirements for approval. This determination is subject to change depending on public comments and further information that may be submitted by the Commonwealth. As part of its review of the amendments, NOAA developed a draft environmental assessment pursuant to the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act for which comments are also requested.

    DATES:

    Comments on the preliminary findings and draft environmental assessment must be received by February 13, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments on the preliminary findings and/or draft environmental assessment by either of the following methods:

    Electronic Submission: Submit all electronic public comments via the Federal e-Rulemaking Portal www.regulations.gov. To submit a comment, go to the docket for this review by typing “NOAA-NOS-2016-0148” into the search function on the Regulations.Gov Home Page.

    Mail: Submit written comments to Mr. Kerry Kehoe, Federal Consistency Specialist, Office for Coastal Management, NOAA, 1305 East-West Highway, 10th Floor, N/OCM6, Silver Spring, MD 20910. Attention: PRCZMP Amendment.

    Instructions: Comments must be submitted by one of the above methods to ensure that the comments are received, documented and considered. Comments sent by any other method, to any other address or individual, or received after the end of the commend period may not be considered. All comments received are 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.) submitted voluntarily by the sender will be publicly accessible. Do not submit confidential business information, or otherwise sensitive or protected information. NOS 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 or Excel, WordPerfect, or Adobe PDF file formats only.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Mr. Kerry Kehoe, Federal Consistency Specialist, Office for Coastal Management, NOAA, at 240-533-0782 or [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background: The federal Coastal Zone Management Act provides incentives to states and U.S. territories to develop programs to manage coastal resources and uses. The PRCZMP was approved NOAA in 1978. Since that time, statutory and regulatory changes have been made to the organizational structure of the land use agencies which comprise the PRCZMP; the land use authority of local governments; and the permit decision-making process. These changes are in force and being implemented as laws of the Commonwealth pursuant to the Puerto Rico Permit Process Reform Act of 2009 (Law 161), as amended by Law 151 of 2013, and pursuant to the Autonomous Municipalities Act of 1991 (Law 81). In order to demonstrate that the program continues to meet the requirements for program approval established under the Coastal Zone Management Act and its implementing regulations, the Department of Natural and Environmental Resources has submitted these changes to NOAA for approval. Copies of the Commonwealth's submission are available on the Regulations.Gov Web site under the Docket No. “NOAA-NOS-2016-0148.”

    NOAA's Office for Coastal Management has determined that these changes are substantial and should be reviewed as a program amendment in accordance with 15 CFR part 923, subpart H. NOAA held a public hearing on the amendment in San Juan, Puerto Rico on September 2, 2015. The focus of the hearing was on whether the PRCZMP continues to meet the requirements for program approval as specified in the Coastal Zone Management Program regulations at 15 CFR part 923. In addition to the hearing, NOAA solicited written comments from the public on the amendment.

    NOAA is issuing preliminary findings on the request for approval of the amendments to the PRCZMP. Although most of the changes to the PRCZMP have been found to be approvable, NOAA has found that the fast-tracking of the permitting process does not provide a meaningful opportunity for public participation in the process. NOAA has also identified concerns with the placement of permitting authority in authorized professionals.

    These preliminary findings are subject to change pending a response from the Commonwealth, and comments from the public.

    NOAA has also completed a draft environmental assessment pursuant to the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act for this review. Comments on the draft environmental assessment are also being solicited.

    The preliminary findings and draft environmental assessment are available for review on the Regulations.Gov Web site under Docket No. “NOAA-NOS-2016-0148.”

    Federal Domestic Assistance Catalog 11.419. Dated: December 2, 2016. Christopher Cartwright, Acting, Deputy Assistant Administrator for Ocean Services and Coastal Management, Coastal Zone Management Program Administration.
    [FR Doc. 2016-29842 Filed 12-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-08-P
    CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION 16 CFR Part 1241 [Docket No. CPSC-2006-0057] Safety Standard for Portable Generators; Notice of Extension of Comment Period AGENCY:

    U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission.

    ACTION:

    Extension of comment period.

    SUMMARY:

    The Consumer Product Safety Commission (Commission or CPSC) voted to publish a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPR) in the Federal Register on November 2, 2016, concerning portable generators. The NPR invited the public to submit written comments during a comment period that would close 75 days after the date of publication of the NPR in the Federal Register. In response to a request for an extension, the Commission is extending the comment period.

    DATES:

    Submit comments by April 24, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. CPSC-2006-0057, by any of the following methods:

    Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:

    Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments. The Commission does not accept comments submitted by electronic mail (email), except through: http://www.regulations.gov. The Commission encourages you to submit electronic comments by using the Federal eRulemaking Portal, as described above.

    Written Submissions

    Submit written submissions in the following way:

    Mail/Hand delivery/Courier, preferably in five copies, to: Office of the Secretary, Consumer Product Safety Commission, Room 820, 4330 East-West Highway, Bethesda, MD 20814; telephone (301) 504-7923.

    Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name and docket number for this notice. All comments received may be posted without change, including any personal identifiers, contact information, or other personal information provided, to: http://www.regulations.gov. Do not submit confidential business information, trade secret information, or other sensitive or protected information electronically. Such information should be submitted in writing.

    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or comments received, go to: http://www.regulations.gov and insert the Docket No. CPSC-2006-0057 into the “Search” box and follow the prompts.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    On November 2, 2016, the Commission voted to publish an NPR in the Federal Register, proposing standards that would apply to portable generators. The NPR was published on November 21, 2016, with a 75-day comment period that will close on February 6, 2017. The Commission issued the proposed rule under the authority of the Consumer Product Safety Act (CPSA). The Portable Generator Manufacturers' Association (PGMA) has requested an additional 75 days to do research, conduct testing, and review the portable generator briefing package and supporting documents to prepare public comments on the NPR.1

    1 The Commission voted (4-1) to publish this notice in the Federal Register. Chairman Elliot F. Kaye and Commissioners Robert S. Adler, Joseph P. Mohorovic, and Marietta S. Robinson voted to approve publication of this notice. Commissioner Ann Marie Buerkle voted against publication of this notice.

    The Commission has considered this request and is extending the comment period for an additional 75 days until April 24, 2017.

    Dated: December 8, 2016. Todd A. Stevenson, Secretary, U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission.
    [FR Doc. 2016-29845 Filed 12-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6355-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Highway Administration 23 CFR Part 655 [FHWA Docket No. FHWA-2016-0036] National Standards for Traffic Control Devices; the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways; Request for Information Related to Use of Clearview Font AGENCY:

    Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Request for Information.

    SUMMARY:

    The Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways (MUTCD) is incorporated by reference in regulation, approved by FHWA, and recognized as the national standard for traffic control devices used on all streets, highways, bikeways, and private roads open to public travel. This document is a Request for Information (RFI) related to the use of the Clearview letter style on highway signs.

    DATES:

    Responses to this RFI should be submitted by January 27, 2017. The FHWA will consider late-filed responses to the extent possible.

    ADDRESSES:

    To ensure that you do not duplicate your docket submissions, please submit them by only one of the following means:

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

    Mail: Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., W12-140, Washington, DC 20590.

    Hand Delivery: West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., e.t., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The telephone number is 202-366-9329.

    Instructions: You must include the agency name and docket number at the beginning of your comments. All comments received will be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For questions about this notice, contact Mr. Martin Calawa, MUTCD Team, FHWA Office of Transportation Operations, (603) 410-4864, or via email at [email protected] For legal questions, please contact Mr. William Winne, Office of the Chief Counsel, (202) 366-1397, or via email at [email protected] Office hours are from 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., e.t., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Purpose of the Request

    On January 25, 2016, FHWA published a document in the Federal Register (81 FR 4083) officially terminating the Interim Approval for Use of Clearview Font for Positive Contrast Legends on Guide Signs (IA-5), which was issued September 2, 2004. The termination discontinued the provisional use of an alternative letter style in traffic control device applications. The result of this termination rescinded the allowance of the use of letter styles other than FHWA Standard Alphabets on traffic control devices except as provided otherwise in the MUTCD and within the document. Existing signs that use the provisional letter style and comply with IA-5 were unaffected by the termination and may remain in place as long as they are in serviceable condition. The termination did not create a mandate for the removal or installation of any sign.

    Following the publication of the termination in the Federal Register and prior to its effective date, FHWA posted a Technical Memorandum 1 and a Technical Brief 2 on the MUTCD Web site. The Technical Memorandum provided guidance to the Federal-aid Highway division offices on implementation of the termination. The FHWA developed the Technical Brief for transportation agency use. It provided conclusions about the national experience with an alternative letter style and a discussion of the technical considerations that led to the termination of the Interim Approval.

    1 Technical Memorandum can be accessed at the following Web address: http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/resources/interim_approval/ia5/ia5_termination.pdf.

    2 Technical Brief, “Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways: Termination of Interim Approval No. 5, Clearview Font for Positive Contrast Legends on Guide Signs,” can be accessed at the following Web address: http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/resources/interim_approval/ia5/ia5_termtechbrief.pdf.

    After the publication of the termination, FHWA received comments from stakeholders suggesting that FHWA should have solicited public comment prior to the termination. Other comments suggested that FHWA did not consider all relevant research that was available in making its decision. As a result, FHWA is publishing this RFI in order to gather any information or research that FHWA may not have been aware of when the termination was prepared.

    RFI Guidelines

    This is not a solicitation for comments on the termination of IA-5 or for experimentation requests. The purpose of this RFI is to gather information, if any, that was not previously available to FHWA. Respondents should not include any information that might be considered proprietary or confidential.

    The FHWA requests quantitative information from State and local agencies specifically related to their use of the Clearview font. Examples of the types of information we are seeking include: State or agency practice, such as the technical standards applied, including any deviations from the conditions of IA-5; factors considered in deciding to convert to the Clearview letter style or to retain or revert to the Standard Alphabets; in-service legibility evaluations; factors related to sign design or manufacturing; safety performance; economic implications; any simultaneous improvements made when converting to Clearview, such as changes to retroreflective sheeting or increases in letter height; or other similar types of information.

    Conclusion

    The FHWA based the termination of IA-5 on available relevant information and research. To ensure that FHWA has access to any additional information, FHWA requests any additional information regarding experience with the use of alternative fonts or research not otherwise known that may be useful to FHWA be submitted for further consideration.

    Authority:

    23 U.S.C. 101(a), 104, 109(d), 114(a), 217, 315, and 402(a); 23 CFR 1.32; and 49 CFR 1.85.

    Issued on: December 7, 2016. Gregory G. Nadeau, Administrator, Federal Highway Administration.
    [FR Doc. 2016-29819 Filed 12-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-22-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R03-OAR-2016-0455; FRL-9956-42-Region 3] Determination of Attainment of the 2012 Annual Fine Particulate Matter Standard; Pennsylvania; Delaware County Nonattainment Area AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Proposed rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to determine that the Delaware County, Pennsylvania moderate nonattainment area (the Delaware County Area) has attained the 2012 annual fine particulate matter (PM2.5) national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS). This determination of attainment, also known as a clean data determination, is based upon quality assured, certified, and complete ambient air monitoring data showing that this area has monitored attainment of the 2012 annual PM2.5 NAAQS based on the 2013-2015 data available in EPA's Air Quality System (AQS) database. If this determination is finalized, the requirements for the Delaware County Area to submit an attainment demonstration, associated reasonably available control measures (RACM), a reasonable further progress (RFP) plan, contingency measures, and other planning state implementation plan (SIP) revisions related to attainment of the standard shall be suspended for so long as the area continues to meet the 2012 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. This action is being taken under the Clean Air Act (CAA).

    In the Final Rules section of this Federal Register, EPA is making this determination of attainment as a direct final rule without prior proposal because the Agency views this as a noncontroversial submittal and anticipates no adverse comments. A detailed rationale for the approval is set forth in the direct final rule. If no adverse comments are received in response to this 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 January 12, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R03-OAR-2016-0455 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:

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

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    For further information about this determination of attainment of the 2012 annual PM2.5 NAAQS for the Delaware County Area, 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 Federal Register publication.

    Dated: November 22, 2016. Shawn M. Garvin, Regional Administrator, Region III.
    [FR Doc. 2016-29747 Filed 12-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 47 CFR Parts 2 and 90 [PS Docket Nos. 13-87 and 06-229, WT Docket No. 96-86; RM-11433 and RM-11577; Report No. 3060] Petition for Partial Reconsideration of Action in Rulemaking Proceeding AGENCY:

    Federal Communications Commission.

    ACTION:

    Petition for reconsideration.

    SUMMARY:

    A Petition for Reconsideration (Petition) has been filed in the Commission's rulemaking proceeding, Chuck Powers, on behalf of Motorola Solutions, Inc.

    DATES:

    Oppositions to the Petition must be filed on or before December 28, 2016. Replies to an opposition must be filed on or before January 9, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th Street SW., Washington, DC 20554.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Clay DeCell, International Bureau, phone: (202) 418-0803, email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This is a summary of the Commission's document, Report No. 3060, released December 1, 2016. The full text of the Petition is available for viewing and copying at the FCC Reference Information Center, 445 12th Street SW., Room CY-A257, Washington, DC 20554. It also may be accessed online via the Commission's Electronic Comment Filing System at: https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/filing/10919110011734/document/10919110011734e7d2. The Commission will not send a copy of this document pursuant to the Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A), because this document does not have an impact on any rules of particular applicability.

    Subject: Service Rules Governing Narrowband Operations in the 769-775/799-805 MHz Bands, FCC 16-111, Order on Reconsideration, published at 81 FR 66830, September 29, 2016, in PS Docket Nos. 13-87 and 06-229, WT Docket No. 96-86; RM-11433 and RM-11577. This document is being published pursuant to 47 CFR 1.429(e). See also 47 CFR 1.4(b)(1) and 1.429(f), (g).

    Number of Petitions Filed: 1.

    Federal Communications Commission. Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-29827 Filed 12-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
    FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 47 CFR Part 73 [DA 16-1297; MB Docket No. 16-270; RM-11772] Radio Broadcasting Services; Pima, Arizona AGENCY:

    Federal Communications Commission.

    ACTION:

    Proposed rule; dismissal.

    SUMMARY:

    The Audio Division dismisses the petition for rulemaking filed by 1TV.Com, Inc., (Petitioner), licensee of KIKO(FM), Claypool, Arizona, proposing to amend the FM Table of Allotments, by substituting noncommercial educational Channel *278A for Channel *296A at Pima, Arizona, to accommodate a hybrid application, requesting modification of the license for Station KIKO(FM) to specify operation on Channel 243C2 rather than Channel 247C2 at Claypool, Arizona. No comments or counterproposals were received by any parties. Petitioner did not file comments expressing a continuing interest in the proposed Pima allotment. It is the Commission's policy to refrain from making an allotment to a community absent an expression of interest. We will not allot Channel *278A at Pima, Arizona.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

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

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This is a synopsis of the Commission's Report and Order, MB Docket No. 16-270, adopted November 17, 2016, and released November 18, 2016. The full text of this Commission decision is available for inspection and copying during normal business hours in the FCC's Reference Information Center at Portals II, CY-A257, 445 12th Street SW., Washington, DC 20554. The full text is also available online at http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/. This document does not contain information collection requirements subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. This document is not subject to the Congressional Review Act. (The Commission is not required to submit a copy of this Report and Order to Government Accountability Office, pursuant to the Congressional Review Act, see 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A) since the proposed petition for rule making is dismissed).

    Federal Communications Commission. Nazifa Sawez, Assistant Chief, Audio Division, Media Bureau.
    [FR Doc. 2016-29903 Filed 12-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
    81 239 Tuesday, December 13, 2016 Notices DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Forest Service Notice of Proposed New Fee Site; Federal Lands Recreation Enhancement Act (Title VIII. Pub. L. 108-447) AGENCY:

    Manti-La Sal National Forest, Forest Service, USDA.

    ACTION:

    Notice of proposed new fee site.

    SUMMARY:

    The Manti-La Sal National Forest is proposing to charge a fee at the Mammoth Administrative Site. Mammoth and Lake Cabins would be available June 5 to September 30 at $50.00 per night each. Either one or both cabins could be rented, but if both are rented, they must be to the same customer. Fees are assessed based on the level of amenities and services provided, cost of operations and maintenance, and market assessment. The fee is proposed and will be determined upon further analysis and public comment. Funds from fees would be used for the continued operation and improvements of these rental cabins.

    An Analysis of the nearby private rental cabins with similar amenities shows that the proposed fees are reasonable and typical of similar sites in the area.

    DATES:

    Comments will be accepted through January 31, 2017. New fees would begin the spring of 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Brian Pentecost, Forest Supervisor, Manti-La Sal National Forest, 599 West Price River Drive, Price, UT 84501.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Jessica Jewkes, Recreation Specialist, 435-636-3587. Information about proposed fee changes can also be found on the Manti-La Sal National Forest Web site: http://www.fs.usda.gov/mantilasal.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Federal Recreation Lands Enhancement Act (Title VII, Pub. L. 108-447) directed the Secretary of Agriculture to publish a six month advance notice on the Federal Register whenever new recreation fee areas are established. Once public involvement is complete, these new fees will be reviewed by a Recreation Resource Advisory Committee prior to a final decision and implementation. People wanting to reserve these cabins would need to do so through the National Recreation Reservation Service, at www.recreation.gov or by calling 1-877-444-6777 when it becomes available.

    Dated: December 6, 2016. Brian M. Pentecost, Forest Supervisor.
    [FR Doc. 2016-29847 Filed 12-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3411-15-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE U.S. Census Bureau Proposed Information Collection; Comment Request; Annual Survey of Entrepreneurs AGENCY:

    U.S. Census Bureau, 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:

    To ensure consideration, written comments must be submitted on or before February 13, 2017.

    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(s) and instructions should be directed to Patrice Norman, U.S. Census Bureau, EWD, 8K151, Washington, DC 20233-6600, (301) 763-7198, [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Abstract

    The Census Bureau is conducting the 2016 Annual Survey of Entrepreneurs (ASE). The ASE asks respondents of employer firms about the owner(s) and business characteristics, including questions on the gender, ethnicity, race, and veteran status of the principal owner(s). The 2016 ASE is conducted as a continuation of an annual collection of information on the characteristics of U.S. businesses and owners by gender, ethnicity, race, and veteran status. The survey is conducted jointly with the Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation, a Missouri nonprofit corporation and a private foundation exempt from taxes under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code, and the Minority Business Development Agency (MBDA) for reference years 2014, 2015 and 2016. The ASE supplements the five-year Survey of Business Owners (SBO) program and provides more timely updates on the status, nature, and scope of women-, minority-, and veteran-owned businesses. The ASE statistics are used by government program officials, industry organization leaders, economic and social analysts, and business entrepreneurs. Examples of data uses include:

    • To assess business assistance needs and allocate available program resources

    • To establish and evaluate contract procurement practices affecting small and disadvantaged businesses

    • To create a framework for planning, directing, and assessing programs that promote the activities of disadvantaged groups

    • To assess minority-owned businesses by industry and area and to educate industry associations, corporations, and government entities

    • To analyze economic and demographic shifts and differences in ownership and performance among geographic areas

    • To analyze business operations in comparison to similar firms, compute market share, and assess business growth and future prospects

    The ASE consists of questions from the 2012 SBO (form SBO-1) with additional questions about sources of capital and financial barriers that are asked each survey year. The ASE is designed to ask a series of new questions each survey year based on a relevant business topic determined prior to data collection. Each year the new module of questions is submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for approval. The module selected for the 2016 ASE focuses on business advice and planning. The 2016 ASE also includes additional questions on business financing relationships, owner demographics, and regulations. The Census Bureau is requesting approval to field the 2016 ASE in July 2017. The following module and additional questions will be added for the 2016 ASE:

    ○ Number of Businesses Previously Owned—Prior to establishing, purchasing, or acquiring this business, how many previous businesses has Owner 1 owned? (Include self-employed businesses.) □ 0 □ 1 □ 2 □ 3 □ 4 □ 5 or more ○ Field of Highest Degree—Prior to establishing, purchasing, or acquiring this business, what was the field of the highest degree completed for Owner 1? Select all that apply. □ Natural and Physical Sciences □ Law or Legal Studies □ Information Technology or Computer Science □ Mathematics, Economics, or Statistics □ Engineering and Related Technologies □ Architecture and Building □ Business or Finance □ Education □ Health, Medicine, or Pharmacy □ Social Sciences □ Humanities or Arts □ Agriculture, Environmental and Related □ Food, Hospitality, or Personal Services □ Other (Specify) □ No Bachelor's, Master's, Doctorate, or Professional Degree ○ Business Banking Relationships—In 2016, were this business's banking relationships with the same financial institutions as any of the owners' personal banking relationships? Banking relationships include business checking or savings accounts, credit cards, loans, etc. Select one box only. □ All of the banking relationships were the same □ Some of the banking relationships were the same □ None of the banking relationships were the same—Skip to Outstanding Loans □ The owners had no business banking relationships—Skip to Outstanding Loans ○ Banking Relationship Duration—How long were the owners' personal banking relationships in place before financial transactions were first conducted by this business? Select one box only. □ 0-1 month □ 2-5 months □ 6-12 months □ More than 12 months ○ Outstanding Loans—In 2016, was this business required to provide collateral or loan guarantee for any outstanding loan the business obtained? Select one box only. □ Business did not have an outstanding loan □ Yes □ No □ Do not know ○ Purchases on Account—In 2016, did this business make any purchases on account or using trade credits? Trade credits are invoice payment terms a business establishes with their suppliers allowing them to purchase goods or services now and at a later date. □ Yes □ No ○ Negative Impact on Profitability—For 2016, did each of the following negatively impact the profitability of this business? Select one box in each row. Yes No Access to financial capital Cost of financial capital Finding qualified labor Taxes Government regulations (federal, state and/or local) Slow business or lost sales Customers or clients not making payments or paying late The unpredictability of business conditions Changes or updates in technology Other (Specify)

    ○ Impact on Regulations—For 2016, which impact did each of the following government regulations have on the business profitability? Select one box in each row.

    Very
  • negative
  • Somewhat negative Neutral Somewhat positive Very
  • positive
  • N/A
    Employee hiring Workers' compensation Occupational health and safety Health insurance Employment records Business and professional licensing Building and renovation permits Business registration Health permits and inspections Environmental Trade Financial regulations Other (Specify)
    ○ Regulations and Starting or Acquiring the Business—What impact did regulations have on the ability to initially start or acquire this business? □ Positive impact □ Negative impact □ No impact □ Do not know ○ Regulations and Growth of the Business—During 2016, what impact did regulations have on expanding the business operations, such as by increasing production, adding locations, or attaining new customers? □ Positive impact □ Negative impact □ No impact □ Business did not plan to expand operations □ Do not know ○ Reasons for Seeking Business Advice—During 2016, what was this business's primary reason for seeking paid or unpaid business advice or mentoring from others? Select all that apply. □ Business finances □ Employee relations (for example, hiring, workforce retention, employee performance/growth, employee separation) □ Management and day-to-day operations □ Product development and innovation □ Investment and access to capital □ Succession planning and exit strategy □ Increasing sales □ Reducing costs □ Taxes and accounting □ Regulatory compliance □ Technology/Information Technology □ Key performance indicators and business targets □ Copyrights, trademarks, and patents □ Did not seek advice/mentoring—Skip to Exit Strategy ○ Providers of Business Advice—During 2016, from whom did this business seek the advice or mentoring selected in the `Reasons for Seeking Business Advice' question? Select all that apply. □ Family (Family refers to spouses, unmarried partners, parents/guardians, children, siblings, or close relatives.) □ Friends □ Professional colleagues □ Employees □ Professional consultants □ Customers □ Suppliers □ Government-supported technical assistance programs (for example, Small Business Administration (SBA), Small Business Development Center, Women's Business Center, or Minority Business Development Agency (MBDA) Business Center) □ Other (Specify) ○ Outcome of Advice or Mentoring—During 2016, did the advice or mentoring selected in the `Reasons for Seeking Business Advice' question lead to positive business outcomes or changes in business operations that are anticipated to be positive? delete quotes □ Yes □ No ○ Exit Strategy—Which of the following best describes this business's current exit strategy for any of the owners? An exit strategy is a plan the business owners create to describe how they intend to exit the business and capture their investment. Select all that apply. □ Walk away from the business □ Liquidate or sell off assets and repay the business's liabilities □ Sell the business to employees or managers (for example, offer an Employee Stock Ownership Program (ESOP), management buyout, or employee buyout) □ Sell or merge the business with another firm □ Sell the business to another individual that is not an owner of the same business □ Sell or transfer ownership to another owner of the same business □ Sell or transfer ownership of the business to a family member(s) that is not an owner of the same business □ Prepare an Initial Public Offering (IPO) □ Other (Specify) □ Business does not currently have an exit strategy

    The module selected for the 2014 ASE focused on business innovation and research and development (R&D) activity. The goal of the 2014 module was to identify new forms of innovation, identify characteristics of businesses that are innovators, and measure R&D activity conducted by entrepreneurs. The questions selected asked about process and product innovation, R&D costs, R&D funding, R&D purchases, and R&D employees. The questions were based on the Microbusiness Innovation Science and Technology Survey (MIST) conducted by the National Science Foundation's (NSF) National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics (NCSES). The 2014 ASE module was approved by OMB on September 4, 2015, and fielded in September 2015. Results from the 2014 ASE were published in September 2016.

    The module selected for the 2015 ASE focused on business management practices. The goal of the 2015 module was to measure how management practices impact productivity and growth. The questions selected asked about the use of targets and key performance indicators, record-keeping, and personnel practices. Some questions on the 2015 ASE module were based on the Management and Organizational Practices Survey (MOPS) conducted by the Census Bureau. The 2015 ASE module was approved by OMB on June 1, 2016, and fielded in July 2016. Results from the 2015 ASE are tentatively scheduled to be published in July 2017.

    Businesses which reported business activity on any one of the following Internal Revenue Service tax forms are eligible for selection: 1040 (Schedule C), “Profit or Loss from Business (Sole Proprietorship); 1065, “U.S. Return of Partnership Income”; 941, “Employer's Quarterly Federal Tax Return”; 944, “Employer's Annual Federal Tax Return”; or any one of the 1120 corporate tax forms. The ASE only requests responses from businesses filing the 941, 944, or 1120 tax forms. Estimates for businesses filing the 1040 or 1065 tax returns are created using statistical modeling of administrative data and will only provide data by race, gender, ethnicity, and veteran status by geography, industry, and size of firm.

    For the 2016 ASE, cognitive interviews were conducted under separate clearance with 15 to 20 businesses in two rounds. Round one interviews were conducted in October 2016, followed by round two in December 2016. The questionnaire and the interview protocol were updated for each round to reflect changes based on testing feedback. The 2016 ASE data collection period is planned for July 2017 through December 2017. Results of the 2016 ASE are tentatively scheduled to be published in July 2018.

    In preparation for the 2017 SBO, the 2016 ASE will include a set of questions to test new content for a small subset of respondents. Approximately 2,900 respondents (one percent of the survey sample) will follow an alternate path of questions as a test for the 2017 SBO. The majority of respondents will follow the traditional survey path (the base ASE questions plus the module). The test respondents will also follow the traditional survey path and module, with the addition of six questions on ownership (noted below). The test path will provide more comprehensive information as input into the 2017 SBO content development. This method of testing will offer a much larger pool of respondents than cognitive testing alone would allow. The test path questions include:

    ○ Ownership or Operation—In 2016, was this business owned or operated by spouses or unmarried partners? □ Yes □ No (skip to Family Ownership) ○ Joint Ownership—In 2016, was this business jointly owned by spouses or unmarried partners? □ Yes □ No ○ Equal Operation—In 2016, was this business equally operated by spouses or unmarried partners? □ Yes □ No, primarily operated by Owner 1 (autofill) □ No, primarily operated by Owner 2 (autofill) ○ Family Ownership—In 2016, did two or more members of one family own more than 50% of this business? (Family refers to spouses, unmarried partners, parents/guardians, children, siblings or close relatives.) □ Yes □ No ○ Number of Owners—In 2016, how many people owned this business?

    Do not combine two or more owners to create one owner.

    Count spouses and partners as separate owners.

    □ 1 person □ 2 people □ 3 people □ 4 people □ 5-10 people □ 11 or more people □ Business is owned only by a parent company, estate, trust, or entity □ Business is owned by a combination of individuals and parent companies, estates, trusts, or entities ○ 10% or More Ownership—In 2016, did at least one person own 10% or more of this business? (Do not count parent companies, estates, trusts or other entities). □ Yes □ No—Select “No” ONLY if no person owned 10% or more of this business
    II. Method of Collection

    The Census Bureau uses a letter-only mail out with an electronic-only data collection for the ASE. The mail out will be conducted from the National Processing Center in Jeffersonville, Indiana. Two mail follow-ups to nonrespondents will be conducted at approximately one-month intervals. The second follow-up of the 2014 ASE included a certified mailing for all nonrespondents. The 2015 ASE included a certified mailing for only a selected group of nonrespondents based on their sampling frame; the other nonrespondents received a standard first-class follow-up mailing. The 2016 ASE collection strategy will be similar to the 2015 ASE. Select nonrespondents will receive a certified mailing for the second follow-up if needed.

    III. Data

    OMB Control Number: 0607-0986.

    Form Number(s): ASE-L1 & ASE-L2, Annual Survey of Entrepreneurs initial letter and follow-up letter.

    Type of Review: Regular submission.

    Affected Public: Large and small employer businesses.

    Estimated Number of Respondents: 290,000.

    Estimated Time per Response: 35 minutes.

    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 169,167.

    Estimated Total Annual Cost to Public: $0.

    Respondent's Obligation: Mandatory.

    Legal Authority: Title 13, United States Code, Sections 8(b), 131 and, 182; Section 1(a)(3) of Executive Order 11625.

    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.

    Sheleen Dumas, PRA Departmental Lead, Office of the Chief Information Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2016-29866 Filed 12-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-07-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-570-983] Drawn Stainless Steel Sinks From the People's Republic of China: Partial 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 partially rescinding its administrative review of the antidumping duty order on drawn stainless steel sinks from the People's Republic of China (PRC) for the period of review (POR) April 1, 2015, through March 31, 2016.

    DATES:

    Effective December 13, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Brandon Custard, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-1823.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background

    On April 1, 2016, the Department published in the Federal Register a notice of “Opportunity to Request Administrative Review” of the antidumping duty order on drawn stainless steel sinks from the PRC for the POR (AD order).1

    1See Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Order, Finding, or Suspended Investigation; Opportunity to Request Administrative Review, 81 FR 18826 (April 1, 2016).

    In April 2016, the Department received multiple timely requests to conduct an administrative review of the antidumping duty order on drawn stainless steel sinks from the PRC.

    On June 6, 2016, in accordance with section 751(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), the Department published in the Federal Register a notice of initiation of an administrative review of the AD order.2 The administrative review was initiated with respect to 32 companies, and covers the period April 1, 2015, through March 31, 2016. Subsequent to the initiation of the administrative review, the requesting parties timely withdrew their review requests for 19 of these companies, as discussed below.

    2See Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews, 81 FR 36268 (June 6, 2016) (Initiation Notice).

    Partial Rescission of Review

    Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), the Department will rescind an administrative review, in whole or in part, if a party that requested a review withdraws its request within 90 days of the date of publication of notice of initiation of the requested review. All requesting parties withdrew their respective requests for an administrative review of the following companies within 90 days of the date of publication of the Initiation Notice:3 Elkay (China) Kitchen Solutions, Co., Ltd.; Foshan Shunde MingHao Kitchen Utensils Co., Ltd.; Franke Asia Sourcing Ltd.; Grand Hill Work Company; Guangdong G-Top Import & Export Co., Ltd.; Hangzhou Heng's Industries Co., Ltd.; Hubei Foshan Success Imp & Exp Co. Ltd.; J&C Industries Enterprise Limited; Jiangmen Pioneer Import & Export Co., Ltd.; Jiangmen Xinhe Stainless Steel Products Co., Ltd.; Jiangxi Zoje Kitchen & Bath Industry Co., Ltd.; Ningbo Oulin Kitchen Utensils Co., Ltd.; Primy Cooperation Limited; Shenzhen Kehuaxing Industrial Ltd.; Shunde Foodstuffs Import & Export Company Limited of Guangdong; Shunde Native Produce Import and Export Co., Ltd. of Guangdong; Zhongshan Newecan Enterprise Development Corporation; Zhongshan Silk Imp. & Exp. Group Co., Ltd. of Guangdong; and Zhuhai Kohler Kitchen & Bathroom Products Co., Ltd. Accordingly, the Department is rescinding this review, in part, with respect to these companies, in accordance with 19 CFR 353.213(d)(1).4

    3See Letter from Elkay Manufacturing Company (the petitioner) to the Department dated August 18, 2016. While the petitioner also submitted a letter on September 6, 2016, withdrawing its request for an administrative review of Guangdong Dongyuan Kitchenware Industrial Co., Ltd. and Guangdong Yingao Kitchen Utensils Co., Ltd., we note that other parties requested administrative reviews of these companies that were not withdrawn.

    4 As stated in Change in Practice in NME Reviews, the Department will no longer consider the non-market economy entity as an exporter conditionally subject to administrative reviews. See Antidumping Proceedings; Announcement of Change in Department Practice for Respondent Selection in Antidumping Duty Proceedings and Conditional Review of the Nonmarket Economy Entity in NME Antidumping Duty Proceedings, 78 FR 65963 (November 3, 2013).

    The instant review will continue with respect to the following companies: B&R Industries Limited; Feidong Import and Export Co., Ltd.; Foshan Zhaoshun Trade Co., Ltd.; Guangdong Dongyuan Kitchenware Industrial Co., Ltd.; Guangdong New Shichu Import & Export Company Limited; Guangdong Yingao Kitchen Utensils Co., Ltd.; Jiangmen Hongmao Trading Co., Ltd.; Jiangmen New Star Hi-Tech Enterprise Ltd.; KaiPing Dawn Plumbing Products, Inc.; Ningbo Afa Kitchen and Bath Co., Ltd.; Xinhe Stainless Steel Products Co., Ltd.; Yuyao Afa Kitchenware Co., Ltd.; and Zhongshan Superte Kitchenware Co., Ltd.

    Assessment

    The Department will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to assess antidumping duties on all appropriate entries. For the companies for which this review is rescinded, antidumping duties shall be assessed at rates equal to the cash deposit of estimated antidumping duties required at the time of entry, or withdrawal from warehouse, for consumption, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(c)(1)(i). The Department intends to issue appropriate assessment instructions directly to CBP 15 days after the date of publication of this notice in the Federal Register.

    Notification to Importers

    This notice serves as the only reminder to importers whose entries will be liquidated as a result of this rescission notice, of their responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate regarding the reimbursement of antidumping duties and/or countervailing duties prior to liquidation of the relevant entries during this review period. Failure to comply with this requirement may result in the presumption that reimbursement of antidumping duties and/or countervailing duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of double antidumping duties.

    Notification Regarding Administrative Protective Order

    This notice serves as the only reminder to parties subject to administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility concerning the disposition of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely written notification of return/destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and the terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation.

    This notice is published in accordance with section 751 of the Act and 19 CFR 351.213(d)(4).

    Dated: December 7, 2016. Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations.
    [FR Doc. 2016-29846 Filed 12-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [C-570-991] Chlorinated Isocyanurates From the People's Republic of China: Preliminary Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review, and Preliminary Intent To Rescind Review, in Part; 2014 AGENCY:

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

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Commerce (the “Department”) preliminarily determines that countervailable subsidies are being provided to producers and exporters of chlorinated isocyanurates (“chloro isos”) from the People's Republic of China (the “PRC”). Interested parties are invited to comment on this preliminary determination.

    DATES:

    Effective December 13, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Omar Qureshi or Andrew Devine, AD/CVD Operations, Office V, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone 202.482.5307 or 202.482.0238, respectively.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Scope of the Order

    The products covered by the order are chloro isos, which are derivatives are cyanuric acid, described as chlorinated s-triazine triones.1 Chloro isos are currently classifiable under subheadings 2933.69.6015, 2933.69.6021, 2933.69.6050, 3808.50.4000, 3808.94.5000, and 3808.99.9500 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (“HTSUS”). The HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes; the written product description of the scope of the order is dispositive.

    1 For a complete description of the Scope of the Order, see Countervailing Duty Administrative Review of Chlorinated Isocyanurates from the People's Republic of China: Decision Memorandum for the Preliminary Results, published concurrently with this notice (“Preliminary Decision Memorandum”).

    Methodology

    On November 13, 2014, the Department published in the Federal Register a countervailing duty (“CVD”) order on chloro isos from the PRC.2 The Department is conducting this administrative review in accordance with section 751(a)(1)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (“the Act”). For each of the subsidy programs found countervailable, we preliminarily find that there is a subsidy (i.e., a financial contribution from an authority that gives rise to a benefit to the recipient), and that the subsidy is specific.3 In making this preliminary determination, the Department relied, in part, on facts otherwise available, with the application of adverse inferences.4 For further information, see “Use of Facts Otherwise Available and Adverse Inferences” in the accompanying Preliminary Decision Memorandum. A list of topics discussed in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum is provided at Appendix I to this notice.

    2Id.

    3See Sections 771(5)(B) and (D) of the Act regarding financial contribution; section 771(5)(E) of the Act regarding benefit; and section 771(5A) of the Act regarding specificity.

    4See Section 776(a) of the Act.

    The Preliminary Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on file electronically via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS). ACCESS is available to registered users at http://access.trade.gov, and is available to all parties in the Central Records Unit, Room B8024 of the main Department of Commerce building. In addition, a complete version of the Preliminary Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly at http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn. The signed Preliminary Decision Memorandum and the electronic version of the Preliminary Decision Memorandum are identical in content.

    Intent To Rescind Administrative Review, In Part

    On May 16, 2016, the Department received a timely response indicating that Juancheng Kangtai Chemical Co., Ltd. (“Kangtai”) made no shipments to the United States during the POR, as part of its response to the Department's initial CVD questionnaire. Because there is no evidence on the record to the contrary, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(3), we preliminarily intend to rescind the review with respect to Kangtai. A final decision regarding whether to rescind the review of this company will be issued with the final results of review.

    Preliminary Results of Review

    In accordance with section 703(d)(1)(A)(i) of the Act, we calculated an estimated individual countervailable subsidy rate for each producer/exporter of the subject merchandise individually investigated. We preliminarily determine these rates to be:

    Company Subsidy
  • rate
  • Hebei Jiheng Chemical Co., Ltd. (“Hebei Jiheng”) 20.94 Heze Huayi Chemical Co., Ltd. (“Huayi”) 1.04
    Disclosure and Public Comment

    The Department intends to disclose to parties to this proceeding the calculations performed in reaching the preliminary results within five days of the publication of these preliminary results.5 The Department also intends to issue a post-preliminary analysis memo on the Export Buyer's Credit program, as discussed in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum. Interested parties may submit written comments (case briefs) 6 within 30 days of the issuance of the post-preliminary results and rebuttal comments (rebuttal briefs) within five days after the time limit for filing case briefs.7 Rebuttal briefs must be limited to issues raised in the case briefs.8 Parties who submit case or rebuttal briefs are requested to submit with the argument: (1) A statement of the issue; (2) a brief summary of the argument; and (3) a table of authorities.9

    5See 19 CFR 351.224(b).

    6See generally 19 CFR 351.303 (for general filing requirements).

    7See 19 CFR 351.309(c)(1)(ii) and 351.309(d)(1).

    8See 19 CFR 351.309(d)(2).

    9See 19 CFR 351.309(c)(2) and (d)(2).

    Interested parties who wish to request a hearing must do so within 30 days of publication of these preliminary results by submitting a written request to the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, U.S. Department of Commerce, using Enforcement and Compliance's ACCESS system.10 Requests should contain the party's name, address, and telephone number, the number of participants, and a list of the issues to be discussed. If a request for a hearing is made, we will inform parties of the scheduled date for the hearing which will be held at the U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230, at a time and location to be determined.11 Parties should confirm by telephone the date, time, and location of the hearing. Issues addressed at the hearing will be limited to those raised in the briefs.12 All briefs and hearing requests must be filed electronically and received successfully in their entirety through ACCESS by 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on the due date.

    10See 19 CFR 351.310(c).

    11See 19 CFR 351.310.

    12See 19 CFR 351.310(c).

    Unless the deadline is extended pursuant to section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act, the Department intends to issue the final results of this administrative review, including the results of our analysis of the issues raised by the parties in their comments, within 120 days after publication of these preliminary results.

    Assessment Rates and Cash Deposit Requirement

    Upon issuance of the final results, the Department shall determine, and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”) shall assess, countervailing duties on all appropriate entries covered by this review. We intend to issue instructions to CBP 15 days after publication of the final results of review.

    Pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act, the Department also intends to instruct CBP to collect cash deposits of estimated countervailing duties, in the amounts shown above for each of the respective companies shown above, on shipments of subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication of the final results of this review. For all non-reviewed firms, we will instruct CBP to continue to collect cash deposits at the most recent company-specific or all-others rate applicable to the company, as appropriate. These cash deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice.

    These preliminary results of review are issued and published in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.213 and 351.221(b)(4).

    Dated: December 5, 2016. Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. Appendix List of Topics Discussed in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum I. Summary II. Background III. Intent to Partially Rescind Review IV. Scope of the Order V. Application of CVD Law to Imports From the PRC VI. Subsidies Valuation VII. Benchmarks VIII. Use of Facts Otherwise Available and Adverse Inferences IX. Analysis of Programs X. Disclosure and Public Comment XI. Conclusion
    [FR Doc. 2016-29844 Filed 12-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-570-001] Potassium Permanganate From the People's Republic of China: Preliminary Results of the 2015 Antidumping Duty Administrative Review 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 (“AD”) order on potassium permanganate from the People's Republic of China (the “PRC”). The period of review (“POR”) is January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015. The Department preliminarily determines that Potassium Permanganate from the PRC is being, or is likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value (“LTFV”), as provided in section 733 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (“the Act”). The estimated weighted-average dumping margin is shown in the “Preliminary Determination” section of this notice. Interested parties are invited to comment on this preliminary determination.

    DATES:

    Effective December 13, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Kenneth Hawkins, AD/CVD Operations, Office V, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone 202-482-6491.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background

    On March 3, 2016, the Department initiated an administrative review of the antidumping order on potassium permanganate from the PRC.1 Between April and September 2016, the Department sent its initial and supplemental questionnaires to Pacific Accelerator Limited (“PAL”), to which it responded in a timely manner. On August 25, 2016, the Department partially extended the deadline for issuing the preliminary results until November 1, 2016.2 On October 20, 2016, the Department partially extended the deadline for issuing the preliminary results until December 1, 2016.3

    1See Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews, 81 FR 11179 (March 3, 2016) (“Initiation Notice”).

    2See Memorandum to Gary Taverman, Associate Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, “Potassium Permanganate from the People's Republic of China: Extension of Deadline for Preliminary Results of the Antidumping Duty Administrative Review,” dated August 25, 2016.

    3See Memorandum to Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, “Potassium Permanganate from the People's Republic of China: Extension of Deadline for Preliminary Results of the Antidumping Duty Administrative Review,” dated October 20, 2016.

    Scope of the Order

    Imports covered by the order are shipments of potassium permanganate, an inorganic chemical produced in free-flowing, technical, and pharmaceutical grades. Potassium permanganate is currently classifiable under item 2841.61.00 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (“HTSUS”). Although the HTSUS item number is provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the merchandise remains dispositive.

    Methodology

    The Department is conducting this review in accordance with sections 751(a)(1)(B) and 751(a)(2)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the “Act”). Export prices were calculated in accordance with section 772 of the Act. Because the PRC is a non-market economy (“NME”) within the meaning of section 771(18) of the Act, NV was calculated in accordance with section 773(c) of the Act.

    For a full description of the methodology underlying our conclusions, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum. The Preliminary Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on file electronically via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (“ACCESS”). ACCESS is available to registered users at http://access.trade.gov, and is available to all parties in the Central Records Unit, room B8024 of the main Department of Commerce building. In addition, a complete version of the Preliminary Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly at http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/. The signed Preliminary Decision Memorandum and the electronic versions of the Preliminary Decision Memorandum are identical in content.

    PRC-Wide Entity

    Under the Department's policy, the PRC-wide entity will not be under review unless a party specifically requests, or the Department self-initiates, a review of the entity. Because no party requested a review of the PRC-wide entity in this review, the entity is not under review and the entity's rate (i.e., 128.94 percent) is not subject to change.

    Preliminary Results of Review

    The Department preliminarily determines that the following weighted-average dumping margins exist for the period January 1, 2015, through December 31, 2015:

    Exporter Weighted-
  • average
  • margin
  • (USD/
  • kilogram)
  • Pacific Accelerator Limited $4.03
    Disclosure, Public Comment and Opportunity To Request a Hearing

    The Department will disclose the calculations used in our analysis to parties in this review within five days of the date of publication of this notice in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).

    Interested parties may submit case briefs within 30 days after the date of publication of these preliminary results of review in the Federal Register.4 Rebuttals to case briefs, which must be limited to issues raised in the case briefs, must be filed within five days after the time limit for filing case briefs.5 Parties who submit arguments are requested to submit with the argument (a) a statement of the issue, (b) a brief summary of the argument, and (c) a table of authorities.6 Parties submitting briefs should do so pursuant to the Department's electronic filing system, ACCESS.

    4See 19 CFR 351.309(c)(1)(ii).

    5See 19 CFR 351.309(d)(1)-(2).

    6See 19 CFR 351.309(c)(2), (d)(2).

    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 within 30 days of the date of publication of this notice. Requests should contain: (1) The party's name, address and telephone number; (2) the number of participants; and (3) a list of issues parties intend to discuss. Issues raised in the hearing will be limited to those raised in the respective case and rebuttal briefs. If a request for a hearing is made, the Department intends to hold the hearing at the U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230, at a date and time to be determined. See 19 CFR 351.310(d). Parties should confirm by telephone the date, time, and location of the hearing two days before the scheduled date.

    The Department intends to issue the final results of this administrative review, which will include the results of our analysis of all issues raised in the case briefs, within 120 days of publication of these preliminary results in the Federal Register, pursuant to section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act.

    Assessment Rates

    Upon issuance of the final results, the Department will determine, and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”) shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries covered by this review.7 The Department intends to issue assessment instructions to CBP 15 days after the publication date of the final results of this review.

    7See 19 CFR 351.212(b).

    For any individually examined respondent whose weighted average dumping margin is above de minimis (i.e., 0.50 percent) in the final results of this review, the Department will calculate importer-specific assessment rates on the basis of the ratio of the total amount of dumping calculated for the importer's examined sales to the total entered value of sales, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1). Where an importer- (or customer-) specific ad valorem rate is greater than de minimis, the Department will instruct CBP to collect the appropriate duties at the time of liquidation.8 Where either a respondent's weighted average dumping margin is zero or de minimis, or an importer- (or customer-) specific ad valorem is zero or de minimis, the Department will instruct CBP to liquidate appropriate entries without regard to antidumping duties.9

    8See 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1).

    9See 19 CFR 351.106(c)(2).

    Cash Deposit Requirements

    The following cash deposit requirements will be effective upon publication of the final results of this review for shipments of the subject merchandise from the PRC entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date, as provided by sections 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) For the companies listed above that have a separate rate, the cash deposit rate will be that established in the final results of this review (except, if the rate is zero or de minimis, then zero cash deposit will be required); (2) for previously investigated or reviewed PRC and non-PRC exporters not listed above 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; (3) 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 that for the PRC-wide entity; and (4) 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.

    Notification to Importers

    This notice also serves as a preliminary reminder to importers of their responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate regarding the reimbursement of antidumping duties prior to liquidation of the relevant entries during the POR. Failure to comply with this requirement could result in the Department's presumption that reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of double antidumping duties.

    These preliminary results are issued and published in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.

    Dated: December 1, 2016. Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. Appendix List of Topics Discussed in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum 1. Summary 2. Case History 3. Scope of the Order 4. Discussion of the Methodology a. Non-Market Economy Country Status b. Separate Rates c. PRC-Wide Entity d. Surrogate Country e. Comparisons to Normal Value f. Determination of Comparison Method g. Results of Differential Pricing Analysis h. Date of Sale i. Export Price j. Value Added Tax k. Normal Value l. Factor Valuations m. Currency Conversion 5. Recommendation
    [FR Doc. 2016-29843 Filed 12-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Institute of Standards and Technology Proposed Information Collection; Comment Request; Building for Environmental and Economic Sustainability (BEES) Please AGENCY:

    National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), 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 February 13, 2017.

    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 Joshua D. Kneifel, (301) 975-6857 or [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Abstract

    Over the last 23 years, the Engineering Laboratory of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) has developed and automated an approach for measuring the life-cycle environmental and economic performance of building products. Known as BEES (Building for Environmental and Economic Sustainability), the tool reduces complex, science-based technical content (e.g., over 500 material and energy flows from raw material extraction through product disposal) to decision-enabling results and delivers them in a visually intuitive graphical format. BEES Please is a voluntary program to collect data from product manufacturers so that the environmental performance of their products may be evaluated scientifically using BEES. NIST will publish in BEES Online (http://ws680.nist.gov/bees) an aggregated version of the data collected from manufacturers that protects data confidentiality, subject to manufacturer's review and approval. BEES measures environmental performance using the environmental life-cycle assessment approach specified in the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 14040 series of standards. All stages in the life of a product are analyzed: Raw material acquisition, manufacture, transportation, installation, use, and recycling and waste management. Economic performance is measured using the ASTM International standard life-cycle cost method (E 917), which covers the costs of initial investment, replacement, operation, maintenance and repair, and disposal.

    II. Method of Collection

    Data on materials use, energy consumption, waste, and environmental releases will be collected using an electronic, MS Excel-based questionnaire. An electronic, MS Word-based User Manual accompanies the questionnaire to help in its completion.

    III. Data

    OMB Control Number: 0693-0036.

    Form Number(s): None.

    Type of Review: Renewal (of a current information collection) with changes.

    Affected Public: Business or other for profit organizations.

    Estimated Number of Respondents: 30.

    Estimated Time per Response: 62 hours and 30 minutes.

    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 1875.

    Estimated Total Annual Cost to Public: $0.

    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.

    Sheleen Dumas, PRA Departmental Lead, Office of the Chief Information Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2016-29778 Filed 12-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XE808 Record of Decision for the Kalamazoo River Natural Resources Damage Assessment: Final Restoration Plan and Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Notice of availability of a Record of Decision.

    SUMMARY:

    The NOAA National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) announces the availability of the Record of Decision (ROD) for the Kalamazoo River Natural Resources Damage Assessment: Final Restoration Plan and Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS). The NMFS Office of Habitat Conservation Director signed the ROD on November 29, 2016, which constitutes the agency's final decision.

    ADDRESSES:

    Patricia A. Montanio, Director, Office of Habitat Conservation, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 1315 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Julie Sims, NOAA Restoration Center, 4840 South State Road, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48108-9719.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Kalamazoo River Trustees prepared the Final Restoration Plan and Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement for Restoration Resulting from the Kalamazoo River Natural Resource Damage Assessment (Final RP/PEIS). The RP/PEIS was prepared under the authority of Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) of 1980 and was also developed to comply with the Federal agency decision-making requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) and NOAA's environmental review procedures (NOAA Administrative Order 216-6, as preserved by NAO 216-6A). The document was designed to solicit public opinion on a proposed restoration program for the Kalamazoo River natural resource damage assessment (NRDA). This ROD documents the Trustees' decision to select Alternative C and conduct restoration within the Kalamazoo River watershed (described in the RP/PEIS in Section 3.2.3). This alternative would consist of a mixture of aquatic habitat restoration, riparian and wetland habitat restoration, dam removal for river and fish passage restoration, and habitat conservation actions in the Kalamazoo River watershed, including potential projects in tributaries. Through this alternative, the Trustees could conduct restoration actions in locations that have not been affected by PCBs, including projects in tributaries other than Portage Creek, and in remediated areas that were previously contaminated with PCBs. This alternative also includes the two specific projects to restore aquatic connectivity on the Kalamazoo River by removing dams in and near Otsego, Michigan. The Trustees selected this alternative since it allows the most flexibility to meet the Trustees' restoration objectives, both in terms of geographic location and timing. The scale of restoration activity that will be implemented by the Trustees under the RP/PEIS will depend upon the resolution of natural resource damage claims with the parties responsible for poly-chlorinated biphenyl releases. Under CERCLA, settlements received by the Trustees, either through negotiated or adjudicated processes, must be used to restore, rehabilitate, replace, and/or acquire the equivalent of those natural resources that have been injured. The Final RP/PEIS will guide future Trustee decision-making regarding the expenditure of settlements and the implementation of restoration activities.

    The NOAA RC is not soliciting comments on the PEIS but will consider any comments submitted that would assist us in preparing future NEPA documents. An electronic copy of the PEIS is available at: https://darrp.noaa.gov/sites/default/files/case-documents/Final_Restoration_Plan_and_Programmatic_Environmental_Impact_Statement_for_Restoration_Resulting_from_the_Kalamazoo_River_Natural_Resource_Damage_Assessment.pdf. Electronic correspondence regarding it can be submitted to [email protected] Otherwise, please submit any written comments via U.S. mail to the responsible official named in the ADDRESSES section.

    Dated: December 7, 2016. Carrie Selberg, Deputy Director, Office of Habitat Conservation, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2016-29792 Filed 12-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XF038 Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; North Pacific Halibut and Sablefish Individual Fishing Quota Cost Recovery Programs AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Notice of standard prices and fee percentage.

    SUMMARY:

    NMFS publishes the individual fishing quota (IFQ) standard prices and fee percentage for cost recovery for the IFQ Program for the halibut and sablefish fisheries of the North Pacific (IFQ Program). The fee percentage for 2016 is 3.0 percent. This action is intended to provide holders of halibut and sablefish IFQ permits with the 2016 standard prices and fee percentage to calculate the required payment for IFQ cost recovery fees due by January 31, 2017.

    DATES:

    Effective December 13, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Carl Greene, Fee Coordinator, 907-586-7105.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background

    NMFS Alaska Region administers the IFQ Program in the North Pacific. The IFQ Program is a limited access system authorized by the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act) and the Northern Pacific Halibut Act of 1982. Fishing under the IFQ Program began in March 1995. Regulations implementing the IFQ Program are set forth at 50 CFR part 679.

    In 1996, the Magnuson-Stevens Act was amended to, among other purposes, require the Secretary of Commerce to “collect a fee to recover the actual costs directly related to the management and enforcement of any . . . individual quota program.” This requirement was further amended in 2006 to include collection of the actual costs of data collection, and to replace the reference to “individual quota program” with a more general reference to “limited access privilege program” at section 304(d)(2)(A). Section 304(d)(2) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act also specifies an upper limit on these fees, when the fees must be collected, and where the fees must be deposited.

    On March 20, 2000, NMFS published regulations in § 679.45 implementing cost recovery for the IFQ Program (65 FR 14919). Under the regulations, an IFQ permit holder must pay a cost recovery fee for every pound of IFQ halibut and IFQ sablefish that is landed on his or her IFQ permit(s). The IFQ permit holder is responsible for self-collecting the fee for all IFQ halibut and IFQ sablefish landings on his or her permit(s). The IFQ permit holder is also responsible for submitting IFQ fee payment(s) to NMFS on or before the due date of January 31 of the year following the year in which the IFQ landings were made. The total dollar amount of the fee due is determined by multiplying the NMFS published fee percentage by the ex-vessel value of all IFQ landings made on the permit(s) during the IFQ fishing year. As required by § 679.45(d)(1) and (d)(3)(i), NMFS publishes this notice of the fee percentage for the halibut and sablefish IFQ fisheries in the Federal Register during or before the last quarter of each year.

    Standard Prices

    The fee is based on the sum of all payments made to fishermen for the sale of the fish during the year. This includes any retro-payments (e.g., bonuses, delayed partial payments, post-season payments) made to the IFQ permit holder for previously landed IFQ halibut or sablefish.

    For purposes of calculating IFQ cost recovery fees, NMFS distinguishes between two types of ex-vessel value: Actual and standard. Actual ex-vessel value is the amount of all compensation, monetary or non-monetary, that an IFQ permit holder received as payment for his or her IFQ fish sold. Standard ex-vessel value is the default value used to calculate the fee. IFQ permit holders have the option of using actual ex-vessel value if they can satisfactorily document it; otherwise, the standard ex-vessel value is used.

    Section 679.45(b)(3)(iii) requires the Regional Administrator to publish IFQ standard prices during the last quarter of each calendar year. These standard prices are used, along with estimates of IFQ halibut and IFQ sablefish landings, to calculate standard ex-vessel values. The standard prices are described in U.S. dollars per IFQ equivalent pound for IFQ halibut and IFQ sablefish landings made during the year. According to § 679.2, IFQ equivalent pound(s) means the weight amount, recorded in pounds, and calculated as round weight for sablefish and headed and gutted weight for halibut, for an IFQ landing. The weight of halibut in pounds landed as guided angler fish is converted to IFQ equivalent pound(s) as specified in § 300.65(c) of this title. NMFS calculates the standard prices to closely reflect the variations in the actual ex-vessel values of IFQ halibut and IFQ sablefish landings by month and port or port-group. The standard prices for IFQ halibut and IFQ sablefish are listed in the tables that follow the next section. Data from ports are combined as necessary to protect confidentiality.

    Fee Percentage

    NMFS calculates the fee percentage each year according to the factors and methods described at § 679.45(d)(2). NMFS determines the fee percentage that applies to landings made in the previous year by dividing the total costs directly related to the management, data collection, and enforcement of the IFQ Program (management costs) during the previous year by the total standard ex-vessel value of IFQ halibut and IFQ sablefish landings made during the previous year (fishery value). NMFS captures the actual management costs associated with certain management, data collection, and enforcement functions through an established accounting system that allows staff to track labor, travel, contracts, rent, and procurement. NMFS calculates the fishery value as described under the section, Standard Prices.

    Using the fee percentage formula described above, the estimated percentage of management costs to fishery value for the 2016 calendar year is 3.1 percent of the standard ex-vessel value; except the fee percentage amount must not exceed 3.0 percent pursuant section 304(d)(2)(B) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act. Therefore, the 2016 fee percentage is set at 3.0 percent. An IFQ permit holder is to use the fee percentage of 3.0 percent to calculate his or her fee for IFQ equivalent pound(s) landed during the 2016 halibut and sablefish IFQ fishing season. An IFQ permit holder is responsible for submitting the 2016 IFQ fee payment to NMFS on or before January 31, 2017. Payment must be made in accordance with the payment methods set forth in § 679.45(a)(4). NMFS no longer accepts credit card information by phone or in-person for fee payments. NMFS has determined that the practice of accepting credit card information by phone or in-person no longer meets agency standards for protection of personal financial information (81 FR 23645; April 22, 2016).

    The 2016 fee percentage of 3.0 percent is unchanged from the 2015 fee percentage of 3.0 percent (80 FR 78172; December 16, 2015). Between 2015 and 2016, there was a 5 percent increase in management costs. NMFS incurred higher costs in 2015 due to additional costs to maintain permit databases; however, other costs decreased, therefore the change in overall management costs was limited. The value of halibut and sablefish harvests under the IFQ Program also increased by 3 percent from 2015 to 2016. This increase in value of the fishery offset some of the increase in management costs, which limited the change in the fee percentage between 2015 and 2016.

    Table 1—Registered Buyer Standard Ex-Vessel Prices by Landing Location for the 2016 IFQ Season [Registered Buyer Standard Ex-Vessel Prices by Landing Location for 2015 IFQ Season] 1 Landing
  • location
  • Period
  • ending
  • Halibut
  • standard
  • ex-vessel
  • price
  • Sablefish
  • Standard
  • ex-vessel
  • price
  • Cordova March 31 - - April 30 - - May 31 - - June 30 - - July 31 7.17 - August 31 - - September 30 - - October 31 - - November 30 - - Homer March 31 - - April 30 6.69 3.97 May 31 6.99 4.21 June 30 7.32 4.17 July 31 7.20 - August 31 7.27 4.39 September 30 6.96 4.68 October 31 6.96 4.68 November 30 6.96 4.68 Ketchikan March 31 6.51 - April 30 6.72 - May 31 6.77 - June 30 6.77 - July 31 6.69 - August 31 6.76 - September 30 7.15 5.20 October 31 7.15 5.20 November 30 7.15 5.20 Kodiak March 31 6.40 - April 30 6.52 4.01 May 31 6.51 4.05 June 30 6.54 3.95 July 31 6.70 4.36 August 31 6.85 4.38 September 30 6.78 4.49 October 31 6.78 4.49 November 30 6.78 4.49 Petersburg March 31 - - April 30 - - May 31 6.65 - June 30 6.63 - July 31 - - August 31 6.97 - September 30 - - October 31 - - November 30 - - Seward March 31 6.57 3.94 April 30 6.69 - May 31 6.88 4.02 June 30 7.21 - July 31 - - August 31 - - September 30 6.96 4.87 October 31 6.96 4.87 November 30 6.96 4.87 Sitka March 31 6.48 - April 30 - - May 31 6.45 - June 30 6.45 - July 31 - - August 31 - - September 30 - - October 31 - - November 30 - - Port Group Bering Sea 2 March 31 - - April 30 - - May 31 6.04 - June 30 6.10 4.19 July 31 6.08 5.14 August 31 6.17 4.64 September 30 6.17 4.82 October 31 6.17 4.82 November 30 6.17 4.82 Port Group Central Gulf 3 March 31 6.58 3.95 April 30 6.63 3.91 May 31 6.76 4.03 June 30 7.10 4.09 July 31 7.14 4.32 August 31 7.03 4.36 September 30 6.91 4.75 October 31 6.91 4.75 November 30 6.91 4.75 Port Group Southeast 4 March 31 6.56 3.89 April 30 6.56 3.94 May 31 6.60 4.38 June 30 6.68 4.51 July 31 6.76 4.68 August 31 6.95 4.74 September 30 6.92 5.13 October 31 6.92 5.13 November 30 6.92 5.13 All-Alaska 5 March 31 6.55 3.90 April 30 6.57 3.97 May 31 6.66 4.14 June 30 6.82 4.25 July 31 6.79 4.56 August 31 6.80 4.48 September 30 6.72 4.91 October 31 6.72 4.91 November 30 6.72 4.91 All 6 March 31 6.55 3.90 April 30 6.57 3.97 May 31 6.82 4.14 June 30 6.79 4.25 July 31 6.80 4.56 August 31 6.72 4.48 September 30 6.72 4.91 October 31 6.72 4.91 November 30 6.72 4.94 1 Note: In many instances prices have not been reported to comply with confidentiality guidelines that prevent price reports when there are fewer than three processors operating in a location during a month. 2Landing locations Within Port Group—Bering Sea: Adak, Akutan, Akutan Bay, Atka, Bristol Bay, Chefornak, Dillingham, Captains Bay, Dutch Harbor, Egegik, Ikatan Bay, Hooper Bay, King Cove, King Salmon, Kipnuk, Mekoryuk, Naknek, Nome, Quinhagak, Savoonga, St. George, St. Lawrence, St. Paul, Togiak, Toksook Bay, Tununak, Beaver Inlet, Ugadaga Bay, Unalaska. 3Landing Locations Within Port Group—Central Gulf of Alaska: Anchor Point, Anchorage, Alitak, Chignik, Cordova, Eagle River, False Pass, West Anchor Cove, Girdwood, Chinitna Bay, Halibut Cove, Homer, Kasilof, Kenai, Kenai River, Alitak, Kodiak, Port Bailey, Nikiski, Ninilchik, Old Harbor, Palmer, Sand Point, Seldovia, Resurrection Bay, Seward, Valdez, Whittier. 4Landing Locations Within Port Group—Southeast Alaska: Angoon, Baranof Warm Springs, Craig, Edna Bay, Elfin Cove, Excursion Inlet, Gustavus, Haines, Hollis, Hoonah, Hyder, Auke Bay, Douglas, Tee Harbor, Juneau, Kake, Ketchikan, Klawock, Metlakatla, Pelican, Petersburg, Portage Bay, Port Alexander, Port Graham, Port Protection, Point Baker, Sitka, Skagway, Tenakee Springs, Thorne Bay, Wrangell, Yakutat. 5Landing Locations Within Port Group—All: For Alaska: All landing locations included in 2, 3, and 4. For California: Eureka, Fort Bragg, Other California. For Oregon: Astoria, Aurora, Lincoln City, Newport, Warrenton, Other Oregon. For Washington: Anacortes, Bellevue, Bellingham, Nagai Island, Edmonds, Everett, Granite Falls, Ilwaco, La Conner, Port Angeles, Port Orchard, Port Townsend, Rainier, Fox Island, Mercer Island, Seattle, Standwood, Other Washington. For Canada: Port Hardy, Port Edward, Prince Rupert, Vancouver, Haines Junction, Other Canada.
    Authority:

    16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

    Dated: December 8, 2016. Emily H. Menashes, Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2016-29879 Filed 12-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XF048 Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; North Pacific Observer Program Standard Ex-Vessel Prices AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Notification of standard ex-vessel prices.

    SUMMARY:

    NMFS publishes standard ex-vessel prices for groundfish and halibut for the calculation of the observer fee under the North Pacific Observer Program (Observer Program). This notice is intended to provide information to vessel owners, processors, registered buyers, and other participants about the standard ex-vessel prices that will be used to calculate the observer fee for landings of groundfish and halibut made in 2017. NMFS will send invoices to processors and registered buyers subject to the fee by January 15, 2018. Fees are due to NMFS on or before February 15, 2018.

    DATES:

    Effective January 1, 2017.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For general questions about the observer fee and standard ex-vessel prices, contact Sally Bibb at 907-586-7389. For questions about the fee billing process, contact Carl Greene at 907-586-7003. Additional information about the Observer Program is available on NMFS Alaska Region's Web site at https://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov/fisheries/observer-program.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background

    The Observer Program deploys NMFS-certified observers (observers) who collect information necessary for the conservation and management of the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands (BSAI) and Gulf of Alaska (GOA) groundfish and halibut fisheries. Fishery managers use information collected by observers to monitor quotas, manage groundfish and prohibited species catch, and document and reduce fishery interactions with protected resources. Scientists use observer-collected information for stock assessments and marine ecosystem research.

    The Observer Program is divided into two observer coverage categories—the partial observer coverage category and the full observer coverage category. All groundfish and halibut vessels and processors are included in one of these two categories. The partial observer coverage category includes vessels and processors that are not required to have an observer at all times; the full observer coverage category includes vessels and processors required to have all of their fishing and processing operations off Alaska observed. Vessels and processors in the full coverage category arrange and pay for observer services from a permitted observer provider. Observer coverage for the partial coverage category is funded through a system of fees based on the ex-vessel value of groundfish and halibut.

    Landings Subject to Observer Coverage Fee

    The objective of the observer fee assessment is to levy a fee on all landings accruing against a Federal total allowable catch (TAC) for groundfish or a commercial halibut quota made by vessels that are subject to Federal regulations and not included in the full coverage category. A fee is only assessed on landings of groundfish from vessels designated on a Federal Fisheries Permit or from vessels landing individual fishing quota (IFQ) or community development quota (CDQ) halibut or IFQ sablefish. Within the subset of vessels subject to the observer fee, only landings accruing against an IFQ allocation or a Federal TAC for groundfish are included in the fee assessment. A table with additional information about which landings are and are not subject to the observer fee is in NMFS regulations at § 679.55(c) and is on page 2 of an informational bulletin titled “Observer Fee Collection” on the NMFS Alaska Region Web site athttps://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov/sites/default/files/observerfees.pdf.

    Fee Determination

    A fee equal to 1.25 percent of the ex-vessel value is assessed on the landings of groundfish and halibut subject to the fee. Ex-vessel value is determined by multiplying the standard price for groundfish by the round weight equivalent for each species, gear, and port combination, and the standard price for halibut by the headed and gutted weight equivalent. NMFS will assess each landing report submitted via eLandings and each manual landing entered into the IFQ landing database and determine if the landing is subject to the observer fee and, if it is, which groundfish in the landing are subject to the observer fee. All IFQ or CDQ halibut in a landing subject to the observer fee will be assessed as part of the fee. For any groundfish or halibut subject to the observer fee, NMFS will apply the appropriate standard ex-vessel prices for the species, gear type, and port, and calculate the observer fee associated with the landing.

    Processors and registered buyers access the landing-specific, observer fee information through NMFS Web Application(https://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov/webapps/efish/login) or eLandings (https://elandings.alaska.gov/). For IFQ halibut, CDQ halibut, and IFQ sablefish, this information is available as soon as the IFQ report is submitted. For groundfish and sablefish that accrue against the fixed gear sablefish CDQ reserve, the observer fee information is generally available within 24 hours of receipt of the report. The time lag on the groundfish and sablefish CDQ fee information is necessary because NMFS must process the landings report through the catch accounting system computer programs to determine if all of the groundfish in the landings are subject to the observer fee. Information about which groundfish in a landing accrues against a Federal TAC is not immediately available from the processor's data entry into eLandings.

    The intent of the North Pacific Fishery Management Council and NMFS is for vessel owners to split the fee 50/50 with the processor or registered buyer. While vessels and processors are responsible for their portion of the fee, the owner of a shoreside processor or a stationary floating processor and the registered buyer are responsible for collecting the fee, including the vessel's portion of the fee, and remitting the full fee to NMFS.

    NMFS will send invoices to processors and registered buyers for their total fee, which is determined by the sum of the fees reported for each landing for that processor or registered buyer for the prior calendar year, by January 15, 2018. Processors and registered buyers must pay the fees to NMFS using NMFS Web Application by February 15, 2018. Processors and registered buyers have access to this system through a User ID and password issued by NMFS. Instructions for electronic payment will be provided on the NMFS Alaska Region Web site at https://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov and on the observer fee invoice to be mailed to each permit holder.

    Standard Prices

    This notice provides the standard ex-vessel prices for groundfish and halibut species subject to the observer fee in 2017. Data sources for ex-vessel prices are—

    • For groundfish other than sablefish IFQ and sablefish accruing against the fixed gear sablefish CDQ reserve, the State of Alaska's Commercial Fishery Entry Commission's (CFEC) gross revenue data, which are based on the Commercial Operator Annual Report (COAR) and Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G) fish tickets; and

    • For halibut IFQ, halibut CDQ, sablefish IFQ, and sablefish accruing against the fixed gear sablefish CDQ reserve, the IFQ Buyer Report that is submitted annually to NMFS under § 679.5(l)(7)(i).

    The standard prices in this notice were calculated using applicable guidance for protecting confidentiality of data submitted to or collected by NMFS. NMFS does not publish any price information that would permit the identification of an individual or business. At least four different vessels must make landings of a species with a particular gear type at a particular port in order for NMFS to publish that price data for that species-gear-port combination. Similarly, at least three different processors in a particular port must purchase a species harvested with a particular gear type in order for NMFS to publish a price for that species-gear-port combination. Price data that is confidential because fewer than four vessels or three processors contributed data to a particular species-gear-port combination has been aggregated to protect confidential data.

    Groundfish Standard Ex-Vessel Prices

    Table 1 shows the groundfish species standard ex-vessel prices for 2017. These prices are based on the CFEC gross revenue data, which are based on landings data from ADF&G fish tickets and information from the COAR. The COAR contains statewide buying and production information, and is considered the most complete routinely collected information to determine the ex-vessel value of groundfish harvested from waters off Alaska.

    The standard ex-vessel prices for groundfish were calculated by adding ex-vessel value from the CFEC gross revenue files for 2013, 2014, and 2015 by species, port, and gear category, and adding the volume (weight) from the CFEC gross revenue files for 2013, 2014, and 2015 by species, port, and gear category, and then dividing total ex-vessel value over the 3-year period in each category by total volume over the 3-year period in each category. This calculation results in an average ex-vessel price per pound by species, port, and gear category for the 3-year period. Three gear categories were used for the standard ex-vessel prices: (1) Non-trawl gear, including hook-and-line, pot, jig, troll, and others (Non-Trawl); (2) non-pelagic trawl gear (NPT); and (3) pelagic trawl gear (PTR).

    CFEC ex-vessel value and volume data are available in the fall of the year following the year the fishing occurred. Thus, it is not possible to base ex-vessel fee liabilities on standard prices that are less than 2 years old. For the 2017 standard ex-vessel prices, the most recent ex-vessel value and volume data available is from 2015.

    If a particular groundfish species is not listed in Table 1, the standard ex-vessel price for a species group, if it exists in the management area, will be used. If price data for a particular species remained confidential once aggregated to the ALL level, data is aggregated by species group (Flathead Sole; GOA Deep-water Flatfish; GOA Shallow-water Flatfish; GOA Skate, Other; and Other Rockfish). Standard prices for the groundfish species groups are shown in Table 2.

    If a port-level price does not meet the confidentiality requirements, the data are aggregated by port group. Port-group data for Southeast Alaska (SEAK) and the Eastern GOA excluding Southeast Alaska (EGOAxSE) also are presented separately when price data are available. Port-group data is then aggregated by regulatory area in the GOA (Eastern GOA, Central GOA, and Western GOA) and by subarea in the BSAI (BS subarea and AI subarea). If confidentiality requirements are still not met by aggregating prices across ports at these levels, the prices are aggregated at the level of BSAI or GOA, then statewide (AK) and ports outside of Alaska (OTAK), and finally all ports, including those outside of Alaska (“ALL”).

    Standard prices are presented separately for non-pelagic trawl and pelagic trawl when non-confidential data is available. NMFS also calculated prices for a “Pelagic Trawl/Non-pelagic Trawl Combined” (PTR/NPT) category that can be used when combining trawl price data for landings of a species in a particular port or port group will not violate confidentiality requirements. Creating this standard price category allows NMFS to assess a fee on 2017 landings of some of the species with pelagic trawl gear based on a combined trawl gear price for the port or port group.

    If no standard ex-vessel price is listed for a species or species group and gear category combination in Table 1, Table 2, or Table 3, no fee will be assessed on that landing. Volume and value data for that species will be added to the standard ex-vessel prices in future years, if that data becomes available and display of a standard ex-vessel price meets confidentiality requirements.

    Table 1—Standard Ex-Vessel Prices for Groundfish Species for 2017 Observer Coverage Fee [Based on volume and value from 2013, 2014, and 2015] Species12 Port/area 34 Non-Trawl NPT PTR PTR/NPT Alaska Plaice Flounder (133) Kodiak $0.09 $0.09 CGOA 0.09 0.09 GOA 0.09 0.09 AK 0.09 0.09 ALL 0.09 0.09 Arrowtooth Flounder (121) Kodiak 0.06 $0.07 CGOA 0.06 0.07 GOA 0.06 0.07 AK 0.06 0.07 ALL 0.06 0.07 Black Rockfish (142) AK $0.52 0.17 0.17 Bocaccio Rockfish (137) Sitka 0.51 SEAK 0.41 EGOA 0.41 GOA 0.41 AK 0.41 ALL 0.41 Butter Sole (126) Kodiak 0.16 0.15 CGOA 0.16 0.15 GOA 0.16 0.15 AK 0.16 0.15 ALL 0.16 0.15 Canary Rockfish (146) Ketchikan 0.36 Sitka 0.49 SEAK 0.45 EGOA 0.44 Seward 0.41 CGOA 0.42 GOA 0.43 AK 0.43 ALL 0.43 China Rockfish (149) Sitka 0.92 SEAK 0.82 Cordova 0.45 EGOAxSE 0.45 Homer 0.65 Seward 0.61 CGOA 0.62 GOA 0.59 AK 0.59 ALL 0.59 Copper Rockfish (138) Sitka 1.04 SEAK 0.86 EGOA 0.74 Homer 0.38 CGOA 0.40 GOA 0.53 AK 0.53 ALL 0.53 Dover Sole (124) Kodiak 0.10 0.09 CGOA 0.10 0.09 GOA 0.10 0.09 AK 0.10 0.09 ALL 0.10 0.09 Dusky Rockfish (172) Sitka 0.53 SEAK 0.52 EGOAxSE 0.32 Homer 0.52 Kodiak 0.32 0.18 0.17 Seward 0.54 CGOA 0.33 0.18 0.17 GOA 0.37 0.18 0.17 AK 0.37 0.18 0.17 ALL 0.37 0.18 0.17 English Sole (128) Kodiak 0.15 0.11 CGOA 0.15 0.11 GOA 0.15 0.11 AK 0.15 0.11 ALL 0.15 0.11 Flathead Sole (122) Kodiak 0.16 0.16 CGOA 0.16 0.15 GOA 0.16 0.12 AK 0.16 0.12 ALL 0.16 0.12 Northern Rockfish (136) Kodiak 0.14 0.17 0.17 CGOA 0.16 0.17 0.17 GOA 0.16 0.17 0.17 AK 0.23 0.17 0.17 ALL 0.23 0.17 0.17 Octopus (870) Homer 0.70 Kodiak 0.55 0.56 0.52 CGOA 0.56 0.56 0.52 WGOA 0.41 GOA 0.53 0.56 0.52 DH/Unalaska 0.30 BS 0.29 BSAI 0.29 AK 0.51 0.53 0.52 ALL 0.51 0.53 0.52 Pacific Cod (110) Juneau 0.59 Ketchikan 0.38 Petersburg 0.14 Sitka 0.57 SEAK 0.57 Cordova 0.32 EGOAxSE 0.34 Homer 0.34 Kenai 0.29 Kodiak 0.32 0.27 0.27 Seward 0.33 CGOA 0.32 0.27 0.27 WGOA 0.27 0.25 0.24 GOA 0.26 0.21 Adak 0.29 AI 0.29 DH/Unalaska 0.29 0.26 0.26 BS 0.28 0.26 0.26 BSAI 0.26 0.26 AK 0.29 0.26 0.20 ALL 0.29 0.26 0.20 Pacific Ocean Perch (141) Kodiak 0.19 0.20 CGOA 0.19 0.20 GOA 0.27 0.19 0.19 AK 0.35 0.19 0.19 ALL 0.35 0.19 0.19 Pollock (270) Homer 0.33 Kodiak 0.12 0.15 0.14 Seward 0.06 CGOA 0.12 0.15 0.14 WGOA 0.13 0.12 GOA 0.12 0.15 0.14 DH/Unalaska 0.13 0.16 0.16 BS 0.08 0.15 0.14 BSAI 0.08 0.15 0.14 AK 0.12 0.15 0.14 ALL 0.12 0.15 0.14 Quillback Rockfish (147) Ketchikan 0.47 Petersburg 0.25 Sitka 0.87 SEAK 0.81 Cordova 0.31 EGOAxSE 0.34 Homer 0.45 Seward 0.39 CGOA 0.39 GOA 0.54 AK 0.54 ALL 0.54 Redbanded Rockfish (153) Juneau 0.30 Ketchikan 0.32 Sitka 0.51 SEAK 0.37 EGOAxSE 0.34 Homer 0.35 Kodiak 0.20 0.18 0.18 Seward 0.40 CGOA 0.34 0.18 0.18 GOA 0.36 0.18 0.18 AK 0.36 0.18 0.18 ALL 0.36 0.18 0.18 Redstripe Rockfish (158) SEAK 0.49 EGOA 0.49 Seward 0.63 CGOA 0.48 GOA 0.48 AK 0.48 ALL 0.48 Rex Sole (125) Kodiak 0.31 0.32 CGOA 0.31 0.32 GOA 0.31 0.32 AK 0.31 0.32 ALL 0.31 0.32 Rock Sole (123) Kodiak 0.25 0.25 CGOA 0.25 0.25 GOA 0.21 0.25 0.25 AK 0.21 0.25 0.25 ALL 0.21 0.25 0.25 Rosethorn Rockfish (150) SEAK 0.52 EGOA 0.52 Seward 0.42 CGOA 0.42 GOA 0.45 AK 0.45 ALL 0.45 Rougheye Rockfish (151) Petersburg 0.26 Sitka 0.51 SEAK 0.41 Cordova 0.29 EGOAxSE 0.30 Homer 0.35 Kodiak 0.30 0.23 0.22 Seward 0.40 CGOA 0.35 0.23 0.22 GOA 0.36 0.24 0.22 BS 0.45 BSAI 0.43 AK 0.36 0.24 0.22 ALL 0.36 0.24 0.22 Sablefish (blackcod) (710) Kodiak 5 n/a 2.64 2.67 CGOA 5 n/a 2.64 2.66 GOA 5 n/a 2.65 2.66 AK 5 n/a 2.65 2.66 ALL 5 n/a 2.65 2.66 Shortraker Rockfish (152) Juneau 0.32 Ketchikan 0.31 Petersburg 0.27 Sitka 0.51 SEAK 0.39 EGOAxSE 0.46 Homer 0.37 Kodiak 0.30 0.19 0.22 Seward 0.40 CGOA 0.39 0.19 0.22 GOA 0.40 0.24 0.22 BS 0.44 BSAI 0.42 AK 0.40 0.24 0.22 ALL 0.40 0.24 0.22 Silvergray Rockfish (157) Juneau 0.33 Ketchikan 0.37 Sitka 0.54 SEAK 0.44 EGOAxSE 0.34 Homer 0.65 Seward 0.43 CGOA 0.46 GOA 0.44 AK 0.44 ALL 0.44 Skate, Alaska (703) GOA 0.41 AK 0.41 ALL 0.41 Skate, Big (702) EGOAxSE 0.41 EGOA 0.41 Kodiak 0.45 0.45 0.45 Seward 0.40 CGOA 0.44 0.45 0.45 GOA 0.44 0.45 0.45 AK 0.44 0.45 0.45 ALL 0.44 0.45 0.45 Skate, Longnose (701) Petersburg 0.40 SEAK 0.40 EGOAxSE 0.40 Homer 0.36 Kodiak 0.45 0.45 0.45 Seward 0.40 CGOA 0.43 0.45 0.45 GOA 0.43 0.45 0.45 AK 0.43 0.45 0.45 ALL 0.43 0.45 0.45 Skate, Other (700) GOA 0.32 AK 0.35 ALL 0.35 Squid (875) Kodiak 0.06 0.06 CGOA 0.08 0.08 GOA 0.08 0.08 AK 0.03 0.07 ALL 0.03 0.07 Starry Flounder (129) Kodiak 0.09 0.09 CGOA 0.09 0.09 GOA 0.09 0.09 AK 0.09 0.09 ALL 0.09 0.09 Thornyhead Rockfish (Idiots) (143) Juneau 1.01 Ketchikan 1.15 Petersburg 0.97 SEAK 1.07 EGOAxSE 0.74 Homer 0.78 Kodiak 0.65 0.67 0.70 Seward 0.82 CGOA 0.76 0.67 0.70 WGOA 0.73 GOA 0.68 0.71 DH/Unalaska 0.75 BS 0.72 BSAI 0.69 AK 0.84 0.68 0.71 ALL 0.84 0.68 0.71 Tiger Rockfish (148) SEAK 0.47 EGOAxSE 0.32 Homer 0.42 Seward 0.40 CGOA 0.40 GOA 0.42 AK 0.42 ALL 0.42 Widow Rockfish (156) Sitka 0.46 SEAK 0.46 EGOA 0.46 GOA 0.47 AK 0.47 ALL 0.47 Yelloweye Rockfish (145) Craig 1.33 Ketchikan 1.40 Petersburg 1.11 Sitka 1.76 SEAK 1.58 Cordova 1.01 Whittier 0.85 EGOAxSE 0.94 Homer 0.80 Kodiak 0.40 0.25 0.25 Seward 0.58 CGOA 0.60 0.25 0.25 WGOA 0.45 GOA 0.25 0.25 BS 0.31 BSAI 0.31 AK 1.34 0.25 0.25 ALL 1.34 0.25 0.25 Yellowtail Rockfish (155) Sitka 0.48 SEAK 0.48 EGOA 0.48 Homer 0.54 Seward 0.87 CGOA 0.40 GOA 0.42 AK 0.42 ALL 0.42 — = no landings in last 3 years or the data is confidential. 1 If species is not listed, use price for the species group in Table 2 if it exists in the management area. If no price is available for the species or species group in Table 1, Table 2, or Table 3, no fee will be assessed on that landing. That species will come into standard ex-vessel prices in future years. 2 For species codes, see Table 2a to 50 CFR part 679. 3 Regulatory areas are defined at § 679.2. (AI = Aleutian Islands subarea; AK = Alaska; ALL = all parts including those outside Alaska; BS = Bering Sea subarea; BSAI = Bering Sea/Aleutian Islands; CGOA = Central Gulf of Alaska; EGOA = Eastern Gulf of Alaska; EGOAxSE = Eastern Gulf of Alaska except Southeast Alaska; GOA = Gulf of Alaska; SEAK = Southeast Alaska; WGOA = Western Gulf of Alaska) 4 If a price is listed for the species, port, and gear type combination, that price will be applied to the round weight equivalent for groundfish landings. If no price is listed for the port and gear type combination, use port group and gear type, or see Table 2 or Table 3. 5 n/a = ex-vessel prices for sablefish landed with hook-and-line, pot, or jig gear are listed in Table 3 with the prices for IFQ and CDQ landings. Table 2—Standard Ex-Vessel Prices for Groundfish Species Groups for 2017 Observer Coverage Fee [Based on volume and value from 2013, 2014, and 2015] Species group 1 Port/area 23 Non-trawl NPT PTR Flathead Sole (FSOL) Kodiak $0.16 $0.16 CGOA 0.16 0.15 GOA 0.16 0.12 AK 0.16 0.12 GOA Deep-water Flatfish 4 (DFL4) Kodiak 0.10 0.09 CGOA 0.10 0.09 GOA 0.10 0.09 GOA Shallow-water Flatfish 5 (SFL1) Kodiak 0.23 0.23 CGOA 0.23 0.23 GOA $0.23 0.23 0.23 GOA Skate, Other (USKT) EGOA 0.40 CGOA 0.39 GOA 0.39 Other Rockfish 67 (ROCK) Juneau 0.42 Ketchikan 0.33 Petersburg 0.36 Sitka 0.55 SEAK 0.46 Cordova 0.83 Whittier 0.72 EGOAxSE 0.78 Homer 0.76 Kodiak 0.38 0.20 0.20 Seward 0.50 CGOA 0.53 0.20 0.20 WGOA 0.60 GOA 0.20 0.20 DH/Unalaska 0.75 BS 0.72 BSAI 0.68 AK 0.20 0.20 — = no landings in last 3 years or the data is confidential. 1 If groundfish species is not listed in Table 1, use price for the species group if it exists in the management area. If no price is available for the species or species group in Table 1, Table 2, or Table 3, no fee will be assessed on that landing. That species will come into standard ex-vessel prices in future years. 2 Regulatory areas are defined at § 679.2. (AK = Alaska; BS = Bering Sea subarea; BSAI = Bering Sea/Aleutian Islands; CGOA = Central Gulf of Alaska; EGOA = Eastern Gulf of Alaska; EGOAxSE = Eastern Gulf of Alaska except Southeast Alaska; GOA = Gulf of Alaska; SEAK = Southeast Alaska; WGOA = Western Gulf of Alaska) 3 If a price is listed for the species, port, and gear type combination, that price will be applied to the round weight equivalent for groundfish landings. If no price is listed for the port and gear type combination, use port group and gear type combination. 4 “Deep-water flatfish” in the GOA means Dover sole, Greenland turbot, Kamchatka flounder, and deepsea sole. 5 “Shallow-water flatfish” in the GOA means flatfish not including “deep-water flatfish,” flathead sole, rex sole, or arrowtooth flounder. 6 In the GOA: “Other rockfish (slope rockfish)” means Sebastes aurora (aurora), S. melanostomus (blackgill), S. paucispinis (bocaccio), S. goodei (chilipepper), S. crameri (darkblotch), S. elongatus (greenstriped), S. variegatus (harlequin), S. wilsoni (pygmy), S. babcocki (redbanded), S. proriger (redstripe), S. zacentrus (sharpchin), S. jordani (shortbelly), S. brevispinis (silvergray), S. diploproa (splitnose), S. saxicola (stripetail), S. miniatus (vermilion), S. reedi (yellowmouth), S. entomelas (widow), and S. flavidus (yellowtail). “Demersal shelf rockfish” means Sebastes pinniger (canary), S. nebulosus (china), S. caurinus (copper), S. maliger (quillback), S. helvomaculatus (rosethorn), S. nigrocinctus (tiger), and S. ruberrimus (yelloweye). “Other rockfish” in the Western and Central Regulatory Areas means other rockfish (slope rockfish) and demersal shelf rockfish. “Other rockfish” in the West Yakutat District of the EGOA means other rockfish (slope rockfish), northern rockfish (S. polyspinis), and demersal shelf rockfish. “Other rockfish” in the SEO District of the GOA (and SEAK for Table 2) means other rockfish (slope rockfish) and northern rockfish (S. polyspinis). 7 “Other rockfish” in the BSAI includes all Sebastes and Sebastolobus species except for Pacific ocean perch, northern, shortraker, and rougheye rockfish. Table 3—Standard Ex-Vessel Prices for Halibut IFQ, Halibut CDQ, Sablefish IFQ, and Sablefish Accruing Against the Fixed Gear Sablefish CDQ Reserve for the 2017 Observer Fee [Based on 2016 IFQ Buyer Report] Species Port/area 1 Price 2 Halibut (200) Juneau $6.75 Ketchikan 6.80 Petersburg 6.71 Sitka 6.51 SEAK 6.69 Cordova 6.87 EGOAxSE 6.75 Homer 7.19 Kodiak 6.63 Seward 6.96 CGOA 6.90 WGOA 6.18 BS 6.02 BSAI 5.96 AK 6.65 ALL 6.65 Sablefish (710) Ketchikan 4.48 SEAK 4.42 EGOAxSE 3.90 Homer 4.25 Kodiak 4.15 Seward 4.14 CGOA 4.15 WGOA 4.10 BS 5.11 BSAI 5.10 AK 4.25 ALL 4.25 1 Regulatory areas are defined at § 679.2. (AK = Alaska; ALL = all ports including those outside Alaska; BS = Bering Sea subarea; BSAI = Bering Sea/Aleutian Islands; CGOA = Central Gulf of Alaska; EGOAxSE = Eastern Gulf of Alaska except Southeast Alaska; SEAK = Southeast Alaska; WGOA = Western Gulf of Alaska) 2 If a price is listed for the species and port combination, that price will be applied to the round weight equivalent for sablefish landings and the headed and gutted weight equivalent for halibut landings. If no price is listed for the port, use port group. Halibut and Sablefish IFQ and CDQ Standard Ex-vessel Prices

    Table 3 shows the observer fee standard ex-vessel prices for halibut and sablefish. These standard prices are calculated as a single annual average price, by species and port or port group. Volume and ex-vessel value data collected on the 2016 IFQ Buyer Report for landings made from October 1, 2015, through September 30, 2016, were used to calculate the standard ex-vessel prices for the 2017 observer fee for halibut IFQ, halibut CDQ, sablefish IFQ, and sablefish landings that accrue against the fixed gear sablefish CDQ reserve.

    Authority:

    16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

    Dated: December 8, 2016. Emily H. Menashes, Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2016-29895 Filed 12-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Applications for New Awards; Magnet Schools Assistance Program AGENCY:

    Office of Innovation and Improvement, Department of Education.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    Overview Information: Magnet Schools Assistance Program (MSAP) Notice inviting applications for new awards for fiscal year (FY) 2017.

    Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number: 84.165A.

    DATES:

    Applications Available: December 13, 2016.

    Deadline for Notice of Intent To Apply: January 9, 2017.

    Deadline for Transmittal of Applications: April 11, 2017.

    Date of Informational 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 MSAP Web site at http://innovation.ed.gov/what-we-do/parental-options/magnet-school-assistance-program-msap/. A recording of this Webinar will be available on the Web site following the session.

    Deadline for Intergovernmental Review: May 8, 2017.

    Full Text of Announcement I. Funding Opportunity Description

    Purpose of Program: The MSAP, authorized under Title IV, Part D of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), as amended by the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA), provides grants to local educational agencies (LEAs) and consortia of LEAs to support magnet schools under an approved, required or voluntary, desegregation plan.

    The ESSA amended the MSAP in several important ways. To better support the development and implementation of magnet schools that increase racial integration and promote academic opportunity and excellence, the ESSA amended the MSAP to prioritize the creation and replication of evidence-based magnet programs and magnet schools that seek to reduce, eliminate, or prevent minority group isolation by taking into account socioeconomic diversity. To assist LEAs with improving access to magnet schools, under the program as reauthorized by the ESSA, MSAP funds may now be used to support student transportation, provided the transportation costs are sustainable and the costs do not constitute a significant portion of grant funds. Additionally, the reauthorized MSAP extends the grant term from three years to up to five years, and increases the maximum cumulative grant award from $12 million to $15 million to each grantee over the course of its project. Grantees must use grant funds for activities intended to improve students' academic achievement, including acquiring books, materials, technology, and equipment to support a rigorous, theme-based academic program; conducting planning and promotional activities; providing professional development opportunities for teachers to implement the academic program; and paying the salaries of effective teachers and other instructional personnel.

    Background: The MSAP seeks to reduce minority group isolation by funding projects in LEAs or consortia of LEAs that propose to implement magnet schools with academically challenging, innovative instructional approaches or specialized curricula “designed to bring students from different social, economic, ethnic, and racial backgrounds together.” 1 Unique to many of these schools is the implementation of high-demand, industry-specific themes, using sophisticated technology and curricula.

    1 20 U.S.C. 7231(b)(2).

    Recent MSAP grantees have experienced both successes and challenges. Some grantees have effectively diversified their schools, while other grantees have struggled to meet their desegregation goals. Similar to the disparity in grantees' results related to desegregation efforts, significant variations in grantees' ability to increase academic achievement have emerged.2 As such, this year's competition continues to emphasize programs that show promise of promoting academic achievement and desegregation (primarily through the use of selection criteria focused on these issues).

    2 Walton, M., Silva, B., and Ford, E. (2016). Magnet Schools Assistance Program FY 2013 Cohort Characteristics and Government Performance and Results Act Data Report for Performance Year 2. U.S. Department of Education, Washington, DC.

    In addition, as part of the program's focus on improving academic achievement and reducing minority group isolation, we include the program's new statutory priority to give a preference to applicants that propose to increase racial integration by taking into account socioeconomic diversity in designing and implementing magnet programs. The socioeconomic make-up of the school is one of the strongest predictors of whether or not a student will succeed academically. Moreover, the social benefits of attending an integrated school also contribute to improved academic and life outcomes for students.3 As of 2011, almost half of public elementary school students attend schools where most of the students are from lower-income households, and black and Latino students are disproportionately concentrated in these schools in almost every State.4 In this year's MSAP competition, we encourage applicants to propose a range of activities that incorporate a focus on socioeconomic diversity, including establishing and participating in a voluntary, inter-district transfer program for students from varied neighborhoods; making strategic decisions regarding magnet school sites to maximize the potential diversity (socioeconomically and otherwise) of the school given the schools' neighboring communities; revising school boundaries, attendance zones, or feeder patterns to take into account residential segregation or other related issues; and the formally merging of or coordinating among multiple educational jurisdictions in order to pool resources, provide transportation, and expand high-quality public school options for lower-income students. Applicants that choose to address this priority should identify the criteria they intend to use to determine students' socioeconomic status (e.g., based on family income, education level, other factors, or a combination thereof) and clearly describe and support how their approach to incorporating socioeconomic diversity is part of their overall effort to eliminate, reduce, or prevent minority group isolation.

    3 Coleman, James. “Equality and Educational Opportunity.” Does Segregation Still Matter, Russell Rumberger and Gregory Palardy, 2005, 1999-2045.

    4 Susan Aud et al., The Condition of Education 2011 (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 2011), Table A-28-1.

    Designing schools that attract and retain a diverse group of students necessitates engagement with their parents, families, and community. For this reason, we encourage applicants to demonstrate ongoing, robust family and community engagement (primarily through the use of a selection criterion focused on this issue). As applicable, each applicant's process for public involvement and consultation should reflect coordination with other relevant government entities, including housing and transportation authorities, given the impact that other public policies, such as housing and transportation, have on the composition of a school's student body. To encourage systemic and timely change, the Department is also interested in proposals that establish new school assignment or admissions policies for schools that seek to increase the number of low-income students they serve through student assignment policies that consider the socioeconomic status of students' households, students residing in neighborhoods experiencing concentrated poverty, and students from low-performing schools (amongst other factors). The Department is further interested in proposals that establish magnet schools at multiple locations within an LEA or consortia of LEAs that vary in terms of the demographics of the surrounding neighborhoods to increase opportunities for all students to attend high-quality magnet schools without placing the majority of the transportation burden on students of color. Such proposals should be addressed in response to Competitive Preference Priority 4.

    With this year's competition, the Department also aims to improve MSAP's short- and longer-term outcomes and generate evidence to inform future efforts by encouraging applicants to (1) propose projects that are supported by prior evidence and (2) propose robust evaluations of their proposed MSAP projects that would yield evidence of promise (as defined in this notice) from which future MSAP applicants could learn. Along these lines, we include a selection criterion that encourages applicants to submit a logic model as part of their applications. Each proposed project should be supported by a logic model with clearly defined outcomes that will inform the project's performance measures and evaluation. In addition, through Competitive Preference Priority 2 we encourage applicants to submit research that demonstrates that the applicant's proposed approach to their MSAP-funded magnet schools is based on prior evidence and we encourage applicants to submit evidence that corresponds to the highest levels of evidence available.

    Under the ESSA amendments to the ESEA, MSAP grantees will now have more funding, time, and resources to implement meaningful, proven methods for developing magnet programs to diversify schools and improve academic outcomes for students. We encourage LEAs to use the MSAP funds as a catalyst to create comprehensive and systematic approaches to racial and socioeconomic integration, including effective desegregation programs that will be continued after the end of the grant.

    Priorities: This competition includes four competitive preference priorities. In accordance with 34 CFR 75.105(b)(2)(ii), Competitive Preference Priorities 1 and 3 are from the MSAP regulations at 34 CFR 280.32. In accordance with 34 CFR 75.105(b)(2)(iv), Competitive Preference Priorities 2 and 4 are from section 4406 of the ESEA, as amended by the ESSA, 20 U.S.C. 7231e.

    Competitive Preference Priorities: For FY 2017, these priorities are competitive preference priorities. Under 34 CFR 280.30(f), we will award up to six additional points to an application, depending on how well the applicant addresses Competitive Preference Priorities 1, 2, and 3. Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i) we will award up to an additional four points to an application, depending on how well the application addresses Competitive Preference Priority 4. Together, depending on how well the application meets these priorities, an application may be awarded up to a total of 10 additional points. Applicants may apply under any, all, or none of the competitive preference priorities. The maximum possible points for each competitive preference priority are indicated in parentheses following the name of the priority. These points are in addition to any points the application earns under the selection criteria in this notice.

    These priorities are:

    Competitive Preference Priority 1—Need for Assistance (0 or 2 Additional Points)

    The Secretary evaluates the applicant's need for assistance by considering—

    (a) The costs of fully implementing the magnet schools project as proposed;

    (b) The resources available to the applicant to carry out the project if funds under the program were not provided;

    (c) The extent to which the costs of the project exceed the applicant's resources; and

    (d) The difficulty of effectively carrying out the approved plan and the project for which assistance is sought, including consideration of how the design of the magnet schools project—e.g., the type of program proposed, the location of the magnet school within the LEA—impacts the applicant's ability to successfully carry out the approved plan.

    Competitive Preference Priority 2—New or Revised Magnet Schools Projects and Strength of Evidence To Support Proposed Projects (0 to 3 Additional Points)

    The Secretary determines the extent to which the applicant proposes to carry out a new evidence-based (as defined in this notice) magnet school program or significantly revise an existing magnet school program using evidence-based methods and practices, as available, or replicate an existing magnet school program that has a demonstrated record of success in increasing student academic achievement and reducing isolation of minority groups.

    Competitive Preference Priority 3—Selection of Students (0 to 2 Additional Points)

    The Secretary determines the extent to which the applicant proposes to select students to attend magnet schools by methods such as lottery, rather than through academic examination.

    Competitive Preference Priority 4—Increasing Racial Integration and Socioeconomic Diversity (0 to 4 Additional Points)

    The Secretary determines the extent to which the applicant proposes to increase racial integration by taking into account socioeconomic diversity in designing and implementing magnet school programs.

    Definitions: The definition of “evidence-based” is from 20 U.S.C. 7801. The remaining definitions are from 34 CFR 77.1(c).

    Evidence-based means an activity, strategy, or intervention that—

    (i) Demonstrates a statistically significant effect on improving student outcomes or other relevant outcomes based on—

    (A) Strong evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented experimental study;

    (B) Moderate evidence from at least one well designed and well-implemented quasi-experimental study; or

    (C) Promising evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented correlational study with statistical controls for selection bias; or

    (ii)

    (A) Demonstrates a rationale based on high-quality research findings or positive evaluation that such activity, strategy, or intervention is likely to improve student outcomes or other relevant outcomes; and

    (B) Includes ongoing efforts to examine the effects of such activity, strategy, or intervention.

    Evidence of promise means there is empirical evidence to support the theoretical linkage(s) between at least one critical component and at least one relevant outcome presented in the logic model for the proposed process, product, strategy, or practice. Specifically, evidence of promise means the conditions in paragraphs (i) and (ii) of this section are met:

    (i) There is at least one study that is a—

    (A) Correlational study with statistical controls for selection bias;

    (B) Quasi-experimental study that meets the What Works Clearinghouse Evidence Standards with reservations; or

    (C) Randomized controlled trial that meets the What Works Clearinghouse Evidence Standards with or without reservations.

    (ii) The study referenced in paragraph (i) found a statistically significant or substantively important (defined as a difference of 0.25 standard deviations or larger), favorable association between at least one critical component and one relevant outcome presented in the logic model for the proposed process, product, strategy, or practice.

    Logic model (also referred to as theory of action) means a well-specified conceptual framework that identifies key components of the proposed process, product, strategy, or practice (i.e., the active “ingredients” that are hypothesized to be critical to achieving the relevant outcomes) and describes the relationships among the key components and outcomes, theoretically and operationally.

    Quasi-experimental design study means a study using a design that attempts to approximate an experimental design by identifying a comparison group that is similar to the treatment group in important respects. These studies, depending on design and implementation, can meet What Works Clearinghouse Evidence Standards with reservations (but not What Works Clearinghouse Evidence Standards without reservations).

    Randomized controlled trial means a study that employs random assignment of, for example, students, teachers, classrooms, schools, or districts to receive the intervention being evaluated (the treatment group) or not to receive the intervention (the control group). The estimated effectiveness of the intervention is the difference between the average outcomes for the treatment group and for the control group. These studies, depending on design and implementation, can meet What Works Clearinghouse Evidence Standards without reservations.

    Relevant outcome means the student outcome(s) (or the ultimate outcome if not related to students) the proposed process, product, strategy, or practice is designed to improve; consistent with the specific goals of a program.

    Strong theory means a rationale for the proposed process, product, strategy, or practice that includes a logic model.

    What Works Clearinghouse Evidence Standards means the standards set forth in the What Works Clearinghouse Procedures and Standards Handbook (Version 3.0, March 2014), which can be found at the following link: http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/DocumentSum.aspx?sid=19.

    Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 7231-7231j.

    Applicable Regulations: (a) The Education Department General Administrative Regulations (EDGAR) in 34 CFR parts 75, 77, 79, 80, 81, 82, 84, 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 in 2 CFR part 200, as adopted and amended as regulations of the Department in 2 CFR part 3474. (d) The regulations for this program in 34 CFR part 280.

    II. Award Information

    Type of Award: Discretionary grants.

    Estimated Available Funds: $90,582,483.

    The Administration has requested $115,000,000 for this program for FY 2017, of which we estimate $90,582,483 will be for new awards. The actual level of funding, if any, depends on final congressional action. However, we are inviting applications at this time to allow enough time for applicants to develop strong applications and for the Department to complete the grant process before the end of the 2017 fiscal year, 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: $700,000-$3,000,000 per budget year.

    Maximum Award: No grant awarded under this competition to a LEA, or a consortium of LEAs, shall be for more than $15,000,000 for the project period. Grantees may not expend more than 50 percent of the year one grant funds and not more than 15 percent of year two and three grant funds for planning activities. Professional development is not considered to be a planning activity.

    Note:

    Yearly award amounts may vary.

    Estimated Number of Awards: 23-30.

    Note:

    The Department is not bound by any estimates in this notice.

    Project Period: Up to 60 months.

    III. Eligibility Information

    1. Eligible Applicants: LEAs or consortia of LEAs implementing a desegregation plan as specified in section III. 3 of this notice.

    2. Cost Sharing or Matching: This program does not require cost sharing or matching.

    3. Application Requirement: Under section 4405(b)(1)(A) of the ESEA, as amended by the ESSA, applicants must describe how a grant awarded under this competition will be used to promote desegregation. Applicants must include any available evidence on how the proposed magnet school programs will increase interaction among students of different social, economic, ethnic, and racial backgrounds. If such evidence is not available, applicants must include a rationale, based on current research, for how the proposed magnet school programs will increase interaction among students of different social, economic, ethnic, and racial backgrounds. Applicants should address this application requirement in the project narrative and, as appropriate, the logic model.

    4. Other: Applicants must submit with their applications one of the following types of desegregation plans to establish eligibility to receive MSAP assistance: (a) A desegregation plan required by a court order; (b) a desegregation plan required by a State agency or an official of competent jurisdiction; (c) a desegregation plan required by the Department's Office for Civil Rights (OCR) under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VI); or (d) a voluntary desegregation plan adopted by the applicant and submitted to the Department for approval as part of the application. Under the MSAP regulations, applicants are required to provide all of the information required in 34 CFR 280.20(a) through (g) in order to satisfy the civil rights eligibility requirements found in 34 CFR 280.2(a)(2) and (b).

    In addition to the particular data and other items for required and voluntary desegregation plans described in the application package, an application must include—

    • Projected enrollment by race and ethnicity for magnet and feeder schools;

    • Signed civil rights assurances (included in the application package); and

    • An assurance that the desegregation plan is being implemented or will be implemented if the application is funded.

    Required Desegregation Plans

    1. Desegregation plans required by a court order. An applicant that submits a desegregation plan required by a court order must submit complete and signed copies of all court documents demonstrating that the magnet schools are a part of the approved desegregation plan. Examples of the types of documents that would meet this requirement include a Federal or State court order that establishes specific magnet schools, amends a previous order or orders by establishing additional or different specific magnet schools, requires or approves the establishment of one or more unspecified magnet schools, or that authorizes the inclusion of magnet schools at the discretion of the applicant.

    2. Desegregation plans required by a State agency or official of competent jurisdiction. An applicant submitting a desegregation plan ordered by a State agency or official of competent jurisdiction must provide documentation that shows that the desegregation plan was ordered based upon a determination that State law was violated. In the absence of this documentation, the applicant should consider its desegregation plan to be a voluntary plan and submit the data and information necessary for voluntary plans.

    3. Desegregation plans required by Title VI. An applicant that submits a desegregation plan required by OCR under Title VI must submit a complete copy of the desegregation plan demonstrating that magnet schools are part of the approved plan or that the plan authorizes the inclusion of magnet schools at the discretion of the applicant.

    4. Modifications to required desegregation plans. A previously approved desegregation plan that does not include the magnet school or program for which the applicant is now seeking assistance must be modified to include the magnet school component. The modification to the desegregation plan must be approved by the court, agency, or official that originally approved the plan. An applicant that wishes to modify a previously approved OCR Title VI desegregation plan to include different or additional magnet schools must submit the proposed modification for review and approval to the OCR regional office that approved its original plan.

    An applicant should indicate in its application if it is seeking to modify its previously approved desegregation plan. However, all applicants must submit proof of approval of all modifications to their plans to the Department by May 19, 2017. Proof of plan modifications should be mailed to the person and address identified under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT in section VII of this notice.

    Voluntary Desegregation Plans

    A voluntary desegregation plan must be approved by the Department each time an application is submitted for funding. Even if the Department has approved a voluntary desegregation plan in an LEA in the past, to be reviewed, the desegregation plan must be resubmitted with the application, by the application deadline.

    An applicant's voluntary desegregation plan must describe how the LEA defines or identifies minority group isolation, demonstrate how the LEA will reduce, eliminate, or prevent minority group isolation for each magnet school in the proposed magnet school application, and, if relevant, at identified feeder schools, and demonstrate that the proposed voluntary desegregation plan is adequate under Title VI. For additional guidance on how an LEA can voluntarily reduce minority group isolation and promote diversity in an LEA in light of the Supreme Court's decision in Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District No 1 et al., 551 U.S. 701 (2007), see the December 2, 2011, “Guidance on the Voluntary Use of Race to Achieve Diversity and Avoid Racial Isolation in Elementary and Secondary Schools” available on the Department's Web site at www.ed.gov/ocr/docs/guidance-ese-201111.pdf.

    Complete and accurate enrollment forms and other information as required by the regulations in 34 CFR 280.20(f) and (g) for applicants with voluntary desegregation plans are critical to the Department's determination of an applicant's eligibility under a voluntary desegregation plan (specific requirements are detailed in the application package).

    Voluntary desegregation plan applicants must submit documentation of school board approval or documentation of other official adoption of the plan as required by the regulations in 34 CFR 280.20(f)(2) when submitting their application. LEAs that were previously under a required desegregation plan, but that have achieved unitary status and so are voluntary desegregation plan applicants, typically would not need to include court orders. Rather such applications should provide the documentation discussed in this section.

    4. Single-Sex Programs: In addition to the normal MSAP grant review process, an applicant proposing to operate a single-sex magnet school or a coeducational magnet school that offers single-sex classes or extracurricular activities will undergo a separate and detailed review of its proposed single-sex educational program to determine compliance with applicable nondiscrimination laws, including the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution (as interpreted in United States v. Virginia, 518 U.S. 515 (1996), and other cases) and Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 (20 U.S.C. 1681, et seq.) and its regulations, including 34 CFR 106.34. This additional review is likely to require the applicant to provide additional fact-specific information about the single-sex program within the Department's timeframes for determining eligibility for funding. It is likely special conditions will be placed on any grant used to support a single-sex educational program. Please see the application package for additional information about an application proposing a single-sex magnet school or a coeducational magnet school offering single-sex classes or extracurricular activities.

    IV. Application and Submission Information

    1. Address to Request Application Package: You can obtain an application package via the Internet, from the Education Publications Center (ED Pubs), or from the program office.

    To obtain a copy via the Internet, use the following address: www.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/grantapps/.

    To obtain a copy from ED Pubs, write, fax, or call the following: Education Publications Center, P.O. Box 22207, Alexandria, VA 22304. Telephone, toll free: 1-877-433-7827. FAX: (703) 605-6794. If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) or a text telephone (TTY), call, toll free: 1-877-576-7734.

    You can contact ED Pubs at its Web site, also: www.EdPubs.gov or at its email address: [email protected]

    If you request an application from ED Pubs, be sure to identify this program as follows: CFDA number 84.165A.

    To obtain a copy from the program office, contact: Jennifer Todd, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., Room 4W201, Washington, DC 20202-5970. Telephone: (202) 453-7200 or by email: [email protected]

    If you use a TDD or 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. a. 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.

    Notice of Intent to Apply: The Department will be able to develop a more efficient process for reviewing grant applications if it has a better understanding of the number of entities that intend to apply for funding under this competition. Therefore, the Secretary strongly encourages each potential applicant to notify the Department of the applicant's intent to submit an application for funding by completing a Web-based form. When completing this form, applicants will provide (1) the applicant organization's name and address, (2) the number of and proposed theme(s) of school(s) that will be served through the MSAP grant, and (3) information on the priority or priorities (if any) under which the applicant intends to apply. Applicants may access this form online at http://innovation.ed.gov/what-we-do/parental-options/magnet-school-assistance-program-msap/. Applicants that do not complete this form may still apply for funding.

    Page Limit: The application narrative (Part III of the application) is where you, the applicant, address the selection criteria and the competitive preference priorities that reviewers use to evaluate your application. The suggested page limit for the application narrative is no more than 150 pages, 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.

    • Double space (no more than three lines per vertical inch) all text in the application narrative, including titles, headings, footnotes, quotations, references, and captions, as well as all text in charts, tables, figures, and graphs.

    • 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 or Arial Narrow) will not be accepted.

    • Include page numbers at the bottom of each page in your narrative.

    The page limit does not apply to Part I, the cover sheet; Part II, the budget section, including the narrative budget justification; Part IV, the assurances, certifications, the desegregation plan and related information, and the tables used to respond to Competitive Preference Priorities 2 and 3; or the one-page abstract, the resumes, or letters of support. However, the page limit does apply to all of the application narrative in Part III.

    2. b. Submission of Proprietary Information: Given the types of projects that may be proposed in applications for the MSAP program, your application may include business information that you consider proprietary. In 34 CFR 5.11 we define “business information” and describe the process we use in determining whether any of that information is proprietary and, thus, protected from disclosure under Exemption 4 of the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552, as amended).

    Because we plan to make successful applications available to the public, you may wish to request confidentiality of business information.

    Consistent with Executive Order 12600, please designate in your application any information that you believe is exempt from disclosure under Exemption 4. In the appropriate Appendix section of your application, under “Other Attachments Form,” please list the page number or numbers on which we can find this information. For additional information please see 34 CFR 5.11(c).

    3. Submission Dates and Times:

    Applications Available: December 13, 2016.

    Date of Informational Webinar: The MSAP intends to hold a Webinar to provide technical assistance to interested applicants. Detailed information regarding this Webinar will be provided on the MSAP Web site at: http://innovation.ed.gov/what-we-do/parental-options/magnet-school-assistance-program-msap/.

    A recording of this Webinar will be available on the Web site following the session.

    Deadline for Transmittal of Applications: April 11, 2017.

    Applications for grants under this competition must be submitted electronically using the Grants.gov Apply site (Grants.gov). For information (including dates and times) about how to submit your application electronically, or in paper format by mail or hand delivery if you qualify for an exception to the electronic submission requirement, please refer to Other Submission Requirements in section IV of this notice.

    We do not consider an application that does not comply with the deadline requirements.

    Individuals with disabilities who need an accommodation or auxiliary aid in connection with the application process should contact the person listed under For Further Information Contact in section VII of this notice. If the Department provides an accommodation or auxiliary aid to an individual with a disability in connection with the application process, the individual's application remains subject to all other requirements and limitations in this notice.

    Deadline for Intergovernmental Review: May 8, 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 program.

    5. Funding Restrictions: We specify unallowable costs in 34 CFR 280.41. The ESEA, as amended by the ESSA, removed the statutory prohibition on the use of funds for transportation; therefore, the prohibition on transportation in the regulation is no longer applicable. We reference additional 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: http://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 MSAP 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 MSAP, CFDA number 84.165A, 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 MSAP at www.Grants.gov. You must search for the downloadable application package for this program by the CFDA number. Do not include the CFDA number's alpha suffix in your search (e.g., search for 84.165, not 84.165A).

    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 MSAP 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.

    • Your electronic application must comply with any page limit requirements described in this notice.

    • After you electronically submit your application, you will receive from Grants.gov an automatic notification of receipt that contains a Grants.gov tracking number. This notification indicates receipt by Grants.gov only, not receipt by the Department. Grants.gov will also notify you automatically by email if your application met all the Grants.gov validation requirements or if there were any errors (such as submission of your application by someone other than a registered Authorized Organization Representative, or inclusion of an attachment with a file name that contains special characters). You will be given an opportunity to correct any errors and resubmit, but you must still meet the deadline for submission of applications.

    Once your application is successfully validated by Grants.gov, the Department will retrieve your application from Grants.gov and send you an email with a unique PR/Award number for your application.

    These emails do not mean that your application is without any disqualifying errors. While your application may have been successfully validated by Grants.gov, it must also meet the Department's application requirements as specified in this notice and in the application instructions. Disqualifying errors could include, for instance, failure to upload attachments in a read-only, non-modifiable PDF; failure to submit a required part of the application; or failure to meet applicant eligibility requirements. It is your responsibility to ensure that your submitted application has met all of the Department's requirements.

    • We may request that you provide us original signatures on forms at a later date.

    Application Deadline Date Extension in Case of Technical Issues With the Grants.gov System: If you are experiencing problems submitting your application through Grants.gov, please contact the Grants.gov Support Desk, toll free, at 1-800-518-4726. You must obtain a Grants.gov Support Desk Case Number and must keep a record of it.

    If you are prevented from electronically submitting your application on the application deadline date because of technical problems with the Grants.gov system, we will grant you an extension until 4:30:00 p.m., Washington, DC time, the following business day to enable you to transmit your application electronically or by hand delivery. You also may mail your application by following the mailing instructions described elsewhere in this notice.

    If you submit an application after 4:30:00 p.m., Washington, DC time, on the application deadline date, please contact the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT in section VII of this notice and provide an explanation of the technical problem you experienced with Grants.gov, along with the Grants.gov Support Desk Case Number. We will accept your application if we can confirm that a technical problem occurred with the Grants.gov system and that the problem affected your ability to submit your application by 4:30:00 p.m., Washington, DC time, on the application deadline date. We will contact you after we determine whether your application will be accepted.

    Note:

    The extensions to which we refer in this section apply only to the unavailability of, or technical problems with, the Grants.gov system. We will not grant you an extension if you failed to fully register to submit your application to Grants.gov before the application deadline date and time or if the technical problem you experienced is unrelated to the Grants.gov system.

    Exception to Electronic Submission Requirement: You qualify for an exception to the electronic submission requirement, and may submit your application in paper format, if you are unable to submit an application through the Grants.gov system because—

    • You do not have access to the Internet; or

    • You do not have the capacity to upload large documents to the Grants.gov system;

    and

    • No later than two weeks before the application deadline date (14 calendar days or, if the fourteenth calendar day before the application deadline date falls on a Federal holiday, the next business day following the Federal holiday), you mail or fax a written statement to the Department, explaining which of the two grounds for an exception prevents you from using the Internet to submit your application.

    If you mail your written statement to the Department, it must be postmarked no later than two weeks before the application deadline date. If you fax your written statement to the Department, we must receive the faxed statement no later than two weeks before the application deadline date.

    Address and mail or fax your statement to: Jennifer Todd, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., Room 4W250, Washington, DC 20202-5970. FAX: (202) 205-5630.

    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 84.165A), LBJ Basement Level 1, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20202-4260.

    You must show proof of mailing consisting of one of the following:

    (1) A legibly dated U.S. Postal Service postmark.

    (2) A legible mail receipt with the date of mailing stamped by the U.S. Postal Service.

    (3) A dated shipping label, invoice, or receipt from a commercial carrier.

    (4) Any other proof of mailing acceptable to the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Education.

    If you mail your application through the U.S. Postal Service, we do not accept either of the following as proof of mailing:

    (1) A private metered postmark.

    (2) A mail receipt that is not dated by the U.S. Postal Service.

    Note:

    The U.S. Postal Service does not uniformly provide a dated postmark. Before relying on this method, you should check with your local post office.

    We will not consider applications postmarked after the application deadline date.

    c. Submission of Paper Applications by Hand Delivery.

    If you qualify for an exception to the electronic submission requirement, you (or a courier service) may deliver your paper application to the Department by hand. You must deliver the original and two copies of your application by hand, on or before the application deadline date, to the Department at the following address: U.S. Department of Education, Application Control Center, Attention: (CFDA Number 84.165A), 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 are from 34 CFR 75.210, 34 CFR 280.30, 34 CFR 280.31, and sections 4401 and 4405 of the ESEA, as amended by the ESSA. All of the selection criteria are listed in this section and in the application package.

    The maximum score for all of the selection criteria is 100 points. The maximum score for each criterion is included in parentheses following the title of the specific selection criterion. Each criterion also includes the factors that reviewers will consider in determining the extent to which an applicant meets the criterion.

    Points awarded under these selection criteria are in addition to any points an applicant earns under the competitive preference priorities in this notice. The maximum score that an application may receive under the competitive preference priorities and the selection criteria is 110 points.

    (a) Desegregation (30 points).

    The Secretary reviews each application to determine the quality of the desegregation-related activities and determines the extent to which the applicant demonstrates—

    (1) The effectiveness of its plan to recruit students from different social, economic, ethnic, and racial backgrounds into the magnet schools. (34 CFR 280.31(a)(2)(v))

    (2) How it will foster interaction among students of different social, economic, ethnic, and racial backgrounds in classroom activities, extracurricular activities, or other activities in the magnet schools (or, if appropriate, in the schools in which the magnet school programs operate). (34 CFR 280.31)

    (3) How it will ensure equal access and treatment for eligible project participants who have been traditionally underrepresented in courses or activities offered as part of the magnet school, e.g., women and girls in mathematics, science, or technology courses, and disabled students. (34 CFR 280.31)

    (4) The effectiveness of all other desegregation strategies proposed by the applicant for the elimination, reduction, or prevention of minority group isolation in elementary schools and secondary schools with substantial proportions of minority students. (Section 4401(b)(1) of the ESEA, as amended by the ESSA)

    (b) Quality of Project Design (30 points).

    The Secretary reviews each application to determine the quality of the project design. In determining the quality of the design of the proposed project, the Secretary considers the following factors:

    (1) The manner and extent to which the magnet school program will improve student academic achievement for all students attending the magnet school programs, including the manner and extent to which each magnet school program will increase student academic achievement in the instructional area or areas offered by the school, including any evidence, or if such evidence is not available, a rationale based on current research findings, to support such description. (Sections 4405(b)(1)(E)(i) and 4405(b)(1)(B) of the ESEA, as amended by the ESSA)

    (2) The extent to which the applicant demonstrates that it has the resources to operate the project beyond the length of the grant, including a multi-year financial and operating model and accompanying plan; the demonstrated commitment of any partners; evidence of broad support from stakeholders (e.g., State educational agencies, teachers' unions) critical to the project's long-term success; or more than one of these types of evidence. (34 CFR 75.210)

    (3) The extent to which the training or professional development services to be provided by the proposed project are of sufficient quality, intensity, and duration to lead to improvements in practice among the recipients of those services. (34 CFR 75.210)

    (4) The extent to which the proposed project is supported by strong theory (as defined in this notice). (34 CFR 75.210)

    (c) Quality of Management Plan (15 points) (34 CFR 75.210).

    The Secretary considers the quality of the management plan for the proposed project. In determining the quality of the management plan for the proposed project, the Secretary considers the following factors:

    (1) The adequacy of the management plan to achieve the objectives of the proposed project on time and within budget, including clearly defined responsibilities, timelines, and milestones for accomplishing project tasks.

    (2) How the applicant will ensure that a diversity of perspectives are brought to bear in the operation of the proposed project, including those of parents, teachers, the business community, a variety of disciplinary and professional fields, recipients or beneficiaries of services, or others, as appropriate.

    (d) Quality of Personnel (5 points) (34 CFR 280.31).

    (1) The Secretary reviews each application to determine the qualifications of the personnel the applicant plans to use on the project. The Secretary determines the extent to which—

    (a) The project director (if one is used) is qualified to manage the project;

    (b) Other key personnel are qualified to manage the project; and

    (c) Teachers who will provide instruction in participating magnet schools are qualified to implement the special curriculum of the magnet schools.

    (2) To determine personnel qualifications, the Secretary considers experience and training in fields related to the objectives of the project, including the key personnel's knowledge of and experience in curriculum development and desegregation strategies.

    (e) Quality of Project Evaluation (20 points) (34 CFR 75.210).

    The Secretary considers the quality of the evaluation to be conducted of the proposed project. In determining the quality of the evaluation, the Secretary considers the following factors:

    (1) The extent to which the methods of evaluation will, if well-implemented, produce evidence of promise (as defined in this notice).

    (2) The extent to which the methods of evaluation include the use of objective performance measures that are clearly related to the intended outcomes of the project and will produce quantitative and qualitative data to the extent possible.

    (3) The extent to which the costs are reasonable in relation to the objectives, design, and potential significance of the proposed project.

    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).

    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) 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: We have established the following five performance measures for the MSAP:

    (a) The number and percentage of magnet schools receiving assistance whose student enrollment reduces, eliminates, or prevents minority group isolation.

    (b) The percentage increase of students from major racial and ethnic groups in magnet schools receiving assistance who score proficient or above on State assessments in reading/language arts as compared to previous year's data.

    (c) The percentage increase of students from major racial and ethnic groups in magnet schools receiving assistance who score proficient or above on State assessments in mathematics as compared to previous year's data.

    (d) The percentage of magnet schools that received assistance that are still operating magnet school programs three years after Federal funding ends.

    (e) The percentage of magnet schools that received assistance that meet the State's annual measurable objectives and, for high schools, graduation rate targets at least three years after Federal funding ends.

    Note:

    Recognizing that States are no longer required to report annual measurable objectives to the Department under the ESEA, as amended by the ESSA, we include this performance measure in order to ensure MSAP grantees monitor and report high school graduation rates. States must establish and measure against ambitious, long-term goals; we encourage MSAP grantees to consider these State goals and incorporate them into their annual performance reporting as appropriate.

    5. Continuation Awards: In making a continuation award under 34 CFR 75.253, the Secretary considers, among other things: Whether a grantee has made substantial progress in achieving the goals and objectives of the project; whether the grantee has expended funds in a manner that is consistent with its approved application and budget; and, if the Secretary has established performance measurement requirements, the performance targets in the grantee's approved application.

    In making a continuation award, the Secretary also considers whether the grantee is operating in compliance with the assurances in its approved application, including those applicable to Federal civil rights laws that prohibit discrimination in programs or activities receiving Federal financial assistance from the Department (34 CFR 100.4, 104.5, 106.4, 108.8, and 110.23).

    VII. Agency Contact FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Jennifer Todd, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., Room 4W201, Washington, DC 20202-5970. Telephone: (202) 453-7200 or by email: [email protected]

    If you use a TDD or TTY, call the FRS, 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 PDF. To use PDF you must have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available free at the site.

    You may also access documents of the Department published in the Federal Register by using the article search feature at: www.federalregister.gov. Specifically, through the advanced search feature at this site, you can limit your search to documents published by the Department.

    Dated: December 8, 2016. Nadya Chinoy Dabby, Assistant Deputy Secretary for Innovation and Improvement.
    [FR Doc. 2016-29907 Filed 12-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4000-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Tests Determined To Be Suitable for Use in the National Reporting System for Adult Education AGENCY:

    Office of Career, Technical, and Adult Education, Department of Education.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Secretary announces tests, test forms, and delivery formats that the Secretary determines to be suitable for use in the National Reporting System for Adult Education (NRS). The Secretary also clarifies that, to provide for the transition from the performance accountability system for the Adult Education and Family Literacy Act (AEFLA) program under the Workforce Investment Act of 1998 (WIA) to the performance accountability system for AEFLA as reauthorized by the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA), this announcement will remain effective until June 30, 2019.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Jay LeMaster, Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., Room 11-152, Potomac Center Plaza, Washington, DC 20202-7240. Telephone: (202) 245-6218 or by email: [email protected]

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

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    On January 14, 2008, we published in the Federal Register final regulations for 34 CFR part 462, Measuring Educational Gain in the National Reporting System for Adult Education (NRS regulations) (73 FR 2306). The NRS regulations established the process the Secretary uses to determine the suitability of tests for use in the NRS by States and local eligible providers. We annually publish in the Federal Register and post on the Internet at www.nrsweb.org a list of the names of tests and the educational functioning levels the tests are suitable to measure in the NRS as required by § 462.12(c)(2).

    On April 16, 2008, we published in the Federal Register a notice inviting test publishers to submit tests for review (73 FR 20616).

    On February 2, 2010, we published in the Federal Register a notice (February 2010 notice) listing the tests and test forms the Secretary determined to be suitable for use in the NRS (75 FR 5303).

    The Secretary determined tests and test forms to be suitable for a period of either seven or three years from the date of the February 2010 notice. A seven-year approval required no additional action on the part of the publisher, unless the information the publisher submitted as a basis for the Secretary's review was inaccurate or unless the test is substantially revised. A three-year approval was issued with a set of conditions to be met by the completion of the three-year period. If these conditions were met, the Secretary would approve a period of time for which the test may continue to be used in the NRS.

    On September 12, 2011, we published in the Federal Register (76 FR 56188) an annual notice of tests determined suitable for use in the NRS (September 2011 notice). The September 2011 notice updated the list published in the February 2010 notice and included suitable test delivery formats. The September 2011 notice clarified that some, but not all, tests using computer-adaptive or computer-based delivery formats are suitable for use in the NRS.

    On August 6, 2012, we published in the Federal Register (77 FR 46749) an annual notice of tests determined suitable for use in the NRS (August 2012 notice) that included the same list of forms and computer delivery formats for the tests published in the September 2011 notice. We also announced a sunset period during which States and local providers could continue to use tests with three-year NRS approvals otherwise expiring on February 2, 2013, during a transition period ending on June 30, 2014.

    On January 25, 2013, we announced in the Federal Register (78 FR 5430) an extension of the approval period for tests approved for a three-year period beginning on February 2, 2010. The approval period was extended from February 2, 2013 to September 30, 2013, without affecting the sunset period ending on June 30, 2014.

    On December 12, 2013, we published in the Federal Register (78 FR 75550) an annual notice of tests determined suitable for use in the NRS (December 2013 notice) that updated the August 2012 notice and provided an extension of the approval period for three tests initially approved for a three-year conditional period from February 2, 2010. The approval period was extended to June 30, 2015. We also announced an extension of the approval period for one additional test—a revised version of a test previously approved for a three-year conditional period from February 2, 2010. The approval period for that test also was extended to June 30, 2015.

    On October 29, 2014, we published in the Federal Register (79 FR 64369) an annual notice of tests determined suitable for use in the NRS (October 2014 notice) that updated the December 2013 notice. We announced that the four tests with approvals extended through June 30, 2015, may be used in the NRS during a sunset period ending on June 30, 2016.

    On August 12, 2015, we published in the Federal Register (80 FR 48304) an annual notice of tests determined suitable for use in the NRS (August 2015 notice) that updated the October 2014 notice. We announced that three tests, previously approved for an extended period through June 30, 2015, were approved for an extended period through February 2, 2017, and one test—a revised version of a test previously approved for an extended period through June 30, 2015—was approved for an extended period through February 2, 2017.

    In this document, the Secretary announces the list of tests and test forms determined to be suitable for use in the NRS. These include: (1) The eight tests previously approved for a seven-year period from February 2, 2010 through February 2, 2017 and now approved for an extended period through February 2, 2019; (2) three tests previously approved for an extended period through February 2, 2017 and now approved for an extended period through February 2, 2019; and (3) one test—a revised version of a test previously approved for an extended period through February 2, 2017—for which the Secretary is extending approval through February 2, 2019. The Secretary is taking this action to extend the approval periods for all 12 of these tests through February 2, 2019 in light of the following intervening factors: (1) The Department's plan to implement new descriptors for the NRS educational functioning levels and implement new regulations in 34 CFR part 462 that became effective on September 19, 2016 and that will govern the assessment review process; (2) the Department's desire to minimize disruption for its grantees in the transition to AEFLA as authorized by WIOA, including with respect to measuring educational gain under the NRS; and (3) the attendant transition authority in section 503(c) of WIOA, which authorizes the Secretary of Education to “take such actions as the Secretary determines to be appropriate to provide for the orderly transition” from AEFLA as authorized by WIA to AEFLA as authorized by WIOA.

    Approved Tests, Forms, and Approval Periods

    Adult education programs must use only the approved forms and computer-based delivery formats for the tests published in this document. If a particular test form or computer delivery format is not explicitly specified for a test in this notice, it is not approved for use in the NRS.

    Tests Previously Determined To Be Suitable for Use in the NRS for a Seven-Year Period From February 2, 2010 Through February 2, 2017 and Now Approved for an Extended Period Through February 2, 2019

    (a) The Secretary has determined that the following test is suitable for use at all Adult Basic Education (ABE) and Adult Secondary Education (ASE) levels and at all English-as-a-Second-Language (ESL) levels of the NRS until February 2, 2019:

    Comprehensive Adult Student Assessment Systems (CASAS) Reading Assessments (Life and Work, Life Skills, Reading for Citizenship, Reading for Language Arts—Secondary Level). Forms 27, 28, 81, 82, 81X, 82X, 83, 84, 85, 86, 185, 186, 187, 188, 310, 311, 513, 514, 951, 952, 951X, and 952X of this test are approved for use on paper and through the computer-based delivery format. Publisher: CASAS, 5151 Murphy Canyon Road, Suite 220, San Diego, CA 92123-4339. Telephone: (800) 255-1036. Internet: www.casas.org/.

    (b) The Secretary has determined that the following tests are suitable for use at all ABE and ASE levels of the NRS until February 2, 2019:

    (1) Comprehensive Adult Student Assessment Systems (CASAS) Life Skills Math Assessments—Application of Mathematics (Secondary Level). Forms 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 505, and 506 of this test are approved for use on paper and through the computer-based delivery format. Publisher: CASAS, 5151 Murphy Canyon Road, Suite 220, San Diego, CA 92123-4339. Telephone: (800) 255-1036. Internet: www.casas.org/.

    (2) Massachusetts Adult Proficiency Test (MAPT) for Math. This test is approved for use through a computer-adaptive delivery format. Publisher: Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education and University of Massachusetts Amherst, College of Education, 156 Hills South, University of Massachusetts Amherst, Amherst, MA 01003. Telephone: (413) 545-0564. Internet: www.sabes.org/.

    (3) Massachusetts Adult Proficiency Test (MAPT) for Reading. This test is approved for use through the computer-adaptive delivery format. Publisher: Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education and University of Massachusetts Amherst, College of Education, 156 Hills South, University of Massachusetts Amherst, Amherst, MA 01003. Telephone: (413) 545-0564. Internet: www.sabes.org/.

    (4) Tests of Adult Basic Education (TABE 9/10). Forms 9 and 10 are approved for use on paper and through the computer-based delivery format. Publisher: Data Recognition Corporation—CTB, 13490 Bass Lake Road, Maple Grove, MN 55311. Telephone: 800-538-9547. Internet: www.ctb.com/.

    (5) Tests of Adult Basic Education Survey (TABE Survey). Forms 9 and 10 are approved for use on paper and through the computer-based delivery format. Publisher: Data Recognition Corporation—CTB, 13490 Bass Lake Road, Maple Grove, MN 55311. Telephone: (800) 538-9547. Internet: www.ctb.com/.

    (c) The Secretary has determined that the following tests are suitable for use at all ESL levels of the NRS until February 2, 2019:

    (1) Basic English Skills Test (BEST) Literacy. Forms B, C, and D are approved for use on paper. Publisher: Center for Applied Linguistics, 4646 40th Street NW., Washington, DC 20016-1859. Telephone: (202) 362-0700. Internet: www.cal.org/.

    (2) Tests of Adult Basic Education Complete Language Assessment System—English (TABE/CLAS-E). Forms A and B are approved for use on paper. Publisher: Data Recognition Corporation—CTB, 13490 Bass Lake Road, Maple Grove, MN 55311. Telephone: (800) 538-9547. Internet: www.ctb.com/.

    Tests Previously Approved for an Extended Period Through February 2, 2017 and Now Approved for an Extended Period Through February 2, 2019

    (a) The Secretary has determined that the following tests are suitable for use at all ABE and ASE levels of the NRS until February 2, 2019:

    (1) General Assessment of Instructional Needs (GAIN)—Test of English Skills. Forms A and B are approved for use on paper and through the computer-based delivery format. Publisher: Wonderlic Inc., 400 Lakeview Parkway, Suite 200, Vernon Hills, IL 60061. Telephone: (877) 605-9496. Internet: www.wonderlic.com/.

    (2) General Assessment of Instructional Needs (GAIN)—Test of Math Skills. Forms A and B are approved for use on paper and through the computer-based delivery format. Publisher: Wonderlic Inc., 400 Lakeview Parkway, Suite 200, Vernon Hills, IL 60061. Telephone: (877) 605-9496. Internet: www.wonderlic.com/.

    (b) The Secretary has determined that the following tests are suitable for use at all ESL levels of the NRS until February 2, 2019:

    (1) Basic English Skills Test (BEST) Plus 2.0. Forms D, E, and F are approved for use on paper and through the computer-adaptive delivery format. Publisher: Center for Applied Linguistics, 4646 40th Street NW., Washington, DC 20016-1859. Telephone: (202) 362-0700. Internet: www.cal.org/.

    (2) Comprehensive Adult Student Assessment Systems (CASAS) Life and Work Listening Assessments (LW Listening). Forms 981L, 982L, 983L, 984L, 985L, and 986L are approved for use on paper and through the computer-based delivery format. Publisher: CASAS, 5151 Murphy Canyon Road, Suite 220, San Diego, CA 92123-4339. Telephone: (800) 255-1036. Internet: www.casas.org/.

    Revocation of Tests

    Under certain circumstances, the Secretary may revoke the determination that a test is suitable (see 34 CFR 462.12(e)). If the Secretary revokes the determination of suitability, the Secretary announces through the Federal Register and posts on the Internet at www.nrsweb.org a notice of that revocation, along with the date by which States and local eligible providers must stop using the revoked test.

    Accessible Format: Individuals with disabilities can obtain this document in an accessible format (such as braille, large print, audiotape, or compact disc) on request to the contact person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT in this notice.

    Electronic Access to This Document: The official version of this document is the document published in the Federal Register. Free Internet access to the official edition of the Federal Register and the Code of Federal Regulations is available via the Federal Digital System at: www.thefederalregister.org/fdsys. At this site you can view this document, as well as all other documents of this Department published in the Federal Register, in text or Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF). To use PDF you must have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available free at the site.

    You may also access documents of the Department published in the Federal Register by using the article search feature at: www.federalregister.gov. Specifically, through the advanced search feature at this site, you can limit your search to documents published by the Department.

    Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 9212.

    Dated: December 7, 2016. Johan E. Uvin, Deputy Assistant Secretary, Delegated the Duties of Assistant Secretary for Career, Technical, and Adult Education.
    [FR Doc. 2016-29899 Filed 12-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4000-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION [Docket No. ED-2016-ICCD-0138] Agency Information Collection Activities; Comment Request; International Early Learning Study (IELS) 2018 Field Test Recruitment AGENCY:

    National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), Department of Education (ED).

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. chapter 3501 et seq.), ED is proposing a new information collection.

    DATES:

    Interested persons are invited to submit comments on or before February 13, 2017.

    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-0138. 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: International Early Learning Study (IELS) 2018 Field Test Recruitment.

    OMB Control Number: 1850-NEW.

    Type of Review: A new information collection.

    Respondents/Affected Public: Individuals or Households.

    Total Estimated Number of Annual Responses: 404.

    Total Estimated Number of Annual Burden Hours: 152.

    Abstract: The International Early Learning Study (IELS), scheduled to be conducted in 2018, is a new study sponsored by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), an intergovernmental organization of industrialized countries. In the United States, the IELS is conducted by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES). The IELS focuses on young children and their cognitive and non-cognitive skills and competencies as they transition to primary school. The IELS is designed to examine: children's early learning and development in a broad range of domains, including social emotional skills as well as cognitive skills; the relationship between children's early learning and children's participation in early childhood education and care (ECEC); the role of contextual factors, including children's individual characteristics and their home backgrounds and experiences, in promoting young children's growth and development; and how early learning varies across and within countries prior to beginning primary school. In 2018, in the participating countries, including the United States, the IELS will assess nationally-representative samples of children ages 5.0-5.5 years (in kindergarten in the United States) through direct and indirect measures, and will collect contextual data about their home learning environments, ECEC histories, and demographic characteristics. The IELS will measure young children's knowledge, skills, and competencies in both cognitive and non-cognitive domains, including language and literacy, mathematics and numeracy, executive function/self-regulation, and social emotional skills. This assessment will take place as children are transitioning to primary school and will provide data on how U.S. children entering kindergarten compare with their international peers on skills deemed important for later success. To prepare for the main study that will take place in September-November 2018, the IELS countries will conduct a field test in the fall of 2017 to evaluate newly developed assessment instruments and questionnaires and to test the study operations. The U.S. IELS field test data collection will occur from September to October, 2017. In order to meet the international data collection schedule for the fall 2017 field test, field test respondent recruiting activities must begin by May 2017. This request is to conduct recruitment activities for the 2017 IELS field test.

    Dated: December 7, 2016. Kate Mullan, Acting Director, Information Collection Clearance Division, Office of the Chief Privacy Officer, Office of Management.
    [FR Doc. 2016-29749 Filed 12-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4000-01-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: PR17-9-000.

    Applicants: TPL SouthTex Transmission Company LP.

    Description: Tariff filing per 284.123(b), (e)+(g): Filing Revised Operating Statement to be effective 11/1/2016; Filing Type: 1300.

    Filed Date: 11/30/2016.

    Accession Number: 201611305268.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/21/16.

    284.123(g) Protests Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/30/17.

    Docket Number: PR17-10-000.

    Applicants: Magic Valley Pipeline, L.P.

    Description: Tariff filing per 284.123(e)/.224: Cancellation of Statement of Operating Conditions to be effective 12/1/2016; Filing Type: 800.

    Filed Date: 11/30/2016.

    Accession Number: 201611305277.

    Comments/Protests Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/21/16.

    Docket Number: PR17-11-000.

    Applicants: Public Service Company of Colorado.

    Description: Tariff filing per 284.123(b), (e)+(g): 20161201_SOR Two GRSA Rate Changes to be effective 11/1/2016; Filing Type: 1300.

    Filed Date: 12/1/2016.

    Accession Number: 201612015228.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/22/16.

    284.123(g) Protests Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/30/17.

    Docket Number: PR17-12-000.

    Applicants: Columbia Gas of Maryland, Inc.

    Description: Tariff filing per 284.123(b), (e)/: CMD SOC Rates effective 10-27-2016 to be effective 10/27/2016; Filing Type: 980.

    Filed Date: 12/1/2016.

    Accession Number: 201612015299.

    Comments/Protests Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/22/16.

    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: RP16-137-009.

    Applicants: Tallgrass Interstate Gas Transmission, L.

    Description: Compliance filing Rate Case Settlement RP16-137 to be effective 5/1/2016.

    Filed Date: 12/5/16.

    Accession Number: 20161205-5437.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/19/16.

    Docket Numbers: RP17-33-001.

    Applicants: Equitrans, L.P.

    Description: Compliance filing Equitrans' October 2016 Clean-Up Compliance Filing to be effective 11/17/2016.

    Filed Date: 12/6/16.

    Accession Number: 20161206-5121.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/19/16.

    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: December 6, 2016. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-29788 Filed 12-12-16; 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: ER16-2226-000.

    Applicants: McHenry Battery Storage, LLC.

    Description: Report Filing: Refund Report of McHenry Battery Storage, LLC to be effective N/A.

    Filed Date: 12/5/16.

    Accession Number: 20161205-5443.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/27/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-62-001.

    Applicants: Otter Tail Power Company.

    Description: Tariff Amendment: Errata to Filing of Certificate of Concurrence to be effective 1/1/2016.

    Filed Date: 12/6/16.

    Accession Number: 20161206-5240.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/13/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-419-000.

    Applicants: American Electric Power Service Corporation, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.

    Description: Transource Pennsylvania, LLC and Transource Maryland, LLC submit Supplement to November 28, 2016 American Electric Power Service Corporation Formula Rate OATT Filing.

    Filed Date: 12/5/16.

    Accession Number: 20161205-5479.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/19/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-490-000.

    Applicants: California Independent System Operator Corporation.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: 2016-12-05 Reactive Power Requirements Automatic Voltage Regulator Amendment to be effective3/6/2017.

    Filed Date: 12/5/16.

    Accession Number: 20161205-5438.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/27/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-491-000.

    Applicants: Southern California Edison Company.

    Description: Tariff Cancellation: Cancel LGIA SP Blythe 1 Project SA No. 176 to be effective 2/8/2017.

    Filed Date: 12/6/16.

    Accession Number: 20161206-5155.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/27/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-493-000.

    Applicants: Southern California Edison Company.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: DSA for the Santa Paula ES A Project, SA No. 917 to be effective 12/7/2016.

    Filed Date: 12/6/16.

    Accession Number: 20161206-5201.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/27/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-494-000.

    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: Clean-up of OA, Definition Sec I-L re: accepted language effective as of 7/18/16 to be effective 1/1/2014.

    Filed Date: 12/6/16.

    Accession Number: 20161206-5202.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/27/16.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric reliability filings

    Docket Numbers: RD17-3-000.

    Applicants: North American Electric Reliability Corporation, Western Electricity Coordinating Council.

    Description: Joint Petition of the North American Electric Reliability Corporation and Western Electricity Coordinating Council for Approval of Interpretation of Regional Reliability Standard BAL-002-WECC-2a.

    Filed Date: 11/9/16.

    Accession Number: 20161109-5164.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/5/17.

    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: December 6, 2016. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-29786 Filed 12-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Combined Notice of Filings

    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:

    Filings Instituting Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP17-214-000.

    Applicants: Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Company.

    Description: § 4(d) Rate Filing: Negotiated Rates—Cherokee AGL—Replacement Shippers—Dec 2016 to be effective 12/1/2016.

    Filed Date: 11/30/16.

    Accession Number: 20161130-5133.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/12/16.

    Docket Numbers: RP17-215-000.

    Applicants: El Paso Natural Gas Company, L.L.C.

    Description: § 4(d) Rate Filing: Non-Conforming Agreements Filing (Pioneer) to be effective 1/1/2017.

    Filed Date: 11/30/16.

    Accession Number: 20161130-5134.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/12/16.

    Docket Numbers: RP17-216-000.

    Applicants: El Paso Natural Gas Company, L.L.C.

    Description: § 4(d) Rate Filing: 11.2(a) Inflation Rates to be effective 1/1/2017.

    Filed Date: 11/30/16.

    Accession Number: 20161130-5159.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/12/16.

    Docket Numbers: RP17-217-000.

    Applicants: Alliance Pipeline L.P.

    Description: § 4(d) Rate Filing: 2017 Tioga Electric Charge to be effective1/1/2017.

    Filed Date: 11/30/16.

    Accession Number: 20161130-5184.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/12/16.

    Docket Numbers: RP17-218-000.

    Applicants: Texas Gas Transmission, LLC.

    Description: § 4(d) Rate Filing: Non-conforming Neg Rate Agmt due to Cap Rel (CCI East Texas 35829) to be effective 12/1/2016.

    Filed Date: 11/30/16.

    Accession Number: 20161130-5187.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/12/16.

    Docket Numbers: RP17-219-000.

    Applicants: Gulf South Pipeline Company, LP.

    Description: § 4(d) Rate Filing: Cap Rel Neg Rate Agmts (Atlanta 8438 to various eff 12-1-2016) to be effective 12/1/2016.

    Filed Date: 11/30/16.

    Accession Number: 20161130-5188.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/12/16.

    Docket Numbers: RP17-220-000.

    Applicants: Gulf South Pipeline Company, LP.

    Description: § 4(d) Rate Filing: Cap Rel Neg Rate Agmt (Petrohawk 41455 to texla 47450) to be effective 12/1/2016.

    Filed Date: 11/30/16.

    Accession Number: 20161130-5191.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/12/16.

    Docket Numbers: RP17-221-000.

    Applicants: Gulf South Pipeline Company, LP.

    Description: § 4(d) Rate Filing: Cap Rel Neg Rate Agmt (Encana 37663 to texla 47451) to be effective 12/1/2016.

    Filed Date: 11/30/16.

    Accession Number: 20161130-5192.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/12/16.

    Docket Numbers: RP17-223-000.

    Applicants: Northern Natural Gas Company.

    Description: § 4(d) Rate Filing: 20161130 Remove Non Conforming to be effective 1/1/2017.

    Filed Date: 11/30/16.

    Accession Number: 20161130-5221.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/12/16.

    Docket Numbers: RP17-224-000.

    Applicants: Gulf South Pipeline Company, LP.

    Description: § 4(d) Rate Filing: Amendment to Neg Rate Agmts (ExGen 43197-3, 43197-5, 43198-4, 43198-6) to be effective 10/1/2016.

    Filed Date: 11/30/16.

    Accession Number: 20161130-5251.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/12/16.

    Docket Numbers: RP17-225-000.

    Applicants: Dauphin Island Gathering Partners.

    Description: § 4(d) Rate Filing: Negotiated Rate Filing 11-30-2016 to be effective 12/1/2016.

    Filed Date: 11/30/16.

    Accession Number: 20161130-5255.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/12/16.

    Docket Numbers: RP17-226-000.

    Applicants: Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC.

    Description: § 4(d) Rate Filing: Negotiated Rate Agreement—Plymouth 792668 to be effective 12/1/2016.

    Filed Date: 11/30/16.

    Accession Number: 20161130-5325.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/12/16.

    Docket Numbers: RP17-227-000.

    Applicants: Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC.

    Description: § 4(d) Rate Filing: Negotiated Rate Agreement—Emera 510979 to be effective 12/1/2016.

    Filed Date: 11/30/16.

    Accession Number: 20161130-5327.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/12/16.

    Docket Numbers: RP17-228-000.

    Applicants: Natural Gas Pipeline Company of America.

    Description: § 4(d) Rate Filing: CNE Gas Supply Negotiated Rate to be effective 12/1/2016.

    Filed Date: 11/30/16.

    Accession Number: 20161130-5329.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/12/16.

    Docket Numbers: RP17-229-000.

    Applicants: Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC.

    Description: § 4(d) Rate Filing: Negotiated Rate Agreement—Enhanced Energy—792657 to be effective12/1/2016.

    Filed Date: 11/30/16.

    Accession Number: 20161130-5333.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/12/16.

    Docket Numbers: RP17-230-000.

    Applicants: Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC.

    Description: § 4(d) Rate Filing: Negotiated Rate—BUG Release to Enhanced—792656 to be effective12/1/2016.

    Filed Date: 11/30/16.

    Accession Number: 20161130-5334.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/12/16.

    Docket Numbers: RP17-231-000.

    Applicants: Dominion Transmission, Inc.

    Description: § 4(d) Rate Filing: DTI—November 30, 2016 Negotiated Rate Agreements to be effective 12/1/2016.

    Filed Date: 11/30/16.

    Accession Number: 20161130-5335.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/12/16.

    Docket Numbers: RP17-232-000.

    Applicants: Alliance Pipeline L.P.

    Description: § 4(d) Rate Filing: Energy America Contract Consolidation to be effective 12/1/2016.

    Filed Date: 11/30/16.

    Accession Number: 20161130-5347.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/12/16.

    Docket Numbers: RP17-233-000.

    Applicants: Texas Eastern Transmission, LP.

    Description: § 4(d) Rate Filing: Negotiated Rate—ConEd release to Plymouth—8944211 to be effective 12/1/2016.

    Filed Date: 11/30/16.

    Accession Number: 20161130-5352.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/12/16.

    Docket Numbers: RP17-234-000.

    Applicants: Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company, L.L.C.

    Description: § 4(d) Rate Filing: Volume No. 2—Neg Rate Agmt—Exelon Generation & Mex Gas Supply to be effective 12/1/2016.

    Filed Date: 11/30/16.

    Accession Number: 20161130-5367.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/12/16.

    Docket Numbers: RP17-235-000.

    Applicants: Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Company.

    Description: § 4(d) Rate Filing: Rate Schedule S-2 Tracker 12-1-16 to be effective 12/1/2016.

    Filed Date: 12/1/16.

    Accession Number: 20161201-5080.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/13/16.

    Docket Numbers: RP17-236-000.

    Applicants: Equitrans, L.P.

    Description: § 4(d) Rate Filing: Negotiated Capacity Release Agreements—12/1/2016 to be effective 12/1/2016.

    Filed Date: 12/1/16.

    Accession Number: 20161201-5083.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/13/16.

    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: RP16-300-004.

    Applicants: Empire Pipeline, Inc.

    Description: Empire Pipeline, Inc. submits Compliance Filing (Modification to Stipulation and Agreement).

    Filed Date: 11/17/16.

    Accession Number: 20161117-5096.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/29/16.

    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: December 1, 2016. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-29787 Filed 12-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Sunshine Act Meeting Notice

    The following notice of meeting is published pursuant to section 3(a) of the government in the Sunshine Act (Pub. L. 94-409), 5 U.S.C. 552b:

    AGENCY HOLDING MEETING:

    Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.

    DATE AND TIME:

    December 15, 2016, 10:00 a.m.

    PLACE:

    Room 2C, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.

    STATUS:

    Open.

    MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:

    Agenda.

    * Note

    —Items listed on the agenda may be deleted without further notice.

    CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION:

    Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Telephone (202) 502-8400.

    For a recorded message listing items struck from or added to the meeting, call (202) 502-8627.

    This is a list of matters to be considered by the Commission. It does not include a listing of all documents relevant to the items on the agenda. All public documents, however, may be viewed on line at the Commission's Web site at http://ferc.capitolconnection.org/ using the eLibrary link, or may be examined in the Commission's Public Reference Room.

    1033rd—Meeting Regular Meeting [December 15, 2016 10:00 a.m.] Item No. Docket No. Company Administrative A-1 AD16-1-000 Agency Administrative Matters. A-2 AD16-7-000 Customer Matters, Reliability, Security and Market Operations. Electric E-1 RM17-8-000 Reform of Generator Interconnection Procedures and Agreements. E-2 RM17-3-000 Fast-Start Pricing in Markets Operated by Regional Transmission Organizations and Independent System Operators. E-3 ER16-1058-000
  • EL16-56-000
  • Consumers Energy Company.
    E-4 ER15-1436-000 Entergy Gulf States Louisiana, LLC.
  • Entergy Arkansas, Inc.
  • Entergy Louisiana, LLC.
  • Entergy Mississippi, Inc.
  • Entergy New Orleans, Inc.
  • Entergy Texas, Inc.
  • ER15-1453-000 Entergy Arkansas, Inc.
  • Entergy Gulf States Louisiana, LLC.
  • Entergy Louisiana, LLC.
  • Entergy Mississippi, Inc.
  • Entergy New Orleans, Inc.
  • Entergy Texas, Inc.
  • ER16-1528-000 (Consolidated) Entergy Arkansas, Inc.
  • Entergy Louisiana, LLC.
  • Entergy Mississippi, Inc.
  • Entergy New Orleans, Inc.
  • Entergy Texas, Inc.
  • E-5 Omitted E-6 Omitted E-7 EL17-5-000 FLS Energy, Inc. QF16-876-001 Bear Gulch Solar, LLC. QF16-877-001 Fox Farm Solar, LLC. QF16-879-001 Couch Solar, LLC. QF16-880-001 Glass Solar, LLC. QF16-881-001 Janney Solar, LLC. QF16-882-001 Malt Solar, LLC. QF16-883-001 Martin Solar, LLC. QF16-884-001 Middle Solar, LLC. QF16-885-001 Ulm Solar, LLC. QF16-886-001 Valley View Solar, LLC. QF16-887-001 River Solar, LLC. QF16-888-001 Sage Creek Solar, LLC. QF16-889-001 Sypes Canyon Solar, LLC. QF16-899-001 Canyon Creek Solar, LLC. E-8 EL17-6-000 Allco Renewable Energy Limted.
  • Allco Finance Limited.
  • QF11-193-002 Ecos Energy, LLC. QF11-194-002 QF11-195-002 QF11-196-002 QF11-197-002 QF11-198-002 QF11-199-002 QF11-200-002 QF11-201-002 QF11-202-002 QF11-203-002 E-9 EL16-78-001 Saguaro Power Company, A Limited Partnership. QF90-203-008 Gas G-1 PL17-1-000 Inquiry Regarding the Commission's Policy for Recovery of Income Tax Costs. G-2 RP15-1022-000
  • RP16-581-000 (Consolidated)
  • RP16-292-000
  • RP16-240-000
  • RP16-986-000
  • RP16-1045-000
  • (Not Consolidated)
  • Alliance Pipeline L.P.
    G-3 RP16-440-000 ANR Pipeline Company. G-4 OR16-26-000 Aircraft Service International Group, Inc.
  • American Airlines, Inc.
  • Delta Air Lines, Inc.
  • Hooker's Point Fuel Facilities LLC.
  • Southwest Airlines Co.
  • United Aviation Fuels Corporation.
  • United Parcel Service, Inc. v. Central Florida Pipeline LLC.
  • Kinder Morgan Liquid Terminals LLC.
  • Hydro H-1 P-14753-001 Rivertec Partners, LLC. P-14777-001 Loxbridge Partners, LLC. Certificates C-1 CP16-12-000 Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company, LLC. C-2 CP15-557-000 Total Peaking Services, LLC.
    Issued: December 8, 2016. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.

    A free webcast of this event is available through http://ferc.capitolconnection.org/. Anyone with Internet access who desires to view this event can do so by navigating to www.ferc.gov's Calendar of Events and locating this event in the Calendar. The event will contain a link to its webcast. The Capitol Connection provides technical support for the free webcasts. It also offers access to this event via television in the DC area and via phone bridge for a fee. If you have any questions, visit http://ferc.capitolconnection.org/ or contact Danelle Springer or David Reininger at 703-993-3100.

    Immediately following the conclusion of the Commission Meeting, a press briefing will be held in the Commission Meeting Room. Members of the public may view this briefing in the designated overflow room. This statement is intended to notify the public that the press briefings that follow Commission meetings may now be viewed remotely at Commission headquarters, but will not be telecast through the Capitol Connection service.

    [FR Doc. 2016-30066 Filed 12-9-16; 4:15 pm] 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: EC17-24-000.

    Applicants: Cimarron Bend Wind Project I, LLC, Cimarron Bend Assets, LLC.

    Description: Supplement to November 2, 2016 Joint Application for Authorization Under Section 203 of the Federal Power Act for Cimarron Bend Wind Project I, LLC and Cimarron Bend Assets, LLC.

    Filed Date: 12/2/16.

    Accession Number: 20161202-5351.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/12/16.

    Docket Numbers: EC17-25-000.

    Applicants: Lindahl Wind Project, LLC.

    Description: Supplement to November 2, 2016 Joint Application for Authorization Under Section 203 of the Federal Power Act for Lindahl Wind Project, LLC.

    Filed Date: 12/2/16.

    Accession Number: 20161202-5349.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/12/16.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2564-007; ER10-2600-007; ER10-2289-007.

    Applicants: Tucson Electric Power Company, UNS Electric, Inc., UniSource Energy Development Company.

    Description: Supplemental Workpapers to October 17, 2016 Notification of Changes in Status of Tucson Electric Power Company, et al.

    Filed Date: 12/5/16.

    Accession Number: 20161205-5292.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/27/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2633-028; ER10-2570-028; ER10-2717-028; ER10-3140-028; ER13-55-018.

    Applicants: Birchwood Power Partners, L.P., Shady Hills Power Company, L.L.C., EFS Parlin Holdings, LLC, Inland Empire Energy Center, LLC, Homer City Generations, L.P.

    Description: Notice of Non-Material Change in Status of the GE Companies.

    Filed Date: 12/5/16.

    Accession Number: 20161205-5297.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/27/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-2720-000.

    Applicants: NextEra Energy Transmission Southwest, LLC.

    Description: Joint Partial Settlement Agreement of NextEra Energy Transmission Southwest, LLC on behalf of itself and the Kansas Corporation Commission.

    Filed Date: 12/2/16.

    Accession Number: 20161202-5322.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/23/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-104-001.

    Applicants: Broadview Energy KW, LLC.

    Description: Tariff Amendment: Supplement to Application for Market-Based Rate Tariff and Waivers to be effective 12/1/2016.

    Filed Date: 12/5/16.

    Accession Number: 20161205-5341.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/27/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-105-001.

    Applicants: Broadview Energy JN, LLC.

    Description: Tariff Amendment: Supplement to Application for Market-Based Rate Tariff and Waivers to be effective 12/1/2016.

    Filed Date: 12/5/16.

    Accession Number: 20161205-5343.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/27/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-311-000.

    Applicants: SR South Loving LLC.

    Description: Report Filing: Supplement to SR South Loving Market Based Rate Application to be effective N/A.

    Filed Date: 12/2/16.

    Accession Number: 20161202-5309.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/12/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-483-000.

    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: 3280 Marshall Wind Energy and Westar Energy Meter Agent Agr to be effective 12/1/2016.

    Filed Date: 12/5/16.

    Accession Number: 20161205-5160.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/27/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-484-000.

    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc., Northern States Power Company, a Minnesota corporation, Great River Energy.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: 2016-12-05_SA 2960 Northern States Power-Great River Energy T-TIA (New Market) to be effective 9/29/2016.

    Filed Date: 12/5/16.

    Accession Number: 20161205-5259.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/27/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-485-000.

    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: Queue Position AB2-139, Original Service Agreement No. 4581 to be effective 11/4/2016.

    Filed Date: 12/5/16.

    Accession Number: 20161205-5260.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/27/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-486-000.

    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: 2016-12-05_Revisions to Attachment TT Measurement and Verification Criteria to be effective 2/4/2017.

    Filed Date: 12/5/16.

    Accession Number: 20161205-5289.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/27/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-487-000.

    Applicants: AEP Texas Central Company.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: TCC-Rocksprings Val Verde Wind Interconnection Agreement to be effective 2/1/2016.

    Filed Date: 12/5/16.

    Accession Number: 20161205-5382.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/27/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-488-000.

    Applicants: AEP Texas Central Company.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: TCC-CPSB of San Antonio TX (CPS Energy) IA to be effective 11/15/2016.

    Filed Date: 12/5/16.

    Accession Number: 20161205-5384.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/27/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-489-000.

    Applicants: Southwestern Electric Power Company.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: AECC Avoca Delivery Point Agreement to be effective 11/7/2016.

    Filed Date: 12/5/16.

    Accession Number: 20161205-5387.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/27/16.

    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: December 6, 2016. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-29785 Filed 12-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. ER17-482-000] BREG Aggregator LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of BREG Aggregator LLC's application for market-based rate authority, with an accompanying rate tariff, noting that such application includes a request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of liability.

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the Applicant.

    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of liability, is December 27, 2016.

    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the intervention or protests.

    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 5 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.

    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the above list. They are also available for electronic review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive email notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please email [email protected] or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

    Dated: December 6, 2016. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-29789 Filed 12-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [FRL-9956-31-Region 10] Public Water Supply Supervision Program; Program Revision for the State of Oregon AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Notice of tentative approval.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given that the State of Oregon has revised its approved State Public Water Supply Supervision Primacy Program. Oregon has adopted regulations analogous to the Environmental Protection Agency's Revised Total Coliform Rule. EPA has determined that these revisions are no less stringent than the corresponding federal regulations. Therefore, EPA intends to approve these State program revisions. By approving these rules, EPA does not intend to affect the rights of federally recognized Indian tribes within “Indian country” as defined by 18 U.S.C. 1151, nor does it intend to limit existing rights of the State of Oregon.

    DATES:

    All interested parties may request a public hearing. A request for a public hearing must be submitted by January 12, 2017 to the Regional Administrator at the EPA address shown below. Frivolous or insubstantial requests for a hearing may be denied by the Regional Administrator. However, if a substantial request for a public hearing is made by January 12, 2017, a public hearing will be held. If no timely and appropriate request for a hearing is received and the Regional Administrator does not elect to hold a hearing on his own motion, this determination shall become final and effective on January 12, 2017. Any request for a public hearing shall include the following information: (1) The name, address, and telephone number of the individual, organization, or other entity requesting a hearing; (2) a brief statement of the requesting person's interest in the Regional Administrator's determination and a brief statement of the information that the requesting person intends to submit at such hearing; (3) the signature of the individual making the request, or, if the request is made on behalf of an organization or other entity, the signature of a responsible official of the organization or other entity.

    ADDRESSES:

    All documents relating to this determination are available for inspection between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, at the Oregon Health Authority, Drinking Water Program, 800 NE. Oregon Street, Suite 640, Portland, Oregon 97232 and between the hours of 9:00 a.m.-12:00 p.m. and 1:00-4:00 p.m. at the EPA Region 10 Library, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle, Washington 98101. Copies of the documents which explain the rule can also be obtained at EPA's Web site at: https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2013/02/13/2012-31205/national-primary-drinking-water-regulations-revisions-to-the-total-coliform-rule and https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2014/02/26/2014-04173/national-primary-drinking-water-regulations-minor-corrections-to-the-revisions-to-the-total-coliform, or by writing or calling Ricardi Duvil, Ph.D. at the address below.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ricardi Duvil, Ph.D., EPA Region 10, Drinking Water Unit, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 900, OWW-193, Seattle, Washington 98101, telephone (206) 553-2578, email at [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Authority: Section 1413 of the Safe Drinking Water Act, as amended (1996), and 40 CFR part 142 of the National Primary Drinking Water Regulations.

    Dated: November 23, 2016. Dennis J. McLerran, Regional Administrator, Region 10.
    [FR Doc. 2016-29885 Filed 12-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [EPA-HQ-OPPT-2013-0677; FRL-9956-01] Receipt of Information Under the Toxic Substances Control Act AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    EPA is announcing its receipt of information submitted pursuant to a rule, order, or consent agreement issued under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). As required by TSCA, this document identifies each chemical substance and/or mixture for which information has been received; the uses or intended uses of such chemical substance and/or mixture; and describes the nature of the information received. Each chemical substance and/or mixture related to this announcement is identified in Unit I. under SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For technical information contact: Hannah Braun, Chemical Control Division (7405M), Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number: (202) 564-5614; 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:

    I. Chemical Substances and/or Mixtures

    Information received about the following chemical substances and/or mixtures is identified in Unit IV.:

    A. Ethanedioic acid (CASRN 144-62-7). B. Octamethylcyclotetrasiloxane (D4) (CASRN 556-67-2). II. Authority

    Section 4(d) of TSCA (15 U.S.C. 2603(d)) requires EPA to publish a notice in the Federal Register reporting the receipt of information submitted pursuant to a rule, order, or consent agreement promulgated under TSCA section 4 (15 U.S.C. 2603).

    III. Docket Information

    A docket, identified by the docket identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPPT-2013-0677, has been established for this Federal Register document, which announces the receipt of the information. Upon EPA's completion of its quality assurance review, the information received will be added to the docket identified in Unit IV., which represents the docket used for the TSCA section 4 rule, order, and/or consent agreement. In addition, once completed, EPA reviews of the information received will be added to the same docket. Use the docket ID number provided in Unit IV. to access the information received and any available EPA review.

    EPA's dockets are available electronically at http://www.regulations.gov or in person at the Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics Docket (OPPT Docket), Environmental Protection Agency Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the OPPT Docket is (202) 566-0280. Please review the visitor instructions and additional information about the docket available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

    IV. Information Received

    As specified by TSCA section 4(d), this unit identifies the information received by EPA.

    A. Ethanedioic Acid (CASRN 144-62-7)

    1. Chemical Uses: Ethanedioic acid is used as a rust remover; in antirust metal cleaners and coatings; as a flame-proofing and cross-linking agent in cellulose fabrics; as a reducing agent in mordent wool dying; as an acid dye stabilizing agent in nylon; as a scouring agent for cotton printing; and as a dye stripper for wool. Ethanedioic acid is also used for degumming silk; for the separation and recovery of rare earth elements from ore; for bleaching leather and masonry; for cleaning aluminum and wood decks; and as a synthetic intermediate for pharmaceuticals.

    2. Applicable Rule, Order, or Consent Agreement: Chemical testing requirements for second group of high production volume chemicals (HPV2), 40 CFR 799.5087.

    3. Applicable docket ID number: The information received will be added to docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPPT-2007-0531.

    4. Information Received: EPA received the following information: Exemption Request.

    B. Octamethylcyclotetrasiloxane (D4) (CASRN 556-67-2)

    1. Chemical Uses: D4 is used as an intermediate for silicone copolymers and other chemicals. D4 is also used in industrial processing applications as a solvent (which becomes part of a product formulation or mixture), finishing agent, and an adhesive and sealant chemical. It is also used for both consumer and commercial purposes in paints and coatings, and plastic and rubber products and has consumer uses in polishes, sanitation, soaps, detergents, adhesives, and sealants.

    2. Applicable Rule, Order, or Consent Agreement: Enforceable Consent Agreement for Environmental Testing for Octamethylcyclotetrasiloxane (D4) (CASRN 556-67-2).

    3. Applicable docket ID number: The information received will be added to docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPPT-2012-0209.

    4. Information Received: EPA received the following information: Benthic sampling events update.

    Authority:

    15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.

    Dated: December 6, 2016. Lynn Vendinello, Acting Director, Chemical Control Division, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics.
    [FR Doc. 2016-29889 Filed 12-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [EPA-HQ-OW-2013-0710; FRL-9956-48-Region 5] State Program Requirements; Approval of Program Revisions to Michigan's Clean Water Act Section 404 Program AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Notice of decision.

    SUMMARY:

    In a July 5, 2013, letter, the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) requested that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) approve revisions to the State's Clean Water Act (CWA) Section 404 permitting program that resulted from the enactment of Michigan Public Act 98 (PA 98). CWA Section 404 requires permits for dredge and fill activities in wetlands subject to federal jurisdiction. A state CWA Section 404 program must be conducted in accordance with the requirements of CWA Section 404 and its implementing regulations. Any revisions to state CWA programs must be approved by EPA before the revision may be implemented. Substantial modifications to a state's CWA Section 404 program become effective upon EPA approval and publication of EPA's decision in the Federal Register.

    EPA has reviewed the proposed revisions to Michigan's Section 404 program within the sections of the Michigan statute modified by PA 98 and has found a majority of revisions within PA 98 sections to be consistent with the CWA and approvable. Other revisions are inconsistent with the CWA and thus not approvable.

    DATES:

    Pursuant to 40 CFR 233.16(d)(4), the following revisions to Michigan's CWA Section 404 program are approved and in effect upon publication of this notice.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Melanie Burdick, Watersheds and Wetlands Branch (WW-16j), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 W. Jackson Blvd., Chicago, Illinois 60604; call toll free: 800-621-8431, weekdays, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. Central time; fax number: 312-697-2598; email address: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

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

    This action applies to the MDEQ's CWA Section 404 program. Approval of these provisions affects those seeking CWA Section 404 dredge and fill permits from the State of Michigan.

    B. How can I get copies of this decision and other related information? Docket

    EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-2013-0710; [FRL 9956-48-REGION 5]. All publicly available materials related to this action are available either electronically through www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Water Docket in the EPA Docket Center, (EPA/DC) 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. 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/. Insert: EPA-HQ-OW-2013-0710; FRL 9956-48-Region 5 in the search field.

    II. Background and Scope of MDEQ Program Revisions

    Under Section 404 of the CWA, permits are required for activities involving discharges of dredged or fill material to waters of the United States, including wetlands, lakes and streams. Michigan assumed CWA Section 404 permitting authority for its inland waters and wetlands in 1984. A state-assumed CWA Section 404 program must be conducted in accordance with the requirements of the CWA and its implementing regulations at 40 CFR part 233 (33 U.S.C. 1344(h), 40 CFR 233.1). In February 1997, EPA received a request from the Michigan Environmental Council to either ensure that the administration of Michigan's Section 404 program was consistent with the CWA, or withdraw Michigan's authority to administer the Section 404 program. In response to the request, EPA initiated an informal review of Michigan's administration of the Section 404 program. This Program Review was completed in April 2008. The 2008 Program Review identified several deficiencies in Michigan's Section 404 program. In response to the 2008 Program Review findings, MDEQ proposed a list of corrective actions to address those deficiencies. These corrective actions included making changes to the State's statutes governing state administration of the Section 404 program. On July 2, 2013, Michigan enacted PA 98 which contained significant amendments to Parts 301 (Inland Lakes and Streams) and 303 (Wetlands Protection) of Michigan's Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Act. The statutory amendments included changes intended to address the legislative corrective actions identified in EPA's 2008 Program Review; changes to the definition of contiguous wetlands regulated by Michigan's Section 404 program; the addition of new exemptions from permitting; and changes to the requirements for mitigating the effects of filling wetlands and other waters of the United States. The program revisions resulting from enactment of PA 98 are described EPA's Supporting document for EPA decision to approve/deny Michigan's section 404 program statute changes in Public Act 98 which can be found in the docket for this action which is available electronically through www.regulations.gov, Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-2013-0710.

    On July 5, 2013, the MDEQ submitted PA 98 to EPA as a proposed revision to its CWA Section 404 program and requested EPA approval of the revisions. Per the regulations at 40 CFR 233.16(d)(3), EPA held a public hearing on December 11, 2013, sought public comment, and consulted with the Corps of Engineers and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service on the program revisions contained in PA 98. (Note: The U.S. National Marine Fisheries Service did not respond to EPA's request to consult.) The EPA also consulted with interested tribes per Executive Order 13175 and EPA policy.

    In a letter to the MDEQ dated November 24, 2014, EPA requested clarification on the State's interpretation of a number of provisions within PA 98. The Michigan Department of the Attorney General responded to this request for clarification in a letter dated May 27, 2015. A copy of these letters can be found in the docket at: www.regulations.gov, Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-2013-0710.

    EPA has reviewed the proposed revisions within the sections of the Michigan statutes modified by PA 98, and has found a majority of the revisions to be fully consistent with the CWA and are approved. Other revisions are inconsistent and thus not approved.

    III. Summary of Public Comments

    The EPA solicited and received public comment on the proposed revisions to Michigan's Section 404 program resulting from PA 98 via testimony at a December 11, 2013, public hearing, electronically through www.regulations.gov, and by written submissions to the docket for this action. Through these efforts, EPA received a total of 286 comments. Of the 134 unique comments received: 82 expressed support of EPA approval of the proposed program revisions resulting from PA 98, 49 opposed EPA approval, and the remaining commenters did not express support for approval or disapproval of the revisions. The majority of commenters simply indicated whether they supported or did not support EPA approval of the program revisions in PA 98. While some commenters provided detailed rationale for their viewpoint, many did not. Most comments that supported approval of the program revisions in PA 98 also identified support for economic development in Michigan. Comments supporting approval of the revisions were from a diverse group of interests including agriculture, oil and gas, drain commissions, land development, home building, and manufacturing. Those commenters who expressed opposition to approval of the program revisions highlighted concern for environmental protection of rivers, lakes, and wetlands. These commenters felt that PA 98 did not adequately address the inconsistencies between Michigan's program and the CWA identified in EPA's 2008 Program Review and that additional provisions in PA 98 were inconsistent with the CWA requirements. Regardless of positions taken on EPA's approval of the proposed program revisions, most commenters supported Michigan's retention of the CWA Section 404 permitting program. Consistent with Executive Order 13175 and EPA's policy on Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribes (http://www.epa.gov/tribal/consultation/consult-policy.htm), EPA held government-to-government consultation teleconferences with four interested Michigan tribal organizations on January 23, 2014. EPA received written comments from two tribes. All public comments received, EPA's Summary of Public Comments and Responsiveness Summary and a summary of EPA's consultation with tribes can be found in the docket at: www.regulations.gov, Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-2013-0710; [FRL 9956-48-REGION 5].

    IV. Notice of Decision

    Pursuant to 40 CFR 233.16(d)(4), EPA has reviewed the proposed revisions to Michigan's Section 404 program resulting from enactment of PA 98 for consistency with the CWA and its implementing regulations. Where EPA has determined that the proposed revisions meet the minimum requirements of the CWA and implementing regulations, EPA has approved the revisions which are in effect upon publication of this notice. EPA has disapproved those revisions that do not meet these minimum requirements.

    EPA's review of the proposed revisions to Michigan's Section 404 program resulting from PA 98 does not constitute a comprehensive review of the State's program for conformance with the CWA, but rather addresses only proposed changes to Michigan's program related to PA 98 ensuring their consistency with CWA Section 404 and its implementing federal regulations. Information about the proposed revisions to Michigan's Section 404 program pursuant to PA 98, the public hearing, EPA's response to comments and other supporting documents are available at: www.regulations.gov/ (insert: EPA-HQ-OW-2013-0710 in the search field).

    I hereby provide public notice that EPA has taken final action on the proposed revisions to MDEQ's CWA Section 404 program as outlined in Tables 1-2 below.

    Table 1—Provisions of PA 98 Consistent With Requirements of CWA Section 404 PA 98 Provision—with descriptor Decision Sec. 1307 Permit Processing Timeframes Approved. Sec. 30101a. Statement of Purpose Approved. Sec. 30103(1)(d)(i) and (ii) Exemption for Maintenance of Agricultural Drains Approved. Sec. 30103(1)(e) Modification of Waste Treatment Exemption Approved. Sec. 30103(1)(f) Modification of Minor Drainage Exemption Approved. Sec. 30103(1)(g)(i)-(vi) and (viii) Modification of Drain Maintenance Exemption Approved. Sec. 30103(3) Definition of Agricultural Drain Added Approved. Sec. 30104 Changes in Michigan's Fee Requirements Approved. Sec. 30105(3) and (5) Modification of Public Notice Provisions Approved. Sec. 30105(8)(b) Modification of Maintenance and Repair of Existing Pipelines Provision Approved. Sec. 30105(9) Modification of Section Authorizing Conditions for a Minor Project Category or General Permit Approved. Sec. 30105(11) General Permit for Drain Activities Approved. Sec. 30305(2)(d) Modification of Exemption for Grazing Approved. Sec. 30305(2)(e) Modification of Exemption for Farming, Horticulture, Agriculture, Silviculture, Lumbering and Ranching Approved. Sec. 30305(2)(h) Modification of Agricultural Drain Maintenance Exemption Approved. Sec. 30305(2)(i) Exemption for Drain Maintenance Approved: EPA recommends the language is clarified. Sec. 30305(2)(j) Modification of Road Maintenance Exemption Approved. Sec. 30305(2)(j) Deletion of Farm Production and Harvesting Exemption Approved. Sec. 30305(2)(k) Modification of Maintenance of Public Streets Exemption Approved. Sec. 30305(2)(l) Modification of Utility Line Maintenance Exemption Approved: with the condition that the 2011 MOA will be revised. Sec. 30305(2)(o) Deletion of Construction of Tailings Basin Exemption Approved. Sec. 30305(4)(a) Modification of Wetlands Incidentally Created as Part of Sand, Gravel or Mineral Mining Exemption Approved. Sec. 30305(8) Definition of Agricultural Drain Approved. Sec. 30306(1)-(6) Modification of Application Requirements and Fees Approved. Sec. 30306(7) Modification of Conditional Permits Under Emergency Conditions Approved. Sec. 30306b Modification of Application Fees and Other Requirements Approved. Sec. 30311(5)-(6) Consideration of Feasible and Prudent Alternatives Approved. Sec. 30311a Deletion of Former Sections 30311a(2)-(5) on Consideration of Feasible and Prudent Alternatives Approved. Sec. 30311d(5) Compensatory Mitigation Ratios Approved. Sec. 30311d(6) Conservation Mitigation Credits for Easements for Impacted Agricultural Sites Approved: the provision for a “stewardship fund.” Sec. 30311d(7) Stewardship Fund Approved. Sec. 30311d(8)(a)-(e) Compensatory Mitigation Rulemaking Approved. Sec. 30311d(9)(a),(b), and (c) Rulemaking to Encourage Banks Approved. Sec. 30311d(10) Mitigation Bank Funding Program Approved. Sec. 30312(5) General Permit Authority Approved. Sec. 30312(6) General Permit for Blueberry Farming Approved. Sec. 30312(7) General Permit for Blueberry Farming Approved. Sec. 30321(7) Defines Drains, Ditches, etc. as Not being Wetlands Approved: the second sentence “A temporary obstruction of drainage . . . identified as a wetland pursuant to section 30301(2).” Sec. 30328 State Program Limited to Navigable Waters and Waters of the U.S. Approved. Table 2—Provisions of PA 98 Inconsistent With Requirements of CWA Section 404 PA 98 Provision—with descriptor Decision Sec. 30103(1)(g)(vii) Modification of Drain Maintenance Exemption Disapproved. Sec. 30103(1)(m) Exemption for Controlled Livestock Access Disapproved. Sec. 30305(2)(m) Modification of Utility Line Installation Exemption Disapproved. Sec. 30305(2)(o) Exemption for Placement of Biological Residues in Wetlands Disapproved. Sec. 30305(4)(b) Modification of Exemption for Wetlands Created as a result of Construction or Operation of a Waste Treatment Pond or Storm Water Facility Disapproved. Sec. 30305(4)(d) Modification of Exemption for Wetlands Created as a Result of Construction of Drains to Remove Excess Soil Moisture from Upland Areas Primarily Used for Agriculture Disapproved. Sec. 30305(4)(e) Exemption for Wetlands Formed in Roadside Ditches Disapproved. Sec. 30305(4)(f) Exemption for Wetlands Created as a Result of Agricultural Soil and Water Conservation Practices Disapproved. Sec. 30305(5) Contiguous Waters as a Result of Excavation Disapproved. Sec. 30311(7) Consideration of Feasible and Prudent Alternatives Disapproved. Sec. 30311d(6) Conservation Mitigation Credits for Easements for Impacted Agricultural Sites Disapproved the statement: “protection and restoration of the impacted site.” Sec. 30321(5) Definition of “Not Contiguous” Disapproved. Sec. 30321(6) Use of Drains to Establish Jurisdiction Disapproved. Sec. 30321(7) Defines Drains, Ditches, etc. as Not Being Wetlands Disapproved: the first sentence “A drainage structure such as a culvert, ditch, or channel, in and of itself, is not a wetland.” Authority:

    This action is taken under the authority of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act as amended, 42 U.S.C. 1344.

    Dated: December 2, 2016. Robert A. Kaplan, Acting Regional Administrator.
    [FR Doc. 2016-29888 Filed 12-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0021; FRL-9955-75] Pesticide Product Registrations; Receipt of Applications for New Active Ingredients AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    EPA has received applications to register pesticide products containing active ingredients not included in any currently registered pesticide products. Pursuant to the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), EPA is hereby providing notice of receipt and opportunity to comment on these applications.

    DATES:

    Comments must be received on or before January 12, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments, identified by the Docket Identification (ID) Number and the File Symbol of interest as shown in the body of this document, by one of the following methods:

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

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

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

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Robert McNally, Biopesticides and Pollution Prevention Division (7511P), main telephone number: (703) 305-7090, email address: [email protected]; or Michael Goodis, Registration Division (7505P), main telephone number: (703) 305-7090, email address: [email protected] The mailing address for each contact person is: Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001. As part of the mailing address, include the contact person's name, division, and mail code. The division to contact is listed at the end of each application summary.

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

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

    • Crop production (NAICS code 111).

    • Animal production (NAICS code 112).

    • Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).

    • Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).

    If you have any questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT for the division listed at the end of the application summary of interest.

    B. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?

    1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through regulations.gov or email. Clearly mark the part or all of the information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or CD-ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM as CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket. Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.

    2. Tips for preparing your comments. When preparing and submitting your comments, see the commenting tips at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/comments.html.

    3. Environmental justice. EPA seeks to achieve environmental justice, the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of any group, including minority and/or low-income populations, in the development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies. To help address potential environmental justice issues, EPA seeks information on any groups or segments of the population who, as a result of their location, cultural practices, or other factors, may have atypical or disproportionately high and adverse human health impacts or environmental effects from exposure to the pesticides discussed in this document, compared to the general population.

    II. Registration Applications

    EPA has received applications to register pesticide products containing active ingredients not included in any currently registered pesticide products. Pursuant to the provisions of FIFRA section 3(c)(4) (7 U.S.C. 136a(c)(4)), EPA is hereby providing notice of receipt and opportunity to comment on these applications. Notice of receipt of these applications does not imply a decision by EPA on these applications. For actions being evaluated under EPA's public participation process for registration actions, there will be an additional opportunity for public comment on the proposed decisions. Please see EPA's public participation Web site for additional information on this process (http://www2.epa.gov/pesticide-registration/public-participation-process-registration-actions). EPA received the following applications to register pesticide products containing active ingredients not included in any currently registered pesticide products:

    1. File Symbol: 432-RLII. Docket ID Number: EPA-HQ-OPP-2016-0581. Applicant: Bayer Environmental Science, 2 T.W. Alexander Dr., Research Triangle Park, NC 27709. Product Name: Bayothrin Technical. Active Ingredient: Insecticide—Transfluthrin at 99%. Proposed Use: Indoor (residential, commercial, and military use) and limited outdoor residential. Contact: RD.

    2. File Symbol: 62719-AOI. Docket ID Number: EPA-HQ-OPP-2016-0560. Applicant: Dow AgroSciences LLC, 9330 Zionsville Rd., Indianapolis, IN 46268. Product Name: GF-3206. Active Ingredient: Herbicide—Florpyrauxifen-benzyl at 2.7%. Proposed Use: Rice. Contact: RD.

    3. File Symbol: 62719-AOO. Docket ID Number: EPA-HQ-OPP-2016-0560. Applicant: Dow AgroSciences LLC, 9330 Zionsville Rd., Indianapolis, IN 46268. Product Name: GF-3301. Active Ingredient: Herbicide—Florpyrauxifen-benzyl at 26.5%. Proposed Use: Rice and freshwater aquatic vegetation. Contact: RD.

    4. File Symbol: 62719-AOT. Docket ID Number: EPA-HQ-OPP-2016-0560. Applicant: Dow AgroSciences LLC, 9330 Zionsville Rd., Indianapolis, IN 46268. Product Name: Rinskor Technical. Active Ingredient: Herbicide—Florpyrauxifen-benzyl at 94.6%. Proposed Use: Rice and freshwater aquatic vegetation. Contact: RD.

    5. File Symbol: 62719-TNN. Docket ID Number: EPA-HQ-OPP-2016-0560. Applicant: Dow AgroSciences LLC, 9330 Zionsville Rd., Indianapolis, IN 46268. Product Name: GF-3480. Active Ingredients: Herbicide—Florpyrauxifen-benzyl at 2.13% and Cyhalofop-butyl at 10.64%. Proposed Use: Rice. Contact: RD.

    6. File Symbol: 62719-TNR. Docket ID Number: EPA-HQ-OPP-2016-0560. Applicant: Dow AgroSciences LLC, 9330 Zionsville Rd., Indianapolis, IN 46268. Product Name: GF-3565. Active Ingredients: Herbicide—Florpyrauxifen-benzyl at 1.3% and Penoxsulam at 2.1%. Proposed Use: Rice. Contact: RD.

    7. File Symbol: 71840-EE. Docket ID Number: EPA-HQ-OPP-2016-0609. Applicant: BASF Corporation, 26 Davis Dr., Research Triangle Park, NC 27709. Product Name: Velifer Fungal Contact Insecticide. Active Ingredient: Insecticide—Beauveria bassiana strain PPRI 5339 at 8.00%. Proposed Use: Greenhouse-grown ornamentals, fruits, vegetables, herbs and spices, and vegetable, fruit, and herb transplants for the consumer market. Contact: BPPD.

    8. File Symbol: 71840-ER. Docket ID Number: EPA-HQ-OPP-2016-0609. Applicant: BASF Corporation, 26 Davis Dr., Research Triangle Park, NC 27709. Product Name: Beauveria bassiana strain PPRI 5339 Technical. Active Ingredient: Insecticide—Beauveria bassiana strain PPRI 5339 at 96.0%. Proposed Use: Manufacturing of end-use pesticide products. Contact: BPPD.

    9. File Symbol: 73771-RN. Docket ID Number: EPA-HQ-OPP-2016-0578. Applicant: Verdesian Life Sciences U.S., LLC, 1001 Winstead Dr., Suite 480, Cary, NC 27513. Product Name: Calciphite. Active Ingredient: Biochemical Systemic Acquired Resistance (SAR)—Calcium Salts of Phosphorous Acid at 95%. Proposed Use: Biochemical manufacturing-use product. Contact: BPPD.

    10. File Symbol: 73771-RR. Docket ID Number: EPA-HQ-OPP-2016-0578. Applicant: Verdesian Life Sciences U.S., LLC, 1001 Winstead Dr., Suite 480, Cary, NC 27513. Product Name: Fungi-Phite Ca. Active Ingredient: Biochemical Systemic Acquired Resistance (SAR)—Calcium Salts of Phosphorous Acid at 40%. Proposed Use: Biochemical end-use product/systemic fungicide. Contact: BPPD.

    11. File Symbol: 91197-R. Docket ID Number: EPA-HQ-OPP-2016-0251. Applicant: AFS009 Plant Protection, Inc., 104 T.W. Alexander Dr., Building 18, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709. Product Name: HowlerTM Technical. Active Ingredient: Fungicide—Pseudomonas chlororaphis strain AFS009 at 100%. Proposed Use: Manufacturing use. Note: In the Federal Register of May 25, 2016 (81 FR 33251) (FRL-9946-40), EPA announced receipt of applications to register three pesticide products containing the active ingredient Pseudomonas chlororaphis subsp. aurantiaca strain AFS009 (File Symbols 91197-R, 91197-E, and 91197-G). Since that time, the applicant provided additional data on the identity of the active ingredient in these pesticide products to EPA. After reviewing these data, EPA now considers the correct identity of the active ingredient in these pesticide products to be Pseudomonas chlororaphis strain AFS009 and not Pseudomonas chlororaphis subsp. aurantiaca strain AFS009. In order to give the public an opportunity to comment on this new information, EPA is republishing its receipt of these applications with an updated and accurate description. Contact: BPPD.

    12. File Symbol: 91197-E. Docket ID Number: EPA-HQ-OPP-2016-0251. Applicant: AFS009 Plant Protection, Inc., 104 T.W. Alexander Dr., Building 18, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709. Product Name: HowlerTM T&O. Active Ingredient: Fungicide—Pseudomonas chlororaphis strain AFS009 at 50.0%. Proposed Use: Turf and ornamental plants. Contact: BPPD.

    13. File Symbol: 91197-G. Docket ID Number: EPA-HQ-OPP-2016-0251. Applicant: AFS009 Plant Protection, Inc., 104 T.W. Alexander Dr., Building 18, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709. Product Name: HowlerTM. Active Ingredient: Fungicide—Pseudomonas chlororaphis strain AFS009 at 50.0%. Proposed Use: Agricultural sites, including berries, citrus, cotton, cucurbits, flowers, fruiting vegetables, herbs, leafy vegetables, cole crops, ornamentals, peanut, pome fruit, shade house, soybean, stone fruit, tobacco, tree nuts, tubers, wheat, and turf, and residential sites. Contact: BPPD.

    Authority:

    7 U.S.C. 136 et seq.

    Dated: December 2, 2016. Robert McNally, Director, Biopesticides and Pollution Prevention Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.
    [FR Doc. 2016-29887 Filed 12-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION [GN Docket No. 12-268; AU Docket No. 14-252; WT Docket No. 12-269; DA 16-1354] Clearing Target of 84 Megahertz Set for Stage 4 of the Broadcast Television Spectrum Incentive Auction; Stage 4 Bidding in the Reverse Auction Will Start on December 13, 2016 AGENCY:

    Federal Communications Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Incentive Auction Task Force and Wireless Telecommunications Bureau announce the spectrum clearing target of 84 megahertz and band plan for Stage 4 of the incentive auction, and that bidding in Stage 4 of the reverse auction is scheduled to begin on December 13, 2016. This document also announces details and dates regarding bidding and the availability of educational and informational materials for reverse and forward auction bidders eligible to participate in Stage 4; the availability of Stage 4 bidding and timing information in the Incentive Auction Public Reporting System; and the importance of bidder contingency plans. Finally, this document reminds each reverse and forward auction applicant of its continuing obligations under the FCC's rules.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Wireless Telecommunications Bureau, Auctions and Spectrum Access Division: For general auction questions, contact Linda Sanderson at (717) 338-2868. For reverse auction or forward auction legal questions, refer to the contact information listed in the Incentive Auction Stage 4 Clearing Target Public Notice.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This is a summary of the Incentive Auction Stage 4 Clearing Target Public Notice, GN Docket No. 12-268, AU Docket No. 14-252, WT Docket No. 12-269, DA 16-1354, released December 9, 2016. The complete text of the Incentive Auction Stage 4 Clearing Target Public Notice is available for public inspection and copying from 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. Eastern Time (ET) Monday through Thursday or from 8:00 a.m. to 11:30 a.m. ET on Fridays in the FCC Reference Information Center, 445 12th Street SW., Room CY-A257, Washington, DC 20554. The complete text is also available on the Commission's Web site at http://wireless.fcc.gov, the Auction 1000 Web site at http://www.fcc.gov/auctions/1000, or by using the search function on the ECFS Web page at http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/ecfs/. Alternative formats are available to persons with disabilities by sending an email to [email protected] or by calling the Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau at (202) 418-0530 (voice), (202) 418-0432 (TTY).

    1. The Incentive Auction Task Force (Task Force) and the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau (Bureau) announce the 84 megahertz spectrum clearing target that has been set by the Auction System's optimization procedure for Stage 4 of the incentive auction, as well as the band plan associated with the 84 megahertz spectrum clearing target, which includes seven Category 1 generic license blocks with zero impairments for each of the 416 Partial Economic Areas (PEAs). The Task Force and Bureau also provide details and specific dates regarding bidding and the continuing availability of educational materials, and remind reverse and forward auction applicants of their continuing obligations.

    I. Stage 4 Clearing Target and Band Plan

    2. The Auction System's clearing target determination procedure has set a spectrum clearing target of 84 megahertz for Stage 4 of the incentive auction. Under the band plan associated with this spectrum clearing target, 70 megahertz, or seven paired blocks, of licensed spectrum will be offered in the forward auction on a nationwide basis.

    3. The generic license blocks offered in Stage 4 of the forward auction under this band plan will consist of a total of 2,912 Category 1 blocks (zero percent impaired). There will be no Category 2 blocks offered under this band plan. In other words, seven 100% unimpaired blocks in all 416 PEAs for a total of 2,912 Category 1 blocks will be offered in Stage 4.

    4. The clearing target for Stage 4 was determined by applying the procedure the Commission adopted in the Auction 1000 Bidding Procedures Public Notice, 80 FR 61917, October 14, 2015, using the same objectives as in the initial clearing target optimization and taking into account the additional channels in the TV band and any participating stations that have dropped out of the auction in the previous stage. Based on the new provisional television channel assignment plan, the nationwide impaired weighted-pops were calculated on a 2x2 cell level and the one-block-equivalent nationwide standard for impairments was applied.

    II. Important Information Concerning the Reverse Auction (Auction 1001)

    5. Educational Materials. The Task Force and Bureau remind all reverse auction bidders of the continuing availability of educational materials regarding bidding in the clock phase of the reverse auction on the Auction 1001 Web site under the Education section. Specifically, such bidders are encouraged to review the Reverse Auction Clock Phase Tutorial and the Reverse Auction New Stage Tutorial prior to the start of Stage 4 of the reverse auction.

    6. Accessing the Auction System for Stage 4. Any bidder that had one or more stations with the status “Frozen—Provisionally Winning” at the end of the previous stage will be able to log in to the Reverse Auction Bidding System for Stage 4. Starting at 10:00 a.m. Eastern Time (ET) on December 9, 2016, such a bidder can log in and view the bidding status, and, where applicable, the following information for Round 1 of the new stage for each of the bidder's stations that qualified to participate in the clock rounds of the reverse auction: Initial bid option, available bid options, vacancy ranges, and clock price offers.

    7. A bidder will need to use the RSA SecurID® tokens (RSA tokens) it used for placing bids in the previous stage to access the Reverse Auction Bidding System for Stage 4. RSA tokens with previously set personal identification numbers (PINs) may be used without setting a new PIN. Any authorized bidder that has not already set a PIN for his or her designated RSA token (e.g., an authorized bidder recently identified on FCC Form 177 or one using a replacement RSA token) must set a PIN as described in the materials sent with the Second Confidential Status Letter. Each bidder will be able to access the Reverse Auction Bidding System at the same web address used during the previous stage. In addition, the FCC Auction Bidder Line phone number for Stage 4 will be the same number used in previous stages. The Auction Bidder Line will be available from 9:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. ET starting on December 12, 2016.

    8. Returning RSA Tokens. Each bidder that did not have any stations with the status “Frozen—Provisionally Winning” at the end of the previous stage will be sent a pre-addressed, stamped envelope to return its RSA tokens.

    9. Clocks Rounds Start Date and Round Schedule. Bidding in the clock rounds of Stage 4 of Auction 1001 will begin on Tuesday, December 13, 2016. Bidders should note that the schedule for two-round days in Stage 4 is different from the schedule for previous two-round days in earlier stages. In Stage 4, bidding rounds will last one hour instead of two hours during the two-round schedule. From Tuesday, December 13, 2016, through Friday December 16, 2016, the schedule will be: Bidding Round (10:00 a.m.-11:00 a.m. ET) and Bidding Round (4:00 p.m.-5:00 p.m. ET). Starting on Monday, December 19, 2016, and continuing until further notice, the schedule will be: Bidding Round (10:00 a.m.-11:00 a.m. ET); Bidding Round (1:00 p.m.-2:00 p.m. ET) and Bidding Round (4:00 p.m.-5:00 p.m. ET). Bidding will be suspended after the second round (1:00 p.m.-2:00 p.m. ET) on Friday, December 23, 2016, and there will be no bidding from Monday, December 26, 2016, through Monday, January 2, 2017, in observance of the holiday period. Shortly before the holiday break, the Bureau will announce in the Reverse Auction Bidding System the bidding schedule that will be used when bidding resumes on Tuesday, January 3, 2017. During the holiday break, the Auction Bidder Line will not be available. The Bureau may adjust the number and length of bidding rounds based upon its monitoring of the bidding and assessment of the reverse auction's progress. The Bureau will provide notice of any adjustment by announcement in the Reverse Auction Bidding System during the course of the auction.

    10. Reset Base Clock Price and Clock Decrement for Round 1 of Stage 4. The base clock price has been reset to $900 per unit of volume for Stage 4 of the reverse auction. The price decrement for Round 1 of Stage 4 of the reverse auction will be five percent of the reset base clock price.

    III. Important Information Concerning the Forward Auction (Auction 1002)

    11. Bidding in Stage 4. On the next business day after Stage 4 of the reverse auction concludes, the Task Force and Bureau will announce the initial bidding schedule for Stage 4 of the forward auction in the Forward Auction Bidding System and in the Incentive Auction Public Reporting System (PRS), including the date and time of the first round of bidding. Bidding in Stage 4 of the forward auction will begin no later than three business days after this announcement. Each bidder is strongly encouraged to regularly monitor the PRS for announcements and other important information related to bidding in Stage 4 of the forward auction. The PRS can be accessed directly at auctiondata.fcc.gov and from a link under the Results section of the Auction 1001 Web site (www.fcc.gov/auctions/1001) and the Auction 1002 Web site (www.fcc.gov/auctions/1002).

    12. Accessing the Forward Auction Bidding System in Stage 4. Any bidder that is eligible to bid in Stage 4 of the forward auction will be able to access the Forward Auction Bidding System beginning at 10:00 a.m. ET on January 5, 2017. There will be zero impairments in the band plan for Stage 4. Therefore, unlike in previous stages, there is no need for bidders to access the Forward Auction Bidding System for purposes of downloading impairment data prior to the start of the reverse auction. Eligible bidders can log in to the Forward Auction Bidding System using the same RSA tokens, Web address, and instructions provided in the bidder registration materials they received prior to the start of Stage 4 when the system becomes available on January 5, 2017. All bidder-specific information, including stage transition files and bidding information from previous stages, is non-public and provided only to eligible bidders to help guide their bidding in Stage 4 of the forward auction. This information will not be disclosed publicly until after the auction concludes. Any bidder with zero eligibility by the end of Stage 3 will not be eligible to bid in Stage 4 of the forward auction.

    13. Returning RSA Tokens. Each bidder that is no longer eligible to participate in the forward auction (i.e., any bidder that has zero eligibility by the end of Stage 3) will be sent a pre-addressed, stamped envelope to return its RSA tokens.

    14. Activity Rule for Round 1 of Stage 4. Starting in the first round of Stage 4, each bidder must be active on at least 95 percent of its bidding eligibility to maintain its bidding eligibility for the next round. Any changes to the activity requirement in subsequent rounds will be announced via the Forward Auction Bidding System. Prior to the start of Stage 4 of the forward auction, a bidder may view its initial eligibility and required activity for Round 1 by downloading the My Bidder Status file under the Bid/Status tab of the Downloads screen.

    15. Clock Increment for Round 1 of Stage 4. An increment of five percent will be used to set clock prices for products in Round 1 of Stage 4 of the forward auction. Prior to the announcement of the forward auction bidding schedule for Stage 4, a bidder may view the clock prices for Round 1 by downloading the Sample Bids file in the Forward Auction Bidding System.

    16. Final Stage Rule Status. In Stage 4, the first component of the final stage rule is no longer based on auction proceeds but instead will be met when the average price per MHz-pop for Category 1 blocks in the high-demand PEAs is at least $1.25 per MHz-pop. Using the formula for calculating the average price and based on the bidding results from Stage 3 and the number of blocks available in Stage 4, the average price per MHz-pop for Category 1 blocks in the high-demand PEAs will be $1.21859 . . . at the start of Stage 4. This amount is approximately three cents short of the required $1.25 benchmark.

    17. The second component of the final stage rule remains the same as in previous stages: The estimated auction net proceeds must be sufficient to cover winning bidder payments for broadcasters and other cost requirements.

    IV. Public Reporting System

    18. As was the case for previous stages of the incentive auction, publicly available bidding and timing information for Stage 4 of the reverse auction and the forward auction will be accessible through the PRS. The PRS will display the same types of bidding and other information for Stage 4 as was available for previous stages. For more information about the types of bidding and other information available in the PRS, please see the Public Reporting System Public Notice.

    V. Bidding Contingency Plan

    19. The Task Force and Bureau remind each bidder that it should maintain and continue to refine as necessary a comprehensive contingency plan that can be quickly implemented in case difficulties arise when participating in the incentive auction. While the Commission will correct any problems with Commission-controlled facilities, each bidder is solely responsible for anticipating and overcoming problems such as bidder computer failures or other technical issues, loss of or problems with data connections (including those used to access and place bids in the Reverse Auction Bidding System or the Forward Auction Bidding System), telephone service interruptions, adverse local weather conditions, unavailability of its authorized bidders, or the loss or breach of confidential security codes.

    20. A bidder should ensure that each of its authorized bidders can access and place bids in the Reverse Auction Bidding System or Forward Auction Bidding System, and it should not rely upon the same computer or data connection to do so. Contingency plans should include arrangements for accessing and placing bids in the Reverse Auction Bidding System or the Forward Auction Bidding System from one or more alternative locations. A bidder's contingency plans might also include, among other arrangements, using the Auction Bidder Line as an alternative method of bidding in the incentive auction.

    21. Each reverse auction bidder is further reminded that a failure to submit a bid for a station with the status “Bidding” is considered to be a missing bid and will be interpreted as a bid to drop out of the auction. The Reverse Auction Bidding System will automatically submit a bid to drop out of the auction for all stations with missing bids. The status of a station that bids to drop out of the auction will be “Exited—Voluntarily” once bid processing is complete for the round (unless the station first becomes frozen). Once a station has the status “Exited,” a bidder cannot bid for the station in any subsequent round or stage.

    22. The Task Force and Bureau remind each forward auction bidder that its failure to submit a bid during a clock round will be considered a “missing” bid and will be treated as a bid for zero blocks, at the lowest price in the price range for the round, for any products in which the bidder had processed demand from the previous round. If there is insufficient excess demand, the “missing” bid may be partially applied or not applied at all and the bidder will continue to have processed demand for the product in the next round. If the “missing” bid is partially or fully applied, that bidder's eligibility may be irrevocably reduced in the next round.

    VI. Continuing Obligations

    23. Due Diligence. The Task Force and Bureau remind each reverse and forward auction bidder that it is solely responsible throughout the auction for investigating and evaluating all legal, technical, and marketplace factors and risks that may have a bearing on the bid(s) it submits in the incentive auction. For more information, each bidder should review the Auction 1000 Application Procedures Public Notice, 80 FR 66429, October 29, 2015.

    24. Prohibited Communications Reminder. The Task Force and Bureau remind all full power and Class A broadcast television licensees, as well as forward auction applicants, that they remain subject to the Commission's rules prohibiting certain communications in connection with Commission auctions. For communications among broadcasters, and between broadcasters and forward auction applicants, the prohibited communication period ends when the results of the incentive auction are announced by public notice. For communications among forward auction applicants, the period ends on the deadline for making down payments on winning bids. A party that is subject to the prohibition remains subject to the prohibition regardless of developments during the auction process.

    25. The Task Force and Bureau further remind each full power and Class A broadcast television licensee that even though communicating whether or not a party filed an application to participate in the reverse auction does not violate the rules prohibiting certain communications, communicating that a party “is not bidding” in or has “exited” the reverse auction could constitute an apparent violation that needs to be reported. All forward auction applicants, including those that did not qualify to bid and those that have since lost eligibility to bid in the forward auction, are also reminded that they remain subject to the rules prohibiting certain communications until the deadline for making down payments on winning bids.

    26. The Commission's rules require covered parties to report violations of the prohibition of certain communications to Margaret W. Wiener, Chief of the Auctions and Spectrum Access Division, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau, by the most expeditious means available. Any such report should be submitted by email to Ms. Wiener at the following email address: [email protected] Any report in hard copy must be delivered only to Margaret W. Wiener, Chief, Auctions and Spectrum Access Division, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau, Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th Street SW., Washington, DC 20554. Failure to make a timely report under the rule constitutes a continuing violation of the rule, with attendant consequences.

    27. For a thorough discussion of the prohibition of certain communications during the incentive auction, please refer to the Prohibited Communications Public Notice, 80 FR 63216, October 19, 2015.

    28. Making Modifications to Applications. The Task Force and Bureau remind each reverse and forward auction applicant that the Commission's rules require an applicant to maintain the accuracy and completeness of information furnished in its application to participate in Auctions 1001 and 1002, respectively. Each applicant should amend its application to furnish additional or corrected information within five days of a significant occurrence, or no more than five days after the applicant becomes aware of the need for an amendment. Any applicant that needs to make changes must do so using the procedures described in the Auction 1000 Application Procedures Public Notice and the Auction 1002 Qualified Bidders Public Notice.

    29. To make changes to its FCC Form 177 or FCC Form 175 while the Auction System is available, the applicant must make those changes electronically using the Auction System and submit a letter briefly summarizing the changes to its FCC Form 177 by email to [email protected], or to its FCC Form 175 by email to [email protected] To make changes at a time when the Auction System is unavailable, the applicant must make those changes using the procedures described in the Auction 1000 Application Procedures Public Notice. All changes are subject to review by Commission staff.

    Federal Communications Commission. Gary D. Michaels, Deputy Chief, Auctions and Spectrum Access Division, WTB.
    [FR Doc. 2016-30000 Filed 12-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
    FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION [OMB 3060-0917, 3060-0918] Information Collections Being Reviewed by the Federal Communications Commission AGENCY:

    Federal Communications Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice and request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, and as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC or the Commission) invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the following information collection. Comments are requested concerning: Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Commission, including whether the information shall have practical utility; the accuracy of the Commission's burden estimate; ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on the respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and ways to further reduce the information collection burden on small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees. The FCC may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid control number. No person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information subject to the PRA that does not display a valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number.

    DATES:

    Written PRA comments should be submitted on or before February 13, 2017. If you anticipate that you will be submitting comments, but find it difficult to do so within the period of time allowed by this notice, you should advise the contact listed below as soon as possible.

    ADDRESSES:

    Direct all PRA comments to Nicole Ongele, FCC, via email [email protected] and to [email protected]

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For additional information about the information collection, contact Nicole Ongele at (202) 418-2991.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    OMB Control Number: 3060-0917.

    Title: CORES Registration Form, FCC Form 160.

    Form Number: FCC Form 160.

    Type of Review: Revision of a currently approved collection.

    Respondents: Businesses or other for-profit entities; individuals or households; not-for-profit institutions; and State, Local, or Tribal Governments.

    Number of Respondent and Responses: 93,000 respondents; 93,000 responses.

    Estimated Time per Response: 10 minutes (0.167 hours).

    Frequency of Response: One-time reporting requirement.

    Obligation to Respond: Required to obtain or retain benefits. Statutory authority for this information collection is contained in the Debt Collection Act of 1996 (DCCA), Public Law 104-134, Chapter 10, Section 31001.

    Total Annual Burden: 15,531 hours.

    Total Annual Cost: None.

    Privacy Impact Assessment: The Privacy Impact Assessment (PIA) covering the PII in the CORES information system is being updated. Upon completion it will be posted at: https://www.fcc.gov/general/privacy-act-information#pia.

    Nature and Extent of Confidentiality: The FCC is not requesting that respondents submit confidential information to the Commission. If the FCC requests that respondents submit information which respondents believe is confidential, respondents may request confidential treatment of such information pursuant to Section 0.459 of the FCC's rules, 47 CFR 0.459. The FCC has a system of records, FCC/OMD-25, Financial Operations Information System (FOIS), to cover the collection, purpose(s), storage, safeguards, and disposal of the personally identifiable information (PII) that individual respondents may submit on FCC Form 160, which is posted at: https://www.fcc.gov/general/privacy-act-information#systems.

    The FCC will also redact PII submitted on this form before it makes FCC Form 160 available for public inspection. FCC Form 160 includes a “privacy statement” to inform applicants (respondents) of the FCC's need to obtain the information and the protections that the FCC has in place to protect PII.

    Needs and Uses: The Commission is revising Form 160 to include Restricted Use FRNs. These FRNs are created in the FCC's Commission Registration System (CORES) and are used only for Form 323, Ownership Report for Commercial Broadcast Station (OMB Control No. 3060-0010) and Form 323-E, Ownership Report for Noncommercial Educational Broadcast Station (OMB Control No. 3060-0084). Registering for a Restricted Use FRN will require the same information as other FRNs with the following differences: respondents will be required to enter a date of birth and only the last four digits of the Social Security Number.

    Respondents use FCC Form 160 to register in CORES. When registering, the respondent receives a unique FCC Registration Number (FRN), which is required for anyone doing business with the Commission. Respondents may also register in CORES on-line at https://apps.fcc.gov/cores. FCC Form 160 is used to collect information that pertains to the entity's name, address, contact representative, telephone number, email address(es), and fax number. The Commission uses this information to collect or report on any delinquent debt arising from the respondent's business dealings with the FCC, including both “feeable” and “nonfeeable” services; and to ensure that registrants (respondents) receive any refunds due. Use of the CORES System is also a means of ensuring that the Commission operates in compliance with the Debt Collection Improvement Act of 1996 (DCCA), Public Law 104-134, Chapter 10, Section 31001.

    On November 19, 2010, the FCC adopted a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM), MD Docket No. 10-234, FCC 10-192, Amendment of Part 1 of the Commission's Rules Concerning Practice and Procedure, Amendment of CORES Registration System. The NPRM proposes to eliminate some of the FCC's exceptions to the requirement that entities and individuals provide their Taxpayer Identification Number (“TIN”) at the time of registration; require FRN holders to provide their email address(es); give FRN holders the option to identify multiple points of contact; and require FRN holders to indicate their tax-exempt status and notify the Commission of pending bankruptcy proceedings. All remaining existing information collection requirements would stay as they are.

    OMB Control Number: 3060-0918.

    Title: CORES Update/Change Form, FCC Form 161.

    Form Number: FCC Form 161.

    Type of Review: Revision of a currently approved collection.

    Respondents: Businesses or other for-profit entities; individuals or households; not-for-profit institutions; and State, Local, or Tribal Governments.

    Number of Respondents and Responses: 80,000 respondents; 80,000 responses.

    Estimated Time per Response: 10 minutes (0.167 hours).

    Frequency of Response: On occasion reporting requirement.

    Obligation to Respond: Required to obtain or retain benefits. Statutory authority for this information collection is contained in the Debt Collection Act of 1996 (DCCA), Public Law 104-134, Chapter 10, Section 31001.

    Total Annual Burden: 13,360 hours.

    Total Annual Costs: None.

    Privacy Impact Assessment: The Privacy Impact Assessment (PIA) covering the PII in the CORES information system is being updated. Upon completion it will be posted at: https://www.fcc.gov/general/privacy-act-information#pia.

    Nature and Extent of Confidentiality: The FCC is not requesting that respondents submit confidential information to the Commission. If the FCC requests that respondents submit information which respondents believe is confidential, respondents may request confidential treatment of such information pursuant to Section 0.459 of the FCC's rules, 47 CFR 0.459. The FCC has a system of records, FCC/OMD-25, Financial Operations Information System (FOIS), to cover the collection, purpose(s), storage, safeguards, and disposal of the personally identifiable information (PII) that individual respondents may submit on FCC Form 161, which is posted at: https://www.fcc.gov/general/privacy-act-information#systems.

    The FCC will also redact PII submitted on this form before it makes Start Printed Page 41797FCC Form 161 available for public inspection. FCC Form 161 includes a “privacy statement” to inform applicants (respondents) of the FCC's need to obtain the information and the protections that the FCC has in place to protect PII.

    Needs and Uses: The Commission is revising Form 161 to include Restricted Use FRNs. These FRNs are created in the FCC's Commission Registration System (CORES) and are used only for Form 323, Ownership Report for Commercial Broadcast Station (OMB Control No. 3060-0010) and Form 323-E, Ownership Report for Noncommercial Educational Broadcast Station (OMB Control No. 3060-0084). Registering for a Restricted Use FRN will require the same information as other FRNs with the following differences: respondents will be required to enter a date of birth and only the last four digits of the Social Security Number.

    After respondents have registered in CORES and have been issued a FCC Registration Number (FRN), they may use FCC Form 161 to update and/or change their contact information, including name, address, telephone number, email address(es), fax number, contact representative, contact representative's address, telephone number, email address, and/or fax number. Respondents may also update their registration information in CORES on-line at https://apps.fcc.gov/cores. The Commission uses this information to collect or report on any delinquent debt arising from the respondent's business dealings with the FCC, including both “feeable” and “nonfeeable” services; and to ensure that registrants (respondents) receive any refunds due. Use of the CORES System is also a means of ensuring that the Commission operates in compliance with the Debt Collection Improvement Act of 1996.

    On November 19, 2010, the FCC adopted a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM), MD Docket No. 10-234, FCC 10-192, Amendment of Part 1 of the Commission's Rules Concerning Practice and Procedure, Amendment of CORES Registration System. The NPRM proposes to eliminate some of the FCC's exceptions to the requirement that entities and individuals provide their Taxpayer Identification Number (“TIN”) at the time of registration; require FRN holders to provide their email address(es); give FRN holders the option to identify multiple points of contact; and require FRN holders to indicate their tax-exempt status and notify the Commission of pending bankruptcy proceedings. All remaining existing information collection requirements would stay as they are.

    Federal Communications Commission. Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary. Office of the Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-29828 Filed 12-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
    FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION [OMB 3060-XXXX] Information Collection Being Reviewed by the Federal Communications Commission AGENCY:

    Federal Communications Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice and request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, and as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), the Federal Communications Commission (FCC or the Commission) invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the following information collection. Comments are requested concerning: Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Commission, including whether the information shall have practical utility; the accuracy of the Commission's burden estimate; ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on the respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and ways to further reduce the information collection burden on small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees. The FCC may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid control number. No person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information subject to the PRA that does not display a valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number.

    DATES:

    Written PRA comments should be submitted on or before February 13, 2017. If you anticipate that you will be submitting comments, but find it difficult to do so within the period of time allowed by this notice, you should advise the contact listed below as soon as possible.

    ADDRESSES:

    Direct all PRA comments to Nicole Ongele, FCC, via email [email protected] and to [email protected]

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For additional information about the information collection, contact Nicole Ongele at (202) 418-2991.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    OMB Control Number: 3060-xxxx.

    Title: Expanding the Economic and Innovation Opportunities of Spectrum Through Incentive Auctions.

    Form Number: N/A.

    Type of Review: New collection.

    Respondents: Businesses or other for-profit.

    Number of Respondents and Responses: 832 respondents and 832 responses.

    Estimated Time per Response: 1 hour.

    Frequency of Response: Wireless licensees who are required to conduct an interference study will be required to produce the study upon request and when an interference complaint occurs.

    Obligation to Respond: Mandatory. The statutory authority for this information collection is contained in 47 U.S.C. 151, 154, 301, 303, 307, 308, 309, 316, 319, 332, 403, 1452 and 1454.

    Total Annual Burden: 832 hours.

    Total Annual Costs: $10

    Nature and Extent of Confidentiality: There is no need for confidentiality. However, applicants may request that any information supplied be withheld from public inspection, pursuant to 47 CFR 0.459 of the FCC's rules. This request must be justified pursuant to 47 CFR 0.457.

    Privacy Act Impact Assessment: No impact(s).

    Needs and Uses: The Commission will submit this new information collection to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) after this 60 day comment period in order to obtain the three-year clearance.

    On October 26, 2015 the Federal Communications Commission released a Third Report and Order, OET Seeks to Supplement the Incentive Auction Proceeding Record Regarding Potential Interference Between Broadcast Television and Wireless Services, ET Docket Nos. 13-26 and 14-14, which resolved the remaining technical issues affecting the operation of 600 MHz wireless licenses and broadcast television stations in areas where they operate on the same or adjacent channels in geographic proximity. Specifically, the Commission adopted a rule requiring wireless licensees to conduct an interference study prior to deploying or operating a wireless base station within a specified distance of a broadcast television station that is co-channel or adjacent channel to their spectrum. A wireless licensee is required to provide this interference study to the Commission upon request or to the broadcast television station when there is an interference complaint.

    Federal Communications Commission. Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, Office of the Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-29829 Filed 12-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
    FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION FDIC Advisory Committee on Economic Inclusion; Notice of Charter Renewal AGENCY:

    Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC).

    ACTION:

    Notice of renewal of the FDIC Advisory Committee on Economic Inclusion.

    SUMMARY:

    Pursuant to the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (“FACA”), 5 U.S.C. App. 2, and after consultation with the General Services Administration, the Chairman of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation has determined that renewal of the FDIC Advisory Committee on Economic Inclusion (“the Committee”) is in the public interest in connection with the performance of duties imposed upon the FDIC by law. The Committee has been a successful undertaking by the FDIC and has provided valuable feedback to the agency on important initiatives focused on expanding access to banking services for underserved populations. The Committee will continue to provide advice and recommendations on initiatives to expand access to banking services for underserved populations. The Committee will continue to review various issues that may include, but not be limited to, basic retail financial services such as low-cost, sustainable transaction accounts, savings accounts, small dollar lending, prepaid cards, money orders, remittances, and other services to promote asset accumulation and financial stability. The structure and responsibilities of the Committee are unchanged from when it was originally established in November 2006. The Committee will continue to operate in accordance with the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Mr. Robert E. Feldman, Committee Management Officer of the FDIC, at (202) 898-7043.

    Dated: December 8, 2016. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. Robert E. Feldman, Committee Management Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2016-29850 Filed 12-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6714-01-P
    FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION Sunshine Act Meeting AGENCY:

    Federal Election Commission.

    DATE and TIME:

    Tuesday, December 6, 2016 at 10:00 a.m.

    PLACE:

    999 E Street NW., Washington, DC.

    STATUS:

    This meeting will be closed to the public.

    Federal Register notice of previous announcement—81 FR 86714.

    Change in the Meeting:

    This meeting was continued on December 8, 2016.

    Person to Contact for Information:

    Judith Ingram, Press Officer; Telephone: (202) 694-1220.

    Shelley E. Garr, Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-29944 Filed 12-9-16; 11:15 am] BILLING CODE 6715-01-P
    FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION Agency Information Collection Activities: 60-Day Public Comment Request AGENCY:

    Federal Maritime Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice and request for comment.

    SUMMARY:

    As part of our continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, and as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Federal Maritime Commission (Commission) invites comments on the continuing information collection (an extension with no change) listed below in this notice.

    DATES:

    Written comments must be submitted on or before February 13, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Address all comments to: Karen V. Gregory, Managing Director, Office of the Managing Director, Federal Maritime Commission, 800 North Capitol Street NW., Washington, DC 20573, Phone: (202) 523-5800, Email: [email protected]

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    A copy of the information collection, or copies of any comments received, may be obtained by contacting Donna Lee at (202) 523-5800 or email at [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Request for Comments

    The Commission, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to comment on the continuing information collection listed in this notice, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).

    Comments submitted in response to this notice will be included or summarized in our request for Office of Management and Budget (OMB) approval of the relevant information collection. All comments received, including attachments, are part of the public record and subject to disclosure. Please do not include any confidential material or material that you consider inappropriate for public disclosure. We invite comments on: (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.

    Information Collection Open for Comment

    Title: 46 CFR part 540—Application for Certificate of Financial Responsibility/Form FMC-131.

    OMB Approval Number: 3072-0012 (Expires February 28, 2017).

    Abstract: Sections 2 and 3 of Public Law 89-777 (46 U.S.C. 44101-44106) require owners or charterers of passenger vessels with 50 or more passenger berths or stateroom accommodations and embarking passengers at United States ports and territories to establish their financial responsibility to meet liability incurred for death or injury to passengers and other persons, and to indemnify passengers in the event of nonperformance of transportation. The Commission's regulations at 46 CFR part 540 implement Public Law 89-777 and specify financial responsibility coverage requirements for such owners and charterers.

    Current Actions: There are no changes to this information collection, and it is being submitted for extension purposes only.

    Type of Review: Extension.

    Needs and Uses: The information will be used by the Commission's staff to ensure that passenger vessel owners and charterers have evidenced financial responsibility to indemnify passengers and others in the event of nonperformance or casualty.

    Frequency: This information is collected when applicants apply for a certificate or when existing certificants change any information in their application forms.

    Affected Public Who Will Be Asked or Required to Respond: Respondents are owners, charterers, and operators of passenger vessels with 50 or more passenger berths that embark passengers from U.S. ports or territories.

    Number of Annual Respondents: The Commission estimates the total number of respondents at 47 annually.

    Estimated Time per Response: The time per response ranges from 0.5 to 8 hours for reporting and recordkeeping requirements contained in the regulations, and 8 hours for completing Application Form FMC-131.

    Total Annual Burden: The Commission estimates the total burden at 1,359 hours per year.

    Rachel E. Dickon, Assistant Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-29851 Filed 12-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6731-AA-P
    FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM [Docket No. OP-1555] Application of the RFI/C(D) Rating System to Savings and Loan Holding Companies AGENCY:

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (Board).

    ACTION:

    Notice and request for comment.

    SUMMARY:

    The Board proposes to fully apply the same supervisory rating system to savings and loan holding companies as currently applies to bank holding companies. This proposal furthers the Board's goal of ensuring that holding companies that control depository institutions are subject to consistent standards and supervisory programs. The proposal would not apply to savings and loan holding companies engaged in significant insurance or commercial activities. These firms would instead continue to receive indicative supervisory ratings.

    DATES:

    Comments must be received no later than February 13, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. OP-1555, by any of the following methods:

    Agency Web site: http://www.federalreserve.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments at http://www.federalreserve.gov/apps/foia/proposedregs.aspx.

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

    Email: [email protected] Include the docket number in the subject line of the message.

    Fax: (202) 452-3819 or (202) 452-3102.

    Mail: Robert deV. Frierson, Secretary, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, 20th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20551.

    All public comments will be made available on the Board's Web site at http://www.federalreserve.gov/apps/foia/proposedregs.aspx as submitted, unless modified for technical reasons. Accordingly, comments will not be edited to remove any identifying or contact information. Public comments may also be viewed electronically or in paper in Room 3515, 1801 K Street NW. (between 18th and 19th Streets NW.), Washington, DC 20006, between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. on weekdays. For security reasons, the Board requires that visitors make an appointment to inspect comments. You may do so by calling (202) 452-3684. Upon arrival, visitors will be required to present valid government-issued photo identification and to submit to security screening in order to inspect and photocopy comments.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    T. Kirk Odegard, Assistant Director and Chief of Staff, Policy Implementation and Effectiveness, (202) 530-6225, or Karen Caplan, Manager, (202) 452-2710, Division of Banking Supervision and Regulation; Tate Wilson, Counsel, (202) 452-3696, Legal Division, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, 20th and C Streets NW., Washington, DC 20551.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Table of Contents I. Background II. The Proposal III. Regulatory Analysis I. Background

    In 2010, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (“Dodd-Frank Act”) transferred responsibility for the supervision of savings and loan holding companies (SLHCs) from the Office of Thrift Supervision to the Federal Reserve.1 Since 2011, the Board has applied its existing rating system for bank holding companies (BHCs)—the RFI/C(D) rating system (commonly referred to as the “RFI rating system”) 2 —to SLHCs on an indicative basis as a way of providing feedback to SLHCs regarding supervisory expectations while the Federal Reserve and SLHCs each became familiar with the newly established statutory framework for supervision. Federal Reserve supervisory staff have assigned to each savings and loan holding company an “indicative rating,” which describes how the savings and loan holding company would be rated under the RFI rating system if applied to the company without the rating itself triggering supervisory consequences.3

    1 12 U.S.C. 5412(b)(1).

    2 Under the RFI rating system, BHCs generally are assigned individual component ratings for risk management (R), financial condition (F), and impact (I) of nondepository entities on subsidiary depository institutions. The risk management component is supported by individual subcomponent ratings for board and senior management oversight; policies, procedures, and limits; risk monitoring and management and information systems; and internal controls. The financial condition rating is supported by individual subcomponent ratings for capital adequacy, asset quality, earnings, and liquidity. An additional component rating is assigned to generally reflect the condition of any depository institution subsidiaries (D), as determined by the primary supervisor(s) of those subsidiaries. An overall composite rating (C) is assigned based on an overall evaluation of a BHC's managerial and financial condition and an assessment of potential future risk to its subsidiary depository institution(s). A simplified version of the RFI rating system that includes only the risk management component and a composite rating is applied to noncomplex BHCs with assets of $1 billion or less.

    3 All SLHCs that have been inspected have received at least one indicative rating.

    Prior to the transfer of supervisory responsibility for SLHCs, the OTS assigned supervisory ratings for SLHCs under the CORE rating system.4 The CORE rating system and the RFI rating system substantially overlapped. The two rating systems generally included assessments of the same set of financial and non-financial factors and provide a summary evaluation of each holding company's condition.5 Under both systems, assigned ratings formed a basis for supervisory responses and actions, including discussions between supervisors and firm management of a holding company's condition.

    4See 72 FR 72442 (December 20, 2007). Under the CORE rating system, SLHCs generally were assigned individual component ratings for capital (C), organizational structure (O), risk management (R), and earnings (E), as well as a composite rating that reflected an overall assessment of the holding company as reflected by consolidated risk management and financial strength.

    5 The primary difference between the two rating systems concerned asset quality and liquidity. Under the CORE rating system, a review of asset quality was subsumed into other rating elements such as capital and earnings, it was not specifically accounted for or assessed. Similarly, liquidity was not rated separately under the CORE rating system; it was taken into account in the organizational structure and earnings assessments. The RFI rating system assigns a separate subcomponent rating for asset quality and liquidity that support the overall financial condition rating.

    The Board did not adopt the CORE rating system upon taking over supervision of SLHCs. Instead, because SLHCs and BHCs face the same risks and engage largely in the same activities, the Board sought to ensure that holding companies of depository institutions were subject to consistent standards and supervisory programs by applying the same RFI rating system to SLHCs as the Board applies to BHCs. To allow a period of adjustment for both the Federal Reserve and SLHCs, the Federal Reserve assigned RFI ratings on an indicative basis only.

    II. The Proposal Applying the RFI Rating System to SLHCs

    After completing a number of supervisory cycles in which the RFI rating system has been applied to SLHCs on an indicative basis and having evaluated the information gained from that process, the Board now proposes to apply the RFI rating system to certain SLHCs on a fully implemented basis.6 Applying the RFI rating system to both BHCs and SLHCs ensures that holding companies of depository institutions are subject to consistent standards and supervisory programs.7 Experience with this process over the past five years indicates that the RFI rating system is an effective approach to communicating supervisory expectations to SLHCs. In proposing this application of the RFI rating system to certain SLHCs, the Board has taken into account the diverse population of SLHCs and the experience gained in assigning indicative RFI ratings to these firms.

    6See 12 U.S.C. 1467a(b) (providing for the supervision and examination of SLHCs by the Board) and 1467a(g) (authorizing the Board to issue regulations and orders it deems necessary to or appropriate to enable it to administer and carry out the purposes of section 10 of HOLA).

    7 The Board is not proposing any changes to the application of the RFI rating system to bank holding companies at this time.

    The Board proposes to apply the RFI rating system to all SLHCs except those that are excluded from the definition of “covered savings and loan holding company” in section 217.2 of the Board's Regulation Q.8 Specifically, the Board would not fully apply the RFI rating system to SLHCs that derive 50 percent or more of their total consolidated assets or total revenues to activities that are not financial in nature under section 4(k) of the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956, as amended (12 U.S.C. 1843(k)). This proposal also would not apply to savings and loan holding companies that are insurance companies or savings and loan holding companies that hold 25 percent or more of their total consolidated assets in subsidiaries that are insurance companies. Instead, the Board would continue to assign an indicative rating under the RFI system to these SLHCs as it reviews whether a modified version of the RFI rating system or some other supervisory rating system is appropriate for these firms on a permanent basis.

    8 12 CFR 217.2.

    Under this proposal, all components of the RFI rating system (i.e., risk management, financial condition, and potential impact of the parent company and nondepository subsidiaries on subsidiary depository institution(s)) would apply to SLHCs.9 Likewise, the depository institution rating, which generally mirrors the primary regulator's assessment of the subsidiary depository institution(s), would apply to certain SLHCs under the proposal. A numeric rating of 1 indicates the highest rating, strongest performance and practices, and least degree of supervisory concern; a numeric rating of 5 indicates the lowest rating, weakest performance, and the highest degree of supervisory concern.

    9 Consistent with the approach for BHCs, when assigning a rating to an SLHC supervisory staff will take into account a company's size, complexity, and financial condition. For example, a noncomplex SLHC with total assets less than $1 billion will not be assigned all subcomponent ratings; rather, only a risk management component rating and composite rating generally will be assigned. These would equate, respectively, to the management component and composite rating under the CAMELS rating system for depository institutions, as assigned to the SLHC's subsidiary savings association by its primary regulator.

    The financial condition component of the RFI rating includes a subcomponent that represents an assessment of capital adequacy. Compliance with minimum regulatory capital requirements is part of a broader qualitative and quantitative assessment of an SLHC's capital adequacy. As of January 1, 2015, certain SLHCs became subject to minimum capital requirements and overall capital adequacy standards.10 For SLHCs subject to minimum regulatory capital requirements, assessment of the SLHC's compliance with those requirements will be one element of a broader qualitative and quantitative assessment of capital adequacy.11

    10See 78 FR 62018, 62028 (October 11, 2013) (outlining the timeframe for implementation of Regulation Q for SLHCs and others).

    11See Sections 4060 and 4061 of the Bank Holding Company Supervision Manual; Supervision and Regulation Letter 15-19 (December 18, 2015), available at https://www.federalreserve.gov/bankinforeg/srletters/sr1519.htm; Supervision and Regulation Letter 15-6 (April 6, 2015), available at https://www.federalreserve.gov/bankinforeg/srletters/sr1506.htm; Supervision and Regulation Letter 09-04 (February 24, 2009, revised December 21, 2015), available at http://www.federalreserve.gov/boarddocs/srletters/2009/sr0904.htm.

    Noncomplex SLHCs under $1 billion will be assigned an abbreviated version of the RFI rating system consistent with the Board's practice for BHCs outlined in SR 13-21.12 An offsite review of the SLHC will be conducted upon receipt of the lead depository institution's report of examination. The supervisory cycle will be determined by the examination frequency of the lead depository institution and the SLHC will be assigned only a risk management rating and a composite rating.

    12 Supervision and Regulation Letter 13-21 (December 17, 2013), available at https://www.federalreserve.gov/bankinforeg/srletters/sr1321.htm.

    Finally, elements of the RFI rating system that are codified in the Board's Bank Holding Company Supervision Manual13 and a policy letter issued by the staff of the Board's Division of Banking Supervision and Regulation will be revised if the proposal to fully apply the RFI system to certain SLHCs is finalized.14

    13Available at http://www.federalreserve.gov/boarddocs/supmanual/supervision_bhc.htm.

    14See Supervision and Regulation Letter 04-18 (December 6, 2014), available at http://www.federalreserve.gov/boarddocs/srletters/2004/sr0418.htm.

    Assessment of Capital Adequacy for SLHCs That Receive Indicative Ratings

    For SLHCs that would continue to receive an indicative rating under the RFI rating system, the Board proposes that examiners, in the evaluation of capital adequacy of an SLHC, consider the risks inherent in the SLHC's activities and the ability of capital to absorb unanticipated losses, provide a base for growth, and support the level and composition of the parent company and subsidiaries' debt.

    Supervisory Guidance for SLHCs With Less Than $10 Billion in Assets

    In 2013, Board staff published several supervisory letters extending the use of the RFI rating system for and assignment of indicative ratings to SLHCs and extending the scope and frequency requirements for supervised holding companies with total consolidated assets of $10 billion or less to SLHCs. Until such time as the Board adopts a final rule on the application of the RFI rating system to SLHCs, SLHCs may refer to these letters for staff-level guidance on the use of indicative ratings.

    The Board invites comment on all aspects of this proposal.

    III. Regulatory Analysis Paperwork Reduction Act

    There is no collection of information required by this proposal that would be subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.

    Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) requires an agency to publish an initial regulatory flexibility analysis with a proposed rule or certify that the proposed rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Based on its analysis, and for the reasons stated below, the rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Nevertheless, the Board is publishing an initial regulatory flexibility analysis and requests public comment on all aspects of its analysis. The Board will, if necessary, conduct a final regulatory flexibility analysis after considering the comments received during the public comment period.

    1. Statement of the need for, and objectives of, the proposed rule. The proposed rule would apply the same supervisory rating system to SLHCs as currently applies to bank holding companies. The RFI rating system is an effective approach to communicating supervisory expectations to SLHCs. This proposal furthers the Board's goal of ensuring that holding companies that control depository institutions are subject to consistent standards and supervisory programs.

    2. Small entities affected by the proposed rule. Under regulations issued by the Small Business Administration, a small entity includes an SLHC with total assets of $550 million or less. As of October 31, 2016, there were approximately 157 small SLHCs. The proposed rule will not have a significant economic impact on the entities that it affects because the proposal does not impose any recordkeeping, reporting, or compliance requirements. The Board invites comment on the effect of the proposed rule on small entities.

    3. Recordkeeping, reporting, and compliance requirements. The proposed rule would not impose any recordkeeping, reporting, or compliance requirements.

    4. Other Federal rules. The Board has not identified any likely duplication, overlap and/or potential conflict between the proposed rule and any Federal rule.

    5. Significant alternatives to the proposed revisions. The Board believes that this proposal will not have a significant economic impact on small banking organizations supervised by the Board and therefore believes that there are no significant alternatives to this proposal that would reduce the economic impact on small banking organizations supervised by the Board.

    The Board solicits comment on any significant alternatives that would reduce the regulatory burden associated on small entities with this proposed rule.

    Solicitation of Comments on Use of Plain Language

    Section 722 of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act requires the Board to use plain language in all proposed and final rules published after January 1, 2000. The Board invites comment on how to make this proposed rule easier to understand. For example:

    • Has the Board organized the material to suit your needs? If not, how could the proposal be more clearly stated?

    • Are the requirements in the proposal clearly stated? If not, how could the proposal be more clearly stated?

    • Does the proposal contain technical language or jargon that is not clear? If so, what language requires clarification?

    • Would a different format (grouping and order of sections, use of headings, paragraphing) make the proposal easier to understand? If so, what changes would make the proposal easier to understand?

    • Would more, but shorter, sections be better? If so, which sections should be changed?

    • What else could the Board do to make the proposal easier to understand?

    By order of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, December 8, 2016. Robert deV. Frierson, Secretary of the Board.
    [FR Doc. 2016-29891 Filed 12-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6210-01-PA13DE3.
    FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION Granting of Request for Early Termination of the Waiting Period Under the Premerger Notification Rules

    Section 7A of the Clayton Act, 15 U.S.C. 18a, as added by Title II of the Hart-Scott-Rodino Antitrust Improvements Act of 1976, requires persons contemplating certain mergers or acquisitions to give the Federal Trade Commission and the Assistant Attorney General advance notice and to wait designated periods before consummation of such plans. Section 7A(b)(2) of the Act permits the agencies, in individual cases, to terminate this waiting period prior to its expiration and requires that notice of this action be published in the Federal Register.

    The following transactions were granted early termination—on the dates indicated—of the waiting period provided by law and the premerger notification rules. The listing for each transaction includes the transaction number and the parties to the transaction. The grants were made by the Federal Trade Commission and the Assistant Attorney General for the Antitrust Division of the Department of Justice. Neither agency intends to take any action with respect to these proposed acquisitions during the applicable waiting period.

    Early Terminations Granted November 1, 2016 Thru November 30, 2016 11/01/2016 20170004 G Sofina s.a.; BCP CC Holdings L.P.; Sofina s.a. 20170060 G Roche Holding Ltd; Hanmi Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd.; Roche Holding Ltd 20170110 G Wellspring Capital Partners V, L.P.; MM Hoffmaster Holdings L.P.; Wellspring Capital Partners V, L.P. 11/02/2016 20161726 G Berry Plastics Group, Inc.; AEP Industries Inc.; Berry Plastics Group, Inc. 20170008 G Tech Data Corporation; Avnet, Inc.; Tech Data Corporation. 20170013 G B&G Foods, Inc.; The Garfield Weston Charitable Foundation; B&G Foods, Inc. 20170114 G RHI AG; Magnesita Refratarios S.A.; RHI AG. 11/03/2016 20170104 G Tenex Capital Partners II, L.P.; Pugh Oil Company, Inc.; Tenex Capital Partners II, L.P. 11/04/2016 20170026 G Francisco Partners IV, L.P.; Eric and Amy Huang Legacy Trust u/a 9/30/11; Francisco Partners IV, L.P. 20170027 G Francisco Partners IV, L.P.; Amy B. Huang Legacy Trust u/a 2/1/12; Francisco Partners IV, L.P. 20170084 G Equistone V FPCI; Wayzata Opportunities Fund II, L.P.; Equistone V FPCI. 20170117 G Comvest Investment Partners V, L.P.; Lasko Group, Inc.; Comvest Investment Partners V, L.P. 20170118 G Acrisure Investors FO, LLC; Genstar Capital Partners VI, L.P.; Acrisure Investors FO, LLC. 20170124 G Onex Partners IV LP; Supervalu Inc.; Onex Partners IV LP. 20170125 G Wynnchurch Capital Partners IV, L.P.; Rosboro, LLC; Wynnchurch Capital Partners IV, L.P. 20170126 G Kayne Anderson Energy Fund VI, L.P.; RSP Permian, Inc.; Kayne Anderson Energy Fund VI, L.P. 20170127 G Kayne Anderson Energy Fund VII, L.P.; RSP Permian, Inc.; Kayne Anderson Energy Fund VII, L.P. 20170132 G Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company; JNF Investors LLC; Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company. 20170135 G Carlyle Partners VI Cayman, L.P.; Total S.A.; Carlyle Partners VI Cayman, L.P. 20170138 G ITOCHU Corporation; Empire Gen Holdings, Inc.; ITOCHU Corporation. 20170145 G Unibel; White Knight VIII FPCI; Unibel. 11/07/2016 20170035 G Warburg Pincus Private Equity XII, L.P.; Ascentium Capital LLC; Warburg Pincus Private Equity XII, L.P. 20170039 G Hanwha General Chemical Co., Ltd.; Hanwha Q Cells Korea Corp.; Hanwha General Chemical Co., Ltd. 20170071 G Allergan plc; AstraZeneca PLC; Allergan plc. 20170115 G Verizon Communications Inc.; AT&T Inc.; Verizon Communications Inc. 20170116 G AT&T Inc.; Verizon Communications Inc.; AT&T Inc. 20170123 G Novartis AG; Selexys Pharmaceuticals Corporation; Novartis AG. 20170147 G Hainan Cihang Charitable Foundation; CIT Group Inc.; Hainan Cihang Charitable Foundation. 20170157 G H.I.G. Middle Market LBO Fund II, L.P.; Mercury Capital, L.P.; H.I.G. Middle Market LBO Fund II, L.P. 11/08/2016 20170085 G Endeavour Capital Fund VII, L.P.; OFD Holdco, Inc.; Endeavour Capital Fund VII, L.P. 20170130 G Oaktree Principal Fund VI, L.P.; SunOpta, Inc.; Oaktree Principal Fund VI, L.P. 20170142 G AEA Investors Fund VI LP; CHS Private Equity V L.P.; AEA Investors Fund VI LP. 11/10/2016 20161294 G Promotora de Inversiones Mexicanas, S.A.; CEMEX S.A.B. de C.V.; Promotora de Inversiones Mexicanas, S.A. 20170152 G Platte River Equity III, L.P.; H. J. Baker & Bro., Inc.; Platte River Equity III, LP. 11/14/2016 20170119 G HKW Capital Partners IV, L.P.; Xirgo Technologies, Inc.; HKW Capital Partners IV, L.P. 20170133 G j2 Global, Inc.; Everyday Health, Inc.; j2 Global, Inc. 11/15/2016 20160836 G Verizon Communications Inc.; Carl C. Icahn; Verizon Communications Inc. 20170153 G Mitsubishi Materials Corporation; Nordic Capital V, L.P.; Mitsubishi Materials Corporation. 20170154 G CONSOL Energy Inc.; Noble Energy, Inc.; CONSOL Energy Inc. 20170158 G Quad-C Partners VIII, L.P.; Fusion Partners, LLC; Quad-C Partners VIII, L.P. 20170160 G Buckeye Partners, L.P.; Vitol Investment Partnership Limited; Buckeye Partners, L.P. 20170161 G Buckeye Partners, L.P.; Vitol Holding B.V.; Buckeye Partners, L.P. 20170168 G Quantum Energy Partners VI, LP; Freeport-McMoRan Inc.; Quantum Energy Partners VI, LP. 20170176 G Soohyung Kim; Twin River Worldwide Holdings, Inc.; Soohyung Kim. 20170177 G InPhi Corporation; ClariPhy Communications, Inc.; InPhi Corporation. 20170183 G Quad-C Partners VIII, L.P.; Wells Fargo & Company; Quad-C Partners VIII, L.P. 20170190 G Richard Webb; Kinder Morgan, Inc.; Richard Webb. 20170191 G Galanos Investments L.P.; KPS Special Situations Fund IV, LP; Galanos Investments L.P. 11/16/2016 20170170 G Audax Private Equity Fund V-A, L.P.; Silver Oak Services Partners, L.P.; Audax Private Equity Fund V-A, L.P. 20170196 G PMHC II, Inc.; Eramet, S.A.; PMHC II, Inc. 11/17/2016 20170129 G Amgen Inc.; Arrowhead Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; Amgen Inc. 20170164 G Daiichi Sankyo Co., Ltd.; Inspirion Delivery Technologies LLC; Daiichi Sankyo Co., Ltd. 20170167 G NextEra Energy, Inc.; Energy Future Holdings Corp.; NextEra Energy, Inc. 20170187 G Thomas A. Garrett; Cerberus Partners, L.P.; Thomas A. Garrett. 20170188 G Archrock Partners, L.P.; Archrock, Inc.; Archrock Partners, L.P. 11/18/2016 20170097 G CBOE Holdings, Inc.; Bats Global Markets; CBOE Holdings, Inc. 20170102 G Joseph Mansueto; PitchBook Data, Inc.; Joseph Mansueto. 20170162 G Constellation Brands, Inc.; Eugenie Patri Sebastien EPS, SA; Constellation Brands, Inc. 20170163 G Constellation Brands, Inc.; Jorge Paulo Lemann; Constellation Brands, Inc. 11/21/2016 20161824 G Blackfriars Corp.; Saudi Basic Industries Corp.; Blackfriars Corp. 20170209 G Odyssey Investment Partners Fund V, L.P.; HSM Tek, Inc.; Odyssey Investment Partners Fund V, L.P. 20170215 G SG Growth Partners III, LP; Weston Presidio V, L.P.; SG Growth Partners III, LP. 20170220 G Enviva Partners, LP; Riverstone/Carlyle Renewable and Alternative Energy Fund II,; Enviva Partners, LP. 20170225 G Sun Hydraulics Corporation; Frank W. Murphy III; Sun Hydraulics Corporation. 20170229 G Bain Capital Europe Fund IV, L.P.; ASF Park Acquisition LP; Bain Capital Europe Fund IV, L.P. 20170250 G Bed Bath & Beyond Inc.; Daniel R. Randolph; Bed Bath & Beyond Inc. 11/22/2016 20170208 G Nestle S.A.; Aimmune Therapeutics, Inc.; Nestle S.A. 11/23/2016 20170137 G Henderson Group plc; Janus Capital Group Inc.; Henderson Group plc. 20170173 G Huntington Ingalls Industries, Inc.; New Mountain Partners III, L.P.; Huntington Ingalls Industries, Inc. 20170174 G BW NHHC Co-Invest, L.P.; Wellspring Capital Partners V, L.P.; BW NHHC Co-Invest, L.P. 20170179 G Comcast Corporation; Racecar Holdings, LLC; Comcast Corporation. 20170180 G Steven E. Grosser; Racecar Holdings, LLC; Steven E. Grosser. 20170181 G Patrick J. McAdaragh; Racecar Holdings, LLC; Patrick J. McAdaragh. 20170217 G Synopsys, Inc.; LLR Equity Partners IV, L.P.; Synopsys, Inc. 11/28/2016 20170113 G Micro Focus International plc; Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company; Micro Focus International plc. 20170136 G GTCR Fund XI/A LP; DPC Holdings, LLC; GTCR Fund XI/A LP. 20170156 G Lintec Corporation; Platinum Equity Capital Evergreen Partners, L.P.; Lintec Corporation. 20170213 G HollyFrontier Corporation; Suncor Energy Inc.; HollyFrontier Corporation. 20170218 G SpeedCast International Limited; Harris Corporation; SpeedCast International Limited. 20170226 G The Kansai Electric Power Co., Inc.; Marubeni Corporation; The Kansai Electric Power Co., Inc. 20170228 G American Midstream Partners, LP; ArcLight Energy Partners Fund V, L.P.; American Midstream Partners, LP. 20170234 G Shangtex Holding Co. Ltd.; Dr. Henry Tan; Shangtex Holding Co. Ltd. 20170238 G JLL Partners Fund VII, L.P.; MedPlast Holdings, Inc.; JLL Partners Fund VII, L.P. 20170239 G Water Street Healthcare Partners III, L.P.; MedPlast Holdings, Inc.; Water Street Healthcare Partners III, L.P. 20170241 G Genstar Capital Partners VII, L.P.; David D. Morgan; Genstar Capital Partners VII, L.P. 20170246 G Blackstone Capital Partners VII L.P.; Team Health Holdings, Inc.; Blackstone Capital Partners VII L.P. 20170252 G Greencore Group plc; Charlesbank Equity Fund VII, Limited Partnership; Greencore Group plc. 20170260 G Leviton Manufacturing Co., Inc.; Allan B. Hubbard; Leviton Manufacturing Co., Inc. 20170264 G NuStar Energy L.P.; Martin Midstream Partners L.P.; NuStar Energy L.P. 20170266 G AP VIII DSB Holdings, L.P.; Ascension Health Alliance; AP VIII DSB Holdings, L.P. 20170268 G Kendall Automotive Group, Inc.; Gayle and James Chalfant; Kendall Automotive Group, Inc. 20170269 G Kendall Automotive Group, Inc.; David and Lorraine Edmark; Kendall Automotive Group, Inc. 20170271 G Ascent Holdings, LLC; Fulcrum BioEnergy, Inc.; Ascent Holdings, LLC. 20170272 G JBG SMITH Properties; JBG/Operating Partners, L.P.; JBG SMITH Properties. 20170280 G Blue Star Parent, L.P.; Ansira Holdings, LLC; Blue Star Parent, L.P. 20170289 G Antelope NewCo, Inc.; AlixPartners Holdings, LLP; Antelope NewCo, Inc. 11/30/2016 20170159 G The Hearst Family Trust; GTCR Fund X/A LP; The Hearst Family Trust. 20170169 G Insight MB Parent LLC; MB Parent Holdings, LLC; Insight MB Parent LLC. 20170274 G Quintiles IMS Holdings, Inc.; Jon C. Anderson; Quintiles IMS Holdings, Inc. 20170279 G Calpine Corporation; NAPGS Holdco, LLC; Calpine Corporation. 20170281 G Adobe Systems Incorporated; TubeMogul, Inc.; Adobe Systems Incorporated. 20170284 G CENTRO ARTE SCIENZA E TECNOLOGIA S.R.L.; Nestle S. A.; CENTRO ARTE SCIENZA E TECNOLOGIA S.R.L. 20170296 G Bain Capital Fund XI, L.P.; Blue Nile, Inc.; Bain Capital Fund XI, L.P. 20170298 G AIPCF VI AIV Moly-Cop (Cayman), LP; Arrium Limited; AIPCF VI AIV Moly-Cop (Cayman), LP. 20170300 G Wind Point Partners, VIII-A, L.P.; Michael J. Baab; Wind Point Partners, VIII-A, L.P. 20170306 G AIM Marina Holdings, LLC; John D. Brewer, Jr. and Margaret S. Brewer; AIM Marina Holdings, LLC. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Theresa Kingsberry Program Support Specialist, Federal Trade Commission Premerger Notification Office Bureau of Competition, Room CC-5301, Washington, DC 20024, (202) 326-3100.

    By direction of the Commission.

    Donald S. Clark Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-29771 Filed 12-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6750-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2016-E-0625] Determination of Regulatory Review Period for Purposes of Patent Extension; NUCALA AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has determined the regulatory review period for NUCALA and is publishing this notice of that determination as required by law. FDA has made the determination because of the submission of an application to the Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), Department of Commerce, for the extension of a patent which claims that human biological product.

    DATES:

    Anyone with knowledge that any of the dates as published (see the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section) are incorrect may submit either electronic or written comments and ask for a redetermination by February 13, 2017. Furthermore, any interested person may petition FDA for a determination regarding whether the applicant for extension acted with due diligence during the regulatory review period by June 12, 2017. See “Petitions” in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for more information.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments as follows:

    Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:

    Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Comments submitted electronically, including attachments, to https://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 https://www.regulations.gov.

    • If you want to submit a comment with confidential information that you do not wish to be made available to the public, submit the comment as a written/paper submission and in the manner detailed (see “Written/Paper Submissions” and “Instructions”).

    Written/Paper Submissions

    Submit written/paper submissions as follows:

    Mail/Hand delivery/Courier (for written/paper submissions): Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

    • For written/paper comments submitted to the Division of Dockets Management, FDA will post your comment, as well as any attachments, except for information submitted, marked and identified, as confidential, if submitted as detailed in “Instructions.”

    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket No. FDA-2016-E-0625 for “Determination of Regulatory Review Period for Purposes of Patent Extension; NUCALA.” Received comments will be placed in the docket and, except for those submitted as “Confidential Submissions,” publicly viewable at https://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 https://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 https://www.regulations.gov and insert the docket number, found in brackets in the heading of this document, into the “Search” box and follow the prompts and/or go to the Division of Dockets Management, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Beverly Friedman, Office of Regulatory Policy, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 51, Rm. 6250, Silver Spring, MD 20993, 301-796-3600.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background

    The Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984 (Pub. L. 98-417) and the Generic Animal Drug and Patent Term Restoration Act (Pub. L. 100-670) generally provide that a patent may be extended for a period of up to 5 years so long as the patented item (human drug product, animal drug product, medical device, food additive, or color additive) was subject to regulatory review by FDA before the item was marketed. Under these acts, a product's regulatory review period forms the basis for determining the amount of extension an applicant may receive.

    A regulatory review period consists of two periods of time: A testing phase and an approval phase. For human biological products, the testing phase begins when the exemption to permit the clinical investigations of the biological product becomes effective and runs until the approval phase begins. The approval phase starts with the initial submission of an application to market the human biological product and continues until FDA grants permission to market the biological product. Although only a portion of a regulatory review period may count toward the actual amount of extension that the Director of the USPTO may award (for example, half the testing phase must be subtracted as well as any time that may have occurred before the patent was issued), FDA's determination of the length of a regulatory review period for a human biological product will include all of the testing phase and approval phase as specified in 35 U.S.C. 156(g)(1)(B).

    FDA has approved for marketing the human biologic product NUCALA (mepolizumab). NUCALA is indicated for add-on maintenance treatment of patients with severe asthma aged 12 years and older, and with an eosinophilic phenotype. Subsequent to this approval, the USPTO received a patent term restoration application for NUCALA (U.S. Patent No. 5,693,323) from GlaxoSmithKline LLC, and the USPTO requested FDA's assistance in determining this patent's eligibility for patent term restoration. In a letter dated May 10, 2016, FDA advised the USPTO that this human biological product had undergone a regulatory review period and that the approval of NUCALA represented the first permitted commercial marketing or use of the product. Thereafter, the USPTO requested that FDA determine the product's regulatory review period.

    II. Determination of Regulatory Review Period

    FDA has determined that the applicable regulatory review period for NUCALA is 6,862 days. Of this time, 6,496 days occurred during the testing phase of the regulatory review period, while 366 days occurred during the approval phase. These periods of time were derived from the following dates:

    1. The date an exemption under section 505(i) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 355(i)) became effective: January 22, 1997. The applicant claims January 21, 1997, as the date the investigational new drug application (IND) became effective. However, FDA records indicate that the IND effective date was January 22, 1997, which was 30 days after FDA receipt of the IND.

    2. The date the application was initially submitted with respect to the human biological product under section 351 of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 262): November 4, 2014. FDA has verified the applicant's claim that the biologics license application (BLA) for NUCALA (BLA 125526) was initially submitted on November 4, 2014.

    3. The date the application was approved: November 4, 2015. FDA has verified the applicant's claim that BLA 125526 was approved on November 4, 2015.

    This determination of the regulatory review period establishes the maximum potential length of a patent extension. However, the USPTO applies several statutory limitations in its calculations of the actual period for patent extension. In its application for patent extension, this applicant seeks 5 years of patent term extension.

    III. Petitions

    Anyone with knowledge that any of the dates as published are incorrect may submit either electronic or written comments and ask for a redetermination (see DATES). Furthermore, any interested person may petition FDA for a determination regarding whether the applicant for extension acted with due diligence during the regulatory review period. To meet its burden, the petition must be timely (see DATES) and contain sufficient facts to merit an FDA investigation. (See H. Rept. 857, part 1, 98th Cong., 2d sess., pp. 41-42, 1984.) Petitions should be in the format specified in 21 CFR 10.30.

    Submit petitions electronically to https://www.regulations.gov at Docket No. FDA-2013-S-0610. Submit written petitions (two copies are required) to the Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

    Dated: December 8, 2016. Leslie Kux, Associate Commissioner for Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-29838 Filed 12-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2013-N-0764] Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for Office of Management and Budget Review; Comment Request; Animal Feed Regulatory Program Standards AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing that a proposed collection of information has been submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and clearance under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

    DATES:

    Fax written comments on the collection of information by January 12, 2017.

    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 0910-0760. 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.

    Animal Feed Regulatory Program Standards—OMB 0910-0760—Extension I. Background

    In the United States, Federal and State Government Agencies ensure the safety of animal feed. FDA is responsible for ensuring that all food and feed moving in interstate commerce, except those under the U.S. Department of Agriculture jurisdiction, are safe, wholesome, and labeled properly. States are responsible for conducting inspections and regulatory activities that help ensure food and feed produced, processed, and distributed within their jurisdictions are safe and in compliance with State laws and regulations. States primarily perform inspections under their own regulatory authority. Some States conduct inspections of feed facilities under contract with FDA. Because jurisdictions may overlap, FDA and States collaborate and share resources to protect animal feed.

    The FDA Food Safety Modernization Act passed on January 4, 2011, calls for enhanced partnerships and provides a legal mandate for developing an Integrated Food Safety System (IFSS). FDA is committed to implementing an IFSS thereby optimizing coordination of food and feed safety efforts with Federal, State, local, tribal, and territorial regulatory and public health Agencies. Model standards provide a consistent, underlying foundation that is critical for uniformity across State and Federal Agencies to ensure credibility of food and feed programs within the IFSS.

    II. Significance of Feed Program Standards

    The Animal Feed Regulatory Program Standards (AFRPS) provide a uniform and consistent approach to feed regulation in the United States. Implementation of the draft feed program standards is voluntary. States implementing the standards will identify and maintain program improvements that will strengthen the safety and integrity of the U.S. animal feed supply.

    The feed standards are the framework that each State should use to design, manage, and improve its feed program. The standards include the following: (1) Regulatory foundation; (2) training; (3) inspection program; (4) auditing; (5) feed-related illness or death and emergency response; (6) enforcement program; (7) outreach activities; (8) budget and planning; (9) assessment and improvement; (10) laboratory services; and (11) sampling program.

    Each standard has a purpose statement, requirement summary, description of program elements, projected outcomes, and a list of required documentation. When a State program voluntarily agrees to implement the feed standards, it must fully implement and maintain the individual program elements and documentation requirements in each standard in order to fully implement the standard.

    The feed standards package includes forms, worksheets, and templates to help the State program assess and meet the program elements in the standard. State programs are not obligated to use the forms, worksheets, and templates provided with the feed standards. Other manual or automated forms, worksheets, and templates may be used as long as the pertinent data elements are present. Records and other documents specified in the feed standards must be maintained in good order by the State program and must be available to verify the implementation of each standard. The feed standards are not intended to address the performance appraisal processes that a State Agency may use to evaluate individual employee performance.

    In the first year of implementation, the State program uses the self-assessment worksheets to determine if the requirements for each standard are fully met, partially met, or not met. The self-assessments are used to develop an improvement plan for fully implementing the requirements of the 11 standards. Second and third-year assessments will provide progress evaluation.

    Although FDA plans to provide financial support to State programs that implement the feed standards, funding opportunities are contingent upon the availability of funds. Funding opportunities may be only available to State feed regulatory programs that currently have an FDA feed inspection contract. State programs receiving financial support to implement the feed standards will be audited by FDA.

    III. Electronic Access

    Persons with access to the Internet may submit requests for a single copy of the current feed standards from [email protected] Please note that due to editorial revisions and public comments, the final standards may differ from the copy you receive.

    In the Federal Register of April 12, 2016 (81 FR 21578), FDA published a 60-day notice requesting public comment on the proposed collection of information. FDA received one comment. However, this comment did not address the information collection.

    FDA estimates the burden of this collection of information as follows:

    Table 1—Estimated Annual Recordkeeping Burden 1 Type of
  • respondent
  • Number of
  • recordkeepers
  • Number of
  • records per
  • recordkeeper
  • Total annual
  • records
  • Average
  • burden per
  • recordkeeping
  • Total hours
    State Employee 40 1 40 3,000 120,000 1 There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of information.

    The burden has been calculated to 3,000 hours per respondent. This burden was determined by capturing the average amount of time for each respondent to assess the current state of the program and work toward implementation of each of the 11 standards contained in AFRPS. FDA recognizes that full use and implementation of the feed standards by State feed programs will occur over many years and the number of years to fully implement the feed standards will vary among States.

    Dated: December 8, 2016. Leslie Kux, Associate Commissioner for Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-29839 Filed 12-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2016-N-2836] Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for Office of Management and Budget Review; Comment Request; Donor Risk Assessment Questionnaire for the Food and Drug Administration/National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute-Sponsored Transfusion-Transmissible Infections Monitoring System—Risk Factor Elicitation AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing that a proposed collection of information has been submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and clearance under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

    DATES:

    Fax written comments on the collection of information by January 12, 2017.

    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—New and title “Donor Risk Assessment Questionnaire for the Food and Drug Administration/National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute-sponsored Transfusion-Transmissible Infections Monitoring System—Risk Factor Elicitation.” 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.

    Donor Risk Assessment Questionnaire for FDA/National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI)-sponsored Transfusion-Transmissible Infections Monitoring System (TTIMS)—Risk Factor Elicitation OMB Control Number—New

    FDA intends to interview blood donors to collect risk factor information associated with testing positive for a Transfusion-Transmissible Infection (TTI). This collection of information is part of a larger initiative called TTIMS, which is a collaborative project funded by FDA, the NHLBI of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Office of the Assistant Secretary of Health with input from other Agencies in HHS, including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). FDA will use these scientific data collected through such interview-based risk factor elicitation of blood donors to monitor and help ensure the safety of the U.S. blood supply.

    Previous assessments of risk factor profiles among blood donors found to be positive for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) were funded by CDC for approximately 10 years after implementation of HIV serologic screening of blood donors in the mid-1980s; whereas studies of Hepatitis C virus (HCV) seropositive donors, funded by NIH, were conducted in the early 1990s. Information on current risk factors in blood donors as assessed using analytical study designs was next evaluated by the Transfusion-Transmitted Retrovirus and Hepatitis Virus Rates and Risk Factors Study conducted by the NHLBI Retrovirus Epidemiology Donor Study-II (REDS-II) approved under OMB control number 0925-0630. Through a risk factor questionnaire, this study elicited risk factors in blood donors who tested confirmed positive for one of four transfusion-transmissible infections: HIV, HCV, Hepatitis B virus (HBV), and Human T-cell Lymphotropic virus. The study also elicited risk factors from donors who did not have any infections (controls) and compared their responses to those of the donors with confirmed infection (cases). Results from the REDS-II study were published in 2015.

    FDA issued a document entitled “Revised Recommendations for Reducing the Risk of Human Immunodeficiency Virus Transmission by Blood and Blood Products, Guidance for Industry” dated December 2015 (http://www.fda.gov/downloads/BiologicsBloodVaccines/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/Blood/UCM446580.pdf) that changed the blood donor criterion for men who have sex with men (MSM) from an indefinite (permanent) deferral to a 12-month deferral since last MSM contact. The impact of this change in the deferral criteria requires a national monitoring effort as part of TTIMS to assess if the relative proportions of risk factors for infection in blood donors have changed following the adoption of the 12-month donor deferral for MSM. TTIMS will use similar procedures as the ones used in the REDS-II study to monitor and evaluate risk factors among HIV-positive donors and recently HCV or HBV infected donors as well as controls.

    This study will help identify the specific risk factors for TTI and their prevalence in blood donors, and help inform FDA on the proportion of incident (new) infections among all HIV positive blood donors. Donations with incident infections have the greatest potential transmission risk because they could be missed during routine blood screening. The study will help FDA evaluate the effectiveness of screening strategies in reducing the risk of HIV transmission from at-risk donors and to evaluate if there are unexpected consequences associated with the recent change in donor deferral policy such as an increase in HIV incidence among donors. These data also will inform FDA regarding future blood donor deferral policy options to reduce the risk of HIV transmission, including the feasibility of moving from the existing time-based deferrals related to risk behaviors to alternate deferral options, such as the use of individual risk assessments, and to inform the design of potential studies to evaluate the feasibility and effectiveness of such alternative deferral options.

    TTIMS will include a comprehensive interview based epidemiological study of risk factor information for viral infection-positive blood donors at the American Red Cross (ARC), Blood Systems, Inc. (BSI), New York Blood Center (NYBC), and OneBlood that will identify the current predominant risk factors and reasons for virus-positive donations. The TTIMS program establishes a new, ongoing donor hemovigilance capacity that currently does not exist in the United States. Using procedures developed by the REDS-II study, TTIMS will establish this capacity in greater than 50 percent of all blood donations collected in the country.

    As part of the TTIMS project, a comprehensive hemovigilance database will be created that integrates the risk factor information collected through donor interviews of blood donor with the resulting data from disease marker testing and blood components collected by participating organizations into a research database. Following successful initiation of the risk factor interviews, the TTIMS network is poised to be expanded to include additional blood centers and/or re-focused on other safety threats as warranted. In this way, the TTIMS program will maintain standardized, statistically and scientifically robust processes for applying hemovigilance information across blood collection organizations.

    The specific objectives are to:

    • Determine current behavioral risk factors associated with all HIV infections, incident HBV, and incident HCV infections in blood donors (including parenteral and sexual risks) across the participating blood collection organizations using a case-control study design.

    • Determine infectious disease marker prevalence and incidence for HIV, HBV, and HCV overall and by demographic characteristics of donors in the majority of blood donations collected in the country. This will be accomplished by forming epidemiological databases consisting of harmonized operational data from ARC, BSI, NYBC, and OneBlood.

    • Analyze integrated risk factor and infectious marker testing data concurrently because when taken together these may suggest that blood centers are not achieving the same degree of success in educational efforts to prevent donation by donors with risk behaviors across all demographic groups.

    The respondents will be persons who donated blood in the United States and these participants will be defined as cases and controls. The estimated number of respondents is based on an overall expected participation in the risk factor survey. We estimate a case to control ratio of 1:2 (200 to 400) with a 50 percent case enrollment.

    In the Federal Register of September 30, 2016 (81 FR 67358), FDA published a 60-day notice requesting public comment on the proposed collection of information. FDA received a few comments from the public. FDA concurs with one comment that providing more information to the blood center and FDA may aid in prevention of transmission of infectious disease and is critical to the safety of the blood supply. Four comments received were not responsive to the comment request on the four specified aspects of the collection of information. None of the responses specifically commented on any of the proposed questions, nor did they request that FDA make any other changes to the Donor Risk Assessment Questionnaire. Furthermore, the responses did not provide any data or explanation that would support a change regarding the information collection requirements.

    FDA estimates the burden of this collection of information as follows:

    Table 1—Estimated Annual Reporting Burden 1 Questionnaire/survey Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • responses per respondent
  • Total annual responses Average burden per response Total hours
    Cases and controls 2 600 1 600 0.75 (45 minutes) 450 1 There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of information. 2 Cases consist of virus-positive donations, and controls represent uninfected donors.
    Dated: December 8, 2016. Leslie Kux, Associate Commissioner for Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-29814 Filed 12-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2009-D-0508] Registration and Product Listing for Owners and Operators of Domestic Tobacco Product Establishment; Guidance for Industry; Availability AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice of availability.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing the availability of a revised guidance for industry entitled “Registration and Product Listing for Owners and Operators of Domestic Tobacco Product Establishments.” This guidance is intended to assist persons making tobacco product establishment registration and product listing submissions to FDA.

    DATES:

    Submit either electronic or written comments on Agency guidances at any time.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments as follows:

    Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:

    Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Comments submitted electronically, including attachments, to http://www.regulations.gov will be posted to the docket unchanged. Because your comment will be made public, you are solely responsible for ensuring that your comment does not include any confidential information that you or a third party may not wish to be posted, such as medical information, your or anyone else's Social Security number, or confidential business information, such as a manufacturing process. Please note that if you include your name, contact information, or other information that identifies you in the body of your comments, that information will be posted on http://www.regulations.gov.

    • If you want to submit a comment with confidential information that you do not wish to be made available to the public, submit the comment as a written/paper submission and in the manner detailed (see “Written/Paper Submissions” and “Instructions”).

    Written/Paper Submissions

    Submit written/paper submissions as follows:

    Mail/Hand delivery/Courier (for written/paper submissions): Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

    • For written/paper comments submitted to the Division of Dockets Management, FDA will post your comment, as well as any attachments, except for information submitted, marked and identified, as confidential, if submitted as detailed in “Instructions.”

    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket No. FDA-2009-D-0508 for “Registration and Product Listing for Owners and Operators of Domestic Tobacco Product Establishments.” Received comments will be placed in the docket and, except for those submitted as “Confidential Submissions,” publicly viewable at http://www.regulations.gov or at the Division of Dockets Management between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.

    • Confidential Submissions—To submit a comment with confidential information that you do not wish to be made publicly available, submit your comments only as a written/paper submission. You should submit two copies total. One copy will include the information you claim to be confidential with a heading or cover note that states “THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.” The Agency will review this copy, including the claimed confidential information, in its consideration of comments. The second copy, which will have the claimed confidential information redacted/blacked out, will be available for public viewing and posted on http://www.regulations.gov. Submit both copies to the Division of Dockets Management. If you do not wish your name and contact information to be made publicly available, you can provide this information on the cover sheet and not in the body of your comments and you must identify this information as “confidential.” Any information marked as “confidential” will not be disclosed except in accordance with 21 CFR 10.20 and other applicable disclosure law. For more information about FDA's posting of comments to public dockets, see 80 FR 56469, September 18, 2015, or access the information at: http://www.fda.gov/regulatoryinformation/dockets/default.htm.

    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or the electronic and written/paper comments received, go to http://www.regulations.gov and insert the docket number, found in brackets in the heading of this document, into the “Search” box and follow the prompts and/or go to the Division of Dockets Management, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

    Submit written requests for single copies of this guidance to the Center for Tobacco Products, Food and Drug Administration, Document Control Center, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 71, rm. G335, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002. Send one self-addressed adhesive label to assist that office in processing your request or include a fax number to which the guidance document may be sent. See the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for information on electronic access to the guidance.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Katherine Collins, Center for Tobacco Products, Food and Drug Administration, Document Control Center, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 71, Rm. G335, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Background

    FDA is announcing the availability of a revised guidance for industry entitled “Registration and Product Listing for Owners and Operators of Domestic Tobacco Product Establishments.” This guidance is intended to assist persons making tobacco product establishment registration and product listing submissions to FDA. We are issuing this guidance consistent with our good guidance practices (GGP) regulation (§ 10.115 (21 CFR 10.115)).

    We are implementing this guidance without prior public comment because we have determined that prior public participation is not feasible or appropriate (§ 10.115(g)(2)). Persons who owned or operated domestic manufacturing establishments engaged in the manufacture of newly deemed products prior to August 8, 2016, and continued to own or operate such establishment(s) on or after August 8, 2016, are required to register and submit product listing under section 905 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the FD&C Act) (21 U.S.C. 387e) by December 31, 2016. However, FDA is announcing that it does not intend to enforce these requirements with respect to newly deemed products provided the registration and product listing submissions are received by FDA on or before June 30, 2017. Although this guidance document is immediately effective, it remains subject to comment in accordance with FDA's GGP regulation.

    The Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act (Tobacco Control Act) (Pub. L. 111-31) added section 905 to the FD&C Act, establishing requirements for tobacco product establishment registration and product listing. Cigarettes, cigarette tobacco, roll-your-own tobacco, and smokeless tobacco were immediately covered by FDA's tobacco product authorities in chapter IX of the FD&C Act, including section 905, when the Tobacco Control Act went into effect. As for other types of tobacco products, section 901(b) of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 387a(b)) grants FDA authority to deem those products subject to chapter IX of the FD&C Act. Pursuant to that authority, on April 25, 2014, FDA issued a proposed rule seeking to deem all other products that meet the statutory definition of tobacco product, set forth in section 201(rr) of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 321(rr)) (except for accessories of those products) (79 FR 23142). After review and consideration of comments on the proposed rule, FDA published the final rule on May 10, 2016 (81 FR 28974) (“the deeming rule”) and it became effective on August 8, 2016. As a result, owners and operators of domestic establishments engaged in the manufacture, preparation, compounding, or processing of tobacco products subject to the deeming rule are now required to comply with chapter IX of the FD&C Act, including the establishment registration and product listing requirements in section 905. The guidance addresses tobacco products that were immediately covered by FDA's tobacco product authorities under chapter IX of the FD&C Act and newly deemed tobacco products.

    The guidance represents the current thinking of FDA on this topic. It does not establish any rights for any person and is not binding on FDA or the public. You can use an alternative approach if it satisfies the requirements of the applicable statutes and regulations.

    II. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

    This guidance refers to previously approved collections of information found in FDA regulations. These collections of information are subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520). The collections of information in section 905 of the FD&C Act have been approved under OMB control number 0910-0650.

    III. Electronic Access

    Persons with access to the Internet may obtain an electronic version of the guidance at either http://www.regulations.gov or http://www.fda.gov/TobaccoProducts/Labeling/RulesRegulationsGuidance/default.htm.

    Dated: December 7, 2016. Leslie Kux, Associate Commissioner for Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-29776 Filed 12-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Office of the Secretary [Document Identifier: HHS-OS-0990-0001-30D] Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Public Comment Request AGENCY:

    Office of the Secretary, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    In compliance with section 3507(a)(1)(D) of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Office of the Secretary (OS), Department of Health and Human Services, announces plans to submit an Information Collection Request (ICR), described below, to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval. The ICR is for renewal of the approved information collection assigned OMB control number 0990-0001, scheduled to expire on December 31, 2016. Comments submitted during the first public review of this ICR will be provided to OMB. OMB will accept further comments from the public on this ICR during the review and approval period.

    DATES:

    Comments on the ICR must be received on or before January 12, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments to [email protected] or via facsimile to (202) 395-5806.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Information Collection Clearance staff, [email protected] or (202) 690-5683.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    When submitting comments or requesting information, please include the document identifier HHS-OS-0990-0001-30D for reference.

    Information Collection Request Title: Application for waiver of the two-year foreign residence requirement of the Exchange Visitor Program.

    OMB No.: 0990-0001.

    Abstract: The Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Global Affairs, OGA is seeking an approval on an extension by OMB on a previously approved information collection request. The OGA program deals with both research and clinical care waivers. Applicant institutions apply to HHS to request a waiver on behalf of research scientists or foreign medical graduates to work as clinicians in HHS designated health shortage areas doing primary care in medical facilities. The instructions request a copy of Form G-28 from applicant institutions represented by legal counsel outside of the applying institution. United States Department of Justice Form G-28 ascertains that legal counsel represents both the applicant organization and the exchange visitor.

    Need and Proposed Use of the Information: Required as part of the application process to collect basic information such as name, address, family status, sponsor and current visa information.

    Likely Respondents: Research scientists and research facilities.

    Annualized Estimate Burden Hour Table Type of respondent Form name Number of
  • respondents
  • Number
  • responses per respondent
  • Average
  • burden per
  • response
  • (in hours)
  • Total burden hours
    Application Waiver/Supplemental A Research HHS 426 45 1 10 450 Application Waiver/Supplemental B Clinical Care HHS 426 35 1 10 350 Total 800

    OS specifically requests comments on (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.

    Terry S. Clark, Asst. Information Collection Clearance Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2016-29810 Filed 12-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4150-38-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health & Human Development (NICHD); Notice of Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of a meeting of the National Advisory Child Health and Human Development Council.

    The meeting will be open to the public as indicated below, with attendance limited to space available. Individuals who plan to attend and need special assistance, such as sign language interpretation or other reasonable accommodations, should notify the Contact Person listed below in advance of the meeting.

    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 52b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Advisory Child Health and Human Development Council.

    Date: January 31, 2017.

    Open: January 31, 2017, 8:00 a.m. to 12:15 p.m..

    Agenda: The agenda will include opening remarks, administrative matters, the new Director's Report, Division of Extramural Research Report and, other business of the Council.

    Closed: January 31, 2017, 1:30 p.m. to 5:00 p.m..

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Building 31, Center Drive, C-Wing, Conference Room 6, Bethesda, MD 20892.

    Contact Person: Della Hann, Ph.D., Director, Division of Extramural Research, Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, NIH, 6710B Rockledge Drive, Room 2314, MSC 7002, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 496-8535.

    Any interested person may file written comments with the committee by forwarding the statement to the contact person listed on this notice. The statement should include the name, address, telephone number, and when applicable, the business or professional affiliation of the interested person.

    In the interest of security, NIH has instituted stringent procedures for entrance onto the NIH campus.All visitor vehicles, including taxis, hotel, and airport shuttles, will be inspected before being allowed on campus. Visitors will be asked to show one form of identification (for example, a government-issued photo ID, driver's license, or passport) and to state the purpose of their visit.

    In order to facilitate public attendance at the open session of Council in the main meeting room, Conference Room 6, please contact Ms. Lisa Kaeser, Program and Public Liaison Office, NICHD, at 301-496-0536 to make your reservation, additional seating will be available in the meeting overflow rooms, Conference Rooms 7 and 8. Individuals will also be able to view the meeting via NIH Videocast. Please go to the following link for Videocast access instructions at: http://www.nichd.nih.gov/about/advisory/nachhd/Pages/virtual-meeting.aspx

    (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: December 7, 2016. Michelle Trout, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-29762 Filed 12-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Institute on Aging; Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute on Aging Special Emphasis Panel, Archiving and Sharing Longitudinal Data.

    Date: January 19, 2017.

    Time: 2:00 p.m. to 3:30 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institute on Aging, Gateway Building, 2W200, 7201 Wisconsin Ave., Bethesda, MD 20892 (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: Kimberly Firth, Ph.D., National Institutes of Health, National Institute on Aging, Gateway Building, 7201 Wisconsin Avenue, Suite 2C212, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-402-7702, [email protected].

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.866, Aging Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: December 7, 2016. Melanie J. Pantoja, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-29765 Filed 12-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Cancer Institute; Notice of Closed Meetings

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following meetings.

    The meetings will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications/contract proposals and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications/contract proposals, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Cancer Institute Special Emphasis Panel, International Tobacco, and Health Research and Capacity Building Program (R01).

    Date: February 9, 2017.

    Time: 11:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Cancer Institute Shady Grove, 9609 Medical Center Drive, Room 7W030, Rockville, MD 20850, (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: David G. Ransom, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Resources and Training Review Branch, Division of Extramural Activities, National Cancer Institute, 9609 Medical Center Drive, Room 7W124, Rockville, MD 20892-9750, 240-276-6351, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: National Cancer Institute Special Emphasis Panel, Informatics Tools for Cancer Care.

    Date: February 15, 2017.

    Time: 11:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate contract proposals.

    Place: National Cancer Institute Shady Grove, 9609 Medical Center Drive, Room 1E030, Rockville, MD 20850, (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: Kenneth L. Bielat, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Research Technology and Contract Review Branch, Division of Extramural Activities, National Cancer Institute, 9609 Medical Center Drive, Room 7W244, Rockville, MD 20892-9750, 240-276-6373, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: National Cancer Institute Special Emphasis Panel, Innovative Research in Cancer Nanotechnology.

    Date: February 16-17, 2017.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Bethesda North Marriott Hotel & Conference Center, 5701 Marinelli Road, Bethesda, MD 20852.

    Contact Person: Nadeem Khan, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Research Technology and Contract Review Branch, Division of Extramural Activities, National Cancer Institute, 9609 Medical Center Drive, Room 7W260, Rockville, MD 20892-9750, 240-276-5856, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: National Cancer Institute Special Emphasis Panel, Imaging Informatics Tools for Cancer Research.

    Date: February 24, 2017.

    Time: 11:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate contract proposals.

    Place: National Cancer Institute Shady Grove, 9609 Medical Center Drive, Room 3W030, Rockville, MD 20850, (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: Kenneth L. Bielat, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Research Technology and Contract Review Branch, Division of Extramural Activities, National Cancer Institute, 9609 Medical Center Drive, Room 7W244. Rockville, MD 20892-9750. 240-276-6373. [email protected].

    Name of Committee: National Cancer Institute Special Emphasis Panel, NCI R03/R21 SEP-5.

    Date: March 2-3, 2017.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 12:30 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Bethesda Marriott Suites, 6711 Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20817.

    Contact Person: Byeong-Chel Lee, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Resources and Training Review Branch, Division of Extramural Activities, National Cancer Institute, 9609 Medical Center Drive, Room 7W238, Rockville, MD 20892-9750, 240-276-7755, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: National Cancer Institute Initial Review Group, Innovative Molecular Analysis Technologies.

    Date: March 28-29, 2017.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Hyatt Regency Bethesda, One Bethesda Metro Center, 7400 Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20814.

    Contact Person: Jeffrey E. DeClue, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Research Technology and Contract Review Branch, Division of Extramural Activities, National Cancer Institute, 9609 Medical Center Drive, Room 7W114, Rockville, MD 20892-9750, 240-276-6371, [email protected].

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.392, Cancer Construction; 93.393, Cancer Cause and Prevention Research; 93.394, Cancer Detection and Diagnosis Research; 93.395, Cancer Treatment Research; 93.396, Cancer Biology Research; 93.397, Cancer Centers Support; 93.398, Cancer Research Manpower; 93.399, Cancer Control, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: December 7, 2016. Melanie J. Pantoja, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-29763 Filed 12-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Institute of General Medical Sciences; Notice of Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of a meeting of the National Advisory General Medical Sciences Council.

    The meeting will be open to the public as indicated below, with a short public comment period at the end. Attendance is limited by the space available. Individuals who plan to attend and need special assistance, such as sign language interpretation or other reasonable accommodations, should notify the Contact Person listed below in advance of the meeting. The open session will also be videocast and can be accessed from the NIH Videocasting and Podcasting Web site (http://videocast.nih.gov).

    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Advisory General Medical Sciences Council.

    Date: January 26-27, 2017.

    Closed: January 26, 2017, 8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Natcher Building, Conference Rooms E1 & E2, 45 Center Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892.

    Open: January 27, 2017, 8:30 a.m. to 12:00 p.m.

    Agenda: For the discussion of program policies and issues; opening remarks; report of the Director, NIGMS; and other business of the Council.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Natcher Building, Conference Rooms E1 & E2, 45 Center Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892.

    Contact Person: Ann A. Hagan, Ph.D., Associate Director for Extramural Activities, NIGMS, NIH, DHHS, 45 Center Drive, Room 2AN24H, MSC6200, Bethesda, MD 20892-6200, (301) 594-4499, [email protected].

    Any interested person may file written comments with the committee by forwarding the statement to the Contact Person listed on this notice. The statement should include the name, address, telephone number and when applicable, the business or professional affiliation of the interested person.

    In the interest of security, NIH has instituted stringent procedures for entrance onto the NIH campus. All visitor vehicles, including taxicabs, hotel, and airport shuttles will be inspected before being allowed on campus. Visitors will be asked to show one form of identification (for example, a government-issued photo ID, driver's license, or passport) and to state the purpose of their visit.

    Information is also available on the Institute's/Center's home page: http://www.nigms.nih.gov/About/Council, where an agenda and any additional information for the meeting will be posted when available.

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.859, Biomedical Research and Research Training, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: December 7, 2016. Melanie J. Pantoja, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-29766 Filed 12-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Institute on Aging; Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute on Aging Special Emphasis Panel, Multi-Component Collaborative Aging Research.

    Date: February 6, 2017.

    Time: 1:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institute on Aging, Gateway Building, Suite 2W200, 7201 Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20892, (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: Anita H. Undale, Ph.D., MD, Scientific Review Officer, Scientific Review Branch, National Institute on Aging, Gateway Building, 2W200, 7201 Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20892, 240-747-7825, [email protected].

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.866, Aging Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: December 7, 2016. Melanie J. Pantoja, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-29764 Filed 12-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health Proposed Collection; 60-Day Comment Request; Generic Clearance for the Collection of Qualitative Feedback on Agency Service Delivery (National Cancer Institute) AGENCY:

    National Institutes of Health.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    In compliance with the requirement of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 to provide opportunity for public comment on proposed data collection projects, the National Cancer Institute (NCI) will publish periodic summaries of propose projects to be submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval.

    DATES:

    Comments regarding this information collection are best assured of having their full effect if received within 60 days of the date of this publication.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    To obtain a copy of the data collection plans and instruments, submit comments in writing, or request more information on the proposed project, contact: Karla Bailey, Office of Management Policy and Compliance, National Cancer Institute, 9609 Medical Center Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892-9760 or call non-toll-free number (240) 276-5582 or Email your request, including your address to: [email protected] Formal requests for additional plans and instruments must be requested in writing.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 requires: Written comments and/or suggestions from the public and affected agencies are invited to address one or more of the following points: (1) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the function of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) The accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) Ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) Ways to minimizes 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.

    Proposed Collection Title: Generic Clearance for the Collection of Qualitative Feedback on Agency Service Delivery (NCI), 0925-0642, Revision, National Cancer Institute (NCI), National Institutes of Health (NIH).

    Need and Use of Information Collection: This information collection activity is collecting qualitative customer and stakeholder feedback in an efficient, timely manner, in accordance with the Administration's commitment to improving service delivery. This generic provides information about the National Cancer Institute's customer or stakeholder perceptions, experiences and expectations, provide an early warning of issues with service, or focus attention on areas where communication, training or changes in operations might improve delivery of products or services. It also allows feedback to contribute directly to the improvement of program management. Feedback collected under this generic clearance provides useful information but it will not yield data that can be generalized to the overall population.

    OMB approval is requested for 3 years. There are no costs to respondents other than their time. The total estimated burden hours are 8,917.

    Estimated Annualized Burden Hours Type of collection Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • responses per respondent
  • Average
  • burden per
  • response
  • (in hours)
  • Total burden hours
    Surveys 10,000 1 30/60 5,000 In-Depth Interviews (IDIs) or Small Discussion Groups 500 1 90/60 750 Focus Groups 1,000 1 90/60 1,500 Website or Software Usability Tests 5,000 1 20/60 1,667 Total 16,500 16,500 8,917
    Dated: December 7, 2016. Karla Bailey, Project Clearance Liaison, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health.
    [FR Doc. 2016-29890 Filed 12-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health Proposed Collection; 60-Day Comment Request; CTEP Support Contracts Forms and Surveys (National Cancer Institute) AGENCY:

    National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Services.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    In compliance with the requirement of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 to provide opportunity for public comment on proposed data collection projects, the National Cancer Institute (NCI) will publish periodic summaries of propose projects to be submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval.

    DATES:

    Comments regarding this information collection are best assured of having their full effect if received within 60 days of the date of this publication.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    To obtain a copy of the data collection plans and instruments, submit comments in writing, or request more information on the proposed project, contact: Michael Montello, Pharm. D., Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program (CTEP), 9609 Medical Center Drive, MSC 9742, Rockville, MD 20850 or call non-toll-free number 240-276-6080 or Email your request, including your address to: [email protected] Formal requests for additional plans and instruments must be requested in writing.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 requires: Written comments and/or suggestions from the public and affected agencies are invited to address one or more of the following points: (1) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the function of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) The accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) Ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) Ways to minimizes 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.

    Proposed Collection Title: CTEP Support Contracts Forms and Surveys, 0925—NEW National Cancer Institute (NCI), National Institutes of Health (NIH).

    Need and Use of Information Collection: The National Cancer Institute (NCI) Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program (CTEP) and the Division of Cancer Prevention (DCP) fund an extensive national program of cancer research, sponsoring clinical trials in cancer prevention, symptom management and treatment for qualified clinical investigators. As part of this effort, CTEP and DCP oversee two support programs, the NCI Central Institutional Review Board (CIRB) and the Cancer Trial Support Unit (CTSU). The purpose of the support programs is to increase efficiency and minimizing burden. The NCI CIRB provides trial oversight satisfying the requirements of 45 CFR 45 and 21 CFR 56 for review of NCI supported studies. The CTSU provides program and systems support for regulatory document collection, membership, data management and patient enrollment. The two programs use integrated systems and processes for managing participant information and documentation of regulatory review.

    To meet the responsibilities of each program, information is collected from the sites for purposes of membership, enrollment, opening of IRB approved studies, documenting IRB review, regulatory approval (for sites not using the CIRB), patient enrollment, and routing of case report forms.

    Several surveys are collected to assess satisfaction and provide feedback to guide improvements with processes and technology. Other Surveys have been developed to assess health professional's interests in clinical trials.

    OMB approval is requested for 3 years. There are no costs to respondents other than their time. The total estimated annualized burden hours are 15,531.

    Estimated Annualized Burden Hours Form name Type of
  • respondent
  • Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • responses per respondent
  • Average
  • burden
  • per response
  • (in hours)
  • Total annual
  • burden hours
  • CTSU IRB/Regulatory Approval Transmittal Form Health Care Practitioner 2,444 12 2/60 978 CTSU IRB Certification Form Health Care Practitioner 2,444 12 10/60 4,888 Withdrawal from Protocol Participation Form Health Care Practitioner 279 1 10/60 47 Site Addition Form Health Care Practitioner 80 12 10/60 160 CTSU Roster Update Form Health Care Practitioner 600 1 5/60 50 CTSU Request for Clinical Brochure Health Care Practitioner 360 1 10/60 60 CTSU Supply Request Form Health Care Practitioner 90 12 10/60 180 Site Initiated Data Update Form Health Care Practitioner 2 12 10/60 4 Data Clarification Form Health Care Practitioner 150 24 10/60 600 RTOG 0834 CTSU Data Transmittal Form Health Care Practitioner 12 76 10/60 152 MC0845(8233) CTSU Data Transmittal Health Care Practitioner 5 12 10/60 10 CTSU Generic Data Transmittal Form Health Care Practitioner 5 12 10/60 10 TAILORx_PACCT1_Data Transmittal Form Health Care Practitioner 161 96 10/60 2,576 Unsolicited Data Modification Form: Protocol: TAILORx/PACCT-1 Health Care Practitioner 30 12 10/60 60 CTSU Patient Enrollment Transmittal Form Health Care Practitioner 12 12 10/60 24 CTSU Transfer Form Health Care Practitioner 360 2 10/60 120 CTSU System Access Request Form Health Care Practitioner 180 1 20/60 60 NCI CIRB AA & DOR between the NCI CIRB and Signatory Institution Participants 50 1 15/60 13 NCI CIRB Signatory Enrollment Form Participants 50 1 15/60 13 CIRB Board Member Biographical Sketch Form Board Member 25 1 15/60 6 CIRB Board Member Contact Information Form Board Member 25 1 10/60 4 CIRB Board Member W-9 Board Member 25 1 15/60 6 CIRB Board Member NDA Board Member 25 1 10/60 4 CIRB Direct Deposit Form Board Member 25 1 15/60 6 CIRB Member COI Screening Worksheet Board Members 12 1 30/60 6 CIRB COI Screening for CIRB meetings Board Members 72 1 15/60 18 CIRB IR Application Health Care Practitioner 80 1 60/60 80 CIRB IR Application for Exempt Studies Health Care Practitioner 4 1 30/60 2 CIRB Amendment Review Application Health Care Practitioner 400 1 15/60 100 CIRB Ancillary Studies Application Health Care Practitioner 1 1 60/60 1 CIRB Continuing Review Application Health Care Practitioner 400 1 30/60 200 Adult IR of Cooperative Group Protocol Board Members 65 1 180/60 195 Pediatric IR of Cooperative Group Protocol Board Members 15 1 180/60 45 Adult Continuing Review of Cooperative Group Protocol Board Members 275 1 60/60 275 Pediatric Continuing Review of Cooperative Group Protocol Board Members 130 1 60/60 130 Adult Amendment of Cooperative Group Protocol Board Members 40 1 120/60 80 Pediatric Amendment of Cooperative Group Protocol Board Members 25 1 120/60 50 Pharmacist's Review of a Cooperative Group Study Board Members 10 1 120/60 20 CPC Pharmacist's Review of Cooperative Group Study Board Members 20 1 120/60 40 Adult Expedited Amendment Review Board Members 348 1 30/60 174 Pediatric Expedited Amendment Review Board Members 140 1 30/60 70 Adult Expedited Continuing Review Board Members 140 1 30/60 70 Pediatric Expedited Continuing Review Board Members 36 1 30/60 18 Adult Cooperative Group Response to CIRB Review Health Care Practitioner 30 1 60/60 30 Pediatric Cooperative Group Response to CIRB Review Health Care Practitioner 5 1 60/60 5 Adult Expedited Study Chair Response to Required Mod Board Members 40 1 15/60 10 Pediatric Expedited Study Chair Response to Required Mod Board Members 40 1 15/60 10 Reviewer Worksheet—Determination of UP or SCN Board Members 360 1 10/60 61 Reviewer Worksheet—CIRB Statistical Reviewer Form Board Members 100 1 60/60 100 CIRB Application for Translated Documents Health Care Practitioner 100 1 30/60 50 Reviewer Worksheet of Translated Documents Board Members 100 1 15/60 25 Reviewer Worksheet of Recruitment Material Board Members 20 1 15/60 5 Reviewer Worksheet Expedited Study Closure Review Board Members 20 1 15/60 5 Reviewer Worksheet Expedited Review of Study Chair Response to CIRB—Required Modifications Board Members 5 1 30/60 3 Reviewer Worksheet of Expedited IR Board Members 5 1 30/60 3 Reviewer Worksheet—CPC—Determination of UP or SCN Board Members 40 1 15/60 10 Annual Signatory Institution Worksheet About Local Context Health Care Practitioner 400 1 40/60 267 Annual Principal Investigator Worksheet About Local Context Health Care Practitioner 1,800 1 20/60 600 Study-Specific Worksheet About Local Context Health Care Practitioner 4,800 1 20/60 1,600 Study Closure or Transfer of Study Review Responsibility Form Health Care Practitioner 1,680 1 15/60 420 UP or SCN Reporting Form Health Care Practitioner 360 1 20/60 120 Change of SI PI Form Health Care Practitioner 120 1 15/60 30 CTSU Web site Customer Satisfaction Survey Health Care Practitioner 275 1 15/60 69 CTSU Help Desk Customer Satisfaction Survey Health Care Practitioner 325 1 15/60 81 CTSU OPEN Survey Health Care Practitioner 60 1 15/60 15 CIRB Customer Satisfaction Survey Participants 600 1 15/60 150 Follow-up Survey (Communication Audit) Participants/Board Members 300 1 15/60 75 Web site Focus Groups, Communication Project Participants/Board Members 18 1 60/60 18 CIRB Board Member Annual Assessment Survey Board Members 60 1 20/60 20 PIO Customer Satisfaction Survey Health Care Practitioner 60 1 5/60 5 Concept Clinical Trial Survey Health Care Practitioner 500 1 5/60 42 Prospective Clinical Trial Survey Health Care Practitioner 1,000 1 1/60 17 Low Accrual Clinical Trial Survey Health Care Practitioner 1,000 1 1/60 17 ETCTN PI Survey Physician 75 1 15/60 19 ETCTN RS Survey Health Care Practitioner 175 1 15/60 44 Totals 24,125 100,362 15,531
    Dated: December 1, 2016. Karla Bailey, Project Clearance Liaison, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health.
    [FR Doc. 2016-29767 Filed 12-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Office of the Secretary [Docket No. DHS-2016-0088] Privacy Act of 1974; Department of Homeland Security/U.S. Customs and Border Protection-007 Border Crossing Information (BCI) System of Records AGENCY:

    Department of Homeland Security, Privacy Office.

    ACTION:

    Notice of Privacy Act System of Records.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Privacy Act of 1974, the Department of Homeland Security proposes to update and reissue a current Department of Homeland Security system of records titled, “Department of Homeland Security (DHS)/U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP)-007 Border Crossing Information (BCI) System of Records.” This system of records allows DHS/CBP to collect and maintain records on border crossing information for all individuals who enter, are admitted or paroled into, and (when available) exit from the United States, regardless of method or conveyance. The BCI includes certain biographic and biometric information; photographs; responses to immigration and customs inspection-related questions, certain mandatory or voluntary itinerary information provided by air, sea, bus, and rail carriers or any other forms of passenger transportation; and the time and location of the border crossing.

    DHS/CBP is updating this system of records notice to provide notice that BCI categories of records include responses to immigration and customs inspection questions collected to facilitate the CBP inspection process and to add a new routine use permitting DHS/CBP to share information from this system of records with external organizations if the information is relevant and necessary to a requesting agency's decision concerning the hiring or retention of an individual, or issuance of a security clearance, license, contract, grant, or other benefit.

    This system of records notice was previously published in the Federal Register on January 25, 2016 (81 FR 4040). A Final Rule exempting portions of this system from certain provisions of the Privacy Act was published on March 21, 2016 (81 FR 14947) and remains in effect. DHS will include this system in its inventory of record systems.

    DATES:

    Submit comments on or before January 12, 2017. This updated system will be effective January 12, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments, identified by docket number DHS-2016-0088 by one of the following methods:

    • Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.

    • Fax: 202-343-4010.

    • Mail: Jonathan R. Cantor, Acting Chief Privacy Officer, Privacy Office, Department of Homeland Security, Washington, DC 20528.

    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.

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

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For general questions, please contact: Debra L. Danisek (202) 344-1610, CBP Privacy Officer, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Privacy and Diversity Office, 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20229. For privacy questions, please contact: Jonathan R. Cantor, (202) 343-1717, Acting Chief Privacy Officer, Privacy Office, Department of Homeland Security, Washington, DC 20528.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Background

    In accordance with the Privacy Act of 1974, 5 U.S.C. 552a, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) proposes to update and reissue a DHS system of records titled, “DHS/CBP-007 Border Crossing Information (BCI) System of Records.” DHS/CBP is updating this system of records notice to provide notice that BCI categories of records include responses to immigration and customs inspection questions collected to facilitate the CBP inspection process and to add a new routine use permitting DHS/CBP to share information from this system of records with external organizations if the information is relevant and necessary to a requesting agency's decision concerning the hiring or retention of an individual, or issuance of a security clearance, license, contract, grant, or other benefit.

    DHS/CBP's priority mission is to prevent terrorists and terrorist weapons from entering the country while facilitating legitimate travel and trade. To further this mission, DHS/CBP maintains BCI about all individuals who enter, are admitted or paroled into, and (when available) exit from the United States regardless of method or conveyance. BCI includes certain biographic and biometric information; photographs; certain responses to inspection questions; certain mandatory or voluntary itinerary information provided by air, sea, bus, and rail carriers or any other forms of passenger transportation; and the time and location of the border crossing. BCI resides on the TECS (not an acronym) information technology (IT) platform.

    DHS/CBP is responsible for collecting and reviewing BCI from travelers entering and departing the United States as part of DHS/CBP's overall border security and enforcement missions. All individuals crossing the border are subject to DHS/CBP inspection upon arrival in the United States. Each traveler entering the United States is required to establish his or her identity, nationality, and admissibility, as applicable, to the satisfaction of a CBP Officer during the inspection process. To manage this process, DHS/CBP creates a record of an individual's admission or parole into the United States at a particular time and port of entry. DHS/CBP also collects information about U.S. citizens and certain aliens upon departure from the United States for law enforcement purposes and to document their border crossing.

    DHS is statutorily mandated to create and integrate an automated entry and exit system that records the arrival and