Federal Register Vol. 81, No.245,

Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 245 (December 21, 2016)

Page Range93571-93790
FR Document

81_FR_245
Current View
Page and SubjectPDF
81 FR 93789 - Wright Brothers Day, 2016PDF
81 FR 93787 - Returning the Flag of the United States to Full- StaffPDF
81 FR 93684 - Deletion of Items From Sunshine Act MeetingPDF
81 FR 93719 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Order Granting an Extension to Limited Exemption From Rule 612(c) of Regulation NMS in Connection With the Exchange's Retail Liquidity Program Until June 30, 2017PDF
81 FR 93638 - Protecting and Promoting the Open InternetPDF
81 FR 93681 - Final EPA-USGS Technical Report: Protecting Aquatic Life from Effects of Hydrologic AlterationPDF
81 FR 93666 - Proposed Information Collection; Comment Request; Chesapeake Bay Watershed Environmental Literacy Indicator ToolPDF
81 FR 93728 - Reports, Forms, and Recordkeeping Requirements: Agency Information Collection ActivityPDF
81 FR 93707 - Notice of Availability of the Record of Decision and the Approved Resource Management Plans for the Beaver Dam Wash and Red Cliffs National Conservation Areas; and Approved Amendment to the St. George Field Office Resource Management Plan in Washington County, UtahPDF
81 FR 93686 - Change in Bank Control Notices; Acquisitions of Shares of a Bank or Bank Holding CompanyPDF
81 FR 93686 - Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Savings and Loan Holding CompaniesPDF
81 FR 93685 - Notice of Agreements FiledPDF
81 FR 93671 - Applications for New Awards; Supporting Effective Educator Development Grant ProgramPDF
81 FR 93704 - Wildlife and Hunting Heritage Conservation Council; Public MeetingPDF
81 FR 93700 - Establishment of Tribal Intergovernmental Advisory Committee; Request for Nominations for Tribal Intergovernmental MembershipPDF
81 FR 93700 - 60-Day Notice of Proposed Information Collection: Consolidated Public Housing Certification of CompletionPDF
81 FR 93699 - 60-Day Notice of Proposed Information Collection: Public Housing Contracting With Resident-Owned Business-Application RequirementsPDF
81 FR 93698 - 60-Day Notice of Proposed Information Collection: Allocation of Operating Subsidies Under the Operating Fund Formula: Data CollectionPDF
81 FR 93725 - Proposed Agency Information Collection Activities; Comment RequestPDF
81 FR 93713 - Memorandum of Understanding Between the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the Electric Power Research InstitutePDF
81 FR 93693 - DHS Data Privacy and Integrity Advisory CommitteePDF
81 FR 93712 - Discount Rates for Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Federal ProgramsPDF
81 FR 93600 - Special Regulations; Areas of the National Park System, Cape Hatteras National Seashore-Off-Road Vehicle ManagementPDF
81 FR 93669 - Extension of the Extended Missing Parts Pilot ProgramPDF
81 FR 93658 - Certain Large Diameter Carbon and Alloy Seamless Standard, Line and Pressure Pipe From Japan; Certain Small Diameter Carbon and Alloy Seamless Standard, Line and Pressure Pipe From Japan and Romania: Final Results of the Expedited Third Five-Year Sunset Reviews of the Antidumping Duty OrdersPDF
81 FR 93580 - Home Mortgage Disclosure (Regulation C) Adjustment to Asset-Size Exemption ThresholdPDF
81 FR 93581 - Truth in Lending Act (Regulation Z) Adjustment to Asset-Size Exemption ThresholdPDF
81 FR 93656 - Virginia Resource Advisory CommitteePDF
81 FR 93665 - Chlorinated Isocyanurates From the People's Republic of China: Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony With the Final Results and Amended Final Results of the Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2010-2011PDF
81 FR 93666 - Circular Welded Carbon Quality Steel Pipe From the People's Republic of China: Rescission of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review; 2015PDF
81 FR 93692 - Accreditation and Approval of Intertek USA, Inc. as a Commercial Gauger and LaboratoryPDF
81 FR 93667 - Proposed Information Collection; Comment Request; Conflict of Interest Disclosure for Nonfederal Government Individuals Who Are Candidates To Conduct Peer ReviewsPDF
81 FR 93656 - Notice of Petitions by Firms for Determination of Eligibility To Apply for Trade Adjustment AssistancePDF
81 FR 93708 - Agency Information Collection; Renewal of a Currently Approved Information Collection (OMB Control Number 1006-0005)PDF
81 FR 93711 - Agency Information Collection; Renewal of a Currently Approved Information Collection (OMB Control Number 1006-0006)PDF
81 FR 93709 - Agency Information Collection; Renewal of a Currently Approved Information Collection (OMB Control Number 1006-0023)PDF
81 FR 93653 - Definitions; Cost Standards and Procedures; Purchasing and Property ManagementPDF
81 FR 93682 - Recent Postings of Broadly Applicable Alternative Test MethodsPDF
81 FR 93711 - Notice of Lodging of Proposed Modification to Consent Decree Under the Clean Water ActPDF
81 FR 93696 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Application To Adjust Status from Temporary to Permanent Resident, Form I-698; Extension, Without Change, of a Currently Approved CollectionPDF
81 FR 93695 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Waiver of Rights, Privileges, Exemptions and Immunities, Form I-508 & I-508F; Extension, Without Change, of a Currently Approved CollectionPDF
81 FR 93697 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Petition for Qualifying Family Member of a U-1 Nonimmigrant, Form I-929; Extension, Without Change, of a Currently Approved CollectionPDF
81 FR 93727 - Limitation on Claims Against Proposed Public Transportation ProjectPDF
81 FR 93688 - Information Collection; Prospective Subcontractor Requests for BondsPDF
81 FR 93687 - Submission for OMB Review; Rights in Data and CopyrightsPDF
81 FR 93688 - Submission for OMB Review; Examination of Records by Comptroller General and Contract AuditPDF
81 FR 93730 - Advisory Committee Charter RenewalsPDF
81 FR 93705 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Request for CommentsPDF
81 FR 93722 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; ISE Gemini, LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Remove Direct Debit for Market Data ProductsPDF
81 FR 93715 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE MKT LLC; Notice of Withdrawal of a Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendments No. 1 and 2 Thereto, Relating to Amendments to NYSE MKT Rules 1600 et seq. and the Listing Rules Applicable to the Shares of the Nuveen Diversified Commodity Fund and the Nuveen Long/Short Commodity Total Return FundPDF
81 FR 93692 - National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; Notice of MeetingPDF
81 FR 93692 - Center for Scientific Review; Notice of Closed MeetingPDF
81 FR 93691 - National Institute of Allergy And Infectious Diseases; Notice of Closed MeetingsPDF
81 FR 93691 - National Institute of Mental Health; Notice of Closed MeetingPDF
81 FR 93720 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change Relating to Rule 4554 Reporting Requirements for Alternative Trading SystemsPDF
81 FR 93723 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Extending Its Program That Allows Transactions To Take Place at a Price That Is Below $1 Per Option Contract Until July 5, 2017PDF
81 FR 93716 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE MKT LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Extending Its Program That Allows Transactions to Take Place at a Price That Is Below $1 Per Option Contract Until July 5, 2017PDF
81 FR 93718 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; International Securities Exchange, LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Remove Direct Debit for Market Data ProductsPDF
81 FR 93714 - Product Change-Priority Mail Negotiated Service AgreementPDF
81 FR 93715 - Product Change-Priority Mail Negotiated Service AgreementPDF
81 FR 93714 - Product Change-Priority Mail Express Negotiated Service AgreementPDF
81 FR 93668 - Commerce Spectrum Management Advisory Committee MeetingPDF
81 FR 93685 - Radio Broadcasting Services; AM or FM Proposals To Change The Community of LicensePDF
81 FR 93680 - Combined Notice of FilingsPDF
81 FR 93689 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Index of Legally Marketed Unapproved New Animal Drugs for Minor SpeciesPDF
81 FR 93702 - Joint U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service Habitat Conservation Planning HandbookPDF
81 FR 93655 - Submission for OMB Review; Comment RequestPDF
81 FR 93657 - Extension of Deadline for Nominations of Members To Serve on the Commerce Data Advisory Council (CDAC)PDF
81 FR 93713 - New Postal ProductsPDF
81 FR 93694 - Intent To Request Approval From OMB of One New Public Collection of Information: Security Appointment Center (SAC) Visitor Request Form and Foreign National Vetting RequestPDF
81 FR 93577 - Federal Credit Union Occupancy, Planning, and Disposal of Acquired and Abandoned Premises; Incidental PowersPDF
81 FR 93664 - Seamless Refined Copper Pipe and Tube from the People's Republic of China and Mexico: Continuation of Antidumping Duty OrdersPDF
81 FR 93599 - Allocation of Assets in Single-Employer Plans; Interest Assumptions for Valuing BenefitsPDF
81 FR 93572 - United States Standards for Grades of Canned VegetablesPDF
81 FR 93595 - Schedules of Controlled Substances: Temporary Placement of Six Synthetic Cannabinoids (5F-ADB, 5F-AMB, 5F-APINACA, ADB-FUBINACA, MDMB-CHMICA and MDMB-FUBINACA) Into Schedule IPDF
81 FR 93642 - Cranberries Grown in the States of Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New Jersey, Wisconsin, Michigan, Minnesota, Oregon, Washington, and Long Island in the State of New York; Proposed Amendment to Marketing Order 929 and Referendum OrderPDF
81 FR 93571 - Revisions to Inspection Application RequirementsPDF
81 FR 93583 - Small Business Size Standards for Manufacturing; CorrectionPDF
81 FR 93649 - Special Monthly Compensation for Veterans With Traumatic Brain InjuryPDF
81 FR 93639 - Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Identification of 14 Distinct Population Segments of the Humpback Whale and Revision of Species-Wide ListingPDF
81 FR 93624 - Determination of Attainment of the 2008 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards; Mariposa County, CaliforniaPDF
81 FR 93620 - Determination of Attainment of the 2008 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards; Eastern San Luis Obispo, CaliforniaPDF
81 FR 93653 - Determination of Attainment of the 2008 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards; Mariposa County, CaliforniaPDF
81 FR 93631 - Air Plan Approval; Ohio; Redesignation of the Columbus, Ohio Area to Attainment of the 2008 Ozone StandardPDF
81 FR 93627 - Air Plan Approval; MA; Infrastructure State Implementation Plan RequirementsPDF
81 FR 93660 - Revisions to User Fees for Export and Investment Promotion Services/EventsPDF
81 FR 93606 - New Mailing Standards for Domestic Mailing Services ProductsPDF
81 FR 93712 - Notice of Information CollectionPDF
81 FR 93636 - Medicare Program; Implementation of Prior Authorization Process for Certain Durable Medical Equipment, Prosthetics, Orthotics, and Supplies (DMEPOS) Items and Publication of the Initial Required Prior Authorization List of DMEPOS Items That Require Prior Authorization as a Condition of PaymentPDF
81 FR 93622 - Air Plan Approval; Tennessee; Regional Haze Progress ReportPDF
81 FR 93633 - Procedures for Rulemaking Under Section 6 of the Toxic Substances Control Act; AmendmentPDF
81 FR 93647 - Airworthiness Directives; Empresa Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A. (Embraer)PDF
81 FR 93645 - Airworthiness Directives; Dassault Aviation AirplanesPDF
81 FR 93756 - Terrorism Risk Insurance ProgramPDF
81 FR 93574 - Organization, Functions, and Delegations of AuthorityPDF
81 FR 93592 - Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier, Inc. AirplanesPDF
81 FR 93583 - Airworthiness Directives; Saab AB, Saab Aeronautics (Formerly Known as Saab AB, Saab Aerosystems) AirplanesPDF
81 FR 93585 - Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company AirplanesPDF
81 FR 93590 - Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company AirplanesPDF
81 FR 93732 - Regulations Implementing FAST Act Section 61003-Critical Electric Infrastructure Security and Amending Critical Energy Infrastructure Information; Availability of Certain North American Electric Reliability Corporation Databases to the CommissionPDF

Issue

81 245 Wednesday, December 21, 2016 Contents Agricultural Marketing Agricultural Marketing Service RULES Grade Standards: United States Standards for Grades of Canned Vegetables, 93572-93574 2016-30619 Revisions to Inspection Application Requirements, 93571-93572 2016-30570 PROPOSED RULES Marketing Orders: Cranberries Grown in the States of Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New Jersey, Wisconsin, Michigan, Minnesota, Oregon, Washington, and Long Island in the State of New York; Proposed Amendment, Referendum Order, 93642-93644 2016-30571 Agriculture Agriculture Department See

Agricultural Marketing Service

See

Forest Service

See

Inspector General Office, Agriculture Department

NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 93655-93656 2016-30654 2016-30672
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection RULES Home Mortgage Disclosure (Regulation C) Adjustment to Asset-Size Exemption Threshold, 93580-93581 2016-30731 Truth in Lending Act (Regulation Z) Adjustment to Asset-Size Exemption Threshold, 93581-93583 2016-30730 Centers Medicare Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services RULES Medicare Program: Implementation of Prior Authorization Process for Certain Durable Medical Equipment, Prosthetics, Orthotics, and Supplies Items and Publication of the Initial Required Prior Authorization List of DMEPOS Items that Require Prior Authorization as a Condition of Payment, 93636-93637 2016-30273 Commerce Commerce Department See

Economic Development Administration

See

Economics and Statistics Administration

See

International Trade Administration

See

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

See

National Telecommunications and Information Administration

See

Patent and Trademark Office

Defense Department Defense Department NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Examination of Records by Comptroller General and Contract Audit, 93688-93689 2016-30700 Prospective Subcontractor Requests for Bonds, 93688 2016-30702 Rights in Data and Copyrights, 93687-93688 2016-30701 Drug Drug Enforcement Administration RULES Schedules of Controlled Substances: Temporary Placement of six synthetic cannabinoids (5F-ADB, 5F-AMB, 5F-APINACA, ADB-FUBINACA, MDMB-CHMICA and MDMB-FUBINACA) into Schedule I, 93595-93599 2016-30595 Economic Development Economic Development Administration NOTICES Trade Adjustment Assistance Eligibility; Petitions, 93656-93657 2016-30723 Economics Statistics Economics and Statistics Administration NOTICES Requests for Nominations: Members to Serve on the Commerce Data Advisory Council; Extension of Deadline, 93657-93658 2016-30665 Education Department Education Department NOTICES Applications for New Awards: Supporting Effective Educator Development Grant Program, 93671-93680 2016-30751 Energy Department Energy Department See

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Environmental Protection Environmental Protection Agency RULES Air Quality State Implementation Plans; Approvals and Promulgations: California; Determination of Attainment of the 2008 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards; Eastern San Luis Obispo, 93620-93622 2016-30476 California; Determination of Attainment of the 2008 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards; Mariposa County, 93624-93627 2016-30477 Massachusetts; Infrastructure State Implementation Plan Requirements, 93627-93631 2016-30466 Ohio; Redesignation of the Columbus, OH Area to Attainment of the 2008 Ozone Standard, 93631-93633 2016-30470 Tennessee; Air Plan Approval; Regional Haze Progress Report, 93622-93623 2016-30184 Procedures for Rulemaking Under Section 6 of the Toxic Substances Control Act; Amendment, 93633-93636 2016-30055 PROPOSED RULES Air Quality State Implementation Plans; Approvals and Promulgations: California; Determination of Attainment of the 2008 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards; Mariposa County, 93653 2016-30474 NOTICES Recent Postings of Broadly Applicable Alternative Test Methods, 93682-93684 2016-30714 Technical Support Documents: Final EPA-USGS Technical Report—Protecting Aquatic Life from Effects of Hydrologic Alteration, 93681-93682 2016-30760 Federal Aviation Federal Aviation Administration RULES Airworthiness Directives: Bombardier, Inc. Airplanes, 93592-93595 2016-29513 Saab AB, Saab Aeronautics (Formerly known as Saab AB, Saab Aerosystems) Airplanes, 93583-93585 2016-29509 The Boeing Company Airplanes, 93585-93592 2016-29306 2016-29307 PROPOSED RULES Airworthiness Directives: Dassault Aviation Airplanes, 93645-93647 2016-30029 Empresa Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A. (Embraer), 93647-93649 2016-30030 Federal Communications Federal Communications Commission RULES Protecting and Promoting the Open Internet, 93638-93639 2016-30766 NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 93684-93685 2016-30900 Radio Broadcasting Services: AM or FM Proposals to Change the Community of License, 93685 2016-30678 Federal Energy Federal Energy Regulatory Commission RULES Critical Electric Infrastructure Security and Amending Critical Energy Infrastructure Information, 93732-93753 2016-28322 NOTICES Combined Filings, 93680-93681 2016-30677 Federal Maritime Federal Maritime Commission NOTICES Agreements Filed, 93685-93686 2016-30752 Federal Railroad Federal Railroad Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 93725-93727 2016-30740 Federal Reserve Federal Reserve System NOTICES Changes in Bank Control: Acquisitions of Shares of a Bank or Bank Holding Company, 93686 2016-30754 Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Savings and Loan Holding Companies, 93686 2016-30753 Federal Transit Federal Transit Administration NOTICES Limitation on Claims Against Proposed Public Transportation Project, 93727-93728 2016-30703 Fish Fish and Wildlife Service RULES Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants: Identification of 14 Distinct Population Segments of the Humpback Whale and Revision of Species-Wide Listing, 93639-93641 2016-30483 NOTICES Joint U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service Habitat Conservation Planning Handbook, 93702-93704 2016-30673 Meetings: Wildlife and Hunting Heritage Conservation Council, 93704-93705 2016-30749 Food and Drug Food and Drug Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Index of Legally Marketed Unapproved New Animal Drugs for Minor Species, 93689-93691 2016-30676 Forest Forest Service NOTICES Meetings: Virginia Resource Advisory Committee, 93656 2016-30729 General Services General Services Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Examination of Records by Comptroller General and Contract Audit, 93688-93689 2016-30700 Prospective Subcontractor Requests for Bonds, 93688 2016-30702 Rights in Data and Copyrights, 93687-93688 2016-30701 Geological Geological Survey NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 93705-93707 2016-30697 Health and Human Health and Human Services Department See

Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services

See

Food and Drug Administration

See

National Institutes of Health

Homeland Homeland Security Department See

Transportation Security Administration

See

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services

See

U.S. Customs and Border Protection

NOTICES Requests for Nominations: Data Privacy and Integrity Advisory Committee, 93693-93694 2016-30737
Housing Housing and Urban Development Department NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Allocation of Operating Subsidies under the Operating Fund Formula—Data Collection, 93698-93699 2016-30741 Consolidated Public Housing Certification of Completion, 93700 2016-30743 Public Housing Contracting with Resident-Owned Business—Application Requirements, 93699 2016-30742 Requests for Nominations: Tribal Intergovernmental Advisory Committee, 93700-93702 2016-30744 Inspector General Agriculture Inspector General Office, Agriculture Department RULES Organization, Functions, and Delegations of Authority, 93574-93577 2016-29976 Interior Interior Department See

Fish and Wildlife Service

See

Geological Survey

See

Land Management Bureau

See

National Park Service

See

Reclamation Bureau

International Trade Adm International Trade Administration NOTICES Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Investigations, Orders, or Reviews: Certain Large Diameter Carbon and Alloy Seamless Standard, Line and Pressure Pipe from Japan. etc., 93658-93660 2016-30732 Chlorinated Isocyanurates from the People's Republic of China; Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony With Final Results, Amended Final Results of Administrative Review; 2010-2011, 93665-93666 2016-30728 Circular Welded Carbon Quality Steel Pipe from the People's Republic of China, 93666 2016-30727 Seamless Refined Copper Pipe and Tube from the People's Republic of China and Mexico, 93664-93665 2016-30653 Proposed Fee Revisions, 93660-93664 2016-30423 Justice Department Justice Department See

Drug Enforcement Administration

NOTICES Consent Decrees: Proposed Consent Decrees Under the Clean Water Act, 93711-93712 2016-30709
Land Land Management Bureau NOTICES Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc.: Approved Resource Management Plans for the Beaver Dam Wash and Red Cliffs National Conservation Areas, etc., Washington County, UT, 93707-93708 2016-30755 Legal Legal Services Corporation PROPOSED RULES Definitions; Cost Standards and Procedures; Purchasing and Property Management, 93653-93654 2016-30717 Management Management and Budget Office NOTICES Discount Rates for Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Federal Programs, 93712 2016-30736 NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 93712 2016-30357 Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Examination of Records by Comptroller General and Contract Audit, 93688-93689 2016-30700 Prospective Subcontractor Requests for Bonds, 93688 2016-30702 Rights in Data and Copyrights, 93687-93688 2016-30701 National Credit National Credit Union Administration RULES Federal Credit Union Occupancy, Planning, and Disposal of Acquired and Abandoned Premises; Incidental Powers, 93577-93580 2016-30657 National Highway National Highway Traffic Safety Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Reports, Forms, and Recordkeeping Requirements, 93728-93730 2016-30756 National Institute National Institutes of Health NOTICES Meetings: Center for Scientific Review, 93692 2016-30692 National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, 93692 2016-30693 National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, 93691 2016-30691 National Institute of Mental Health, 93691-93692 2016-30690 National Oceanic National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Chesapeake Bay Watershed Environmental Literacy Indicator Tool, 93666-93667 2016-30757 Conflict of Interest Disclosure for Nonfederal Government Individuals who are Candidates to Conduct Peer Reviews, 93667-93668 2016-30724 Joint U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service Habitat Conservation Planning Handbook, 93702-93704 2016-30673 National Park National Park Service RULES Special Regulations: Areas of the National Park System, Cape Hatteras National Seashore—Off-Road Vehicle Management, 93600-93606 2016-30735 National Telecommunications National Telecommunications and Information Administration NOTICES Meetings: Commerce Spectrum Management Advisory Committee, 93668-93669 2016-30679 Nuclear Regulatory Nuclear Regulatory Commission NOTICES Memorandum of Understanding Between the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the Electric Power Research Institute, 93713 2016-30739 Patent Patent and Trademark Office NOTICES Extended Missing Parts Pilot Program, 93669-93671 2016-30733 Pension Benefit Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation RULES Allocation of Assets in Single-Employer Plans; Interest Assumptions for Valuing Benefits, 93599-93600 2016-30634 Postal Regulatory Postal Regulatory Commission NOTICES New Postal Products, 93713-93714 2016-30664 Postal Service Postal Service RULES New Mailing Standards for Domestic Mailing Services Products, 93606-93620 2016-30381 NOTICES Product Changes: Priority Mail Express Negotiated Service Agreement, 93714-93715 2016-30681 Priority Mail Negotiated Service Agreement, 93714-93715 2016-30682 2016-30683 2016-30684 2016-30685 Presidential Documents Presidential Documents PROCLAMATIONS Special Observances: Returning the Flag of the United States to Full-Staff (Proc. 9556), 93785-93787 2016-30953 Wright Brothers Day (Proc. 9557), 93789-93790 2016-30955 Reclamation Reclamation Bureau NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 93708-93711 2016-30718 2016-30719 2016-30720 Securities Securities and Exchange Commission NOTICES Self-Regulatory Organizations; Proposed Rule Changes: Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc., 93720-93722 2016-30689 International Securities Exchange, LLC, 93718-93719 2016-30686 ISE Gemini, LLC, 93722-93723 2016-30695 NYSE Arca, Inc., 93719-93720, 93723-93725 2016-30688 2016-30814 NYSE MKT LLC, 93715-93717 2016-30687 2016-30694 Small Business Small Business Administration RULES Small Business Size Standards for Manufacturing; Correction, 93583 2016-30568 Transportation Department Transportation Department See

Federal Aviation Administration

See

Federal Railroad Administration

See

Federal Transit Administration

See

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Security Transportation Security Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Security Appointment Center Visitor Request Form and Foreign National Vetting Request, 93694-93695 2016-30662 Treasury Treasury Department RULES Terrorism Risk Insurance Program, 93756-93784 2016-29987 U.S. Citizenship U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Application to Adjust Status from Temporary to Permanent Resident, 93696-93697 2016-30707 Petition for Qualifying Family Member of a U-1 Nonimmigrant, Form I-929, 93697-93698 2016-30705 Waiver of Rights, Privileges, Exemptions and Immunities, 93695-93696 2016-30706 Customs U.S. Customs and Border Protection NOTICES Commercial Gaugers and Laboratories; Accreditations and Approvals: Intertek USA, Inc., 93692-93693 2016-30726 Veteran Affairs Veterans Affairs Department PROPOSED RULES Special Monthly Compensation for Veterans with Traumatic Brain Injury, 93649-93653 2016-30509 NOTICES Charter Renewals: MyVA Advisory Committee, 93730 2016-30698 Separate Parts In This Issue Part II Energy Department, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 93732-93753 2016-28322 Part III Treasury Department, 93756-93784 2016-29987 Part IV Presidential Documents, 93785-93787, 93789-93790 2016-30953 2016-30955 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.

81 245 Wednesday, December 21, 2016 Rules and Regulations DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Agricultural Marketing Service 7 CFR Parts 51 and 52 [Doc. No. AMS-SC-16-0063] Revisions to Inspection Application Requirements AGENCY:

Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA.

ACTION:

Interim rule with request for comments.

SUMMARY:

This rule amends the inspection, certification and standards requirements for fresh fruits, vegetables and other products and processed fruits and vegetables, processed products and certain other processed food products (7 CFR parts 51 and 52) by adding an option to allow for electronic submissions of inspection applications. This rule also eliminates outdated terminology referencing submission of inspection applications by telegraph.

DATES:

Effective December 22, 2016; comments received by February 21, 2017 will be considered prior to issuance of a final rule.

ADDRESSES:

Interested persons are invited to submit comments via the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. Comments submitted by mail or courier must be sent in duplicate to Francisco Grazette, United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS), Specialty Crops Program (SCP), Specialty Crops Inspection (SCI) Division, 1400 Independence Avenue SW., Room 1536, Stop 0240, Washington, DC 20250, FAX (202) 720-0393. All comments should reference the document number, and the date and page number of this issue of the Federal Register. All comments received will be posted without change, including any personal information provided, online at http://www.regulations.gov and will be made available for public inspection at the above physical address during regular business hours.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Francisco Grazette, USDA, AMS, SCP, SCI Division, 1400 Independence Avenue SW., Room 1536, Stop 0240, Washington, DC 20250-0250; telephone: (202) 720-5870; fax: (202) 720-0393; email: [email protected]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Section 203(c) (7 U.S.C. 1622(c)) of the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946 (7 U.S.C. 1621-1627) (Act of 1946), as amended, directs and authorizes the Secretary of Agriculture to develop and improve standards of quality, condition, quantity, grade, and packaging, and recommend and demonstrate such standards in order to encourage uniformity and consistency in commercial practices.

Parts 51 and 52 of title 7 of the Code of Federal Regulations specify the inspection, certification and standard requirements for fresh and processed fruit, vegetable and specialty crops to ensure uniformity and consistency.

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

This interim rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform. This rule is not intended to have retroactive effect and does not preempt any state or local law, regulation, or policy unless it presents an irreconcilable conflict with this rule. There are no administrative procedures which must be exhausted prior to any judicial challenge to the provisions of this rule.

This rule amends the inspection, certification and standards requirements for fresh fruits, vegetables and other products and processed fruits and vegetables, processed products and certain other processed food products (7 CFR parts 51 and 52) by adding an option to allow for electronic submissions of inspection applications. This rule also eliminates outdated terminology referencing the telegraph. These changes are administrative in nature and do not impose any new requirements on applicants.

Pursuant to Section 8e of the Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act of 1937, as amended (7 U.S.C. 601-674) (Act of 1937), whenever certain commodities are regulated under Federal marketing orders, imports of those commodities into the United States are prohibited unless they meet the same or comparable grade, size, quality or maturity requirements as those in effect for domestically-produced commodities. The Act of 1937 also authorizes USDA to perform inspections and other related functions (such as commodity sampling) on those commodities and to certify whether these requirements have been met.

AMS's Specialty Crops Inspection (SCI) Division performs the inspections and other related functions on Section 8e imports in accordance with its authority under the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946.

SCI Division is amending 7 CFR parts 51 and 52 to add the ability to submit initial inspection requests electronically and eliminate terminology referencing the telegraph. Individuals desiring to apply for an inspection for applicable fruit, vegetable, and specialty crop imports must complete and file AMS's form SC-357, Initial Inspection Request for Regulated Imported Commodities, in writing or electronically, to notify AMS of the need for an inspection.

Specifically, sections 51.6 and 52.7, “How to make an application” and “Information required in connection with application”, respectively, are being modified by this action.

Amending parts 51 and 52 of title 7 to provide for the electronic filing of the application for inspection supports the International Trade Data System (ITDS), a key White House Initiative that has been under development for over ten years and is mandated for completion by December 31, 2016 (pursuant to Executive Order 13659, Streamlining the Export/Import Process for American's Businesses, signed on February 19, 2014, by President Obama (79 FR 10657)). ITDS streamlines the export and import process for America's businesses. Upon full implementation, ITDS, through the Automated Commercial Environment (ACE), will allow businesses to electronically submit the data required by U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and its Partner Government Agencies (PGAs) to import or export cargo through a “single window” concept.

The update to the inspection, certification and standards requirements to allow for electronic submission of inspection applications will meet CBP's requirement for ITDS.

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

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

The purpose of the RFA is to fit regulatory actions to the scale of businesses subject to such actions in order that small businesses will not be unduly or disproportionately burdened.

Small agricultural producers are defined by the Small Business Administration (SBA) as those having annual receipts of no more than $750,000 and small agricultural service firms are defined as those having annual receipts of no more than $7.5 million. Under these definitions, AMS estimates the number of companies affected is approximately 60,000, with 24,000, or 40%, of the companies considered small businesses. AMS does not foresee any negative impact on members of the industry, regardless of size, as a result of this interim rule.

AMS is making these administrative changes to allow for the use of current technology by allowing the application for inspection to be submitted electronically and eliminating references to filing applications for service by telegraph.

Paperwork Reduction Act

In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35), the information collection requirements for form SC-357, Initial Inspection Request for Regulated Imported Commodities, was previously approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and assigned OMB No. 0581-0125, effective August 1, 2016. AMS has determined that no changes are required to the information collection requirements as a result of the changes in this action. Should additional changes become necessary, they would be submitted to OMB for approval. AMS is committed to complying with the E-Government Act, to promote the use of the internet and other information technologies to provide increased opportunities for citizen access to Government information and services, and for other purposes.

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

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

This rule invites comments on updates to application requirements and the administrative change to the inspection, certification and standards requirements for fresh and processed fruit, vegetable, and specialty crops. Any comments received will be considered prior to finalization of this rule.

After consideration of all relevant material presented, it is found that this interim rule, as hereinafter set forth, will tend to effectuate the declared policy of the Act of 1946. Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553, AMS has found and determined upon good cause that it is impracticable, unnecessary, and contrary to the public interest to give preliminary notice prior to putting this rule into effect because: (1) The changes in this rule reflect current practices; (2) the import industry is aware of the ITDS initiative and its goal to automate paper-based processes; (3) CBP is requiring the timely update of import regulations to meet the ITDS electronic data submission requirement; and (4) this rule provides a 60-day comment period, and all comments received will be considered prior to the finalization of this rule.

List of Subjects 7 CFR Part 51

Food grades and standards, Fruits, Nuts, Reporting and recordkeeping, Vegetables.

7 CFR Part 52

Food grades and standards, Food labeling, Frozen foods, Fruits, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Vegetables.

For the reasons set forth in the preamble, 7 CFR parts 51 and 52 are amended as follows: 1. The authority citation for parts 51 and 52 continues to read as follows: Authority:

7 U.S.C. 1621-1627.

PART 51—FRESH FRUITS, VEGETABLES AND OTHER PRODUCTS (INSPECTION, CERTIFICATION, AND STANDARDS) 2. Revise § 51.6 to read as follows:
§ 51.6 How to make application.

An application for inspection service may be filed in an office of inspection at any market referred to in § 51.4 (b), (c), or (d) or with any inspector. It may be made in writing, orally, electronically, or by telephone. If made orally or by telephone, the inspector may require that it be confirmed by the applicant in writing or electronically. An application may be made for one or more lots, or it may be in the nature of a blanket application for inspection of all designated lots of a given commodity within a particular period, or for all designated lots loaded or received at a specified point.

PART 52—PROCESSED FRUITS AND VEGETABLES, PROCESSED PRODUCTS THEREOF, AND CERTAIN OTHER PROCESSED FOOD PRODUCTS 3. Revise § 52.7 paragraph (a) to read as follows:
§ 52.7 Information required in connection with application.

(a) Application for inspection service shall be made in the English language and may be made orally (in person or by telephone), in writing, or electronically. If an application for inspection is made orally, written confirmation may be required by the inspection service involved.

Dated: December 14, 2016. Elanor Starmer, Administrator, Agricultural Marketing Service.
[FR Doc. 2016-30570 Filed 12-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-02-P
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Agricultural Marketing Service 7 CFR Part 52 [Document Number AMS-FV-15-0049, FV-16-332] United States Standards for Grades of Canned Vegetables AGENCY:

Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA.

ACTION:

Final notice of U.S. grade standards.

SUMMARY:

The Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) of the Department of Agriculture (USDA) is revising 18 U.S. grade standards for canned vegetables issued on or before August 3, 1998. AMS is replacing the two-term grading system (dual nomenclature) with a single term to describe each quality level for the grade standards identified in this document. Terms using the letter grade will be retained and the descriptive term will be eliminated. For example, grade standards using the term “U.S. Grade A” or “U.S. Fancy” will be revised to use only the term “U.S. Grade A.” Likewise, grade standards using the term “U.S. Grade B” or “U.S. Extra Standard” will be revised to use the single term “U.S. Grade B.” These changes will bring the grade standards in line with the present quality levels being marketed today and provide guidance in the effective use of these products. Editorial changes will also be made to the grade standards that conform to recent changes made in other grade standards.

DATES:

These grade standards go into effect January 20, 2017.

ADDRESSES:

Standardization Branch, Specialty Crops Inspection Division, Specialty Crops Program, Agricultural Marketing Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1400 Independence Avenue SW., Room 0709-South Building; STOP 0247, Washington, DC 20250.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Dana N. White, at the address above, by phone (202) 720-5870; fax (202) 690-1527; or email: [email protected] Copies of the revised U.S. standards for grades for the 18 canned vegetables covered by this document will be available on the Internet at http://www.ams.usda.gov/grades-standards/vegetables.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Section 203(c) of the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946, as amended, directs and authorizes the Secretary of Agriculture “to develop and improve standards of quality, condition, quantity, grade, and packaging, and recommend and demonstrate such standards in order to encourage uniformity and consistency in commercial practices.”

AMS is committed to carrying out this authority in a manner that facilitates the marketing of agricultural commodities and makes copies of official standards available upon request. The U.S. standards for grades of fruits and vegetables not connected with Federal Marketing Orders or U.S. import requirements no longer appear in the Code of Federal Regulations, but are maintained by USDA, AMS, Specialty Crops Program and are available on the internet at: http://www.ams.usda.gov/grades-standards/vegetables. AMS revised these U.S. Standards for Grades using the procedures that appear in part 36 of title 7 of the Code of Federal Regulations (7 CFR part 36).

BACKGROUND: AMS periodically reviews the grade standards for usefulness in serving the industry. AMS has determined that changes to 18 grade standards covering various canned vegetables are required. More recently developed grade standards use a single term, such as “U.S. Grade A” or “U.S. Grade B,” to describe each level of quality within a grade standard. Older grade standards used dual nomenclature, such as “U.S. Grade A” and “U.S. Fancy,” “U.S. Grade B” and “U.S. Extra Standard,” and “U.S. Grade C” and “U.S. Standard,” to describe the same level of quality. The terms “U.S. Fancy,” “U.S. Extra Standard,” and “U.S. Standard” will be removed and the terms “U.S. Grade A,” “U.S. Grade B,” and “U.S. Grade C” will be used exclusively. AMS proposed editorial changes to these grade standards, i.e., updating addresses to obtain copies of the grade standards, removing specific addresses for licensed suppliers of color standards and inspection aids, and updating Code of Federal Regulations references where applicable. Contact information for current licensed suppliers is available in the Fresh and Processed Equipment Catalog on the AMS Web site at: http://www.ams.usda.gov/grades-standards/how-purchase-equipment-and-visual-aids. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: These revisions will provide a format that is consistent with those of other grade standards (75 FR 43141). The following table summarizes the changes made by AMS. U.S. Standards for grades of canned Effective date Change level of quality designation to single term Other revisions proposed Asparagus 06/20/73 Yes Update address for standards.
  • Correct Standard of Identity citation.
  • Beets 08/03/98 Yes Update address for standards. Carrots 08/03/98 Yes Update address for standards. Chili Sauce 10/20/53 Yes Update address for standards. Corn, Cream Style 07/01/57 Yes Update address for standards.
  • Add Standard of Identity citation.
  • Add Latin name.
  • Hominy 03/10/58 Yes Update address for standards. Leafy Greens 09/01/73 Yes Update address for standards.
  • Add titles to Tables IV and V.
  • Correct Standard of Identity citation.
  • Okra 07/08/57 Yes Update address for standards. Okra and Tomatoes or Tomatoes and Okra 12/24/57 Yes Update address for standards. Onions 11/02/57 Yes Update address for standards.
  • Add titles for Tables II and III.
  • Add Standard of Identity citation.
  • Peas and Carrots 07/20/70 Yes Update address for standards. Peas, Field and Black-eye Peas 07/01/57 Yes Update address for standards.
  • Replace “U.S. Grade D” with “Substandard.”
  • Pimientos 10/23/67 Yes Update address for standards. Pumpkin (Squash) 07/01/57 Yes Update address for standards. Sauerkraut 05/13/63 Yes Update address for standards. Spinach 05/08/71 Yes Update address for standards.
  • Correct Standard of Identity citation.
  • Squash (Summer Type) 05/25/59 Yes Update address for standards. Succotash 05/24/67 Yes Update address for standards.
  • Replace “U.S. Grade D” with “Substandard.”
  • Put “proportion of ingredients” in outline form.
  • These revisions provide a common language for trade and better reflect the current marketing of fruits and vegetables.

    On June 17, 2016, AMS published a Proposed Notice in the Federal Register (81 FR 39596) soliciting comments on replacing the two-term grading system with a single term to describe each quality level for the grade standards identified in this document. Two comments were received by August 16, 2016, the closing date of the public comment period, from one private citizen and one individual associated with a tribal government agency.

    The two comments supported the replacement of the two-term grading system with a single term as a positive step forward. USDA stands by its decision to replace the two-term grading system (dual nomenclature) with a single term.

    Based on the information gathered, AMS is removing the two-term grading system (dual nomenclature) and making editorial changes to the aforementioned U.S. Standards for Grade. The revision brings these grade standards in line with other recently amended standards and current terminology, and updates the standards to more accurately represent today's marketing practices.

    Authority:

    7 U.S.C. 1621-1627.

    Dated: December 15, 2016. Elanor Starmer, Administrator, Agricultural Marketing Service.
    [FR Doc. 2016-30619 Filed 12-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-02-P
    DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Office of Inspector General 7 CFR Part 2610 Organization, Functions, and Delegations of Authority AGENCY:

    Office of Inspector General, USDA.

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), Office of Inspector General (OIG) amends its regulation relating to organization, functions, and delegations of authority. The amendments are necessary to reflect reorganizations within OIG.

    DATES:

    Effective December 21, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Christy Slamowitz, Counsel to the Inspector General, U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1400 Independence Avenue SW., Room 441-E, Washington, DC 20250-2308, Telephone: (202) 720-9110.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The regulation on USDA-OIG's organization, functions, and delegations of authority was last published in 1995 (60 FR 52840). Since that time, OIG has had several internal reorganizations. In order to provide the public with current information regarding OIG's organization, functions, and delegations of authority, OIG is amending its regulations.

    Administrative Procedure Act

    This rule relates to agency organization and internal agency management. Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(A), such rules are not subject to the requirement to provide public notice of proposed rulemaking and opportunity for public comment. Therefore, notice and comment before the effective date are being waived.

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563

    OIG has reviewed this rule to ensure its consistency with the regulatory philosophy and principles set forth in Executive Orders 12866 and 13563. OIG has determined that this rule is non-significant within the meaning of Executive Order 12866. Therefore, this rule is not required to be and has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).

    Regulatory Flexibility Act

    These regulations will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Therefore, a regulatory flexibility analysis as provided by the Regulatory Flexibility Act, as amended, is not required.

    Executive Order 12291

    This rule relates to internal agency organization and management. Therefore, it is exempt from the provisions of Executive Order 12291.

    Paperwork Reduction Act

    These regulations impose no additional reporting and recordkeeping requirements. Therefore, clearance by OMB is not required.

    Federalism (Executive Order 13132)

    This rule does not have Federalism implications, as set forth in Executive Order 13132. 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.

    Congressional Review Act

    OIG has determined that this rule is not a major rule as defined by the Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 804.

    List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 2610

    Authority delegations (Government agencies), Organization and functions (Government agencies).

    For the reasons set forth in the preamble, the Office of Inspector General revises 7 CFR part 2610 to read as follows: PART 2610—ORGANIZATION, FUNCTIONS, AND DELEGATIONS OF AUTHORITY Sec. 2610.1 General statement. 2610.2 Headquarters organization. 2610.3 Regional organization. 2610.4 Requests for service. 2610.5 Delegations of authority. Authority:

    5 U.S.C. 301, 552; Inspector General Act of 1978, as amended, 5 U.S.C. app.; 7 U.S.C. 2270.

    § 2610.1 General statement.

    (a) The Inspector General Act of 1978, as amended, 5 U.S.C. app. (IG Act), established an Office of Inspector General (OIG) in the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and transferred to it the functions, powers, and duties of offices referred to in the Department as the “Office of Investigation” and the “Office of Audit,” previously assigned to the OIG created by the Secretary's Memoranda 1915 and 1727, dated March 23, 1977, and October 5, 1977, respectively. Under the IG Act, OIG was established as an independent and objective unit, headed by the Inspector General (IG), who is appointed by the President and reports to and is under the general supervision of the Secretary.

    (b) OIG conducts and supervises audits and investigations relating to Department programs and operations; provides leadership and coordination and recommends policies for activities designed to promote economy, efficiency, and effectiveness in the administration of, and to prevent and detect fraud and abuse in, such programs and operations; and provides a means for keeping the Secretary of Agriculture and the Congress fully and currently informed about problems and deficiencies relating to the administration of such programs and operations and the necessity for and progress of corrective action.

    (c) The IG has specific duties, responsibilities, and authorities pursuant to the IG Act, including to:

    (1) Provide policy direction for, and conduct, supervise, and coordinate audits and investigations relating to USDA programs and operations.

    (2) Review existing and proposed legislation and regulations related to USDA programs and operations and make recommendations to the Secretary and the Congress on the impact such laws or regulations will have on the economy and efficiency of program administration or in the prevention and detection of fraud and abuse in USDA programs and operations.

    (3) Recommend policies for, and conduct, supervise, or coordinate other activities carried out or financed by USDA for the purpose of promoting economy and efficiency in the administration of, or preventing and detecting fraud and abuse, in USDA programs and operations.

    (4) Recommend policies for, and conduct, supervise, or coordinate relationships between, USDA and other Federal, State, and local governmental agencies and nongovernmental entities regarding the promotion of economy and efficiency, prevention of fraud and abuse, or the identification and prosecution of participants in fraud and abuse.

    (5) Keep the Secretary and the Congress fully and currently informed about problems, abuses, and deficiencies, and the necessity for and progress of corrective actions in the administration of USDA programs and operations.

    (6) Report expeditiously to the Attorney General any matter where there are reasonable grounds to believe there has been a violation of Federal criminal law.

    (7) Have access to all records, reports, audits, reviews, documents, papers, recommendations, or other material available to the Department which relate to programs and operations for which the IG has responsibility.

    (8) Make such investigations and reports relating to the administration of USDA programs and operations as are, in the judgment of the IG, necessary or desirable.

    (9) Request such information or assistance as may be necessary for carrying out the duties and responsibilities of the IG Act from any Federal, State, or local governmental agency or unit thereof.

    (10) Issue subpoenas for the production of information, documents, reports, answers, records, accounts, papers, and other data in any medium (including electronically stored information, as well as any tangible thing) and documentary evidence necessary in the performance of functions assigned by the IG Act, except that procedures other than subpoenas shall be used to obtain documents and information from Federal agencies.

    (11) Whenever necessary in the performance of functions assigned by the IG Act, administer to or take from any person an oath, affirmation, or affidavit, which shall have the same force and effect as if administered or taken by or before an officer having a seal.

    (12) Have direct and prompt access to the Secretary when necessary for any purpose pertaining to the performance of functions and responsibilities under the IG Act.

    (13) Select, appoint, and employ necessary officers and employees in OIG in accordance with laws and regulations governing the civil service, including an Assistant Inspector General for Audit (AIG/A) and an Assistant Inspector General for Investigations (AIG/I).

    (14) Obtain services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109.

    (15) Enter into contracts and other arrangements for audits, inspections, studies, analyses, and other services with public agencies and private persons, and make such payments as may be necessary to carry out the provisions of the IG Act, to the extent and in such amounts as may be provided in advance by an appropriation act.

    (16) Receive and investigate complaints or information from any Department employee concerning the possible existence of an activity constituting a violation of law, rules, or regulations, or mismanagement, gross waste of funds, abuse of authority, or a substantial and specific danger to the public health and safety.

    (17) Designate a Whistleblower Protection Ombudsman, who will educate Department employees about prohibitions on retaliation for protected disclosures; and who have made or are contemplating making a protected disclosure about the rights and remedies against retaliation for protected disclosures.

    (d) Pursuant to § 2.33 of this title, the Secretary has made the following delegations of authority to the IG:

    (1) Advise the Secretary and General officers in the planning, development, and execution of Department policies and programs.

    (2) At the request of the Secretary's security office, determine the availability of OIG law enforcement personnel to assist the security office in providing for the personal security of the Secretary and Deputy Secretary.

    (3) Serve as liaison official for the Department for all audits of USDA performed by the Government Accountability Office.

    (e) The IG, under section 1337 of the Agriculture and Food Act of 1981, Public Law 97-98, 7 U.S.C. 2270, and pursuant to rules issued by the Secretary in part 1a of this title, has the authority to:

    (1) Designate OIG employees who investigate alleged or suspected felony criminal violations of statutes administered by the Secretary of Agriculture or any agency of USDA, when engaged in the performance of official duties to:

    (i) Make an arrest without a warrant for any such criminal felony violation if such violation is committed, or if the employee has probable cause to believe that such violation is being committed, in his/her presence;

    (ii) Execute and serve a warrant for an arrest, for the search of premises, or the seizure of evidence when issued under authority of the United States upon probable cause to believe that such a violation has been committed; and

    (iii) Carry a firearm.

    (2) Issue directives and take the actions prescribed by the Secretary's rules.

    § 2610.2 Headquarters organization.

    (a) OIG has a headquarters office in Washington, DC, and regional offices throughout the United States. The headquarters office consists of the immediate office of the IG, which includes three component offices, and four operational units.

    (b) Immediate Office Components. (1) The Director of the Office of Compliance and Integrity (OCI) performs independent quality assurance and internal control reviews of OIG operations. OCI also investigates allegations of criminal and/or serious administrative misconduct by OIG employees.

    (2) Section 3(g) of the IG Act mandates that each IG shall obtain legal advice from a counsel either reporting directly to the IG or to another IG. Within USDA-OIG, such legal advice is provided by the Counsel to the Inspector General. The Office of Counsel (OC) provides legal advice and representation on issues arising during the course of audit, investigative, and Office of Data Sciences (ODS) activities or on internal administrative and management issues. OC also manages OIG's congressional, media relations, ethics, Freedom of Information Act, and Privacy Act programs; and reviews proposed legislation, regulations, and procedures.

    (3) The Director of the Office of Diversity and Conflict Resolution advises OIG leadership on applying the principles of civil rights, equal employment opportunity, dispute resolution, diversity, and inclusion, on matters affecting the OIG workforce, program activities, and development of policy. This office also guides all OIG personnel through the use of the Federal sector employment discrimination complaints and dispute resolution processes, as needed.

    (c) Operational units. (1) The AIG/A carries out the OIG's domestic and foreign audit operations through a headquarters office and three regional offices shown in § 2610.3(a). The staff provides for audit review of information technology (IT) security throughout USDA. Auditing officials conduct operational liaison on audit matters; schedule and conduct audits; release audit reports to management; monitor agency action to assure that audit reports have been properly acted upon through review of Department management follow up systems; monitor the quality of OIG audit reports; and coordinate activities with the AIG/I. The staff also provides an integrated approach to fraud prevention and detection and management improvement in USDA programs and operations; coordinates analyses and reports on vulnerability assessments; and recommends policies and provides technical assistance for audit operations. The Auditing headquarters office consists of the immediate office of the AIG/A and five staff divisions.

    (2) The Assistant Inspector General for Data Sciences carries out OIG's data sciences operations through a headquarters office. OIG officials within ODS perform predictive data analysis, statistical sampling, modeling, computer matching, data mining, and data warehousing of USDA programs and operations in support of OIG audits, investigations, and other activities.

    (3) The AIG/I carries out OIG's domestic and foreign investigative operations through a headquarters office and the five regional offices shown in § 2610.3(b). Investigations officials conduct operational and intelligence liaison on investigative matters with the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Secret Service, Internal Revenue Service, Interpol, and other Federal, State, and local law enforcement organizations; determine the need for investigative action; conduct investigations; prepare factual reports of investigative findings; refer reports for appropriate administrative or legal action; follow up on agency actions to assure that OIG investigative reports have been properly acted upon; monitor the quality of investigative reports; and coordinate activities with the AIG/A. The staff also conducts special investigations of major programs, operations, and high level officials; can assist the Secretary's security office in providing for the protection of the Secretary and Deputy Secretary; and receives and processes employee complaints concerning possible violations of laws, rules, regulations or mismanagement. The OIG Whistleblower Protection Ombudsman described in § 2610.1(c)(17) is located within the Office of Investigations.

    (4) The Assistant Inspector General for Management (AIG/M) manages formulation of OIG policies and procedures; develops, administers and directs comprehensive programs for the management, budget, financial, personnel, systems improvement, and information activities and operations of OIG; and is responsible for OIG IT and information management systems. The staff maintains OIG's directives system, and Departmental Regulations and Federal Register issuances. The immediate office of the AIG/M and four divisions carry out these functions.

    § 2610.3 Regional organization.

    (a) Each regional Audit Director is responsible to the IG and to the AIG/A for supervising the performance of all OIG auditing activities relating to the Department's domestic and foreign programs and operations within an assigned geographic area. The addresses and telephone numbers of the three Audit regional offices and the territories served are as follows:

    Audit Region, Address, Telephone Number, and Territory Eastern Region, 5601 Sunnyside Avenue, Suite 2-2230 (Mail Stop 5300), Beltsville, Maryland 20705-5300, (301) 504-2100; Alabama, Arkansas, Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Mississippi, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Puerto Rico, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Vermont, Virgin Islands, Virginia, West Virginia, and Wisconsin. Midwestern Region, 8930 Ward Parkway, Suite 3016, Kansas City, Missouri 64114, (816) 926-7667; Colorado, Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Montana, Minnesota, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah, and Wyoming. Western Region, 1333 Broadway, Suite 400, Oakland, California 94612, (510) 208-6800; Alaska, Arizona, California, Hawaii, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, Territory of Guam, Trust Territories of the Pacific, and Washington.

    (b) Each regional Special Agent-in-Charge (SAC) is responsible to the IG and to the AIG/I for supervising the performance of all OIG investigative activities relating to the Department's domestic and foreign programs and operations within an assigned geographic area. The addresses and telephone numbers of the five Investigations regional offices and the territories served are as follows:

    Investigations Region, Address, Telephone Number, and Territory Midwest Region, 111 N. Canal Street, Suite 325, Chicago, Illinois 60606-7296, (312) 353-1358; Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, North Dakota, Ohio, South Dakota, and Wisconsin. Northeast Region, 26 Federal Plaza, Room 1409, New York, New York 10278-0004, (212) 264-8400; Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, and West Virginia. Southeast Region, 401 W. Peachtree Street NW., Room 2329, Atlanta, Georgia 30308, (404) 730-3274; Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, North Carolina, Puerto Rico, South Carolina, Tennessee, and the Virgin Islands. Southwest Region, 101 South Main, Room 311, Temple, Texas 76501, (254) 743-6535; Arkansas, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, New Mexico, Oklahoma, and Texas. Western Region, 1333 Broadway, Suite 400, Oakland, California 94612, (510) 208-6860; Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, Territory of Guam, Trust Territories of the Pacific, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming.
    § 2610.4 Requests for service.

    (a) Heads of USDA agencies will direct requests for audit or investigative service to the AIG/A, AIG/I, Audit Director, SAC, or to other OIG audit or investigation officials responsible for providing service of the type desired in the geographical area where service is desired.

    (b) Agency officials or other employees may, at any time, direct to the personal attention of the IG any audit or investigation matter that warrants such attention.

    (c) Other persons (i.e., non-USDA personnel) may address their communications regarding audit or investigative matters to: The Inspector General, U.S. Department of Agriculture, USDA Stop 2301, Washington, DC 20250.

    (d) OIG has established several channels for USDA employees and the general public to report fraud, waste, abuse, and mismanagement in USDA programs, or misconduct by a USDA employee. These include a general OIG Hotline, a Bribery/Assault Line, and (for USDA employees) a Whistleblower Ombudsman.

    (1) General fraud, waste, and abuse hotline:

    (i) File complaint online: http://www.usda.gov/oig/hotline.htm (click on “Submit a Complaint” button);

    (ii) Telephone: (800) 424-9121, (202) 690-1622, or (202) 690-1202 (Telecommunication Device for the Deaf);

    (iii) Facsimile: (202) 690-2474; or

    (iv) Write a letter to United States Department of Agriculture, Office of Inspector General, P.O. Box 23399, Washington, DC 20026.

    (2) Bribery/Assault Line: (202) 720-7257 (24 hours a day).

    (3) Whistleblower Protection Ombudsman. USDA employees may contact the Ombudsman via email at: [email protected]. Additional information about the Ombudsman is available online at https://www.usda.gov/oig/ombudsman.htm.

    § 2610.5 Delegations of authority.

    (a) AIGs, Directors, and Counsel listed in § 2610.2, and Audit Directors and SACs listed in § 2610.3, are authorized to take whatever actions are necessary to carry out their assigned functions. This authority may be re-delegated.

    (b) The IG reserves the right to establish audit and investigation policies, program, procedures, and standards; to allocate appropriated funds; to determine audit and investigative jurisdiction; and to exercise any of the powers or functions or perform any of the duties referenced in the above delegation.

    Dated: December 8, 2016. Phyllis K. Fong, Inspector General.
    [FR Doc. 2016-29976 Filed 12-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-23-P
    NATIONAL CREDIT UNION ADMINISTRATION 12 CFR Parts 701 and 721 RIN 3133-AE54 Federal Credit Union Occupancy, Planning, and Disposal of Acquired and Abandoned Premises; Incidental Powers AGENCY:

    National Credit Union Administration (NCUA).

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    As part of NCUA's Regulatory Modernization Initiative, the NCUA Board (Board) is finalizing amendments to its regulation governing federal credit union (FCU) occupancy, planning, and disposal of acquired and abandoned premises, and its regulation regarding incidental powers. To provide regulatory relief to FCUs, this final rule eliminates a requirement in the current occupancy rule (formerly known as the fixed assets rule) that an FCU must plan for, and eventually achieve, full occupancy of acquired premises.

    The final rule generally retains the current regulatory timeframes for partial occupancy. However, it modifies the definition of “partially occupy” to mean occupation and use, on a full-time basis, of at least fifty percent of the premises by the FCU, or by a combination of the FCU and a credit union service organization (CUSO) in which the FCU has a controlling interest in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP).

    The final rule also amends the excess capacity provision in NCUA's incidental powers rule to clarify that an FCU may lease or sell excess capacity in its facilities, but it need not anticipate that such excess capacity will be fully occupied by the FCU in the future. However, the sale or lease of excess capacity in equipment or services, including employee-sharing and data processing for third parties, continues to be limited to circumstances where an FCU reasonably anticipates that such excess capacity will be taken up by the future expansion of services to members.

    DATES:

    This rule is effective January 20, 2017.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Justin M. Anderson, Senior Staff Attorney, Office of General Counsel, at (703) 518-6540, or Jacob McCall, Program Officer, Office of Examination and Insurance, at (703) 518-6360.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background II. Summary of Comments III. Regulatory Procedures I. Background

    In April 2016, the Board issued a proposed rule 1 to amend its regulation governing FCU occupancy, planning, and disposal of acquired and abandoned premises, and its regulation regarding incidental powers. The regulatory changes in the 2016 proposed rule are identical to the regulatory changes adopted in this final rule as summarized above. The Board received 27 comment letters in response to the proposed rule. Twenty-six of the commenters generally supported the proposal and one commenter opposed the rule. Of the 26 supportive comments, approximately half recommended additional changes or more regulatory relief.

    1 81 FR 24738 (Apr. 27, 2016).

    II. Summary of Comments.

    As noted above, one commenter opposed the proposed rule in its entirety. This commenter asserted that the proposed rule was a significant departure from the Board's previous interpretation of the Federal Credit Union Act (the Act) and could lead to FCUs exceeding their authority.

    As stated in the proposed rule, the Board believes the language in Section 107(4) of the Act supports an interpretation that provides FCUs with more flexibility than permitted by the current rule to acquire and hold real property.2 Accordingly, the Board has reconsidered its current approach of requiring FCUs to fully occupy premises. The Board notes that section 107(4) of the Act neither explicitly mentions nor requires full occupancy of FCU property.

    2 12 U.S.C. 1757(4).

    While this final rule represents a departure from the Board's previous interpretation of section 107(4) of the Act, the Board believes the rule is both reasonable and consistent with the requirements of the Act and is within the Board's authority. The Board notes that the United States Supreme Court has emphasized that an “initial agency interpretation is not instantly carved in stone,” and “to engage in informed rulemaking, [an agency] must consider varying interpretations and the wisdom of its policy on a continuing basis,” indicating that an agency may change its interpretive position on the statutes it administers.3 The final rule is reasonable and eliminates the imposition of unnecessary hardship on FCUs whose growth potential and member service strategies may be hampered by the current rule.

    3Chevron v. Natural Res. Def. Council, 467 U.S. 837, 863-864 (1984). The Supreme Court has also found that an agency is entitled to Chevron deference if it reverses an earlier interpretation. See, e.g., Rust v. Sullivan, 500 U.S. 173 (1991); National Cable & Telecomms. Ass'n v. Brand X Internet Servs., 545 U.S. 967 (2005).

    The Board reiterates, however, its current view that there is no authority in the Act for an FCU to invest in real estate for speculative purposes or to otherwise engage in real estate activities that do not generally support its purpose of providing financial services to its members. The Act is clear that any property acquired or held by an FCU must be “necessary or incidental to its operations.” 4 NCUA has stated consistently that an FCU may only invest in property it intends to use to transact credit union business or in property that supports its internal operations or member services.

    4 12 U.S.C. 1757(4).

    A. Elimination of Requirement That an FCU Must Plan for, and Eventually Achieve, Full Occupancy of Acquired Premises

    The large majority of commenters strongly supported removing the full occupancy requirement. However, two commenters opposed this particular aspect of the proposed rule. Commenters that disagreed with the elimination of the full occupancy requirement expressed concern that FCUs will be more likely to venture into real estate activities that are beyond the scope of credit union operations envisioned by Congress.

    In the proposed rule, the Board emphasized that maintaining the requirement that an FCU must partially occupy real property it obtains will reduce the likelihood and opportunity for speculative investments. The Board reaffirms this position and also notes that NCUA will diligently oversee FCUs' activities in this area to ensure that FCUs are not engaging in speculative investments or other real estate activities that are not permitted under the Act. Any FCU in violation of these requirements could be subject to all administrative remedies available to the agency. Therefore, the Board does not believe this final rule will result in FCUs operating beyond the scope of their authority as Congress provided for in the Act.

    B. Partial Occupancy 1. Definition

    Under the current rule, an FCU must partially occupy premises acquired for future expansion, within a reasonable period, but no later than six years after the date of acquisition. The proposed rule did not change this requirement, but did modify the definition of “partially occupy” to mean occupation and use, on a full-time basis, of at least fifty percent of the premises by the FCU, or by a combination of the FCU and a CUSO in which the FCU has a controlling interest in accordance with GAAP.

    Nearly half of the commenters supported the proposed definition of “partially occupy.” Several of these commenters, however, asked how they are to measure different areas of a building (e.g., common, service and mechanical areas) for determining the FCU's percentage of occupancy. The Board notes that NCUA will consider all shared facilities owned by the FCU as occupied by the FCU, unless the area is specifically leased to an outside entity for their exclusive use. This will include common, service, and mechanical areas, and other shared spaces.

    In addition, a few commenters supported the proposed definition, but suggested the rule should allow for exceptions to the fifty percent requirement or permit waivers from the partial occupancy requirement. Some of these commenters noted that an FCU meeting the fifty percent occupancy requirement may, at a later time, occupy less than fifty percent for economic or strategic reasons. One commenter stated that waivers should be allowed in such circumstances. Another commenter suggested that satisfaction of the fifty percent occupancy requirement should be “grandfathered” once initially achieved by the FCU. Finally, one commenter said mixed-use developments in urban areas sometimes require shared space and that common areas and other shared fixtures and utilities should count toward the fifty percent partial occupancy requirement.

    The final rule retains the waiver provisions for the partial occupancy requirement. FCUs can request a waiver of either the fifty percent requirement or the six-year requirement. The waiver process is designed to allow NCUA to evaluate unique circumstances. For example, certain zoning laws affecting a particular property may support NCUA accepting less than fifty percent occupancy or extending the time period for compliance. The Board believes the waiver process balances providing flexibility to FCUs while maintaining safety and soundness.

    A few commenters disagreed with the proposed definition in its entirety. One commenter argued against the fifty percent threshold and stated the rule should allow FCUs broader flexibility to occupy a lesser percentage of their premises. As discussed in more detail above, the Board purposefully included the proposed partial occupancy requirement, among other reasons, as a protection against FCUs potentially engaging in impermissible and speculative real estate investment transactions. Further, the ability to request a waiver from the partial occupancy requirement is, in part, an acknowledgement that there may be circumstances where an FCU could prudently occupy a lesser percentage of the premises and still comply with the Act.

    One commenter argued that there is no need for a prescriptive fifty percent occupancy requirement. Another commenter urged that the fifty percent occupancy threshold be removed or, alternatively, that the threshold be reduced to no more than twenty-five percent. A different commenter suggested “partially occupy” should be defined as “less-than-full occupancy that is material and visible actual usage.” The same commenter also suggested that the addition of an absolute prohibition on real estate speculation, analogous to NCUA's regulatory ban on credit union speculation on derivatives, could be adopted as an added safeguard against speculative real estate investing. One commenter noted the fifty percent threshold is somewhat ambiguous with respect to mixed-use properties and larger tracts of land. The same commenter recommended that the final rule revert to an earlier iteration of the regulatory definition, which at one point required only full occupancy of FCU property on a part-time basis.

    The Board believes that removing the full occupancy requirement provides FCUs with greater flexibility in managing their real estate, and that it is important to maintain the partial occupancy requirement to ensure safety and soundness. The fifty percent standard provides FCUs with a clear guideline for achieving compliance, and the waiver provisions ensure further flexibility when warranted.

    2. CUSOs

    Several commenters asked what is meant by “a controlling interest in a CUSO.” As stated in the proposed rule, NCUA defines controlling interest in a CUSO under GAAP using FASB Accounting Standards Update (ASU) 805. This standard defines controlling interest as “the ability of an entity to direct the policies and management that guide the ongoing activities of another entity so as to increase its benefits and limit its losses from that other entity's activities.” 5

    5 FASB Exposure Draft, Consolidated Financial Statements: Purpose and Policy, Paragraph 6 (1999).

    In addition, two commenters disagreed with the controlling interest requirement for CUSOs entirely. These commenters suggested that an FCU and its CUSO should be able to meet the partial occupancy threshold regardless of the amount of ownership interest the FCU has in the CUSO. One of the commenters further suggested that the types of entities with which an FCU may meet the fifty percent occupancy requirement should be expanded to include credit union industry “partners” or other credit union service providers.

    The Board stated in the proposed rule that:

    Occupancy of FCU premises with third-party vendors or CUSOs in which the FCU does not maintain a controlling interest will not count towards the fifty percent partial occupancy requirement because these entities operate at the direction of other owners and may not be obligated to primarily support the FCU that acquired the premises or to primarily serve that FCU's members.6

    6 81 FR 24738 (Apr. 27, 2016).

    Further, the Board notes that this definition will ensure that any property acquired or held by an FCU is primarily utilized for a purpose that is necessary or incidental to its operations, as required by the Act.

    3. Timeframe for Partial Occupancy

    Nearly half of the commenters offered input on the current rule's six-year regulatory timeframe for partial occupancy of improved and unimproved property. Of these, several urged that the regulatory timeframe for partial occupancy be eliminated entirely or, alternatively, be extended to ten years.

    Three commenters recommended the rule be modified to allow ten years for partial occupancy of unimproved property or raw land. One commenter suggested that the occupancy requirement for unimproved property should be removed entirely. In addition, two commenters suggested that the occupancy waiver provision should be amended to require NCUA to grant waivers upon request unless there are specific safety and soundness concerns.

    The Board notes that the final rule will retain the waiver provisions for the partial occupancy requirement, which allows an FCU to request a waiver of the six-year requirement. The Board believes the waiver process, as currently written, provides sufficient flexibility while protecting safety and soundness.

    C. Incidental Powers

    As discussed above, the proposed rule amends the excess capacity provision in NCUA's incidental powers rule to clarify that an FCU may lease or sell excess capacity in its facilities, but it need not anticipate that such excess capacity will be fully occupied by the FCU in the future. However, the sale or lease of excess capacity in equipment or services, including employee-sharing and data processing for third parties, would continue to be limited to circumstances where an FCU reasonably anticipates that such excess capacity will be taken up by the future expansion of services to members.

    Four commenters expressed support for this aspect of the proposed rule and one commenter disagreed with it, stating that it would allow credit unions to exceed their authority under the Act. The Board does not believe that anything in this final rule will allow FCUs to exceed their authority under the Act.

    D. Additional Comments

    Two commenters advocated the creation of an independent appeals process for adjudicating disagreements between NCUA and an FCU concerning the acquisition and use of FCU premises. The creation of such a process was not part of the proposed rule and is, therefore, outside the scope of this final rulemaking. The Board will, however, consider amending NCUA's appeals process in the coming year.

    Finally, one commenter suggested that there should be a de minimis exception for fixed assets that are financially immaterial to the FCU's operations. This commenter asserted that such de minimis fixed assets should not be subject to any regulatory occupancy requirements, including the fifty percent rule and the six-year occupancy timeframe. The Board notes that the occupancy rule implements provisions of the Act. The Act does not distinguish certain fixed assets from other fixed assets based on financial materiality. The Board believes this final rule provides significant flexibility and regulatory relief to FCUs and does not include a de minimis exception.

    III. Regulatory Procedures A. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) requires NCUA to prepare and make available for public comment an initial regulatory flexibility analysis that describes the impact of a rule on small entities. A regulatory flexibility analysis is not required, however, if the agency certifies that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities (defined for purposes of the RFA to include credit unions with assets less than $100 million) and publishes its certification and a short, explanatory statement in the Federal Register together with the rule. The final rule would provide regulatory relief by eliminating the need to develop a plan for full occupancy. Also, FCUs currently have limited flexibility to purchase real estate with excess capacity. NCUA certifies that this final rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small credit unions.

    B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) applies to rulemakings in which an agency by rule creates a new paperwork burden on regulated entities or modifies an existing burden.7 For purposes of the PRA, a paperwork burden may take the form of either a reporting or a recordkeeping requirement, both referred to as information collections. The final rule provides regulatory relief to FCUs by eliminating the requirement that, if an FCU does not fully occupy premises acquired for future expansion within one year, it must have a board resolution in place by the end of that year with definitive plans for full occupation. The final rule does not impose new paperwork burdens. Rather, the final rule would relieve FCUs from the current requirement to have a board-approved plan for full occupation of its premises.

    7 44 U.S.C. 3507(d); 5 CFR part 1320.

    According to NCUA estimates, approximately 15 FCUs are required to develop a plan for full occupation of premises each year. Accordingly, the reduction to existing paperwork burdens that would result from the final is analyzed below:

    Estimate of the reduced burden by eliminating the full occupancy planning requirement.

    Estimated FCUs: 15.

    Frequency of waiver request: Annual.

    Reduced hour burden: 15 hours.

    15 FCUs × 15 hours = 225 hours reduced burden.

    In accordance with the requirements of the PRA, NCUA intends to obtain a modification of its OMB Control Number to reflect these changes. NCUA is submitting a copy of this rule to OMB, along with an application for a modification of the OMB Control Number.

    The PRA and OMB regulations require that the public be provided an opportunity to comment on the paperwork requirements, including an agency's estimate of the burden of the paperwork requirements. The Board did not receive any comments on the PRA aspects of the rule.

    C. Executive Order 13132

    Executive Order 13132 encourages independent regulatory agencies to consider the impact of their actions on state and local interests. NCUA, an independent regulatory agency, as defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(5), voluntarily complies with the executive order to adhere to fundamental federalism principles. Because the occupancy and incidental powers regulations apply only to FCUs, the final rule does 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. As such, NCUA has determined that this rule does not constitute a policy that has federalism implications for purposes of the executive order.

    D. Assessment of Federal Regulations and Policies on Families

    NCUA has determined that this rule will not affect family well-being within the meaning of Section 654 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act of 1999.8

    8 Public Law 105-277, 112 Stat. 2681 (1998).

    List of Subjects 12 CFR Part 701

    Credit unions, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    12 CFR Part 721

    Credit unions, Functions, Implied powers.

    By the National Credit Union Administration Board, on December 15, 2016. Gerard Poliquin, Secretary of the Board.

    For the reasons stated above, NCUA amends 12 CFR parts 701 and 721 as follows:

    PART 701—ORGANIZATION AND OPERATION OF FEDERAL CREDIT UNIONS 1. The authority citation for part 701 is revised to read as follows: Authority:

    12 U.S.C. 1752(5), 1757, 1765, 1766, 1781, 1782, 1787, 1789; Title V, Pub. L. 109-351, 120 Stat. 1966.

    2. Amend § 701.36 as follows: a. Revise the section heading. b. Revise paragraph (a). c. Amend paragraph (b) by revising the definitions of Abandoned premises and Partially occupy. d. Remove paragraph (c)(1). e. Redesignate paragraphs (c)(2) and (3) as (c)(1) and (2), respectively. f. Revise newly redesignated paragraph (c)(1).

    The revisions read as follows:

    § 701.36 Federal credit union occupancy and disposal of acquired and abandoned premises.

    (a) Scope. Section 107(4) of the Federal Credit Union Act (12 U.S.C. 1757(4)) authorizes a federal credit union to purchase, hold, and dispose of property necessary or incidental to its operations. This section interprets and implements that provision by establishing occupancy and disposal requirements for acquired and abandoned premises, and by prohibiting certain transactions. This section applies only to federal credit unions.

    (b) * * *

    Abandoned premises means premises previously used to transact credit union business but no longer used for that purpose. It also means premises originally acquired to transact future credit union business but no longer intended for that purpose.

    Partially occupy means occupation and use, on a full-time basis, of at least fifty percent of each of the premises by the federal credit union, or the federal credit union and a credit union service organization in which the federal credit union has a controlling interest in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP).

    (c) Premises not currently used to transact credit union business. (1) If a federal credit union acquires premises, including unimproved land or unimproved real property, it must partially occupy each of them within a reasonable period, but no later than six years after the date of acquisition. NCUA may waive the partial occupation requirements. To seek a waiver, a federal credit union must submit a written request to its Regional Office and fully explain why it needs the waiver. The Regional Director will provide the federal credit union a written response, either approving or disapproving the request. The Regional Director's decision will be based on safety and soundness considerations.

    PART 721—INCIDENTAL POWERS 3. The authority citation for part 721 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    12 U.S.C. 1757(17), 1766 and 1789.

    4. Amend § 721.3 by revising paragraph (e) to read as follows:
    § 721.3 What categories of activities are preapproved as incidental powers necessary or requisite to carry on a credit union's business?

    (e) Excess capacity. Excess capacity is the excess use or capacity remaining in facilities, equipment, or services that you properly invested in or established, in good faith, with the intent of serving your members or supporting your business operations. You may sell or lease the excess capacity in facilities, such as office space and other premises. You may sell or lease the excess capacity in equipment or services, such as employees and data processing, if you reasonably anticipate that the excess capacity will be taken up by the future expansion of services to your members.

    [FR Doc. 2016-30657 Filed 12-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7535-01-P
    BUREAU OF CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION 12 CFR Part 1003 Home Mortgage Disclosure (Regulation C) Adjustment to Asset-Size Exemption Threshold AGENCY:

    Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection.

    ACTION:

    Final rule; official commentary.

    SUMMARY:

    The Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection (Bureau) is issuing a final rule amending the official commentary that interprets the requirements of the Bureau's Regulation C (Home Mortgage Disclosure) to reflect the asset-size exemption threshold for banks, savings associations, and credit unions based on the annual percentage change in the average of the Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (CPI-W). Based on the 0.8 percent increase in the average of the CPI-W for the 12-month period ending in November 2016, the exemption threshold will remain at $44 million. Therefore, banks, savings associations, and credit unions with assets of $44 million or less as of December 31, 2016, are exempt from collecting data in 2017.

    DATES:

    This final rule is effective January 1, 2017.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Jaclyn Maier, Counsel, Office of Regulations, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, 1700 G Street NW., Washington, DC 20552, at (202) 435-7700.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Background

    The Home Mortgage Disclosure Act of 1975 (HMDA) (12 U.S.C. 2801-2810) requires most mortgage lenders located in metropolitan areas to collect data about their housing related lending activity. Annually, lenders must report their data to the appropriate Federal agencies and make the data available to the public. The Bureau's Regulation C (12 CFR part 1003) implements HMDA.

    Prior to 1997, HMDA exempted certain depository institutions as defined in HMDA (i.e., banks, savings associations, and credit unions) with assets totaling $10 million or less as of the preceding year-end. In 1996, HMDA was amended to expand the asset-size exemption for these depository institutions. 12 U.S.C. 2808(b). The amendment increased the dollar amount of the asset-size exemption threshold by requiring a one-time adjustment of the $10 million figure based on the percentage by which the CPI-W for 1996 exceeded the CPI-W for 1975, and it provided for annual adjustments thereafter based on the annual percentage increase in the CPI-W, rounded to the nearest multiple of $1 million.

    The definition of “financial institution” in § 1003.2 provides that the Bureau will adjust the asset threshold based on the year-to-year change in the average of the CPI-W, not seasonally adjusted, for each 12-month period ending in November, rounded to the nearest $1 million. For 2016, the threshold was $44 million. During the 12-month period ending in November 2016, the average of the CPI-W increased by 0.8 percent. This increase results in no change to the asset-size threshold when rounded to the nearest $1 million. Thus, the exemption threshold will remain at $44 million. Therefore, banks, savings associations, and credit unions with assets of $44 million or less as of December 31, 2016, are exempt from collecting data in 2017. An institution's exemption from collecting data in 2017 does not affect its responsibility to report data it was required to collect in 2016.

    II. Procedural Requirements A. Administrative Procedure Act

    Under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), notice and opportunity for public comment are not required if the Bureau finds that notice and public comment are impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest. 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B). Pursuant to this final rule, comment 2(Financial institution)-2 in Regulation C, supplement I, is amended to update the exemption threshold. The amendment in this final rule is technical and non-discretionary, and it merely applies the formula established by Regulation C for determining any adjustments to the exemption threshold. For these reasons, the Bureau has determined that publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking and providing opportunity for public comment are unnecessary. Therefore, the amendment is adopted in final form.

    Section 553(d) of the APA generally requires publication of a final rule not less than 30 days before its effective date, except (1) a substantive rule which grants or recognizes an exemption or relieves a restriction; (2) interpretive rules and statements of policy; or (3) as otherwise provided by the agency for good cause found and published with the rule. 5 U.S.C. 553(d). At a minimum, the Bureau believes the amendments fall under the third exception to section 553(d). The Bureau finds that there is good cause to make the amendments effective on January 1, 2017. The amendment in this final rule is technical and non-discretionary, and it applies the method previously established in the agency's regulations for determining adjustments to the threshold.

    B. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    Because no notice of proposed rulemaking is required, the Regulatory Flexibility Act does not require an initial or final regulatory flexibility analysis. 5 U.S.C. 603(a), 604(a).

    C. Paperwork Reduction Act

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3506; 5 CFR 1320), the agency reviewed this final rule. No collections of information pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act are contained in the final rule.

    List of Subjects in 12 CFR Part 1003

    Banking, Banks, Credit unions, Mortgages, National banks, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Savings associations.

    Authority and Issuance

    For the reasons set forth above, the Bureau amends Regulation C, 12 CFR part 1003, as set forth below:

    PART 1003—HOME MORTGAGE DISCLOSURE (REGULATION C) 1. The authority citation for part 1003 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    12 U.S.C. 2803, 2804, 2805, 5512, 5581.

    2. In Supplement I to Part 1003, under Section 1003.2—Definitions, under the definition “Financial institution”, paragraph 2 is revised to read as follows: Supplement I to Part 1003—Staff Commentary Section 1003.2—Definitions

    Financial institution.

    2. Adjustment of exemption threshold for banks, savings associations, and credit unions. For data collection in 2017, the asset-size exemption threshold is $44 million. Banks, savings associations, and credit unions with assets at or below $44 million as of December 31, 2016, are exempt from collecting data for 2017.

    Dated: December 15, 2016. Richard Cordray, Director, Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection.
    [FR Doc. 2016-30731 Filed 12-19-16; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE 4810-AM-P
    BUREAU OF CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION 12 CFR Part 1026 Truth in Lending Act (Regulation Z) Adjustment to Asset-Size Exemption Threshold AGENCY:

    Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection.

    ACTION:

    Final rule; official interpretation.

    SUMMARY:

    The Bureau is amending the official commentary that interprets the requirements of the Bureau's Regulation Z (Truth in Lending) to reflect a change in the asset-size threshold for certain creditors to qualify for an exemption to the requirement to establish an escrow account for a higher-priced mortgage loan based on the annual percentage change in the average of the Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (CPI-W) for the 12-month period ending in November. The exemption threshold is adjusted to increase to $2.069 billion from $2.052 billion. The adjustment is based on the .8 percent increase in the average of the CPI-W for the 12-month period ending in November 2016. Therefore, creditors with assets of less than $2.069 billion (including assets of certain affiliates) as of December 31, 2016, are exempt, if other requirements of Regulation Z also are met, from establishing escrow accounts for higher-priced mortgage loans in 2017. This asset limit will also apply during a grace period, in certain circumstances, with respect to transactions with applications received before April 1 of 2018. The adjustment to the escrows exemption asset-size threshold will also increase a similar threshold for small-creditor portfolio and balloon-payment qualified mortgages. Balloon-payment qualified mortgages that satisfy all applicable criteria, including being made by creditors that have (together with certain affiliates) total assets below the threshold, are also excepted from the prohibition on balloon payments for high-cost mortgages.

    DATES:

    This final rule is effective January 1, 2017.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Jaclyn Maier, Counsel, Office of Regulations, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, 1700 G Street NW., Washington, DC 20552, at (202) 435-7700.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Background

    The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (Dodd-Frank Act) amended TILA to add section 129D(a), which contains a general requirement that an escrow account be established by a creditor to pay for property taxes and insurance premiums for certain first-lien higher-priced mortgage loan transactions. TILA section 129D also generally permits an exemption from the higher-priced mortgage loan escrow requirement for a creditor that meets certain requirements, including any asset-size threshold the Bureau may establish.

    In the 2013 Escrows Final Rule,1 the Bureau established such an asset-size threshold of $2 billion, which would adjust automatically each year, based on the year-to-year change in the average of the CPI-W for each 12-month period ending in November, with rounding to the nearest million dollars.2 In 2015, the Bureau revised the criteria for small creditors, and rural and underserved areas, for purposes of certain special provisions and exemptions from various requirements provided to certain small creditors under the Bureau's mortgage rules.3 As part of this revision the Bureau made certain changes that affect how the asset-size threshold applies. The Bureau revised § 1026.35(b)(2)(iii)(C) and its accompanying commentary to include in the calculation of the asset-size threshold the assets of the creditor's affiliates that regularly extended covered transactions secured by first liens during the applicable period. The Bureau also added a grace period from calendar year to calendar year to allow an otherwise eligible creditor that exceeded the asset limit in the preceding calendar year (but not in the calendar year before the preceding year) to continue to operate as a small creditor with respect to transactions with applications received before April 1 of the current calendar year.4 5 For 2016, the threshold was $2.052 billion.

    1 78 FR 4726 (Jan. 22, 2013).

    2See 12 CFR 1026.35(b)(2)(iii)(C).

    3See 80 FR 59943 (Oct. 2, 2015).

    4See 80 FR 59943, 59951 (Oct. 2, 2015).

    5 The Bureau also issued an interim final rule in March 2016 to revise certain provisions in Regulation Z to effectuate the HELP Rural Communities Act's amendments to TILA (Pub. L. 114-94, section 89003 (2015)). The rule broadened the cohort of creditors that may be eligible under TILA for the special provisions allowing origination of balloon-payment qualified mortgages and balloon-payment high-cost mortgages, as well as for the escrow exemption. See 81 FR 16074 (Mar. 25, 2016).

    During the 12-month period ending in November 2016, the average of the CPI-W increased by .8 percent. As a result, the exemption threshold is increased to $2.069 billion for 2017. Thus, if the creditor's assets together with the assets of its affiliates that regularly extended first-lien covered transactions during calendar year 2016 are less than $2.069 billion on December 31, 2016, and it meets the other requirements of § 1026.35(b)(2)(iii), it will be exempt in 2017 from the escrow-accounts requirement for higher-priced mortgage loans and will also be exempt from the escrow-accounts requirement for higher-priced mortgage loans for purposes of any loan consummated in 2018 for which the application was received before April 1, 2018. The adjustment to the escrows exemption asset-size threshold will also increase the threshold for small-creditor portfolio and balloon-payment qualified mortgages under Regulation Z. The requirements for small-creditor portfolio qualified mortgages at § 1026.43(e)(5)(i)(D) reference the asset threshold in § 1026.35(b)(2)(iii)(C). Likewise, the requirements for balloon-payment qualified mortgages at § 1026.43(f)(1)(vi) reference the asset threshold in § 1026.35(b)(2)(iii)(C). Under § 1026.32(d)(1)(ii)(C), balloon-payment qualified mortgages that satisfy all applicable criteria in § 1026.43(f)(1)(i) through (vi) and (f)(2), including being made by creditors that have (together with certain affiliates) total assets below the threshold in § 1026.35(b)(2)(iii)(C), are also excepted from the prohibition on balloon payments for high-cost mortgages.

    II. Procedural Requirements A. Administrative Procedure Act

    Under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), notice and opportunity for public comment are not required if the Bureau finds that notice and public comment are impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest. 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B). Pursuant to this final rule, comment 35(b)(2)(iii)-1 in Regulation Z is amended to update the exemption threshold. The amendment in this final rule is technical and merely applies the formula previously established in Regulation Z for determining any adjustments to the exemption threshold. For these reasons, the Bureau has determined that publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking and providing opportunity for public comment are unnecessary. Therefore, the amendment is adopted in final form.

    Section 553(d) of the APA generally requires publication of a final rule not less than 30 days before its effective date, except (1) a substantive rule which grants or recognizes an exemption or relieves a restriction; (2) interpretive rules and statements of policy; or (3) as otherwise provided by the agency for good cause found and published with the rule. 5 U.S.C. 553(d). At a minimum, the Bureau believes the amendments fall under the third exception to section 553(d). The Bureau finds that there is good cause to make the amendments effective on January 1, 2017. The amendment in this notice is technical and applies the method previously established in the agency's regulations for automatic adjustments to the threshold.

    B. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    Because no notice of proposed rulemaking is required, the Regulatory Flexibility Act does not require an initial or final regulatory flexibility analysis. 5 U.S.C. 603(a), 604(a).

    C. Paperwork Reduction Act

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3506; 5 CFR 1320), the agency reviewed this final rule. No collections of information pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act are contained in the final rule.

    List of Subjects in 12 CFR Part 1026

    Advertising, Appraisal, Appraiser, Banking, Banks, Consumer protection, Credit, Credit unions, Mortgages, National banks, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Savings associations, Truth in lending.

    Authority and Issuance

    For the reasons set forth above, the Bureau amends Regulation Z, 12 CFR part 1026, as set forth below:

    PART 1026—TRUTH IN LENDING (REGULATION Z) 1. The authority citation for part 1026 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    12 U.S.C. 2601, 2603-2605, 2607, 2609, 2617, 3353, 5511, 5512, 5532, 5581; 15 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.

    2. In Supplement I to Part 1026, under Section 1026.35—Requirements for Higher-Priced Mortgage Loans, 35(b)(2) Exemptions, Paragraph 35(b)(2)(iii), paragraph 1.iii.E introductory text is revised and paragraph 1.iii.E.4 is added to read as follows: Supplement I to Part 1026—Official Interpretations Subpart E—Special Rules for Certain Home Mortgage Transactions

    Section 1026.35—Requirements for Higher-Priced Mortgage Loans

    35(b)(2) Exemptions.

    Paragraph 35(b)(2)(iii).

    1. * * *

    iii. * * *

    E. Under § 1026.35(b)(2)(iii)(C), the $2,000,000,000 asset threshold adjusts automatically each year based on the year-to-year change in the average of the Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers, not seasonally adjusted, for each 12-month period ending in November, with rounding to the nearest million dollars. The Bureau will publish notice of the asset threshold each year by amending this comment. For calendar year 2017, the asset threshold is $2,069,000,000. A creditor that together with the assets of its affiliates that regularly extended first-lien covered transactions during calendar year 2016 has total assets of less than $2,069,000,000 on December 31, 2016, satisfies this criterion for purposes of any loan consummated in 2017 and for purposes of any loan consummated in 2018 for which the application was received before April 1, 2018. For historical purposes:

    4. For calendar year 2016, the asset threshold was $2,052,000,000. A creditor that together with the assets of its affiliates that regularly extended first-lien covered transactions during calendar year 2015 had total assets of less than $2,052,000,000 on December 31, 2015, satisfied this criterion for purposes of any loan consummated in 2016 and for purposes of any loan consummated in 2017 for which the application was received before April 1, 2017.

    Dated: December 15, 2016. Richard Cordray, Director, Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection.
    [FR Doc. 2016-30730 Filed 12-19-16; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE 4810-AM-P
    SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION 13 CFR Part 121 RIN 3245-AG50 Small Business Size Standards for Manufacturing; Correction AGENCY:

    U.S. Small Business Administration.

    ACTION:

    Correcting amendments.

    SUMMARY:

    The U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) is correcting a final rule that appeared in the Federal Register on January 26, 2016 (81 FR 4469). The rule increased small business size standards for a number of industries in North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) Sector 31-33, Manufacturing. The rule also stated that SBA was amending Footnote 5 to the table of size standards relating to NAICS 326211, Tire Manufacturing (except Retreading), to reflect the current Census Product Classification Codes 3262111 and 3262113. However, SBA inadvertently omitted code 3262111 from the revised text in Footnote 5. This action corrects the omission. This correction does not affect the 1,500-employee small business size standard for NAICS 326211.

    DATES:

    Effective December 21, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Dr. Jorge Laboy-Bruno at (202) 205-6618 or [email protected], Office of Size Standards, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 Third Street SW., Washington, DC 20416.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    On January 26, 2016, SBA published a final rule implementing changes to the size standards for a number of industries in NAICS Sectors 31-33, Manufacturing (81 FR 4469). As discussed in the preamble of the rule, SBA intended to amend paragraphs (a) and (b) of Footnote 5 to the table of size standards relating to NAICS 326211, Tire Manufacturing (except Retreading), by replacing the former Census classification codes 30111 and 30112 with the new Census Product Classification Codes 3262111 and 3262113. However, the amended text inadvertently omitted the new Census Product Classification code 3262111. This action corrects that omission, but does not affect the 1,500-employee small business size standard for NAICS 326211.

    List of Subjects in 13 CFR Part 121

    Administrative practice and procedure, Government procurement, Government property, Grant programs—business, Individuals with disabilities, Loan programs—business, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Small businesses.

    Accordingly, 13 CFR part 121 is corrected by making the following correcting amendments:

    PART 121—SMALL BUSINESS SIZE REGULATIONS 1. The authority citation for part 121 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    15 U.S.C. 632, 634(b)(6), 662, and 694a(9).

    § 121.201 [Amended]
    2. In Footnote 5 to the table in § 121.201, amend paragraphs (a) and (b) by adding the phrase “3262111 and” before the number “3262113” each time it appears. A. John Shoraka, Associate Administrator for Government Contracting and Business Development.
    [FR Doc. 2016-30568 Filed 12-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8205-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2016-9056; Directorate Identifier 2016-NM-007-AD; Amendment 39-18743; AD 2016-25-17] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Saab AB, Saab Aeronautics (Formerly Known as Saab AB, Saab Aerosystems) Airplanes AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain Saab AB, Saab Aeronautics Model SAAB 2000 airplanes. This AD was prompted by an occurrence that was reported of rudder pedal restriction on a SAAB Model 2000 airplane with the large potable water system (LPWS) installed, equipped with in-line heaters. This AD requires installation of shrinkable tubes on the water piping of the basic potable water system (BPWS). We are issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.

    DATES:

    This AD is effective January 25, 2017.

    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of January 25, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    For service information identified in this final rule, contact Saab AB, Saab Aeronautics, SE-581 88, Linköping, Sweden; telephone +46 13 18 5591; fax +46 13 18 4874; email [email protected]; Internet http://www.saabgroup.com. You may view this referenced service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 425-227-1221. It is also available on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-9056.

    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-2016-9056; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street address for the Docket Office (telephone 800-647-5527) is Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Shahram Daneshmandi, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; telephone 425-227-1112 ; fax 425-227-1149.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to certain Saab AB, Saab Aeronautics Model SAAB 2000 airplanes. The NPRM published in the Federal Register on September 8, 2016 (81 FR 62024) (“the NPRM”). The NPRM was prompted by an occurrence that was reported of rudder pedal restriction on a SAAB Model 2000 airplane with the LPWS installed, equipped with in-line heaters. The NPRM proposed to require installation of shrinkable tubes on the water piping of the BPWS. We are issuing this AD to prevent water spray in case of a failed pipe or coupling during water filling on the ground. This condition, if not corrected, could freeze parts of the flight control system, possibly resulting in reduced control of the airplane.

    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA Airworthiness Directive 2016-0013, dated January 14, 2016 (referred to after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or “the MCAI”), to correct an unsafe condition for certain Saab AB, Saab Aeronautics Model SAAB 2000 airplanes. The MCAI states:

    An occurrence was reported of rudder pedal restriction on a SAAB 2000 aeroplane with the Large Potable Water System (LPWS) installed, equipped with in-line heaters (options 38:201 and 38:201-1). Subsequent investigation showed that this event was the result of a ruptured in-line heater attachment, causing water leakage at the inlet tubing for the in-line heater in the lower part of the forward fuselage (Zone 116). In flight, the water froze on the rudder control mechanism, causing the rudder pedal restriction. Analysis after the reported event indicates that the pitch control mechanism (including pitch disconnect/spring unit) may also be frozen, which would prevent disconnection and normal pitch control.

    This condition, if not corrected, could result in further occurrences of water spray, possibly resulting in reduced control of the aeroplane.

    To address this potential unsafe condition, EASA issued Emergency AD 2013-0172-E, to require deactivation of the LPWS. Following that, EASA AD 2013-0172R1 [which corresponds to FAA AD 2014-15-04, Amendment 39-17906 (79 FR 45337, August 5, 2014)] introduced a temporary alternative procedure for filling, reactivation and operation of the LPWS.

    Finally, EASA AD 2014-0255 [which corresponds to FAA AD 2016-12-05, Amendment 39-18554 (81 FR 38903, June 15, 2016) was issued, superseding EASA AD 2013-0172R1, to require a modification allowing reactivating of the system and the use of regular filling procedures.

    Although the Basic Potable Water System (BPWS) does not contain an in-line heater, which was the major risk contributor and the actual cause of the previous leakage events in the LPWS, a Zonal Safety Analysis performed by SAAB concluded that the implementation of spray shield (tube/hose) for the water piping is necessary for the BPWS as well, to protect the flight controls and electrical equipment from water spray in case of a failed pipe or coupling during water filling on ground.

    Consequently SAAB developed a modification and issued Service Bulletin (SB) 2000-38-012 to provide modification instructions to install shrinkable tubes as spray shields.

    For reasons described above, this [EASA] AD requires installation of shrinkable tubes on the water piping of the BPWS.

    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-2016-9056.

    Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing this AD. We received no comments on the NPRM or on the determination of the cost to the public.

    Conclusion

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

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

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

    Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    Saab has issued Service Bulletin 2000-38-012, dated August 20, 2015. The service information describes how to install shrinkable tubes on the water piping of the BPWS. This service information is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

    Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 7 airplanes of U.S. registry.

    We also estimate that it takes about 6 work-hours per product to comply with the basic requirements of this AD. The average labor rate is $85 per work-hour. Required parts will cost about $3,650 per product. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of this AD on U.S. operators to be $29,120 or $4,160 per product.

    Authority for This Rulemaking

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

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

    Regulatory Findings

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

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

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

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

    3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska; and

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

    List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

    Adoption of the Amendment

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

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

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

    § 39.13 [Amended]
    2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): 2016-25-17 Saab AB, Saab Aeronautics (formerly known as Saab AB, Saab Aerosystems): Amendment 39-18743; Docket No. FAA-2016-9056; Directorate Identifier 2016-NM-007-AD. (a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective January 25, 2017.

    (b) Affected ADs

    None.

    (c) Applicability

    This AD applies to certain Saab AB, Saab Aeronautics (formerly known as Saab AB, Saab Aerosystems) Model SAAB 2000 airplanes, certificated in any category, serial numbers 017, 019 through 021 inclusive, 027 through 028 inclusive, 030, 034, 040, 050, and 052.

    (d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 38, Water/waste.

    (e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by an occurrence that was reported of rudder pedal restriction on a SAAB Model 2000 airplane with the large potable water system installed, equipped with in-line heaters. We are issuing this AD to prevent water spray in case of a failed pipe or coupling during water filling on the ground. This condition, if not corrected, could freeze parts of the flight control system, possibly resulting in reduced control of the airplane.

    (f) Compliance

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

    (g) Repair of Basic Potable Water System (BPWS)

    Within 24 months after the effective date of this AD, install shrinkable tubes on the water piping of the BPWS, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of SAAB Service Bulletin 2000-38-012, dated August 20, 2015.

    (h) 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: Shahram Daneshmandi, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; telephone 425-227-1112; fax 425-227-1149. Information may be emailed to: [email protected] Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding district office.

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

    (i) Related Information

    Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information (MCAI) EASA Airworthiness Directive 2016-0013, dated January 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-2016-9056.

    (j) Material Incorporated by Reference

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

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

    (i) SAAB Service Bulletin 2000-38-012, dated August 20, 2015.

    (ii) Reserved.

    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact Saab AB, Saab Aeronautics, SE-581 88, Linköping, Sweden; telephone +46 13 18 5591; fax +46 13 18 4874; email [email protected]; Internet http://www.saabgroup.com.

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

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

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on December 1, 2016. Michael Kaszycki, Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
    [FR Doc. 2016-29509 Filed 12-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2015-5816; Directorate Identifier 2015-NM-029-AD; Amendment 39-18731; AD 2016-25-05] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes AGENCY:

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all The Boeing Company Model 747-100, 747-100B, 747-100B SUD, 747-200B, 747-200C, 747-200F, 747-300, 747-400, 747-400D, 747-400F, 747SR, and 747SP series airplanes. This AD was prompted by reports of cracking found in the splice plates, hinge fittings, terminal fittings, the upper skin of the outboard and center sections, upper chord, and rear spar webs before reaching the inspection interval specified in AD 2006-10-16. Cracked and fractured Maraging steel fasteners were also found. This AD requires repetitive inspections for cracking, an inspection to determine whether fasteners are magnetic, repetitive ultrasonic inspections for cracking and fractures of affected fasteners, and related investigative and corrective actions if necessary. We are issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.

    DATES:

    This AD is effective January 25, 2017.

    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of January 25, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    For service information identified in this final rule, contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management, P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, WA 98124-2207; telephone: 206-544-5000, extension 1; fax: 206-766-5680; Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You may view this referenced service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 425-227-1221. It is also available on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2015-5816.

    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-2015-5816; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The address for the Docket Office (phone: 800-647-5527) is Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Nathan Weigand, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; phone: 425-917-6428; fax: 425-917-6590; email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR part 39 to supersede AD 2006-10-16, Amendment 39-14600 (71 FR 28570, May 17, 2006) (“AD 2006-10-16”). AD 2006-10-16 applies to all The Boeing Company Model 747-100, 747-100B, 747-100B SUD, 747-200B, 747-200C, 747-200F, 747-300, 747-400, 747-400D, 747-400F, 747SR, and 747SP series airplanes. The NPRM published in the Federal Register on November 27, 2015 (80 FR 74052) (“the NPRM”). The NPRM was prompted by reports of cracking found in the splice plates, hinge fittings, terminal fittings, the upper skin of the outboard and center sections, upper chord, and rear spar webs before reaching the inspection interval specified in AD 2006-10-16. Cracked and fractured Maraging steel fasteners were also found. The NPRM proposed to reduce the compliance time for certain inspections and add repetitive inspections for cracking of the splice plates, hinge fittings, terminal fittings, upper skin of the outboard and center sections, and rear spar webs in Zone B. The NPRM also proposed to require an inspection to determine whether fasteners are magnetic in Zone C, repetitive ultrasonic inspections for cracking and fractures of affected fasteners, and related investigative and corrective actions if necessary. The NPRM also added an optional modification, which would terminate certain repetitive inspections, provided post-modification inspections and corrective action are done if necessary. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct this cracking, which could lead to reduced structural capability of the outboard and center sections of the horizontal stabilizer and could result in loss of control of the airplane.

    Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing this AD. The following presents the comments received on the NPRM and the FAA's response to each comment.

    Request To Clarify Inspections

    Atlas Airlines, United Airlines, and The Boeing Company requested that we clarify the inspection required by the proposed AD. Atlas Airlines stated that the “Proposed AD Requirements” paragraph of the NPRM states that the proposed AD would retain all the requirements of AD 2006-10-16. Atlas Airlines also stated that paragraph (f) of AD 2006-10-16 is not included in the proposed AD and noted that paragraph (g)(3) of the proposed AD identifies only Groups 7 through 9 as the applicable groups for the Zone A inspections. Atlas Airlines asked for clarification of the Zone A inspections.

    Boeing noted that AD 2006-10-16 includes Zone C inspections as specified in Part 5 of Boeing Service Bulletin 747-55A2050, Revision 1, dated May 1, 2003, and included Zone A inspections for Groups 1 through 6. Boeing noted that these inspections have not been removed by Boeing Service Bulletin 747-55A2050, Revision 2, dated January 23, 2015. Boeing also requested that we revise the proposed AD to address the Zone C inspections in Part 5 of Boeing Service Bulletin 747-55A2050, Revision 2, dated January 23, 2015, and the Zone A inspections for Groups 1 through 6.

    United Airlines disagreed with not restating the requirements of AD 2006-10-16. United Airlines stated that operators might miss that Zone A inspections and Zone C, Part 5, inspections required by AD 2006-10-16 are intended to be mandated. United Airlines noted that although the preamble of the NPRM stated that all inspections of AD 2006-10-16 are retained, paragraph (g) of the proposed AD only specifies new requirements and does not include certain Zone A inspections and Zone C, Part 5, inspections.

    We agree that clarification is necessary. As stated in the preamble to the NPRM, we intended to retain all requirements of AD 2006-10-16. However, the actions specified in the proposed AD do not include the inspections referred to by the commenters. We have determined that instead of including those actions in this final rule, we will issue this action as a stand-alone AD. Thus, AD 2006-10-16 is not superseded, making it clear that all actions in AD 2006-10-16 continue to be required. In addition, we have revised this AD to specify when accomplishing certain actions in this AD terminates actions specified in AD 2006-10-16. We have made the following changes:

    • Revised paragraph (g)(1) of this AD to specify that accomplishing a Zone B inspection required by paragraph (g)(1) of this AD terminates the inspections required by paragraph (g) of AD 2006-10-16 for the inspected area only.

    • Revised paragraph (g)(2) of this AD to specify that accomplishing a Zone B inspection required by paragraph (g)(2) of this AD terminates the inspections required by paragraph (i) of AD 2006-10-16 for the inspected area only.

    • Revised paragraph (g)(3) of this AD to specify that accomplishing Zone A and Zone B inspections required by paragraph (g)(3) of this AD terminates the inspections required by paragraphs (f), (i), and (l) of AD 2006-10-16 for the inspected area only.

    • Added paragraph (i)(1)(iii) to this AD to clarify that accomplishing the actions specified in paragraph (i)(1) of this AD terminates inspections required by paragraph (g) of AD 2006-10-16 for Zone B, as specified in Part 3 of the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 747-55A2050, Revision 2, dated January 23, 2015, for the modified area only.

    • Added paragraph (i)(1)(iv) to this AD to clarify that accomplishing the actions specified in paragraph (i) of this AD terminates inspections required by paragraph (k) of AD 2006-10-16 for Zone C, as specified in Part 5 of the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 747-55A2050, Revision 2, dated January 23, 2015, for the modified area only.

    • Added paragraph (i)(2)(ii) of this AD to clarify that accomplishing the actions specified in paragraph (i)(2) of this AD terminates the repetitive inspections required by paragraph (k) of AD 2006-10-16 for Zone C, as specified in Part 5 of the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 747-55A2050, Revision 2, dated January 23, 2015, for the inspected area only.

    • Added paragraph (i)(3)(ii) of this AD to clarify that accomplishing the actions specified in paragraph (i)(3) of this AD terminates the repetitive inspections required by paragraph (i) of AD 2006-10-16 for Zone B, as specified in Part 4 of the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 747-55A2050, Revision 2, dated January 23, 2015, for the modified area only.

    Request To Update Terminating Action Language for Zone C Inspections

    Boeing requested that we revise paragraph (i)(2) of the proposed AD to clarify which Zone C inspections are terminated. Boeing noted that paragraph (i)(2) of the proposed AD specifies that the actions terminate Zone C inspections specified in Part 6 of Boeing Service Bulletin 747-55A2050, Revision 2, dated January 23, 2015, and noted that Zone C inspections in Part 5 of Boeing Service Bulletin 747-55A2050, Revision 2, dated January 23, 2015, are also terminated.

    We agree to clarify the terminating action for the Zone C inspections, and have revised paragraph (i)(2) of this AD accordingly.

    Conclusion

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

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

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

    We also determined that these changes will not increase the economic burden on any operator or increase the scope of this AD.

    Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    We reviewed Boeing Service Bulletin 747-55A2050, Revision 2, dated January 23, 2015. The service information describes procedures for accomplishing Zone A, Zone B, and Zone C inspections for cracking of the upper skin and upper rear spar chord of the outboard and center sections of the horizontal stabilizer, and related investigative and corrective actions if necessary. The service information also describes procedures for a magnetic inspection to determine the type of fasteners, ultrasonic inspections for cracking and fractures of affected fasteners, and related investigative and corrective actions if necessary. This service information is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

    Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 116 airplanes of U.S. registry.

    We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:

    Estimated Costs—Required Actions Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per product Cost on U.S.
  • operators
  • Zone A Inspections (required by AD 2006-10-16) 8 work-hours × $85 per hour = $680 $0 $680 Up to $78,880. Zone B Open-hole nondestructive testing (NDT) Inspection (required by AD 2006-10-16 for Groups 3, 4, and 5 airplanes; and for Groups 1, 2, and 3 airplanes, if done) 30 work-hours × $85 per hour = $2,550 0 2,550 Up to $295,800. Zone C Maraging or H-11 Steel Fastener Inspection (required by AD 2006-10-16 for Groups 1, 2, and 3 airplanes) 8 work-hours × $85 per hour = $680 0 680 Up to $78,880. New Zone B Inspections 248 work-hours × $85 per hour = $21,080 0 21,080 $2,445,280. New Zone C Inspection 26 work-hours × $85 per hour = $2,210 0 2,210 $256,360.
    Estimated Costs—Optional Actions Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per product Open-hole NDT Inspections (high frequency eddy current inspections) Up to 298 work-hours × $85 per hour = up to $25,330 $0 Up to $25,330. Zone B Modification Up to 313 work-hours × $85 per hour = up to $26,605 Up to $3,486 Up to $30,091. Post-Modification Inspections Up to 298 work-hours × $85 per hour = up to $25,330 $0 Up to $25,330.

    We have received no definitive data that would enable us to provide a cost estimate for the on-condition actions specified in this 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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

    Adoption of the Amendment

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

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

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

    § 39.13 [Amended]
    2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): 2016-25-05 The Boeing Company: Amendment 39-18731; Docket No. FAA-2015-5816; Directorate Identifier 2015-NM-029-AD. (a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective January 25, 2017.

    (b) Affected ADs

    This AD affects AD 2006-10-16, Amendment 39-14600 (71 FR 28570, May 17, 2006) (“AD 2006-10-16”).

    (c) Applicability

    This AD applies to all The Boeing Company Model 747-100, 747-100B, 747-100B SUD, 747-200B, 747-200C, 747-200F, 747-300, 747-400, 747-400D, 747-400F, 747SR, and 747SP series airplanes; certificated in any category.

    (d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 55, Stabilizers.

    (e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by reports of cracking found in the splice plates, hinge fittings, terminal fittings, the upper skin of the outboard and center sections, upper chord, and rear spar webs before reaching the inspection interval specified in AD 2006-10-16. Cracked and fractured Maraging steel fasteners were also found. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct this cracking, which could lead to reduced structural capability of the outboard and center sections of the horizontal stabilizer and could result in loss of control of the airplane.

    (f) Compliance

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

    (g) Repetitive Inspections/Investigative and Corrective Actions

    At the applicable time specified in paragraph 1.E., “Compliance,” of Boeing Service Bulletin 747-55A2050, Revision 2, dated January 23, 2015, except as required by paragraphs (h)(1) and (h)(2) of this AD: Do the applicable actions specified in paragraphs (g)(1), (g)(2), (g)(3), and (g)(4) of this AD, and all applicable related investigative and corrective actions, in accordance with the applicable part of the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 747-55A2050, Revision 2, dated January 23, 2015, except as required by paragraph (h)(3) of this AD. Do all applicable related investigative and corrective actions before further flight. Repeat the applicable inspections specified in paragraphs (g)(1), (g)(2), (g)(3), and (g)(4) of this AD at the applicable times specified in paragraph 1.E., “Compliance,” of Boeing Service Bulletin 747-55A2050, Revision 2, dated January 23, 2015.

    (1) For Group 1 through 3 airplanes identified in Boeing Service Bulletin 747-55A2050, Revision 2, dated January 23, 2015: Do non-destructive test (NDT) inspections (ultrasonic, high frequency eddy current, and low frequency eddy current inspections) or open-hole NDT inspections (high frequency eddy current inspections) of Zone B for cracking, in accordance with Part 3 or Part 4 of the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 747-55A2050, Revision 2, dated January 23, 2015, as applicable. Accomplishing a Zone B inspection required by this paragraph terminates the inspections required by paragraph (g) of AD 2006-10-16 for the inspected area only.

    (2) For Group 4 through 6 airplanes identified in Boeing Service Bulletin 747-55A2050, Revision 2, dated January 23, 2015: Do open-hole NDT inspections (high frequency eddy current inspections) of Zone B for cracking, in accordance with Part 4 of the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 747-55A2050, Revision 2, dated January 23, 2015. Accomplishing a Zone B inspection required by this paragraph terminates the inspections required by paragraph (i) of AD 2006-10-16 for the inspected area only.

    (3) For Group 7 through 9 airplanes identified in Boeing Service Bulletin 747-55A2050, Revision 2, dated January 23, 2015: Do inspections of Zone A (detailed or high frequency eddy current inspections) and Zone B (open-hole high frequency eddy current inspections) for cracking, in accordance with Part 1, Part 2, or Part 4 of the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 747-55A2050, Revision 2, dated January 23, 2015, as applicable. Accomplishing Zone A and Zone B inspections required by this paragraph terminates the inspections required by paragraphs (f), (i), and (l) of AD 2006-10-16 for the inspected area only.

    (4) For Group 1 through 3 airplanes identified in Boeing Service Bulletin 747-55A2050, Revision 2, dated January 23, 2015: Do an inspection of Zone C Maraging or H-11 steel fasteners to determine whether fasteners are magnetic, in accordance with Part 6 of the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 747-55A2050, Revision 2, dated January 23, 2015.

    (h) Exceptions to Service Bulletin Specifications

    (1) Where Boeing Service Bulletin 747-55A2050, Revision 2, dated January 23, 2015, specifies a compliance time “after the Revision 2 date of this service bulletin,” this AD requires compliance within the specified compliance time after the effective date of this AD.

    (2) The Condition column of Table 1 of paragraph 1.E., “Compliance,” of Boeing Service Bulletin 747-55A2050, Revision 2, dated January 23, 2015, refers to airplanes with certain total flight cycles and total flight hours. This AD, however, applies to the airplanes with the specified total flight cycles and total flight hours as of the effective date of this AD.

    (3) Where Boeing Service Bulletin 747-55A2050, Revision 2, dated January 23, 2015, specifies to contact Boeing for repair instructions: Before further flight, repair using a method approved in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (l) of this AD.

    (i) Optional Terminating Action

    (1) For Group 1 through 3 airplanes identified in Boeing Service Bulletin 747-55A2050, Revision 2, dated January 23, 2015: Accomplishing the Zone B modification, including all applicable related investigative and corrective actions, specified in Part 7 of the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 747-55A2050, Revision 2, dated January 23, 2015, except as required by paragraph (h)(3) of this AD, terminates the repetitive inspections specified in paragraphs (i)(1)(i) through (i)(1)(iv) of this AD for the modified area only.

    (i) Inspections required by paragraph (g)(1) of this AD for Zone B, as specified in Part 3 and Part 4 of the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 747-55A2050, Revision 2, dated January 23, 2015.

    (ii) Inspections required by paragraph (g)(4) of this AD for Zone C, as specified in Part 6 of the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 747-55A2050, Revision 2, dated January 23, 2015.

    (iii) Inspections required by paragraph (g) of AD 2006-10-16 for Zone B, as specified in Part 3 of the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 747-55A2050, Revision 2, dated January 23, 2015.

    (iv) Inspections required by paragraph (k) of AD 2006-10-16 for Zone C, as specified in Part 5 of the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 747-55A2050, Revision 2, dated January 23, 2015.

    (2) For Group 1 through 3 airplanes identified in Boeing Service Bulletin 747-55A2050, Revision 2, dated January 23, 2015: Accomplishing the Zone B open-hole NDT inspection, repairing any cracking as applicable, and replacing fasteners as specified in Part 4 of the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 747-55A2050, Revision 2, dated January 23, 2015, terminates the actions specified in paragraphs (i)(2)(i) and (i)(2)(ii) of this AD for the inspected area only.

    (i) The inspections required by paragraph (g)(4) of this AD for Zone C, as specified in Part 6 of the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 747-55A2050, Revision 2, dated January 23, 2015.

    (ii) The repetitive inspections required by paragraph (k) of AD 2006-10-16 for Zone C, as specified in Part 5 of the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 747-55A2050, Revision 2, dated January 23, 2015.

    (3) For Group 4 through 9 airplanes identified in Boeing Service Bulletin 747-55A2050, Revision 2, dated January 23, 2015: Accomplishing the Zone B modification, including all applicable related investigative and corrective actions, specified in Part 7 of the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 747-55A2050, Revision 2, dated January 23, 2015, except as required by paragraph (h)(3) of this AD, terminates the actions specified in paragraphs (i)(3)(i) and (i)(3)(ii) of this AD for the modified area only.

    (i) The repetitive inspections required by paragraph (g)(2) or (g)(3) of this AD, as applicable, only for Zone B, as specified in Part 4 of the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 747-55A2050, Revision 2, dated January 23, 2015.

    (ii) The repetitive inspections required by paragraph (i) of AD 2006-10-16 for Zone B, as specified in Part 4 of the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 747-55A2050, Revision 2, dated January 23, 2015.

    (j) Repetitive Post-Modification Inspections and Corrective Actions

    At the applicable time specified in paragraph 1.E., “Compliance,” of Boeing Service Bulletin 747-55A2050, Revision 2, dated January 23, 2015: Do the applicable inspections specified in paragraphs (j)(1) and (j)(2) of this AD, and all applicable corrective actions, in accordance with Part 8 of the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 747-55A2050, Revision 2, dated January 23, 2015, except as required by paragraph (h)(3) of this AD. Do all applicable corrective actions before further flight. Repeat the applicable inspections at the applicable times specified in paragraph 1.E., “Compliance,” of Boeing Service Bulletin 747-55A2050, Revision 2, dated January 23, 2015.

    (1) For Group 1 through 3 airplanes identified in Boeing Service Bulletin 747-55A2050, Revision 2, dated January 23, 2015, on which the Zone B modification specified in paragraph (i)(1) of this AD is done: Do non-destructive test (NDT) inspections (ultrasonic, high frequency eddy current, and low frequency eddy current inspections) or open-hole NDT inspections (high frequency eddy current inspections) of Zone B for cracking.

    (2) For Group 4 through 9 airplanes identified in Boeing Service Bulletin 747-55A2050, Revision 2, dated January 23, 2015, on which the Zone B modification specified in paragraph (i)(3) of this AD is done: Do open-hole NDT inspections (high frequency eddy current inspections) of Zone B for cracking.

    (k) Parts Installation Prohibition

    As of the effective date of this AD, no person may install any Maraging or H-11 steel fasteners in the locations specified in this AD. Where Boeing Service Bulletin 747-55A2050, Revision 2, dated January 23, 2015, specifies to install H-11 bolts (kept fasteners), this AD requires installation of Inconel bolts.

    (l) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

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

    (2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding district office.

    (3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be used for any repair required by this AD if it is approved by the Boeing Commercial Airplanes Organization Designation Authorization (ODA) that has been authorized by the Manager, Seattle ACO, to make those findings. For a repair method to be approved, the repair must meet the certification basis of the airplane, and the approval must specifically refer to this AD.

    (4) AMOCs approved for AD 2006-10-16, are approved as AMOCs for the corresponding provisions of paragraph (g) of this AD, except for approved AMOCs that allow installation of Maraging or H-11 steel fasteners.

    (m) Related Information

    For more information about this AD, contact Nathan Weigand, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle ACO, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; phone: 425-917-6428; fax: 425-917-6590; email: [email protected]

    (n) Material Incorporated by Reference

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

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

    (i) Boeing Service Bulletin 747-55A2050, Revision 2, dated January 23, 2015.

    (ii) Reserved.

    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management, P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, WA 98124-2207; telephone: 206-544-5000, extension 1; fax: 206-766-5680; Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com.

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

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

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on November 25, 2016. John P. Piccola, Jr., Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
    [FR Doc. 2016-29307 Filed 12-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2016-8845; Directorate Identifier 2016-NM-094-AD; Amendment 39-18732; AD 2016-25-06] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes AGENCY:

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all The Boeing Company Model DC-9-81 (MD-81), DC-9-82 (MD-82), DC-9-83 (MD-83), and DC-9-87 (MD-87) airplanes; and Model MD-88 airplanes. This AD was prompted by a report of fatigue cracking in a rear spar lower cap of the horizontal stabilizer. This AD requires repetitive inspections for cracking of the rear spar lower caps of the horizontal stabilizer, post-modification and post-repair inspections, and corrective actions if necessary. This AD also provides an optional terminating fatigue life enhancement modification. We are issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.

    DATES:

    This AD is effective January 25, 2017.

    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of January 25, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    For service information identified in this final rule, contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Contractual & Data Services (C&DS), 2600 Westminster Blvd., MC 110-SK57, Seal Beach, CA 90740-5600; telephone: 562-797-1717; Internet: https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You may view this referenced service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 425-227-1221. It is also available on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-8845.

    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-2016-8845 or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The address for the Docket Office (phone: 800-647-5527) is Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Haytham Alaidy, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM-120L, FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, CA 90712-4137; phone: 562-627-5224; fax: 562-627-5210; email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to all The Boeing Company Model DC-9-81 (MD-81), DC-9-82 (MD-82), DC-9-83 (MD-83), and DC-9-87 (MD-87) airplanes; and Model MD-88 airplanes. The NPRM published in the Federal Register on August 22, 2016 (81 FR 56540) (“the NPRM”). The NPRM was prompted by a report of fatigue cracking in a rear spar lower cap of the horizontal stabilizer. The NPRM proposed to require repetitive inspections for cracking of the rear spar lower caps of the horizontal stabilizer, post-modification and post-repair inspections, and corrective actions if necessary. The proposed AD also included an optional terminating fatigue life enhancement modification. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct fatigue cracking in the rear spar lower caps of the horizontal stabilizer, which, paired with cracking in adjacent areas, could adversely affect the structural integrity of the airplane.

    Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing this AD. We have considered the comment received. Boeing supported the NPRM.

    Conclusion

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

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

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

    Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    We reviewed Boeing Alert Service Bulletin MD80-55A072, dated April 8, 2016. The service information describes procedures for doing inspections for cracking of the rear spar lower caps of the horizontal stabilizer, post-modification and post-repair inspections, and corrective actions. This service information is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

    Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 395 airplanes of U.S. registry.

    We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:

    Estimated Costs Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per
  • product
  • Cost on U.S. operators
    Inspection 3 work-hours × $85 per hour = $255 per inspection cycle $0 $255 per inspection cycle $100,725 per inspection cycle.
    Estimated Costs for Optional Actions Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per
  • product
  • Modification 59 work-hours × $85 per hour = $5,015 per stabilizer $1,267 $6,282 per stabilizer.

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

    On-Condition Costs Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per product Replacement 368 work-hours × $85 per hour = $31,280 per stabilizer $31,408 $62,688 per stabilizer.

    We have received no definitive data that would enable us to provide cost estimates for the on-condition actions that require repair using a method specified in paragraph (k) of this 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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

    Adoption of the Amendment

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

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

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

    § 39.13 [Amended]
    2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): 2016-25-06 The Boeing Company: Amendment 39-18732; Docket No. FAA-2016-8845; Directorate Identifier 2016-NM-094-AD. (a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective January 25, 2017.

    (b) Affected ADs

    None.

    (c) Applicability

    This AD applies to all The Boeing Company Model DC-9-81 (MD-81), DC-9-82 (MD-82), DC-9-83 (MD-83), and DC-9-87 (MD-87) airplanes; and Model MD-88 airplanes; certificated in any category.

    (d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 55, Stabilizers.

    (e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by a report of fatigue cracking in a Model MD-88 rear spar lower cap of the horizontal stabilizer. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct fatigue cracking in the rear spar lower caps of the horizontal stabilizer, which, paired with cracking in adjacent areas, could adversely affect the structural integrity of the airplane.

    (f) Compliance

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

    (g) Repetitive Inspections and Corrective Actions

    Except as specified in paragraph (i)(1) of this AD, at the applicable time specified in paragraph 1.E., “Compliance,” of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin MD80-55A072, dated April 8, 2016: Do an open hole high frequency eddy current inspection (HFEC) or surface HFEC inspection for cracking of the rear spar lower caps of the horizontal stabilizer, and do all applicable corrective actions; in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin MD80-55A072, dated April 8, 2016, except as specified in paragraph (i)(2) of this AD. Do all applicable corrective actions before further flight. Repeat the inspection thereafter at the applicable interval specified in paragraph 1.E., “Compliance,” of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin MD80-55A072, dated April 8, 2016, until accomplishment of the actions provided by paragraph (h) of this AD.

    (h) Optional Terminating Action

    Accomplishment of the fatigue life enhancement modification in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin MD80-55A072, dated April 8, 2016, terminates the repetitive inspections required by paragraph (g) of this AD.

    (i) Service Information Exceptions

    (1) Where paragraph 1.E., “Compliance,” of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin MD80-55A072, dated April 8, 2016, specifies a compliance time “after the original issue date of this service bulletin,” this AD requires compliance within the specified compliance time after the effective date of this AD.

    (2) If any cracking is found during any inspection required by this AD, and Boeing Alert Service Bulletin MD80-55A072, dated April 8, 2016, specifies to contact Boeing for appropriate action: Before further flight, repair the cracking using a method approved in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (k) of this AD.

    (j) Post-Modification and Post-Repair Actions

    For airplanes on which any modification or repair specified in (g) or (h) of this AD has been done: At the applicable time and intervals specified in paragraph 1.E., “Compliance,” of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin MD80-55A072, dated April 8, 2016, do all applicable post-modification and post-repair inspections and all applicable corrective actions; in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin MD80-55A072, dated April 8, 2016; except as specified in paragraph (i)(2) of this AD. All applicable corrective actions must be done before further flight.

    (k) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

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

    (2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding district office.

    (3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be used for any repair, modification, or alteration required by this AD if it is approved by the Boeing Commercial Airplanes Organization Designation Authorization (ODA) that has been authorized by the Manager, Los Angeles ACO, to make those findings. To be approved, the repair method, modification deviation, or alteration deviation must meet the certification basis of the airplane, and the approval must specifically refer to this AD.

    (4) Except as required by paragraph (i)(2) of this AD: For service information that contains steps that are labeled as Required for Compliance (RC), the provisions of paragraphs (k)(4)(i) and (k)(4)(ii) of this AD apply.

    (i) The steps labeled as RC, including substeps under an RC step and any figures identified in an RC step, must be done to comply with the AD. If a step or sub-step is labeled “RC Exempt,” then the RC requirement is removed from that step or sub-step. An AMOC is required for any deviations to RC steps, including substeps and identified figures.

    (ii) Steps not labeled as RC may be deviated from using accepted methods in accordance with the operator's maintenance or inspection program without obtaining approval of an AMOC, provided the RC steps, including substeps and identified figures, can still be done as specified, and the airplane can be put back in an airworthy condition.

    (l) Related Information

    For more information about this AD, contact Haytham Alaidy, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM-120L, FAA, Los Angeles ACO, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, CA 90712-4137; phone: 562-627-5224; fax: 562-627-5210; email: [email protected]

    (m) Material Incorporated by Reference

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

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

    (i) Boeing Alert Service Bulletin MD80-55A072, dated April 8, 2016.

    (ii) Reserved.

    (3) For Boeing service information identified in this AD, contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Contractual & Data Services (C&DS), 2600 Westminster Blvd., MC 110-SK57, Seal Beach, CA 90740-5600; telephone: 562-797-1717; Internet: https://www.myboeingfleet.com.

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

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

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on November 25, 2016. John P. Piccola, Jr., Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
    [FR Doc. 2016-29306 Filed 12-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2016-8847; Directorate Identifier 2016-NM-020-AD; Amendment 39-18742; AD 2016-25-16] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier, Inc. Airplanes AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain Bombardier, Inc. Model CL-600-2E25 (Regional Jet Series 1000) airplanes. This AD was prompted by reports of two cases where the main landing gear (MLG) failed to fully extend; it was determined that interference between the MLG door and the MLG fairing seal prevented the MLG door from opening fully. This AD requires repetitive inspections of the MLG fairing, fairing seal, door, and adjacent structures; and replacement or repair of affected parts and fasteners, or removal of the MLG door, if necessary. This AD also requires installation of a safety guide in the MLG fairing and an increase of the spacing between the MLG door and the fairing, which would terminate the repetitive inspections. We are issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.

    DATES:

    This AD is effective January 25, 2017.

    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of January 25, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    For service information identified in this final rule, contact Bombardier, Inc., 400 Côte-Vertu Road West, Dorval, Québec H4S 1Y9, Canada; Widebody Customer Response Center North America toll-free telephone 1-866-538-1247 or direct-dial telephone 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. It is also available on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-8847.

    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-2016-8847; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street address for the Docket Office (telephone 800-647-5527) is Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Fabio Buttitta, 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 516-228-7303; fax 516-794-5531.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply certain Bombardier, Inc. Model CL-600-2E25 (Regional Jet Series 1000) airplanes. The NPRM published in the Federal Register on August 26, 2016 (81 FR 58874) (“the NPRM”).

    Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA), which is the aviation authority for Canada, has issued Canadian Airworthiness Directive CF-2015-30, dated December 30, 2015 (referred to after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or “the MCAI”), to correct an unsafe condition for certain Bombardier, Inc. Model CL-600-2E25 (Regional Jet Series 1000) airplanes. The MCAI states:

    Two cases of main landing gear (MLG) failure to fully extend have been reported on model CL-600-2C10/-2D15/-2D24 aeroplanes. Investigation determined that interference between the MLG door and the MLG fairing seal prevented the MLG door from opening.

    Although model CL-600-2E25 aeroplanes feature new MLG door design, similar interference between the MLG door and the MLG fairing seal could exist on aeroplanes listed in the Applicability section of this [Canadian] AD. An MLG failing to extend may result in an unsafe asymmetric landing configuration.

    This [Canadian] AD mandates the repetitive inspection and rectification [which could include replacement or repair of affected parts and fasteners, or removal of the door, if necessary], as required, of the MLG fairing and seal, MLG door, and adjacent structures, until the mandatory terminating action is completed.

    The terminating action includes installation of a safety guide in the MLG fairing and an increase of the spacing between the MLG door and the fairing, which would terminate the repetitive inspections. 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-2016-8847.

    Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing this AD. We received no comments on the NPRM or on the determination of the cost to the public.

    Conclusion

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

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

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

    We also determined that these changes will not increase the economic burden on any operator or increase the scope of this AD.

    Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    We reviewed Bombardier Service Bulletin 670BA-32-041, dated March 28, 2013. The service information describes procedures for detailed inspections of the MLG fairing, fairing seal, door, and adjacent structures; replacement or repair of affected parts and fasteners and removal of the MLG door.

    We also reviewed Bombardier Service Bulletin 670BA-32-049, dated May 26, 2015. The service information describes procedures for installation of a safety guide in the MLG fairing and an increase of the spacing between the MLG door and the fairing.

    This service information is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

    Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 40 airplanes of U.S. registry.

    We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:

    Estimated Costs Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per
  • product
  • Cost on U.S. operators
    Inspection and Installation 50 work-hours × $85 per hour = $4,250 $0 $4,250 $170,000

    We have received no definitive data on the costs for the on-condition repairs that will be required based on the results of the inspection.

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

    On-Condition Costs Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per product Replacement of damaged fairing seal 6 work-hours × $85 per hour = $510 per seal replacement $921 per seal $1,431 per seal replacement. Removal of MLG door 3 work-hours × $85 per hour = $255 per removal of MLG door 0 255 per removal of MLG door. Optional Actions Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per
  • product
  • Installation of MLG door 13 work-hours × $85 per hour = $1,105 $0 $1,105
    Authority for This Rulemaking

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

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

    Regulatory Findings

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

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

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

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

    3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska; and

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

    List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

    Adoption of the Amendment

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

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

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

    § 39.13 [Amended]
    2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): 2016-25-16 Bombardier, Inc.: Amendment 39-18742; Docket No. FAA-2016-8847; Directorate Identifier 2016-NM-020-AD. (a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective January 25, 2017.

    (b) Affected ADs

    None.

    (c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Bombardier, Inc. Model CL-600-2E25 (Regional Jet Series 1000) airplanes, certificated in any category, serial numbers 19002 through 19041 inclusive.

    (d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 32, Landing gear.

    (e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by reports of two cases where the main landing gear (MLG) failed to fully extend; it was determined that interference between the MLG door and the MLG fairing seal prevented the MLG door from opening fully. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct interference between the MLG door and the MLG fairing seal. Such interference could result in a MLG failing to fully extend, which could cause an unsafe asymmetric landing configuration.

    (f) Compliance

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

    (g) Inspection of MLG Fairing, Fairing Seal, Door, and Adjacent Structures

    Within 660 flight hours after the effective date of this AD, conduct a detailed inspection for damage to the MLG fairing, fairing seal, door, and adjacent structures, and for missing parts and fasteners, in accordance with Part A of the Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 670BA-32-041, dated March 28, 2013. Repeat the inspection thereafter at intervals not to exceed 660 flight hours until the installation required by paragraph (m) of this AD is done.

    (h) Replacement of MLG Fairing Seal or Door Removal

    If damage to the MLG fairing seal is found during any inspection required by paragraph (g) of this AD, before further flight, replace the seal, in accordance with Part B of the Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 670BA-32-041, dated March 28, 2013; or remove the MLG door, in accordance with Part C of the Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 670BA-32-041, dated March 28, 2013.

    (i) Repair of the MLG Door or MLG Door Removal

    If damage to the MLG door is found during any inspection required by paragraph (g) of this AD, 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); or remove the MLG door, in accordance with Part C of the Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 670BA-32-041, dated March 28, 2013.

    (j) Repair of the MLG Fairing

    If damage to the MLG fairing is found during any inspection required by paragraph (g) 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.

    (k) Repair of the Adjacent Structure and Other Corrective Actions

    If damage to the adjacent structure is found or if any part or fastener is found missing or damaged during any inspection required by paragraph (g) of this AD, before further flight, do the applicable actions specified in paragraphs (k)(1) and (k)(2) of this AD.

    (1) Replace missing or damaged parts and fasteners, in accordance with Part A of the Accomplishment Instruction of Bombardier Service Bulletin 670BA-32-041, dated March 28, 2013, except where Bombardier Service Bulletin 670BA-32-041, dated March 28, 2013, specifies to contact Bombardier, 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) Repair damaged structure using a method approved by the Manager, New York ACO, ANE-170, FAA; or TCCA; or Bombardier, Inc.'s TCCA DAO.

    (l) Reinstallation of the MLG Door

    For any MLG door that has been removed as specified in paragraph (h) or (i) of this AD: Reinstallation of the door, if accomplished, must be done in accordance with Part D of the Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 670BA-32-041, dated March 28, 2013. Before further flight after any reinstallation, the inspection required by paragraph (g) of this AD must be done and the inspection must be repeated thereafter at the times specified in paragraph (g) of this AD until the installation required by paragraph (m) of this AD is done.

    (m) Installation of a Safety Guide on the MLG Fairing and Increase of Spacing Between MLG Door and Fairing

    Except as required by paragraph (n) of this AD: Within 6,600 flight hours or 36 months, whichever occurs first, after the effective date of this AD, install a safety guide on the MLG fairing and increase the spacing between the MLG door and the fairing, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 670BA-32-049, dated May 26, 2015. Accomplishment of these actions terminates the requirements of paragraphs (g) and (l) of this AD.

    (n) Provisions for Removed/Reinstalled Doors

    If the MLG door has been removed in accordance with Part C of the Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 670BA-32-041, dated March 28, 2013, the installation required by paragraph (m) of this AD may be delayed until the MLG door is reinstalled in accordance with paragraph (l) of this AD. When the removed MLG door is reinstalled, the installation required by paragraph (m) of this AD must be done at the time specified in paragraph (m) of this AD or before further flight after reinstallation of the removed MLG door, whichever occurs later.

    (o) 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 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: 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.

    (p) Related Information

    Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information (MCAI) Canadian Airworthiness Directive CF-2015-30, dated December 30, 2015, 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-2016-8847.

    (q) Material Incorporated by Reference

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

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

    (i) Bombardier Service Bulletin 670BA-32-041, dated March 28, 2013.

    (ii) Bombardier Service Bulletin 670BA-32-049, dated May 26, 2015.

    (3) 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 1-866-538-1247 or direct-dial telephone 1-514-855-2999; fax 514-855-7401; email [email protected]; Internet http://www.bombardier.com.

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

    (5) You may view this service information that is incorporated by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to: http://www.archives.govfxsp0;/federal-registerfxsp0;/cfr/ibr-locations.htmlfxsp0;.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on December 1, 2016. Michael Kaszycki, Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
    [FR Doc. 2016-29513 Filed 12-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Drug Enforcement Administration 21 CFR Part 1308 [Docket No. DEA-446] Schedules of Controlled Substances: Temporary Placement of Six Synthetic Cannabinoids (5F-ADB, 5F-AMB, 5F-APINACA, ADB-FUBINACA, MDMB-CHMICA and MDMB-FUBINACA) Into Schedule I AGENCY:

    Drug Enforcement Administration, Department of Justice.

    ACTION:

    Notice of intent.

    SUMMARY:

    The Administrator of the Drug Enforcement Administration is issuing this notice of intent to temporarily schedule six synthetic cannabinoids: methyl 2-(1-(5-fluoropentyl)-1H-indazole-3-carboxamido)-3,3-dimethylbutanoate [5F-ADB; 5F-MDMB-PINACA]; methyl 2-(1-(5-fluoropentyl)-1H-indazole-3-carboxamido)-3-methylbutanoate [5F-AMB]; N-(adamantan-1-yl)-1-(5-fluoropentyl)-1H-indazole-3-carboxamide [5F-APINACA, 5F-AKB48]; N-(1-amino-3,3-dimethyl-1-oxobutan-2-yl)-1-(4-fluorobenzyl)-1H-indazole-3-carboxamide [ADB-FUBINACA]; methyl 2-(1-(cyclohexylmethyl)-1H-indole-3-carboxamido)-3,3-dimethylbutanoate [MDMB-CHMICA, MMB-CHMINACA] and methyl 2-(1-(4-fluorobenzyl)-1H-indazole-3-carboxamido)-3,3-dimethylbutanoate [MDMB-FUBINACA], into schedule I pursuant to the temporary scheduling provisions of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA). This action is based on a finding by the Administrator that the placement of these synthetic cannabinoids into schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act is necessary to avoid an imminent hazard to the public safety. Any final order will impose the administrative, civil, and criminal sanctions and regulatory controls applicable to schedule I substances under the Controlled Substances Act on the manufacture, distribution, possession, importation, exportation of, and research and conduct with, instructional activities of these synthetic cannabinoids.

    DATES:

    December 21, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Michael J. Lewis, Office of Diversion Control, Drug Enforcement Administration; Mailing Address: 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152; Telephone: (202) 598-6812.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Any final order will be published in the Federal Register and may not be effective prior to January 20, 2017.

    Legal Authority

    The Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) implements and enforces titles II and III of the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970, as amended. 21 U.S.C. 801-971. Titles II and III are referred to as the “Controlled Substances Act” and the “Controlled Substances Import and Export Act,” respectively, and are collectively referred to as the “Controlled Substances Act” or the “CSA” for the purpose of this action. The DEA publishes the implementing regulations for these statutes in title 21 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), chapter II. The CSA and its implementing regulations are designed to prevent, detect, and eliminate the diversion of controlled substances and listed chemicals into the illicit market while providing for the legitimate medical, scientific, research, and industrial needs of the United States. Controlled substances have the potential for abuse and dependence and are controlled to protect the public health and safety.

    Under the CSA, every controlled substance is classified into one of five schedules based upon its potential for abuse, its currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States, and the degree of dependence the drug or other substance may cause. 21 U.S.C. 812. The initial schedules of controlled substances established by Congress are found at 21 U.S.C. 812(c), and the current list of all scheduled substances is published at 21 CFR part 1308.

    Section 201 of the CSA, 21 U.S.C. 811, provides the Attorney General with the authority to temporarily place a substance into schedule I of the CSA for two years without regard to the requirements of 21 U.S.C. 811(b) if she finds that such action is necessary to avoid an imminent hazard to the public safety. 21 U.S.C. 811(h)(1). In addition, if proceedings to control a substance are initiated under 21 U.S.C. 811(a)(1), the Attorney General may extend the temporary scheduling for up to one year. 21 U.S.C. 811(h)(2).

    Where the necessary findings are made, a substance may be temporarily scheduled if it is not listed in any other schedule under section 202 of the CSA, 21 U.S.C. 812, or if there is no exemption or approval in effect for the substance under section 505 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA), 21 U.S.C. 355. 21 U.S.C. 811(h)(1); 21 CFR part 1308. The Attorney General has delegated scheduling authority under 21 U.S.C. 811 to the Administrator of the DEA. 28 CFR 0.100.

    Background

    Section 201(h)(4) of the CSA 21 U.S.C. 811(h)(4), requires the Administrator to notify the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) of any intention to temporarily place a substance into schedule I of the CSA.1 The Acting Administrator transmitted notice of his intent to place 5F-ADB, 5F-AMB, 5F-APINACA, ADB-FUBINACA, MDMB-CHMICA and MDMB-FUBINACA in schedule I on a temporary basis to the Assistant Secretary by letter dated April 22, 2016. The Assistant Secretary responded to this notice by letter dated May 2, 2016, and advised that based on a review by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), there were no investigational new drug applications or approved new drug applications for 5F-ADB, 5F-AMB, 5F-APINACA, ADB-FUBINACA, MDMB-CHMICA or MDMB-FUBINACA. The Assistant Secretary also stated that the HHS had no objection to the temporary placement of 5F-ADB, 5F-AMB, 5F-APINACA, ADB-FUBINACA, MDMB-CHMICA or MDMB-FUBINACA into schedule I of the CSA. 5F-ADB, 5F-AMB, 5F-APINACA, ADB-FUBINACA, MDMB-CHMICA or MDMB-FUBINACA are not currently listed in any schedule under the CSA.

    1 As discussed in a memorandum of understanding entered into by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA), the FDA acts as the lead agency within the Department of Health and Human Service (HHS) in carrying out the Secretary's scheduling responsibilities under the CSA, with the concurrence of NIDA. 50 FR 9518, Mar. 8, 1985. The Secretary of the HHS has delegated to the Assistant Secretary for Health of the HHS the authority to make domestic drug scheduling recommendations. 58 FR 35460, July 1, 1993.

    To find that placing a substance temporarily into schedule I of the CSA is necessary to avoid an imminent hazard to the public safety, the Administrator is required to consider three of the eight factors set forth in 21 U.S.C. 811(c): The substance's history and current pattern of abuse; the scope, duration and significance of abuse; and what, if any, risk there is to the public health. 21 U.S.C. 811(h)(3). Consideration of these factors includes actual abuse, diversion from legitimate channels, and clandestine importation, manufacture, or distribution. 21 U.S.C. 811(h)(3).

    A substance meeting the statutory requirements for temporary scheduling may only be placed in schedule I. 21 U.S.C. 811(h)(1). Substances in schedule I are those that have a high potential for abuse, no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States, and a lack of accepted safety for use under medical supervision. 21 U.S.C. 812(b)(1).

    5F-ADB, 5F-AMB, 5F-APINACA, ADB-FUBINACA, MDMB-CHMICA and MDMB-FUBINACA

    Available data and information for 5F-ADB, 5F-AMB, 5F-APINACA, ADB-FUBINACA, MDMB-CHMICA and MDMB-FUBINACA indicate that these synthetic cannabinoids (SCs) have a high potential for abuse, no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States, and a lack of accepted safety for use under medical supervision.

    Synthetic Cannabinoids

    SCs are substances synthesized in laboratories that mimic the biological effects of delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), the main psychoactive ingredient in marijuana. It is believed that SCs were first introduced on the designer drug market in several European countries as “herbal incense” before the initial encounter in the United States by U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) in November 2008. From 2009 to the present, misuse and abuse of SCs has increased in the United States with law enforcement encounters describing SCs applied onto plant material and in designer drug products intended for human consumption. It has been demonstrated that the substances and the associated designer drug products are abused for their psychoactive properties. With many generations of SCs having been encountered since 2009, 5F-ADB, 5F-AMB, 5F-APINACA, ADB-FUBINACA, MDMB-CHMICA and MDMB-FUBINACA are some of the latest, and the abuse of these substances is negatively impacting communities.

    As observed by the DEA and CBP, SCs originate from foreign sources, such as China. Bulk powder substances are smuggled via common carrier into the United States and find their way to clandestine designer drug product manufacturing operations located in residential neighborhoods, garages, warehouses, and other similar destinations throughout the country. According to online discussion boards and law enforcement encounters, applying by spraying or mixing the SCs with plant material provides a vehicle for the most common route of administration—smoking (using a pipe, a water pipe, or rolling the drug-laced plant material in cigarette papers).

    5F-ADB, 5F-AMB, 5F-APINACA, ADB-FUBINACA, MDMB-CHMICA, and MDMB-FUBINACA have no accepted medical use in the United States. Use of these specific SCs has been reported to result in adverse effects in humans including deaths (see 3-Factor document in “Supporting and Related Material” section). Use of other SCs has resulted in signs of addiction and withdrawal, and based on the similar pharmacological profile of these six substances, it is believed that there will be similar observed adverse effects.

    5F-ADB, 5F-AMB, 5F-APINACA, ADB-FUBINACA, MDMB-CHMICA and MDMB-FUBINACA are SCs that have pharmacological effects similar to the schedule I hallucinogen delta-Δ-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and temporarily and permanently controlled schedule I synthetic cannabinoid substances. In addition, the misuse of 5F-ADB, 5F-AMB, 5F-APINACA, ADB-FUBINACA, MDMB-CHMICA and/or MDMB-FUBINACA have been associated with either overdoses requiring emergency medical intervention or death (see factor 6). With no approved medical use and limited safety or toxicological information, 5F-ADB, 5F-AMB, 5F-APINACA, ADB-FUBINACA, MDMB-CHMICA and MDMB-FUBINACA have emerged on the designer drug market, and the abuse of these substances for their psychoactive properties is concerning. The DEA's analysis is available in its entirety under “Supporting and Related Material” of the public docket for this action at www.regulations.gov under docket number DEA-443.

    Factor 4. History and Current Pattern of Abuse

    Synthetic cannabinoids have been developed over the last 30 years as tools for investigating the endocannabinoid system (e.g. determining CB1 and CB2 receptor activity). The first encounter of SCs within the United States occurred in November 2008 by CBP. Since then the popularity of SCs and their associated products has increased steadily as evidenced by law enforcement seizures, public health information, and media reports. 5F-ADB, 5F-AMB, 5F-APINACA, ADB-FUBINACA, MDMB-CHMICA and MDMB-FUBINACA are SCs that have been recently encountered (see “Supporting and Related Material,” Factor 5). Multiple overdoses involving emergency medical intervention or deaths have been associated with 5F-ADB, 5F-AMB, 5F-APINACA, ADB-FUBINACA, MDMB-CHMICA and MDMB-FUBINACA.

    Research and clinical reports have demonstrated that SCs are applied onto plant material so that the material may be smoked as users attempt to obtain a euphoric and/or psychoactive “high,” believed to be similar to marijuana. Data gathered from published studies, supplemented by discussions on Internet discussion Web sites, demonstrate that these products are being abused mainly by smoking for their psychoactive properties. The adulterated products are marketed as “legal” alternatives to marijuana. In recent overdoses, 5F-ADB, 5F-AMB, 5F-APINACA, ADB-FUBINACA, MDMB-CHMICA and MDMB-FUBINACA have been shown to be applied onto plant material, similar to the SCs that have been previously available.

    Law enforcement personnel have encountered various application methods including buckets or cement mixers in which plant material and one or more SCs (including 5F-ADB, 5F-AMB, 5F-APINACA, ADB-FUBINACA, MDMB-CHMICA and/or MDMB-FUBINACA) are mixed together, as well as large areas where the plant material is spread out so that a dissolved SC mixture can be applied directly. Once mixed, the SC plant material is then allowed to dry before manufacturers package the product for distribution, ignoring any control mechanisms to prevent contamination or to ensure a consistent, uniform concentration of the substance in each package. Adverse health consequences may also occur from directly ingesting the substance(s) during the manufacturing process. 5F-ADB, 5F-AMB, 5F-APINACA, ADB-FUBINACA, MDMB-CHMICA and MDMB-FUBINACA, similar to other SCs, have been encountered in form of dried leaves or herbal blends.

    The designer drug products laced with SCs, including 5F-ADB, 5F-AMB, 5F-APINACA, ADB-FUBINACA, MDMB-CHMICA and MDMB-FUBINACA, are often sold under the guise of “herbal incense” or “potpourri,” use various product names, and are routinely labeled “not for human consumption.” Additionally, these products are marketed as a “legal high” or “legal alternative to marijuana” and are readily available over the Internet, in head shops, or sold in convenience stores. There is an incorrect assumption that these products are safe, that they are a synthetic form of marijuana, and that labeling these products as “not for human consumption” is a legal defense to criminal prosecution.

    A major concern, as reiterated by public health officials and medical professionals, is the targeting and direct marketing of SCs and SC-containing products to adolescents and youth. This is supported by law enforcement encounters and reports from emergency departments; however, all age groups have been reported by media as abusing these substances and related products. Individuals, including minors, are purchasing SCs from Internet Web sites, gas stations, convenience stores, and head shops.

    Factor 5. Scope, Duration and Significance of Abuse

    SCs, including 5F-ADB, 5F-AMB, 5F-APINACA, ADB-FUBINACA, MDMB-CHMICA and MDMB-FUBINACA, continue to be encountered on the illicit market regardless of scheduling actions that attempt to safeguard the public from the adverse effects and safety issues associated with these substances. Numerous substances are encountered each month, differing only by small modifications intended to avoid prosecution while maintaining the pharmacological effects. Law enforcement and health care professionals continue to report abuse of these substances and their associated products.

    As described by the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA), many substances being encountered in the illicit market, specifically SCs, have been available for years but have reentered the marketplace due to a renewed popularity.

    The threat of serious injury to the individual following the ingestion of 5F-ADB, 5F-AMB, 5F-APINACA, ADB-FUBINACA, MDMB-CHMICA and MDMB-FUBINACA and other SCs persists. Numerous calls have been received by poison centers regarding the abuse of products potentially laced with SCs that have resulted in visits to emergency departments. Law enforcement continues to encounter novel SCs on the illicit market, including 5F-ADB, 5F-AMB, 5F-APINACA, ADB-FUBINACA, MDMB-CHMICA and MDMB-FUBINACA (see factor 5 in “Supporting and Related Material”).

    The following information details information obtained through NFLIS 2 (queried on November 7, 2016), including dates of first encounter, exhibits/reports, and locations.

    2 The National Forensic Laboratory Information System (NFLIS) is a national drug forensic laboratory reporting system that systematically collects results from drug chemistry analyses conducted by state and local forensic laboratories in the United States.

    5F-ADB: NFLIS—2,311 reports, first encountered in September 2014, locations include: Arizona, Arkansas, California, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Missouri, New Jersey, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Texas, Virginia, and Wisconsin.

    5F-AMB: NFLIS—3,349 reports, first encountered in January 2014, locations include: Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Wisconsin, and Wyoming.

    5F-APINACA: NFLIS—1,936 reports, first encountered in August 2012, locations include: Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Jersey, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Puerto Rico, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, West Virginia, Wisconsin, and Wyoming.

    ADB-FUBINACA: NFLIS—942 reports, first encountered in March 2014, locations include: Arkansas, California, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Mississippi, Missouri, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Dakota, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Texas, Utah, Virginia, and Wyoming.

    MDMB-CHMICA: NFLIS—227 reports, first encountered in March 2015, locations include: Arkansas, Georgia, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, Nevada, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, and Texas.

    MDMB-FUBINACA: NFLIS—507 reports, first encountered in July 2015, locations include: Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Missouri, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Texas, Virginia, Wisconsin, and West Virginia.

    Factor 6. What, if Any, Risk There Is to the Public Health

    5F-ADB, 5F-AMB, 5F-APINACA, ADB-FUBINACA, MDMB-CHMICA and MDMB-FUBINACA have all been identified in overdose and/or cases involving death attributed to their abuse. Adverse health effects reported from these incidents involving 5F-ADB, 5F-AMB, 5F-APINACA, ADB-FUBINACA, MDMB-CHMICA and/or MDMB-FUBINACA have included: Nausea, persistent vomiting, agitation, altered mental status, seizures, convulsions, loss of consciousness and/or cardio toxicity. Large clusters of overdoses requiring medical care have been reported involving 5F-AMB, MDMB-FUBINACA, MDMB-CHMICA and 5F-ADB. Reported deaths involving these SCs have included 5F-ADB (8); 5F-AMB (6); 5F-APINACA (1); ADB-FUBINACA (2); MDMB-CHMICA (4), European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction has reported an additional 12 deaths involving MDMB-CHMICA; and MDMB-FUBINACA (1) (see factor 6 in “Supporting and Related Material”).

    Finding of Necessity of Schedule I Placement to Avoid Imminent Hazard to Public Safety

    In accordance with 21 U.S.C. 811 (h)(3), based on the available data and information summarized above, the continued uncontrolled manufacture, distribution, importation, exportation, conduct of research and chemical analysis, possession, and abuse of 5F-ADB, 5F-AMB, 5F-APINACA, ADB-FUBINACA, MDMB-CHMICA and MDMB-FUBINACA pose an imminent hazard to the public safety. The DEA is not aware of any currently accepted medical uses for these substances in the United States. A substance meeting the statutory requirements for temporary scheduling, 21 U.S.C. 811(h)(1), may only be placed in schedule I. Substances in schedule I are those that have a high potential for abuse, no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States, and a lack of accepted safety for use under medical supervision. Available data and information for 5F-ADB, 5F-AMB, 5F-APINACA, ADB-FUBINACA, MDMB-CHMICA and MDMB-FUBINACA indicate that these SCs have a high potential for abuse, no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States, and a lack of accepted safety for use under medical supervision. As required by section 201(h)(4) of the CSA, 21 U.S.C. 811(h)(4), the Administrator, through a letter dated April 22, 2016, notified the Assistant Secretary of the DEA's intention to temporarily place these six substances in schedule I.

    Conclusion

    This notice of intent initiates a temporary scheduling action and provides the 30-day notice pursuant to section 201(h) of the CSA, 21 U.S.C. 811(h). In accordance with the provisions of section 201(h) of the CSA, 21 U.S.C. 811(h), the Administrator considered available data and information, herein sets forth the grounds for his determination that it is necessary to temporarily schedule methyl 2-(1-(5-fluoropentyl)-1H-indazole-3-carboxamido)-3,3-dimethylbutanoate [5F-ADB; 5F-MDMB-PINACA]; methyl 2-(1-(5-fluoropentyl)-1H-indazole-3-carboxamido)-3-methylbutanoate [5F-AMB]; N-(adamantan-1-yl)-1-(5-fluoropentyl)-1H-indazole-3-carboxamide [5F-APINACA, 5F-AKB48]; N-(1-amino-3,3-dimethyl-1-oxobutan-2-yl)-1-(4-fluorobenzyl)-1H-indazole-3-carboxamide [ADB-FUBINACA]; methyl 2-(1-(cyclohexylmethyl)-1H-indole-3-carboxamido)-3,3-dimethylbutanoate [MDMB-CHMICA, MMB-CHMINACA] and methyl 2-(1-(4-fluorobenzyl)-1H-indazole-3-carboxamido)-3,3-dimethylbutanoate [MDMB-FUBINACA] in schedule I of the CSA, and finds that the placement of these substances into schedule I of the CSA on a temporary basis is necessary to avoid an imminent hazard to the public safety.

    Because the Administrator hereby finds that it is necessary to temporarily place these SCs into schedule I to avoid an imminent hazard to the public safety, any subsequent final order temporarily scheduling these substances will be effective on the date of publication in the Federal Register, and will be in effect for a period of two years, with a possible extension of one additional year, pending completion of the regular (permanent) scheduling process. 21 U.S.C. 811(h)(1) and (2). It is the intention of the Administrator to issue such a final order as soon as possible after the expiration of 30 days from the date of publication of this notice. 5F-ADB, 5F-AMB, 5F-APINACA, ADB-FUBINACA, MDMB-CHMICA and MDMB-FUBINACA will then be subject to the regulatory controls and administrative, civil, and criminal sanctions applicable to the manufacture, distribution, importation, exportation, research, conduct of instructional activities, and chemical analysis and possession of a schedule I controlled substance.

    The CSA sets forth specific criteria for scheduling a drug or other substance. Regular scheduling actions in accordance with 21 U.S.C. 811(a) are subject to formal rulemaking procedures done “on the record after opportunity for a hearing” conducted pursuant to the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 556 and 557. 21 U.S.C. 811. The regular scheduling process of formal rulemaking affords interested parties with appropriate process and the government with any additional relevant information needed to make a determination. Final decisions that conclude the regular scheduling process of formal rulemaking are subject to judicial review. 21 U.S.C. 877. Temporary scheduling orders are not subject to judicial review. 21 U.S.C. 811(h)(6).

    Regulatory Matters

    Section 201(h) of the CSA, 21 U.S.C. 811(h), provides for an expedited temporary scheduling action where such action is necessary to avoid an imminent hazard to the public safety. As provided in this subsection, the Attorney General may, by order, schedule a substance in schedule I on a temporary basis. Such an order may not be issued before the expiration of 30 days from (1) the publication of a notice in the Federal Register of the intention to issue such order and the grounds upon which such order is to be issued, and (2) the date that notice of the proposed temporary scheduling order is transmitted to the Assistant Secretary. 21 U.S.C. 811(h)(1).

    Inasmuch as section 201(h) of the CSA directs that temporary scheduling actions be issued by order and sets forth the procedures by which such orders are to be issued, the DEA believes that the notice and comment requirements of section 553 of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), 5 U.S.C. 553, do not apply to this notice of intent. In the alternative, even assuming that this notice of intent might be subject to section 553 of the APA, the Administrator finds that there is good cause to forgo the notice and comment requirements of section 553, as any further delays in the process for issuance of temporary scheduling orders would be impracticable and contrary to the public interest in view of the manifest urgency to avoid an imminent hazard to the public safety.

    Although the DEA believes this notice of intent to issue a temporary scheduling order is not subject to the notice and comment requirements of section 553 of the APA, the DEA notes that in accordance with 21 U.S.C. 811(h)(4), the Administrator will take into consideration any comments submitted by the Assistant Secretary with regard to the proposed temporary scheduling order.

    Further, the DEA believes that this temporary scheduling action is not a “rule” as defined by 5 U.S.C. 601(2), and, accordingly, is not subject to the requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA). The requirements for the preparation of an initial regulatory flexibility analysis in 5 U.S.C. 603(a) are not applicable where, as here, the DEA is not required by section 553 of the APA or any other law to publish a general notice of proposed rulemaking.

    Additionally, this action is not a significant regulatory action as defined by Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review), section 3(f), and, accordingly, this action has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget.

    This action will not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. Therefore, in accordance with Executive Order 13132 (Federalism) it is determined that this action does not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant the preparation of a Federalism Assessment.

    List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 1308

    Administrative practice and procedure, Drug traffic control, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    For the reasons set out above, the DEA amends 21 CFR part 1308 as follows:

    PART 1308—SCHEDULES OF CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES 1. The authority citation for part 1308 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    21 U.S.C. 811, 812, 871(b), unless otherwise noted.

    2. In § 1308.11, add paragraphs (h)(23) through (28) to read as follows:
    § 1308.11 Schedule I

    (h) * * *

    (23) methyl 2-(1-(5-fluoropentyl)-1H-indazole-3-carboxamido)-3,3-dimethylbutanoate, its optical, positional, and geometric isomers, salts and salts of isomers (Other names: 5F-ADB; 5F-MDMB-PINACA) (7034) (24) methyl 2-(1-(5-fluoropentyl)-1H-indazole-3-carboxamido)-3-methylbutanoate, its optical, positional, and geometric isomers, salts and salts of isomers (Other names: 5F-AMB) (7033) (25) N-(adamantan-1-yl)-1-(5-fluoropentyl)-1H-indazole-3-carboxamide, its optical, positional, and geometric isomers, salts and salts of isomers (Other names: 5F-APINACA, 5F-AKB48) (7049) (26) N-(1-amino-3,3-dimethyl-1-oxobutan-2-yl)-1-(4-fluorobenzyl)-1H-indazole-3-carboxamide, its optical, positional, and geometric isomers, salts and salts of isomers (Other names: ADB-FUBINACA) (7010) (27) methyl 2-(1-(cyclohexylmethyl)-1H-indole-3-carboxamido)-3,3-dimethylbutanoate, its optical, positional, and geometric isomers, salts and salts of isomers (Other names: MDMB-CHMICA, MMB-CHMINACA) (7042) (28) methyl 2-(1-(4-fluorobenzyl)-1H-indazole-3-carboxamido)-3,3-dimethylbutanoate, its optical, positional, and geometric isomers, salts and salts of isomers (Other names: MDMB-FUBINACA) (7020)
    Dated: December 13, 2016. Chuck Rosenberg, Acting Administrator.
    [FR Doc. 2016-30595 Filed 12-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-09-P
    PENSION BENEFIT GUARANTY CORPORATION 29 CFR Part 4044 Allocation of Assets in Single-Employer Plans; Interest Assumptions for Valuing Benefits AGENCY:

    Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation.

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    This final rule amends the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation's regulation on Allocation of Assets in Single-Employer Plans to prescribe interest assumptions under the asset allocation regulation for valuation dates in the first quarter of 2017. The interest assumptions are used for valuing benefits under terminating single-employer plans covered by the pension insurance system administered by PBGC. As discussed below, PBGC has published a separate final rule document dealing with interest assumptions under its regulation on Benefits Payable in Terminated Single-Employer Plans for January 2017.

    DATES:

    Effective January 1, 2017.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Deborah C. Murphy ([email protected]), Assistant General Counsel for Regulatory Affairs, Office of the General Counsel, Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation, 1200 K Street NW., Washington, DC 20005, 202-326-4400 ext. 3451. (TTY/TDD users may call the Federal relay service toll free at 1-800-877-8339 and ask to be connected to 202-326-4400 ext. 3451.)

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    PBGC's regulation on Allocation of Assets in Single-Employer Plans (29 CFR part 4044) prescribes actuarial assumptions—including interest assumptions—for valuing plan benefits under terminating single-employer plans covered by title IV of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974. The interest assumptions in the regulation are also published on PBGC's Web site (http://www.pbgc.gov).

    The interest assumptions in Appendix B to Part 4044 are used to value benefits for allocation purposes under ERISA section 4044. Assumptions under the asset allocation regulation are updated quarterly and are intended to reflect current conditions in the financial and annuity markets. This final rule updates the asset allocation interest assumptions for the first quarter (January through March) of 2017.

    The first quarter 2017 interest assumptions under the allocation regulation will be 1.87 percent for the first 20 years following the valuation date and 2.37 percent thereafter. In comparison with the interest assumptions in effect for the fourth quarter of 2016, these interest assumptions represent no change in the select period (the period during which the select rate (the initial rate) applies), a decrease of 0.11 percent in the select rate, and a decrease of 0.30 percent in the ultimate rate (the final rate).

    PBGC has determined that notice and public comment on this amendment are impracticable and contrary to the public interest. This finding is based on the need to determine and issue new interest assumptions promptly so that the assumptions can reflect current market conditions as accurately as possible.

    Because of the need to provide immediate guidance for the valuation of benefits under plans with valuation dates during the first quarter of 2017, PBGC finds that good cause exists for making the assumptions set forth in this amendment effective less than 30 days after publication.

    PBGC has determined that this action is not a “significant regulatory action” under the criteria set forth in Executive Order 12866.

    Because no general notice of proposed rulemaking is required for this amendment, the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 does not apply. See 5 U.S.C. 601(2).

    List of Subjects in 29 CFR Part 4044

    Employee benefit plans, Pension insurance, Pensions.

    In consideration of the foregoing, 29 CFR part 4044 is amended as follows:

    PART 4044—ALLOCATION OF ASSETS IN SINGLE-EMPLOYER PLANS 1. The authority citation for part 4044 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    29 U.S.C. 1301(a), 1302(b)(3), 1341, 1344, 1362.

    2. In appendix B to part 4044, a new entry for January-March 2017, as set forth below, is added to the table. Appendix B to Part 4044—Interest Rates Used To Value Benefits For valuation dates occurring in the month— The values of i t are: i t for t = i t for t = i t for t = *         *         *         *         *         *         * January-March 2017 0.0187 1-20 0.0237 >20 N/A N/A

    Signed in Washington, DC.

    Deborah Chase Murphy, Assistant General Counsel for Regulatory Affairs, Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation.
    [FR Doc. 2016-30634 Filed 12-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7709-02-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR National Park Service 36 CFR Part 7 [NPS-SER-CAHA-22533; PPSECAHAS0, PPMPSPD1Z.YM0000] RIN 1024-AE33 Special Regulations; Areas of the National Park System, Cape Hatteras National Seashore—Off-Road Vehicle Management AGENCY:

    National Park Service, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The National Park Service (NPS) amends its special regulation for off-road vehicle (ORV) use at Cape Hatteras National Seashore, North Carolina, to revise the times that certain beaches open to ORV use in the morning, to extend the dates that certain seasonal ORV routes are open in the fall and spring, and to modify the size and location of certain vehicle-free areas. The NPS was required to consider these changes by section 3057 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015. The NPS also amends this special regulation to allow the Superintendent to issue ORV permits for different lengths of time than are currently allowed, and to remove an ORV route designation on Ocracoke Island to allow vehicle access to a soundside area without the requirement of an ORV permit.

    DATES:

    This rule is effective on January 20, 2017.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Superintendent, Cape Hatteras National Seashore, 1401 National Park Drive, Manteo, North Carolina 27954. Phone 252-475-9032.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background Description of Cape Hatteras National Seashore

    Situated along the Outer Banks of North Carolina, Cape Hatteras National Seashore (Seashore or park) was authorized by Congress in 1937 and established in 1953 as the nation's first national seashore. Consisting of more than thirty thousand acres distributed along approximately 67 miles of shoreline, the Seashore is part of a dynamic barrier island system.

    The Seashore contains important wildlife habitat created by dynamic environmental processes. Several species listed under the Endangered Species Act, including the piping plover, rufa subspecies of the red knot, and five species of sea turtles, are found within the park. The Seashore also serves as a popular recreation destination where users participate in a variety of activities.

    Authority and Jurisdiction To Promulgate Regulations

    In the NPS Organic Act (54 U.S.C. 100101), Congress granted the NPS broad authority to regulate the use of areas under its jurisdiction. The Organic Act authorizes the Secretary of the Interior, acting through the NPS, to “prescribe such regulations as the Secretary considers necessary or proper for the use and management of [National Park] System units.” 54 U.S.C. 100751(a).

    Off-Road Motor Vehicle Regulation

    Executive Order 11644, Use of Off-Road Vehicles on the Public Lands, was issued in 1972 in response to the widespread and rapidly increasing off-road driving on public lands “often for legitimate purposes but also in frequent conflict with wise land and resource management practices, environmental values, and other types of recreational activity.” Executive Order 11644 was amended by Executive Order 11989 in 1977, and together they are jointly referred to in this rule as the “E.O.” The E.O. requires Federal agencies that allow motorized vehicle use in off-road areas to designate specific areas and routes on public lands where the use of motorized vehicles may be permitted and to minimize user conflicts and resource impacts.

    The NPS regulation at 36 CFR 4.10(b) implements the E.O. and requires that routes and areas designated for ORV use be promulgated as special regulations and that the designation of routes and areas must comply with 36 CFR 1.5 and E.O. 11644. It also states that ORV routes and areas may be designated only in national recreation areas, national seashores, national lakeshores, and national preserves. This rule is consistent with these authorities and with Section 8.2.3.1 (Motorized Off-road Vehicle Use) of NPS Management Policies 2006, available at: http://www.nps.gov/policy/mp/policies.html.

    Recent ORV Management at Cape Hatteras National Seashore

    In 2010, the NPS completed the Off-Road Vehicle Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement (ORV FEIS) for ORV use at the Seashore to guide the management and use of ORVs at the Seashore. As a part of the selected alternative, certain elements of the ORV FEIS were implemented through rulemaking. The final rule for ORV management at the Seashore was published in the Federal Register on January 23, 2012 (77 FR 3123) (2012 Final Rule).

    On December 19, 2014, the President signed the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015 (2014 Act). Section 3057 of the 2014 Act requires the Secretary of the Interior to consider three specific changes to the 2012 Final Rule regarding:

    • Morning opening times of beaches that are closed to ORV use at night;

    • Extending the dates for seasonal ORV routes; and

    • The size and location of vehicle-free areas (VFAs).

    On February 17, 2016, the NPS published the Consideration of Modifications to the Final Rule for Off-Road Vehicle Management Environmental Assessment (EA). The EA evaluated:

    • The times that beach routes open to ORV use in the mornings;

    • Extending the dates that seasonal ORV routes are open in the fall and spring; and

    • Modifying the size and location of VFAs.

    The EA also considered:

    • Issuing ORV permits for different lengths of time;

    • Revising some ORV route designations; and

    • Providing access improvements for soundside locations on Ocracoke Island.

    The EA, which contains a full description of the purpose and need for taking action, scoping, the alternatives considered, maps and the environmental impacts associated with the project, may be viewed on the NPS planning Web site at http://parkplanning.nps.gov/caha-orv-ea under the “Document List” link. Public comments on the EA were accepted until March 18, 2016. The EA resulted in a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) that was signed on December 19, 2016 and is available at http://parkplanningfxsp0;.nps.gov/caha-orv-ea under the “Document List” link.

    Summary of Public Comments on the Proposed Rule

    The NPS published a proposed rule on August 22, 2016 (81 FR 56550). The NPS accepted comments through the mail, hand delivery, and the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. Comments were accepted through October 21, 2016. After considering the public comments and after additional review, the NPS did not make any changes to the proposed rule. A summary of comments and NPS responses is provided below.

    Beach Opening Times

    1. Comment: Several commenters requested that all beaches or priority beaches at the Seashore be opened to ORV use at 6:00 a.m. or earlier when nighttime driving is restricted.

    NPS Response: The rule states that ORV use is not allowed on designated routes in sea turtle nesting habitat before 6:00 a.m. between May 1 and September 14, and between September 15 and November 15 if sea turtles remain. This will ensure that there will be sufficient light for resource management staff to safely and properly complete their morning surveys for nesting activities. The actual opening times are not stated in the rule. They will be published by the NPS annually based on the civil twilight time at sunrise and sunset for each month that nighttime ORV restrictions are in place. Civil twilight is the period of time before sunrise and after sunset when the sun is less than 6 degrees below the horizon when there is enough visibility to conduct ordinary outdoor activities. From May through October these times range from 5:20 a.m. to 6:50 a.m. Allowing ORV access before 6:00 a.m. for the months when nighttime driving is restricted would not provide resource management staff enough light to complete their morning beach surveys properly.

    2. Comment: One commenter was concerned that the rule does not identify criteria for setting the morning beach opening times and designating priority beaches that may open before 7:00 a.m. The commenter requested the NPS identify the priority beaches in the rule.

    NPS Response: The location and times of priority beach openings are intentionally omitted from the rule to provide NPS management with the flexibility to adapt to changes in visitation patterns and workload associated with the demonstrated variability of wildlife nesting on beaches. The priority beaches are identified in the FONSI and will also be included in the Superintendent's Compendium and published annually in the park's ORV Brochure. After reviewing each season's visitation patterns, Seashore conditions, and wildlife nesting activity, the NPS will publish information about opening times for priority beaches.

    3. Comment: Several commenters stated that having different opening times for different months and different beaches could confuse visitors.

    NPS Response: The NPS understands this concern and intends to provide clear information and direction for all Seashore visitors. The NPS will clearly notify the public about opening times and locations by several methods. Priority beaches and opening times will be published at the beginning of each season in the Superintendent's Compendium, the ORV Brochure, and on the park Web site (www.nps.gov/caha). The Web site also provides a daily update on which ORV routes are open or closed due to wildlife nesting activities or Seashore conditions.

    Dates for Use of Seasonal ORV Routes

    4. Comment: Several commenters suggested a variety of dates when seasonal ORV routes around the villages and Ocracoke Campground should be opened for ORV use. Commenters also requested expanded use periods for seasonal ORV routes that are not in front of villages or the Ocracoke Campground.

    NPS Response: Extending the seasonal ORV route periods for six weeks or more was considered and dismissed during the EA process due to the higher visitation rates and larger staff requirements that would be needed to manage active turtle and bird nests during those periods. Because of wildlife nesting activity in the spring and late summer, the NPS's emphasis on providing a diversity of visitor experiences, and the importance of managing the workload of NPS staff, the rule does not make any changes to the dates for seasonal ORV routes other than the routes in front of villages and the Ocracoke Campground.

    5. Comment: One commenter requested that the NPS open ORV routes on the Friday before spring break week if that date falls before the opening date identified in the rule.

    NPS Response: The NPS considered this request, but there is no standard school spring break vacation week and this period varies substantially throughout the country. Opening the Friday before spring break would increase management complexity and make it more difficult to notify the public about the opening dates for the ORV season.

    Size and Location of Vehicle Free Areas (VFAs)

    6. Comment: Commenters suggested a wide variety of modifications to the VFAs. Some commenters recommended prohibiting beach driving or increasing the number and size of VFAs. Other commenters sought substantial reductions of VFA mileage. Many commenters suggested changes to VFAs at specific ramps and routes throughout the Seashore, especially in and around the Cape Point area. One commenter requested that no changes to the existing VFAs be made, noting these are nesting areas where seasonal ORV use would introduce additional harassment of wildlife, disruption of habitat, and visitor conflicts.

    NPS Response: When considering the modifications to the VFAs, the NPS began with the existing VFAs as a baseline, considered each of the VFAs along the Seashore, and identified particular places where changes could be made while remaining consistent with management requirements at the Seashore. Although the rule does not establish any VFAs directly, the rule includes changes to designated ORV routes that result in corresponding changes to the size and location of VFAs at the Seashore. The rule changes certain ORV routes to allow greater access on each of the islands without substantially impacting the balance of visitor opportunities, the complexity of staff workload, public safety, or sensitive wildlife species. Protective wildlife buffers will be in place, regardless of route designation, to protect beach nesting species both within ORV routes and VFAs. The specific changes to VFAs resulting from the rule will not change the implementation and effectiveness of these buffers. The VFAs at the Seashore, as modified by the rule, continue to allow for large areas where pedestrians can utilize the beach without ORVs.

    7. Comment: One commenter requested Ramp 2—which the NPS proposed to open to ORV use in the proposed rule—be used only seasonally, or that the NPS designate the first 1/4 mile of the ORV route (south of Ramp 2) as a pass through only zone with no ORV parking allowed. The commenter suggested that these changes to the proposed rule would avoid visitor conflicts.

    NPS Response: The realignment of Ramp 2 to the south, along with the construction of a pedestrian walkway (also accessible by people with disabilities) near the Coquina Beach bathhouse, should alleviate any potential safety issues associated with reopening Ramp 2 to ORV use. There are currently additional walking paths other than Ramp 2 that provide pedestrian access to Coquina Beach that will alleviate visitor conflicts. The NPS will post signs that direct pedestrians to those locations to avoid user conflicts on the realigned ramp. Following the opening of a realigned Ramp 2, the NPS will evaluate any visitor use conflicts and may implement an appropriately-sized no stopping zone if necessary.

    Permit Durations

    8. Comment: One commenter requested that the NPS specify the proposed changes to permit durations in the rule, rather than in the Superintendent's Compendium.

    NPS Response: Given the highly dynamic nature of the Seashore and tourism in the area, the NPS believes that it is prudent to provide management flexibility to NPS staff regarding the length of permits as circumstances change over time.

    Other Access Improvements

    9. Comment: One commenter noted that redesignating Ramp 45 as a park road—a management action that was included in the EA—should have been stated in the proposed rule. The commenter raised concerns that designating an ORV route as a park road would set a precedent and could potential result in larger re-designations in the future.

    NPS Response: Old Ramp 45 is an existing park road currently closed to vehicle traffic. The road continues to be maintained with culverts and a hard packed pervious surface. Unlike the designation of a route for ORV use, NPS regulations do not require a special regulation to reopen a park road to motor vehicle use. Reopening this road for vehicular use will not affect any other route or road within the Seashore.

    The Final Rule

    This rule implements the selected action in the FONSI and amends the special regulation for ORV use at the Seashore as it relates to:

    • The morning opening times of beaches that are closed to ORV use at night;

    • The dates that some seasonal ORV routes are open in the fall and spring;

    • The size and location of VFAs;

    • The duration of ORV permits; and

    • Other access improvements.

    Beach Opening Times

    The rule states that ORV use is not allowed on designated routes in sea turtle nesting habitat (ocean intertidal zone, ocean backshore, dunes) before 6:00 a.m. between May 1 and September 14, and between September 15 and November 15 if sea turtles remain. Instead of establishing opening times for each ORV route in the rule, the NPS will publish the opening times for each route on an annual basis in the Superintendent's Compendium and on the park Web site (www.nps.gov/caha). This will give the Superintendent the flexibility to adjust opening times each year based on changing conditions at the Seashore and the ability of park staff to patrol and complete resource management inventories on beaches before they are opened to vehicle use. The NPS expects that most ORV routes will continue to open at 7:00 a.m. The NPS may open certain “priority” beach routes to ORV use before 7:00 a.m., but no earlier than 6:00 a.m. This will allow ORV users to access the more popular beaches earlier in the morning. NPS resource staff will patrol these “priority” beaches before opening so that park resources are protected even though earlier access will be allowed.

    Dates for Use of Seasonal ORV Routes

    The rule extends the dates for ORV use of seasonal designated routes in front of the villages of Rodanthe, Waves, Salvo, Avon, Frisco, and Hatteras and the Ocracoke Campground. These routes will open two weeks earlier in the fall and close two weeks later in the spring, making these seasonal routes open to ORV use from October 15 through April 14. These seasonal extensions are in areas and at times of the year which will not result in measurable impacts to sensitive wildlife, visitor experience, safety, or workload complexity for park staff.

    Size and Location of VFAs

    The changes in the rule to designated ORV routes will modify the size and location of VFAs and improve ORV access in some locations. This rule makes the following changes to the designated ORV routes at the Seashore. Ramps 2.5 and 59.5 will not be constructed and are therefore removed from the chart of designated ORV routes. Ramp 2 will be restored to ORV use, extending the existing ORV route approximately 0.5 miles to the north and providing ORV access to the route from either ramp 4 or ramp 2. Ramp 59 will continue to be open to ORV use, extending the existing year-round ORV route approximately 0.5 miles. The seasonal ORV route at ramp 34 will be extended approximately 1 mile to the north and the seasonal ORV route at ramp 23 will be extended approximately 1.5 miles to the south. These changes will slightly increase ORV access on each of the islands without measurably impacting visitor experience, safety, sensitive wildlife species, or the workload complexity for NPS staff.

    Permit Durations

    The existing regulations for the Seashore state that annual permits are valid for the calendar year for which they are issued, and that seven-day permits are valid from the date of issue. This rule removes this provision and instead states that ORV permits are valid for the dates specified in the permit. The Superintendent will publish the standard duration of permits in the Compendium and on the park's Web site (www.nps.gov/caha). The standard duration of permits may be changed from time to time based upon circumstances at the Seashore and visitation patterns. To start, however, ORV permits will be valid for one year from the date of issuance instead of being valid for the calendar year of issuance, and the existing 7-day ORV permit will be replaced by a 10-day ORV permit. The 10-day ORV permit will allow many ORV users to access the beaches over two weekends, depending upon when they arrive at the Seashore.

    The NPS intends to continue to recover the costs of administering the ORV permit program under 54 U.S.C. 103104.

    Access Improvements—Ocracoke Island

    The NPS is removing the existing ORV route designation along Devil Shoals Road (also referred to as Dump Station Road). An ORV permit will no longer be required to travel this road because motor vehicles are allowed on park roads without a permit under general NPS regulations. This route is therefore removed as a designated ORV route in the rule. Devil Shoals Road is an existing dirt road located across North Carolina State Highway 12 from the Ocracoke Campground that has been maintained as part of the park's road network. This road meets NPS road design standards as a Class II connector road than can provide normal passenger vehicle access to park areas of scenic and recreational interest on a dirt/gravel surface. This change allows for limited vehicular soundside access on Ocracoke Island without the requirement to purchase an ORV permit.

    Access Improvements—Hatteras Island

    This rule extends the existing Cape Point bypass route south of ramp 44 by approximately 0.4 miles to the north so that it joins with ramp 44. This rule also extends the existing bypass route by approximately 600 feet to the south to provide additional ORV access near Cape Point when the ORV route along the beach is closed for safety or resource protection.

    Other Updates

    This rule makes several changes to the language in the existing ORV regulation to clarify and more accurately reflect existing conditions. Ramp 25.5 is renamed “ramp 25”; ramp 32.5 is renamed “ramp 32”; ramp 47.5 is renamed “ramp 48”; the description of the soundside ORV route at Little Kinnakeet is changed to reflect that it begins just west of the Kinnakeet lifesaving structures; and additional details are added to further clarify where existing routes terminate (e.g. the routes adjacent to ramps 32, 48, and 63 do not end exactly at the ramp). These clarifying changes do not increase or decrease ORV access at the Seashore.

    Maps

    The changes to routes and ramps made as a result of this rule are available at http://parkplanningfxsp0;.nps.gov/caha-orv-ea.

    Compliance With Other Laws, Executive Orders, and Department Policy Use of Off-Road Vehicles on the Public Lands (Executive Order 11644)

    As discussed previously, the E.O. applies to ORV use on federal public lands that is not authorized under a valid lease, permit, contract, or license. Section 3(4) of E.O. 11644 provides that ORV “areas and trails shall be located in areas of the National Park system, Natural Areas, or National Wildlife Refuges and Game Ranges only if the respective agency head determines that off-road vehicle use in such locations will not adversely affect their natural, aesthetic, or scenic values.” Since the E.O. clearly was not intended to prohibit all ORV use everywhere in these units, the term “adversely affect” does not have the same meaning as the somewhat similar terms “adverse impact” or “adverse effect” commonly used in the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA). Under NEPA, a procedural statute that provides for the study of environmental impacts, the term “adverse effect” refers to any effect, no matter how minor or negligible.

    Section 3(4) of the E.O., by contrast, does not prescribe procedures or any particular means of analysis. It concerns substantive management decisions, and must instead be read in the context of the authorities applicable to such decisions. The Seashore is an area of the National Park System. Therefore, the NPS interprets the E.O. term “adversely affect” consistent with its NPS Management Policies 2006. These policies require the NPS to allow only “appropriate uses” of parks and to avoid “unacceptable impacts” to park resources or values. The NPS has evaluated this rule and confirmed that it complies with these policies.

    Specifically, this rule will not impede the attainment of the Seashore's desired future conditions for natural and cultural resources as identified in the ORV FEIS. The NPS has determined this rule will not unreasonably interfere with the atmosphere of peace and tranquility, or the natural soundscape maintained in natural locations within the Seashore. Therefore, within the context of the E.O., ORV use on the ORV routes amended by this rule (which are also subject to safety and resource closures and other species management measures that will be implemented under this rule) will not adversely affect the natural, aesthetic, or scenic values of the Seashore.

    Section 8(a) of the E.O. requires NPS to monitor the effects of the use of off-road vehicles on lands under its jurisdiction. On the basis of the information gathered, NPS shall from time to time amend or rescind designations of areas or other actions taken pursuant to the E.O. as necessary to further the policy of the E.O. The existing ORV FEIS and Record of Decision identify monitoring and resource protection procedures, and desired future conditions to provide for the ongoing and future evaluation of impacts of ORV use on protected resources. The Superintendent has the authority under this rule and under 36 CFR 1.5 to close portions of the Seashore as needed to protect park resources and values, and public health and safety.

    Regulatory Planning and Review (Executive Orders 12866 and 13563)

    Executive Order 12866 provides that the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs in the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) will review all significant rules. The Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs has determined that this rule is not significant.

    Executive Order 13563 reaffirms the principles of E.O. 12866 while calling for improvements in the nation's regulatory system to promote predictability, to reduce uncertainty, and to use the best, most innovative, and least burdensome tools for achieving regulatory ends. It directs agencies to consider regulatory approaches that reduce burdens and maintain flexibility and freedom of choice for the public where these approaches are relevant, feasible, and consistent with regulatory objectives. E.O. 13563 emphasizes further that regulations must be based on the best available science and that the rulemaking process must allow for public participation and an open exchange of ideas. We have developed this rule in a manner consistent with these requirements.

    Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

    This rule will not have a significant economic effect on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). This certification is based on information contained in a report entitled, “Benefit-Cost and Regulatory Flexibility Analyses: Special Regulations of Off-Road Motor Vehicles at Cape Hatteras National Seashore”, available for public review at: http://parkplanningfxsp0;.nps.gov/caha-orv-ea. According to that report, no entities, small or large, are directly regulated by this rule, which regulates visitors' use of ORVs. The courts have held that the RFA requires an agency to perform a regulatory flexibility analysis of small entity impacts only when a rule directly regulates them. Therefore, agencies must assess the impacts on directly regulated entities, but are not required to analyze in a regulatory flexibility analysis the indirect effects from rules on small entities.

    Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA)

    This rule is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 804(2) of the SBREFA. This rule:

    (a) Does not have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more.

    (b) Will not cause a major increase in costs or prices for consumers, individual industries, Federal, State, or local government agencies, or geographic regions.

    (c) Does not have significant adverse effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or the ability of U.S.-based enterprises to compete with foreign-based enterprises.

    Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)

    This rule does not impose an unfunded mandate on state, local, or tribal governments or the private sector of more than $100 million per year. The rule does not have a significant or unique effect on state, local, or tribal governments or the private sector. The designated ORV routes are located entirely within the Seashore, and will not result in direct expenditure by State, local, or tribal governments. This rule addresses public use of NPS lands, and imposes no requirements on other agencies or governments. Therefore, a statement containing the information required by the UMRA (2 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) is not required.

    Takings (Executive Order 12630)

    This rule does not effect a taking of private property or otherwise have taking implications under Executive Order 12630. Access to private property located within or adjacent to the Seashore will not be affected, and this rule does not regulate uses of private property. Therefore, a takings implication assessment is not required.

    Federalism (Executive Order 13132)

    Under the criteria in section 1 of Executive Order 13132, this rule does not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant the preparation of a federalism summary impact statement. This rule only affects use of NPS-administered lands and imposes no requirements on other agencies or governments. A federalism summary impact statement is not required.

    Civil Justice Reform (Executive Order 12988)

    This rule complies with the requirements of Executive Order 12988. Specifically, this rule:

    (a) Meets the criteria of section 3(a) requiring that all regulations be reviewed to eliminate errors and ambiguity and be written to minimize litigation; and

    (b) Meets the criteria of section 3(b)(2) requiring that all regulations be written in clear language and contain clear legal standards.

    Consultation With Indian tribes (Executive Order 13175 and Department Policy)

    The Department of the Interior strives to strengthen its government-to-government relationship with Indian tribes through a commitment to consultation with Indian tribes and recognition of their right to self-governance and tribal sovereignty. We have evaluated this rule under the criteria in Executive Order 13175 and under the Department's tribal consultation policy and have determined that tribal consultation is not required because the rule will have no substantial direct effect on federally recognized Indian tribes.

    Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.)

    This rule does not contain any new collection of information that requires approval by Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the PRA of 1995. OMB has approved the information collection requirements associated with NPS Special Park Use Permits and has assigned OMB Control Number 1024-0026 (expires 12/31/2016 and in accordance with 5 CFR 1320.10, the agency may continue to conduct or sponsor this collection of information while the submission is pending at OMB). We estimate the annual burden associated with this information collection to be 8,500 hours per year. An agency may not conduct or sponsor and a person is not required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

    National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)

    This rule does not constitute a major Federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment. A detailed statement under NEPA is not required because the NPS issued a FONSI. The EA and FONSI are available at http://parkplanningfxsp0;.nps.gov/caha-orv-ea under the “Document List” link. These documents contain a full description of the alternatives that were considered, the environmental impacts associated with the project, public involvement, and other supporting documentation. The NPS considered public comments made on the EA in drafting this rule. The NPS has evaluated substantive comments received on the proposed rule to develop the final rule.

    Effects on the Energy Supply (Executive Order 13211).

    This rule is not a significant energy action under the definition in Executive Order 13211. A Statement of Energy Effects is not required.

    Drafting Information

    The primary authors of this regulation were Russel J. Wilson, Chief Regulations, Jurisdiction and Special Park Uses, National Park Service; and Jay Calhoun, Regulations Program Specialist, National Park Service.

    List of Subjects in 36 CFR Part 7

    District of Columbia, National Parks, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    In consideration of the foregoing, the National Park Service amends 36 CFR part 7 as follows:

    PART 7—SPECIAL REGULATIONS, AREAS OF THE NATIONAL PARK SYSTEM 1. The authority citation for part 7 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    54 U.S.C. 100101, 100751, 320102; Sec. 7.96 also issued under DC Code 10-137 and DC Code 50-2201.07.

    2. Amend § 7.58 by revising paragraphs (c)(2)(iv) and (c)(9), the paragraph (c)(12) subject heading, and paragraph (c)(12)(i) to read as follows:
    § 7.58 Cape Hatteras National Seashore.

    (c) * * *.

    (2) * * *

    (iv) ORV permits are valid for the dates specified on the permit. The public will be notified of any changes to ORV permit durations through one or more of the methods listed in § 1.7(a) of this chapter.

    (9) ORV routes. The following tables indicate designated ORV routes. The following ramps are designated for off-road use to provide access to ocean beaches: 2, 4, 23, 25, 27, 30, 32, 34, 38, 43, 44, 48, 49, 55, 59, 63, 67, 68, 70, and 72. Designated ORV routes and ramps are subject to resource, safety, seasonal, and other closures implemented under § 7.58(c)(10). Soundside ORV access ramps are described in the table below. For a village beach to be open to ORV use during the winter season, it must be at least 20 meters (66 feet) wide from the toe of the dune seaward to mean high tide line. Maps showing designated routes and ramps are available in the Office of the Superintendent and on the Seashore Web site.

    When is the route open? Where is the route located? Bodie Island—Designated Routes Year Round Ramp 2 to 0.2 miles south of ramp 4. September 15-March 14 0.2 miles south of ramp 4 to the eastern confluence of the Atlantic Ocean and Oregon Inlet. Hatteras Island—Designated Routes Year Round 1.5 miles south of ramp 23 to ramp 27. Ramp 30 to approximately 0.3 miles south of ramp 32 The following soundside ORV access routes from NC Highway 12 to Pamlico Sound between the villages of Salvo and Avon: soundside ramps 46, 48, 52, 53, 54. The soundside ORV access at Little Kinnakeet starts just to the west of the Kinnakeet lifesaving structures and continues to the sound. Ramp 38 to 1.5 miles south of ramp 38. The following soundside ORV access routes from NC Highway 12 to Pamlico Sound between the villages of Avon and Buxton: soundside ramps 57, 58, 59, and 60. 0.4 miles north of ramp 43 to Cape Point to 0.3 miles west of “the hook.” Bypass which extends due south from the opening at ramp 44, running continuously behind the dunes until the bypass connects with the beach. Interdunal route (“Inside Road”) from intersection with Lighthouse Road (i.e. ramp 44) to ramp 49, with one spur route from the interdunal route to ramp 48. Just east of Ramp 48 to east Frisco boundary. A soundside ORV access route from Museum Drive to Pamlico Sound near Coast Guard Station Hatteras Inlet Pole Road from Museum Drive to Spur Road to Pamlico Sound, with one spur route, commonly known as Cable Crossing, to Pamlico Sound and four spur routes to the ORV route below. Ramp 55 southwest along the ocean beach for 1.6 miles, ending at the intersection with the route commonly known as Bone Road. October 15-April 14 0.1 mile south of Rodanthe Pier to 1.5 mile south of ramp 23
  • 1.0 mile north of ramp 34 to ramp 38 (Avon)
  • East Frisco boundary to west Frisco boundary (Frisco village beach)
  • East Hatteras boundary to ramp 55 (Hatteras village beach)
  • Ocracoke Island—Designated Routes Year Round Ramp 59 to just southwest of ramp 63. Routes from NC Highway 12 to Pamlico Sound located north of the Pony Pens, commonly known as Prong Road, Barrow Pit Road, and Scrag Cedar Road. 1.0 mile northeast of ramp 67 to 0.5 mile northeast of ramp 68
  • 0.4 miles northeast of ramp 70 to Ocracoke inlet.
  • From ramp 72 to a pedestrian trail to Pamlico Sound, commonly known as Shirley's Lane. October 15-April 14 0.5 mile northeast of ramp 68 to ramp 68 (Ocracoke Campground area). September 15-March 14 A route 0.6 mile south of ramp 72 from the beach route to a pedestrian trail to Pamlico Sound. A route at the north end of South Point spit from the beach route to Pamlico Sound.

    (12) Hours of Operation/Night-Driving Restrictions. (i) Hours of operation and night-driving restrictions are listed in the following table:

    Hours of Operation/Night Driving Restrictions When are the restrictions in place? Where are the restrictions in place? November 16-April 30 All designated ORV routes are open 24 hours a day. May 1-September 14 Designated ORV routes in sea turtle nesting habitat (ocean intertidal zone, ocean backshore, dunes) are closed at 9:00 p.m. and open no earlier than 6:00 a.m. The Seashore will publish exact opening times on an annual basis. September 15-November 15 Designated ORV routes in sea turtle nesting habitat (ocean intertidal zone, ocean backshore, dunes) are closed at 9:00 p.m. and open no earlier than 6:00 a.m., but the Superintendent may open designated ORV routes, or portions of the routes, 24 hours a day if no turtle nests remain. The Seashore will publish exact opening times on an annual basis.
    Michael Bean, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks.
    [FR Doc. 2016-30735 Filed 12-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4312-52-P
    POSTAL SERVICE 39 CFR Part 111 New Mailing Standards for Domestic Mailing Services Products AGENCY:

    Postal ServiceTM.

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    On October 12, 2016, the Postal Service filed a notice of mailing services price adjustments with the Postal Regulatory Commission (PRC), effective January 22, 2017. This final rule contains the revisions to Mailing Standards of the United States Postal Service, Domestic Mail Manual (DMM®) that we will adopt to implement the changes coincident with the price adjustments.

    DATES:

    Effective date: January 22, 2017.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Audrey Meloni at (856) 933-4360, or Lizbeth Dobbins at (202) 268-3789.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Final prices are available under Docket Number R2017-1 on the Postal Regulatory Commission's Web site at www.prc.gov.

    The Postal Service's final rule includes: Changes to prices, several mail classification updates, mailpiece marking changes, modifications to mailpiece weights and mail preparation categories, multiple product simplification efforts, a few minor revisions to the DMM to condense language and eliminate redundancy, a change to the redemption period of a money order claim from two years to one year, the addition of Official Mail Accounting System (OMAS) stamp shipment fee language, and updates to Enterprise Post Office Box Online (ePOBOL) process that change payment periods for online Post Office Box activity. Changes to Collect On Delivery will be published in a future final rule.

    Comments on Proposed Changes and USPS Response

    The Postal Service received 21 formal responses encompassing 34 comments on our price-change related proposal. Five responses included comments regarding more than one issue.

    Standard Mail Name Change to USPS Marketing Mail

    Nine comments requested that the Postal Service reconsider its decision to rename Standard Mail to USPS Marketing Mail. The commenters suggested that using the term “marketing” would indicate “advertising mail” or “junk mail” and cause the mail to have a lower “open rate”. Customers were unclear how a name change would encourage more people to use the mail.

    Additional comments asked about the indicia, labeling criteria, transition period, and the lack of discussion with the industry and supportive research that would support such a measure that could be costly to both the USPSTM and the mailing industry.

    One commenter believed the change would help promote the use of mail for marketing; while another was willing to explore an 18-month transition period before any changes to indicia would be required.

    USPS Response

    The Postal Service is updating the name to reflect vibrancy and to breathe new life into the former “Third-Class Mail” and “Standard Mail”. We expressed a desire at the National Postal Forum and through MTAC in early 2016 to improve the position of Standard Mail in the marketplace and to improve its perception.

    In response to feedback from the mailing community, the new indicia or postage markings should not be used for letter or flat mail until January 2018 at the earliest. Tray label and pallet markings will be deferred until mid-2017 at the earliest. Other types of changes, such as changes to postage statements and forms, can move forward with the January 2017 price change. This phased transition period will allow both hardware and software changes to be implemented successfully.

    First-Class Mail up to 3.5 ounces

    Three commenters requested clarification on the pricing methodology for computing prices for First-Class Mail up to 3.5 ounces, and for residual pieces from either a presorted or automation mailing.

    One comment suggested that heavier letters might slow down processing for mail service providers. The same commenter wanted to know whether the next price increase would be within the existing CPI allowances for the existing product, or the USPS would seek higher pricing based on this current proposed change.

    Additional comments cited the lack of DMM language in the proposed rule identifying the types of pieces to which the weight increase changes would apply (such as enveloped pieces only, envelopes containing discs, heavy letters only, etc.), and clarifying the barcode placement for such pieces.

    USPS Response

    There are no changes to the pricing methodology for residual mail pieces. Also, there are no changes to the requirements for enveloped mail pieces, heavy letters, or envelopes containing discs. The market dominant price change will be done using the Centralized Accounting Postage System (CAPS), and all applicable DMM sections have been updated in this final rule.

    First-Class Package Service

    One commenter asked if the new Labeling List 104 was being proposed as an added convenience.

    USPS Response

    Use of the new labeling list is optional.

    USPS Marketing Mail Letters Weight Limit

    Three commenters requested clarification of the USPS Marketing Mail weight limits. One wanted to know if the Notice 123, Price List would be updated to reflect these changes. Another requested clarification regarding the barcode clear zone.

    USPS Response

    USPS Marketing Mail automation letters weight will increase to 3.5 ounces, eliminating the previous piece/pound price for 3.3 to 3.5 ounces. Automation letters over 3.5 ounces will pay the applicable flats prices, however, for non-automation letters; the weight is up to 4 ounces.

    Notice 123, Price List, will be updated to reflect all the piece/pound and weight changes and will be available on Postal Explorer at pe.usps.com beginning January 22, 2017. The applicable DMM sections regarding barcode clear zones are also updated with this final rule

    USPS Marketing Mail Flats Weight Limit

    Three comments were received. One comment stated that the Postal Service has not considered the unintended effects of the proposed rule change, and the associated loss of revenue, and suggested withdrawing this change. The commenter suggested that many mailers will take advantage of the rule change by combining more mailpieces, thus reducing the number of pieces entered and the associated revenue, while increasing the average cost to handle those pieces.

    Another comment wanted clarification regarding the effect of this change on booklets and folded self-mailers.

    Lastly, one comment stated that raising the weight limit on the piece/pound break is a great move as long as the rate is not raised to make up for the resulting lost revenue.

    USPS Response

    There will be no changes to the parameters of booklets or Folded Self-Mailers.

    Permit and Annual Mailing Fees

    Two comments requested clarification about the elimination of permit and annual mailing fees, specifically with regard to Bound Printed Matter and the QBRM quarterly fee.

    USPS Response

    A permit application fee and annual mailing fee must be paid for any destination entry Bound Printed Matter flats (except for qualifying Full-service Intelligent Mail barcode mailings). There is no application fee or annual mailing fee if a mailer uses Bound Printed Matter to mail parcels only.

    There is no change to the QBRM quarterly fee at this time.

    Combining 3-Digit and AADC

    Two comments addressed the combining of 3-Digit and AADC letters, requesting clarification regarding the mandatory origin 3-Digit trays for the local SCF area, and the use of labeling lists L801 and L003.

    USPS Response

    Labeling list L003 will be combined with L801 with the following exceptions. With this final rule, effective January 22, 2017, all First-Class and Standard Mail automation/machinable letters will no longer be sorted to the 3 Digit level. They will be sorted to the AADC level, after optional 5-Digit sort, whether they are Destinating AADC trays or Originating AADC trays. The current requirement that origin SCF mail be sorted down to 3-Digit trays will be eliminated. There is no minimum quantity for Origin AADC trays; however, less bundling should result in fuller trays, and the use of many fewer trays. The entry price is the same. The L801 will be applicable to all of this type of mail.

    The use of 3 Digit trays will still apply to Nonmachinable letters in all three classes, and Periodicals Machinable/Automation prices. Destinating and Originating 3 Digit trays can still be made for these three classes of Nonmachinable letters along with Periodicals machinable/auto letters. The origin 3-Digit tray preparation will thus remain the same for all Nonmachinable letters and Periodicals machinable/automation letters. Labeling List 002 will be used, which may involve L003 for 3-Digit schemes.

    Prices

    One organization submitted two comments suggesting that a price increase for commercial USPS Marketing Mail flats would result from increasing the pound rate and decreasing the per piece rate; producing a potential 4-10 percent increase in postage costs for their mailings.

    USPS Response

    Comments from comparable mailers expressed satisfaction with the prices as proposed. [A request for a recent postage statement so that USPS could do a before-and-after analysis to see if correct prices were being charged was not received.]

    FSS Price Structure

    Two comments were received. One strongly supported the proposal to eliminate the FSS-specific price structures for Periodicals, USPS Marketing Mail, and Bound Printed Matter; however, the commenter disagreed with the proposal to leave the 250-pound minimum intact, fearing the unintended consequences of curtailing the benefits sought to be realized by the restoration of a more rational price structure.

    Another comment asked if the Notice 123 would be updated and if FSS facility preparation would become mandatory.

    USPS Response

    The 250-pound minimum requirements will remain intact. The Notice 123, Price List, will be updated on January 22, 1017, to remove all pricing related to FSS preparation. Additionally, FSS facility preparation will be optional.

    Shipping Products Permit

    One comment asked what indicia changes are proposed, and whether USPS data under the combined permit would be broken down by product.

    USPS Response

    There will be no changes to current procedures. Each product must be identified for volume reporting purposes.

    Informed Delivery

    One comment regarding the Informed Delivery enhancement suggested that the process would add another level of complexity and potential for errors, thereby, increasing costs.

    USPS Response

    Informed Delivery is outside the scope of the price changes addressed in this final rule.

    General

    We received three comments of a general nature. One comment suggested that DMM exhibit 708.7.1.1 was missing an indicator for presorted Bound Printed Matter flats, and another requested that educational webinars should be provided on Premium Forwarding Service and Share Mail.

    USPS Response

    The DMM will be updated as part of the January 22, 2017, price change implementation. Educational seminars will be presented on various subjects in the near future.

    Overview of Changes Made by This Final Rule Flats Sequencing System (FSS)

    As background, on December 18, 2013, the Postal Service began to require bundle and pallet preparation of flat-size Standard Mail®, Periodicals, and Bound Printed Matter mailpieces for delivery within ZIP CodesTM served by FSS processing (78 FR 76533-76548). This requirement was incorporated into the DMM on January 26, 2014. Subsequently, on May 31, 2015, the Postal Service introduced FSS specific price structures for flat-sized Bound Printer Matter, Standard Mail, and Periodicals mailpieces, pursuant to PRC Order no. 2472, issued on May 7, 2015. This final rule removes all FSS specific pricing structures from Periodicals, Standard Mail and Bound Printed Matter. One change, for example, requires mailers to add Optional Endorsement Lines (OELs) on each FSS scheme mailpiece. For FSS preparation, mailers place qualifying mailpieces from all price categories into a separate pool for each individual 5-digit FSS scheme combination.

    All carrier route Bound Printed Matter (BPM), carrier route Periodicals and carrier route (except saturation) Standard Mail flats meeting the standards in DMM 201.6.2 must be sorted to FSS schemes, properly bundled and placed on or in pallets, trays, sacks or approved containers, for FSS scheme ZIP Code combinations within the same facility. Mailings (excluding saturation mailings of Standard Mail) with non-presorted BPM flats may be included in FSS preparation, but will continue to be ineligible for presorted or carrier route prices.

    To reiterate, all mailpieces in a 5-digit scheme FSS bundle must be identified with an OEL, as described in DMM 708.7.0. Mailpieces entered under a combined mailing of Standard Mail and Periodicals flats (DMM 705.15.0) still include class and price markings, applicable to the price paid, in addition to the OEL.

    Periodicals, Standard Mail, and Bound Printed Matter flats properly included in a FSS scheme bundle qualify for the piece price applied prior to inclusion in the FSS scheme pool with the following exceptions for Standard Mail:

    1. A carrier route mailpiece in a FSS bundle on a FSS scheme pallet will receive the Basic CR-Bundles/Pallet price.

    2. A carrier route mailpiece in a FSS bundle on a FSS facility pallet will receive the Basic CR price.

    Additional information on each mail class affected is under the Bound Printed Matter, Periodicals, and Standard Mail sections. First-Class Mail—Combine First-Class Mail (FCM) Commercial Automation Automated Area Distribution Center (AADC) and 3-Digit Sortations for Letters and Cards Into One Combined Sortation Level Known as AADC

    Currently, there are four presort levels for FCM Commercial Automation Letters and Cards: Mixed AADC, AADC, 3-Digit, and 5-Digit. To help simplify the pricing structure, the Postal Service implemented the same price for AADC Automation Letters (Cards) and 3-Digit Automations Letters (Cards) in Docket No. R2012-3. The Postal Service is now combining AADC and 3-Digit presort levels into one sortation. The new sortation name will be AADC. The existing labeling List 801 will drive the FCM AADC separations, and origin entry separations, based on labeling List 002, will be modified to reflect origin entry AADC separations.

    First-Class Mail—Increase the Weight Standard for First-Class Mail (FCM) Commercial Automation and Machinable Letters and Cards From Up to 3.3 Ounces to Up to 3.5 Ounces

    Currently, the “up to” weight standard for FCM Commercial Machinable Letters is 3.3 ounces. This lower weight break of up to 3.3 ounces is being increased due to mail processing improvements. Since machinable letters must follow the standards for Automation Letters (except for IMb), the same weight maximum should apply. Based on this, the Postal Service will increase the weight maximum from 3.3 ounces to 3.5 ounces. This change does not apply to the maximum weight of Booklets which are capped at 3.0 ounces.

    First-Class Mail—One Price for Up To 3.5 Ounces for First-Class Mail (FCM) Commercial Automation Letters

    Currently, the same price applies for one- and two-ounce pieces for each individual mail sortation level for FCM Commercial Automation Letters. With this final rule there will be one price for up to 3.5 ounces for each individual mail sortation level for FCM Commercial Automation Letters. This will also apply to mixed-weight FCM Residual mailings up to 3.5 ounces. The current preparation requirements for non-blended trays, such as one ounce, up to two ounces, and now extending to 3.5 ounces will continue. This change does not include FCM single-piece letters (non-residual) or FCM Flats.

    First-Class Mail—Simplifying and Renaming FCM Alternate Postage as FCM Share Mail

    The Postal Service will rename Alternate Postage as Share Mail. This implements a proposal published in the June 9, 2016, Postal Bulletin (Issue #22443). Share Mail allows Postal Service customers to distribute single-piece FCM letters or cards to consumers, who may in turn mail those pieces to any domestic address, without having to affix postage. Share Mail pieces are permitted to weigh up to one ounce each. Payment is collected electronically from the customer's Postage Due and Centralized Accounting Postage System (CAPS) Account. Invoicing is performed manually, by the Postal Service's Share Mail Program Office in Marketing. To continue the Postal Service's efforts to simplify its product line, the Share Mail payment tiers will be collapsed into one, and upfront postage payment requirements will be eliminated. Unique Intelligent Mail barcodes are no longer required nor is a signed Marketing Agreement. Picture Permit will no longer be available in order to help expedite the approval process. A customer who wishes to participate must submit a request to the Share Mail Program Office along with production pieces to ensure readability for postal processing. Share Mail relies on Intelligent Mail barcode (IMb) technology and scan data collected as the mailpiece travels through the mailstream to determine piece counts, so readability is paramount.

    Periodicals—Eliminate Flats Sequencing System (FSS) Pricing

    The Postal Service will eliminate the FSS specific price structures for Periodicals Outside-County. FSS preparation will still be required and all FSS marking requirements will remain as is. Outside-County Periodicals flats properly included in a FSS scheme bundle will qualify for the price applied prior to inclusion in the FSS scheme pool. If a FSS scheme pallet is drop-shipped to a DFSS facility, the pallet will receive Carrier Route pallet pricing. If a FSS facility pallet is drop-shipped to a DFSS facility the pallet will receive DSCF pallet pricing. Qualifying FSS scheme pieces entered at a DFSS facility will receive DSCF pound pricing. FSS scheme bundles on an FSS scheme pallet will receive carrier route bundle prices. FSS scheme bundles on an FSS facility pallet will receive 3-digit/SCF bundle pricing. FSS scheme and facility sack/trays or other authorized container will receive 3-digit/SCF sack/tray prices.

    Standard Mail—Renaming Standard Mail as “USPS Marketing Mail”

    The Postal Service will rename Standard Mail as “USPS Marketing Mail”. This name change will better communicate to our customers the message that Standard Mail fits into their marketing mix.

    To help smooth the transition for this change, the Postal Service will modify postage statements and the DMM for January 2017 and implement other changes to postal forms or documents during the normal update cycles. The initial implementation date for mailers to adopt the new USPS Marketing Mail abbreviations (such as MKT in lieu of STD) is July 1, 2018. Abbreviations and examples of permit imprints will be available in a future Postal Bulletin.

    Bound Printed Matter—Eliminate Flat Sequencing System (FSS) Pricing

    The Postal Service is eliminating FSS specific price structures for Bound Printed Matter Flats. FSS preparation will still be required, and all FSS marking requirements will remain in place. Bound Printed Matter flat pieces included in an FSS scheme bundle will qualify for the zone and entry piece pricing and pound pricing applicable to the mailing piece before inclusion in the FSS scheme pool. If an FSS container is drop shipped to a DFSS facility, those pieces will receive DSCF pricing.

    Standard Mail—Combine AADC and 3 Digit Automation Sorts for Letters Into One Sort Level

    Currently there are four presort levels for Standard Mail and Standard Mail Nonprofit Automation Letters: Mixed AADC Automation Letters, AADC Automation Letters, 3-Digit Automation Letters, and 5-Digit Automation Letters. To simplify the pricing structure, the Postal Service implemented the same price for AADC Automation Letters and 3-Digit Automation Letters in Docket No. R2013-1. The Postal Service is combining these two presort levels (AADC and 3-Digit) into one new sortation which will be named AADC.

    Standard Mail—Increase the Weight Standard for Standard Mail and Standard Mail Nonprofit Nonautomation Machinable Letters From Up to 3.3 Ounces to Up to 3.5 Ounces

    Currently, the “up to” weight standard for Standard Mail and Standard Mail Nonprofit Machinable Letters is 3.3 ounces. This lower “weight break” is no longer needed due to improvements in mail processing equipment. Since machinable letters must follow the standards for Automation Letters (except for the IMb standards), the weight maximum should also apply. Accordingly, the Postal Service will increase the weight maximum from 3.3 ounces to 3.5 ounces. This change does not include Standard Mail Ride-Along mailpieces which are capped at 3.3 ounces and are inserted into a host Periodicals mailpiece.

    It is important that both the Industry and the Postal Service evaluate the effects of higher weight breaks for First-Class Mail automation letters and cards along with Standard Mail letters. Collaboration and feedback throughout calendar year 2017 will be critical in helping to determine whether higher weights cause processing or address quality metrics to be put at risk.

    Standard Mail—Reduce the Number of Simple Sample Tiers

    There are currently six volume tiers for Standard Mail Commercial and Nonprofit Simple Samples. Based on the volume thresholds currently used by most customers, the Postal Service will collapse the existing six tiers into two new tiers: Volumes up to and including 200,000 pieces, and volumes greater than 200,000 pieces.

    Standard Mail—Eliminate Flat Sequencing System (FSS) Pricing

    The Postal Service will eliminate the FSS-specific price structures within Standard Mail and Standard Mail Nonprofit. FSS preparation will still be required and all FSS marking requirements will remain intact.

    Standard Mail and Standard Mail Nonprofit flats properly included in a FSS scheme pool will qualify for the price applied prior to the FSS scheme pool with the following exceptions:

    1. A carrier route mailpiece in an FSS bundle on an FSS scheme pallet will receive the Basic CR-Bundles/Pallet price, and

    2. A carrier route mailpiece in a FSS bundle on an FSS facility pallet will receive the Basic CR price.

    If an FSS pallet is drop shipped to a DFSS facility, those pieces will receive DSCF pricing.

    Standard Mail—Increase Standard Mail and Standard Mail Nonprofit Flats, Nonautomation Letters, and Nonmachinable Letters Piece-Price Weight Break Structure From 3.3 Ounces to 4.0 Ounces

    The current piece/pound price structure for Standard Mail and Standard Mail Nonprofit Flats, Nonautomation Letters, and Nonmachinable Letters does not provide a simple, clear view of the actual price of a mailing, especially if it includes nonidentical-weight pieces between 3.3 and 4 ounces. The Postal Service will increase the piece price weight break structure from 3.3 ounces to 4.0 ounces for Standard Mail and Standard Mail Nonprofit Flats, and Nonautomation and Nonmachinable Letters. Pieces up to 4 ounces will pay the same price and a pound price will apply over 4 ounces. This will not include Nonautomation Machinable Letters.

    Extra Services (Returns Simplification)—Eliminate BRM Parcels Permit & Account Maintenance Fee

    Business Reply Mail (BRM) currently consists of letters, flats, and parcels. Occasionally, BRM customers may choose to use Business Reply Mail for return parcels because they possess a BRM permit for inbound correspondence. The Postal Service will waive the annual permit fee for those customers using BRM exclusively for return parcels. This will align BRM parcels with other returns products. BRM permit fees for letters and flats, and for weight-averaged BRM letters, flats and parcels, will remain.

    Extra Services—Eliminate QBRM Permit Fees

    The Postal Service is also eliminating the annual permit fees for Business Reply customers who use only QBRM Basic and High Volume Qualified for letters and cards. All other fees and postage pricing remain intact.

    Extra Services—Shipping Services Permit Fees

    The Postal Service will eliminate the fees for certain outbound and return permits used for parcel shipments including associated annual account maintenance fees. This will streamline the application and returns process, and eliminate the need to pay permit application fees for additional entry points. Shipping Products included under this umbrella are outbound shipments of Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail, First-Class Package Service, Parcel Select (including Parcel Select Lightweight), Bound Printed Matter (parcels only), Media Mail, and Library Mail, as well as for return shipments of MRS, Parcel Return Service and BRM (parcels only).

    Extra Services (Address Correction)—Adjust Standard Mail Forwarding Fee to 2 Decimal Places

    Standard Mail letters and flats mailers that use this service are charged the Forwarding Fee via Address Correction Service (ACS) billing which is managed by the ACS Department of Address Management Systems in Memphis, TN. The ACS data file, Shipping Notice data file, and the Invoice data file have an implied decimal position that is conducive to 2-decimal places for address correction services. When mailers use these files to track their ACS fees and costs, they must recognize that the Forwarded Fee product codes have an implied 3-decimal place price and must manipulate the data files provided to them through ACS so that the decimal place differences are recognized in all of the data files provided via ACS. This would adjust the Standard Mail Forwarding Fee to 2-decimal point places to allow mailers to track their ACS fees and costs without making adjustments for the Forwarding Fees.

    Extra Services—Money Order Redemption Period

    To be consistent with Banking Industry Standards and other companies' comparable money order offerings, the Postal Service will change the time limit for claims for improper payment to a limit of one year. This language will be updated on the reverse side of the domestic and international money order form so the purchaser is aware of the time limit.

    Extra Services—Enterprise PO Boxes Online (ePOBOL) Payment Process Change

    The Postal Service plans to allow Enterprise PO Boxes Online customers to modify their current payment period to align their multiple PO Boxes, Caller Service, and Reserve payments to one due date per year, when using an Enterprise Payment Account (EPA). Eligible customers will be allowed to pay pro-rated fees on a one-time basis to align all payments to a selected annual renewal date in the future. This method is optional and will be available for all of an eligible customer's PO Boxes and Caller Service numbers. When the true-up date is reached they will continue to pay for the 12 month term as committed when first enrolled in the Enterprise Payment Account.

    Extra Services—OMAS Stamp Delivery Fee for Federal Agencies Ordering Stamps From the Stamp Fulfillment Center

    Federal agencies have the option today to order stamps from the USPS Stamp Fulfillment Services in Kansas City and to pay for the stamps through their Official Mail Accounting System (OMAS) accounts. It has been a long-standing practice to charge customers other than federal agencies a nominal handling fee for all purchases ordered through Stamp Fulfillment Services. Beginning January 1, 2017, these fees will apply to federal agencies using OMAS.

    The handling fee schedule can be found in section 1560 of the Mail Classification Schedule, under References, on the Postal Regulatory Commission Web site at http://www.prc.gov/.

    Extra Services—Resources

    The Postal Service will provide additional resources to assist customers with this price change for competitive products. These tools include price lists, downloadable price files, and Federal Register Notices, which may be found on the Postal Explorer® Web site at pe.usps.com.

    List of Subjects in 39 CFR Part 111

    Administrative practice and procedure, Postal Service.

    The Postal Service adopts the following changes to Mailing Standards of the United States Postal Service, Domestic Mail Manual (DMM), incorporated by reference in the Code of Federal Regulations. See 39 CFR 111.1.

    Accordingly, 39 CFR part 111 is amended as follows: PART 111—[AMENDED] 1. The authority citation for 39 CFR part 111 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    5 U.S.C. 552(a); 13 U.S.C. 301-307; 18 U.S.C. 1692-1737; 39 U.S.C. 101, 401, 403, 404, 414, 416, 3001-3011, 3201-3219, 3403-3406, 3621, 3622, 3626, 3632, 3633, and 5001.

    2. Revise the following sections of Mailing Standards of the United States Postal Service, Domestic Mail Manual (DMM), as follows: Mailing Standards of the United States Postal Service, Domestic Mail Manual (DMM) 200 Commercial Letters, Cards, Flats, and Parcels 201 Physical Standards 1.0 Physical Standards for Machinable Letters and Cards 1.1.2 Weight Standards for Machinable Letters

    [Revise 1.1.2 to read as follows:]

    The maximum weight for Presorted First-Class Mail machinable letters is 3.5 ounces (0.2188 pound). The maximum weight for USPS Marketing Mail machinable letters is 3.5 ounces (0.2188 pound).

    2.0 Physical Standards for Nonmachinable Letters 2.1 Criteria for Nonmachinable Letters

    [Revise the last sentence of 2.1 to read as follows:]

    * * * In addition, a letter-size piece is nonmachinable if it weighs more than 3.5 ounces (except Periodicals nonmachinable letters cannot weigh more than 3.3 ounces), unless it has a barcode and is eligible for, and claims, automation letter prices or USPS Marketing Mail Carrier Route (barcoded) letter prices.

    3.0 Physical Standards for Machinable and Automation Letters and Cards 3.5 Maximum Weight, Machinable and Automation Letters and Cards

    The following maximum weight limits apply:

    [Revise 3.5b as follows:]

    b. Machinable enveloped letters and cards—3.5 ounces. (see 3.6 for pieces over 3 ounces.)

    4.0 Physical Standards for Flats 4.7 Flat-Size Pieces Not Eligible for Flat-Size Prices Exhibit 4.7b Pricing for Flats Exceeding Maximum Deflection (see 4.6)

    [Revise Exhibit 4.7b as follows:]

    Eligibility as presented Eligibility with failed deflection PERIODICALS OUTSIDE COUNTY [Delete Machinable barcoded FSS] [Delete Nonmachinable barcoded 5-digit flat]. *         *         *         *         *         *         * [Delete Machinable nonbarcoded FSS] [Delete Nonmachinable nonbarcoded 5-digit flat]. *         *         *         *         *         *         * USPS MARKETING MAIL [Delete Automation FSS Sch Pallet] [Delete Nonautomation FSS Sch Pallet]. [Delete Automation FSS Other] [Delete Nonautomation FSS Other]. [Delete Automation FSS Sch Cont.] [Delete Nonautomation FSS Sch Cont.]. [Delete Automation FSS Facility Cont.] [Delete Nonautomation FSS Facility Cont.]. *         *         *         *         *         *         * BOUND PRINTED MATTER *         *         *         *         *         *         * [Delete Barcoded/noncoded FSS Sch flat] [Delete Presorted parcel]. *         *         *         *         *         *         * 202 Elements on the Face of a Mailpiece 5.0 Barcode Placement Letters and Flats 5.1 Letter-Size 5.1.2 General Barcode Placement for Letters

    [Revise the second and third sentences to read as follows:]

    * * * A nonautomation letter may bear an Intelligent Mail barcode under 708.4.0. Mailers must print the barcode either in the address block or in the barcode clear zone, except for pieces that weigh more than 3.5 ounces which must include the barcode in the address block. * * *

    203 Basic Postage Statement, Documentation, and Preparation Standards 4.0 Letter and Flat Trays 4.5 Letter Tray Strapping Exception

    [Revise second sentence to read as follows:]

    Strapping is not required for any letter tray placed on a 5-digit, 3-digit, or SCF pallet secured with stretchwrap. If the processing and distribution manager gives a written waiver, strapping is not required for any mixed AADC letter tray of First-Class Mail or for any letter tray that originates and destinates in the same SCF or AADC (mail processing plant) service area.

    207 Periodicals 12.0 Nonbarcoded (Presorted) Eligibility 12.2 Prices—Outside-County

    Outside-County nonbarcoded (Presorted) prices are based on the following criteria:

    [Revise 12.2a, b, and c to read as follows.]

    a. Piece prices are based on shape, machinability, barcoding, and presort level. The presort level of the piece is based primarily on the bundle level of the piece, except the presort level of pieces loose in trays is based on the tray level and qualifying FSS scheme flats are based on presort levels prior to inclusion in the FSS scheme bundle.

    b. Bundle prices are based on the bundle and container sortation level except FSS scheme bundles in/on a FSS scheme container receives carrier route pricing; FSS scheme bundles in/on a FSS facility container receives 3-digit/SCF pricing.

    c. Container prices are based on the type of container (tray, sack, or pallet), the level of sortation of the container and where the container is entered except FSS facility containers and FSS scheme sacks or trays receive 3-digit/SCF pricing and where the container is entered, and FSS scheme pallets receive carrier route prices and where the pallet is entered.

    12.3 Prices—In-County 12.3.2 Three-Digit Prices

    3-digit prices apply to:

    [Add new item c as follows:]

    c. Flat-size pieces not qualifying for carrier route or 5-digit prices, but properly included in a FSS scheme pool prepared under 705.14.0.

    13.0 Carrier Route Eligibility 13.2 Sorting 13.2.1 Basic Standards

    Preparation to qualify eligible pieces for carrier route prices is optional and need not be performed for all carrier routes in a 5-digit area. Carrier route prices apply to copies that are prepared in carrier route bundles of six or more addressed pieces each, subject to these standards:

    b. Nonletter-size mailings. Carrier route prices apply to carrier route bundles that are sorted in one of the following ways:

    [Add new item 13.2.1b4 as follows:]

    4. Qualifying carrier route mailpieces sorted into FSS bundles and prepared on pallets under 705.14.0.

    13.3 Walk-Sequence Prices 13.3.1 Eligibility

    [Revise 13.3.1 to read as follows:]

    The high density or saturation prices apply to each piece in a carrier route mailing, eligible under 13.2.1 and prepared under 705.8.0, 23.0, or (non-letter-size mail only) 705.10.0, 705.12.0, 705.13.0 or 705.14.0, that also meets the corresponding addressing and density standards in 13.3.4. High density and saturation mailings must be prepared in carrier walk sequence according to USPS schemes see 23.8 except nonletter-size mailpieces that are included in FSS bundles.

    14.0 Barcoded (Automation) Eligibility 14.4 Prices—In-County 14.4.2 Three-Digit Prices

    3-digit automation prices apply to:

    [Add new item c as follows:]

    c. Flat-size pieces not qualifying for carrier route or 5-digit prices, but properly included in a FSS scheme pool prepared under 705.14.0.

    18.0 General Mail Preparation 18.5 FSS Preparation

    [Revise the text of 18.5 to read as follows.]

    Flat sized Periodicals In-County priced mailings, along with a maximum of 5,000 Outside-County pieces for the same issue (see 1.1.4) may be optionally sorted under FSS preparation standards. All other Periodicals flats including Saturation (Non-simplified addressed) and High Density priced flats (except Firm bundles) destinating and qualifying to FSS zones in L006, must be prepared under 705.14.0.

    29.0 Destination Entry 29.4 Destination Sectional Center Facility 29.4.2 Price Eligibility

    [Revise the text of 29.4.2 to read as follows.]

    Determine price eligibility as follows:

    a. Pound Prices. Outside-County pieces are eligible for DSCF pound prices when placed on an SCF or more finely presorted container, deposited at the DSCF, DFSS or USPS-designated facility (see also 29.4.2b), and addressed for delivery within the DSCF's or DFSS service area. Non-letter-size pieces are also eligible when the mailer deposits 5-digit bundles at the destination delivery unit (DDU) (the facility where the carrier cases mail for delivery to the addresses on the pieces) and the 5-digit bundles are in or on the following types of containers:

    1. A merged 5-digit scheme or merged 5-digit sack.

    2. A merged 5-digit scheme, merged 5-digit, or 5-digit scheme pallet.

    b. Container Prices. Mailers may claim the DSCF container price for SCF or FSS and more finely presorted containers that are entered at and destined within the service area of the SCF or FSS at which the container is deposited.

    29.5 Destination Flat Sequencing System (DFSS) Facility Entry 29.5.2 Eligibility

    [Revise the first sentence of 29.5.2 to read as follows.]

    DSCF prices apply to eligible FSS pieces deposited at a USPS-designated FSS processing facility and correctly placed in a flat tray, sack, alternate approved container or on a pallet, labeled to a FSS scheme processed by that facility, under labeling list L006, column B or C. * * *

    230 First-Class Mail 233 Prices and Eligibility 5.0 Additional Eligibility Standards for Automation First-Class Mail 5.4 Price Application- Automation Cards and Letters

    Automation prices apply to each piece that is sorted under 235.6.0 into the corresponding qualifying groups:

    [Revise the text in items a, b, and c to read as follows.]

    a. Groups of 150 or more pieces in 5-digit/scheme trays qualify for the 5-digit price. Preparation to qualify for the 5-digit price is optional. Pieces placed in full AADC trays in lieu of 5-digit/scheme overflow trays under 235.6.5 are eligible for the 5-digit prices.

    b. Groups of 150 or more pieces in AADC trays qualify for the AADC price.

    c. Groups of fewer than 150 pieces in AADC origin and pieces placed in mixed AADC trays in lieu of AADC overflow trays under 235.6.5 are eligible for the AADC prices.

    235 Mail Preparation 1.0 General Definition of Terms 1.3 Terms for Presort Levels 1.3.1 Letters and Cards

    Terms used for presort levels are defined as follows:

    [Add new i and renumber current items i and j as new j and k]

    i. Origin/optional entry AADC: the ZIP Code in the delivery address on all pieces begins with one of the 3-digit prefixes processed at the AADC in whose service area the mail is verified/entered.

    1.4 Preparation Definition and Instructions

    [Renumber items i through o as j through p.]

    [Add new item i to read as follows.]

    i. An origin AADC tray contains all mail (regardless of quantity) for an AADC ZIP Code area processed by the AADC or SCF in whose service area the mail is verified/entered. Only one less-than-full tray may be prepared for each AADC area.

    6.0 Preparing Automation Letters 6.2 Mailings

    The requirements for mailings are as follows:

    [Revise item b to read as follows.]

    b. First-Class Mail. A single automation price First-Class Mail mailing may include pieces prepared at 5-digit, AADC, and mixed AADC prices.

    6.5 Tray Preparation

    [Revise the introductory text of 6.5 to read as follows.]

    Instead of preparing overflow trays with fewer than 150 pieces, mailers may include these pieces in an existing qualified tray of at least 150 or more pieces at the next tray level. (For example, if a mailer has 30 overflow 5-digit pieces for ZIP Code 20260, these pieces may be added to an existing qualified AADC tray for the correct destination and the overflow 5-digit pieces will still qualify for the 5-digit price.) Mailers must note these trays on standardized documentation (see 708.1.2). Pieces that are placed in the next tray level must be grouped by destination and placed in the front or back of that tray. Mailers may use this option selectively for AADC ZIP Codes. This option does not apply to origin/entry trays. Preparation sequence, tray size, and Line 1 labeling:

    [Delete item b and renumber items c and d as b and c.]

    [Revise renumbered item b to read as follows.]

    b. AADC: optional, but required for AADC price (150-piece minimum except no minimum for origin entry AADC); overflow allowed; For Line 1, use L801, Column B.

    6.6 Tray Line 2

    Line 2: “FCM LTR” and:

    [Delete items c and d and renumber items e and f as c and d.]

    [Revise the heading of 240 to read as follows:]

    240 USPS Marketing Mail

    [Revise, by finding and replacing “Standard Mail” with “USPS Marketing Mail” throughout section 240]

    243 Prices and Eligibility 1.0 Prices and Fees

    [Revise the title to 1.2 to read as follows.]

    1.2 USPS Marketing Mail Price Application

    [Revise 1.2 to read as follows.]

    USPS Marketing Mail prices are based on the weight of the pieces as follows:

    a. The appropriate minimum per piece price applies to USPS Marketing Mail automation or machinable letter-sized mailpiece that weighs 3.5 ounces (0.2188 pound) or less, Nonautomation nonmachinable letters that weigh 4.0 ounces (0,25 pounds) or less, flat-sized mailpieces that weighs 4.0 ounces (0.25 pound) or less and presorted Marketing Parcels and irregular parcels that weighs 3.3 ounces (0.2063 pound) or less.

    b. A price determined by adding the per piece charge and the corresponding per pound charge applies to any USPS Marketing Mail piece that weighs more than the following: Nonmachinable letters and flats that weigh more than 4.0 ounces, presorted Marketing Parcels and Irregular parcels that weigh more than 3.3 ounces, and machinable parcels 3.5 ounces or more.

    4.0 Price Eligibility for USPS Marketing Mail 4.2 Minimum Per Piece Prices

    The minimum per piece prices (the minimum postage that must be paid for each piece) apply as follows:

    [Revise the third sentence of item c to read as follows.]

    c. * * * Except for Customized MarketMail pieces, discounted per piece prices also may be claimed for destination network distribution center (DNDC), destination sectional center facility (DSCF), and destination delivery unit (DDU)) under 246. * * *

    4.3 Piece/Pound Prices

    [Revise the last sentence of 4.3 to read as follows.]

    * * * Discounted per pound prices also may be claimed for destination entry mailings DNDC, DSCF, and DDU under 246.

    5.0 Additional Eligibility Standards for Nonautomation USPS Marketing Mail Letters, Flats, and Presorted Standard Mail Parcels 5.2 Weight Standards for Machinable Letter Pieces

    [Revise 5.2 to read as follows.]

    Maximum weight limit for machinable nonautomation USPS Marketing mail letters is 3.5 ounces (0.2188 pound).

    5.6 Nonautomation Price Application—Flats 5.6.1 5-Digit Prices for Flats

    The 5-digit price applies to flat-size pieces:

    [Add new item d as follows.]

    d. In an FSS bundle of 10 or more pieces properly placed in sack of at least 125 pieces or 15 pounds of pieces or on a pallet under 705.14.0.

    5.6.2 3-Digit Prices for Flats

    [Add new item c as follows.]

    c. In an FSS bundle of 10 or more pieces properly placed in sack of at least 125 pieces or 15 pounds of pieces or on a pallet under 705.14.0.

    [Delete item 5.6.5, FSS Scheme Piece Price for Flats, in its entirety and renumber current 5.6.6 as new 5.6.5.]

    5.6.5 Mixed ADC Prices for Flats

    [Revise renumbered 5.6.5 to read as follow:]

    Mixed ADC prices apply to flat-size pieces in bundles that do not qualify for 5-digit, 3-digit, or ADC prices; placed in mixed ADC sacks or on ASF, NDC, or mixed NDC pallets under 705.8.0.

    6.0 Additional Eligibility Standards for Enhanced Carrier Route USPS Marketing Mail Letters and Flats 6.1 General Enhanced Carrier Route Standards 6.1.2 Basic Eligibility Standards

    [Revise item c to read as follows:]

    c. Be sorted to carrier routes (except under 705.14.0), marked, and documented under 245.9.0, 705.8.0, or 705.14.0.

    [Delete the last sentence in item h, in its entirety.]

    6.3 Basic Price Enhanced Carrier Route Standards 6.3.3 Basic Price Eligibility—Flats

    Basic prices apply to each piece in a carrier route bundle of 10 or more pieces that is:

    [Revise item a to read as follows:]

    a. Palletized under 705.8.0, 705.10.0, 705.12.0, 705.13.0 or 705.14.0 (FSS scheme bundles on a FSS facility pallet or prior eligibility to inclusion in FSS scheme pool).

    6.3.4 Basic Carrier Route Bundles on a 5-digit Pallet (Basic-CR Bundles/Pallet) Price Eligibility-Flats

    [Revise item 6.3.4 to read as follows:]

    Basic—CR Bundles/Pallet prices apply to each piece in a carrier route bundle of 10 or more pieces that are palletized under 705.8.0 on a 5-digit carrier route or 5-digit scheme carrier route pallet entered at an Origin (None), DNDC, DSCF, or DDU entry or palletized under 705.14.0 on a FSS scheme pallet (in a FSS Scheme bundle).

    6.4 High Density and High Density Plus (Enhanced Carrier Route) Standards—Letters

    [Delete 6.4.3, High Density and High Density Plus Discount for Heavy Letters, in its entirety.]

    6.5 High Density and High Density Plus (Enhanced Carrier Route) Standards—Flats 6.5.2 High Density and High Density Plus Prices for Flats

    High density or high density plus prices apply to each piece meeting the density standards in 6.5.1 or in a carrier route bundle of 10 or more pieces that is:

    [Revise item a to read as follows.]

    a. Palletized under 705.8.0, 705.10.0, 705.12.0, 705.13.0 or 705.14.0 (eligibility prior to inclusion in FSS scheme bundles).

    [Add new item e to 6.5.2 to read as follows.]

    e. Placed in a FSS facility or scheme sack containing at least 125 pieces or 15 pounds of high density priced pieces or at least 300 pieces of high density plus priced pieces (pieces must qualify for price prior to inclusion in FSS bundle).

    6.6 Saturation ECR Standards—Letters

    [Delete 6.6.3, Saturation Discount for Heavy Letters, in its entirety.]

    7.0 Eligibility Standards for Automation USPS Marketing Mail 7.4 Price Application for Automation Letters

    Automation prices apply to each piece that is sorted under 245.10.0, into the corresponding qualifying groups:

    [Revise item a to read as follows.]

    a. Groups of 150 or more pieces in 5-digit/scheme trays qualify for the 5-digit price. Preparation to qualify for that price is optional. Pieces placed in full AADC trays under 245.7.5 in lieu of 5-digit/scheme overflow trays are eligible for 5-digit prices (see 245.7.5).

    [Delete item b and renumber items c and d as items b and c.]

    [Revise renumbered item b to read as follows.]

    b. Groups of fewer than 150 pieces in origin AADC trays and groups of 150 or more pieces in an AADC tray qualify for the AADC price. Pieces placed in mixed AADC trays under 245.7.5 in lieu of AADC overflow trays also are eligible for AADC prices (see 245.7.5).

    7.5 Price Application for Automation Flats

    Automation prices apply to each piece properly sorted into qualifying groups:

    [Revise items a and b to read as follows.]

    a. The 5-digit price applies to flat-size pieces in a 5-digit/scheme bundle or pooled in a FSS scheme bundle of 10 or more pieces, or 15 or more pieces, as applicable;

    b. The 3-digit price applies to flat-size pieces in a 3-digit/scheme bundle or pooled in a FSS scheme bundle of 10 or more pieces.

    [Delete items e through h in their entirety.]

    245 Mail Preparation 1.0 General Information for Mail Preparation 1.3 Terms for Presort Levels 1.3.1 Letters

    Terms used for presort levels are defined as follows:

    [Revise item e to read as follows:]

    e. Origin/entry AADC: The ZIP Code in the delivery address on all pieces is addressed for delivery service area of the same automated area distribution center (AADC) (see L801).

    1.4 Preparation Definition and Instructions

    [Renumber items r through x as s through y.]

    [Add new item r to read as follows.]

    r. An origin AADC tray contains all mail (regardless of quantity) for an AADC ZIP Code area processed by the AADC or SCF in whose service area the mail is verified/entered. Only one less-than-full tray may be prepared for each AADC area.

    1.6 FSS Preparation

    [Revise the text of 1.6 to read as follows.]

    Except for USPS Marketing Mail flats mailed at Saturation prices, all USPS Marketing Mail flats and meeting the physical standards in 201.6.2 destinating to a FSS scheme in accordance with labeling list L006 must be prepared under 705.14.0.

    6.0 Preparing Enhanced Carrier Route Letters 6.6 General Traying and Labeling

    [Revise the introductory text to read as follows.]

    For all ECR letters over 3.5 ounces and all ECR letters that are not automation-compatible or delivery-point barcoded, prepare trays as explained below. Also prepare trays as explained below when a mailing contains some pieces over 3.5 ounces and some pieces up to 3.5 ounces. Pieces with simplified addresses must be prepared in separate trays from pieces with other forms of addressing. For ECR automation-compatible letters that are delivery-point barcoded and weigh up to 3.5 ounces, prepare trays under 6.7. Preparation sequence, tray size, and labeling:

    6.7 Traying and Labeling for Automation-Compatible ECR Letters

    [Revise first sentence of the introductory text to read as follows.]

    Mailers must make full carrier route and 5-digit carrier routes trays, when possible, for automation-compatible, delivery-point barcoded ECR letters that weigh up to 3.5 ounces. * * *

    7.0 Preparing Automation Letters 7.5 Tray Preparation

    [Revise the introductory text to read as follows.]

    Instead of preparing overflow trays with fewer than 150 pieces, mailers may include these pieces in an existing qualified tray of at least 150 or more pieces at the next tray level. (For example, if a mailer has 30 overflow 5-digit pieces for ZIP Code 20260, these pieces may be added to an existing qualified AADC tray for the correct destination and the overflow 5-digit pieces will still qualify for the 5-digit price). Mailers must note these trays on standardized documentation (see 708.1.2). Pieces that are placed in the next tray level must be grouped by destination and placed in the front or back of that tray. Mailers may use this option selectively for AADC ZIP Codes. This option does not apply to origin/entry AADC trays. Preparation sequence, tray size, and Line 1 labeling:

    [Delete item b and renumber items c and d as items b and c.]

    [Revise renumbered item b to read as follows.]

    b. AADC: Optional, but required for AADC price (150-piece minimum except no minimum for origin entry AADC); overflow allowed. For Line 1, use L801, Column B.

    7.6 Tray Line 2

    Line 2: “MKT LTR” and:

    [Delete items c and d and renumber items e and f as c and d.]

    8.0 Preparing Nonautomation Flats 8.1 Basic Standards

    All mailings and all pieces in each mailing at Regular USPS Marketing Mail and Nonprofit USPS Marketing Mail nonautomation prices are subject to specific preparation standards in 8.2 through 8.9 and to these general standards (automation price mailings must be prepared under 10.0):

    [Revise item d to read as follows:]

    d. Sortation determines price eligibility as specified in 243.5.0 except when included in a FSS scheme bundle under 705.14.0.

    9.0 Preparing Enhanced Carrier Route Flats 9.1 Basic Standards

    All mailings and all pieces in each mailing at Enhanced Carrier Route USPS Marketing Mail and Enhanced Carrier Route Nonprofit USPS Marketing Mail nonautomation prices are subject to specific preparation standards in 9.2 through 9.7 and to these general standards:

    [Revise items d and e to read as follows:]

    d. All pieces in the mailing must meet the specific sortation and preparation standards in 9.0 or the palletization standards in 705.8.0 except when included in a FSS scheme bundle under 705.14.0. Flat-size pieces may be prepared under 705.9.0 through 705.13.0.

    e. Sortation determines price eligibility as specified in 243.5.0 except when included in a FSS scheme bundle under 705.14.0.

    246 Enter and Deposit 6.0 Destination Flat Sequencing System (DFSS) Facility Entry 6.2 Eligibility

    [Revise the first sentence of 6.2 to read as follows.]

    DSCF prices apply to pieces deposited at a USPS-designated FSS processing site and correctly placed in or on a container labeled to a FSS scheme or FSS Facility processed by that site under labeling list L006 (Column B or Column C).

    260 Bound Printed Matter 263 Prices and Eligibility 1.0 Prices and Fees for Bound Printed Matter 1.1 Nonpresorted Bound Printed Matter 1.1.1 Prices

    [Revise the second sentence of 1.1.1 to read follows.]

    * * * The nonpresorted price applies to BPM not mailed at the Presorted or carrier route prices. * * *

    1.2 Presorted and Carrier Route Bound Printed Matter 1.2.3 Price Application

    [Revise the first sentence of 1.2.3 to read as follows.]

    The presorted Bound Printed Matter price has a per piece charge and a per pound charge. * * *

    1.2.8 Computing Postage for Permit Imprint

    [Revise the introductory text of 1.2.8 to read as follows.]

    Presorted and Carrier Route Bound Printed Matter mailings paid with permit imprint are charged a per pound price and a per piece price as follows:

    4.0 Price Eligibility for Bound Printed Matter 4.1 Price Eligibility

    BPM prices are based on the weight of a single addressed piece or 1 pound, whichever is higher, and the zone (where applicable) to which the piece is addressed. Price categories are as follows:

    [Revise items b and c to read as follows.]

    b. Presorted Price. The Presorted price applies to BPM prepared in a mailing of at least 300 BPM pieces, prepared and presorted as specified in 265.5.0, 265.8.0, 705.8.0, 705.14.0 and 705.21.0. Each parcel must bear a unique Intelligent Mail package barcode or extra services barcode, including a postal routing code, prepared under 708.5.0.

    c. Carrier Route Price. The Carrier Route price applies to BPM prepared in a mailing of at least 300 pieces presorted to carrier routes, prepared and presorted as specified in 265.6.0, 265.9.0, 705.8.0 or 705.14.0. Each parcel must bear a unique Intelligent Mail package barcode or extra services barcode, including a postal routing code, prepared under 708.5.0.

    4.2 Destination Entry Price Eligibility

    [Revise the first sentence of the introductory text to read as follows.]

    BPM destination entry prices apply to BPM mailings prepared as specified in 705.8.0, 705.14.0 and 265, and addressed for delivery within the service area of a destination network distribution center, sectional center facility, or delivery unit where they are deposited by the mailer. * * *

    [Revise item b to read as follows.]

    b. A destination sectional center facility (DSCF) includes all facilities in L005 and destination flats sequencing system (DFSS) in L006.

    265 Mail Preparation 1.0 General Information for Mail Preparation 1.6 FSS Preparation

    [Revise text of 1.6 to read as follows.]

    BPM flats claiming presorted prices in FSS scheme bundles, meeting the standards in 201 and destinating to a FSS scheme in accordance with labeling list L006, must be prepared under 705.14.0.

    266 Enter and Deposit 5.0 Destination Sectional Center Facility (DSCF) Entry 5.2 Presorted Flats

    [Revise the text of 5.2 to read as follows.]

    Presorted flats and automation flats in sacks for the FSS scheme, 5-digit, 3-digit, and SCF sort levels or on pallets at the 5-digit scheme, 5-digit, 3-digit, SCF, and ASF sort levels may claim DSCF prices. Mail must be entered at the appropriate facility under 5.1.

    7.0 Destination Flat Sequencing System (DFSS) Facility Entry 7.2 Eligibility

    [Revise the first sentence of 7.2 to read as follows.]

    DSCF prices apply to pieces deposited at a USPS-designated FSS processing facility and correctly placed on a container labeled to a FSS scheme or a FSS facility processed by that facility or to a single 5-digit destination processed by that facility under labeling list L006.

    503 Extra and Additional Services 1.10 Receipts

    [Revise the text of 1.10 to read as follows.]

    Except for certificate of mailing under 5.0, the mailer receives a USPS sales receipt and the postmarked (round-dated) extra service form for services purchased at retail channels. The mailer must provide the receipt when submitting an insurance claim or filing an inquiry. For articles mailed via PC Postage or other online services, the mailer may access a computer printout online that identifies the applicable extra service number, total postage paid, insurance fee amount, declared value, declared mailing date, origin ZIP Code, and delivery ZIP Code. For three or more pieces with extra or accountable services presented for mailing at one time, the mailer uses Form 3877 (firm sheet) or USPS-approved privately printed firm sheets (see 1.7.2) in lieu of the receipt portion of the individual form. All entries made on firm sheets must be computer generated or made by typewriter, ink, or ballpoint pen. Alterations must be initialed by the mailer and accepting employee. Obliterate all unused portions of the addressee column with a diagonal line. USPS-approved privately printed firm sheets that contain the same information as Form 3877 may be approved by the local Postmaster or manager Business Mail Entry. The mailer may omit columns from privately printed Form 3877 that are not applicable to extra service requested. If the mailer wants the firm sheets receipted by the USPS (postmarked), the mailer must present the firm sheets with the articles to be mailed at a Post Office. The postmarked firm sheets become the mailer's receipts. For Registered Mail and COD (when Label 3816 is used), the mailer submits the forms in duplicate and receives one copy as a mailing receipt after the entries are verified by the postal employee accepting the mailing. Except for Registered Mail and COD items, the USPS keeps no mailing records for mail pieces bearing extra services.

    4.0 Insured Mail 4.1.1 Additional Insurance-Priority Mail Express

    [Revise 4.1.1 to read as follows.]

    Additional insurance, up to a maximum coverage of $5,000.00, may be purchased for merchandise valued at more than $100.00 sent by Priority Mail Express. The additional insurance fee is in addition to postage and other fees. Coverage is limited to the actual value of the contents, regardless of the fee paid, or the highest insurance value increment for which the fee is fully paid, whichever is lower. When “signature required” service is not requested or when “waiver of signature” is requested, additional insurance is not available.

    505 Return Services 1.0 Business Reply Mail (BRM) 1.1.3 Basic Qualified BRM (QBRM)

    [Revise the first sentence of 1.1.3 to read as follows.]

    For basic qualified BRM a permit holder is required to pay an account maintenance fee under 1.1.8, and a per-piece fee under 1.1.7, in addition to the applicable letter or card First-Class Mail postage for each returned piece. * * *

    1.1.4 High-Volume Qualified BRM

    [Revise the text of 1.1.4 to read as follows.]

    In addition to the account maintenance, per-piece fees and applicable postage required under 1.1.3, a quarterly fee under 1.1.11 is required for high-volume QBRM.

    1.2 Permits 1.2.2 Application Process

    [Revise the first sentence of 1.2.2 to read as follows.]

    The mailer may apply for a BRM permit by submitting a completed Form 3615 to the Post Office issuing the permit and except under 1.2.3 paying the annual permit fee. * * *

    1.2.3 Annual Permit Fee

    [Revise the first sentence of 1.2.3 to read as follows.]

    Except for QBRM permits, a permit fee must be paid once each 12-month period at each Post Office where a BRM permit is held. * * *

    1.2.4 Renewal of Annual Permit Fee

    [Revise the introductory text of 1.2.4 to read as follows.]

    Except for QBRM permits, an annual renewal notice is provided to each BRM permit holder by the USPS. QBRM permits do not expire unless the account is unused for a period of 12 months. The renewal notice and the payment for the next 12 months must be returned by the expiration date to the Post Office that issued the permit. After the expiration date, if the permit holder has not paid the annual permit fee, then returned BRM pieces are treated as follows:

    1.2.6 Revocation of a Permit

    [Revise the text of 1.2.6 to read as follows.]

    The USPS may revoke any BRM permit because of format errors or for refusal to pay the applicable permit fees (annual, accounting, quarterly, or monthly), postage, or per piece fees. If the permit was revoked due to format errors, then a former permit holder may obtain a new permit and permit number by completing and submitting a new Form 3615, paying the required BRM annual permit fee (if applicable), paying a new annual account maintenance fee (if applicable), and, for the next 2 years, submitting two samples of each BRM format to the appropriate Post Office for approval.

    507 Mailer Services 1.0 Treatment of Mail 4.3.4 Holding Mail

    [Revise the first sentence of 4.3.4 to read as follows.]

    At the sender's request, the delivery Post Office holds mail, other than Registered Mail, insured, Certified Mail, Adult Signature, Signature Confirmation and return receipt for merchandise, for no fewer than 3 days nor more than 30 days. * * *

    508 Recipient Services 1.0 Recipient Options 1.1 Basic Recipient Concerns 1.1.7 Priority Mail Express and Accountable Mail

    [Revise item f to read as follows.]

    f. A notice is provided to the addressee for a mailpiece that cannot be delivered. If the piece is not called for or redelivery is not requested, the piece is returned to the sender after 15 days (five days for Priority Mail Express), unless the sender specifies fewer days on the piece.

    1.8 Commercial Mail Receiving Agencies 1.8.1 Procedures

    [Revise item d to read as follows.]

    d. A CMRA is authorized to accept the following accountable mail from their customers for mailing at the Post Office: Insured, Priority Mail Express, Certified Mail, USPS Tracking, and Signature Confirmation mail. The sender (CMRA customer) must present accountable mail items not listed to the Post Office for mailing.

    7.0 Hold For Pickup 7.2 Basic Information 7.2.5 Extra Services

    [Delete item e in its entirety.]

    600 Basic Standards for All Mailing Services 604 Postage Payment Methods and Refunds 5.0 Permit Imprint (Indicia)

    [Revise the heading and text of 5.1.4 to read as follows.]

    5.1.4 Permit and Application Information

    A mailer may obtain a permit to use a permit imprint indicia by submitting Form 3615 to the Post Office where mailings are made, or online under the terms and conditions in the Business Customer Gateway portal at https://gateway.usps.com. Mail Anywhere allows a qualified mailer to maintain a single permit for a postage payment method for mailings at any Business Mail Acceptance site under 705.23.3.2.

    5.1.5 Application Fee

    [Revise the text of 5.1.5 to read as follows.]

    No application fee is required.

    5.2 Suspension and Revocation 5.2.2 Revocation of Permit

    [Revise the first sentence of 5.2.2 to read as follows.]

    A permit may be revoked for use in operating any unlawful scheme or enterprise, if no mailings or payment of postage occurred during any consecutive 2-year period, for refusal to provide information about permit imprint use or mailings, and for noncompliance with any standard applicable to permit imprints. * * *

    5.3 Indicia Design, Placement, and Content 5.3.10 Use of a Local Permit Imprint in Other Mailing Locations

    A permit imprint displaying the city, state, and permit number of a mailer's original permit may be applied to pieces in a mailing presented for verification and acceptance at another Post Office location under the following conditions:

    [Delete item a and renumber items b through d as items a through c]

    [Revise the heading and introductory text of 5.5 to read as follows.]

    5.5 Share Mail

    Share Mail is an electronic postage payment mechanism for single-piece First-Class Mail letters or postcards, addressed to any domestic address, that weigh no more than one ounce each. Customers wishing to participate in this program must submit their request in writing to the Manager, New Solutions, Mailing Services, USPS, 475 L'Enfant Plaza SW., Room 5440, Washington, DC 20260-4440. Customers participating in the Share Mail postage payment program must, at a minimum, meet the following requirements:

    9.0 Exchanges and Refunds 9.2 Postage and Fee Refunds 11.0 Postage Due Weight Averaging Program 11.1 Basic Information 11.1.3 Quality Control

    [Revise the first sentence of the introductory text to read as follows.]

    PDWA customers may elect to establish a quality control program to ensure that all missorted and accountable mail (including Certified Mail), return receipt for merchandise, USPS Tracking, Adult Signature, and Signature Confirmation) is identified and returned to the servicing Post Office prior to being opened. * * *

    609 Filing Indemnity Claims for Loss or Damage 1.0 General Filing Instructions 1.3 Who May File

    A claim may be filed by:

    [Revise item e to reads as follows.]

    1.5 Where and How to File 1.5.1 Claims Filed Online 700 Special Standards

    [Throughout section 700, find and replace the name of “Standard Mail” to “USPS Marketing Mail”]

    703 Nonprofit USPS Marketing Mail and Other Unique Eligibility 705 Advanced Preparation and Special Postage Payment Systems 14.0 FSS Scheme Preparation 14.1 General

    [Revise the introductory text of 14.1 to read as follows.]

    All presorted and high density plus, high density and basic carrier route USPS Marketing Mail, presorted and carrier route Bound Printed Matter (BPM), and Periodicals flats including all carrier route flats meeting the standards in 201.6.2 must be separated/pooled into FSS schemes, properly bundled and placed on or in pallets, trays, sacks, or approved alternate containers, for FSS scheme ZIP Code combinations within the same facility. Mailings that include 10 or more pieces of USPS Marketing Mail flats, 6 or more pieces of Periodicals flats, or 10 or more pieces (or 10 or more pounds) of BPM flats to an FSS scheme must be separated/pooled into FSS scheme bundles. The Postal Service also recommends the use of authorized flat trays in lieu of sacks for FSS bundles. FSS scheme bundles that are not required to be placed in a FSS scheme or FSS facility container are combined with bundles of non-FSS sorted bundles and placed on an applicable SCF, 3-digit or NDC container. Mailers must prepare FSS scheme qualifying mailpieces for each individual FSS scheme combination, and then prepare bundles of uniform size from those pieces. Mailings (excluding saturation mailings of USPS Marketing Mail) with nonpresorted BPM flats may be included in FSS preparation, but will not be eligible for presorted or carrier route prices. Mailpieces that meet the eligibility standards for 5-digit or 3-digit automation, 5-digit or 3-digit nonautomation, carrier route (except USPS Marketing Mail saturation) or presort will continue to be eligible for those piece prices when prepared in accordance with the FSS preparations standards. Mailpieces and bundles must also be prepared as follows:

    14.2 Basic Standards 14.2.1 Basic Standards

    [Revise the introductory text and items a through e to read as follows.]

    All Periodicals flats (including carrier route flats) meeting the standards in 201.6.2 and destinating to FSS sites as shown in L006 must be prepared according to these standards. Mailings of In-County Periodicals flats and the associated Outside-County Periodicals flats mailings of 5,000 pieces or less may be prepared according to these standards. Periodicals are subject to the following:

    a. Pricing eligibility is based on 207.11.0 through 207.14.0. FSS bundles placed on FSS facility pallets, sacks, trays, or approved alternate container will claim the 3-Digit/SCF bundle price. FSS bundles placed on a FSS scheme pallet, sack, tray or approved alternate container will claim the Carrier Route bundle price.

    b. FSS scheme pallets will be assessed the Carrier Route Pallet price. FSS facility sort level pallets will be charged a 3-Digit/SCF Pallet container price. FSS scheme or facility sacks or trays will be assessed the 3-Digit/SCF Sack/Tray price. Pallets, sacks and trays entered at a DFSS will claim the DSCF entry price.

    c. The Outside-County pound price for mail entered at a DFSS will be the DSCF price. The Inside-County price will claim prices for the “None” entry level.

    d. Mailers must provide standardized presort documentation under 708.1.0 that demonstrates eligibility for prices in accordance with 207.14.0 and 207.25.0.

    e. Each mailpiece must be identified with an optional endorsement line in accordance with Exhibit 708.7.1.1, or when authorized, using a red Label 5 SCH barcoded pressure-sensitive bundle label.

    14.3 USPS Marketing Mail 14.3.1 Basic Standards

    [Revise the introductory text of 14.3.1 to read as follows.]

    All flat-size USPS Marketing Mail mailpieces (except saturation) must be separated/pooled into 5-digit FSS scheme bundles and placed on pallets, or in sacks or approved alternate containers, for delivery to ZIP Codes having Flats Sequencing System (FSS) processing capability, as shown in L006. USPS Marketing Mail flats are subject to the following:

    [Revise items b and c to read as follows.]

    b. Mailers must provide standardized presort documentation under 708.1.0 that demonstrates eligibility for prices in accordance with 243.

    c. Each mailpiece must be identified with an optional endorsement line in accordance with Exhibit 708.7.1.1; or when authorized, using a red Label 5 SCH barcoded pressure-sensitive bundle label.

    14.4 Bound Printed Matter 14.4.1 Basic Standards

    [Revise the introductory text of 14.4.1 to read as follows.]

    Bound Printed Matter (BPM) flats that meet the standards in 201.6.2 must be separated/pooled into FSS scheme bundles and placed on pallets, or in flat trays, sacks, or approved alternate containers, for delivery to ZIP Codes having FSS processing capability, as shown in L006. BPM flats are subject to the following:

    [Revise items b, c and d to read as follows.]

    b. Mailers must provide standardized presort documentation under 708.1.0 that demonstrates eligibility for prices in accordance with 263.

    c. Mailers must separate/pool all eligible flat-size mailpieces into FSS scheme bundles according to L006.

    d. Each mailpiece must be identified with an optional endorsement line in accordance with Exhibit 708.7.1.1; or when authorized, using a red Label 5 SCH barcoded pressure-sensitive bundle label.

    15.0 Combining USPS Marketing Mail Flats and Periodicals Flats 15.1.0 Basic Standards 15.1.6 Piece Prices

    [Revise the text of 15.1.6 to read as follows.]

    Apply piece prices based on the bundle level except FSS scheme bundles apply the piece prices based on the original bundle level. Pieces contained within mixed class bundles may claim prices based on the presort level of the bundle.

    15.1.11 Preparation for FSS Zones

    [Revise the introductory text of 15.1.11 to read as follows.]

    Mailers authorized to combine mailings of USPS Marketing Mail flats and Periodicals flats must prepare these mailings under 14.0, when the mailing includes pieces destinating within one or more of the FSS zones in L006. The following applies:

    [Revise item a to read as follows.]

    a. Each mailpiece must be identified with an optional endorsement line (OEL), including the correct ZIP Code listed in L006, Column B, in accordance with Exhibit 708.7.1.1. The OEL described in 2.2 must not be used with mailpieces prepared under this option.

    15.4.0 Pallet Preparation 15.4.1 Pallet Preparation, Sequence and Labeling

    When combining USPS Marketing Mail and Periodicals flats within the same bundle or combining bundles of USPS Marketing Mail flats and bundles of Periodicals flats on pallets, bundles must be placed on pallets. Preparation, sequence and labeling:

    [Reverse the order of items a and b to read as follows.]

    a. 5-digit scheme carrier routes, required. Pallet must contain only carrier route bundles for the same 5-digit scheme under L001. For 5-digit destinations not part of L001, 5-digit carrier routes pallet preparation begins with 15.4.1c. Labeling:

    1. Line 1: L001.

    2. Line 2: “STD/PER FLTS”; followed by “CARRIER ROUTES” (or “CR-RTS”); followed by “SCHEME” (or “SCH”); followed by “MIX COMAIL.”

    b. Merged 5-digit scheme, optional. Not permitted for bundles containing non-carrier route automation-compatible flats under 201.6.0. Required for all other bundles. Pallet must contain carrier route bundles and non-carrier route 5-digit bundles (Presorted bundles only) for the same 5-digit scheme under L001. For 5-digit destinations not part of L001, merged 5-digit pallet preparation begins with 15.4.1d. Labeling:

    1. Line 1: L001.

    71

    2. Line 2: “STD/PER FLTS CR/5D;” followed by “SCHEME” (or “SCH”); followed by “MIX COMAIL.”

    708 Technical Specifications 1.0 Standardized Documentation for First-Class Mail, Periodicals, USPS Marketing Mail, and Flat-Size Bound Printed Matter 1.2 Format and Content

    For First-Class Mail, Periodicals, USPS Marketing Mail, and Bound Printed Matter, standardized documentation includes:

    [Revise the introductory text of item e, to read as follows.]

    e. At the end of the documentation, a summary report of the number of pieces mailed at each price for each mailing by postage payment method (flat pieces mailed under FSS sort by 5-digit, 3-digit, saturation, high density, high density plus, basic carrier route and by entry point for drop shipment mailings) and the number of pieces in each mailing. This information must match the information reported on the postage statement(s). For Periodicals mailings, documentation also must provide:

    1.6 Detailed Zone Listing for Periodicals 1.6.1 Definition and Retention

    [Revise the first sentence of 1.6.1 to read as follows.]

    The publisher must be able to present documentation to support the number of copies of each edition of an issue, by entry point, mailed to each zone, and at DDU, DSCF, DADC, DNDC, and In-County prices. * * *

    1.6.3 Zone Abbreviations

    Use the actual price name or the authorized zone abbreviation in the listings in 1.0 and 207.17.4.2:

    ZONE ABBREVIATION RATE EQUIVALENT

    [In the chart directly under 1.6.3, delete the row containing FSS under `Zone Abbreviation' and Outside-County, DFSS under `Rate Equivalent' in their entirety.]

    7.0 Optional Endorsement Lines (OELs) 7.1 OEL Use 7.1.1. Basic Standards

    [Revise the first sentence of the introductory text to read as follows.]

    An optional endorsement line (OEL) may be used to label bundles instead of applying pressure-sensitive bundle labels or facing slips to the top piece of bundles except each mailpiece in a FSS bundle must bear an optional endorsement line in human-readable text, including the correct ZIP code listed in Column B of L006, as described in Exhibit 7.1.1 * * *

    Exhibit 7.1.1 OEL Formats

    [Revise Exhibit 7.1.1 to read as follows.]

    Sortation Level OEL Example Firm—BPM machinable parcels ******FIRM 12345. Firm—Periodicals ******FIRM 12345. Origin Mixed ADC—Periodicals (3-digit ZIP Code prefix) ******ORIGIN MIXED ADC 117. Carrier Route—Periodicals basic ******CARRT LOT**C-001. ******CR LOT 1234A**C-001. Carrier Route—Periodicals & Mkt Mail basic FSS ******SCH 5-DIGIT 12345 FSSC. Carrier Route—Periodicals high density ******CARRT WSH**C-001. Carrier Route—Periodicals & Mktg Mail High density FSS ******SCH 5- DIGIT 12345 FSSB. Carrier Route—Periodicals saturation ******CARRT WSS**C-001. Carrier Route—Periodicals Saturation FSS ******SCH 5-DIGIT 12345 FSSH. ECR—Mktg Mail basic ******ECRLOT**C-001. ******ECRLOT 1234A**C-001. ECR—Mktg Mail high density or high density plus ******ECRWSH**C-001. ECR—Mktg Mail High Density Plus FSS ******SCH 5-DIGIT 12345 FSSA. ECR—Mktg Mail saturation ******ECRWSS**C-001. Carrier Route—Bound Printed Matter ******CARRT SORT**C-001. Carrier Route FSS—Bound Printed Matter ******SCH 5-DIGIT 12345 FSSM. 5-Digit 5-DIGIT 12345. 5-Digit (Nonautomation FSS flats) ******SCH 5-DIGIT 12345 FSSE. 5-Digit Scheme (Automation flats) ******SCH 5-DIGIT 12345. 5-Digit Scheme (Automation FSS flats) ******SCH 5-DIGIT 12345 FSSD. 3-Digit ******3-DIGIT 771. 3-Digit (Nonautomation FSS flats) ******SCH 5-DIGIT 12345 FSSG. 3-Digit Scheme (Automation flats) ******SCH 3-DIGIT 006. 3-Digit Scheme ******SCH 5-Digit (Automation FSS flats) 12345 FSSF. ADC (3-digit ZIP Code prefix) ******ALL FOR ADC 105. ADC (5-digit ZIP Code) ******ALL FOR ADC 90197. ADC (Automation FSS flats) ******SCH 5-DIGIT 12345 FSSK. ADC (Nonautomation FSS flats) ******SCH 5-DIGIT 12345 FSSL. Mixed ADC (3-digit ZIP Code prefix) ******MIXED ADC 640. Mixed ADC (5-digit ZIP Code) ******MIXED ADC 60821. Presorted BPM (FSS flats) ******SCH 5-DIGIT 12345 FSSJ. Nonpresorted BPM FSS ******SCH 5-DIGIT 12345 FSSN. Optional tray level piece ID for automation letters: AADC (3-digit ZIP Code prefix) ******ALL FOR AADC 050. AADC (5-digit ZIP Code) ******ALL FOR AADC 07099. Mixed AADC (3-digit ZIP Code prefix) ******MIXED AADC 870. Mixed AADC (5-digit ZIP Code) ******MIXED AADC 75197. Additional required human-readable text for use with combined mailings of USPS Marketing Mail and Periodical flats: 5-Digit Scheme (and other sortation levels as appropriate) ******SCH 5-DIGIT 12345 MIX COMAIL. 5-Digit Scheme (Automation FSS flats) *****SCH 5-DIGIT 12345 FSSD COMAIL. 5-Digit (Nonautomation FSS flats) *****SCH 5-DIGIT 12345 FSSE COMAIL. 3-Digit (Automation FSS flats) *****SCH 5-DIGIT 12345 FSSF COMAIL. 3-Digit (Nonautomation FSS flats) *****SCH 5-DIGIT 12345 FSSG COMAIL. ADC (Automation FSS flats) *****SCH 5-DIGIT 12345 FSSK COMAIL. ADC (Nonautomation FSS flats) *******SCH 5-DIGIT 12345 FSS COMAIL. Carrier Route high density plus (FSS flats) ******SCH 5-DIGIT 12345. FSSG COMAIL ******SCH 5-DIGIT 12345 FSSA COMAIL. Carrier Route high density (FSS flats) ******SCH 5-DIGIT 12345 FSSB COMAIL. FSSC COMAIL ******SCH 5-DIGIT 12345 FSSA COMAIL. Carrier Route high density (FSS flats) ******SCH 5-DIGIT 12345 FSSC COMAIL. Carrier Route basic ******SCH 5-DIGIT 12345 FSSC COMAIL. 7.1.8 Required OEL Use in Combined Mailings of USPS Marketing Mail and Periodicals Flats

    * * * The following additional standards also apply:

    [Revise item c to read as follows.]

    c. When combined mailings of USPS Marketing Mail and Periodicals flats are prepared to FSS zones under 705.15.1.11, each mailpiece must bear an optional endorsement line in human-readable text, including the correct ZIP code listed in Column B of L006, as described in Exhibit 7.1.1.

    We will publish an appropriate amendment to 39 CFR part 111 to reflect these changes.

    Stanley F. Mires, Attorney, Federal Compliance.
    [FR Doc. 2016-30381 Filed 12-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R09-OAR-2016-0543 FRL-9956-98-Region 9] Determination of Attainment of the 2008 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards; Eastern San Luis Obispo, California AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is finalizing our determination that the San Luis Obispo (Eastern San Luis Obispo) ozone nonattainment area (NAA) in California has attained the 2008 ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS or “standards”) by the applicable attainment date of July 20, 2016. This determination is based on complete, quality-assured and certified data for the 3-year period preceding that attainment date. Based on this determination, the Eastern San Luis Obispo NAA will not be reclassified to a higher ozone classification.

    DATES:

    This rule will be effective on January 20, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    The EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID No. EPA-R09-OAR-2016-0543. All documents in the docket are listed on the http://www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly-available, e.g., Confidential Business Information or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly-available only in hard copy form. Publicly-available docket materials are available through http://www.regulations.gov, or please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section for additional availability information.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Nancy Levin, EPA Region IX, (415) 972-3848, [email protected].

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Throughout this document, “we,” “us” and “our” refer to the EPA.

    Table of Contents I. Summary of Proposed Rule II. Public Comments and EPA Responses III. Final Action IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews I. Summary of Proposed Rule

    On October 12, 2016 (81 FR 70382), the EPA proposed to determine that the Eastern San Luis Obispo ozone NAA has attained the 2008 ozone standard by the applicable attainment date of July 20, 2106, based on complete, quality-assured and certified ambient air quality monitoring data for the 2013-2015 monitoring period. San Luis Obispo County is the northern-most county within the air basin designated by California as the South Central Coast Air Basin. The NAA encompasses roughly the eastern half of San Luis Obispo County. For the precise boundaries of the Eastern San Luis Obispo 2008 ozone NAA, see 40 CFR 81.305.

    Our proposed rule provided background information on the 2008 ozone standards,1 the EPA's classification of the Eastern San Luis Obispo NAA under the Clean Air Act (CAA) as “Marginal” for the 2008 ozone standard, and the EPA's prior approval of an extension of the applicable attainment date for the area from July 20, 2015 to July 20, 2016 (81 FR 26697, May 4, 2016). In our proposed rule, we described our obligation under CAA section 181(b)(2)(A) to determine whether an ozone NAA attained the ozone NAAQS by the applicable attainment date within six months of that date; how we determine whether an area's air quality meets the 2008 ozone standard; and the relevant air quality monitoring agencies in the Eastern San Luis Obispo ozone NAA, their monitoring network plans, and the relevant ozone monitoring sites. We also discussed our previous review of the networks and network plans, the annual certifications of ambient air monitoring data, and our determination of completeness for 2013-2015 data from the two ozone monitoring sites within the Eastern San Luis Obispo NAA.

    1 Since the primary and secondary 2008 ozone standards are the same, we hereafter refer to them herein using the singular “2008 ozone standard.”

    Our proposed rule included a table of ozone “design values” at the two ozone monitoring sites in the Eastern San Luis Obispo NAA.2 See 81 FR 70382, at 70384. As explained in our proposed rule, the 2008 ozone standard is attained in an area when the design value is less than or equal to 0.075 parts per million (ppm), as determined in accordance with 40 CFR part 50, appendix P, at each monitoring site within the area. See 40 CFR 50.15. Based on our review of the monitoring data, which showed a design value for the area of 0.073 ppm (based on data collected at the Red Hills site) for 2013-2015, and taking into account the extent and reliability of the applicable ozone monitoring network, we proposed to determine that the Eastern San Luis Obispo NAA has attained the 2008 ozone standard by the applicable attainment date of July 20, 2016 based on complete, certified and quality-assured data for the 2013-2015 period. Lastly, we noted that if we finalize our proposed determination, then the Marginal Eastern San Luis Obispo NAA would not be subject to reclassification to “Moderate” for the 2008 ozone standard, that a determination of attainment by the applicable attainment date would not constitute a redesignation, and that the designation status of the Eastern San Luis Obispo area would remain nonattainment for the 2008 ozone standard until such time as the EPA determines that the area meets the CAA requirements for redesignation to attainment. Please see our proposed rule for more information concerning these topics.

    2 The design value is a statistic that describes the air quality status of a given location relative to the level of the NAAQS. For the purpose of comparison with the 2008 ozone standard, the design value for a site is the 3-year average of the annual fourth highest daily maximum 8-hour average ozone concentrations. The design value for a given area is based on the monitoring site with the highest design value.

    II. Public Comments and EPA Responses

    The EPA's proposed action provided a 30-day public comment period. During this period, we received no comments.

    III. Final Action

    Under CAA section 181(b)(2)(A), and based on the rationale presented in our proposed rule and summarized above, the EPA is finalizing our determination that the Eastern San Luis Obispo ozone NAA has attained the 2008 ozone NAAQS by the applicable attainment date of July 20, 2016. The EPA is making this determination based on complete, quality-assured and certified ambient air quality monitoring data for the 2013-2015 monitoring period. As a result of this determination, the Eastern San Luis Obispo 2008 ozone NAA will not be reclassified to a higher classification for the 2008 ozone standard.

    IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    This action is a determination based on air quality data and does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that reason, this action:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because it will not impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.

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

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by February 21, 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. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements (see section 307(b)(2)).

    List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Oxides of nitrogen, Ozone, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: December 8, 2016. Alexis Strauss, Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.

    Chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations 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 F—California 2. Section 52.282 is amended by adding paragraph (i) to read as follows:
    § 52.282 Control strategy and regulations: Ozone

    (i) Determination of attainment. The EPA has determined that, as of January 20, 2017, the San Luis Obispo (Eastern San Luis Obispo) 2008 8-hour ozone nonattainment area in California has attained the 2008 ozone standard by the July 20, 2016 applicable attainment date, based upon complete, quality-assured and certified data for 2013-2015. Therefore, the EPA has met its obligation pursuant to CAA section 181(b)(2)(A) to determine, based on the area's air quality data as of the attainment date, whether the area attained the standard. As a result of this determination, the San Luis Obispo (Eastern San Luis Obispo) 2008 ozone nonattainment area in California will not be reclassified for failure to attain by the July 20, 2016 applicable attainment date under section 181(b)(2)(A).

    [FR Doc. 2016-30476 Filed 12-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R04-OAR-2013-0799; FRL- 9956-90-Region 4] Air Plan Approval; Tennessee; Regional Haze Progress Report AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the State of Tennessee through the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation (TDEC) on April 19, 2013. Tennessee's April 19, 2013, SIP revision (Progress Report) addresses requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) and EPA's rules that require each state to submit periodic reports describing progress towards reasonable progress goals (RPGs) established for regional haze and a determination of the adequacy of the State's existing SIP addressing regional haze (regional haze plan). EPA is approving Tennessee's Progress Report on the basis that it addresses the progress report and adequacy determination requirements for the first implementation period for regional haze.

    DATES:

    This rule will be effective January 20, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket Identification No. EPA-R04-OAR-2013-0799. All documents in the docket are listed on the www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the index, some information may not be publicly available, i.e., Confidential Business Information or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically through www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Air Regulatory Management Section, Air Planning and Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. EPA requests that if at all possible, you contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's official hours of business are Monday through Friday 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding federal holidays.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Michele Notarianni, Air Regulatory Management Section, Air Planning and Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. Ms. Notarianni can be reached by phone at (404) 562-9031 and via electronic mail at [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Background

    Under the Regional Haze Rule,1 each state was required to submit its first implementation plan addressing regional haze visibility impairment to EPA no later than December 17, 2007. See 40 CFR 51.308(b). Tennessee submitted its regional haze plan on April 4, 2008, and like many other states subject to the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR), relied on CAIR to satisfy best available retrofit technology (BART) requirements for emissions of sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides from electric generating units in the State.

    1 Located in 40 CFR part 51, subpart P.

    On April 24, 2012, EPA finalized a limited approval of Tennessee's April 4, 2008, regional haze plan as meeting some of the applicable regional haze requirements as set forth in sections 169A and 169B of the CAA and in 40 CFR 51.300-51.308.2 Also in this April 24, 2012, action, EPA finalized a limited disapproval of Tennessee's regional haze plan because of deficiencies arising from the State's reliance on CAIR to satisfy certain regional haze requirements. See 77 FR 24392. On June 7, 2012, EPA promulgated Federal Implementation Plans (FIPs) to replace reliance on CAIR with reliance on the Cross State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR) to address deficiencies in CAIR-dependent regional haze plans of several states, including Tennessee's regional haze plan.3 See 77 FR 33642.

    2 This April 24, 2012, action did not include the BART determination for Eastman Chemical Company (Eastman). On November 27, 2012, EPA finalized approval of the BART requirements for Eastman that were provided in the April 4, 2008, regional haze SIP, as later modified and supplemented on May 14, 2012, and May 25, 2012 (77 FR 70689).

    3 Although a number of parties challenged the legality of CSAPR and the D.C. Circuit initially vacated and remanded CSAPR to EPA in EME Homer City Generation, L.P. v. EPA, 696 F.3d 7 (D.C. Cir. 2012), the United States Supreme Court reversed the D.C. Circuit's decision on April 29, 2014, and remanded the case to the D.C. Circuit to resolve remaining issues in accordance with the high court's ruling. EPA v. EME Homer City Generation, L.P., 134 S. Ct. 1584 (2014). On remand, the D.C. Circuit affirmed CSAPR in most respects, and CSAPR is now in effect. EME Homer City Generation, L.P. v. EPA, 795 F.3d 118 (D.C. Cir. 2015).

    Each state is also required to submit a progress report in the form of a SIP revision every five years that evaluates progress towards the RPGs for each mandatory Class I Federal area within the state and for each mandatory Class I Federal area outside the state which may be affected by emissions from within the state. See 40 CFR 51.308(g). Each state is also required to submit, at the same time as the progress report, a determination of the adequacy of its existing regional haze plan. See 40 CFR 51.308(h). The first progress report was due five years after submittal of the initial regional haze plan.

    On April 19, 2013, as required by 40 CFR 51.308(g), TDEC submitted to EPA, in the form of a revision to Tennessee's SIP, a report on progress made towards the RPGs for Class I areas in the State and for Class I areas outside the State that are affected by emissions from sources within the State. This submission also includes a negative declaration pursuant to 40 CFR 51.308(h)(1) that the State's regional haze plan is sufficient in meeting the requirements of the Regional Haze Rule.

    In a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) published on September 28, 2016 (81 FR 66596), EPA proposed to approve Tennessee's Progress Report on the basis that it satisfies the requirements of 40 CFR 51.308(g) and 51.308(h). No comments were received on the September 28, 2016, proposed rulemaking. The details of Tennessee's submittal and the rationale for EPA's action is further explained in the NPRM. See 81 FR 66596 (September 28, 2016).

    II. Final Action

    EPA is finalizing approval of Tennessee's Regional Haze Progress Report SIP revision, submitted by the State on April 19, 2013, as meeting the applicable regional haze requirements set forth in 40 CFR 51.308(g) and 51.308(h).

    III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by February 21, 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. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. See section 307(b)(2).

    List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

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

    Dated: December 1, 2016. Heather McTeer Toney, Regional Administrator, Region 4.

    40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

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

    42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    Subpart RR—Tennessee 2. Section 52.2220(e), is amended by adding an entry for “April 2013 Regional Haze Progress Report” at the end of the table to read as follows:
    § 52.2220 Identification of plan.

    (e) * * *

    EPA-Approved Tennessee Non-Regulatory Provisions Name of non-regulatory SIP
  • provision
  • Applicable geographic or nonattainment area State effective date EPA approval date Explanation
    *         *         *         *         *         *         * April 2013 Regional Haze Progress Report Tennessee 4/19/2013 12/21/2016, [insert Federal Register citation]
    [FR Doc. 2016-30184 Filed 12-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R09-OAR-2016-0669; FRL-9956-66-Region 9] Determination of Attainment of the 2008 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards; Mariposa County, California AGENCY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Direct final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking direct final action to determine that the Mariposa County, California Moderate Nonattainment Area (NAA) has attained the 2008 8-hour ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS or “standards”). This determination is based on complete, quality-assured and certified data for 2013-2015. Preliminary data for 2016 are consistent with continued attainment of the standards in the Mariposa County NAA. This determination suspends any unfulfilled obligations to submit revisions to the state implementation plan (SIP) related to attainment of the 2008 ozone standards for the Mariposa County NAA for as long as the area continues to meet those standards.

    DATES:

    This rule is effective on February 21, 2017 without further notice, unless the EPA receives adverse comments by January 20, 2017. If the EPA receives such comments, the EPA will publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal Register to notify the public that this direct final rule will not take effect.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R09-OAR-2016-0669 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:

    Nancy Levin, EPA Region IX, (415) 972-3848, [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Throughout this document, whenever “we,” “us” or “our” is used, we mean the EPA.

    Table of Contents I. What is the background for this action? A. Ozone NAAQS, Area Designations and Classifications B. Relevant Statutory and Regulatory Requirements C. Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Data II. What is the EPA's analysis of the Relevant Air Quality data? A. Monitoring Network and Data Considerations B. Evaluation of the Ambient Air Quality Data III. What is the effect of this action? IV. Final Action V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews I. What is the background for this action? A. Ozone NAAQS, Area Designations and Classifications

    The Clean Air Act (CAA or “Act”) requires the EPA to establish national primary and secondary standards for certain widespread pollutants, such as ozone, that cause or contribute to air pollution that is reasonably anticipated to endanger public health or welfare.1 In the 1970s, the EPA promulgated primary and secondary ozone standards, based on a 1-hour average. In 1997, we replaced the 1-hour ozone standards with primary and secondary 8-hour ozone standards. In 2008, we tightened the 8-hour ozone standards to the level of 0.075 parts per million (ppm), daily maximum 8-hour average.2 See 73 FR 16436 (March 27, 2008); 40 CFR 50.15. Since the primary and secondary ozone standards are the same, we refer to them hereafter in this document using the singular “2008 ozone standard” (or simply “standard”) or NAAQS. The 2008 ozone standard is met at an ambient air quality monitoring site when the 3-year average of the annual fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour average ozone concentration is less than or equal to 0.075 ppm, as determined in accordance with 40 CFR part 50, Appendix P.

    1See sections 108 and 109 of the Clean Air Act (CAA or “Act”). Primary standards represent ambient air quality standards the attainment and maintenance of which the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has determined, including a margin of safety, are requisite to protect the public health. Secondary standards represent ambient air quality standards the attainment and maintenance of which the EPA has determined are requisite to protect the public welfare from any known or anticipated adverse effects associated with the presence of such air pollutant in the ambient air. CAA section 109(b).

    2 In 2015, we tightened the ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS or “standards”) even further and established 0.070 parts per million (ppm), 8-hour average, as the new ozone NAAQS. See 80 FR 65292 (October 26, 2015). While the 1979 1-hour ozone NAAQS and 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS have been revoked, the 2008 ozone NAAQS remains in effect.

    The EPA designated NAAs for the 2008 ozone standard on May 21, 2012, effective July 20, 2012 (77 FR 30088). In that action, the EPA classified (by operation of law) the Mariposa County, California 3 NAA as a “Marginal” nonattainment area. The original attainment date for the 2008 ozone standard for this Marginal ozone nonattainment area was as expeditious as practicable but not later than July 20, 2015. See 40 CFR 51.1103.

    3 Mariposa County is located in central California and is the southern-most county within the air basin designated by California as the Mountain Counties Air Basin. The nonattainment area designation for Mariposa County encompasses the entire county.

    In May 2016, the EPA determined that the Mariposa County NAA failed to attain the 2008 ozone standard by the applicable attainment date of July 20, 2015, and reclassified the area to the next higher classification, i.e., “Moderate.” Our determination was based on complete, quality-assured and certified data for 2012-2014.4 States with Moderate ozone NAAs are required to submit revisions to the applicable SIP that comply with the requirements set forth in subpart 2 of part D of title I of the CAA and in the EPA's ozone implementation rule for the 2008 ozone NAAQS in 40 CFR part 51, subpart AA. The relevant SIP requirements include, among other requirements, attainment demonstrations and associated reasonably available control measures (RACM), reasonable further progress (RFP) plans, and contingency measures for failure to attain or make RFP. The applicable attainment date for areas classified as Moderate nonattainment for the 2008 ozone NAAQS is as expeditious as practicable but not later than July 20, 2018. See 40 CFR 51.1103.

    4 81 FR 26697 (May 4, 2016). The 2012-2014 design value for the Mariposa County NAA was 0.078 parts per million, which exceeded the 2008 ozone NAAQS of 0.075 ppm, daily maximum 8-hour average. We note that today's action is based on the 2013-2015 design value.

    B. Relevant Statutory and Regulatory Requirements

    Under the provisions of EPA's ozone implementation rule for the 2008 ozone NAAQS, if the EPA issues a determination that an area is attaining the relevant standard, also known as a Clean Data Determination, the requirements for such area to submit attainment demonstrations and associated RACM, RFP plans, contingency measures and other planning SIPs related to attainment of the 2008 ozone NAAQS are suspended until such time as the area is redesignated to attainment for the 2008 ozone NAAQS. However, if the EPA later determines, through notice-and-comment rulemaking, that the area has again violated the 2008 ozone NAAQS, the area is again required to submit such plans. See 40 CFR 51.1118. While these requirements are suspended, the EPA is not precluded from acting upon these SIP elements at any time if submitted to the EPA for review and approval.

    C. Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Data

    A determination of whether an area's air quality meets the 2008 ozone NAAQS is generally based upon three consecutive calendar years of complete, quality-assured data measured at established State and Local Air Monitoring Stations (SLAMS) in the NAA and entered into the EPA Air Quality System (AQS) database. Data from ambient air monitoring sites operated by state or local agencies in compliance with EPA monitoring requirements must be submitted to AQS. Heads of monitoring agencies annually certify that these data are accurate to the best of their knowledge. Accordingly, the EPA relies primarily on data in AQS when determining the attainment status of an area. See 40 CFR 50.15; 40 CFR part 50, Appendix P; 40 CFR part 53; 40 CFR part 58, Appendices A, C, D and E. All data are reviewed to determine the area's air quality status in accordance with 40 CFR part 50, Appendix P.

    The 2008 ozone standard is met at an ambient air quality monitoring site when the design value is less than or equal to 0.075 ppm, as determined in accordance with 40 CFR part 50, Appendix P. See 40 CFR 50.15. The design value is a statistic that describes the air quality status of a given location relative to the level of the NAAQS. For the purpose of comparison with the 2008 ozone standard, the design value for a site is the 3-year average of the annual fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour average ozone concentrations. When the design value is less than or equal to 0.075 ppm (based on the rounding convention in 40 CFR part 50, Appendix P) at each monitoring site within the area, then the area is meeting the NAAQS. The data completeness requirement is met when the 3-year average percent of days with valid monitoring data is at least 90 percent, and no single year has less than 75 percent data completeness as determined in accordance with 40 CFR part 50, Appendix P.

    II. What is the EPA's analysis of the Relevant Air Quality data? A. Monitoring Network and Data Considerations

    The California Air Resources Board (CARB) and local air pollution control districts and air quality management districts (“districts”) operate ambient air monitoring stations throughout the State of California. CARB is the lead monitoring agency in the Primary Quality Assurance Organization (PQAO) that includes all the monitoring agencies in the State with a few exceptions.5 6

    5 A Primary Quality Assurance Organization (PQAO) means a monitoring organization, a group of monitoring organizations or other organization that is responsible for a set of stations that monitor the same pollutant and for which data quality assessments can be pooled. Each criteria pollutant sampler/monitor at a monitoring station must be associated with only one PQAO. (40 CFR 58.1).

    6 The Bay Area Air Quality Management District (AQMD), the South Coast AQMD and the San Diego Air Pollution Control District are each designated as the PQAO for their respective ambient air monitoring programs.

    Within the Mariposa County ozone nonattainment area, there is one ozone SLAMS (referred to as the Jerseydale site) that is operated by CARB, and one SLAMS (referred to as the Turtleback Dome site in Yosemite National Park) that is operated by the National Park Service (NPS). The ozone monitoring site operated by NPS at Turtleback Dome is one of many sites throughout the U.S. and Canada that comprise the Clean Air Status and Trends Network (CASTNET).7 Ozone monitors at CASTNET sites meet the EPA's ambient air quality monitoring requirements of 40 CFR part 58, and data from such sites are submitted to AQS. Ozone data from CASTNET sites, such as Turtleback Dome, are eligible for use in determining compliance with the ozone NAAQS. CARB is the PQAO for the Jerseydale site. The NPS is the PQAO for the Turtleback Dome site.

    7 Clean Air Status and Trends Network (CASTNET) is a national monitoring network established to assess trends in pollutant concentrations, atmospheric deposition and ecological effects due to changes in air pollutant emissions. For additional background on CASTNET, see https://www.epa.govfxsp0;/castnet.

    All state and local air monitoring agencies are required to submit annual monitoring network plans to the EPA.8 An annual monitoring network plan discusses the status of the air monitoring network, as required under 40 CFR part 58.10. CARB submits the annual monitoring network plans for the Jerseydale site.

    8See 40 CFR 58.10(a)(1).

    Since 2007, the EPA has regularly reviewed these annual monitoring network plans for compliance with the applicable reporting requirements in 40 CFR part 58. With respect to ozone, the EPA found that the area's annual monitoring network plans meet the applicable requirements under 40 CFR part 58. See EPA letters to CARB approving annual monitoring network plans for the years 2013, 2014 and 2015.9 The 2016 CASTNET annual network plan, dated June 23, 2016, includes the Turtleback Dome site.10

    9 Letter from Meredith Kurpius, Manager, Air Quality Analysis Office, EPA Region IX, to Karen Magliano, Chief, Air Quality Data Branch, Planning and Technical Support Division, CARB, dated March 7, 2014, approving CARB's 2013 annual monitoring network report; letter from Meredith Kurpius, Manager, Air Quality Analysis Office, EPA Region IX, to Karen Magliano, Chief, Air Quality Data Branch, Planning and Technical Support Division, CARB, dated January 27, 2015, approving CARB's 2014 annual monitoring report; and letter from Meredith Kurpius, Manager, Air Quality Analysis Office, U.S. EPA Region IX, to Ravi Ramalingam, Chief Consumer Products and Air Quality Assessment Branch, Air Quality Planning and Science Division, CARB, dated November 13, 2015, approving CARB's 2015 annual monitoring network report.

    10 The 2016 CASTNET Annual Network Plan is available at https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2016-07/documents/castnet_plan_2016_final.pdf.

    The EPA also concluded from its Technical System Audit of the CARB PQAO (conducted during Summer 2015), that the combined ambient air monitoring network operated by CARB currently meets or exceeds the requirements for the minimum number of SLAMS for the 2008 ozone standard.11 All of the monitoring sites in the PQAO are reviewed with respect to monitoring objectives, spatial scales and other site criteria as required by 40 CFR part 58, Appendix D.

    11 Letter from Elizabeth J. Adams, Acting Director, Air Division, EPA Region IX, to Richard Corey, Executive Officer, CARB, dated August 31, 2016, transmitting findings of the EPA's 2015 Technical System Audit of the CARB's ambient air monitoring program.

    CARB oversees the quality assurance of all data collected within the CARB PQAO. Also, CARB annually certifies that the data it submits to AQS are complete and quality-assured. This includes data from all CARB sites, including the Jerseydale site.12 Data from the Turtleback Dome site are certified by the NPS.13

    12See, e.g., letter from Ravi Ramalingam, Chief, Air Quality Data Branch, CARB, to Elizabeth Adams, Acting Director, Air Division, EPA Region 9, certifying calendar year 2015 ambient air quality data and quality assurance data, May 10, 2016.

    13See, e.g., letter from Barkley Sive, Air Resources Division Program Manager, National Park Service, to Lew Weinstock, EPA Office of Air Quality Policy and Standards, certifying calendar year 2015 ambient air quality data and quality assurance, dated April 27, 2016.

    As noted above, there are two ozone SLAMS monitoring sites operating within the Mariposa County NAA. These sites monitor ozone concentrations on a continuous basis using EPA reference or equivalent methods.14 15

    14See the CARB's Annual Monitoring Network Report for Twenty-five Districts in California (July 2015). The EPA approved an ozone season waiver for the Jerseydale site. See letter from Meredith Kurpius, Manager, Air Quality Analysis Office, EPA Region IX, to Ravi Ramalingam, Chief, Consumer Products and Air Quality Assessment Branch, CARB, dated March 8, 2016. The Jerseydale ozone monitor operates only in the warmer six months of the year. The site is at a high elevation where access during the winter can be problematic. Ozone concentrations during the winter at the Jerseydale site are well below the levels of the 2008 ozone standard.

    15See the CARB's Annual Monitoring Network Report for Twenty-five Districts in California (July 2015).

    Lastly, consistent with the requirements contained in 40 CFR part 50, the EPA has reviewed the quality-assured and certified ozone ambient air monitoring data, as recorded in AQS for the applicable monitoring period, collected at the monitoring sites in the Mariposa County NAA for completeness. The EPA has determined that the data are complete.16 For the two ozone monitoring sites in Mariposa County, daily maximum 8-hour average concentrations are available for at least 90 percent of the days within the ozone monitoring season, on average for the 2013-2015 period, and daily maximum 8-hour average concentrations are available for at least 75 percent of the days within the ozone monitoring season for each individual year within that period.

    16See EPA, Air Quality System, Design Value Report, July 25, 2016.

    B. Evaluation of the Ambient Air Quality Data

    As noted above, the applicable attainment date for the Mariposa County ozone NAA is July 20, 2018; however, we have reviewed the data collected at the two monitoring sites within that area during the most recent three-year period (2013-2015) to determine whether the area has already attained the 2008 ozone standard. Table 1 shows the fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour ozone concentrations for 2013 through 2015 at both sites in the Mariposa County ozone NAA and shows the design values for 2013-2015. The design value for a given area is based on the monitoring site in the area with the highest design value. In this case, the design value for 2013-2015 for the Mariposa County ozone NAA is at the Jerseydale site and is 0.075 ppm, which is equal to the standard (i.e., 0.075 ppm). Therefore, we are determining, based on the complete, quality-assured and certified data for 2013-2015, that the Mariposa County Moderate ozone NAA has attained the 2008 ozone standard. We have also reviewed preliminary data for 2016 and find that they are consistent with continued attainment of the standard in the Mariposa County NAA.17

    17See EPA's Ozone Watch. The November 8, 2016 Ozone Watch reports that the preliminary 2014-2016 Design Value for Mariposa County 2008 ozone NAA is 0.075 ppm. http://oaqpsapps.epa.gov/;MadeInAQAG/index.php?title=Ozone_Watch.

    Table 1—2013-2015 Ozone Design Values at Sites Within the Mariposa County NAA Monitoring site AQS site
  • identification number
  • Fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour ozone
  • concentration (ppm)
  • 2013 2014 2015 Design value
  • (2013-2015)
  • Yosemite NP—Turtleback Dome 06-043-0003 0.073 0.077 0.073 0.074 Jerseydale 06-043-0006 0.077 0.077 0.071 0.075 Source: EPA AQS Quick Look Report (AMP450), August 10, 2016.
    III. What is the effect of this action?

    With this determination that the Mariposa County ozone NAA has attained the 2008 ozone NAAQS, the obligation on the State of California to submit SIP revisions related to attainment of the 2008 ozone standard in Mariposa County, including but not limited to SIP revisions demonstrating attainment and RFP, is suspended until such time as Mariposa County is redesignated to attainment for the 2008 ozone standard, at which time the requirements no longer apply. However, if the EPA determines, through notice-and-comment rulemaking, that Mariposa County has once again violated the 2008 ozone NAAQS, then the area is again required to submit the attainment-related SIP revisions. See 40 CFR 51.1118.

    This final determination of attainment for the Mariposa County NAA does not constitute a redesignation to attainment. Under CAA section 107(d)(3)(E), redesignations to attainment require states to meet a number of additional statutory criteria, including EPA's approval of a SIP revision demonstrating maintenance of the standard for 10 years after redesignation. The designation status of the Mariposa County area will remain Moderate nonattainment for the 2008 ozone NAAQS until such time as the EPA determines that the area meets the CAA requirements for redesignation to attainment.

    IV. Final Action

    The EPA is taking direct final action to determine that the Mariposa County Moderate ozone NAA has attained the 2008 ozone standard based on complete, quality-assured and certified ambient air quality monitoring data for the 2013-2015 monitoring period. Preliminary data for 2016 are consistent with continued attainment of the standard in the Mariposa County NAA. Upon the effective date of this determination, the requirements for the Mariposa County NAA to submit planning SIPs related to attainment of the standard are suspended until the area is redesignated or the EPA determines that the area has violated the standard, at which time the area would again be required to submit such plans.

    We do not think anyone will object to this determination, so we are finalizing it without proposing it in advance. However, in the Proposed Rules section of this Federal Register, we are simultaneously proposing to make the same determination made herein. If we receive adverse comments by January 20, 2017, we will publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal Register to notify the public that the direct final action will not take effect and we will address the comments in a subsequent final action based on the proposal. If we do not receive timely adverse comments, the direct final action will be effective without further notice on February 21, 2017.

    V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    This action makes a determination based on air quality data and does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that reason, the action:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because the SIP obligations discussed herein do not apply to Indian tribes, and thus this action will not impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.

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

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by February 21, 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 today's Federal Register, rather than file an immediate petition for judicial review of this direct final rule, so that the EPA can withdraw this direct final rule and address the comment in the proposed rulemaking. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements (see section 307(b)(2)).

    List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Oxides of Nitrogen, Ozone, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: December 2, 2016. Deborah Jordan, Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.

    Chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations 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 F—California 2. Section 52.282 is amended by adding paragraph (j) to read as follows:
    § 52.282 Control strategy and regulations: Ozone

    (j) Determination of attainment. The EPA has determined that, as of February 21, 2017, the Mariposa County 2008 8-hour ozone nonattainment area in California has attained the 2008 ozone standard, based upon complete, quality-assured and certified data for 2013-2015. Under the provisions of the EPA's ozone implementation rule (see 40 CFR 51.1118), this determination suspends the requirements for the area to submit attainment demonstrations and associated reasonably available control measures, reasonable further progress plans, contingency measures for failure to attain or make reasonable further progress and other planning SIPs related to attainment of the 2008 ozone standard for as long as the area continues to attain the 2008 ozone standard. If the EPA determines, after notice-and-comment rulemaking, that the Mariposa County ozone nonattainment area no longer meets the 2008 ozone standard, the corresponding determination of attainment for this area shall be withdrawn.

    [FR Doc. 2016-30477 Filed 12-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R01-OAR-2014-0720; A-1-FRL-9952-94-Region 1] Air Plan Approval; MA; Infrastructure State Implementation Plan Requirements AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving most elements of State Implementation Plan (SIP) submissions from Massachusetts regarding the infrastructure requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) for the 1997 ozone, 2008 lead (Pb), 2008 ozone, 2010 nitrogen dioxide (NO2), and 2010 sulfur dioxide (SO2) National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). EPA is also conditionally approving three aspects of the Commonwealth's submittals. In addition, we are also making findings of failure to submit pertaining to various aspects of the prevention of significant deterioration (PSD) requirements of infrastructure SIPs. Lastly, we are removing 40 CFR 52.1160 as legally obsolete. This action is being taken in accordance with the Clean Air Act.

    DATES:

    This rule is effective on January 20, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket Identification No. EPA-R01-OAR-2014-0720. All documents in the docket are listed on the http://www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available at http://www.regulations.gov or at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England Regional Office, Office of Ecosystem Protection, Air Quality Planning Unit, 5 Post Office Square—Suite 100, Boston, MA. EPA requests that if at all possible, you contact the contact listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's official hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding legal holidays.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Bob McConnell, Environmental Engineer, Air Quality Planning Unit, Air Programs Branch (Mail Code OEP05-02), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 1, 5 Post Office Square, Suite 100, Boston, Massachusetts, 02109-3912; (617) 918-1046; [email protected].

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Throughout this document whenever “we,” “us,” or “our” is used, we mean EPA. The term “the Commonwealth” refers to the state of Massachusetts.

    Organization of this document. The following outline is provided to aid in locating information in this preamble.

    I. Background and Purpose II. Final Action III. Incorporation by Reference IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews I. Background and Purpose

    On July 20, 2016 (81 FR 47133), EPA published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPR) for the State of Massachusetts which proposed approval of most elements of SIP submissions from the Commonwealth regarding the infrastructure requirements of the CAA for the 1997 ozone, 2008 lead, 2008 ozone, 2010 NO2, and 2010 SO2 NAAQS, proposed to conditionally approve three aspects of the Commonwealth's submittals, and proposed findings of failure to submit pertaining to various aspects of the PSD requirements of infrastructure SIPs. Additionally, we proposed to remove 40 CFR 52.1160 as legally obsolete. The Commonwealth submitted its infrastructure State Implementation Plan (ISIP) for the 1997 ozone NAAQS on December 14, 2007, its ISIP for the 2008 Pb NAAQS on December 4, 2012, and its ISIPs for the 2008 ozone, 2010 NO2, and 2010 SO2 NAAQS on June 6, 2014.

    Under sections 110(a)(1) and (2) of the CAA, states are required to submit infrastructure SIPs to ensure that their SIPs provide for implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of the NAAQS, including the 1997 ozone, 2008 Pb, 2008 ozone, 2010 NO2, and 2010 SO2 NAAQS. These submissions must contain any revisions needed for meeting the applicable SIP requirements of section 110(a)(2), or certifications that their existing SIPs for the NAAQS already meet those requirements. Table 1 below provides a summary of the actions we are taking on the various portions of the Commonwealth's infrastructure submittals.

    Table 1—Final Action on MA Infrastructure SIP Submittals for Various NAAQS Element 1997 Ozone 2008 Pb 2008 Ozone 2010 NO2 2010 SO2 (A): Emission limits and other control measures CA CA CA CA CA (B): Ambient air quality monitoring and data system A A A A A (C)(i): Enforcement of SIP measures A A A A A (C)(ii): PSD program for major sources and major modifications PF PF PF FS FS (C)(iii): Permitting program for minor sources and minor modifications A A A A A (D)(i)(I): Contribute to nonattainment/interfere with maintenance of NAAQS (prongs 1 and 2) NI A NS A NS (D)(i)(II): PSD (prong 3) PF/CA PF/CA PF/CA FS/CA FS/CA (D)(i)(II): Visibility Protection (prong 4) A A A A A (D)(ii): Interstate Pollution Abatement PF PF PF FS FS (D)(ii): International Pollution Abatement A A A A A (E)(i): Adequate resources A A A A A (E)(ii): State boards A A A A A (E)(iii): Necessary assurances with respect to local agencies NA NA NA NA NA (F): Stationary source monitoring system A A A A A (G): Emergency power CA A CA A CA (H): Future SIP revisions A A A A A (I): Nonattainment area plan or plan revisions under part D + + + + + (J)(i): Consultation with government officials FS FS FS FS FS (J)(ii): Public notification A A A A A (J)(iii): PSD PF PF PF FS FS (J)(iv): Visibility protection + + + + + (K): Air quality modeling and data A A A A A (L): Permitting fees A A A A A (M): Consultation and participation by affected local entities A A A A A

    In the above table, the key is as follows:

    A Approve. CA Conditional approval. FS Finding of failure to submit. NA Not applicable. NI Not included in submittal we are acting on in today's action. NS No Submittal. PF Prior finding of failure to submit. + Not germane to infrastructure SIPs.

    The specific requirements of ISIPs and the rationale for EPA's proposed actions on the Commonwealth's submittals are explained in the NPR and will not be restated here. No public comments were received on the NPR.

    II. Final Action

    EPA is approving most portions of Massachusetts ISIP submittals for the 1997 ozone, 2008 lead, 2008 ozone, 2010 NO2, and 2010 SO2 NAAQS as outlined within Table 1 of this final rulemaking.

    Additionally, EPA is conditionally approving three portions of these submittals. First, for the five NAAQS listed within Table 1 we are conditionally approving an aspect of the Commonwealth's submittals for element 110(a)(2)(A) pertaining to ambient air quality standards because the current, SIP-approved version of 310 CMR 7.00, Air Pollution Control, does not reflect the current version of the various NAAQS we are taking action on in this rulemaking. However, by letter dated June 14, 2016, the Commonwealth committed to rectify this deficiency by adding a definition of NAAQS to 310 CMR 7.00 that includes a calendar date to address this issue. Therefore, EPA is conditionally approving this SIP revision. Second, we are conditionally approving the Commonwealth's submittals for element 110(a)(2)(G) pertaining to contingency plans for the 1997 ozone, 2008 ozone, and 2010 SO2 NAAQS pursuant to Massachusetts commitment within their June 14, 2016 letter to submit a regulation meeting the contingency plan requirement of element 110(a)(2)(G). And last, we are conditionally approving the aspect of 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) for the five NAAQS listed within Table 1 pertaining to the Commonwealth's Nonattainment New Source Review (NNSR) program pursuant to the state's June 14, 2016 letter committing to submit portions of 310 CMR 7.00: Appendix A, to EPA as a SIP revision request. Massachusetts must make the above mentioned submittals to EPA by a date no later than one year from EPA's final action on these infrastructure SIPs. If the Commonwealth fails to do so, this approval will become a disapproval on that date, and we will notify Massachusetts by letter that this action has occurred. At that time, this commitment will no longer be a part of the approved Massachusetts SIP. EPA subsequently will publish a notice in the notice section of the Federal Register notifying the public that the conditional approval automatically converted to a disapproval. If the State meets its commitments within the applicable time frame, the conditionally approved submissions will remain a part of the SIP until EPA takes final action approving or disapproving the new legislative authority. If EPA disapproves the new submittal, these conditionally approved aspects of the Commonwealth's ISIPs will also be disapproved at that time. If EPA approves the Commonwealth's submittals, they will be fully approved in their entirety and replace the conditionally approved items in the Massachusetts SIP. If the conditional approval is converted to a disapproval, the final disapproval triggers the Federal implementation plan (FIP) requirement under section 110(c).

    As noted within Table 1 of this final rulemaking notice, we are also making findings of failure to submit for the aspects of the Commonwealth's ISIPs noted within CAA sections 110(a)(2)(C)(ii), (D)(i)(II), (D)(ii), J(i), and J(iii). These findings relate to inadequacies with Massachusetts' program for the prevention of significant deterioration (PSD), and are elaborated on within our July 20, 2016 NPR. As mentioned in our proposed rulemaking, the Commonwealth is subject to a PSD Federal Implementation Plan (FIP), and has implemented and enforced the federal PSD program through a delegation agreement. See 76 FR 31241; May 31, 2011. Therefore, our findings of failure to submit will not trigger any additional FIP obligation by the EPA under section 110(c)(1), because the deficiency is addressed by the FIP already in place. Moreover, the state is not subject to mandatory sanctions solely as a result of this finding, because the SIP submittal deficiencies are neither with respect to a sub-element that is required under part D nor in response to a SIP call under section 110(k)(5) of the Act.

    Furthermore, as proposed, we are incorporating into the Massachusetts SIP sections 6 and 6A of the state's Conflict of Interest law, which the Commonwealth submitted on June 6, 2014, and are removing 40 CFR 52.1160 regarding Massachusetts Low Emission Vehicle program in that this section is legally obsolete.

    III. Incorporation by Reference

    In this rule, the EPA is finalizing regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is finalizing the incorporation by reference of M.G.L c. 268A, sections 6 and 6A of the Commonwealth's Conflict of Interest law submitted to EPA on June 6, 2014, as described in the amendments to 40 CFR part 52 set forth below. The EPA has made, and will continue to make, these documents generally available through http://www.regulations.gov.

    IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by February 21, 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. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. (see section 307(b)(2).)

    List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

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

    Dated: September 13, 2016. H. Curtis Spalding, Regional Administrator, EPA New England.

    Part 52 of chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:

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

    42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    Subpart W—Massachusetts 2. Section 52.1119 is amended by adding paragraphs (a)(3) through (5) to read as follows:
    § 52.1119 Identification of plan-conditional approval

    (a) * * *

    (3) Massachusetts submitted an infrastructure State Implementation Plan (ISIP) for the 1997 ozone national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) on December 14, 2007, submitted an ISIP for the 2008 Pb NAAQS on December 4, 2012, and submitted ISIPs for the 2008 ozone, 2010 NO2, and 2010 SO2 NAAQS on June 6, 2014. On June 14, 2016, Massachusetts submitted a letter committing to add a definition of NAAQS to Massachusetts regulation 310 CMR 7.00, and to submit the amended version of this regulation to EPA as a SIP revision request, by a date no later than one year from the effective date of EPA's actions on these ISIPs. In light of this commitment, the portion of the Commonwealth's ISIP submittals mentioned above made to address Clean Air Act section 110(a)(2)(A), Emission limits and other control measures, is conditionally approved.

    (4) Massachusetts submitted an infrastructure State Implementation Plan (ISIP) for the 1997 ozone national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) on December 14, 2007, submitted an ISIP for the 2008 Pb NAAQS on December 4, 2012, and submitted ISIPs for the 2008 ozone, 2010 NO2, and 2010 SO2 NAAQS on June 6, 2014. On June 14, 2016, Massachusetts submitted a letter committing to submit portions of 310 CMR 7.00: Appendix A: Emission Offsets and Nonattainment Review, to EPA as a SIP revision request, by a date no later than one year from the effective date of EPA's actions on these ISIPs. In light of this commitment, the portions of the Commonwealth's ISIP submittals mentioned above made to address Clean Air Act section 110 (a)(2)(D)(i)(II), PSD, is conditionally approved.

    (5) Massachusetts submitted an infrastructure State Implementation Plan (ISIP) for the 1997 ozone national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) on December 14, 2007, and submitted ISIPs for the 2008 ozone and 2010 SO2 NAAQS on June 6, 2014. On June 14, 2016, Massachusetts submitted a letter committing to submit 310 CMR 8.00, The Prevention and/or Abatement of Air Pollution Episode and Air Pollution Incident Emergencies, to EPA as a SIP revision request, by a date no later than one year from the effective date of EPA's actions on these ISIPs. In light of this commitment, the portions of the Commonwealth's ISIP submittals mentioned above made to address Clean Air Act section 110 (a)(2)(G), Emergency power, is conditionally approved.

    3. Section 52.1120 is amended by adding paragraphs (c)(145) through (147) to read as follows:
    § 52.1120 Identification of plan

    (c) * * *

    (145) Revisions to the State Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted by the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection on December 14, 2007. The submittal consists of an Infrastructure SIP for the 1997 ozone national ambient air quality standard.

    (146) Revisions to the State Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted by the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection on December 4, 2012. The submittal consists of an Infrastructure SIP for the 2008 lead national ambient air quality standard.

    (147) Revisions to the State Implementation Plan submitted by the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection on June 6, 2014. The submittal consists of Infrastructure SIPs for the 2008 ozone, 2010 NO2, and 2010 SO2 national ambient air quality standards.

    (i) Incorporation by reference.

    (A) Section 6, “Financial interest of state employee, relative, or associates; disclosure,” of the Massachusetts General Laws Annotated, chapter 268A, “Conduct of Public Officials and Employees,” as amended by Statute 1978, chapter 210, § 9.

    (B) Section 6A, “Conflict of interest of public officials; reporting requirement,” of the Massachusetts General Laws Annotated, chapter 268A, “Conduct of Public Officials and Employees,” as amended by Statute 1984, chapter 189, § 163.

    § 52.1160 [Removed and Reserved]
    4. Section 52.1160 is removed and reserved. 5. In § 52.1167, Table 52.1167 is amended by adding a state citation for conflict of interest law at the end of the table to read as follows:
    § 52.1167 EPA-approved Massachusetts State regulations. Table 52.1167—EPA-Approved Rules and Regulations [See Notes at end of Table] State citation Title/subject Date submitted by State Date
  • approved by EPA
  • Federal
  • Register citation
  • 52.1120(c) Comments/unapproved
  • sections
  • *         *         *         *         *         *         * M.G.L. c. 268A, sections 6 and 6A Conduct of Public Officials and Employees June 6, 2014 12/21/16 [Insert Federal Register citation] 147 Approved Section 6: Financial interest of state employee, relative or associates; disclosure, and Section 6A: Conflict of interest of public official; reporting requirement. Notes: 1. This table lists regulations adopted as of 1972. It does not depict regulatory requirements which may have been part of the Federal SIP before this date. 2. The regulations are effective statewide unless otherwise stated in comments or title section.
    [FR Doc. 2016-30466 Filed 12-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 [EPA-R05-OAR-2016-0372; FRL-9956-59-Region 5] Air Plan Approval; Ohio; Redesignation of the Columbus, Ohio Area to Attainment of the 2008 Ozone Standard AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is finding that the Columbus, Ohio area is attaining the 2008 ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS or standard) and redesignating the area to attainment for the 2008 ozone NAAQS because the area meets the statutory requirements for redesignation under the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act). The Columbus area includes Delaware, Fairfield, Knox, Licking, and Mason Counties. EPA is also approving, as a revision to the Ohio State Implementation Plan (SIP), the state's plan for maintaining the 2008 ozone standard through 2030 in the Columbus area. Finally, EPA finds adequate and is approving the state's 2020 and 2030 volatile organic compound (VOC) and oxides of nitrogen (NOX) Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets (MVEBs) for the Columbus area. The Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (Ohio EPA) submitted the SIP revision and redesignation request on June 16, 2016.

    DATES:

    This final rule is effective December 21, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID No. EPA-R05-OAR-2016-0372. 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 either through http://www.regulations.gov, or please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section for additional availability information.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Kathleen D'Agostino, Environmental Scientist, Attainment Planning and Maintenance Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886-1767, [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Throughout this document whenever “we,” “us,” or “our” is used, we mean EPA.

    I. What is being addressed in this document?

    This rule takes action on the June 16, 2016, submission from Ohio EPA requesting redesignation of the Columbus area to attainment for the 2008 ozone standard. The background for today's action is discussed in detail in EPA's proposal, dated September 28, 2016 (81 FR 66578). In that rulemaking, we noted that, under EPA regulations at 40 CFR part 50, the 2008 ozone NAAQS is attained in an area when the 3-year average of the annual fourth highest daily maximum 8-hour average concentration is equal to or less than 0.075 ppm, when truncated after the thousandth decimal place, at all of the ozone monitoring sites in the area. (See 40 CFR 50.15 and appendix P to 40 CFR part 50.) Under the CAA, EPA may redesignate nonattainment areas to attainment if sufficient complete, quality-assured data are available to determine that the area has attained the standard and if it meets the other CAA redesignation requirements in section 107(d)(3)(E). The proposed rule, dated September 28, 2016, provides a detailed discussion of how Ohio has met these CAA requirements.

    As discussed in the proposed rule, quality-assured and certified monitoring data for 2013-2015 and preliminary data for 2016 show that the Columbus area has attained and continues to attain the 2008 ozone standard. In the maintenance plan submitted for the area, Ohio has demonstrated that the ozone standard will be maintained in the area through 2030. Finally, Ohio has adopted 2020 and 2030 VOC and NOX MVEBs for the Columbus area that are supported by Ohio's maintenance demonstration.

    II. What comments did we receive on the proposed rule?

    EPA provided a 30-day review and comment period for the September 28, 2016, proposed rule. The comment period ended on October 28, 2016. During the comment period, comments in support of the action were submitted on behalf of the Ohio Utility Group and its member companies. We received no adverse comments on the proposed rule.

    III. What action is EPA taking?

    EPA is determining that the Columbus nonattainment area is attaining the 2008 ozone standard, based on quality-assured and certified monitoring data for 2013-2015 and that the Ohio portion of this area has met the requirements for redesignation under section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. EPA is thus changing the legal designation of the Columbus area from nonattainment to attainment for the 2008 ozone standard. EPA is also approving, as a revision to the Ohio SIP, the state's maintenance plan for the area. The maintenance plan is designed to keep the Columbus area in attainment of the 2008 ozone NAAQS through 2030. Finally, EPA finds adequate and is approving the newly-established 2020 and 2030 MVEBs for the Columbus area.

    In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(d), EPA finds there is good cause for these actions to become effective immediately upon publication. This is because a delayed effective date is unnecessary due to the nature of a redesignation to attainment, which relieves the area from certain CAA requirements that would otherwise apply to it. The immediate effective date for this action is authorized under both 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1), which provides that rulemaking actions may become effective less than 30 days after publication if the rule “grants or recognizes an exemption or relieves a restriction,” and section 553(d)(3), which allows an effective date less than 30 days after publication “as otherwise provided by the agency for good cause found and published with the rule.” The purpose of the 30-day waiting period prescribed in section 553(d) is to give affected parties a reasonable time to adjust their behavior and prepare before the final rule takes effect. Today's rule, however, does not create any new regulatory requirements such that affected parties would need time to prepare before the rule takes effect. Rather, today's rule relieves the state of planning requirements for this ozone nonattainment area. For these reasons, EPA finds good cause under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3) for these actions to become effective on the date of publication of these actions.

    IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, redesignation of an area to attainment and the accompanying approval of a maintenance plan under section 107(d)(3)(E) are actions that affect the status of a geographical area and do not impose any additional regulatory requirements on sources beyond those imposed by state law. A redesignation to attainment does not in and of itself create any new requirements, but rather results in the applicability of requirements contained in the CAA for areas that have been redesignated to attainment. Moreover, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that reason, this action:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    In addition, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land or in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, this rule does not have tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because redesignation is an action that affects the status of a geographical area and does not impose any new regulatory requirements on tribes, impact any existing sources of air pollution on tribal lands, nor impair the maintenance of ozone national ambient air quality standards in tribal lands.

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

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by February 21, 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. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)

    List of Subjects 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Oxides of nitrogen, Ozone, Volatile organic compounds.

    40 CFR Part 81

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, Air pollution control, Designations and classifications, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen oxides, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: December 5, 2016. Robert A. Kaplan, Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.

    Parts 52 and 81, chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations 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.

    2. Section 52.1885 is amended by adding paragraph (pp)(2) to read as follows:
    § 52.1885 Control strategy: Ozone.

    (pp) * * *

    (2) Approval—On June 16, 2016, the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency submitted a request to redesignate the Columbus area to attainment of the 2008 ozone NAAQS. As part of the redesignation request, the State submitted a maintenance plan as required by section 175A of the Clean Air Act. Elements of the section 175 maintenance plan include a contingency plan and an obligation to submit a subsequent maintenance plan revision in eight years as required by the Clean Air Act. The 2020 motor vehicle emissions budgets for the Columbus area are 50.66 tons per summer day (TPSD) for VOC and 90.54 TPSD for NOX. The 2030 motor vehicle emissions budgets for the Columbus area are 44.31 TPSD for VOC and 85.13 TPSD for NOX.

    PART 81—DESIGNATION OF AREAS FOR AIR QUALITY PLANNING PURPOSES 3. The authority citation for part 81 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    4. Section 81.336 is amended by revising the entry for Columbus, OH in the table entitled “Ohio—2008 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS (Primary and secondary)” to read as follows:
    § 81.336 Ohio. Ohio—2008—8-Hour Ozone NAAQS [Primary and secondary] Designated area Designation Date 1 Type Classification Date 1 Type *         *         *         *         *         *         * Columbus, OH: 2 Delaware County, Fairfield County, Franklin County, Knox County, Licking County, Madison County December 21, 2016 Attainment *         *         *         *         *         *         * 1 This date is July 20, 2012, unless otherwise noted. 2 Excludes Indian country located in each area, unless otherwise noted.
    [FR Doc. 2016-30470 Filed 12-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 750 [HQ-OPPT-2016-0525; FRL-9955-15] RIN 2070-AK28 Procedures for Rulemaking Under Section 6 of the Toxic Substances Control Act; Amendment AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    Section 6 of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) provides EPA with several authorities for addressing risks from chemical substances and includes procedures that EPA must follow in doing so. EPA promulgated regulations shortly after TSCA was enacted to implement the procedural requirements for rulemaking under TSCA section 6 as they existed at that time. TSCA was recently amended by the Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act. This final rule removes the regulations specifying certain procedural requirements for rulemaking under TSCA section 6, including the requirement for a hearing, because TSCA, as amended, no longer mandates those procedures.

    DATES:

    This final rule is effective December 21, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Cindy Wheeler, Chemical Control Division, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number: (202) 566-0484; email address: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. General Information A. What is the agency's authority for taking this action?

    The authority for this action is TSCA section 6, as amended by the Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act (15 U.S.C. 2605).

    Section 553 of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(A), provides that “rules of agency organization, procedure, or practice” are exempt from notice and comment requirements. This action involves revisions to the rules that set out the general rulemaking procedure for EPA under the prior version of TSCA, and the action does not affect the substance of any determinations EPA will make under the amended TSCA section 6. Accordingly, these revisions fall under the exemption provided in APA section 553(b)(3)(A), and the EPA is not taking comment on this action.

    B. Does this action apply to me?

    This action affects only Agency procedure in future rulemakings under TSCA section 6 and has no particular applicability to the public. If you have any questions regarding the applicability of this action, consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

    II. Background A. What action is the agency taking?

    This action removes 40 CFR part 750, subpart A (the general procedural requirements for rulemaking under TSCA section 6, including the requirement for a hearing). Subpart A detailed hearing-related procedures as well as the content and timing of EPA's notices and the Agency's record. This action also removes the similar provisions from the procedural rules in subparts B and C for exemptions from the prohibitions in TSCA section 6(e) applicable to polychlorinated biphenyls.

    TSCA, enacted in 1976, was intended to provide EPA with the tools necessary to develop information and manage risks associated with chemicals in commerce. TSCA section 6(a) requires EPA to take action to address unreasonable risks that EPA determines are presented by chemical substances or mixtures. Under TSCA section 6 as enacted in 1976, if EPA had a reasonable basis to conclude that the manufacture (including import), processing, distribution in commerce, use, or disposal of a chemical substance or mixture presented an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment, EPA would have to by rule apply requirements to the substance or mixture to the extent necessary to address the unreasonable risk using the least burdensome requirement. These requirements could include prohibitions or limitations on manufacturing processing, distribution in commerce, commercial use, or disposal; marking (labeling) requirements; and recordkeeping requirements. This section of TSCA also established certain procedures that EPA would have to follow in promulgating such rules. As enacted in 1976, TSCA section 6(c) required, among other things, that EPA provide the opportunity for an informal hearing and that EPA make certain findings and publish certain statements.

    EPA published final procedural regulations to implement the TSCA section 6 procedural requirements shortly thereafter in the Federal Register of December 2, 1977, (42 FR 61259). These procedural regulations, codified as 40 CFR part 750, are quite detailed with respect to the contents of Notices of Proposed Rulemaking, hearing procedures, the handling of public comments, and docketing of comments and other supporting materials. These procedural requirements for rulemaking under TSCA section 6 have been amended several times, most notably in 1978 to add interim procedural rules for filing and processing petitions for exemptions from the TSCA section 6(e) ban on the manufacture of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) (43 FR 50905, November 1, 1978), and in 1979 to add similar rules for petitions for exemptions from the TSCA section 6(e) bans on PCB processing and distribution in commerce (44 FR 31558, May 31, 1979).

    On June 22, 2016, the President signed the Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act into law. This legislation amends many sections of TSCA, including TSCA section 6. While the new law still directs EPA to take action against unreasonable risks presented by chemical substances or mixtures, EPA's duties under TSCA section 6 have been significantly modified to include specific deadlines and procedures for prioritizing chemicals for risk evaluations, conducting the risk evaluations and promulgating regulations to address unreasonable risks that are identified. Notably, once unreasonable risks have been identified through a risk evaluation, TSCA section 6(c)(1) now requires EPA to issue a proposed rule to address the risks no later than one year after the final risk evaluation is published, and the final rule must be issued no later than two years after the final risk evaluation is published, subject to the limited extension authorized by TSCA section 6(c)(1)(C).

    After reviewing 40 CFR part 750 in light of the amendments to TSCA, EPA has determined that the procedural regulations in subpart A do not facilitate the efficient administrative process envisioned by the Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act. Subpart A was principally promulgated to provide further details related to the informal hearing process under TSCA as originally enacted. However, with the statutory amendments' removal of the informal hearing requirement and addition of ambitious deadlines for action under section 6, subpart A is particularly outdated and no longer designed for effective implementation of section 6. To the extent subpart A simply reflected administrative requirements of TSCA and the Administrative Procedure Act, the current version of TSCA and the Administrative Procedure Act will continue to apply on their own terms, and section 6 of TSCA as amended prescribes considerably more procedure than the previous version of TSCA. To the extent subpart A goes beyond the current statutory requirements of such law, EPA believes that the layering of additional procedural requirements by regulation is both unnecessary to ensure a transparent rulemaking process with robust public participation and not well-suited to the rapid throughput required by the law. EPA also believes the requirements are in some respects outdated with respect to current technology. The remainder of this notice elaborates on these points.

    First, regarding the hearing-related provisions of 40 CFR part 750, TSCA section 6, as amended, no longer requires EPA to provide an opportunity for an informal hearing on a proposed rule. After TSCA was amended on June 22, 2016 and before this final rule, 40 CFR part 750 inaccurately referred to “the informal hearing required by section 6(c)(2)(C) of TSCA” when, in fact, TSCA section 6 no longer requires EPA to provide an opportunity for informal hearing and TSCA section 6(c)(2)(C) in particular now refers to another topic. Given that EPA is no longer required to provide an opportunity for an informal hearing on a proposed rule under TSCA section 6, and that the statutory citations in the hearing-related regulations are no longer correct, much of 40 CFR part 750 is no longer needed or appropriate.

    Moreover, by establishing a two-year deadline for final rules after unreasonable risks are identified through risk evaluation, Congress expressed an intention for EPA to move relatively quickly to address unreasonable risks. Although Congress also established a limited process by which EPA could extend this deadline, EPA does not believe that Congress intended for extended deadlines to be a routine occurrence. The cumbersome nature of the informal hearing-related provisions established in 40 CFR part 750 would make it difficult for EPA to meet the newly-established rulemaking deadlines.

    Yet EPA does not interpret the removal of the hearing requirement as an indication that reduced public input is desired. To the contrary, the amended TSCA section 6 specifically requires public comment periods at several stages during the chemical prioritization, risk evaluation, and risk management processes. EPA interprets the removal of the informal hearing requirement as being motivated by Congressional intent to simplify and thereby quicken the pace of TSCA section 6 rulemaking, considering the establishment of new rulemaking deadlines and the manner in which the tools for managing EPA's administrative rulemaking process have evolved over the 40 years since TSCA was enacted (e.g., the advent of electronic commenting). Under the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 553), EPA must give interested persons an opportunity to participate in a legislative rulemaking by submitting written comments. In addition, for existing chemicals under TSCA, EPA often holds public meetings in order to solicit oral comments as well as written comments.

    Next, while EPA must still consider and publish a statement on certain factors when promulgating a rule under TSCA section 6(a), the factors have changed. For example, TSCA section 6(c) as originally enacted required EPA to consider and publish a statement with respect to the availability of substitutes for various uses of a chemical substance or mixture. TSCA section 6(c) as amended requires EPA to, in deciding whether to prohibit or restrict a chemical substance or mixture in a manner that substantially prevents a specific condition of use, and in setting an appropriate transition period for such chemical substance or mixture, consider, to the extent practicable, whether technically and economically feasible alternatives that benefit health or the environment will be reasonably available as a substitute when the proposed prohibition or other restriction takes effect. Therefore, EPA is removing the outdated specification of the content and timing of EPA notices in 40 CFR part 750, subpart A, and instead EPA's notices in future section 6 rulemakings will conform to TSCA as amended.

    As EPA noted in 1987 (52 FR 23054), the initiation of a section 6 proceeding could be by proposed rule, advance notice of proposed rulemaking, or notice of other appropriate action. The agency is not changing its position on this matter by removing 40 CFR 750.2(a). As the agency stated previously, “Federal courts have acknowledged that rulemaking commences before the publication of a notice of proposed rulemaking. See, for example, Natural Resources Defense Council v. EPA, 595 F. Supp. 1255 (S.D.N.Y. 1984), where the court found that EPA may use an ANPR to initiate a rulemaking proceeding under section 4 of TSCA.” Therefore, the provision regarding when a proceeding begins does not need to be codified in the CFR.

    Lastly, modern electronic tools and remote conferencing were not available when TSCA was enacted nor when procedural requirements under 40 CFR part 750 regarding Agency records were promulgated by EPA. EPA believes that it is now reasonable and prudent to use its information resources, including information technology, to establish an electronic record to contain rulemaking documents being considered and public comments submitted, a possibility not anticipated by the outdated record provisions. Consistent with TSCA section 2's expression of Congressional intent that EPA carry out TSCA in a reasonable and prudent manner, and in consideration of the environmental, economic, and social impacts that any action taken under TSCA may have, (15 U.S.C. 2601), electronic correspondence can reduce burden and costs for the regulated entities by eliminating the costs associated with printing and mailing documents, and traveling to hearings, while at the same time improving EPA's efficiency in reviewing public comments, making decisions, and disseminating information to the public.

    Therefore, after considering the points discussed earlier in this notice, EPA is removing the general TSCA section 6 procedural requirements contained in subpart A of 40 CFR part 750. EPA is not making any changes to the procedures contained in subparts B and C of 40 CFR part 750 for petitions for exemptions from the prohibitions in TSCA section 6(e), other than to remove references to the informal hearing-related procedures as well as the content and timing of EPA's notices and the Agency's record corresponding to the removal of subpart A.

    III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Additional information about these statutes and Executive Orders can be found at http://www2.epa.gov/laws-regulations/laws-and-executive-orders.

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

    This action is not a significant regulatory action and was therefore not submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review under Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011).

    B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)

    This action does not contain any information collection activities that require approval under the PRA, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. This rulemaking removes unnecessary internal EPA procedures and does not impose any requirements on the public.

    C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

    This action is not subject to the RFA, 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq. The RFA applies only to rules subject to notice and comment rulemaking requirements under the APA, 5 U.S.C. 553, or any other statute.

    D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

    E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    This action does not have federalism implications as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). 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 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because it merely removes procedural requirements that the Agency must follow when conducting rulemaking under TSCA section 6. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this action.

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

    EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), as applying only to those regulatory actions that concern environmental health or safety risks that the EPA has reason to believe may disproportionately affect children, per the definition of “covered regulatory action” in section 2-202 of the Executive Order. This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it does not concern an environmental health risk or safety risk.

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

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001), because it is not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.

    I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)

    This rulemaking does not involve any technical standards, and is therefore not subject to considerations under NTTAA section 12(d), 15 U.S.C. 272 note.

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

    This action does not establish an environmental health or safety standard, and is therefore not is not subject to environmental justice considerations under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994), because it does not establish an environmental health or safety standard. This regulatory action is a procedural change and does not have any impact on human health or the environment.

    K. Congressional Review Act (CRA)

    This rule is exempt from the CRA (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.) because it is a rule of agency organization, procedure or practice that does not substantially affect the rights or obligations of non-agency parties.

    List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 750

    Administrative practice and procedure, Chemicals, Environmental protection, Hazardous substances.

    Dated: December 8, 2016. Gina McCarthy, Administrator.

    Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:

    PART 750—PROCEDURES FOR RULEMAKING UNDER SECTION 6 OF THE TOXIC SUBSTANCES CONTROL ACT [AMENDED] 1. The authority citation for part 750 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    15 U.S.C. 2605.

    Subpart A—[Removed and Reserved] 2. Subpart A, consisting of §§ 750.1 through 750.9 and an appendix, is removed and reserved. 3. Revise § 750.10 to read as follows:
    § 750.10 Applicability

    Sections 750.10-750.15 apply to all rulemakings under authority of section 6(e)(3)(B) of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), 15 U.S.C. 2605(e)(3)(B) with respect to petitions filed pursuant to § 750.11(a).

    4. Revise § 750.13 to read as follows:
    § 750.13 Notice of proposed rulemaking.

    Rulemaking for PCB exemptions filed pursuant to § 750.11(a) shall begin with the publication of a notice of proposed rulemaking in the Federal Register. The notice shall state in summary form the required information described in § 750.11(c). Due to time constraints, the notice need not indicate what action EPA proposes to take on the exemption petitions.

    §§ 750.14 and 750.15 [Removed]
    5. Remove §§ 750.14 and 750.15.
    § 750.16 [Redesignated as § 750.14]
    6. Redesignate § 750.16 as § 750.14.
    §§ 750.17 through 750.20 [Removed]
    7. Remove §§ 750.17 through 750.20.
    §§ 750.21 [Redesignated as § 750.15]
    8. Redesignate § 750.21 as § 750.15, and revise it to read as follows:
    § 750.15 Final rule.

    (a) [Reserved]

    (b) EPA will grant or deny petitions under TSCA section 6(e)(3)(B) submitted pursuant to § 750.11.

    (c) In determining whether to grant an exemption to the PCB ban, the Agency shall apply the two standards enunciated in TSCA section 6(e)(3)(B).

    9. Revise § 750.30 to read as follows:
    § 750.30 Applicability

    Sections 750.30 through 750.35 apply to all rulemakings under authority of section 6(e)(3)(B) of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), 15 U.S.C. 2605(e)(3)(B) with respect to petitions for PCB processing and distribution in commerce exemptions filed pursuant to § 750.31(a).

    10. Revise § 750.33 to read as follows:
    § 750.33 Notice of proposed rulemaking.

    Rulemaking for PCB exemptions filed pursuant to § 750.31(a) shall begin with the publication of a notice of proposed rulemaking in the Federal Register. The notice shall state in summary form the required information described in § 750.31(c).

    §§ 750.34 and 750.35 [Removed]
    11. Remove §§ 750.34 and 750.35.
    § 750.36 [Redesignated as § 750.34]
    12. Redesignate § 750.36 as § 750.34.
    §§ 750.37 through 750.40 [Removed]
    13. Remove §§ 750.37 through 750.40.
    § 750.41 [Redesignated as § 750.35]
    14. Redesignate § 750.41 as § 750.35, and revise it to read as follows:
    § 750.35 Final rule.

    (a) [Reserved]

    (b) EPA will grant or deny petitions under TSCA section 6(e)(3)(B) submitted pursuant to § 750.31.

    (c) In determining whether to grant an exemption to the PCB ban, EPA will apply the two standards enunciated in TSCA section 6(e)(3)(B).

    [FR Doc. 2016-30055 Filed 12-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services 42 CFR Part 414 [CMS-6072-N] Medicare Program; Implementation of Prior Authorization Process for Certain Durable Medical Equipment, Prosthetics, Orthotics, and Supplies (DMEPOS) Items and Publication of the Initial Required Prior Authorization List of DMEPOS Items That Require Prior Authorization as a Condition of Payment AGENCY:

    Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), HHS.

    ACTION:

    Implementation of list and phases.

    SUMMARY:

    This document announces the implementation of the prior authorization program for certain durable medical equipment, prosthetics, orthotics, and supplies (DMEPOS) items in two phases and the issuance of the initial Required Prior Authorization List of DMEPOS items that require prior authorization as a condition of payment.

    DATES:

    Phase one of implementation is effective on March 20, 2017. Phase two of implementation is effective on July 17, 2017.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Jennifer Phillips, (410) 786-1023. Linda O'Hara (410) 786-8347. Scott Lawrence (410) 786-4313. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background

    Sections 1832, 1834, and 1861 of the Social Security Act (the Act) establish that the provision of durable medical equipment, prosthetic, orthotics, and supplies (DMEPOS) is a covered benefit under Part B of the Medicare program.

    Section 1834(a)(15) of the Act authorizes the Secretary to develop and periodically update a list of DMEPOS items that the Secretary determines, on the basis of prior payment experience, are frequently subject to unnecessary utilization and to develop a prior authorization process for these items.

    In the December 30, 2015 final rule (80 FR 81674), titled “Medicare Program; Prior Authorization Process for Certain Durable Medical Equipment, Prosthetics, Orthotics, and Supplies”, we implemented section 1834(a)(15) of the Act by establishing an initial Master List (called the Master List of Items Frequently Subject to Unnecessary Utilization) of certain DMEPOS that the Secretary determined, on the basis of prior payment experience, are frequently subject to unnecessary utilization and by establishing a prior authorization process for these items. The Master List is self-updating annually, and items remain on the Master List for 10 years from the date the item was added to the Master List. Items are removed from the list sooner than 10 years if the purchase amount drops below the payment threshold described later in this section. We will notify the public annually of any additions and deletions from the Master List by posting the notification in the Federal Register and on the CMS Prior Authorization Web site. The Master List includes items that meet the following criteria:

    ++ Appear on the DMEPOS Fee Schedule list.

    ++ Have an average purchase fee of $1,000 or greater (adjusted annually for inflation) or an average monthly rental fee schedule of $100 or greater (adjusted annually for inflation). (These dollar amounts are referred to as the payment threshold).

    ++ Meet either of the following criteria:

    —Identified in a Government Accountability Office (GAO) or Department of Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General (OIG) report that is national in scope and published in 2007 or later as having a high rate of fraud or unnecessary utilization.

    —Listed in the 2011 or later Comprehensive Error Rate Testing (CERT) program's Annual Medicare Fee-For-Service (FFS) Improper Payment Rate Report and/or the Supplementary Appendices for the Medicare Fee-for-Service Improper Payments Report.

    II. Provisions of the Document

    In the December 30, 2015 final rule (80 FR 81689), we stated that we would inform the public of those DMEPOS items on the Required Prior Authorization List in the Federal Register with 60-day notice before implementation. The Required Prior Authorization List specified in § 414.234(c)(1) is selected from the Master List of Items Frequently Subject to Unnecessary Utilization (as described in § 414.234(b)(1)), and items on the Required Prior Authorization List require prior authorization as a condition of payment. Additionally, we stated that CMS may elect to limit the prior authorization requirement to a particular region of the country if claims data analysis shows that unnecessary utilization of the selected item(s) is concentrated in a particular region. The purpose of this document is to inform the public that we are implementing the prior authorization program for certain DMEPOS items and to provide the initial Required Prior Authorization List of DMEPOS items that require prior authorization as a condition of payment. To assist stakeholders in preparing for implementation of the prior authorization program, CMS is providing 90 days' notice.

    The following two DMEPOS items, represented by HCPCS (Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System) codes K0856 and K0861 are added to the Required Prior Authorization List:

    • K0856 HCPCS: Power wheelchair, group 3 standard, single power option, sling/solid seat/back, patient weight capacity up to and including 300 pounds.

    • K0861 HCPCS: Power wheelchair, group 3 standard, multiple power option, sling/solid seat/back, patient weight capacity up to and including 300 pounds.

    Power wheelchairs, represented by HCPCS codes K0856 and K0861, will be subject to the requirements of the prior authorization program for certain DMEPOS items as outlined in § 414.234. (We note that these Group 3 power wheelchairs are not part of the separate Prior Authorization of Power Mobility Devices (PMDs) Demonstration.)

    We will implement a national prior authorization program for K0856 and K0861 in two phases, as specified in the DATES section of this document. We are implementing the program in this manner to test the new prior authorization program because new complex claims processing systems changes are required for implementation. This phased-in approach will allow us to identify and resolve any unforeseen issues by using a smaller claim volume in phase one before national implementation occurs in phase two.

    In phase one of implementation, which begins as specified in the DATES section of this document, we will limit the prior authorization requirement to one state in each of the four DME Medicare Administrative Contractors (MAC) geographic jurisdictions, as follows: Illinois, Missouri, New York, and West Virginia. Initially limiting the program to one state in each of the DME MAC geographic jurisdictions allows us to test the national claims processing system and the local DME MAC processes. In phase two, which begins as specified in the DATES section of this document, we will expand the program to the remaining states.

    Prior to furnishing the item to the beneficiary and prior to submitting the claim for processing, a requester must submit a prior authorization request that includes evidence that the item complies with all applicable Medicare coverage, coding, and payment rules. Consistent with § 414.234(d), such evidence must include the order, relevant information from the beneficiary's medical record, and relevant supplier-produced documentation. After receipt of all applicable required Medicare documentation, CMS or one of its review contractors will conduct a medical review and communicate a decision that provisionally affirms or non-affirms the request.

    We will issue specific prior authorization guidance in subregulatory communications, including final timelines, which are customized for the DMEPOS item subject to prior authorization, for communicating a provisionally affirmed or non-affirmed decision to the requester. In the December 30, 2015 final rule, we stated that this approach to final timelines provides flexibility to develop a process that involves fewer days, as may be appropriate, and allows us to safeguard beneficiary access to care. If at any time we become aware that the prior authorization process is creating barriers to care, we can suspend the program.

    III. Collection of Information Requirements

    This document does not impose information collection requirements, that is, reporting, recordkeeping or third-party disclosure requirements. Consequently, there is no need for review by the Office of Management and Budget under the authority of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).

    Dated: December 1, 2016. Andrew M. Slavitt, Acting Administrator, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. [FR Doc. 2016-30273 Filed 12-19-16; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE 4120-01-P
    FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 47 CFR Parts 1, 8, and 20 [GN Docket No. 14-28; FCC 15-24] Protecting and Promoting the Open Internet AGENCY:

    Federal Communications Commission.

    ACTION:

    Final rule; announcement of applicability date.

    SUMMARY:

    In this document, the Commission announces that the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has approved, for a period of three years for fixed broadband Internet access service (3060-1158) and for a period of two years for mobile broadband Internet access service (3060-1220), the information collections associated with the transparency rule enhancements adopted by the Commission in Protecting and Promoting the Open Internet, Report and Order on Remand, Declaratory Ruling, and Order (Open Internet Order). On August 11, 2015, the Commission requested approval of a modified information collection to include the transparency rule enhancements. OMB has approved the information collection as it applies to fixed broadband Internet access service for a period of three years (3060-1158) and, except for disclosure of packet loss, as it applies to mobile broadband Internet access service for a period of two years (3060-1220). The Open Internet Order stated that the Commission would publish a document in the Federal Register announcing the effective of the modified information collection requirements associated with the enhancements following OMB approval.

    DATES:

    The modified information collection requirements contained in paragraphs 164, 166, 167, 169, 173, 174, 179, 180, and 181, published at 80 FR 19737, April 13, 2015, are applicable January 17, 2017 for fixed broadband Internet access service. The modified information collection requirements, except for disclosure of packet loss, contained in paragraphs 164, 166, 167, 169, 173, 174, 179, 180, and 181, published at 80 FR 19737, April 13, 2015, are applicable January 17, 2017 for mobile broadband Internet access service.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    John B. Adams, Consumer Policy Division, Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau, at (202) 418-2854, or email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This document announces that, on December 15, 2016, OMB approved, for a period of three years, the information collection requirements relating to the enhancements to the transparency rule in paragraphs 164, 166, 167, 169, 173, 174, 179, 180, and 181 of the Commission's Open Internet Order, GN Docket No. 14-28, FCC 15-24, published at 80 FR 19737, April 13, 2015 applicable to fixed broadband Internet access service. The OMB Control Number is 3060-1158. This document also announces that, on December 15, 2016, OMB approved, for a period of two years, the information collection requirements relating to the enhancements to the transparency rule, except for disclosure of packet loss, in paragraphs 164, 166, 167, 169, 173, 174, 179, 180, and 181 of the Commission's Open Internet Order, GN Docket No. 14-28, FCC 15-24, published at 80 FR 19737, April 13, 2015 applicable to mobile broadband Internet access service. The OMB Control Number is 3060-1220. The Commission sought public comment on the associated burden estimates on May 20, 2015 (80 FR 29000) and on August 11, 2016 (81 FR 53145). The Commission publishes this document as an announcement of the applicability date of the enhancements. If you have any comments on the burden estimates listed below, or how the Commission can improve the collections and reduce any burdens caused thereby, please contact Cathy Williams, Federal Communications Commission, Room 1-C823, 445 12th Street SW., Washington, DC 20554. Please include the OMB Control Numbers, 3060-1158 and 3060-1220, in your correspondence. The Commission will also accept your comments via email at [email protected]

    To request materials in accessible formats for people with disabilities (Braille, large print, electronic files, audio format), send an email to [email protected] or call the Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau at (202) 418-0530 (voice), (202) 418-0432 (TTY).

    Synopsis

    As required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507), the FCC is notifying the public that it received final OMB approval on December 15, 2016, for the information collection requirements relating to the enhancements to the transparency rule contained in paragraphs 164, 166, 167, 169, 173, 174, 179, 180, and 181 of the Commission's Open Internet Order applicable to fixed broadband Internet access service. The FCC also is notifying the public that it received final OMB approval on December 15, 2016, for the information collection requirements relating to the enhancements to the transparency rule, except for disclosure of packet loss, contained in paragraphs 164, 166, 167, 169, 173, 174, 179, 180, and 181 of the Commission's Open Internet Order applicable to mobile broadband Internet access service.

    During OMB's review of the modified information collection, it determined that the mobile broadband disclosures were at a different stage than the fixed broadband disclosures and should therefore be approved for two years, with conditions, rather than the three year approval, without conditions, for fixed broadband. OMB therefore issued Control No. 3060-1220 for Transparency Rule Disclosures, Protecting and Promoting the Open Internet, Report and Order on Remand, Declaratory Ruling, and Order, GN Docket No. 14-28, FCC 15-24 (Mobile Broadband Disclosures) and Control No. 3060-1158 for Transparency Rule Disclosures, Protecting and Promoting the Open Internet, Report and Order on Remand, Declaratory Ruling, and Order, GN Docket No. 14-28, FCC 15-24 (Fixed Broadband Disclosures). Although there is a separate collection for mobile broadband disclosures, the FCC is reporting an identical burden estimate for the calculation and disclosure of broadband performance data by both fixed and mobile broadband providers, which was subject to public review and comment. Under 5 CFR 1320, an agency may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless it displays a current, valid OMB Control Number.

    No person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act that does not display a current, valid OMB Control Number. The OMB Control Number for fixed broadband Internet access service is 3060-1158. The OMB Control Number for mobile broadband Internet access service is 3060-1220.

    The foregoing notice is required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13, October 1, 1995, and 44 U.S.C. 3507.

    The total annual reporting burdens and costs for the respondents are as follows:

    OMB Control Numbers: 3060-1158 (fixed broadband) and 3060-1220 (mobile broadband).

    OMB Approval Date: December 15, 2016.

    OMB Expiration Date: December 31, 2019 for fixed broadband Internet access service; December 31, 2018 for mobile broadband Internet access service.

    Title: Transparency Rule Disclosures, Protecting and Promoting the Open Internet, Report and Order on Remand, Declaratory Ruling, and Order, GN Docket No. 14-28, FCC 15-24.

    Form Number: N/A.

    Respondents: Businesses or other for-profit entities; Not-for profit entities; State, local or tribal governments.

    Number of Respondents and Responses: 3,188 respondents; 3,188 responses.

    Estimated Time per Response: 31.2 hours (average).

    Frequency of Response: On occasion reporting requirement; Third party disclosure requirement.

    Obligation to Respond: Mandatory. The statutory authority for this information collection is contained in sections 1, 2, 3, 4, 10, 201, 202, 301, 303, 316, 332, 403, 501, 503 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, and section 706 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, as amended, and 47 U.S.C. 151, 152, 153, 154, 160, 201, 202, 301, 303, 316, 332, 403, 501, 503, and 1302.

    Total Annual Burden: 99,466 hours.

    Total Annual Cost: $640,000.

    Nature and Extent of Confidentiality: An assurance of confidentiality is not offered because this information collection does not require the collection of personally identifiable information (PII) from individuals.

    Privacy Act: No impact(s).

    Needs and Uses: The Commission's transparency rule for providers of broadband Internet access service require all providers of broadband Internet access service to publicly disclose accurate information regarding the network management practices, performance, and commercial terms of their broadband Internet access services sufficient for consumers to make informed choices regarding use of such services and for content, application, service, and device providers to develop, market, and maintain Internet offerings. The rules ensure transparency and continued Internet openness, while making clear that broadband providers can manage their networks effectively. The enhancements to the transparency rule adopted in the Open Internet Order will better enable end-user consumers to make informed choices about broadband services by providing them with timely information tailored more specifically to their needs, and will similarly provide edge providers with the information necessary to develop new content, applications, services, and devices that promote the virtuous cycle of investment and innovation. The Commission anticipates that small entities may have less of a burden, and larger entities may have more of a burden than the average compliance burden. This is because larger entities serve more customers, are more likely to serve multiple geographic regions, and are not eligible to avail themselves of the temporary exemption from the enhancements granted to smaller providers.

    Federal Communications Commission. Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-30766 Filed 12-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service 50 CFR Part 17 [Docket No. FWS-HQ-ES-2016-0126; FXES11130900000 167 FF09E42000] RIN 1018-BB80 Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Identification of 14 Distinct Population Segments of the Humpback Whale and Revision of Species-Wide Listing AGENCY:

    Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), in accordance with the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act), are amending the List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife (List) by removing the current species-level listing of the humpback whale (Megaptera novaeangliae), and in its place listing the Cape Verde Islands/Northwest Africa, Western North Pacific, Central America, and Arabian Sea distinct population segments (DPSs) as endangered and the Mexico DPS as threatened. Humpback whales in the remaining DPSs will no longer be protected under the Act. This amendment is based on a previously published determination by the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Department of Commerce, which has jurisdiction for this species.

    DATES:

    This rule is effective December 21, 2016. Applicability date: The revised listings were applicable as of October 11, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Don Morgan, Chief, Branch of Recovery and State Grants, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, MS-ES, 5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041-3803; 703-358-2171.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background

    In accordance with the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) and Reorganization Plan No. 4 of 1970 (35 FR 15627; October 6, 1970), NMFS has jurisdiction over the marine taxa identified in this rule. Under section 4(a)(2) of the Act, NMFS must decide whether a species under its jurisdiction should be classified as an endangered or threatened species. NMFS makes these determinations via its rulemaking process. We, the Service, are then responsible for publishing final rules to amend the Lists of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants (Lists) in title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) at 50 CFR 17.11(h) and 17.12(h), respectively.

    Under section 4(a)(2)(A) of the Act, if NMFS determines that a species should be listed as endangered or threatened, or that a species' status should be changed from threatened to endangered, then NMFS is required to inform the Service of the status change. The Service is then responsible for implementing the status change by publishing a final rule to amend the appropriate List at 50 CFR 17.11(h) or 17.12(h). Under section 4(a)(2)(B) of the Act, if NMFS determines that a species should be removed from the List (delisted), or that a species' status should be changed from an endangered to a threatened species, then NMFS is required to recommend the status change to the Service. If the Service concurs with the recommended status change, then the Service will implement the status change by publishing a final rule to amend the appropriate List.

    On April 21, 2015, NMFS published a proposed rule (80 FR 22304) to remove the species-level listing of the humpback whale (Megaptera novaeangliae) from 50 CFR part 224 and in its place list the Cape Verde Islands/Northwest Africa and Arabian Sea DPSs as endangered (at 50 CFR part 224) and the Western North Pacific and Central America DPSs as threatened (at 50 CFR part 223). NMFS solicited public comments on the proposed rule for 90 days, ending July 20, 2015. On September 8, 2016, NMFS published a final rule (81 FR 62260) to list the Cape Verde Islands/Northwest Africa, Western North Pacific, Central America, and Arabian Sea DPSs as endangered and the Mexico DPS as threatened. As of the effective date of NMFS' rule (October 11, 2016), the humpback whales that make up the remaining nine DPSs identified in the rule are no longer listed under the Act.

    The removal of the species-level listing and the listing of the five humpback whale DPSs were applicable as of October 11, 2016. In the September 8, 2016, final rule (81 FR 62260), NMFS addressed all public comments received in response to the proposed rule. NMFS reconsidered its proposals with regard to the Western North Pacific, Mexico, and Central America DPSs, listing the Western North Pacific and Central America DPSs as endangered instead of threatened as proposed and listing the Mexico DPS as threatened instead of not listing it.

    For the Western North Pacific DPS, NMFS considered the relatively low, slightly revised abundance estimate (1,059 instead of 1,100); the moderate reduction of its population size or growth rate likely from energy development, competition with fisheries, whaling, and vessel collisions; the serious reduction of its population size or growth rate likely from fishing gear entanglements; and the considerable uncertainty reflected in the distribution of Biological Review Team (BRT) votes in assigning extinction risk categories.

    For the Mexico DPS, NMFS considered the revised abundance estimate that is significantly lower than previously thought (3,264 instead of 6,000-7,000) and the presence of the known fishing gear entanglement threat of moderate intensity.

    For the Central America DPS, NMFS considered the original low abundance estimate of 500-600 (which was at the dividing line between BRT risk categories) and the more recently updated estimate of 411 (which is below the BRT's threshold of 500 between “high risk of extinction” and “moderate risk of extinction”), the fact that the moderate threats of vessel collisions and fishing gear entanglement continue to act upon a population that is so small, and the considerable uncertainty reflected in the distribution of BRT votes for different extinction risk categories.

    As discussed under the Status Review section of NMFS' final rule (see 81 FR 62261-62262; September 8, 2016), the BRT considered abundance and trend information carefully in evaluating extinction risk, but abundance was not the sole criterion for evaluating extinction risk. The thresholds described by the BRT were only general guidelines, and NMFS was required to consider them in light of the considerations just outlined. Under these circumstances, for these particular DPSs, the extinction risk is compounded by the lack of information on the population abundance trends. NMFS concluded that the Western North Pacific and Central America DPSs are in danger of extinction throughout their ranges and the Mexico DPS is likely to become endangered throughout its range within the foreseeable future.

    Because humpback whales that make up some of the identified DPSs of humpback whale will no longer be protected under the Act and whales in one DPS are considered threatened rather than endangered, both section 4(a)(2)(A) and section 4(a)(2)(B) of the Act apply to our responsibility to implement the status changes by publishing a final rule to amend the List at 50 CFR 17.11(h).

    In a September 6, 2016, memorandum (Memorandum from Gary Frazer to Donna Wieting, September 6, 2016), per section 4(a)(2)(B), we concur with NMFS's recommendation that humpback whales in nine DPSs are no longer endangered or threatened species and that whales in the Mexico DPS are now a threatened species rather than an endangered species. By publishing this final rule, we are taking the necessary administrative step to codify these changes in the List at 50 CFR 17.11(h).

    Administrative Procedure Act

    Because NMFS provided a public comment period on the proposed rule for the humpback whale, and we concur with NMFS' actions, we find good cause that the notice and public comment procedures of 5 U.S.C. 553(b) are unnecessary for this action. We also find good cause under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3) to make this rule effective immediately. The NMFS rule (81 FR 62260; September 8, 2016) revised the listing status of the humpback whale, extending protection under the Act to five DPSs and listing them at 50 CFR parts 223 and 224; this rule is an administrative action to add those DPSs to the List at 50 CFR 17.11(h). The public would not be served by delaying the effective date of this rulemaking action.

    Required Determinations National Environmental Policy Act

    We have determined that an environmental assessment, as defined under the authority of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), need not be prepared in connection with regulations adopted pursuant to section 4(a) of the Act. We outlined our reasons for this determination in the Federal Register on October 25, 1983 (48 FR 49244).

    List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17

    Endangered and threatened species, Exports, Imports, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Transportation.

    Regulation Promulgation

    Accordingly, we amend part 17, subchapter B of chapter I, title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations, as set forth below:

    PART 17—ENDANGERED AND THREATENED WILDLIFE AND PLANTS 1. The authority citation for part 17 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    16 U.S.C. 1361-1407; 1531-1544; and 4201-4245, unless otherwise noted.

    2. Amend § 17.11(h), the List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife, under MAMMALS, by: a. Removing the entry for “Whale, humpback”; and b. Adding entries, in alphabetical order, for “Whale, humpback [Arabian Sea DPS]”; “Whale, humpback [Cape Verde Islands/Northwest Africa DPS]”; “Whale, humpback [Central America DPS]”; “Whale, humpback [Mexico DPS]”; and “Whale, humpback [Western North Pacific DPS]”, to read as follows:
    § 17.11 Endangered and threatened wildlife.

    (h) * * *

    Common name Scientific name Where listed Status Listing citations and applicable rules Whale, humpback [Arabian Sea DPS] Megaptera novaeangliae Arabian Sea DPS—see 50 CFR 224.101 E 35 FR 8491; 6/2/1970, 35 FR 18319; 12/2/1970, 81 FR 62260; 9/8/2016N, 81 FR [Insert Federal Register page where the document begins], 12/21/2016. Whale, humpback [Cape Verde Islands/Northwest Africa DPS] Megaptera novaeangliae Cape Verde Islands/Northwest Africa DPS—see 50 CFR 224.101 E 35 FR 8491; 6/0/1970, 35 FR 18319; 12/2/1970, 81 FR 62260; 9/8/2016N, 81 FR [Insert Federal Register page where the document begins], 12/21/2016. Whale, humpback [Central America DPS] Megaptera novaeangliae Central America DPS—see 50 CFR 224.101 E 35 FR 8491; 6/2/1970, 35 FR 18319; 12/2/1970, 81 FR 62260; 9/8/2016N, 81 FR [Insert Federal Register page where the document begins], 12/21/2016. Whale, humpback [Mexico DPS] Megaptera novaeangliae Mexico DPS—see 50 CFR 223.102 T 35 FR 8491; 6/2/1970, 35 FR 18319; 12/2/1970, 81 FR 62260; 9/8/2016N, 81 FR [Insert Federal Register page where the document begins], 12/21/2016,
  • 50 CFR 223.213
  • 50 CFR 223.214.
  • Whale, humpback [Western North Pacific DPS] Megaptera novaeangliae Western North Pacific DPS—see 50 CFR 224.101 E 35 FR 8491; 6/2/1970, 35 FR 18319; 12/2/1970, 81 FR 62260; 9/8/2016N, 81 FR [Insert Federal Register page where the document begins], 12/21/2016,
  • 50 CFR 224.103.
  • Dated: December 5, 2016. Stephen Guertin, Acting Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
    [FR Doc. 2016-30483 Filed 12-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4333-15-P
    81 245 Wednesday, December 21, 2016 Proposed Rules DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Agricultural Marketing Service 7 CFR Part 929 [Doc. No. AMS-SC-16-0041; SC16-929-1] Cranberries Grown in the States of Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New Jersey, Wisconsin, Michigan, Minnesota, Oregon, Washington, and Long Island in the State of New York; Proposed Amendment to Marketing Order 929 and Referendum Order AGENCY:

    Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA.

    ACTION:

    Proposed rule and Referendum Order.

    SUMMARY:

    This rule proposes an amendment to Marketing Order No. 929 (order), which regulates the handling of cranberries grown in the states of Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New Jersey, Wisconsin, Michigan, Minnesota, Oregon, Washington, and Long Island in the State of New York. The amendment is based on a proposal made by the Cranberry Marketing Committee (Committee), which is responsible for the local administration of the order. The amendment would authorize the Committee to receive and expend voluntary contributions from domestic sources. Contributed funds would be used solely for research and development activities authorized under the order and would be free from any encumbrances as to their usage by the donor.

    DATES:

    The referendum will be conducted from January 23, 2017 through February 13, 2017. The representative period for the purpose of the referendum is September 1, 2015 through August 31, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

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

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

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This proposal is issued under Marketing Order and Agreement No. 929, as amended (7 CFR part 929), regulating the handling of cranberries grown in the states of Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New Jersey, Wisconsin, Michigan, Minnesota, Oregon, Washington, and Long Island in the State of New York. The order is effective under the Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act of 1937, as amended (7 U.S.C. 601-674), hereinafter referred to as the “Act.” Section 608c(17) of the Act and the applicable rules of practice and procedure governing the formulation of marketing agreements and orders (7 CFR part 900) authorizes amendment of the order through this informal rulemaking action.

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

    This proposal has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform. This rule is not intended to have retroactive effect. This rule shall not be deemed to preclude, preempt, or supersede any State programs covering cranberries grown in the production area unless they present an irreconcilable conflict with this rule.

    The Act provides that administrative proceedings must be exhausted before parties may file suit in court. Under section 608c(15)(A) of the Act, any handler subject to an order may file with USDA a petition stating that the order, any provision of the order, or any obligation imposed in connection with the order is not in accordance with law and request a modification of the order or to be exempted therefrom. A handler is afforded the opportunity for a hearing on the petition. After the hearing, USDA would rule on the petition. The Act provides that the district court of the United States in any district in which the handler is an inhabitant, or has his or her principal place of business, has jurisdiction to review USDA's ruling on the petition, provided an action is filed no later than 20 days after the date of entry of the ruling.

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

    AMS has considered these factors and has determined that the amendment proposed is not unduly complex and the nature of the proposed amendment is appropriate for utilizing the informal rulemaking process to amend the order.

    The proposed amendment was unanimously recommended by the Committee following deliberations at a public meeting held August 17-18, 2015.

    A proposed rule soliciting comments on the proposed amendment was issued on July 27, 2016, and published in the Federal Register on August 4, 2016 (81 FR 51383). No comments were received. AMS will conduct a producer referendum to determine support for the proposed amendment. If appropriate, a final rule will then be issued to effectuate the amendment favored by producers in the referendum.

    The Committee's proposed amendment would amend the marketing order by authorizing the Committee to receive and expend voluntary contributions from domestic sources for research and development activities.

    Proposal—Voluntary Contributions

    This proposal would add a new section, § 929.43, Contributions, to the order. If implemented, this section would authorize the Committee to accept voluntary financial contributions. Such contributions could only be accepted from domestic sources and would be free from any restrictions on their use by the donor. When received, the Committee would retain complete control of their use. The use of contributed funds would be limited to funding program activities authorized under § 929.45, Research and development.

    Currently, program operations are solely financed through assessments collected from handlers regulated under the order. Sources not subject to the order have expressed an interest in supporting many of the research and development projects currently funded by the order. However, without the ability to accept financial contributions, the Committee has had to decline these offers. This proposal would provide authority to accept financial contributions. With the potential for additional funding, more research and development projects could be undertaken.

    For the reasons stated above, it is proposed that § 929.43, Contributions, be added to provide authority to accept voluntary financial contributions.

    Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

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

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

    Based on Committee data, there are approximately 1,200 cranberry growers in the regulated area and approximately 45 cranberry handlers who are subject to regulation under the marketing order. Small agricultural producers are defined by the Small Business Administration (SBA) as those having annual receipts of less than $750,000, and small agricultural service firms are defined as those having annual receipts of less than $7,500,000 (13 CFR 121.201).

    According to the National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS), grower prices were $30.90 per barrel for cranberries during the 2014-15 marketing year. NASS also reported total bearing acres at 40,600 and average yield per acre at 10.3 tons for the 2014-15 marketing year.

    Based on the total bearing acres provided by NASS and the approximate number of cranberry growers (1,200 growers), the average acreage per grower is 33.8 acres. Multiplying the average acreage per grower (33.8 acres) by the average yield per acre (10.3 tons) results in an average production of 348.5 tons. To convert the average production from tons to barrels, 348.5 tons is multiplied by 2,000 pounds (one ton equals 2,000 pounds) to equal 696,966.7 pounds and is then divided by 100 (100 pounds equals 1 barrel), resulting in an average production per growers of 6,969.7 barrels.

    Multiplying the average production (6,967.7 barrels) by the grower price ($30.90 per barrel), provided by NASS, equals an average grower revenue of $215,301.90. Based on this calculation, the average annual grower revenue for the 2014-15 marketing year was below $750,000.

    Using Committee information and shipment data, the majority of cranberry handlers could also be considered small businesses under SBA's definition. Therefore, the majority of cranberry growers and handlers may be classified as small entities under SBA definitions.

    The amendment proposed by the Committee would add a new section, § 929.43, Contributions, to the order. If implemented, this section would authorize the Committee to accept voluntary financial contributions. Such contributions could only be accepted from domestic sources and would be free from any encumbrances or restrictions on their use by the donor. When received, the Committee would retain complete control of their use. The use of contributed funds would be limited to funding program activities authorized under § 929.45, Research and development.

    The Committee's proposed amendment was unanimously recommended at a public meeting on August 17-18, 2015.

    If the proposal is approved in referendum, there would be no direct financial effect on growers or handlers. This proposal would provide authority to accept financial contributions. With the potential for additional funding, more research and promotional projects could be undertaken. Therefore, it is anticipated that both small and large producer and handler businesses would benefit from its implementation.

    Alternatives to this proposal, including making no changes at this time, were considered. However, the Committee believes it would be beneficial to authorize contributions from domestic sources which would help support research and promotional activities.

    Paperwork Reduction Act

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35), the order's information collection requirements have been previously approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and assigned OMB No. 0581-0189, “Generic Fruit Crops.” No changes in those requirements as a result of this action would be necessary. Should any changes become necessary, they would be submitted to OMB for approval.

    As with all Federal marketing order programs, reports and forms are periodically reviewed to reduce information requirements and duplication by industry and public sector agencies. In addition, USDA has not identified any relevant Federal rules that duplicate, overlap, or conflict with this rule.

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

    The Committee's meeting was widely publicized throughout the cranberry production area. All interested persons were invited to attend the meeting and encouraged to participate in Committee deliberations on all issues. Like all Committee meetings, the August 17-18, 2015, meeting was public, and all entities, both large and small, were encouraged to express their views on this proposal.

    A proposed rule concerning this action was published in the Federal Register on August 4, 2016 (81 FR 51383). Copies of the proposed rule were mailed or sent via facsimile to all Committee members and cranberry handlers. Finally, the rule was made available through the Internet by USDA and the Office of the Federal Register. A 60-day comment period ending October 3, 2016, was provided to allow interested persons to respond to the proposal. No comments were received. Accordingly, no changes have been made to the proposed amendments.

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

    Findings and Conclusions

    The findings and conclusions and general findings and determinations included in the proposed rule set forth in the August 4, 2016, issue of the Federal Register are hereby approved and adopted.

    Marketing Order

    Annexed hereto and made a part hereof is the document entitled “Order Amending the Order Regulating the Handling of cranberries grown in the states of Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New Jersey, Wisconsin, Michigan, Minnesota, Oregon, Washington, and Long Island in the State of New York.” This document has been decided upon as the detailed and appropriate means of effectuating the foregoing findings and conclusions. It is hereby ordered, that this entire rule be published in the Federal Register.

    Referendum Order

    It is hereby directed that a referendum be conducted in accordance with the procedure for the conduct of referenda (7 CFR part 900.400-407) to determine whether the annexed order amending the order regulating the handling of cranberries grown in the states of Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New Jersey, Wisconsin, Michigan, Minnesota, Oregon, Washington, and Long Island in the State of New York is approved by growers, as defined under the terms of the order, who during the representative period were engaged in the production of cranberries in the production area. The representative period for the conduct of such referendum is hereby determined to be September 1, 2015 through August 31, 2016.

    The agents of the Secretary to conduct such referendum are designated to be Doris Jamieson and Christian D. Nissen, Southeast Marketing Field Office, Marketing Order and Agreement Division, Specialty Crops Program, AMS, USDA; Telephone: (863) 324-3375, Fax: (863) 325-8793, or Email: [email protected] or [email protected] respectively.

    List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 929

    Cranberries, Marketing agreements, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: December 14, 2016. Elanor Starmer, Administrator, Agricultural Marketing Service. Order Amending the Order Regulating the Handling of Cranberries Grown in the States of Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New Jersey, Wisconsin, Michigan, Minnesota, Oregon, Washington, and Long Island in the State of New York 1

    1 This order shall not become effective unless and until the requirements of § 900.14 of the rules of practice and procedure governing proceedings to formulate marketing agreements and marketing orders have been met.

    Findings and Determinations

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

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

    2. The marketing order, as amended, and as hereby proposed to be further amended, regulates the handling of cranberries grown in the States of Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New Jersey, Wisconsin, Michigan, Minnesota, Oregon, Washington, and Long Island in the State of New York in the same manner as, and are applicable only to, persons in the respective classes of commercial and industrial activity specified in the marketing order;

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

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

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

    Order Relative to Handling

    It is therefore ordered, that on and after the effective date hereof, all handling of cranberries grown in the States of Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New Jersey, Wisconsin, Michigan, Minnesota, Oregon, Washington, and Long Island in the State of New York shall be in conformity to, and in compliance with, the terms and conditions of the said order as hereby proposed to be amended as follows:

    The provisions of the proposed marketing order amending the order contained in the proposed rule issued by the Administrator on July 27, 2016, and published in the Federal Register (81 FR 51383) on August 4, 2016, will be and are the terms and provisions of this order amending the order and are set forth in full herein.

    PART 929—CRANBERRIES GROWN IN THE STATES OF MASSACHUSETTS, RHODE ISLAND, CONNECTICUT, NEW JERSEY, WISCONSIN, MICHIGAN, MINNESOTA, OREGON, WASHINGTON, AND LONG ISLAND IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK 1. The authority citation for 7 CFR part 929 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    7 U.S.C. 601-674.

    2. Add § 929.43 to read as follows:
    § 929.43 Contributions.

    The Committee may accept voluntary contributions to pay expenses incurred pursuant to § 929.45, Research and development. Such contributions may only be accepted if they are sourced from domestic contributors and are free from any encumbrances or restrictions on their use by the donor. The Cranberry Marketing Committee shall retain complete control of their use.

    [FR Doc. 2016-30571 Filed 12-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-02-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2016-9504; Directorate Identifier 2016-NM-107-AD] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Dassault Aviation Airplanes AGENCY:

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

    SUMMARY:

    We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain Dassault Aviation Model FALCON 7X airplanes. This proposed AD was prompted by reports that during the assembly of structural elements on some airplanes, lack of established procedures and tools caused boring and torqueing defects to be present at some locations. This proposed AD would require a detailed visual inspection of bore holes for defects, replacement of bolts, and repair if necessary. We are proposing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.

    DATES:

    We must receive comments on this proposed AD by February 6, 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: Deliver to Mail address above between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

    For service information identified in this NPRM, contact Dassault Falcon Jet Corporation, Teterboro Airport, P.O. Box 2000, South Hackensack, NJ 07606; telephone 201-440-6700; Internet http://www.dassaultfalcon.com. You may view this referenced service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 425-227-1221.

    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-2016-9504; 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 Operations office (telephone 800-647-5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

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

    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-2016-9504; Directorate Identifier 2016-NM-107-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

    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA Airworthiness Directive 2016-0116, dated June 16, 2016 (referred to after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or “the MCAI”), to correct an unsafe condition for certain Dassault Aviation Model FALCON 7X airplanes. The MCAI states:

    During the assembly of structural elements on some aeroplanes, lack of established procedures and tools caused boring and torqueing defects to be present at some locations on the foot of frame (FR) 36 and FR39. Dassault Aviation (DA) identified the individual aeroplanes that are potentially affected by this production deficiency. Quality control actions have been implemented to ensure that new aeroplanes, from s/n 183, cannot be affected by this defect.

    This condition, if not detected and corrected, would adversely affect the structural integrity of the aeroplane.

    For the reasons described above, this [EASA] AD requires [a detailed visual] inspection of bore holes [for defects] and replacement of bolts at FR36 and FR39 and, depending on findings, accomplishment of a repair.

    To address this potential unsafe condition, DA published Service Bulletin (SB) F7X-379 to provide corrective action instructions.

    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-2016-9504.

    Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    We reviewed Dassault Service Bulletin 7X-379, dated February 29, 2016. The service information describes procedures for a detailed visual inspection of bore holes at FR36 and FR39 for defects, replacement of bolts at FR36 and FR39, and repair. This service information is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

    FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to our bilateral agreement with the State of Design Authority, we have been notified of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and service information referenced above. We are 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 the same type design.

    Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD affects 41 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
    Inspection and Replacement 6 work-hours × $85 per hour = $510 $26 $536 $21,976

    We have received no definitive data that would enable us to provide cost estimates for the on-condition repair 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 adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): Dassault Aviation: Docket No. FAA-2016-9504; Directorate Identifier 2016-NM-107-AD. (a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by February 6, 2017.

    (b) Affected ADs

    None.

    (c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Dassault Aviation Model FALCON 7X airplanes, certificated in any category, serial numbers (S/Ns) 2, 5, and 8 through 182 inclusive; except S/Ns 141, 148, 149, 157, 159, 166, 170, 171, 174, 175, and 177 through 180 inclusive.

    (d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 53, Fuselage.

    (e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by reports that during the assembly of structural elements on some airplanes, lack of established procedures and tools caused boring and torqueing defects to be present at some locations on the foot of frame (FR) 36 and FR39. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct defects in the bore holes at FR36 and FR39 that could adversely affect the structural integrity of the airplane.

    (f) Compliance

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

    (g) Inspection of Bore Holes

    At the applicable time identified in paragraphs (g)(1) or (g)(2) of this AD, remove the sheer bolts at FR36 and FR39, left hand and right hand, as identified in Dassault Service Bulletin 7X-379, dated February 29, 2016, and do a detailed visual inspection of the bore holes for defects, in accordance with Dassault Service Bulletin 7X-379, dated February 29, 2016.

    (1) For airplanes with S/N 2 and 5: Before exceeding 4,100 flight cycles after the date of release to service after the first C-Check or within 3 months from the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later.

    (2) For airplanes other than those identified in paragraph (g)(1) of this AD: Before exceeding 4,100 flight cycles since the date of issuance of the original certificate of airworthiness or the original export certificate of airworthiness or within 3 months from the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later.

    (h) Repair of Bore Holes and Bolt Replacement

    (1) If, during any inspection required by paragraph (g) of this AD, any defect is found, before further flight, repair the affected areas, and replace the sheer bolts at FR36 and FR39, in accordance with Dassault Service Bulletin 7X-379, dated February 29, 2016; except where Dassault Service Bulletin 7X-379, dated February 29, 2016, specifies to contact Dassault Aviation for instructions, before further flight, repair using a method approved by the Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA; or the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA); or Dassault Aviation's EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA).

    (2) If, during any inspection required by paragraph (g) of this AD, no defect is found, before further flight, replace the sheer bolts at FR36 and FR39, in accordance with Dassault Service Bulletin 7X-379, dated February 29, 2016.

    (i) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:

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

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

    (j) Related Information

    (1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information (MCAI) EASA Airworthiness Directive 2016-0116, dated June 16, 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-2016-9504.

    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact Dassault Falcon Jet Corporation, Teterboro Airport, P.O. Box 2000, South Hackensack, NJ 07606; telephone 201-440-6700; Internet http://www.dassaultfalcon.com. 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 December 6, 2016. Dionne Palermo, Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
    [FR Doc. 2016-30029 Filed 12-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2016-9507; Directorate Identifier 2016-NM-127-AD] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Empresa Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A. (Embraer) AGENCY:

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

    SUMMARY:

    We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all Embraer S.A. Model EMB-120, -120ER, -120FC, -120QC, and -120RT airplanes. This proposed AD was prompted by changes to the airworthiness limitations, which add life-limited landing gear parts not previously identified. This proposed AD would require revising the maintenance or inspection program to incorporate new airworthiness limitations that add life limits for previously unidentified landing gear parts. We are proposing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.

    DATES:

    We must receive comments on this proposed AD by February 6, 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: Deliver to Mail address above between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

    For service information identified in this NPRM, contact Empresa Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A. (Embraer), Technical Publications Section (PC 060), Av. Brigadeiro Faria Lima, 2170—Putim—12227-901 São Jose dos Campos—SP—Brasil; telephone +55 12 3927-5852 or +55 12 3309-0732; fax +55 12 3927-7546; email [email protected]; Internet http://www.flyembraer.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-2016-9507; 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 Operations office (telephone 800-647-5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Todd Thompson, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington 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-2016-9507; Directorate Identifier 2016-NM-127-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

    The Agência Nacional de Aviação Civil (ANAC), which is the aviation authority for Brazil, has issued Brazilian Airworthiness Directive 2016-07-02, dated July 27, 2016 (referred to after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or “the MCAI”), to correct an unsafe condition for all Embraer S.A. Model EMB-120, -120ER, -120FC, -120QC, and -120RT airplanes. The MCAI states:

    This [Brazilian] AD was prompted by changes to the Airworthiness Limitation Section of the Maintenance Review Board Report MRB 120-HI-200, which add life-limited landing gear parts not previously identified. We are issuing this [Brazilian] AD to prevent life-limited landing gear parts from being used beyond their safe-life limits, which could lead to collapse of the landing gear.

    This proposed AD would require revising the maintenance or inspection program to incorporate new airworthiness limitations that add life limits for previously unidentified landing gear parts. 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-2016-9507.

    Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    We reviewed the following Embraer S.A. service information:

    • Temporary Revision (TR) 28-1 to MRB Report 120-HI-200, dated May 17, 2016. This service information adds life-limited landing gear parts not previously identified to the airworthiness limitations section.

    • Alert Service Bulletin 120-32-A543, dated July 11, 2016. This service information provides procedures for replacement of affected parts.

    This service information is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

    FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to our bilateral agreement with the State of Design Authority, we have been notified of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and service information referenced above. We are 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.

    Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD affects 70 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
    Maintenance program revision 1 work-hour × $85 per hour = $85 $0 $85 $5,950
    Authority for This Rulemaking

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

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

    Regulatory Findings

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

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

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

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

    3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska; and

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

    List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

    The Proposed Amendment

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

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

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

    § 39.13 [Amended]
    2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): Empresa Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A. (Embraer): Docket No. FAA-2016-9507; Directorate Identifier 2016-NM-127-AD. (a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by February 6, 2017.

    (b) Affected ADs

    None.

    (c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Embraer S.A. Model EMB-120, EMB-120RT, EMB-120ER, EMB-120FC, and EMB-120QC airplanes, certificated in any category, all serial numbers.

    (d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 32, Landing Gear.

    (e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by changes to the Airworthiness Limitation Section of the Maintenance Review Board (MRB) Report 120-HI-200, which adds life-limited landing gear parts not previously identified. We are issuing this AD to prevent life-limited landing gear parts from being used beyond their safe-life limits, which could lead to collapse of the landing gear.

    (f) Compliance

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

    (g) Revision of Maintenance or Inspection Program

    Within 90 days after the effective date of this AD, revise the maintenance or inspection program, as applicable, by incorporating the life-limited landing gear parts and the applicable safe-life limits identified in table 1 to paragraph (g) of this AD, as specified in Embraer S.A. Temporary Revision (TR) 28-1 to MRB Report 120-HI-200, dated May 17, 2016.

    Table 1 to Paragraph (g) of This AD—Life-Limited Landing Gear Parts Part number Description Safe-life limits (landings) 19699-001-00 Pin drag strut, lower 104,054 19429-000-00 Piston tube (pre-modification service bulletin 120-032-0514) 30,000 19429-000-00 Piston tube (post-modification service bulletin 120-032-0514) 90,000 19946-001-00 Pin leg hinge 90,000 20030-001-00 Pin torque link 90,000 19437-000-00 Drag strut, upper half 104,054 20031-001-00 Pin drag strut hinge 104,054 19414-000-00 Piston tube 90,000 19919-000-00 Pin leg hinge 90,000 (h) Replace Affected Parts

    The initial compliance for the replacement of affected parts is specified in paragraphs (h)(1) and (h)(2) of this AD. Replace affected parts with serviceable parts, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Embraer S.A. Alert Service Bulletin 120-32-A543, dated July 11, 2016.

    (1) Before the applicable safe-life limit identified in table 1 to paragraph (g) of this AD, or within 90 days after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later.

    (2) Within 90 days after the effective date of this AD for parts on which the current status is unknown.

    (i) Parts Installation Prohibition

    As of the effective date of this AD, no person may install on any airplane a main landing gear part or nose landing gear part having a part number identified in table 1 to paragraph (g) of this AD, if it has reached or exceeded its safe-life limit, or if its current status is unknown.

    (j) No Alternative Actions and Intervals

    After accomplishing the revision required by paragraph (g) of this AD, no alternative actions (e.g., inspections) or intervals may be used unless the actions or intervals are approved as an alternative method of compliance 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 ACO, send it to ATTN: Todd Thompson, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington 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: 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 Agência Nacional de Aviação Civil (ANAC); or ANAC's authorized Designee. If approved by the ANAC Designee, the approval must include the Designee's authorized signature.

    (l) Related Information

    (1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information (MCAI) ANAC AD No.: 2016-07-02, dated July 27, 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-2016-9507.

    (2) For service information identified in this NPRM, contact Empresa Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A. (Embraer), Technical Publications Section (PC 060), Av. Brigadeiro Faria Lima, 2170—Putim—12227-901 São Jose dos Campos—SP—BRASIL; telephone +55 12 3927-5852 or +55 12 3309-0732; fax +55 12 3927-7546; email [email protected]; Internet http://www.flyembraer.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 December 6, 2016. Dionne Palermo, Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
    [FR Doc. 2016-30030 Filed 12-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS 38 CFR Part 3 RIN 2900-AP23 Special Monthly Compensation for Veterans With Traumatic Brain Injury AGENCY:

    Department of Veterans Affairs.

    ACTION:

    Proposed rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) seeks to amend its adjudication regulations to add an additional benefit for veterans with residuals of traumatic brain injury (TBI). This benefit was enacted by the Veterans' Benefits Act of 2010 and provides special monthly compensation for veterans with TBI who are in need of aid and attendance and, in the absence of such aid and attendance, would require hospitalization, nursing home care, or other residential institutional care. Prior to the law's enactment, veterans with TBI were not eligible for this benefit unless they had a separate service-related disability that qualified under the law.

    DATES:

    Comments must be received on or before February 21, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Written comments may be submitted through www.Regulations.gov; by mail or hand-delivery to Director, Regulation Policy and Management (00REG), Department of Veterans Affairs, 810 Vermont Avenue NW., Room 1068, Washington, DC 20420; or by fax to (202) 273-9026. Comments should indicate that they are submitted in response to “RIN 2900-AP23—Special Monthly Compensation for Veterans with Traumatic Brain Injury.” Copies of comments received will be available for public inspection in the Office of Regulation Policy and Management, Room 1068, between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday (except holidays). Please call (202) 461-4902 for an appointment. (This is not a toll-free number.) In addition, during the comment period, comments may be viewed online through the Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) at www.Regulations.gov.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Eric G. Mandle, Policy Analyst, Regulations Staff (211D), Compensation Service, Department of Veterans Affairs, 810 Vermont Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20420, (202) 461-9700. (This is not a toll-free telephone number.)

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    On October 13, 2010, the Veterans' Benefits Act of 2010, Public Law 111-275 (the Act) was signed into law. Section 601 of the Act amends 38 U.S.C. 1114, adding subsection (t) to include special monthly compensation (SMC) for veterans who as the result of service-connected disability, are in need of regular aid and attendance for the residuals of traumatic brain injury (TBI), and in the absence of such regular aid and attendance would require hospitalization, nursing home care, or other residential institutional care. The law grants an additional monetary allowance for veterans with residuals of TBI who require this higher level of care but would not otherwise qualify for the benefit under 38 U.S.C. 1114(r)(2). The amendment became effective October 1, 2011.

    VA administers SMC benefits under 38 CFR 3.350. Additionally, 38 CFR 3.352 provides the criteria to determine the need for aid and attendance and whether a claimant is permanently bedridden; 38 CFR 3.552 requires adjustments of allowance for aid and attendance when a beneficiary is hospitalized. Internal guidance has been published since April 4, 2011, instructing VA offices engaged in claims adjudication on how to implement the new SMC provision, but a formal update to VA's adjudication regulations has not yet been published.

    I. VA Interpretation of Public Law 111-275

    Under this proposed rule, VA will directly implement 38 U.S.C. 1114(t), which states that an additional award of SMC is payable to a veteran who, as the result of service-connected disability, is in need of regular aid and attendance for the residuals of traumatic brain injury, is not eligible for additional compensation under 38 U.S.C. 1114(r)(2), and in the absence of such regular aid and attendance would require hospitalization, nursing home care, or other residential institutional care. VA would also make clear that a veteran entitled to this benefit shall be paid during periods he or she is not hospitalized at United States Government expense as if receiving the amount equal to the compensation authorized under 38 U.S.C. 1114(o) or the maximum rate authorized under 38 U.S.C. 1114(p) and, in addition to such compensation, a monthly allowance equal to the rate described in 38 U.S.C. 1114(r)(2).

    VA believes that there are two potential readings of the Act. Under the first, more restrictive reading, a veteran affected by section 1114(t) would receive only the rate noted under 38 U.S.C. 1114(r)(2), e.g., $2,983, in addition to any other rate of special monthly compensation the individual in question might happen to qualify for. Reading the Act in this way, however, would result in benefits that are less than the amount to which other veterans requiring the same level of care not related to TBI would be entitled. This is because the predicate rates built into section 1114(r), such as the rate authorized by subsection (o), the maximum rate authorized under subsection (p), or the intermediate rate authorized under subsections (n) and (o), will not typically be met for veterans suffering from TBI, rather than the other conditions enumerated in section 1114.

    Under the second, more liberal interpretation of section 1114(t), VA would pay veterans who meet the criteria of section 1114(t) the full amount described by section 1114(r) (i.e., the rate authorized by subsection (o), which is also the maximum rate authorized under subsection (p), in addition to the allowance authorized by subsection (r)). The statutory language, viewed together with its purpose and legislative history, can be interpreted as establishing that Congress intended that veterans receiving the aid and attendance allowance authorized by subsection (r)(2) necessarily also qualify for the predicate rates described in subsection (r).

    VA finds that Congress' intent was to enact a law that pays veterans of this class an amount equal to the compensation authorized under section 1114(o) or the maximum rate authorized under section 1114(p), plus the additional amount described under section 1114(r)(2). VA chose the rates permitted under section 1114(o) and (p) because those are the highest rates permitted under section 1114 and therefore would be the most favorable rates for this group of veterans requiring this higher level of care.

    Textually, subsection (r) generally preconditions receipt of the heightened aid and attendance allowance under either subsection (r)(1) or (r)(2) on receipt of one of the predicate rates identified in subsection (r), which include the rates specified in (o) and (p). Additionally, subsection (r) makes clear that a veteran is receiving that heightened allowance “in addition to” the special monthly compensation otherwise described in subsection (r). VA has long interpreted subsection (r) as reflecting the assumption that a veteran is necessarily in receipt of one of the predicate rates described in the body of subsection (r) whenever a veteran is in receipt of the heightened aid and attendance allowance under either subsection (r)(1) or (r)(2). This interpretation is reflected in VA's current regulations. See 38 CFR 3.352(b)(1) (higher level of aid and attendance authorized by 38 CFR 3.350(h) requires that the veteran be “entitled to the compensation authorized under [subsection (o),] or the maximum rate of compensation authorized under [subsection (p)].”).

    In support of this interpretation, VA notes that 38 U.S.C. 1114(r)(2) provides additional compensation to those veterans with certain service-connected disabilities who are in need of a higher level of care. The legislative history for section 601 of Public Law 111-275 indicates that subsection (t) is intended to provide additional compensation to veterans with TBI who do not have those qualifying service-connected disabilities and therefore are not otherwise eligible for benefits under (r)(2), but still require a higher level of care comparable to what would otherwise be contemplated by the allowance provided by (r)(2). See S. Rep. No. 111-71, at 17 (2009) (discussing the intent to provide the ting (r)(2) rate of compensation as evidence of Congress' intent to pay (t) aid and attendance at the rate commonly received by veterans entitled to (r)(2) payments. If Congress intended subsection (t) to confer a freestanding allowance, it is counterintuitive that Congress would link the allowance to (r)(2) rather than simply declaring that any veteran in need of regular aid and attendance for the residuals of TBI should receive a specified dollar amount. Instead, Congress chose to match the existing rate and aid and attendance requirements described under (r)(2). In so doing, Congress emphasized that the overall impairment and need for care are the same for those with TBI as they are for those with certain service-connected disabilities who require a higher level of aid and attendance. S. Rep. 111-71 at *18.

    VA's interpretation of section 1114(t) would mean that the rate authorized by section 1114(o) and (p) is the “other compensation under this section” referenced in section 1114(t) for purposes of all cases under that section. We acknowledge that this interpretation imports a specfic meaning to the term “other compensation” that is not apparent on the face of that term. We find that this interpretation is warranted because interpreting the phrase “other compensation under this section” to refer only to other compensation for which the veteran independently qualifies would defeat the purpose of the legislation. The legislative history noted that 38 U.S.C. 1114(l) prescribes the basic monthy compensation amount for veterans in need of aid and attendance due to their service-connected disabilities and that section 1114(r)(2) prescribes an “additional” monthly amount payable for veterans in need of a higher level of care. S. Rep. 111-71 at *17. Congress thus recognized that the needs of veterans who qualify for the (r)(2) rate are met by payment of both a basic monthly SMC rate, which generally would be provided under subsections (l) through (p) of section 1114 and the heightened aid and attendance payment under (r)(2). Congress determined that legislation was needed to extend similar benefits to veterans with TBI because the provisions of section 1114 generally focus on physical disabilities and locomotion rather than cognitive or psychological impairments associated with TBI. S. Rep. 111-71 at *17-18.

    For the reasons stated in the legislative history, cognitive disability due to TBI generally would not qualify for the basic monthly SMC rates prescribed in section 1114(l)-(p). As a result, if the term “other compensation under this section,” as used in section 1114(t) were construed to mean compensation for which the veteran otherwise qualifies without regard to section 1114(t), a substantial part of the benefits contemplated by (r)(2)—i.e., the basic monthly SMC rate—would be unavailable in most cases covered by section 1114(t). Such an interpretation would defeat the statute's clear purpose in that it would, based on section 1114's focus on physical disability, provide veterans covered by section 1114(t) with a monthly benefit well below the amount Congress has determined necessary to provide for the needs of veterans requiring a heightened level of care under (r)(2). Accordingly, we believe section 1114(t) is most properly construed to permit payment of both the “additional” amount specified in (r)(2) and the predicate SMC rate specified in section 1114(o) and (p).

    VA finds the language of the amended statute to be ambiguous, but has determined that Congress intended to provide veterans in need of aid and attendance due to TBI residuals the same level of compensation as veterans entitled to the section 1114(r)(2) rate. See Chevron, U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Res. Def. Council, Inc., 467 U.S. 837, 842-844 (1984) (if Congress has not addressed “the precise question at issue,” a court should defer to an administering agency's construction of the statute so long as it is a “permissible” construction). VA believes its interpretation is the most logical one because it is unlikely that Congress would wish to bestow a lesser benefit on veterans with TBI than is applicable to veterans with certain service-connected disabilities that might otherwise qualify for the (r)(2) allowance, while simultaneously emphasizing that veterans with TBI may be in a functionally similar situation. This interpretation is also the most advantageous to veterans with TBI who require a higher level of care.

    II. Regulatory Amendment Mechanics

    This rulemaking proposes to amend § 3.350 by adding paragraph (j), proposes to amend § 3.352 by adding a new paragraph (b)(2) and revising the authority citation, and proposes to amend § 3.552(b) by adding a reference to 38 U.S.C. 1114(t) to paragraph (b)(2) and revising the authority citation. Proposed paragraph (j) will set forth the general criteria prescribed by 38 U.S.C. 1114(t). Paragraph (j) would reference § 3.352 to provide guidance on determining the need for aid and attendance. Paragraph (j)(1) would provide that a veteran shall be entitled to the amount equal to the compensation authorized under 38 U.S.C. 1114(o) or the maximum rate authorized under 38 U.S.C. 1114(p) and, in addition to such compensation, a monthly allowance equal to the rate described in 38 U.S.C. 1114(r)(2) during periods he or she is not hospitalized at United States Government expense.

    In addition, to ensure consistency with current § 3.350(h), VA proposes to reference revised § 3.552(b)(2) under proposed § 3.350(j)(1). Section 3.552(b)(2) requires VA to discontinue the aid and attendance benefit following hospitalization at government expense. Proposed § 3.350(j)(2) would note that an allowance under proposed paragraph (j) would be paid in lieu of any allowance authorized by 38 U.S.C. 1114(r)(1).

    Section 3.352 governs the criteria for determining the need for aid and attendance and what is “permanently bedridden” for VA disability compensation purposes. VA proposes to amend § 3.352 to regulate entitlement to a higher level of aid and attendance allowance for residuals of TBI. Specifically, we propose to redesignate paragraphs (b)(2) through (b)(5) of § 3.352 as (b)(3) through (b)(6). Paragraph (b)(1)(iii) and newly redesignated paragraph (b)(4) of this section reference (b)(2). As such, those paragraphs would also be revised to reflect that (b)(2) would become (b)(3).

    This rulemaking also proposes to add a new paragraph (b)(2) to § 3.352 stating that a veteran is entitled to the higher level of aid and attendance allowance for residuals of TBI, as authorized by § 3.350(j), in lieu of the regular aid and attendance allowance. Entitlement would be found when the veteran meets the requirements for entitlement to the regular aid and attendance allowance in paragraph (a) of the section and when the veteran needs a higher level of care (as defined in redesignated paragraph (b)(3) of the section) than is required to establish entitlement to the regular aid and attendance allowance, and in the absence of the provision of such higher level of care would require hospitalization, nursing home care, or other residential institutional care.

    As previously discussed, VA has determined that Congress intended 38 U.S.C. 1114(t) to provide total compensation equal to the total rate paid after factoring total compensation paid in (r)(2) cases, who also receive payment under subsections (o) or (p). VA therefore proposes to apply the same definition of a higher level of care when determining entitlement under proposed § 3.350(j) as VA applies under § 3.350(h). Specifically, VA proposes to require that veterans entitled to SMC under section 1114(t) establish entitlement to the regular aid and attendance allowance in paragraph (a) of § 3.352, as well as establish a requirement for a higher level of care, where, in the absence of the higher level of care, the veteran would require hospitalization, nursing home care, or other residential institutional care. These requirements mirror the current requirements for entitlement under § 3.350(h) and § 3.352(b). We would clarify in § 3.352(b)(2)(i) and (ii) that the need for this higher level of aid and attendance must be as a result of service-connected residuals of traumatic brain injury. This requirement is consistent with the statutory language which requires that the veteran “as a result of service-connected disability, is in need of regular aid and attendance for the residuals of [TBI].” While the statutory language could be read to allow entitlement to section 1114(t) compensation to those veterans with any service-connected disability that also suffer from TBI residuals, VA believes that the phrase “as a result of” indicates Congress intended that the need for a higher level of aid and attendance for TBI residuals to be due to a service-connected disability. Further, the legislative history is clear that Congress intended section 1114(t) compensation to be provided to those veterans suffering from service-connected residuals of TBI. See Chevron, supra; see S. Rep. No. 111-71, at 17 (2009) (discussing that the committee bill “would allow veterans suffering from severe TBIs to receive the highest level of aid and attendance benefits from VA”). We would also amend the authority citation for § 3.352(b) to add section 1114(t).

    Lastly, VA proposes to amend 38 CFR 3.552(b)(2). Section 3.552 regulates adjustments of allowance for aid and attendance. Specifically, paragraph (b)(2) states that “[w]hen a veteran is hospitalized at the expense of the United States Government, the additional aid and attendance allowance authorized by 38 U.S.C. 1114(r)(1) or (2) will be discontinued . . .”. To ensure consistency in its regulations, and to implement the conforming amendment of the Act, VA is amending that paragraph to include 38 U.S.C. 1114(t). This amendment is supported by the plain language of the statute, which states “[s]ubject to section 5503(c) of this title.” Section 5503(c) of title 38 United States Code governs hospitalization of veterans and states, in effect, the rule we propose to establish here. We would also amend the authority citation for § 3.552(b). The current authority citation cites 38 U.S.C. 5503(e); however, the Veterans Education and Benefits Expansion Act of 2001, Public Law 107-103, 204(a), 115 Stat. 990, amended section 5503 by redesignating section 5503(e) as section 5503(c). Therefore, we would revise the authority citation to reflect the accurate legal authority as 38 U.S.C. 5503(c).

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, when regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public health and safety effects, and other advantages; distributive impacts; and equity). Executive Order 13563 (Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review) emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and benefits, reducing costs, harmonizing rules, and promoting flexibility. Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review) defines a “significant regulatory action” requiring review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), unless OMB waives such review, as “any regulatory action that is likely to result in a rule that may: (1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local, or tribal governments or communities; (2) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an action taken or planned by another agency; (3) Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients thereof; or (4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in this Executive Order.”

    The economic, interagency, budgetary, legal, and policy implications of this regulatory action have been examined, and it has been determined not to be a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866. VA's impact analysis can be found as a supporting document at http://www.regulations.gov, usually within 48 hours after the rulemaking document is published. Additionally, a copy of this rulemaking and its impact analysis are available on VA's Web site at http://www.va.gov/orpm/, by following the link for “VA Regulations Published From FY 2004 Through Fiscal Year to Date.”

    Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Secretary hereby certifies that this proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities as they are defined in the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612). This proposed rule would directly affect only individuals and would not directly affect small entities. Therefore, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 605(b), this rulemaking is exempt from the initial and final regulatory flexibility analysis requirements of sections 603 and 604.

    Unfunded Mandates

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995, 2 U.S.C. 1532, requires that agencies prepare an assessment of anticipated costs and benefits before issuing any rule that may result in the expenditure by State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100 million or more (adjusted annually for inflation) in any one year. This proposed rule would have no such effect on State, local, and tribal governments, or on the private sector.

    Paperwork Reduction Act

    This proposed rule contains no provisions constituting a collection of information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3521).

    Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance

    The Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance number and title for the program affected by this document is 64.109, Veterans Compensation for Service-Connected Disability.

    Signing Authority

    The Secretary of Veterans Affairs, or designee, approved this document and authorized the undersigned to sign and submit the document to the Office of the Federal Register for publication electronically as an official document of the Department of Veterans Affairs. Gina S. Farrisee, Deputy Chief of Staff, Department of Veterans Affairs, approved this document on December 13, 2016, for publication.

    Dated: December 13, 2016. Jeffrey Martin, Office Program Manager, Office of Regulation Policy & Management, Office of the Secretary, Department of Veterans Affairs.

    For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Department of Veterans Affairs proposes to amend 38 CFR part 3 as set forth below:

    PART 3—ADJUDICATION Subpart A—Pension, Compensation, and Dependency and Indemnity Compensation 1. The authority citation for part 3, subpart A continues to read as follows: Authority:

    38 U.S.C. 501(a), unless otherwise noted.

    2. Amend § 3.350 to add paragraph (j) to read as follows:
    § 3.350 Special monthly compensation ratings.

    (j) Special aid and attendance benefit for residuals of traumatic brain injury (38 U.S.C. 1114(t)). The special monthly compensation provided by 38 U.S.C. 1114(t) is payable to a veteran who, as the result of service-connected disability, is in need of regular aid and attendance for the residuals of traumatic brain injury, is not eligible for compensation under 38 U.S.C. 1114(r)(2), and in the absence of such regular aid and attendance would require hospitalization, nursing home care, or other residential institutional care. Determination of this need is subject to the criteria of § 3.352.

    (1) A veteran described in this paragraph (j) shall be entitled to the amount equal to the compensation authorized under 38 U.S.C. 1114(o) or the maximum rate authorized under 38 U.S.C. 1114(p) and, in addition to such compensation, a monthly allowance equal to the rate described in 38 U.S.C. 1114(r)(2) during periods he or she is not hospitalized at United States Government expense. (See § 3.552(b)(2) as to continuance following admission for hospitalization.)

    (2) An allowance authorized under 38 U.S.C. 1114(t) shall be paid in lieu of any allowance authorized by 38 U.S.C. 1114(r)(1).

    (Authority: 38 U.S.C. 501, 38 U.S.C. 1114(t))
    3. Amend § 3.352 by: a. Redesignating paragraphs (b)(2) through (b)(5) as (b)(3) through (b)(6); b. In paragraph (b)(1)(iii), removing the phrase “paragraph (b)(2)” and in its place adding the phrase “paragraph (b)(3)”; c. Adding new paragraph (b)(2); d. In redesignated paragraph (b)(4), removing the phrase “paragraph (b)(2)” and in its place adding the phrase “paragraph (b)(3)”; and e. In the authority citation at the end of paragraph (b), adding “1114(t)”.

    The addition and revision reads as follows:

    § 3.352 Criteria for determining need for aid and attendance and “permanently bedridden.”

    (b)(1) * * *

    (2) A veteran is entitled to the higher level aid and attendance allowance authorized by § 3.350(j) in lieu of the regular aid and attendance allowance when all of the following conditions are met:

    (i) As a result of service-connected residuals of traumatic brain injury, the veteran meets the requirements for entitlement to the regular aid and attendance allowance in paragraph (a) of this section.

    (ii) As a result of service-connected residuals of traumatic brain injury, the veteran needs a “higher level of care” (as defined in paragraph (b)(3) of this section) than is required to establish entitlement to the regular aid and attendance allowance, and in the absence of the provision of such higher level of care the veteran would require hospitalization, nursing home care, or other residential institutional care.

    * * *

    (Authority: 38 U.S.C. 501, 1114(r)(2), 1114(t))
    4. Amend § 3.552(b) by: a. In paragraph (b)(2), adding the phrase “or 38 U.S.C. 1114(t)” after the phrase “authorized by 38 U.S.C. 1114(r)(1) or (2)”; and b. At the end of paragraph (b), revising the authority citation.

    The revision read as follows:

    § 3.552 Adjustment of allowance for aid and attendance. (Authority: 38 U.S.C. 5503(c))
    [FR Doc. 2016-30509 Filed 12-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8320-01-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R09-OAR-2016-0669; FRL-9956-67-Region 9] Determination of Attainment of the 2008 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards; Mariposa County, California AGENCY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Proposed rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to determine that the Mariposa County, California Moderate Nonattainment Area (NAA) has attained the 2008 8-hour ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS or “standards”). This proposed determination is based on complete, quality-assured and certified data for 2013-2015. Preliminary data for 2016 are consistent with continued attainment of the standards in the Mariposa County NAA. If the determination is finalized as proposed, any unfulfilled obligations to submit revisions to the state implementation plan (SIP) related to attainment of the 2008 ozone standards for the Mariposa County NAA will be suspended for as long as the area continues to meet those standards.

    DATES:

    Any comments must arrive by January 20, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R09-OAR-2016-0669 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:

    Nancy Levin, EPA Region IX, (415) 972-3848, [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Throughout this document, whenever “we,” “us” or “our” is used, we mean the EPA. In the Rules and Regulations section of this Federal Register, we are making a determination that the Mariposa County, California Moderate NAA has attained the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS as a direct final rule without prior proposal because the Agency views this action as noncontroversial and anticipates no adverse comments. A detailed rationale for this determination of attainment is set forth in the direct final rule. If we receive adverse comments, however, we will publish a timely withdrawal of the direct final rule and address the comments in subsequent action based on this proposed rule. We do not plan to open a second comment period, so anyone interested in commenting should do so at this time. If we do not receive adverse comments, no further activity is planned. For further information, please see the direct final rule, which is located in the Rules and Regulations section of this Federal Register.

    Dated: December 2, 2016. Deborah Jordan, Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
    [FR Doc. 2016-30474 Filed 12-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    LEGAL SERVICES CORPORATION 45 CFR Parts 1600, 1630, and 1631 Definitions; Cost Standards and Procedures; Purchasing and Property Management AGENCY:

    Legal Services Corporation.

    ACTION:

    Proposed rule; Extension of comment period.

    SUMMARY:

    The Legal Services Corporation (“LSC”) issued a proposed rule in the Federal Register of October 28, 2016 [FR Doc. 2016-25831], concerning proposed amendments to its regulations governing definitions, cost standards and procedures, and purchasing and property management. This notice extends the comment period for 30 days to January 26, 2017.

    DATES:

    Comments must be submitted by January 26, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments by any of the following methods:

    Email: [email protected] Include “Parts 1630/1631 Rulemaking” in the subject line of the message.

    Fax: (202) 337-6519, ATTN: Parts 1630/1631 Rulemaking.

    Mail: Stefanie K. Davis, Assistant General Counsel, Legal Services Corporation, 3333 K Street NW., Washington, DC 20007, ATTN: Parts 1630/1631 Rulemaking.

    Hand Delivery/Courier: Stefanie K. Davis, Assistant General Counsel, Legal Services Corporation, 3333 K Street NW., Washington, DC 20007, ATTN: Parts 1630/1631 Rulemaking.

    Instructions: Electronic submissions are preferred via email with attachments in Acrobat PDF format. LSC may not consider written comments sent via any other method or received after the end of the comment period.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Stefanie K. Davis, Assistant General Counsel, Legal Services Corporation, 3333 K Street NW., Washington, DC 20007, (202) 295-1563 (phone), (202) 337-6519 (fax), [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    LSC is extending the public comment period stated in the Federal Register notice for this rulemaking. 81 FR 75006, Oct. 28, 2016. In that notice, LSC proposed amendments to its regulations governing definitions (45 CFR part 1600), cost standards and procedures (45 CFR part 1630), and purchasing and property management (45 CFR part 1631). LSC has received requests for an extension of the comment period to allow interested parties and stakeholders additional time to develop their comments on the proposed rulemaking, including obtaining data about the potential effects of proposed changes. LSC is therefore extending the comment period for 30 days, from December 27, 2016 to January 26, 2017.

    Dated: December 16, 2016. Stefanie K. Davis, Assistant General Counsel.
    [FR Doc. 2016-30717 Filed 12-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7050-01-P
    81 245 Wednesday, December 21, 2016 Notices DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request December 15, 2016.

    The Department of Agriculture has submitted the following information collection requirement(s) to OMB for review and clearance under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. Comments are requested regarding (1) whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of burden including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

    Comments regarding this information collection received by January 20, 2017 will be considered. Written comments should be addressed to: Desk Officer for Agriculture, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget (OMB), [email protected] or fax (202) 395-5806 and to Departmental Clearance Office, USDA, OCIO, Mail Stop 7602, Washington, DC 20250-7602. Copies of the submission(s) may be obtained by calling (202) 720-8958.

    An agency may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless the collection of information displays a currently valid OMB control number and the agency informs potential persons who are to respond to the collection of information that such persons are not required to respond to the collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

    Food and Nutrition Service

    Title: Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program: State Options.

    OMB Control Number: 0584-0496.

    Summary of Collection: The Food, Conservation and Energy Act of 2008, Public Law 110-246, Section 4001-4002, amended the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 to rename the Food Stamp Program the “Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). The Act establishes SNAP as a means-tested program under which needy households may apply for and receive assistance to supplement their ability to purchase food. The Act specifies national eligibility standards and imposes certain administrative requirements on State agencies in administering the program. The program is directly administered by State agencies, which are responsible for determining the eligibility of applicant households and issuing benefits to those households entitled to benefits under the Act.

    Need and Use of the Information: FNS will collect information from State agencies on how the various SNAP implementation options will be determined. The information collected will be used by FNS to establish quality control reviews, standards and self-employment costs.

    Description of Respondents: State, Local or Tribal Government.

    Number of Respondents: 53.

    Frequency of Responses: Recordkeeping; Reporting: Annually.

    Total Burden Hours: 746.

    Ruth Brown, Departmental Information Collection Clearance Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2016-30654 Filed 12-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-30-P
    DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request December 15, 2016.

    The Department of Agriculture has submitted the following information collection requirement(s) to OMB for review and clearance under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. Comments are requested regarding (1) whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of burden including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

    Comments regarding this information collection received by January 20, 2017 will be considered. Written comments should be addressed to: Desk Officer for Agriculture, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget (OMB), New Executive Office Building, 725—17th Street NW., Washington, DC 20502. Commenters are encouraged to submit their comments to OMB via email to: [email protected] or fax (202) 395-5806 and to Departmental Clearance Office, USDA, OCIO, Mail Stop 7602, Washington, DC 20250-7602. Copies of the submission(s) may be obtained by calling (202) 720-8958.

    An agency may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless the collection of information displays a currently valid OMB control number and the agency informs potential persons who are to respond to the collection of information that such persons are not required to respond to the collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

    National Institute of Food and Agriculture

    Title: 4-H Enrollment Report.

    OMB Control Number: 0524-0045.

    Summary of Collection: The 1914 Smith-Lever Act created the Cooperative Extension System and the land-grant universities and their federal partner, the Extension Service, now the National Institute of Food and Agriculture, USDA. The mission of the National 4-H Headquarters; National Institute of Food and Agriculture, United States Department of Agriculture; is to advance scientific knowledge for agriculture, the environment, human and animal health and well-being, and communities by creating opportunities for youth. 4-H is the premier youth development program of the United States Department of Agriculture. Originating in the early 1900's as “four-square education,” the 4-H's (head-heart-hands-health) seek to promote positive youth development, facilitate learning and engage youth in the work of their community to enhance the quality of life.

    Need and Use of the Information: The annual 4-H Enrollment Report is the principal means by which the 4-H movement can keep track of its progress, as well as emerging needs, potential problems and opportunities. All of the information necessary to run the 4-H program is collected from individuals clubs, and other units. The information collected is used to report, as requested by the Congress or the Administration, on rural versus urban outreach, enrollment by race, youth participation in leadership, community service, etc. It is also used to determine market share or percentage of the youth of each state by age and place of residence who are enrolled in the 4-H youth development program. Without the information it would be impossible to justify federal funding for the 4-H program.

    Description of Respondents: State, Local or Tribal Government.

    Number of Respondents: 109.

    Frequency of Responses: Reporting: Annually.

    Total Burden Hours: 111.

    Ruth Brown, Departmental Information Collection Clearance Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2016-30672 Filed 12-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-09-P
    DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Forest Service Virginia Resource Advisory Committee AGENCY:

    Forest Service, USDA.

    ACTION:

    Notice of meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    The Virginia Resource Advisory Committee (RAC) will meet in Roanoke, VA. The committee is authorized under the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act (the Act) and operates in compliance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act. The purpose of the committee is to improve collaborative relationships and to provide advice and recommendations to the Forest Service concerning projects and funding consistent with Title II of the Act. Additional RAC information, including the meeting agenda and the meeting summary/minutes can be found at the following Web site: www.fs.fed.us/r8/gwj.

    DATES:

    The meeting will be held at 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on the following dates:

    • April 10, 2017 • April 17, 2017 • April 24, 2017

    All RAC meetings are subject to cancellation. For status of meeting prior to attendance, please contact the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

    ADDRESSES:

    The meetings will be held at the George Washington and Jefferson National Forests (NF) Supervisor's Office, Conference Room, 5162 Valleypointe Parkway, Roanoke, Virginia.

    Written comments may be submitted as described under SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. All comments, including names and addresses when provided, are placed in the record and are available for public inspection and copying. The public may inspect comments received at the George Washington and Jefferson NF Supervisor's Office. Please call ahead to facilitate entry into the building.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Rebecca Robbins, RAC Coordinator by phone at (540) 265-5173 or via email at [email protected]

    Individuals who use telecommunication devices for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8339 between 8:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m., Eastern Standard Time, Monday through Friday.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The purpose of the meetings is to prioritize and recommend projects for Title II funds. The meeting is open to the public. The agenda will include time for people to make oral statements of three minutes or less. Individuals wishing to make an oral statement should request in writing by April 3, 2017 to be scheduled on the agenda. Anyone who would like to bring related matters to the attention of the committee may file written statements with the committee staff before or after the meeting. Written comments and requests for time for oral comments must be sent to Rebecca Robbins, RAC Coordinator, George Washington and Jefferson NF Supervisor's Office, 5162 Valleypointe Parkway, Roanoke, Virginia 24019; or by email to [email protected], or via facsimile to 540-265-5145.

    Meeting Accommodations: If you are a person requiring reasonable accommodation, please make requests in advance for sign language interpreting, assistive listening devices or other reasonable accommodation for access to the facility or proceedings by contacting the person listed in the section titled FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. All reasonable accommodation requests are managed on a case by case basis.

    Dated: December 15, 2016. Joby P. Timm Forest Supervisor.
    [FR Doc. 2016-30729 Filed 12-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3411-15-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Economic Development Administration Notice of Petitions by Firms for Determination of Eligibility To Apply for Trade Adjustment Assistance AGENCY:

    Economic Development Administration, Department of Commerce.

    ACTION:

    Notice and opportunity for public comment.

    Pursuant to Section 251 of the Trade Act 1974, as amended (19 U.S.C. 2341 et seq.), the Economic Development Administration (EDA) has received petitions for certification of eligibility to apply for Trade Adjustment Assistance from the firms listed below. Accordingly, EDA has initiated investigations to determine whether increased imports into the United States of articles like or directly competitive with those produced by each of these firms contributed importantly to the total or partial separation of the firm's workers, or threat thereof, and to a decrease in sales or production of each petitioning firm.

    List of Petitions Received by EDA for Certification Eligibility To Apply for Trade Adjustment Assistance [12/15/2016 through 12/16/2016] Firm name Firm address Date
  • accepted for
  • investigation
  • Product(s)
    Advanced Design Consulting USA, Inc. 126 Ridge Road, P.O. Box 187, Lansing, NY 14882 12/15/2016 The firm manufactures complex scientific components and instruments for government laboratories and corporations world wide.

    Any party having a substantial interest in these proceedings may request a public hearing on the matter. A written request for a hearing must be submitted to the Trade Adjustment Assistance for Firms Division, Room 71030, Economic Development Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, Washington, DC 20230, no later than ten (10) calendar days following publication of this notice.

    Please follow the requirements set forth in EDA's regulations at 13 CFR 315.9 for procedures to request a public hearing. The Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance official number and title for the program under which these petitions are submitted is 11.313, Trade Adjustment Assistance for Firms.

    Miriam Kearse, Lead Program Analyst.
    [FR Doc. 2016-30723 Filed 12-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-WH-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Economics and Statistics Administration Extension of Deadline for Nominations of Members To Serve on the Commerce Data Advisory Council (CDAC) AGENCY:

    Economics and Statistics Administration (ESA), Department of Commerce.

    ACTION:

    Extension of Deadline for Nominations of Members to the Commerce Data Advisory Council (CDAC).

    SUMMARY:

    The Secretary of Commerce is requesting nomination of individuals to the Commerce Data Advisory Council. The Secretary will consider nominations received in response to this notice, as well as from other sources. The SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this notice provides committee and membership criterial

    DATES:

    The Economics and Statistics Administration must receive nominations of members by midnight January 6, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Please submit nominations to the email account [email protected], this account is specifically set up to receive Data Advisory Council applications. Nominations may also be submitted by postal delivery to Burton Reist, Director of External Affairs, Economics and Statistics Administration/DFO CDAC, Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington DC 20230.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Burton Reist, Director of External Affairs, Economics and Statistics Administration, Department of Commerce, at (202) 482-3331 or email [email protected], also at 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington DC 20230.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Background

    The Department of Commerce (Department) collects, compiles, analyzes, and disseminates a treasure trove of data, including data on the Nation's economy, population, and environment. This data is fundamental to the Department's mission and is used for the protection of life and property, for scientific purposes, and to enhance economic growth. However, the Department's capacity to disseminate the increasing amount of data held and to disseminate it in formats most useful to its customers is significantly constrained.

    In order to realize the potential value of the data the Department collects, stores, and disseminates, the Department must minimize barriers to accessing and using the data. Consistent with privacy and security considerations, the Department is firmly committed to unleashing its untapped data resources in ways that best support downstream information access, processing, analysis, and dissemination.

    The Commerce Data Advisory Council (CDAC) provides advice and recommendations, to include process and infrastructure improvements, to the Secretary on ways to make Commerce data easier to find, access, use, combine and disseminate. The aim of this advice shall be to maximize the value of Commerce data to all users including governments, businesses, communities, academia, and individuals.

    The Secretary will draw CDAC membership from the data industry academia, non-profits and state and local governments with a focus on recognized expertise in collection, compilation, analysis, and dissemination. As privacy concerns span the entire data lifecycle, expertise in privacy protection also will be represented on the Council. The Secretary will select members that represent the entire spectrum of Commerce data including demographic, economic, scientific, environmental, patent, and geospatial data. The Secretary will select members from the information technology, business, non-profit, and academic communities, and state and local governments. Collectively, their knowledge will include all types of data Commerce distributes and the full lifecycle of data collection, compilation, analysis, and dissemination.

    II. Description of Duties

    The Council shall advise the Secretary on ways to make Commerce data easier to find, access, use, combine, and disseminate. Such advice may include recommended process and infrastructure improvements. The aim of this advice shall be to maximize the value of Commerce data to governments, businesses, communities, and individuals.

    In carrying out its duties, the Council may consider the following:

    —Data management practices that make it easier to track and disseminate integrated, interoperable data for diverse users; —Best practices that can be deployed across Commerce to achieve common, open standards related to taxonomy, vocabulary, application programming interfaces (APIs), metadata, and other key data characteristics; —Policy issues that arise from expanding access to data, including issues related to privacy, confidentiality, latency, and consistency; —Opportunities and risks related to the combination of public and private data sources and the development of joint data products and services resulting from public-private partnerships; —External uses of Commerce data and similar federal, state, and private data sets by businesses; and, —Methods to enhance communication and collaboration between stakeholders and subject-matter experts at Commerce on data access and use.

    The Council meets up to four times a year, budget permitting. Special meetings may be called when appropriate.

    Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), which sets forth standards for the formation and use of advisory committees, is the governing instrument for the CDAC.

    III. Membership

    1. The Council shall consist of up to 20 members.

    2. The Secretary shall select and appoint members and members shall serve at the pleasure of the Secretary.

    3. Members shall represent a cross-section of business, academic, non-profit, and non-governmental organizations.

    4. The Secretary will choose members of the Council who ensure objectivity and balance, a diversity of perspectives, and guard against potential for conflicts of interest.

    5. Members shall be prominent experts in their fields, recognized for their professional and other relevant achievements and their objectivity.

    6. In order to ensure the continuity of the Commerce Data Advisory Council, the Council shall be appointed so that each year the terms expire of approximately one-third of the members of the Council.

    7. Council members serve for terms of two years and may be reappointed to any number of additional terms. Initial appointments may be for 12-, 18- and 24-month increments to provide staggered terms.

    8. Nominees must be able to actively participate in the tasks of the Council, including, but not limited to regular meeting attendance, Council meeting discussant responsibilities, and review of materials, as well as participation in conference calls, webinars, working groups, and special Council activities.

    9. Should a council member be unable to complete a two-year term and when vacancies occur, the Secretary will select replacements who can best either replicate the expertise of the departing member or provide the CDAC with a new, identified needed area of expertise. An individual chosen to fill a vacancy shall be appointed for the remainder of the term of the member replaced or for a two-year term as deemed. A vacancy shall not affect the exercise of any power of the remaining members to execute the duties of the Council.

    10. No employee of the federal government can serve as a member of the Census Scientific Advisory Committee.

    All members of the Commerce Data Advisory Council shall adhere to the conflict of interest rules applicable to Special Government Employees as such employees are defined in 18 U.S.C. 202(a). These rules include relevant provisions in 18 U.S.C. related to criminal activity, Standards of Ethical Conduct for Employees of the Executive Branch (5 CFR part 2635), and Executive Order 12674 (as modified by Executive Order 12731).

    IV. Compensation

    1. Membership is under voluntary circumstances and therefore members do not receive compensation for service on the Commerce Data Advisory Council.

    2. Members shall receive per diem and travel expenses as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 5703, as amended, for persons employed intermittently in the Government service.

    V. Nominations Information

    The Secretary will consider nominations of all qualified individuals to ensure that the CDAC includes the areas of subject matter expertise noted above (see ”Background and Membership”). Individuals may nominate themselves or other individuals, and professional associations and organizations may nominate one or more qualified persons for membership on the CDAC. Nominations shall state that the nominee is willing to serve as a member of the Council. A nomination package should include the following information for each nominee:

    1. A letter of nomination stating the name, affiliation, and contact information for the nominee, the basis for the nomination (i.e., what specific attributes recommend him/her for service in this capacity), and the nominee's field(s) of expertise;

    2. A biographical sketch of the nominee and a copy of his/her resume or curriculum vitae; and

    3. The name, return address, email address, and daytime telephone number at which the nominator can be contacted.

    The Department of Commerce is committed to equal opportunity in the workplace and seeks diverse Committee membership. The Department has special interest in assuring that women, minority groups, and the physically disabled are adequately represented on advisory committees; and therefore, extends particular encouragement to nominations for appropriately qualified female, minority, or disabled candidates. The Department of Commerce also encourages geographic diversity in the composition of the Council. All nomination information should be provided in a single, complete package and received by the stated deadline, January 6, 2017. Interested applicants should send their nomination package to the email or postal address provided above.

    Potential candidates will be asked to provide detailed information concerning financial interests, consultancies, research grants, and/or contracts that might be affected by recommendations of the Council to permit evaluation of possible sources of conflicts of interest. Finally, nominees will be required to certify that they are not subject to the Foreign Agents Registration Act (22 U.S.C. 611) or the Lobbying Disclosure Act (2 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.).

    Dated: December 15, 2016. Burton Reist, Director of External Affairs, Economics and Statistics Administration.
    [FR Doc. 2016-30665 Filed 12-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-588-850, A-588-851, A-485-805] Certain Large Diameter Carbon and Alloy Seamless Standard, Line and Pressure Pipe From Japan; Certain Small Diameter Carbon and Alloy Seamless Standard, Line and Pressure Pipe From Japan and Romania: Final Results of the Expedited Third Five-Year Sunset Reviews of the Antidumping Duty Orders AGENCY:

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

    DATES:

    Effective December 21, 2016.

    SUMMARY:

    As a result of these sunset reviews, the Department of Commerce (the Department) finds that revocation of the antidumping duty orders on certain large diameter carbon and alloy seamless standard, line and pressure pipe (large diameter pipe) from Japan and certain small diameter carbon and alloy seamless standard, line and pressure pipe (small diameter pipe) from Japan and Romania would likely lead to a continuation or recurrence of dumping at the margins identified in the “Final Results of Review” section of this notice.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Thomas Schauer, AD/CVD Operations, Office I, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone (202) 482-0410.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background

    On September 1, 2016, the Department published the notice of initiation of the third sunset reviews of the antidumping duty orders on large diameter pipe from Japan and small diameter pipe from Japan and Romania, pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act).1 The Department received notices of intent to participate in both of the Japan reviews from TMK IPSCO, Vallourec Star, L.P. (Vallourec), and United States Steel Corporation (U.S. Steel), domestic interested parties (collectively, the petitioners) and a notice of intent to participate in the Romania review from Vallourec and U.S. Steel, within the deadline specified in 19 CFR 351.218(d)(1)(i). The petitioners claimed interested party status for each of these reviews under section 771(9)(C) of the Act, as manufacturers of the domestic like product in the United States.

    1See Initiation of Five-Year (“Sunset”) Review, 81 FR 60343 (September 1, 2016).

    On October 3, 2016, the Department received a complete substantive response from the petitioners for each of the reviews within the deadline specified in 19 CFR 351.218(d)(3)(i). We received no substantive responses from any respondent interested parties. As a result, pursuant to section 751(c)(3)(B) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.218(e)(1)(ii)(C)(2), the Department conducted expedited sunset reviews of these antidumping duty orders.

    Scope of the Orders Large Diameter Pipe From Japan

    The products covered by this order are large diameter seamless carbon and alloy (other than stainless) steel standard, line, and pressure pipes. The seamless pipes subject to this order are currently classifiable under the subheadings 7304.10.10.30, 7304.10.10.45, 7304.10.10.60, 7304.10.50.50, 7304.19.10.30, 7304.19.10.45, 7304.19.10.60, 7304.19.50.50, 7304.31.60.10, 7304.31.60.50, 7304.39.00.04, 7304.39.00.06, 7304.39.00.08, 7304.39.00.36, 7304.39.00.40, 7304.39.00.44, 7304.39.00.48, 7304.39.00.52, 7304.39.00.56, 7304.39.00.62, 7304.39.00.68, 7304.39.00.72, 7304.51.50.15, 7304.51.50.45, 7304.51.50.60, 7304.59.20.30, 7304.59.20.55, 7304.59.20.60, 7304.59.20.70, 7304.59.60.00, 7304.59.80.30, 7304.59.80.35, 7304.59.80.40, 7304.59.80.45, 7304.59.80.50, 7304.59.80.55, 7304.59.80.60, 7304.59.80.65, and 7304.59.80.70 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). The HTSUS subheading is provided for convenience and customs purposes. The written product description remains dispositive.2

    2 A full description of the scope of the order is contained in the Memorandum from Deputy Assistant Secretary Christian Marsh to Assistant Secretary Paul Piquado, “Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Final Results of the Expedited Sunset Reviews of the Antidumping Duty Orders on Certain Large Diameter Carbon and Alloy Seamless Standard, Line and Pressure Pipe from Japan (A-588-850), Certain Small Diameter Carbon and Alloy Seamless Standard, Line and Pressure Pipe from Japan (A-588-851) and Romania (A-485-805),” dated concurrently with and hereby adopted by this notice (Issues and Decision Memorandum).

    Small Diameter Pipe From Japan and Romania

    The products covered by these orders include small diameter seamless carbon and alloy (other than stainless) steel standard, line, and pressure pipes and redraw hollows. The seamless pipes subject to these orders are currently classifiable under the subheadings 7304.10.10.20, 7304.10.50.20, 7304.19.10.20, 7304.19.50.20, 7304.31.30.00, 7304.31.60.50, 7304.39.00.16, 7304.39.00.20, 7304.39.00.24, 7304.39.00.28, 7304.39.00.32, 7304.51.50.05, 7304.51.50.60, 7304.59.60.00, 7304.59.80.10, 7304.59.80.15, 7304.59.80.20, and 7304.59.80.25 of the HTSUS. The HTSUS subheading is provided for convenience and customs purposes. The written product description remains dispositive.3

    3See Issues and Decision Memorandum.

    Analysis of Comments Received

    All issues raised in these reviews, including the likelihood of continuation or recurrence of dumping and the magnitude of the margins likely to prevail if the orders were revoked, are addressed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum. The Issues and 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 to all parties in the Central Records Unit, room B8024 of the main Department of Commerce building. In addition, a complete version of the Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly on the Internet at http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn.

    Final Results of Sunset Reviews

    Pursuant to sections 751(c)(1) and 752(c)(1), (2), and (3) of the Act, the Department determines that revocation of the order on large diameter pipe from Japan and the orders on small diameter pipe from Japan and Romania would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping up to the following weighted-average margin percentages:

    Country Weighted-
  • average
  • margin
  • (percent)
  • Japan (Large Diameter) 107.80 Japan (Small Diameter) 106.07 Romania (Small Diameter) 14.25
    Notification to Interested Parties

    This notice also serves as the only reminder to parties subject to administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. Timely notification of the return or destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial protective orders is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and terms of an APO is a violation which is subject to sanction.

    We are issuing and publishing these final results and notice in accordance with sections 751(c), 752(c), and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.218.

    Dated: December 15, 2016. Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations. Appendix—List of Topics Discussed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum

    I. Summary II. Background III. Scope of the Orders IV. History of the Orders V. Legal Framework VI. Discussion of the Issues 1. Likelihood of Continuation or Recurrence of Dumping 2. Magnitude of the Margins Likely To Prevail VII. Final Results of Sunset Reviews VIII. Recommendation [FR Doc. 2016-30732 Filed 12-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [Docket No. 161020988-6988-01] RIN 0625-XC026 Revisions to User Fees for Export and Investment Promotion Services/Events AGENCY:

    U.S. & Foreign Commercial Service, International Trade Administration, Commerce.

    ACTION:

    Notice of proposed fee revisions and request for comment.

    SUMMARY:

    The U.S. & Foreign Commercial Service (US&FCS) within the International Trade Administration (ITA) is seeking comment on its proposal to adjust user fees in light of an independent cost study which concluded that the US&FCS is not fully covering its costs for providing services under the current fee structure, as provided in the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-25. ITA provides a wide range of export and investment promotion information and services to U.S. individuals and entities. The services considered here are a subset of ITA activities that involve relatively more intensive time engagements with particular client firms; ITA will continue to provide information and services that are less intensive and/or benefit the general public without charge. As part of this proposal, US&FCS also proposes to revise the standards related to company size for determining the fees to be charged.

    DATES:

    We will consider all comments that we receive by January 16, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments by either of the following methods:

    Federal eRulemaking Portal: www.Regulations.gov. The identification number is ITA-2016-0012.

    • Postal Mail/Commercial Delivery to Docket No. ITA-2016-0012, International Trade Administration, U.S. & Foreign Commercial Service, Office of Strategic Planning & Resource Management, 1400 Constitution Avenue NW., Rm. C125, Washington, DC 20235.

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

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ms. Aditi Palli, International Trade Administration, U.S. & Foreign Commercial Service, Office of Strategic Planning, 1400 Constitution Avenue NW., Rm. 21022, Washington, DC 20230, Phone: (202) 482-2025.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background

    The statutory mission of US&FCS is to “place primary emphasis on the promotion of exports of goods and services from the United States, particularly by small businesses and medium-sized businesses, and on the protection of United States business interests abroad . . . through activities that include assisting United States exporters.” 15 U.S.C. Sec. 4721(b). The statute further defines the term “United States exporter” at 15 U.S.C. Sec. 4721(j) as a U.S. citizen, U.S. corporation, or foreign corporation that is more than 95% U.S.-owned, that “exports or seeks to export, goods or services produced in the United States.” In addition, US&FCS leads the federal government's investment promotion efforts “to attract and retain investment in the American economy” as provided in Executive Order 13577—SelectUSA Initiative (June 15, 2011). In carrying out these efforts, US&FCS may collect user fees from U.S. economic development organizations that seek to promote their locality to foreign investors.

    OMB Circular A-25 requires the recovery of an appropriate share of the full cost through user fees for goods and services provided to recipients of benefits beyond those accruing to the general public. Specifically, section 6 of Circular A-25 states that “when a service (or privilege) provides special benefits to an identifiable recipient beyond those that accrue to the general public, a charge will be imposed (to recover the full cost to the Federal Government for providing the special benefit, or the market price).” A “user fee” is the amount paid by a recipient of a special benefit beyond those benefits accruing to the general public. A “special benefit” may accrue and a user fee be imposed when a government service: (a) Enables the beneficiary to obtain more immediate or substantial gains or values than those that accrue to the general public; (b) is performed at the request or for the convenience of the recipient, and is beyond the services regularly received by members of the same industry or group or by the general public; or (c) provides business stability or contributes to public confidence in the business activity of the beneficiary.

    The direct or indirect cost of a service provided by the Federal Government includes, but is not limited to, the following:

    • Direct and indirect personnel costs, including salaries and fringe benefits such as medical insurance and retirement. Retirement costs should include all (funded or unfunded) accrued costs not covered by employee contributions as specified in Circular A-11.

    • Physical overhead, consulting, or other indirect costs including material and supply costs, utilities, insurance travel, and rents or imputed rents on land, buildings, and equipment.

    • The management and supervisory costs.

    • The costs of enforcement, collection, research, establishment of standards, and regulation, including any environmental impact statements.

    Business Size Standards

    To comply with the Small Business Act, US&FCS, in consultation with the Small Business Administration (SBA), proposes the following standards related to company size:

    Small Business: The company qualifies as a “small business” under SBA's size standards matched to the North American Industry Classification System Codes.

    Medium-sized Business: The company does not qualify under SBA's size standards matched to the North American Industry Classification System Codes, but has less than $1 billion in annual revenue.

    Large Business: The company does not qualify under SBA's size standards matched to the North American Industry Classification System Codes and has more than $1 billion in annual revenue.

    The US&FCS is committed to ensuring small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) can access the services that US&FCS provides. The US&FCS has historically offered a discount to SMEs, as well as to U.S. economic development organizations and non-profit educational institutions. US&FCS proposes to continue discounted fees for these target populations. Rather than applying a standard discount rate to all services, the fees proposed for each service are based on price sensitivity survey results as well as other considerations, such as the need to ensure that user fees set the proper expectation about the value-added for one service relative to other service offerings. The result is an average discount of 70 percent for small companies, U.S. economic development organizations, and non-profit educational institutions, and 30 percent for medium-sized companies.

    User Fee Schedule

    The US&FCS offers export and investment promotion services to U.S. businesses that consist of Standardized Fee Services and Customized Fee Services. For each of these services, the US&FCS collects fees according to the User Fee Schedule that is made available on its Web site and agency publications. The “Standardized Fee Services” listed in the User Fee Schedule are services that are performed in the same general manner by all US&FCS field units. Other “Customized Services,” not shown in the chart below, entail substantive variation of the scope of work with fees based on the level of effort required and direct costs incurred. Under this notice, US&FCS proposes to turn more Customized Fee Services into Standardized Fee Services to improve the consistency and clarity of fees to be charged.

    The US&FCS proposes to modify the user fees for both Standardized Fee Services and Customized Fee Services. The proposed new User Fee Schedule provided below lists each standardized fee service and the estimated number of hours for completion of service delivery. To determine the large company fee for any service, a flat hourly rate of $46 for locally employed staff, $150 for commercial officers and $80 for U.S.-based staff is multiplied by the estimated workload hours for each employee type. To determine the fees for a small business and medium-sized business, price sensitivity survey results were analyzed to determine the discount to be applied. Direct costs, such as transportation or an interpreter, will be discussed with the client and assessed in addition to the user fee. For Customized Fee Services, the estimated workload hours will vary, but the user fee will be calculated based on the weighted average hourly rate of $90 per hour for large companies, $70 per hour for medium-sized enterprises, and $30 per hour for small businesses. The services included in this proposal are described below.

    1. Business Service Provider A listing of U.S. and foreign business service providers that offer export/investment assistance; such as consultants, lawyers, freight forwarders, etc. The fee is paid for by the business service provider to be listed on US&FCS's Web sites.

    2. Certified Trade/Investment Mission: Provides a group of U.S. companies or economic development organizations with a market briefing, networking reception and Gold Key Service in-country as part of a mission organized by an economic development organization or US&FCS office/team. The fees for these missions are separate from DOC Executive-led Missions, which are organized by Industry and Analysis/Trade Promotion Programs.

    3. Featured U.S. Exporter: Provides U.S. companies with an opportunity to enhance their international marketing efforts through improved search engine optimization via .gov link-backs to their company's Web site. The service entails listing their goods/services overseas on a trusted U.S. government Web site with a brief description and contact information.

    4. Gold Key Service: Provides U.S. companies with matchmaking appointments with up to five interested partners in a foreign market; including: Identification and outreach to potential matching firms; sending client's information to identified matching firms; preparing a profile of interested firms; and providing a report with the profile and contact information for interested firms.

    5. Initial Market Check: Provides U.S. firms with a report containing information needed to evaluate the potential of their product or service offering in a specific target market; including: A snapshot of the market potential of the product/service; feedback from up to five local contacts on their level of interest in the product/service; and analysis and recommendations for next steps.

    6. International Company Profile—Full Report: Full: Provides U.S. companies and economic development organizations with a comprehensive background report on a specific foreign company, including: Information on company size, sales data, business activities, corporate structure, shareholders and directors, references, financial data creditworthiness and market outlook; site visit and interviews with principals; information sources consulted in preparing the report; and analysis of information collected.

    7. International Company Profile—Partial Report: Provides U.S. companies and economic development organizations with a partial background report on a specific foreign company; including: Information on company size, sales data, business activities, references, corporate structure, and shareholders/directors; information sources consulted in preparing the report; and brief analysis of information collected.

    8. International Partner Service: Provides U.S. companies with a list of up to five partners/distributors that have expressed an interest in the client's goods/services; including: Identification and outreach to potential matching firms; sending client's information to identified matching firms; preparing a profile of interested firms; and providing a report with the profile and contact information for interested firms.

    9. International Partner Search + Virtual Introductions: Provides the same as above, but also includes virtual introductions via conference calls with up to five of the contacts identified.

    10. Other Customized Services/Events: Includes all other services/events not listed.

    11. Single Company or Location Promotion: Provides a U.S. firm or locality with a promotional event (such as a technical seminar, press conference, luncheon, dinner, cocktail reception, etc.) to help increase awareness of their locality or existing/new products/services in a specific market, including: organizing the event logistics/venue; conducting a targeted direct mail or email campaigns; managing the promotional campaign and event-related logistics; providing logistical and promotional support on-site during the event; and providing a post-event de-briefing to discuss next steps.

    12. Target Market Analysis: Provides U.S. firms with an analysis of the most promising target markets overseas for their product/service based on analysis of secondary research/data (macroeconomic/commercial & trade/risk data).

    13. Trade Show Representation: Provides U.S. companies and economic development organizations with the ability to increase their marketing exposure at a trade show when they are unable to attend in-person; entails conducting pre-trade show promotions via Internet/social media/email campaign; representing the client at the trade show; displaying the client's promotional materials at the trade show; conducting outreach to foreign buyers/distributors in attendance at the trade show; and providing contact information for each overseas company that expressed interest in the client's products/services at the trade show.

    14. Verified Contact List: Provides U.S. firms with a basic contact list of up to five to 10 agents, distributors and partners in a foreign market. The information included in the contact list will have been reviewed and verified for accuracy only and no information will be provided on the level of interest in the client's products/services.

    15. Webinar: Provides U.S. firms and economic development organizations with export knowledge and/or market intelligence from experts located around the globe via an online webinar. The webinars are archived on export.gov.

    16. Web site Globalization: provides U.S. companies with services to enhance the strength of their Web site for the purpose of attracting foreign partners/business.

    User Fee Discounts

    The US&FCS currently offers various discounts to SMEs, economic development organizations and non-profit educational institutions. US&FCS proposes to discount services for all small businesses, economic development organization and non-profit educational institutions by an average of ~70 percent and for all medium-sized enterprises by an average of ~30 percent. Under this notice, US&FCS also proposes to eliminate the current SME incentive program, which currently offers an additional discount for first-time users of US&FCS services.

    Full cost rates and SME discount rates are provided on the next page so that the public can comment upon the implications of full and SME rates.

    1 Other direct costs not included in the service description must be assumed by the client. Types of other direct costs include translation, transportation, use of contractors, venue rental, catering, etc.

    2 Fees listed also apply to Economic Development Organizations and Non-profit Educational Institutions

    3 Fees listed also apply to Foreign Companies, regardless of their size, that use US&FCS services, particularly the Business Service Provider listing, to promote themselves to U.S. exporters.

    Proposed User Fee Schedule for Export Promotion Services Service/Event Average hours
  • (per client)
  • Current fee 1 Small 2 Medium Large 3 Proposed fee 1 Small 2 Medium Large 3
    Business Service Provider 4 $300
  • + $50 for translation if needed
  • $600
  • + $50 for translation if needed
  • $600
  • + $50 for translation if needed
  • $150
  • + $50 for translation if needed
  • $250
  • + $50 for translation if needed
  • $350
  • + $50 for translation if needed.
  • Certified Trade Mission (market briefing and/or networking reception and/or Gold Key Service—GKS) 70 $28 per staff hour
  • + any direct costs
  • $28 per staff hour
  • + any direct costs
  • $28 per staff hour
  • + any direct costs
  • Full Package: $1,200
  • Networking Reception and GKS: $1,100
  • Market Briefing and GKS: $1,000
  • Market Briefing and Networking Reception: $250
  • + any direct costs
  • Full Package: $2,800
  • Networking Reception and GKS: $2,700
  • Market Briefing and GKS: $2,400
  • Market Briefing and Networking Reception: $500
  • + any direct costs
  • Full Package: $4,000.
  • Networking Reception and GKS: $3,900.
  • Market Briefing and GKS: $3,500.
  • Market Briefing and Networking Reception: $600.
  • + any direct costs.
  • Featured U.S. Exporter listing (5 markets) 8 $150
  • + $50 for translation if needed
  • $300
  • + $50 for translation if needed
  • $300
  • + $50 for translation if needed
  • $150
  • + $50 for translation if needed
  • $350
  • + $50 for translation if needed
  • $500.
  • + $50 for translation if needed.
  • Gold Key Service 62 $700
  • + $350 for 2nd day
  • $2,300
  • + $1,000 for 2nd day
  • $2,300
  • + $1,000 for 2nd day
  • $950
  • + $350 for 2nd day
  • $2,300
  • + $1,000 for 2nd day
  • $3,400.
  • + $1,200 for 2nd day.
  • Initial Market Check 20 $450 $1,280 $1,280 $450 $1,000 $1,300. International Company Profile—Full 31 $600 $900 $900 $700 $1,200 $2,000. International Company Profile—Partial 12 N/A N/A N/A $350 $850 $1,100. International Partner Search 40 $550 $1,400 $1,400 $750 $1,400 $2,800. International Partner Search + Virtual Introductions 45 N/A N/A N/A $900 $1,750 $3,250. Other Customized Services and Events N/A $28 per staff hour
  • + any direct costs
  • $80 per staff hour
  • + any direct costs
  • $80 per staff hour
  • + any direct costs
  • $30 per staff hour
  • + any direct costs
  • $70 per staff hour
  • + any direct costs
  • $90 per staff hour
  • + any direct costs.
  • Single Company Promotion Events requires 20 to 40; 40 to 80; or 80 to 110 $28 per staff hour
  • + any direct costs
  • $80 per staff hour
  • + any direct costs
  • $80 per staff hour
  • + any direct costs
  • 20 to 40 hours of staff time: $800
  • 40 to 80 hours of staff time: $1,500
  • 80 to 110 hours of staff time: $2,600
  • + any direct costs.
  • 20 to 40 hours of staff time: $1,800
  • 40 to 80 hours of staff time: $2,000
  • 80 to 110 hours of staff time: $4,800
  • + any direct costs.
  • 20 to 40 hours of staff time: $2,600.
  • 40 to 80 hours of staff time: $4,500.
  • 80 to 110 hours of staff time: $6,300.
  • + any direct costs.
  • Target Market Analysis 5 N/A N/A N/A $150 $350 $500. Trade Show Representation 12 N/A N/A N/A $400 $950 $1,350. Verified Contact List 5 N/A N/A N/A $150 $350 $450. Webinar 2 $28 per staff hour $28 per staff hour $28 per staff hour $25 per webinar hour $25 per webinar hour $25 per webinar hour. Website Globalization 4 N/A N/A N/A $100 $300 $400.

    4 Other direct costs not included in the service description must be covered by the client in the form of additional user fees. Types of other direct costs include translation, transportation, use of contractors, venue rental, catering, etc.

    Proposed User Fee Schedule for Investment Promotion Services Service Average hours
  • (per client)
  • Current fee for economic development
  • organizations 4
  • Proposed fee for economic development
  • organizations 4
  • Certified Investment Mission (market briefing, networking reception and Gold Key Service) 70 $28 per staff hour
  • + any direct costs.
  • Full Package: $1,200.
  • Networking Reception and GKS: $1,100.
  • Market Briefing and GKS: $1,000.
  • Market Briefing and Networking Reception: $250.
  • + any direct costs.
  • Gold Key Service 62 $700
  • + $350 for 2nd day.
  • $950
  • + $350 for 2nd day.
  • International Company Profile—Full 31 $600 $700. International Company Profile—Partial 12 N/A $350. Other Customized Services/Events N/A $28 per staff hour
  • + any direct costs.
  • $30 per staff hour
  • + any direct costs.
  • Single Location Promotion 20 to 40; 40 to 80; or 80 to 110 $28 per staff hour
  • + any direct costs.
  • 20-40 hours of staff time: $800.
  • 40-80 hours of staff time: $1,500.
  • 80-110 hours of staff time: $2,000.
  • + any direct costs.
  • Notes:

    Business Service Provider: Fee is for up to 5 categories. To be listed in more than 5 categories, there is an additional fee per category of $60 for large companies, $40 for medium-sized enterprises and $30 for small businesses.

    Certified Trade Mission: The fee is assessed on a per Post/city basis. Applicants will be charged a fee for an Initial Market Check if US&FCS staff is uncertain about their market potential. The fee paid by the applicant will then be applied to their Certified Trade Mission fee if they participate in the mission.

    Featured U.S. Exporter: Listings are typically provided for up to 5 markets; however, they can be provided for an individual market for $100 for large companies, $40 for medium-sized enterprises and $30 for small businesses.

    Initial Market Check: Will be a required precursor to more time intensive services if US&FCS staff is uncertain about a client's market potential. Fees paid for the Initial Market Check will then be applied to any follow-on service if the results are positive. The fee is assessed on a per country basis.

    International Company Profile—Partial: Does not include a site visit.

    • Webinars will be archived and made available to the general public, so the requirement to cover US&FCS's costs does not apply; however, a minimal fee is proposed to help ensure the suitability of participants and cover the cost of any special benefit that may derive from attending in real-time, such as question and answer opportunities. Uniform pricing is proposed as the enforcement of pricing by size standards of each registrant would create an administrative burden. Some webinars will be provided at no charge when the purpose is primarily to promote US&FCS or other United States Government events, activities, etc.

    Determining the Cost of Performing Each Service

    The cost of service methodology developed by US&FCS was designed to bring the organization closer to full cost recovery guidance set forth in OMB Circular A-25. To set user fees that are “self-sustaining,” the US&FCS had to determine the true cost of providing various export and investment promotion services.

    Federal Accounting Standards permit US&FCS to use an activity-based costing model to determine the true cost of services listed in the proposed User Fee Schedule. The activities were defined in accordance with the US&FCS list of services offered by US&FCS, including both standard and customized services.

    As part of the cost of service study, the US&FCS conducted a workload survey to obtain a more accurate estimate of the true cost for delivery of specific services. The workload survey was designed and distributed to all US&FCS international and domestic field units. The data submitted by various US&FCS field units was then aggregated to determine the global average of workload for each standard or customized service. Using FY2015 US&FCS budget data, fringe benefits and non-labor related costs (e.g., materials, supplies, rent, utilities, and equipment) were prorated to determine the burdening rate that was to be added to the hourly rate. This resulted in an hourly rate that accounts for all applicable labor and non-labor costs specifically related to the delivery of services, which is consistent with federal accounting standards.

    Conclusion

    Based on the information provided above, the US&FCS believes its proposed fees are consistent with both the mission of US&FCS to promote “exports of goods and services from the United States, particularly by small businesses and medium-sized businesses,” and the objective of OMB Circular A-25 to “promote efficient allocation of the nation's resources by establishing charges for special benefits provided to the recipient that are at least as great as the cost to the U.S. Government of providing the special benefits.”

    Frank Spector, Senior Advisor, Office of Trade Promotion Programs.
    [FR Doc. 2016-30423 Filed 12-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-FP-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-570-964; A-201-838] Seamless Refined Copper Pipe and Tube from the People's Republic of China and Mexico: Continuation of Antidumping Duty Orders AGENCY:

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

    SUMMARY:

    As a result of the determinations by the Department of Commerce (the “Department”) and the International Trade Commission (the “ITC”) that revocation of the antidumping duty (“AD”) orders on seamless refined copper pipe and tube (“copper pipe and tube”) from the People's Republic of China (“PRC”) and Mexico would likely lead to a continuation or recurrence of dumping and material injury to an industry in the United States, the Department is publishing this notice of continuation of the AD orders.

    DATES:

    Effective December 21, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Robert Galantucci, 202-482-2923, AD/CVD Operations, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background

    On November 22, 2010, the Department published the AD orders on copper pipe and tube from the PRC and Mexico.1 On October 1, 2015, the Department initiated 2 and the ITC instituted 3 five-year (sunset) reviews of the Orders, pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the “Act”). As a result of its reviews, the Department determined that revocation of the Orders would likely lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping.4 The Department, therefore, notified the ITC of the magnitude of the dumping margins likely to prevail should the Orders be revoked.5 On December 8, 2016, the ITC published its determination that revocation of the Orders would likely lead to continuation or recurrence of material injury to an industry in the United States within a reasonably foreseeable time, pursuant to section 751(c) of the Act.6

    1See Seamless Refined Copper Pipe and Tube from Mexico and the People's Republic of China: Antidumping Duty Orders and Amended Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value from Mexico, 75 FR 71070 (November 22, 2010) (“Orders”).

    2See Initiation of Five-Year (“Sunset”) Review, 80 FR 59133 (October 1, 2015).

    3See Seamless Refined Copper Pipe and Tube from China and Mexico; Institution of Five-Year Reviews, 80 FR 59186 (October 1, 2015).

    4See Seamless Refined Copper Pipe and Tube from the People's Republic of China and Mexico: Preliminary Results of the Sunset Reviews of the Antidumping Duty Orders, 81 FR 4252 (January 26, 2016) and accompanying Preliminary Decision Memorandum; Seamless Refined Copper Pipe and Tube from the People's Republic of China and Mexico: Final Results of the Full Sunset Reviews of the Antidumping Duty Orders, 81 FR 38134 (June 13, 2016).

    5Id.

    6See Seamless Refined Copper Pipe and Tube From China and Mexico; Determination, 81 FR 88704 (December 8, 2016).

    Scope of the Orders

    For the purpose of the Orders, the products covered are all seamless circular refined copper pipes and tubes, including redraw hollows, greater than or equal to six inches (152.4 mm) in length and measuring less than 12.130 inches (308.102 mm) (actual) in outside diameter (“OD”), regardless of wall thickness, bore (e.g., smooth, enhanced with inner grooves or ridges), manufacturing process (e.g., hot finished, cold-drawn, annealed), outer surface (e.g., plain or enhanced with grooves, ridges, fins, or gills), end finish (e.g., plain end, swaged end, flared end, expanded end, crimped end, threaded), coating (e.g., plastic, paint), insulation, attachments (e.g., plain, capped, plugged, with compression or other fitting), or physical configuration (e.g., straight, coiled, bent, wound on spools).

    The scope of the Orders covers, but is not limited to, seamless refined copper pipe and tube produced or comparable to the American Society for Testing and Materials (“ASTM”) ASTM-B42, ASTM-B68, ASTM-B75, ASTM-B88, ASTM-B88M, ASTM-B188, ASTM-B251, ASTM-B251M, ASTM-B280, ASTM-B302, ASTM-B306, ASTM-359, ASTM-B743, ASTM-B819, and ASTM-B903 specifications and meeting the physical parameters described therein. Also included within the scope of the Orders are all sets of covered products, including “line sets” of seamless refined copper tubes (with or without fittings or insulation) suitable for connecting an outdoor air conditioner or heat pump to an indoor evaporator unit. The phrase “all sets of covered products” denotes any combination of items put up for sale that is comprised of merchandise subject to the scope.

    “Refined copper” is defined as: (1) Metal containing at least 99.85 percent by weight of copper; or (2) metal containing at least 97.5 percent by weight of copper, provided that the content by weight of any other element does not exceed the following limits:

    Element Limiting
  • Content
  • Percent by Weight
  • Ag—Silver 0.25 As—Arsenic 0.5 Cd—Cadmium 1.3 Cr—Chromium 1.4 Mg—Magnesium 0.8 Pb—Lead 1.5 S—Sulfur 0.7 Sn—Tin 0.8 Te—Tellurium 0.8 Zn—Zinc 1.0 Zr—Zirconium 0.3 Other elements (each) 0.3

    Excluded from the scope of the Orders are all seamless circular hollows of refined copper less than 12 inches in length whose OD (actual) exceeds its length. The products subject to the Orders are currently classifiable under subheadings 7411.10.1030 and 7411.10.1090 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (“HTSUS”). Products subject to the Orders may also enter under HTSUS subheadings 7407.10.1500, 7419.99.5050, 8415.90.8065, and 8415.90.8085. Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the scope of the Orders is dispositive.

    Continuation of the Orders

    As a result of the determinations by the Department and the ITC that revocation of the Orders would likely lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping and material injury to an industry in the United States, pursuant to section 751(d)(2) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.218(a), the Department hereby orders the continuation of the AD orders on copper pipe and tube from the PRC and Mexico. United States Customs and Border Protection will continue to collect AD cash deposits at the rates in effect at the time of entry for all imports of subject merchandise.

    The effective date of the continuation of the Orders will be the date of publication in the Federal Register of this notice of continuation. Pursuant to section 751(c)(2) of the Act, the Department intends to initiate the next five-year reviews of the Orders not later than 30 days prior to the fifth anniversary of the effective date of continuation.

    These five-year sunset reviews and this notice are in accordance with section 751(c) of the Act and published pursuant to section 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.218(f)(4).

    Dated: December 14, 2016. Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary, for Enforcement and Compliance.
    [FR Doc. 2016-30653 Filed 12-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-570-898] Chlorinated Isocyanurates From the People's Republic of China: Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony With the Final Results and Amended Final Results of the Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2010-2011 AGENCY:

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

    SUMMARY:

    On November 23, 2016, the United States Court of International Trade (the Court) sustained the final second remand redetermination pertaining to the administrative review of the antidumping duty order on Chlorinated Isocyanurates from the People's Republic of China (PRC) for the period of review of June 1, 2010, through May 31, 2011.1 Consistent with the decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) in Timken Co., v United States, 893 F.2d 337 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (Timken), as clarified by Diamond Sawblades Mfrs. Coalition v. United States, 626 F.3d 1374 (Fed. Cir. 2010) (Diamond Sawblades), the Department of Commerce (the Department) is notifying the public that the final judgment in this case is not in harmony with the 2010-2011 AR Final Results, 2 and that the Department is amending the 2010-2011 AR Final Results with respect to the weighted-average dumping margin assigned to both Juangcheng Kangtai Chemical Co. Ltd. (Kangtai), and Hebei Jiheng Chemical Co., Ltd. (Jiheng).

    1See Clearon Corp., and Occidental Chemical Corp., et al. v. United States, Consol. Ct. No. 13-00073, Slip Op. 16-110 (CIT 2016); see also Memorandum, “Antidumping Duty Administrative Review of Chlorinated Isocyanurates from the People's Republic of China: Final Results of Second Redetermination Pursuant to Remand,” March 22, 2016 (Final Second Redetermination), and available here: http://enforcement.trade.gov/remands/15-91.pdf.

    2See Chlorinated Isocyanurates From the People's Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2010-2011, 78 FR 4386 (January 22, 2013) (2010-2011 AR Final Results).

    DATES:

    Effective December 3, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Emily Halle, AD/CVD Operations, Office VII, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone (202) 482-0176.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background

    On January 22, 2013, the Department published the 2010-2011 AR Final Results. On July 24, 2014, the Court remanded the 2010-2011 AR Final Results to the Department regarding our primary surrogate country selection as follows: (1) Provide a reasonable explanation why the range of the GNIs listed on the Surrogate Country Memorandum qualify the countries as proximate and “economically comparable” to the PRC, including a discussion of why the Department believes India's GNI does not, if that continues to be our determination, qualify it as an economically comparable country, and (2) place the data on the record that the Department relied upon to make our determination. The Court also accepted the Department's request for a voluntary remand of the final results with the following instructions to: (1) Reconsider whether the ILO wage rate used to value the labor FOP includes labor, retirement, and employee benefit expenses, and whether these expenses are double counted if the Department does not adjust the financial ratio to correctly reflect overlapping expenses in the financial statements; (2) explain the Department's change in methodology for calculating intra-company transportation costs by collecting additional information if necessary and to provide parties an opportunity to comment on any new additional information; and (3) explain our change in the calculation of our by-product methodology and to request additional information if necessary, and to provide parties an opportunity to comment on any new additional information.3

    3See Clearon Corp., and Occidental Chemical Corp., et. al. v. United States, Slip Op. 14-88, Consolidated Court No. 13-00073 (CIT 2014) (First Redetermination).

    Upon consideration of the First Remand Results,4 on August 20, 2015, the Court remanded the 2010-2011 AR Final Results and First Remand Results to the Department as follows: (1) To either remove the labor items identified among the selling, general and administrative (SG&A) expenses of the financial statements from MVC or explain why adhering to the Department's Labor Methodology policy is inappropriate in this instance; (2) to either supply valid reasons to support changing the byproduct methodology in this proceeding which amounts to a “sufficient, reasoned analysis,” supported by substantial evidence, or to revert to the “former” methodology, with any appropriate modification (e.g., capping) to avoid illogical conclusions that do not match the real world experience of the respondents; (3) to value urea using Philippine domestic pricing data or explain why GTA import data is superior to the domestic pricing data on the record; and (4) to select the best SVs for hydrogen and chlorine that reflect a full consideration of the interested parties' comments and how these inputs were valued in prior administrative reviews.5 On November 23, 2016, the Court sustained the Department's Final Second Redetermination, and entered final judgment.6

    4See Clearon Corp., and Occidental Chemical Corp., et. al. v. United States, Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant to Remand, December 11, 2014 (First Remand Results).

    5See Clearon Corp., and Occidental Chemical Corp., et. al. v. United States, Slip Op. 15-91, Consolidated Court No. 13-00073 (CIT 2015).

    6See Clearon Corp., and Occidental Chemical Corp., et. al. v. United States, Slip Op. 16-110, Consolidated Court No. 13-00073 (CIT 2016).

    Timken Notice

    In its decision in Timken, as clarified by Diamond Sawblades, the CAFC held that, pursuant to section 516A(e) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), the Department must publish a notice of a court decision that is not “in harmony” with a Department determination and must suspend liquidation of entries pending a “conclusive” court decision. The Court's final judgment affirming the 2010-2011 AR Final Results constitutes the Court's final decision which is not in harmony with the 2010-2011 AR Final Results. This notice is published in fulfillment of the publication requirements of Timken. Accordingly, the Department will continue the suspension of liquidation of the subject merchandise pending a final and conclusive court decision.

    Amended Final Results of Review

    Because there is now a final court decision, the Department is amending the 2010-2011 AR Final Results with respect Jiheng and Kangtai, as follows:

    Exporter Weighted-
  • average
  • margin
  • percentage
  • Hebei Jiheng Chemical Co., Ltd. 31.22 Juancheng Kangtai Chemical Co., Ltd. 34.21

    In the event the Court's ruling is not appealed or, if appealed, upheld by a final and conclusive court decision, the Department will instruct the U.S. Customs and Border Protection to assess antidumping duties on unliquidated entries of subject merchandise based on the revised rate the Department determined and listed above.

    Cash Deposit Requirements

    Because there have been subsequent administrative reviews for Jiheng and Kangtai, the case deposit rates will remain the rates established in the 2012-2013 Final Results, which are 0.00 percent respectively for both Jiheng and Kangtai.7

    7See Chlorinated Isocyanurates From the People's Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2012-2013, 80 FR 4539 (January 28, 2015) (2012-2013 Final Results).

    Notification to Interested Parties

    This notice is issued and published in accordance with sections 516A(e)(l), 75l(a)(l), and 777(i)(l) of the Act.

    Dated: December 15, 2016. Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations.
    [FR Doc. 2016-30728 Filed 12-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [C-570-911] Circular Welded Carbon Quality Steel Pipe From the People's Republic of China: Rescission of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review; 2015 AGENCY:

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

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Commerce is rescinding the administrative review of the countervailing duty order on circular welded carbon quality steel pipe (CWP) from the People's Republic of China (PRC) for the period January 1, 2015, through December 31, 2015, based on the timely withdrawal of the request for review.

    DATES:

    Effective December 21, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Rebecca M. Janz, AD/CVD Operations, Office II, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-2972.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background

    On July 5, 2016, the Department published in the Federal Register a notice of opportunity to request an administrative review of the countervailing duty order on CWP from the PRC for the period January 1, 2015, through December 31, 2015.1 The Department received a timely-filed request from Wheatland Tube Company (the petitioner), in accordance with section 751(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), and 19 CFR 351.213(b), for an administrative review of this countervailing duty order.2 Pursuant to this request and in accordance with 19 CFR 351.221(c)(1)(i), on September 12, 2016, the Department published in the Federal Register a notice of initiation with respect to 20 individually-named companies or company groups.3 On December 12, 2016, the petitioner timely withdrew its request for an administrative review.4

    1See Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Order, Finding, or Suspended Investigation; Opportunity to Request Administrative Review, 81 FR 43584 (July 5, 2016).

    2See letter from the petitioner, “Circular Welded Carbon Quality Steel Pipe From the People's Republic of China: Request for Administrative Review,” dated July 29, 2016.

    3See Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews, 81 FR 62720 (September 12, 2016).

    4See letter from the petitioner, “Circular Welded Carbon Quality Steel Pipe From the People's Republic of China: Withdrawal of Request for Administrative Review,” dated December 12, 2016.

    Rescission of Review

    Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), the Department will rescind an administrative review, in whole or in part, if a party that requested a review withdraws the request within 90 days of the date of publication of notice of initiation of the requested review. The petitioner withdrew its request for review by the 90-day deadline. No other parties requested an administrative review of the order. Therefore, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), we are rescinding the administrative review of the countervailing duty order on CWP from the PRC covering the period January 1, 2015, through December 31, 2015.

    Assessment

    The Department will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to assess countervailing duties on all appropriate entries. Countervailing duties shall be assessed at rates equal to the cash deposit of estimated countervailing duties required at the time of entry, or withdrawal from warehouse, for consumption, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(c)(1)(i). The Department intends to issue appropriate assessment instructions to CBP 15 days after the date of publication of this notice in the Federal Register.

    This notice is published in accordance with section 751 of the Act and 19 CFR 351.213(d)(4).

    Dated: December 15, 2016. Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations.
    [FR Doc. 2016-30727 Filed 12-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Proposed Information Collection; Comment Request; Chesapeake Bay Watershed Environmental Literacy Indicator Tool AGENCY:

    National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Commerce, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing information collections, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

    DATES:

    Written comments must be submitted on or before February 21, 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 Shannon Sprague, NOAA Chesapeake Bay Office, 410 Severn Avenue, Suite 207, Annapolis, MD 21403, 410-267-5664 or [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Abstract

    This request is for a new information collection.

    The Chesapeake Bay Watershed Agreement of 2014 requires monitoring of progress towards the environmental literacy goal: “Enable students in the region to graduate with the knowledge and skills needed to act responsibly to protect and restore their local watersheds.” NOAA, on behalf of the Chesapeake Bay Program, will ask the state education agencies for Maryland, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Virginia, West Virginia, and the District of Columbia to survey their local education agencies (LEAs) to determine: (1) LEA capacity to implement a comprehensive and systemic approach to environmental literacy education, (2) student participation in Meaningful Watershed Educational Experiences during the school year, (3) sustainability practices at schools, and (4) LEA needs for improving environmental literacy education programming. LEAs (generally school districts, in some cases charter school administration) are asked to complete the survey on the status of their LEA on a set of key indicators for the four areas listed above. One individual from each LEA is asked to complete this survey once every two years.

    II. Method of Collection

    Respondents will submit their information electronically on web-based survey forms.

    III. Data

    OMB Control Number: 0648-xxxx.

    Form Number(s): None.

    Type of Review: Regular (request for a new information collection).

    Affected Public: State, Local, or Tribal government (local education agencies); Not-for-profit organizations (charter schools).

    Estimated Number of Respondents: The survey will be distributed to approximately 983 local education agencies.

    Estimated Time per Response: 1.5 hours.

    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 1,106 hours.

    Estimated Total Annual Cost to Public: $0 in recordkeeping/reporting costs.

    IV. Request for Comments

    Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden (including hours and cost) of the proposed collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

    Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and/or included in the request for OMB approval of this information collection; they also will become a matter of public record.

    Dated: December 16, 2016. Sarah Brabson, NOAA PRA Clearance Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2016-30757 Filed 12-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-12-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Proposed Information Collection; Comment Request; Conflict of Interest Disclosure for Nonfederal Government Individuals Who Are Candidates To Conduct Peer Reviews AGENCY:

    National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Commerce, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing information collections, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

    DATES:

    Written comments must be submitted on or before February 21, 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 Michael Liddel (301) 427-8139 or [email protected].

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Abstract

    This request is for extension of a currently approved collection.

    The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) issued government-wide guidance to enhance the practice of peer review of government science documents. OMB's Final Information Quality Bulletin for Peer Review (“Peer Review Bulletin” or PRB) (available at http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/memoranda/fy2005/m05-03.pdf) establishes minimum peer review standards for influential scientific information that Federal agencies intend to disseminate.

    The Peer Review Bulletin also directs Federal agencies to adopt or adapt the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) policy for evaluating conflicts of interest when selecting peer reviewers who are not Federal government employees (federal employees are subject to Federal ethics requirements). For peer review purposes, the term “conflicts of interest” means any financial or other interest which conflicts with the service of the individual because it could: (1) Significantly impair the individual's objectivity; or (2) create an unfair competitive advantage for any person or organization. NOAA has adapted the NAS policy and developed two confidential conflict disclosure forms which the agency will use to examine prospective reviewers' potential financial conflicts and other interests that could impair objectivity or create an unfair advantage. One form is for peer reviewers of studies related to government regulation and the other form is for all other influential scientific information subject to the Peer Review Bulletin. In addition, the latter form has been adapted by NOAA's Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research for potential reviewers of scientific laboratories.

    The forms include questions about employment as well as investment and property interests and research funding. Both forms also require the submission of curriculum vitae. NOAA is seeking to collect this information from potential peer reviewers who are not government employees when conducting a peer review pursuant to the PRB. The information collected in the conflict of interest disclosure is essential to NOAA's compliance with the OMB PRB, and helps to ensure that government studies are reviewed by independent, impartial peer reviewers.

    II. Method of Collection

    Forms may be downloaded from the Internet and are fillable and signable electronically or manually. They may be submitted, along with the Curriculum Vitae, via email or regular mail.

    III. Data

    OMB Control Number: 0648-0567.

    Form Number: None.

    Type of Review: Regular submission (extension of a currently approved collection).

    Affected Public: Individuals or households.

    Estimated Number of Respondents: 321.

    Estimated Time per Response: 30 minutes.

    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 161.

    Estimated Total Annual Cost to Public: $0 in recordkeeping/reporting costs.

    IV. Request for Comments

    Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden (including hours and cost) of the proposed collection of information;

    (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

    Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and/or included in the request for OMB approval of this information collection; they also will become a matter of public record.

    Dated: December 16, 2016. Sarah Brabson, NOAA PRA Clearance Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2016-30724 Filed 12-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Telecommunications and Information Administration Commerce Spectrum Management Advisory Committee Meeting AGENCY:

    National Telecommunications and Information Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce.

    ACTION:

    Notice of open meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice announces a public meeting of the Commerce Spectrum Management Advisory Committee (Committee). The Committee provides advice to the Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Communications and Information and the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) on spectrum management policy matters.

    DATES:

    The meeting will be held on January 25, 2017, from 1:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m., Eastern Standard Time (EST).

    ADDRESSES:

    The meeting will be held at the Verizon Technology and Policy Center, 1300 I St NW., Suite 500 East, Washington, DC 20005. Public comments may be mailed to the Commerce Spectrum Management Advisory Committee, National Telecommunications and Information Administration, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Room 4600, Washington, DC 20230, or emailed to [email protected]

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    David J. Reed, Designated Federal Officer, at (202) 482-5955 or [email protected]; and/or visit NTIA's Web site at http://www.ntia.doc.gov/category/csmac.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background: The Committee provides advice to the Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Communications and Information on needed reforms to domestic spectrum policies and management in order to: License radio frequencies in a way that maximizes public benefits; keep wireless networks as open to innovation as possible; and make wireless services available to all Americans. See Charter at http://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/publications/csmac_2015_charter_renewal_2-26-15.pdf.

    This Committee is subject to the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), 5 U.S.C. App. 2, and is consistent with the National Telecommunications and Information Administration Act, 47 U.S.C. 904(b). The Committee functions solely as an advisory body in compliance with the FACA. For more information about the Committee visit: http://www.ntia.doc.gov/category/csmac.

    Matters to Be Considered: The Committee provides advice to the Assistant Secretary to assist in developing and maintaining spectrum management policies that enable the United States to maintain or strengthen its global leadership role in the introduction of communications technology, services, and innovation; thus expanding the economy, adding jobs, and increasing international trade, while at the same time providing for the expansion of existing technologies and supporting the country's homeland security, national defense, and other critical needs of government missions. The Committee will hear the response of NTIA to the Committee's recommendations provided at the end of the last session in August 2016, as well as discuss the questions it will address this session. NTIA intends to post a detailed agenda on its Web site prior to the meeting, at http://www.ntia.doc.gov/category/csmac. To the extent that the meeting time and agenda permit, members of the public may speak to or otherwise address the Committee regarding the agenda items. See Open Meeting and Public Participation Policy, available at http://www.ntia.doc.gov/category/csmac.

    Time and Date: The meeting will be held on January 25, 2017, from 1:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. EST. The meeting time and agenda are subject to change. The meeting will be available via two-way audio link and may be webcast. Please refer to NTIA's Web site, at http://www.ntia.doc.gov/category/csmac, for the most up-to-date meeting agenda and access information.

    Place: The meeting will be held at the Verizon Technology and Policy Center, 1300 I St NW., Suite 500 East, Washington, DC 20005. Public comments may be mailed to Commerce Spectrum Management Advisory Committee, National Telecommunications and Information Administration, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Room 4600, Washington, DC 20230.

    The meeting will be open to the public and members of the press on a first-come, first-served basis, as space is limited. The public meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Individuals requiring accommodations, such as sign language interpretation or other ancillary aids, are asked to notify Mr. Reed at (202) 482-5955 or [email protected] at least ten (10) business days before the meeting.

    Status: Interested parties are invited to attend and to submit written comments to the Committee at any time before or after the meeting. Parties wishing to submit written comments for consideration by the Committee in advance of a meeting may send them via postal mail to Commerce Spectrum Management Advisory Committee, National Telecommunications and Information Administration, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Room 4600, Washington, DC 20230. It would be helpful if paper submissions also include a compact disc (CD) that contains the comments in Microsoft Word and/or PDF file formats. CDs should be labeled with the name and organizational affiliation of the filer. Alternatively, comments may be submitted via electronic mail to [email protected] and should also be in one or both of the file formats specified above. Comments must be received five (5) business days before the scheduled meeting date in order to provide sufficient time for review. Comments received after this date will be distributed to the Committee, but may not be reviewed prior to the meeting.

    Records: NTIA maintains records of all Committee proceedings. Committee records are available for public inspection at NTIA's Washington, DC office at the address above. Documents including the Committee's charter, member list, agendas, minutes, and reports are available on NTIA's Web site at http://www.ntia.doc.gov/category/csmac.

    Dated: December 15, 2016. Kathy D. Smith, Chief Counsel, National Telecommunications and Information Administration.
    [FR Doc. 2016-30679 Filed 12-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-60-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Patent and Trademark Office [Docket No.: PTO-P-2016-0055] Extension of the Extended Missing Parts Pilot Program AGENCY:

    United States Patent and Trademark Office, Commerce.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) implemented a pilot program (Extended Missing Parts Pilot Program) in which an applicant, under certain conditions, can request a 12-month time period to pay the search fee, the examination fee, any excess claim fees, and the surcharge (for the late submission of the search fee and the examination fee) in a nonprovisional application. The Extended Missing Parts Pilot Program benefits applicants by permitting additional time to determine if patent protection should be sought—at a relatively low cost—and by permitting applicants to focus efforts on commercialization during this period. The Extended Missing Parts Pilot Program benefits the USPTO and the public by adding publications to the body of prior art, and by removing from the USPTO's workload those nonprovisional applications for which applicants later decide not to pursue examination. While the USPTO has not yet completed its evaluation of the program, the number of participants in the program over the past several years indicates that there may be sufficient benefits to the patent community. Thus, the USPTO is extending the Extended Missing Parts Pilot Program until January 2, 2018, to allow the USPTO to continue its evaluation of the pilot program. The requirements of the program have not changed.

    DATES:

    Duration: The Extended Missing Parts Pilot Program will run through January 2, 2018. Therefore, any certification and request to participate in the Extended Missing Parts Pilot Program must be filed on or before January 2, 2018. The USPTO may further extend the pilot program (with or without modifications) depending on the feedback received and the continued effectiveness of the pilot program.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Eugenia A. Jones, Senior Legal Advisor, Office of Patent Legal Administration, Office of the Deputy Commissioner for Patent Examination Policy, by telephone at (571) 272-7727, or Erin M. Harriman, Legal Advisor, Office of Patent Legal Administration, Office of the Deputy Commissioner for Patent Examination Policy, by telephone at (571) 272-7747.

    Inquiries regarding this notice may be directed to the Office of Patent Legal Administration, by telephone at (571) 272-7701, or by electronic mail at [email protected] Alternatively, mail may be addressed to: Mail Stop Comments—Patents, Commissioner for Patents, P.O. Box 1450, Alexandria, VA 22313-1450, marked to the attention of Eugenia A. Jones.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    On December 8, 2010, after considering written comments from the public, the USPTO changed the missing parts examination procedures in certain nonprovisional applications by implementing a pilot program (i.e., Extended Missing Parts Pilot Program). See Pilot Program for Extended Time Period To Reply to a Notice to File Missing Parts of Nonprovisional Application, 75 FR 76401 (Dec. 8, 2010), 1362 Off. Gaz. Pat. Office 44 (Jan. 4, 2011). Over the course of the pilot program, the USPTO provided extensions of the Extended Missing Parts Pilot Program through notices published in the Federal Register. The most recent notice extended the program until December 31, 2016, to allow the USPTO time to seek public comment on whether the Extended Missing Parts Pilot Program offers sufficient benefits to the patent community for it to be made permanent. See Extension of Extended Missing Parts Pilot Program, 80 FR 80325 (Dec. 24, 2015), 1422 Off. Gaz. Pat. Office 192 (Jan. 19, 2016).

    On September 6, 2016, the USPTO sought public comment on whether the Extended Missing Parts Pilot Program offers sufficient benefits to the patent community for it to be made permanent or whether the USPTO should permit the pilot program to expire. See Request for Comments on the Extended Missing Parts Pilot Program, 81 FR 61195 (Sept. 6, 2016), 1430 Off. Gaz. Pat. Office 269 (Sept. 27, 2016). The USPTO received a total of two comments, and both comments appear to support the pilot program. The two comments are available via the USPTO's Internet Web site at https://www.uspto.gov/patent/laws-and-regulations/comments-public/comments-extended-missing-parts-pilot-program. While the USPTO has not yet completed its evaluation of the pilot program, the increase in the number of participants in the program over the past five years indicates that there may be sufficient benefits to the patent community. Thus, the USPTO is extending the Extended Missing Parts Pilot Program until January 2, 2018, to allow the USPTO to continue its evaluation of the pilot program.

    The requirements of the program, which have not been modified, are reiterated below. Applicants are strongly advised to review the pilot program requirements before making a request to participate in the Extended Missing Parts Pilot Program. See Pilot Program for Extended Time Period To Reply to a Notice To File Missing Parts of Nonprovisional Application, 75 FR 76401 (Dec. 8, 2010), 1362 Off. Gaz. Pat. Office 44 (Jan. 4, 2011).

    The USPTO cautions all applicants that, in order to claim the benefit of a prior provisional application, the statute requires a nonprovisional application filed under 35 U.S.C. 111(a) to be filed within 12 months after the date on which the corresponding provisional application was filed. See 35 U.S.C. 119(e). It is essential that applicants understand that the Extended Missing Parts Pilot Program cannot and does not change this statutory requirement. Title II of the Patent Law Treaties Implementation Act of 2012 (PLTIA) amended the provisions of title 35, United States Code, including 35 U.S.C. 119(e), to implement the Patent Law Treaty (PLT). See Public Law 112-211, § 20-203, 126 Stat. 1527, 1533-37 (2012). In the rulemaking to implement the PLT and title II of the PLTIA, the USPTO provided that an applicant may file a petition under 37 CFR 1.78(b) to restore the benefit of a provisional application filed up to fourteen months earlier. See Changes To Implement the Patent Law Treaty, 78 FR 62367, 62368-69 (Oct. 21, 2013) (final rule). Any petition to restore the benefit of a provisional application must include the benefit claim, the petition fee, and a statement that the delay in filing the subsequent application was unintentional. This change was effective on December 18, 2013, and applies to any application filed before, on, or after December 18, 2013. However, if a nonprovisional application is filed outside the 12 month period from the date on which the corresponding provisional application was filed, the nonprovisional application is not eligible for participation in the Extended Missing Parts Pilot Program, even though the applicant may be able to restore the benefit of the provisional application by submitting a petition under 37 CFR 1.78(b).

    I. Requirements: In order for an applicant to be provided a 12-month (non-extendable) time period to pay the search and examination fees and any required excess claims fees in response to a Notice to File Missing Parts of Nonprovisional Application under the Extended Missing Parts Pilot Program, the applicant must satisfy the following conditions: (1) The applicant must submit a certification and request to participate in the Extended Missing Parts Pilot Program with the nonprovisional application on filing, preferably by using Form PTO/AIA/421, titled “Certification and Request for Extended Missing Parts Pilot Program”; (2) the application must be an original (i.e., not a Reissue) nonprovisional utility or plant application filed under 35 U.S.C. 111(a) within the duration of the pilot program; (3) the nonprovisional application must directly claim the benefit under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) and 37 CFR 1.78 of a prior provisional application filed within the previous 12 months, and the specific reference to the provisional application must be in an application data sheet under 37 CFR 1.76 (see 37 CFR 1.78(a)(3)); and (4) the applicant must not have filed a nonpublication request.

    As required for all nonprovisional applications, the applicant will need to satisfy filing date requirements and publication requirements. In the rulemaking to implement the PLT and title II of the PLTIA, the USPTO provided that an application (other than an application for a design patent) filed on or after December 18, 2013, is not required to include a claim to be entitled to a filing date. See Changes To Implement the Patent Law Treaty, 78 FR 62367, 62638 (Oct. 21, 2013) (final rule). This change was effective on December 18, 2013, and applies to any application filed under 35 U.S.C. 111 on or after December 18, 2013. However, if an application is filed without any claims, the Office of Patent Application Processing will issue a notice giving the applicant a two-month (extendable) time period within which to submit at least one claim in order to avoid abandonment (see 37 CFR 1.53(f)). The Extended Missing Parts Pilot Program does not change this time period. In accordance with 35 U.S.C. 122(b), the USPTO will publish the application promptly after the expiration of 18 months from the earliest filing date for which benefit is sought. Therefore, the nonprovisional application should also be in condition for publication as provided in 37 CFR 1.211(c). The following are required in order for the nonprovisional application to be in condition for publication: (1) The basic filing fee; (2) the executed inventor's oath or declaration in compliance with 37 CFR 1.63 or an application data sheet containing the information specified in 37 CFR 1.63(b); (3) a specification in compliance with 37 CFR 1.52; (4) an abstract in compliance with 37 CFR 1.72(b); (5) drawings in compliance with 37 CFR 1.84 (if applicable); (6) any application size fee required under 37 CFR 1.16(s); (7) any English translation required by 37 CFR 1.52(d); and (8) a sequence listing in compliance with 37 CFR 1.821-1.825 (if applicable). The USPTO also requires any compact disc requirements to be satisfied and an English translation of the provisional application to be filed in the provisional application if the provisional application was filed in a non-English language and a translation has not yet been filed. If the requirements for publication are not met, the applicant will need to satisfy the publication requirements within a two-month extendable time period.

    As noted above, applicants should request participation in the Extended Missing Parts Pilot Program by using Form PTO/AIA/421. For utility patent applications, the applicant may file the application and the certification and request electronically using the USPTO electronic filing system, EFS-Web, and selecting the document description of “Certification and Request for Missing Parts Pilot” for the certification and request on the EFS-Web screen. Form PTO/AIA/421 is available on the USPTO Web site at http://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/forms/aia0421.pdf. Information regarding EFS-Web is available on the USPTO Web site at http://www.uspto.gov/patents-application-process/applying-online/about-efs-web.

    The utility application including the certification and request to participate in the pilot program may also be hand-carried to the USPTO or filed by mail, for example, by Priority Mail Express® in accordance with 37 CFR 1.10. However, applicants are advised that, effective November 15, 2011, as provided in the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act, a new additional fee of $400.00 for a non-small entity ($200.00 for a small entity) is due for any nonprovisional utility patent application that is not filed by EFS-Web. See Public Law 112-29, 10(h), 125 Stat. 283, 319 (2011). This non-electronic filing fee is due on filing of the utility application or within the two-month (extendable) time period to reply to the Notice to File Missing Parts of Nonprovisional Application. Applicants will not be given the 12-month time period to pay the non-electronic filing fee. Therefore, utility applicants are strongly encouraged to file their utility applications via EFS-Web to avoid this additional fee.

    For plant patent applications, the applicant must file the application including the certification and request to participate in the pilot program by mail or hand-carried to the USPTO since plant patent applications cannot be filed electronically using EFS-Web. See Legal Framework for Electronic Filing System—Web (EFS-Web), 74 FR 55200 (Oct. 27, 2009), 1348 Off. Gaz. Pat. Office 394 (Nov. 24, 2009).

    II. Processing of Requests: If the applicant satisfies the requirements (discussed above) on filing of the nonprovisional application and the application is in condition for publication, the USPTO will send the applicant a Notice to File Missing Parts of Nonprovisional Application that sets a 12-month (non-extendable) time period to submit the search fee, the examination fee, any excess claims fees (under 37 CFR 1.16(h)-(j)), and the surcharge under 37 CFR 1.16(f) (for the late submission of the search fee and examination fee). The 12-month time period will run from the mailing date, or notification date for e-Office Action participants, of the Notice to File Missing Parts. For information on the e-Office Action program, see Electronic Office Action, 1343 Off. Gaz. Pat. Office 45 (June 2, 2009), and http://www.uspto.gov/patents-application-process/checking-application-status/e-office-action-program. After an applicant files a timely reply to the Notice to File Missing Parts within the 12-month time period and the nonprovisional application is completed, the nonprovisional application will be placed in the examination queue based on the actual filing date of the nonprovisional application.

    For a detailed discussion regarding treatment of applications that are not in condition for publication, processing of improper requests to participate in the program, and treatment of authorizations to charge fees, see Pilot Program for Extended Time Period To Reply to a Notice to File Missing Parts of Nonprovisional Application, 75 FR 76401, 76403-04 (Dec. 8, 2010), 1362 Off. Gaz. Pat. Office 44, 47-49 (Jan. 4, 2011).

    III. Important Reminders: Applicants are reminded that the disclosure of an invention in a provisional application should be as complete as possible because the claimed subject matter in the later-filed nonprovisional application must have support in the provisional application in order for the applicant to obtain the benefit of the filing date of the provisional application.

    Furthermore, the nonprovisional application as originally filed must have a complete disclosure that complies with 35 U.S.C. 112(a) and is sufficient to support the claims submitted on filing and any claims submitted later during prosecution. New matter cannot be added to an application after the filing date of the application. See 35 U.S.C. 132(a). In the rulemaking to implement the PLT and title II of the PLTIA, the USPTO provided that, in order to be accorded a filing date, a nonprovisional application (other than an application for a design patent) must include a specification with or without claims. See Changes To Implement the Patent Law Treaty, 78 FR 62367, 62369 (Oct. 21, 2013) (final rule). This change was effective on December 18, 2013, and applies to any application filed under 35 U.S.C. 111 on or after December 18, 2013. Although a claim is not required in a nonprovisional application (other than an application for a design patent) for filing date purposes and the applicant may file an amendment adding additional claims as prescribed by 35 U.S.C. 112 and drawings as prescribed by 35 U.S.C. 113 later during prosecution, the applicant should consider the benefits of submitting a complete set of claims and any necessary drawings on filing of the nonprovisional application. This would reduce the likelihood that any claims and/or drawings added later during prosecution might be found to contain new matter. Also, if a patent is granted and the patentee is successful in litigation against an infringer, provisional rights to a reasonable royalty under 35 U.S.C. 154(d) may be available only if the claims that are published in the patent application publication are substantially identical to the patented claims that are infringed, assuming timely actual notice is provided. Thus, the importance of the claims that are included in the patent application publication should not be overlooked.

    Applicants are also advised that the extended missing parts period does not affect the 12-month priority period provided by the Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property (Paris Convention). Accordingly, any foreign filings must, in most cases, still be made within 12 months of the filing date of the provisional application if the applicant wishes to rely on the provisional application in the foreign-filed application or if protection is desired in a country requiring filing within 12 months of the earliest application for which rights are left outstanding in order to be entitled to priority.

    For additional reminders, see Pilot Program for Extended Time Period To Reply to a Notice to File Missing Parts of Nonprovisional Application, 75 FR 76401, 76405 (Dec. 8, 2010), 1362 Off. Gaz. Pat. Office 44, 50 (Jan. 4, 2011).

    Dated: December 15, 2016. Michelle K. Lee, Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office.
    [FR Doc. 2016-30733 Filed 12-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-16-P
    DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Applications for New Awards; Supporting Effective Educator Development Grant Program AGENCY:

    Office of Innovation and Improvement, Department of Education.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    Overview Information:

    Supporting Effective Educator Development (SEED) Grant Program

    Notice inviting applications for new awards for fiscal year (FY) 2016.

    Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number: 84.367D

    Dates:

    Applications Available: December 21, 2016.

    Deadline for Notice of Intent to Apply: January 20, 2017.

    Date of Informational Webinar: The SEED program intends to hold a Webinar designed to provide technical assistance to interested applicants. Detailed information regarding this Webinar will be provided on the SEED Web site at http://innovation.ed.gov/what-we-do/teacher-quality/supporting-effective-educator-development-grant-program/.

    Deadline for Transmittal of Applications: March 7, 2017.

    Deadline for Intergovernmental Review: April 20, 2017.

    Full Text of Announcement I. Funding Opportunity Description

    Purpose of Program: The SEED program provides funding for grants to National Not-for-Profit Organizations for projects that support teacher or principal training or professional enhancement activities and that are supported by at least Moderate Evidence of Effectiveness. The purpose of the program is to increase the number of Highly Effective Teachers and Principals by developing or expanding the implementation of practices that are demonstrated to have an impact on improving Student Achievement or Student Growth. These grants will allow eligible entities to develop, expand, and evaluate practices that can serve as models that can be sustained and disseminated.

    Please note that on December 10, 2015, President Obama signed into law the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA), which reauthorized the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA). ESSA provided specific statutory authority for the SEED program, under section 2242, for grant competitions beginning with funds appropriated for FY 2017. Accordingly, this FY 2016 SEED competition will be the final SEED competition under the statutory and regulatory provisions in effect prior to enactment of the ESSA. Consequently, except as noted, all references to the ESEA in this notice are to the ESEA as amended by the No Child Left Behind Act.

    Priorities: This competition includes four absolute priorities, one of which is required for all applicants, and four competitive preference priorities. Absolute Priority 1 and Competitive Preference Priority 1 are from 34 CFR 75.226. Absolute Priorities 2 through 4 and Competitive Preference Priorities 2 and 3 are from the notice of final priorities, requirements, definitions, and selection criteria for this program, published in the Federal Register on February 12, 2013 (78 FR 9815) (“SEED NFP”). Competitive Preference Priority 4 is from the Department's notice of final supplemental priorities and definitions, published in the Federal Register on December 10, 2014 (79 FR 73425) (“Supplemental Priorities”).

    Absolute Priorities: Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(3) we consider only applications that meet Absolute Priority 1 and meet one or more of Absolute Priorities 2 through 4.

    These priorities are:

    Absolute Priority 1: Supporting Practices and Strategies for Which There Is Moderate Evidence of Effectiveness.

    Projects that are supported by Moderate Evidence of Effectiveness.

    Absolute Priority 2: Teacher or Principal Recruitment, Selection, and Preparation.

    This priority funds projects that will create or expand practices and strategies that increase the number of Highly Effective Teachers or Highly Effective Principals by recruiting, selecting, and preparing talented individuals to work in schools with high concentrations of High-Need Students. Projects must include activities that focus on creating or expanding high-performing teacher preparation programs, principal preparation programs, or both. Activities may include but are not limited to expanding clinical experiences, redesigning and implementing program coursework to align with State standards and district requirements for P-12 teachers, providing induction and other support for program participants in their classrooms and schools, and developing strategies for tracking the effect program graduates have on the achievement of their students or the performance of their schools.

    In addition, an applicant must propose a plan demonstrating a rigorous, competitive selection process to determine which aspiring teachers or principals participate in the applicant's proposed activities.

    Absolute Priority 3: Professional Development for Teachers of Academic Subjects.

    This priority funds projects that will create or expand practices and strategies that increase the number of Highly Effective Teachers by providing professional development opportunities to teachers, including special education teachers, in schools with high concentrations of High-Need Students. Projects must focus on increasing Student Achievement in academic subjects by providing high-quality professional development to teachers. The academic subjects that may be addressed through professional development under this priority include foreign languages, civics and government, economics, arts, history, physical education, geography, environmental education, and financial literacy.

    Applicants are required to describe the need of the proposed districts to be served for teacher professional development in the selected high-need academic subjects and to demonstrate alignment of the proposed projects with State standards.

    In addition, applicants must describe how they plan to measure the impact the professional development has on teacher effectiveness. Applicants must determine teacher effectiveness through a rigorous, transparent, and fair evaluation in which performance is differentiated using multiple measures of effectiveness and based in significant part on Student Growth.

    Note:

    The list of subjects provided in this priority is illustrative. Applicants may propose to address other academic subjects or areas, such as writing, reading, or mathematics, which partner schools and districts have demonstrated to be high-need.

    Absolute Priority 4: Advanced Certification and Advanced Credentialing.

    This priority funds projects that will create or expand practices and strategies based on advanced certification or advanced credentialing that increase the number of Highly Effective Teachers, Highly Effective Principals, or both, who work in schools with high concentrations of High-Need Students.

    Applicants are required to focus their proposed projects on encouraging and supporting teachers, principals, or both, who seek a nationally recognized, standards-based advanced certificate or advanced credential through high-quality professional enhancement projects designed to improve teaching and learning for teachers who may take on Career Ladder Positions, principals, or both who would serve as models, mentors, and coaches for other teachers, principals, or both working in schools with high concentrations of High-Need Students.

    In addition, the effectiveness of teachers or principals who receive advanced certification or credentialing must be determined through a rigorous, transparent, and fair evaluation in which performance is differentiated using multiple measures of effectiveness and based in significant part on Student Growth.

    Finally, an applicant must propose a plan demonstrating a rigorous, competitive selection process to determine which teachers or principals participate in the applicant's proposed activities.

    Competitive Preference Priorities: Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i) we award an additional four points to an application that meets Competitive Preference Priority 1. We award an additional one point to an application that meets Competitive Preference Priority 2. We award an additional two points to an application that meets Competitive Preference Priority 3. We award up to an additional three points to an application, depending on how well the application meets Competitive Preference Priority 4. The total number of points an application may receive for addressing the competitive preference priorities is 10. These points are in addition to any points the application earns under the selection criteria. Addressing these competitive preference priorities is optional, and applicants may choose to respond to none, one, two, three, or all four of the competitive preference priorities for this competition.

    These priorities are:

    Competitive Preference Priority 1: Supporting Practices and Strategies for Which There Is Strong Evidence of Effectiveness (0 or 4 points).

    Projects that are supported by Strong Evidence of Effectiveness.

    Competitive Preference Priority 2: Improving Efficiency (Cost-Effectiveness) (0 or 1 point).

    Projects that will identify strategies for providing cost-effective, high-quality services at the State, regional, or local level by making better use of available resources. Such projects may include innovative and sustainable uses of technology, modification of school schedules and teacher compensation systems, use of Open Educational Resources, or other strategies.

    Competitive Preference Priority 3: Promoting Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Education 1 (0 or 2 points).

    1 For the purposes of this notice, STEM may include computer science.

    This priority funds projects that address one or both of the following priority areas:

    (a) Increasing the opportunities for high-quality preparation of, or professional development for, teachers of STEM subjects.

    (b) Increasing the number of individuals from groups traditionally underrepresented in STEM, including minorities, individuals with disabilities, and women, who are teachers of STEM subjects and have increased opportunities for high-quality preparation or professional development.

    In addition, applicants must describe how they plan to measure the impact the proposed project activities have on teacher effectiveness. Applicants must determine teacher effectiveness through a rigorous, transparent, and fair evaluation in which performance is differentiated using multiple measures of effectiveness and based in significant part on Student Growth.

    Note:

    Applicants may choose to respond to one or both of the priority areas and are not required to respond to each priority area in order to receive the maximum available points under this competitive preference priority.

    Competitive Preference Priority 4: Supporting High-Need Students (0 to 3 points).

    This priority funds projects that are designed to improve academic outcomes for one or more of the following groups of students:

    (i) Students served by Rural Local Educational Agencies.

    (ii) Students with disabilities.

    (iii) English learners.

    (iv) Students who are members of federally recognized Indian tribes.

    Note:

    Applicants may choose to respond to one or more of the priority areas and are not required to respond to each priority area in order to receive the maximum available points under this competitive preference priority.

    Definitions

    The following definitions are from the SEED NFP, the Supplemental Priorities, and 34 CFR 77.1. The source of each definition is noted in parentheses following the text of the definition.

    Career Ladder Positions means school-based instructional leadership positions designed to improve instructional practice, which teachers may voluntarily accept, such as positions described as master teacher, mentor teacher, demonstration or model teacher, or instructional coach, and for which teachers are selected based on criteria that are predictive of the ability to lead other teachers. (SEED NFP)

    High-Minority School means a school as that term is defined by a local educational agency (LEA), which must define the term in a manner consistent with its State's Teacher Equity Plan, as required by section 1111(g)(1)(B) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, as amended (ESEA). The applicant must provide the definition(s) of “High-Minority Schools” used in its application. (Supplemental Priorities)

    Note:

    The requirement concerning State Teacher Equity Plans is set out in section 1111(g)(1)(B) of the ESEA, as amended by the ESSA. Applicants that did not establish Teacher Equity Plans after ESSA took effect can rely on their prior Teacher Equity Plan.

    High-Need Students means students who are at risk of educational failure or otherwise in need of special assistance and support, such as students who are living in poverty, who attend High-Minority Schools, who are far below grade level, who have left school before receiving a Regular High School Diploma, who are at risk of not graduating with a diploma on time, who are homeless, who are in foster care, who have been incarcerated, who have disabilities, or who are English learners. (Supplemental Priorities)

    Highly Effective Principal means a principal whose students, overall and for each subgroup as described in section 1111(b)(2)(C)(v)(II) of the ESEA (i.e., economically disadvantaged students, students from major racial and ethnic groups, students with disabilities, and students with limited English proficiency), achieve high rates (e.g., one and one-half grade levels in an academic year) of Student Growth. Eligible applicants may include multiple measures, provided that principal effectiveness is evaluated, in significant part, based on Student Growth. Supplemental measures may include, for example, high school graduation rates; college enrollment rates; evidence of providing supportive teaching and learning conditions, support for ensuring effective instruction across subject areas for a well-rounded education, strong instructional leadership, and positive family and community engagement; or evidence of attracting, developing, and retaining high numbers of effective teachers. (SEED NFP)

    Highly Effective Teacher means a teacher whose students achieve high rates (e.g., one and one-half grade levels in an academic year) of Student Growth. Eligible applicants may include multiple measures, provided that teacher effectiveness is evaluated, in significant part, based on Student Growth. Supplemental measures may include, for example, multiple observation-based assessments of teacher performance or evidence of leadership roles (which may include mentoring or leading professional development learning communities) that increase effectiveness of other teachers in the school or LEA. (SEED NFP)

    Large Sample means an analytic sample of 350 or more students (or other single analysis units), or 50 or more groups (such as classrooms or schools) that contain 10 or more students (or other single analysis units). (34 CFR 77.1)

    Lowest-Performing Schools means—

    For a State with an approved request for flexibility under the ESEA, Priority Schools or Tier I and Tier II Schools identified under the School Improvement Grants program.

    For any other State, Tier I and Tier II Schools identified under the School Improvement Grants program. (Supplemental Priorities)

    Note:

    ESEA flexibility ended on August 1, 2016. Consequently, the approved requests for flexibility referenced in the definition of “Lowest-Performing Schools” would have been granted prior to that date.

    Moderate Evidence of Effectiveness means one of the following conditions is met:

    (a) There is at least one study of the effectiveness of the process, product, strategy, or practice being proposed that meets the What Works Clearinghouse Evidence Standards without reservations, found a statistically significant favorable impact on a Relevant Outcome (with no statistically significant and overriding unfavorable impacts on that outcome for relevant populations in the study or in other studies of the intervention reviewed by and reported on by the What Works Clearinghouse), and includes a sample that overlaps with the populations or settings proposed to receive the process, product, strategy, or practice.

    (b) There is at least one study of the effectiveness of the process, product, strategy, or practice being proposed that meets the What Works Clearinghouse Evidence Standards with reservations, found a statistically significant favorable impact on a Relevant Outcome (with no statistically significant and overriding unfavorable impacts on that outcome for relevant populations in the study or in other studies of the intervention reviewed by and reported on by the What Works Clearinghouse), includes a sample that overlaps with the populations or settings proposed to receive the process, product, strategy, or practice, and includes a Large Sample and a Multi-site Sample. (Note: Multiple studies can cumulatively meet the large and Multi-site Sample requirements as long as each study meets the other requirements in this paragraph.) (34 CFR 77.1)

    Multi-site Sample means more than one site, where site can be defined as an LEA, locality, or State. (34 CFR 77.1)

    National Level describes the level of scope or effectiveness of a process, product, strategy, or practice that is able to be effective in a wide variety of communities, including rural and urban areas, as well as with different groups (e.g., economically disadvantaged, racial and ethnic groups, migrant populations, individuals with disabilities, English learners, and individuals of each gender). (SEED NFP)

    National Not-for-Profit Organization means an entity that meets the definition of “nonprofit” under 34 CFR 77.1(c) and is of national scope, meaning that the entity provides services in multiple States to a significant number or percentage of recipients and is supported by staff or affiliates in multiple States. (SEED NFP)

    Open Educational Resources means teaching, learning, and research resources that reside in the public domain or have been released under an intellectual property license that permits their free use or repurposing by others. (SEED NFP)

    Persistently Lowest Achieving School means, as determined by the State—

    (a)(1) Any Title I school that has been identified for improvement, corrective action, or restructuring under section 1116 of the ESEA, and that—

    (i) Is among the lowest-achieving five percent of Title I schools in improvement, corrective action, or restructuring or the lowest-achieving five Title I schools in improvement, corrective action, or restructuring in the State, whichever number of schools is greater; or

    (ii) Is a high school that has had a graduation rate, as defined in 34 CFR 200.19(b), that is less than 60 percent over a number of years; and

    (2) Any secondary school that is eligible for, but does not receive, Title I funds that—

    (i) Is among the lowest-achieving five percent of secondary schools or the lowest-achieving five secondary schools in the State that are eligible for, but do not receive, Title I funds, whichever number of schools is greater; or

    (ii) Is a high school that has had a graduation rate, as defined in 34 CFR 200.19(b), that is less than 60 percent over a number of years.

    (b) To identify the lowest-achieving schools, a State must take into account both—

    (i) The academic achievement of the “all students” group in a school in terms of proficiency on the State's assessments under section 1111(b)(3) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, as amended by the No Child Left Behind Act, in reading/language arts and mathematics combined; and

    (ii) The school's lack of progress on those assessments over a number of years in the “all students” group. (Supplemental Priorities)

    Note:

    The Department will also consider any school a persistently lowest-achieving school that, at the time of submission of application under this competition, meets the definition of “Lowest-Performing Schools” set out in this Notice.

    We are providing this flexibility because a State that received ESEA flexibility was not required to identify schools in corrective action or restructuring under the ESEA; but rather, the State identified priority and focus schools. Moreover, consistent with final regulations issued under the School Improvement Grants program (80 FR 7223), the definition of Tier I and Tier II Schools includes persistently lowest-achieving schools.

    Priority Schools means schools that, based on the most recent data available, have been identified as among the Lowest-Performing Schools in the State. The total number of Priority Schools in a State must be at least five percent of the Title I schools in the State. A Priority School is—

    (a) A school among the lowest five percent of Title I schools in the State based on the achievement of the “all students” group in terms of proficiency on the statewide assessments that are part of the SEA's differentiated recognition, accountability, and support system, combined, and has demonstrated a lack of progress on those assessments over a number of years in the “all students” group;

    (b) A Title I-participating or Title I-eligible high school with a graduation rate that is less than 60 percent over a number of years; or

    (c) A Tier I or Tier II school under the School Improvement Grant (SIG) program that is using SIG funds to implement a school intervention model. (Supplemental Priorities)

    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). (34 CFR 77.1)

    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. (34 CFR 77.1)

    Regular High School Diploma means the standard high school diploma that is awarded to students in the State and that is fully aligned with the State's academic content standards or a higher diploma and does not include a General Education Development (GED) credential, certificate of attendance, or any alternative award. (Supplemental Priorities)

    Rural Local Educational Agency means an LEA that is eligible under the Small Rural School Achievement (SRSA) program or the Rural and Low-Income School (RLIS) program authorized under Title VI, Part B of the ESEA. Eligible applicants may determine whether a particular LEA is eligible for these programs by referring to information on the Department's Web site at www2.ed.gov/nclb/freedom/local/reap.html. (Supplemental Priorities)

    Strong Evidence of Effectiveness means one of the following conditions is met:

    (a) There is at least one study of the effectiveness of the process, product, strategy, or practice being proposed that meets the What Works Clearinghouse Evidence Standards without reservations, found a statistically significant favorable impact on a Relevant Outcome (with no statistically significant and overriding unfavorable impacts on that outcome for relevant populations in the study or in other studies of the intervention reviewed by and reported on by the What Works Clearinghouse), includes a sample that overlaps with the populations and settings proposed to receive the process, product, strategy, or practice, and includes a Large Sample and a Multi-site Sample. (Note: Multiple studies can cumulatively meet the Large and Multi-site Sample requirements as long as each study meets the other requirements in this paragraph.)

    (b) There are at least two studies of the effectiveness of the process, product, strategy, or practice being proposed, each of which: Meets the What Works Clearinghouse Evidence Standards with reservations, found a statistically significant favorable impact on a Relevant Outcome (with no statistically significant and overriding unfavorable impacts on that outcome for relevant populations in the studies or in other studies of the intervention reviewed by and reported on by the What Works Clearinghouse), includes a sample that overlaps with the populations and settings proposed to receive the process, product, strategy, or practice, and includes a Large Sample and a Multi-site Sample. (34 CFR 77.1)

    Student Achievement means—

    (a) For tested grades and subjects: (1) A student's score on the State's assessments under the ESEA; and, as appropriate, (2) other measures of student learning, such as those described in paragraph (b) of this definition, provided they are rigorous and comparable across schools.

    (b) For non-tested grades and subjects: alternative measures of student learning and performance, such as student scores on pre-tests and end-of-course tests; student performance on English language proficiency assessments; and other measures of Student Achievement that are rigorous and comparable across schools. (SEED NFP)

    Student Growth means the change in Student Achievement (as defined in this notice) for an individual student between two or more points in time. An applicant may also include other measures that are rigorous and comparable across classrooms. (SEED NFP)

    Tier I School means—

    (a) A Title I school that has been identified as in improvement, corrective action, or restructuring under section 1116 of the ESEA and that is identified by the SEA under paragraph (a)(1) of the definition of “Persistently Lowest Achieving School.”

    (b) An elementary school that is eligible for Title I, Part A funds that—

    (1)(i) Has not made adequate yearly progress for at least two consecutive years; or

    (ii) Is in the State's lowest quintile of performance based on proficiency rates on the State's assessments under section 1111(b)(3) of the ESEA in reading/language arts and mathematics combined; and (2) Is no higher achieving than the highest-achieving school identified by the SEA under paragraph (a)(1)(i) of the definition of “Persistently Lowest Achieving School.” (Supplemental Priorities)

    Tier II School means—

    (a) A secondary school that is eligible for, but does not receive, Title I, Part A funds and is identified by the State educational agency (SEA) under paragraph (a)(2) of the definition of “Persistently Lowest Achieving Schools.”

    (b) A secondary school that is eligible for Title I, Part A funds that—

    (1)(i) Has not made adequate yearly progress for at least two consecutive years; or

    (ii) Is in the State's lowest quintile of performance based on proficiency rates on the State's assessments under section 1111(b)(3) of the ESEA, in reading/language arts and mathematics combined; and

    (2)(i) Is no higher achieving than the highest-achieving school identified by the SEA under paragraph (a)(2)(i) of the definition of “Persistently Lowest Achieving school;” or

    (ii) Is a high school that has had a graduation rate, as defined in 34 CFR 200.19(b), that is less than 60 percent over a number of years. (Supplemental Priorities)

    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. (34 CFR 77.1)

    Program Authority: Public Law 114-113, Division H, Title III.

    Applicable Regulations: (a) The Education Department General Administrative Regulations in 34 CFR parts 75, 77, 79, 81, 82, 84, 86, 97, 98, and 99. (b) The OMB Guidelines to Agencies on Governmentwide Debarment and Suspension (Nonprocurement) in 2 CFR part 180, as adopted and amended as regulations of the Department in 2 CFR part 3485. (c) The Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards in 2 CFR part 200, as adopted and amended in 2 CFR part 3474. (d) The SEED NFP (78 FR 9815). (e) The Supplemental Priorities (79 FR 73425).

    Note:

    The regulations in 34 CFR part 86 apply to institutions of higher education only.

    II. Award Information

    Type of Award: Discretionary grants.

    Estimated Available Funds: $40,000,000.

    Estimated Range of Awards: $8,000,000-$15,000,000.

    Estimated Average Size of Awards: $12,000,000.

    Estimated Number of Awards: 3-4 awards.

    Note:

    The Department will provide each selected project with a single award for a multi-year grant period. The Department is not bound by any estimates in this notice.

    Project Period: Up to 36 months.

    Note:

    In subsequent fiscal years, under 34 CFR 75.250(b), the Department may offer SEED grantees the option of extending their SEED-related data collection and evaluation activities beyond the 36-month project period, and could choose to provide additional funding, for the purposes of data collection, analysis, and reporting, pending Congressional appropriations. This flexibility is not guaranteed and is contingent on available funding in subsequent fiscal years. The Department has discretion in deciding which, if any, SEED projects will receive additional time and funding for the purposes of data collection, analysis, and reporting.

    III. Eligibility Information

    1. Eligible Applicants: As established in the SEED NFP (78 FR 9815), to be eligible for a SEED program grant, an entity must be a National Not-for-Profit Organization. Each applicant must provide in its application documentation that it is a National Not-for-Profit Organization.

    2. Cost Sharing or Matching: This competition does not require cost sharing or matching.

    3. Evidence Standards: To meet Absolute Priority 1: Supporting Practices and Strategies for Which There Is Moderate Evidence of Effectiveness, each applicant must provide in its application documentation that its proposed project is supported by at least Moderate Evidence of Effectiveness. All applicants must respond to Absolute Priority 1, and one or more of Absolute Priorities 2 through 4, in order to be eligible to receive funding. An applicant that also responds to Competitive Preference Priority 1: Supporting Practices and Strategies for Which There Is Strong Evidence of Effectiveness must provide documentation that its proposed project is supported by Strong Evidence of Effectiveness. An applicant must ensure that all evidence is available to the Department from publically available sources and provide links or references to, or copies of, the evidence in the application. If the Department determines that an applicant has provided insufficient evidence that its proposed project meets the definition of “Moderate Evidence of Effectiveness” or “Strong Evidence of Effectiveness,” the applicant will not have an opportunity to provide additional evidence to support its application.

    4. Evaluations: As established in the SEED NFP, an applicant receiving funds under this program must comply with the requirements of any evaluation of the program conducted by the Department. In addition, an applicant receiving funds under this program must make broadly available through formal (e.g., peer-reviewed journals) or informal (e.g., newsletters) mechanisms, in print or electronically, the results of any evaluations it conducts of its funded activities.

    IV. Application and Submission Information

    1. Address To Request Application Package: Margarita Meléndez, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., Room 4W115, Washington, DC 20202-5960 or by email: [email protected]

    If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) or a text telephone (TTY), call the Federal Relay Service (FRS), toll free, at 1-800-877-8339.

    Individuals with disabilities can obtain a copy of the application package in an accessible format (e.g., braille, large print, audiotape, or compact disc) by contacting the program contact person listed in this section.

    2.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: January 20, 2017. 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 Department strongly encourages each potential applicant to notify the Department by sending a short email message indicating the applicant's intent to submit an application for funding. The email need not include information regarding the content of the proposed application, only the applicant's intent to submit it. The Department requests that this email notification be sent to the SEED program inbox at: [email protected]

    Eligible entities that fail to provide this email notification may still apply for funding.

    Page Limit: The application narrative (Part III of the application) is where you, the applicant, address the selection criteria that reviewers use to evaluate your application. We recommend that you limit the application narrative to the equivalent of no more than 50 pages, using the following standards:

    • A “page” is 8.5″ × 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, except for titles, headings, footnotes, quotations, references, captions, 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.

    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 and certifications; or the one-page abstract, the resumes, or letters of support. However, the page limit does apply to all of the application narrative section [Part III].

    b. Submission of Proprietary Information: Given the types of projects that may be proposed in applications for the SEED 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 feel 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 21, 2016.

    Deadline for Notice of Intent To Apply: January 20, 2017.

    Date of Informational Webinar: The SEED program intends to hold a Webinar designed to provide technical assistance to interested applicants. Detailed information regarding this Webinar will be provided on the SEED Web site at http://innovation.ed.gov/what-we-do/teacher-quality/supporting-effective-educator-development-grant-program/.

    Deadline for Transmittal of Applications: March 7, 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: April 20, 2017.

    4. Intergovernmental Review: This competition is subject to Executive Order 12372 and the regulations in 34 CFR part 79. Information about Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs under Executive Order 12372 is in the application package for this competition.

    5. Funding Restrictions: We reference regulations outlining funding restrictions in the Applicable Regulations section of this notice.

    6. Data Universal Numbering System Number, Taxpayer Identification Number, and System for Award Management: To do business with the Department of Education, you must—

    a. Have a Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number and a Taxpayer Identification Number (TIN);

    b. Register both your DUNS number and TIN with the System for Award Management (SAM), the Government's primary registrant database;

    c. Provide your DUNS number and TIN on your application; and

    d. Maintain an active SAM registration with current information while your application is under review by the Department and, if you are awarded a grant, during the project period.

    You can obtain a DUNS number from Dun and Bradstreet at the following Web site: http://fedgov.dnb.com/webform. A DUNS number can be created within one to two business days.

    If you are a corporate entity, agency, institution, or organization, you can obtain a TIN from the Internal Revenue Service. If you are an individual, you can obtain a TIN from the Internal Revenue Service or the Social Security Administration. If you need a new TIN, please allow two to five weeks for your TIN to become active.

    The SAM registration process can take approximately seven business days, but may take upwards of several weeks, depending on the completeness and accuracy of the data you enter into the SAM database. Thus, if you think you might want to apply for Federal financial assistance under a program administered by the Department, please allow sufficient time to obtain and register your DUNS number and TIN. We strongly recommend that you register early.

    Note:

    Once your SAM registration is active, it may be 24 to 48 hours before you can access the information in, and submit an application through, Grants.gov.

    If you are currently registered with SAM, you may not need to make any changes. However, please make certain that the TIN associated with your DUNS number is correct. Also note that you will need to update your registration annually. This may take three or more business days.

    Information about SAM is available at www.SAM.gov. To further assist you with obtaining and registering your DUNS number and TIN in SAM or updating your existing SAM account, we have prepared a SAM.gov Tip Sheet, which you can find at: 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 this competition must be submitted electronically unless you qualify for an exception to this requirement in accordance with the instructions in this section.

    a. Electronic Submission of Applications.

    Applications for grants under the SEED program, CFDA number 84.367D, must be submitted electronically using the Governmentwide Grants.gov Apply site at www.Grants.gov. Through this site, you will be able to download a copy of the application package, complete it offline, and then upload and submit your application. You may not email an electronic copy of a grant application to us.

    We will reject your application if you submit it in paper format unless, as described elsewhere in this section, you qualify for one of the exceptions to the electronic submission requirement and submit, no later than two weeks before the application deadline date, a written statement to the Department that you qualify for one of these exceptions. Further information regarding calculation of the date that is two weeks before the application deadline date is provided later in this section under Exception to Electronic Submission Requirement.

    You may access the electronic grant application for the SEED program at www.Grants.gov. You must search for the downloadable application package for this competition by the CFDA number. Do not include the CFDA number's alpha suffix in your search (e.g., search for 84.367, not 84.367D).

    Please note the following:

    • When you enter the Grants.gov site, you will find information about submitting an application electronically through the site, as well as the hours of operation.

    • Applications received by Grants.gov are date and time stamped. Your application must be fully uploaded and submitted and must be date and time stamped by the Grants.gov system no later than 4:30:00 p.m., Washington, DC time, on the application deadline date. Except as otherwise noted in this section, we will not accept your application if it is received—that is, date and time stamped by the Grants.gov system—after 4:30:00 p.m., Washington, DC time, on the application deadline date. We do not consider an application that does not comply with the deadline requirements. When we retrieve your application from Grants.gov, we will notify you if we are rejecting your application because it was date and time stamped by the Grants.gov system after 4:30:00 p.m., Washington, DC time, on the application deadline date.

    • The amount of time it can take to upload an application will vary depending on a variety of factors, including the size of the application and the speed of your Internet connection. Therefore, we strongly recommend that you do not wait until the application deadline date to begin the submission process through Grants.gov.

    • You should review and follow the Education Submission Procedures for submitting an application through Grants.gov that are included in the application package for this competition to ensure that you submit your application in a timely manner to the Grants.gov system. You can also find the Education Submission Procedures pertaining to Grants.gov under News and Events on the Department's G5 system home page at www.G5.gov. In addition, for specific guidance and procedures for submitting an application through Grants.gov, please refer to the Grants.gov Web site at: www.grants.gov/web/grants/applicants/apply-for-grants.html.

    • You will not receive additional point value because you submit your application in electronic format, nor will we penalize you if you qualify for an exception to the electronic submission requirement, as described elsewhere in this section, and submit your application in paper format.

    You must submit all documents electronically, including all information you typically provide on the following forms: the Application for Federal Assistance (SF 424), the Department of Education Supplemental Information for SF 424, Budget Information—Non-Construction Programs (ED 524), and all necessary assurances and certifications.

    • You must upload any narrative sections and all other attachments to your application as files in a read-only Portable Document Format (PDF). Do not upload an interactive or fillable PDF file. If you upload a file type other than a read-only 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 a determination is made on 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: Margarita Meléndez, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., Room 4W115, Washington, DC 20202-5960. FAX: (202) 401-4123.

    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 84.367D), 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 84.367D), 550 12th Street SW., Room 7039, Potomac Center Plaza, Washington, DC 20202-4260.

    The Application Control Center accepts hand deliveries daily between 8:00 a.m. and 4:30:00 p.m., Washington, DC time, except Saturdays, Sundays, and Federal holidays.

    Note for Mail or Hand Delivery of Paper Applications: If you mail or hand deliver your application to the Department—

    (1) You must indicate on the envelope and—if not provided by the Department—in Item 11 of the SF 424 the CFDA number, including suffix letter, if any, of the competition under which you are submitting your application; and

    (2) The Application Control Center will mail to you a notification of receipt of your grant application. If you do not receive this notification within 15 business days from the application deadline date, you should call the U.S. Department of Education Application Control Center at (202) 245-6288.

    V. Application Review Information

    1. Selection Criteria: The selection criteria for this competition are from the SEED NFP and from 34 CFR 75.210, and are as follows:

    The maximum score for all the selection criteria is 100 points. The maximum score for each criterion is indicated in parentheses. Each criterion also includes the factors that reviewers will consider in determining the extent to which an applicant meets the criterion.

    In addressing each criterion, applicants are encouraged to make explicit connections to relevant aspects of responses to other selection criteria.

    A. Significance (10 points). The Secretary considers the significance of the proposed project. In determining the significance of the proposed project, the Secretary considers:

    (1) The significance of the proposed project on a National Level. (SEED NFP)

    (2) The potential contribution of the proposed project to the development and advancement of teacher and school leadership theory, knowledge, and practices. (SEED NFP)

    (3) The importance or magnitude of the results or outcomes likely to be attained by the proposed project, especially improvements in teaching and Student Achievement. (SEED NFP)

    B. Quality of the Project Design and Services (35 points). The Secretary considers the quality of the design and services of the proposed project. In determining the quality of the design and services of the proposed project, the Secretary considers:

    (1) The extent to which the goals, objectives, and outcomes to be achieved by the proposed project are clearly specified, aligned, and measurable. (SEED NFP)

    (2) The extent to which the proposed project is part of a comprehensive effort to improve teaching and learning and support rigorous academic standards for students. (SEED NFP)

    (3) The extent to which the training or professional development services to be provided by the proposed project will be of sufficient quality, intensity, and duration to lead to improvements in practice among the recipients of those services. (SEED NFP)

    (4) The extent to which the proposed project will prepare personnel for fields in which shortages have been demonstrated. (34 CFR 75.210)

    (5) The extent to which the proposed project will focus on serving or otherwise addressing the needs of disadvantaged individuals. (34 CFR 75.210)

    C. Quality of the Management Plan and Personnel (20 points). The Secretary considers the quality of the management plan for the proposed project and of the personnel who will carry out the proposed project. In determining the quality of the management plan and the project personnel, the Secretary considers:

    (1) The qualifications, including relevant training and experience, of the project director, key project personnel, and project consultants or subcontractors. (SEED NFP)

    (2) 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. (SEED NFP)

    (3) The extent to which the proposed management plan includes sufficient and reasonable resources to effectively carry out the proposed project, including the project evaluation. (SEED NFP)

    D. Sustainability (15 points). The Secretary considers the adequacy of resources to continue the proposed project after the grant period ends. In determining the adequacy of resources and the potential for utility of the proposed project's activities and products by other organizations, the Secretary considers:

    (1) The extent to which the proposed project is designed to build capacity and yield results that will extend beyond the period of Federal financial assistance. (SEED NFP)

    (2) The extent to which the proposed project is likely to yield findings and products (such as information, materials, processes, or techniques) that may be used by other agencies and organizations. (SEED NFP)

    (3) The extent to which the applicant will disseminate information about results and outcomes of the proposed project in ways that will enable others, including the public, to use the information or strategies. (SEED NFP)

    E. Quality of the Project Evaluation (20 points). 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:

    (1) The extent to which the methods of evaluation are thorough, feasible, and appropriate to the goals, objectives, and outcomes of the proposed project. (SEED NFP)

    (2) The extent to which the evaluation includes the use of objective performance measures that are clearly related to the intended outcomes of the project and will produce quantitative and qualitative data. (SEED NFP)

    (3) The extent to which the evaluation will provide performance feedback and permit periodic assessment of progress toward achieving intended outcomes. (SEED NFP)

    (4) The extent to which the methods of evaluation will, if well-implemented, produce evidence about the project's effectiveness that would meet What Works Clearinghouse Evidence Standards without reservations. (34 CFR 75.210)

    Note:

    We encourage applicants to review the following technical assistance resources on evaluation: (1) WWC Procedures and Standards Handbook: http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/references/idocviewer/doc.aspx?docid=19&tocid=1; and (2) IES/NCEE Technical Methods papers: http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/tech_methods/. In addition, applicants may view two optional Webinar recordings that were hosted by the Institute of Education Sciences. The first Webinar discussed strategies for designing and executing well-designed Quasi-experimental design studies and is available at: http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/Multimedia.aspx?sid=23. The second Webinar focused on more rigorous evaluation designs and discussed strategies for designing and executing studies that meet WWC evidence standards without reservations. This Webinar is available at: http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/Multimedia.aspx?sid=18.

    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 current 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 multi-year award, you must submit an annual performance report that provides the most current performance and financial expenditure information as directed by the Secretary under 34 CFR 75.118. The Secretary may also require more frequent performance reports under 34 CFR 75.720(c). For specific requirements on reporting, please go to www.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/appforms/appforms.html.

    (c) Under 34 CFR 75.250(b), the Secretary may provide a grantee with additional funding for data collection analysis and reporting. In this case the Secretary establishes a data collection period.

    4. Performance Measures: The overall purpose of the SEED program is to support projects by National Not-for-Profit organizations that are supported by at least Moderate Evidence of Effectiveness to recruit, select, and prepare or provide professional enhancement activities for teachers, principals, or both. We have established the following performance measures for the SEED program: (a) The percentage of teacher and principal participants who serve concentrations of High-Need Students; (b) the percentage of participants who serve concentrations of High-Need Students and are highly effective; (c) the percentage of participants who serve concentrations of High-Need Students, are highly effective, and serve for at least two years; and (d) the cost per such participant. Grantees will report annually on each measure.

    VII. Agency Contact For Further Information Contact:

    Margarita Meléndez, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., Room 4W115, Washington, DC 20202-5960. Telephone: (202) 260-3548, or by email: [email protected]

    If you use a TDD or TTY, call the FRS, toll free, at 1-800-877-8339.

    VIII. Other Information

    Accessible Format: Individuals with disabilities can obtain this document and a copy of the application package in an accessible format (e.g., braille, large print, audiotape, or compact disc) on request to the program contact person listed under For Further Information Contact in section VII of this notice.

    Electronic Access to This Document: The official version of this document is the document published in the Federal Register. Free Internet access to the official edition of the Federal Register and the Code of Federal Regulations is available via the Federal Digital System at: www.thefederalregister.org/fdsys. At this site you can view this document, as well as all other documents of this Department published in the Federal Register, in text or 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.

    Dated: December 16, 2016. Nadya Chinoy Dabby, Assistant Deputy Secretary for Innovation and Improvement.
    [FR Doc. 2016-30751 Filed 12-20-16; 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: PR17-12-001.

    Applicants: Columbia Gas of Maryland, Inc..

    Description: Tariff filing per 284.123(b),(e)/: CMD SOC effective 10-27-2016 Amendment to be effective 10/27/2016; Filing Type: 1000.

    Filed Date: 12/13/2016.

    Accession Number: 201612135028.

    Comments/Protests Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/3/17.

    Docket Number: PR17-13-000.

    Applicants: Jefferson Island Storage & Hub, L.L.C.

    Description: Market Power Study Reaffirming Market-Based Rates.

    Filed Date: 12/8/2016.

    Accession Number: 20161208-5175.

    Comments/Protests Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/29/16.

    Docket Numbers: RP17-253-000.

    Applicants: Guardian Pipeline, L.L.C.

    Description: § 4(d) Rate Filing: Negotiated Rate PAL Agreement with MIECO INC. to be effective 12/10/2016.

    Filed Date: 12/9/16.

    Accession Number: 20161209-5191.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/21/16.

    Docket Numbers: RP17-255-000.

    Applicants: Sea Robin Pipeline Company, LLC.

    Description: Compliance filing Annual Flowthrough Crediting Mechanism Filing on 12/12/16.

    Filed Date: 12/12/16.

    Accession Number: 20161212-5058.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/27/16.

    Docket Numbers: RP17-256-000.

    Applicants: Texas Eastern Transmission, LP.

    Description: Compliance filing Gas Quality Settlement.

    Filed Date: 12/13/16.

    Accession Number: 20161213-5000.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/27/16.

    Docket Numbers: RP17-257-000.

    Applicants: Rockies Express Pipeline LLC.

    Description: § 4(d) Rate Filing: Neg Rate 2016-12-2 Capacity Enhancement Amend Many Ks to be effective 12/13/2016.

    Filed Date: 12/13/16.

    Accession Number: 20161213-5110.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/27/16.

    Docket Numbers: RP17-258-000.

    Applicants: Gulf Shore Energy Partners, LP.

    Description: Compliance filing Gulf Shore Energy Partners—Cost and Revenue Study.

    Filed Date: 12/13/16.

    Accession Number: 20161213-5113.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/27/16.

    Docket Numbers: RP17-259-000.

    Applicants: Natural Gas Pipeline Company of America.

    Description: § 4(d) Rate Filing: Negotiated Rate—Occidental Energy to be effective 1/1/2017.

    Filed Date: 12/13/16.

    Accession Number: 20161213-5148.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/27/16.

    Docket Numbers: RP17-260-000.

    Applicants: Texas Eastern Transmission, LP.

    Description: § 4(d) Rate Filing: Negotiated Rate—Piedmont Release to Atmos—8944225 to be effective 12/9/2016.

    Filed Date: 12/13/16.

    Accession Number: 20161213-5237.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/27/16.

    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: RP17-200-001.

    Applicants: Guardian Pipeline, L.L.C.

    Description: Tariff Amendment: Amendment to Docket No. RP17-200-000 to be effective 12/31/2016.

    Filed Date: 12/12/16.

    Accession Number: 20161212-5208.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/27/16.

    Docket Numbers: RP17-71-001.

    Applicants: Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC.

    Description: Compliance filing AGT FRQ 2016 Compliance Filing.

    Filed Date: 12/12/16.

    Accession Number: 20161212-5084.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/27/16.

    Any person desiring to protest in any of the above proceedings must file in accordance with Rule 211 of the Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the links or querying the docket number.

    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

    Dated: December 14, 2016. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-30677 Filed 12-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [EPA-HQ-OW-2015-0335; FRL-9956-93-OW] Final EPA-USGS Technical Report: Protecting Aquatic Life from Effects of Hydrologic Alteration AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and United States Geological Survey (USGS).

    ACTION:

    Notice of availability.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the United States Geological Survey are releasing a technical report: Final EPA-USGS Technical Report: Protecting Aquatic Life from Effects of Hydrologic Alteration. Healthy aquatic ecosystems provide an array of services to individuals and society, including clean drinking water, irrigation supplies, and recreational opportunities. Sound and sustainable management of aquatic ecosystems is an integral part of managing water resources to meet the needs of society. Hydrologic alteration can be a contributor to the impairment of water bodies that are designated to support aquatic life. Stresses on aquatic life associated with hydrologic alteration may be further exacerbated by climate change.

    This report provides States, Tribes and territories with scientific and technical information on the natural flow regime and potential effects of flow alteration on aquatic life, and a flexible, nonprescriptive framework that state water managers might consider if they are interested in developing narrative or numeric targets for flow regime components that are protective of aquatic life. The report also provides information about States and Tribes that have adopted narrative water quality standards to protect their waterbodies' flow regimes and on the potential impact of climate change on flow regimes.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Diana Eignor, Health and Ecological Criteria Division, Office of Water (Mail Code 4304T), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: (202) 566-1143; email address: [email protected]

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

    1. Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy. Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically in www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Water Docket, EPA/DC, EPA West, Room 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 Water Docket is (202) 566-2426. For additional information about EPA's public docket, visit EPA Docket Center homepage at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.

    II. What is this document?

    This document serves as a technical and informational resource for States, Tribes, territories, and other stakeholders that want to protect aquatic life from the adverse effects of flow alteration. To that end, this report provides technical information about the effect of altered flow regimes on aquatic life and a nonprescriptive framework that may be used to help quantify targets for flow regime components that are protective of aquatic life and their habitats. The report also provides examples of state and tribal water quality standards designed to protect such flow regimes and discusses the potential impact of climate change on flow regimes. This technical report is not a rule and it, therefore, does not impose any mandatory requirements. State and Tribal decision makers retain the discretion to adopt approaches or information presented in this report on a case-by-case basis that differ from the approaches described in this report.

    III. Additional Information:

    EPA and USGS each conducted internal peer reviews of the report, and EPA managed a contractor-led independent external peer review of the Draft EPA-USGS Technical Report: Protecting Aquatic Life from Effects of Hydrologic Alteration. EPA will make the external peer review comments and Agency responses to these comments available in the docket at http://www.regulations.gov.

    Dated: December 14, 2016. Joel Beauvais, Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Water.
    [FR Doc. 2016-30760 Filed 12-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [EPA-HQ-OAR-2007-1196; FRL-9956-89] Recent Postings of Broadly Applicable Alternative Test Methods AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Notice of availability.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice announces the broadly applicable alternative test method approval decisions the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has made under and in support of New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) and the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) between January 1, 2016, and December 12, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    An electronic copy of each alternative test method approval document is available at https://www.epa.gov/emc/broadly-applicable-approved-alternative-test-methods. For questions about this notice, contact Mrs. Lula H. Melton, Air Quality Assessment Division, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards (E143-02), Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711; telephone number: (919) 541-2910; fax number: (919) 541-0516; email address: [email protected] For technical questions about individual alternative test method decisions, refer to the contact person identified in the individual approval document(s).

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. General Information A. Does this notice apply to me?

    This notice will be of interest to entities regulated under 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) parts 60, 61, and 63, state, local, and tribal agencies, and the EPA Regional offices responsible for implementation and enforcement of regulations under 40 CFR parts 60, 61, and 63.

    B. How can I get copies of this information?

    You may access copies of the broadly applicable alternative test method approval documents at https://www.epa.gov/emc/broadly-applicable-approved-alternative-test-methods.

    II. Background

    Broadly applicable alternative test method approval decisions made by the EPA in 2016 under the NSPS, 40 CFR part 60 and the NESHAP, 40 CFR parts 61 and 63 are identified in this notice (see Table 1). Source owners and operators may voluntarily use these broadly applicable alternative test methods in lieu of otherwise specified reference test methods. Use of these broadly applicable alternative test methods does not change the applicable emission standards.

    As explained in a previous Federal Register notice published at 72 FR 4257 (January 30, 2007) and located at https://www.epa.gov/emc/broadly-applicable-approved-alternative-test-methods, the EPA Administrator has the authority to approve the use of alternative test methods to comply with requirements under 40 CFR parts 60, 61, and 63. This authority is found in sections 60.8(b)(3), 61.13(h)(1)(ii), and 63.7(e)(2)(ii). A similar authority is granted in 40 CFR part 65 under section 65.158(a)(2). In the past, we have performed thorough technical reviews of numerous source-specific requests for alternatives and modifications to test methods and procedures. Based on these reviews, we have often found that these changes or alternatives would be equally valid and appropriate to apply to other sources within a particular class, category, or subcategory. Consequently, we have concluded that, where a method modification or an alternative method is clearly broadly applicable to a class, category, or subcategory of sources, it is both more equitable and efficient to approve its use for all appropriate sources and situations at the same time.

    It is important to clarify that alternative methods are not mandatory but permissive. Sources are not required to employ such a method but may choose to do so in appropriate circumstances. Source owners or operators should review the specific broadly applicable alternative method approval decision at https://www.epa.gov/emc/broadly-applicable-approved-alternative-test-methods before electing to employ the alternative method. As per section 63.7(f)(5), a source owner or operator electing to use an alternative method for 40 CFR part 63 standards must continue to use the alternative method until otherwise authorized.

    The criteria for approval and procedures for submission and review of broadly applicable alternative test methods are outlined at 72 FR 4257 (January 30, 2007). We will continue to announce approvals for broadly applicable alternative test methods at https://www.epa.gov/emc/broadly-applicable-approved-alternative-test-methods and publish a notice annually that summarizes approvals for broadly applicable alternative test methods during the preceding year.

    This notice comprises a summary of seven such approval documents posted to our Technology Transfer Network between January 1, 2016, and December 12, 2016. The alternative method decision letter/memo number, the reference method affected, sources allowed to use this alternative, and the modification or alternative method allowed are summarized in Table 1 of this notice. For more detailed information, please refer to the complete copies of these approval documents available at https://www.epa.gov/emc/broadly-applicable-approved-alternative-test-methods, as Table 1 serves only as a brief summary of the broadly applicable alternative test methods.

    If you are aware of reasons why a particular alternative test method approval that we issued should not be broadly applicable or that its use should in some way be limited, we request that you make us aware of the reasons in writing, and we will revisit the broad approval. Any objection to a broadly applicable alternative test method, as well as the resolution of that objection, will be announced at https://www.epa.gov/emc/broadly-applicable-approved-alternative-test-methods and in the subsequent Federal Register notice. If we decide to retract a broadly applicable test method, we will continue to grant case-by-case approvals, as appropriate, and will (as states, local and tribal agencies and the EPA Regional offices should) consider the need for an appropriate transition period for users either to request case-by-case approval or to transition to an approved method.

    Dated: December 14, 2016. Stephen Page, Director, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards. Table 1—Approved Alternative Test Methods and Modifications To Test Methods Referenced in or Published Under Appendices in 40 CFR Parts 60, 61, and 63 Posted Between January 2016 and December 2016 Alternative
  • method decision letter/memo
  • number
  • As an alternative or modification to . . . For . . . You may . . .
    ALT-114 Performance Specification 18-Performance Specifications and Test Procedures for Gaseous Hydrogen Chloride (HCl) Continuous Emission Monitoring Systems at Stationary Sources and Procedure 6-Quality Assurance Requirements for Gaseous Hydrogen Chloride (HCl) Emission Monitoring Systems Used for Compliance Determination at Stationary Sources Sources subject to 40 CFR Part 63, subpart LLL-National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants from the Portland Cement Manufacturing Industry Sources; 40 CFR Part 63, subpart UUUUU-National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Coal- and Oil-Fired Electric Utility Steam Generating Units; 40 CFR Part 63, subpart DDDDD-National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Major Sources: Industrial, Commercial, and Institutional Boilers and Process Heaters; and 40 CFR Part 60, subparts CCCC and DDDD-Standards of Performance for Commercial and Industrial Solid Waste Incineration Units Use the alternative approach for preparation of gas standards as specified in the agency's approval letter dated February 22, 2016. ALT-115 40 CFR 63.7525(a)(2)(vi). Sources subject to 40 CFR Part 63, subpart DDDDD-National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Major Sources: Industrial, Commercial, and Institutional Boilers and Process Heaters. Use the alternative approach for moisture measurement as specified in the agency's approval letter dated March 2, 2016 (only when both CO and CO2 are being measured on a wet basis). ALT-116 Method 7E-Determination of Nitrogen Oxide Emissions From Stationary Sources (Instrumental Analyzer Procedure) Sources subject to 40 CFR Parts 60, 61, and 63 Use higher concentration NO2 gases in conjunction with Method 205 for converter efficiency testing as specified in the agency's approval letter dated April 27, 2014. ALT-117 Method 5-Determination of Particulate Matter Emissions From Stationary Sources Sources subject to 40 CFR Parts 60, 61, and 63 Use single temperature DGM (dry gas meter) sensor in lieu of two sensors with the criteria specified in the agency's approval letter dated March 15, 2016. ALT-118 Performance Specification 12A-Specifications and Test Procedures for Total Vapor Phase Mercury Continuous Emission Monitoring Systems in Stationary Sources and Procedure 5-Quality Assurance Requirements for Vapor Phase Mercury Continuous Emission Monitoring Systems and Sorbent Trap Monitoring Systems Used for Compliance Determination at Stationary Sources Sources subject to 40 CFR Part 63, subpart LLL-National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants from the Portland Cement Manufacturing Industry; 40 CFR Part 63, subpart UUUUU-National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Coal- and Oil-Fired Electric Utility Steam Generating Units; 40 CFR Part 63, subpart DDDDD-National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Major Sources: Industrial, Commercial, and Institutional Boilers and Process Heaters; and 40 CFR Part 60, subparts CCCC and DDDD-Standards of Performance for Commercial and Industrial Solid Waste Incineration Units Use a NIST-certified Vendor Prime elemental mercury gas generator for research gas mixtures (RGM) in the EPA Traceability Protocol for Assay and Certification of Gaseous Calibration Standards with the provisions specified in the agency's approval letter dated May 24, 2016. ALT-119 Performance Specification 12B-Specifications and Test Procedures for Monitoring Total Vapor Phase Mercury Emissions From Stationary Sources Using a Sorbent Trap Monitoring System Sources subject to 40 CFR Part 63, subparts LLL-National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants from the Portland Cement Manufacturing Industry and UUUUU-National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Coal- and Oil-Fired Electric Utility Steam Generating Units Use the alternative analytical test procedure for low level measurements as specified in the agency's approval letter dated May 26, 2016. ALT-120 40 CFR 63.1350(k)(2)(ii) and (iii) Sources subject to 40 CFR Part 63, subparts LLL-National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants from the Portland Cement Manufacturing Industry Use the alternative procedure for above span mercury calibrations through January 1, 2018, only as specified in the agency's approval letter dated June 28, 2016. Source owners or operators should review the specific broadly applicable alternative method approval letter at https://www.epa.gov/emc/broadly-applicable-approved-alternative-test-methods before electing to employ it.
    [FR Doc. 2016-30714 Filed 12-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Deletion of Items From Sunshine Act Meeting December 14, 2016.

    The following Agenda items have been deleted from the list of items scheduled for consideration at the Thursday, December 15, 2016, Open Meeting and previously listed in the Commission's Notice of December 8, 2016. Items 3. 4, 5, 6, have been adopted by the Commission.

    2 Public Safety & Homeland Security Title: Amendment of Part 11 of the Commission's Rules Regarding the Emergency Alert System (PS Docket No. 15-94). Summary: The Commission will consider a Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to enhance the Emergency Alert System (EAS) as a tool for community emergency preparedness. The Report and Order improves alerting organization at the state and local levels, builds stronger community-based alerting exercise programs, and protects the EAS against accidental misuse and malicious intrusion. The Further Notice seeks comment on proposals to leverage technological advances to improve alerting and additional measures to preserve EAS security. 3 International Title: Update to Parts 2 and 25 Concerning Non-geostationary, Fixed Satellite Service Systems and Related Matters. Summary: The Commission will consider a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to update, clarify, and streamline the Commission's rules to facilitate the deployment of recently proposed non-geostationary-satellite orbit, fixed-satellite service satellite systems. 4 General Counsel Title: Amendment of Part 0 of the Commission's Rules Regarding Public Information, the Inspection of Records, and Implementing the Freedom of Information Act. Summary: The Commission will consider an Order that updates its Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) regulations consistent with the FOIA Improvement Act of 2016. 5 Wireless Telecommunications Title: Maritime Communications/Land Mobile, LLC, Order on Reconsideration and Memorandum Opinion and Order. Summary: The Commission will consider an Order on Reconsideration and Memorandum Opinion and Order regarding the assignment of licenses held by Maritime Communications/Land Mobile, LLC. 6 Public Safety & Homeland Security Title: Improving the Resiliency of Mobile Wireless Communications Networks, (PS Docket 13-239); Reliability and Continuity of Communications Networks, Including Broadband Technologies (PS Docket No. 11-60). Summary: The Commission will consider an Order that evaluates the Wireless Network Resiliency Cooperative Framework submitted by members of the wireless industry. 7 Enforcement Title: Preferred Long Distance, Inc., Memorandum Opinion & Order. Summary: The Commission will consider a Memorandum Opinion and Order that addresses a Petition for Reconsideration of a Forfeiture Order issued by the Commission for slamming and deceptive marketing.

    The following Consent Agenda item has been deleted from the list of items scheduled for consideration at the Thursday, December 15, 2016, Open Meeting and previously listed in the Commission's Notice of December 8, 2016.

    Consent Agenda 5 Consumer & Governmental Affairs Title: Ministry of Communications of the Archdiocese of Miami, FL; Closed Captioning Petitions for Waiver; Application for Review. Summary: The Commission will consider a Memorandum Opinion and Order addressing an Application for Review seeking review of the Bureau's dismissal of the Ministry's petition for exemption from the Commission's closed captioning requirements. Federal Communications Commission. Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-30900 Filed 12-19-16; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
    FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Radio Broadcasting Services; AM or FM Proposals To Change The Community of License AGENCY:

    Federal Communications Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The following applicants filed AM or FM proposals to change the community of License: CSSI Non-Profit Educational Broadcasting Corporation, Station KYQX, Facility ID 62040, BMPED-20161202ABT, From Weatherford, TX, To Mineral Wells, TX; Gois Broadcasting Boston, LLC, Station WLLH, Facility ID 24971, BP-20161110AAP, From Lowell, MA, To Lawrence, MA; Grace Baptist Church of Orangeburg, Station WWOS, Facility ID 38899, BP-20161020ABD, From St. George, SC, To Walterboro, SC; Great Northern Broadcasting System, Inc., Station WLDR-FM, Facility ID 24974, BPH-20161128AFR, From Traverse City, MI, To Beulah, MI; Northwest Georgia Broadcasting, Station WYXC, Facility ID 19541, BP-20161107ACA, From Cartersville, GA, To East Point, GA; Premiere Enterprises, LLC, Station WALI, Facility ID 25206, BPH-20161020ABE, From Walterboro, SC, To Burton, SC; Revival Christian Ministries, Inc., Station WSGG, Facility ID 92857, BPED-20161110ABC, From Norfolk, CT, To Canaan, CT; Roy E. Henderson, Station WOUF, Facility ID 14646, BPH-20161128AFT, From Beulah, MI, To Traverse City, MI.

    DATES:

    The agency must receive comments on or before February 21, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Federal Communications Commission, 445 Twelfth Street SW., Washington, DC 20554.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Tung Bui, 202-418-2700.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The full text of these applications is available for inspection and copying during normal business hours in the Commission's Reference Center, 445 12th Street SW., Washington, DC 20554 or electronically via the Media Bureau's Consolidated Data Base System, http://licensing.fcc.gov/prod/cdbs/pubacc/prod/cdbs_pa.htm.

    Federal Communications Commission. James D. Bradshaw, Deputy Chief, Audio Division, Media Bureau.
    [FR Doc. 2016-30678 Filed 12-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
    FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION Notice of Agreements Filed

    The Commission hereby gives notice of the filing of the following agreements under the Shipping Act of 1984. Interested parties may submit comments on the agreements to the Secretary, Federal Maritime Commission, Washington, DC 20573, within twelve days of the date this notice appears in the Federal Register. Copies of the agreements are available through the Commission's Web site (www.fmc.gov) or by contacting the Office of Agreements at (202)-523-5793 or [email protected]

    Agreement No.: 012309-001.

    Title: WWL/EUKOR/ARC/GLOVIS Cooperative Working Agreement.

    Parties: Wallenius Wilhelmsen Logistics AS; EUKOR Care Carriers Inc.; Hyundai Glovis Co. Ltd.; and American Roll-on Roll-off Carrier, LLC.

    Filing Party: Wayne Rohde, Esq; Cozen O'Connor; 1200 19th Street NW.; Washington, DC 20036.

    Synopsis: The amendment adds a new Article 5.2 which authorizes the parties or any two or more of them to solicit bids for contracts covering the provision of tug services at ports in the trade and/or to negotiate and enter into joint and/or individual contracts with respect to such services. The amendment makes corresponding changes to Article 2 and 5.3.

    Agreement No.: 012448.

    Title: ECUS/ECSA Slot Exchange Agreement.

    Parties: Alianca Navegacao e Logistics Ltds.; Companhia Libra de Navegacao, Hapag-Lloyd AG; Hamburg Sud; and MSC Mediterranean Shipping Company S.A.

    Filing Party: Wayne Rohde, Esq; Cozen O'Connor; 1200 19th Street NW.; Washington, DC 20036.

    Synopsis: The Agreement authorizes the Parties to FMC Agreement No. 012297 on the one hand and MSC Mediterranean Shipping Company SA on the other hand to exchange space on their respective services in the trade between the U.S. Atlantic Coast and ports in the Bahamas, Dominican Republic, Panama, Brazil, Uruguay and Argentina during the slack season. The Parties request expedited review.

    Agreement No.: 012449.

    Title: Global Ports Group Agreement.

    Parties: APM Terminals Management B.V.; DP World Limited; Hutchison Port Holdings Limited; Port of Rotterdam Authority; PSA International Pte. Ltd.; and Shanghai International Port (Group) Co. Ltd.

    Filing Party: Michael Scanlon, Esq.; K & L Gates LLP; 1601 K Street NW.; Washington, DC 20006-1600.

    Synopsis: The Agreement authorizes the Parties to discuss, exchange information, and coordinate on issues affecting the efficiency and effectiveness of the container port industry.

    Agreement No.: 012450.

    Title: Hoegh Autoliners and NYK Space Charter Agreement.

    Parties: Hoegh Autliners AS and Nippon Yusen Kaisha.

    Filing Party: Kristen Chung, Esq.; NYK Line (North America) Inc.; 300 Lighting Way, 5th Floor; Secaucus, NJ 07094.

    Synopsis: The Agreement authorizes Hoegh and NYK to share vessels and vessel space in the trade between ports and places in the U.S. and ports and places in a foreign country.

    Agreement No.: 012451.

    Title: Memorandum of Agreement of July 1, 2015 Concerning Assessments to Provide Los Angeles Crane Operator Make Whole Pay.

    Parties: Pacific Maritime Association and International Longshore and Warehouse Union.

    Filing Party: David F. Smith, Esq.; Cozen O'Connor; 1200 19th Street, NW.; Washington, DC 20036.

    Synopsis: The Agreement provides for payments to be made to certain Crane Operators in Los Angeles at the equivalent Crane Operator prevailing daily rate of pay regardless of the job they work and establishes the particular conditions under which PMA shall assess its members to provide for these payments.

    Agreement No.: 201103-011.

    Title: Memorandum Agreement of the Pacific Maritime Association of December 14, 1983 Concerning Assessments to Pay ILWU-PMA Employee Benefit Costs, As Amended, Through May 12, 2011.

    Parties: Pacific Maritime Association and International Longshore and Warehouse Union.

    Filing Party: David F. Smith, Esq.; Cozen O'Connor; 1200 19th Street, NW.; Washington, DC 20036.

    Synopsis: The amendment revises how the man-hour base assessment will be calculated.

    By Order of the Federal Maritime Commission.

    Dated: December 16, 2016. Rachel E. Dickon, Assistant Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-30752 Filed 12-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6731-AA-P
    FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM Change in Bank Control Notices; Acquisitions of Shares of a Bank or Bank Holding Company

    The notificants listed below have applied under the Change in Bank Control Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)) and § 225.41 of the Board's Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.41) to acquire shares of a bank or bank holding company. The factors that are considered in acting on the notices are set forth in paragraph 7 of the Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)(7)).

    The notices are available for immediate inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The notices also will be available for inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their views in writing to the Reserve Bank indicated for that notice or to the offices of the Board of Governors. Comments must be received not later than January 9, 2017.

    A. Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta (Chapelle Davis, Assistant Vice President) 1000 Peachtree Street NE., Atlanta, Georgia 30309. Comments can also be sent electronically to [email protected]g:

    1. James A. Hammack, Ann S. Hammack, Margaret A. Hammack 1998 Trust, Anne S. Hammack, Trustee, James A. Hammack, III Trust, Anne S. Hammack, Trustee; Margaret Hammack, Anne S. Hammack, guardian, Anne Singletary Hammack item IIIA 2 TR, all of Dalton, Georgia, and James A. Hammack, III, Atlanta, Georgia; to retain voting shares of One South Financial, Inc., Blakely, Georgia, and its subsidiaries, Bank of Early, Blakely, Georgia, and One South Bank, Chipley, Florida.

    B. Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas (Robert L. Triplett III, Senior Vice President) 2200 North Pearl Street, Dallas, Texas 75201-2272:

    1. Atticus Franklin Miller, individually, Reno, Texas, and as the Executor of the Frank H. Miller Estate; to acquire and retain voting shares of Cooper Lake Financial Corporation, Cooper, Texas, and thereby, indirectly own shares of The First National Bank in Cooper, Cooper, Texas.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, December 16, 2016. Yao-Chin Chao, Assistant Secretary of the Board.
    [FR Doc. 2016-30754 Filed 12-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6210-01-P
    FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Savings and Loan Holding Companies

    The companies listed in this notice have applied to the Board for approval, pursuant to the Home Owners' Loan Act (12 U.S.C. 1461 et seq.) (HOLA), Regulation LL (12 CFR part 238), and Regulation MM (12 CFR part 239), and all other applicable statutes and regulations to become a savings and loan holding company and/or to acquire the assets or the ownership of, control of, or the power to vote shares of a savings association and nonbanking companies owned by the savings and loan holding company, including the companies listed below.

    The applications listed below, as well as other related filings required by the Board, are available for immediate inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The application also will be available for inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their views in writing on the standards enumerated in the HOLA (12 U.S.C. 1467a(e)). If the proposal also involves the acquisition of a nonbanking company, the review also includes whether the acquisition of the nonbanking company complies with the standards in section 10(c)(4)(B) of the HOLA (12 U.S.C. 1467a(c)(4)(B)). Unless otherwise noted, nonbanking activities will be conducted throughout the United States.

    Unless otherwise noted, comments regarding each of these applications must be received at the Reserve Bank indicated or the offices of the Board of Governors not later than January 18, 2017.

    A. Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta (Chapelle Davis, Assistant Vice President) 1000 Peachtree Street, NE., Atlanta, Georgia 30309. Comments can also be sent electronically to [email protected]:

    1. Community First Bancshares, MHC, to become a mutual savings and loan holding company, and Community First Bancshares, Inc., to become a mid-tier stock savings and loan holding company; by acquiring 100 percent of Newton Federal Bank, all of Covington, Georgia.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, December 16, 2016. Yao-Chin Chao, Assistant Secretary of the Board.
    [FR Doc. 2016-30753 Filed 12-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6210-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION [OMB Control No. 9000-0090; Docket 2016-0053; Sequence 38] Submission for OMB Review; Rights in Data and Copyrights AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Notice of request for public comments regarding an extension to an existing OMB clearance.

    SUMMARY:

    Under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, the Regulatory Secretariat Division will be submitting to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) a request to review and approve an extension of a previously approved information collection requirement concerning rights in data and copyrights. A notice published in the Federal Register at 81 FR 58940 on August 26, 2016. No comments were received.

    DATES:

    Submit comments on or before January 20, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden to: Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs of OMB, Attention: Desk Officer for GSA, Room 10236, NEOB, Washington, DC 20503. Additionally submit a copy to GSA by any of the following methods:

    Regulations.gov: http://www.regulations.gov. Submit comments via the Federal eRulemaking portal by inputting “Information Collection 9000-0090” under the heading “Enter Keyword or ID” and selecting “Search”. Select the link “Submit a Comment” that corresponds with “Information Collection 9000-0090”. Follow the instructions provided at the “Submit a Comment” screen. Please include your name, company name (if any), and “Information Collection 9000-0090” on your attached document.

    Mail: General Services Administration, Regulatory Secretariat Division (MVCB), 1800 F Street NW., Washington, DC 20405. ATTN: Ms. Flowers/IC 9000-0090.

    Instructions: Please submit comments only and cite Information Collection 9000-0090, in all correspondence related to this collection. Comments received generally will be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal and/or business confidential information provided. To confirm receipt of your comment(s), please check www.regulations.gov, approximately two to three days after submission to verify posting (except allow 30 days for posting of comments submitted by mail).

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Mr. Charles Gray, Procurement Analyst, at 703-795-6328 or email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    A. Purpose

    Subpart 27.4, Rights in Data and Copyrights is a regulation which concerns the rights of the Government and contractors with whom the Government contracts, regarding the use, reproduction, and disclosure of information developed under such contracts. The delineation of such rights is necessary in order to protect the contractor's rights to not disclose proprietary data, and to insure that data developed with public funds is available to the public.

    The information collection burdens and recordkeeping requirements included in this regulation fall into the following four categories:

    (a) A provision which is to be included in solicitations where the offeror would identify any proprietary data it would use during contract performance, in order that the contracting officer might ascertain if such proprietary data should be delivered.

    (b) Contract provisions which, in unusual circumstances, would be included in a contract and require a contractor to deliver proprietary data to the Government for use in evaluating work results, or is software to be used in a Government computer. These situations would arise only when the very nature of the contractor's work is comprised of limited rights data or restricted computer software and if the Government would need to see that data in order to determine the extent of the work.

    (c) A technical data certification for major systems, which requires the contractor to certify that the data delivered under the contract is complete, accurate and compliant with the requirements of the contract. As this provision is for major systems only, and few civilian agencies have such major systems, only about 30 contracts should require this certification.

    (d) The Additional Data Requirements clause, which is to be included in all contracts for experimental, developmental, research, or demonstration work (other than basic or applied research to be performed solely by a university or college where the contract amount will be $500,000 or less). The clause requires that the contractor keep all data first produced in the performance of the contract for a period of three years from the final acceptance of all items delivered under the contract. Much of this data will be in the form of deliverables provided to the Government under the contract (final report, drawings, specifications, etc.). Some data, however, will be in the form of computations, preliminary data, records of experiments, etc., and these will be the data that will be required to be kept over and above the deliverables. The purpose of such recordkeeping requirements is to insure that the Government can fully evaluate the research in order to ascertain future activities and to insure that the research was completed and fully reported, as well as to give the public an opportunity to assess the research results and secure any additional information. All data covered by this clause is unlimited rights data paid for by the Government.

    Paragraph (d) of the Rights in Data—General clause (52.227.14) outlines a procedure whereby a contracting officer can challenge restrictive markings on data delivered. Under civilian agency contracts, limited rights data or restricted computer software is rarely, if ever, delivered to the Government. Therefore, there may rarely be any challenges. Thus, there is no burden on the public.

    B. Annual Reporting Burden

    Respondents: 944.

    Responses per Respondent: 2.43.

    Annual Responses: 2294.

    Hours per Response: 1.0.

    Total Burden Hours: 2294.

    C. Public Comments

    Public comments are particularly invited on: Whether this collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of functions of the FAR, and whether it will have practical utility; whether our estimate of the public burden of this collection of information is accurate, and based on valid assumptions and methodology; ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and ways in which we can minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, through the use of appropriate technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

    Obtaining Copies of Proposals: Requesters may obtain a copy of the information collection documents from the General Services Administration, Regulatory Secretariat Division (MVCB), 1800 F Street NW., Washington, DC 20405, telephone 202-501-4755. Please cite OMB Control No. 9000-0090, Rights in Data and Copyrights, in all correspondence.

    Dated: December 16, 2016. Lorin S. Curit, Director, Federal Acquisition Policy Division, Office of Governmentwide Acquisition Policy, Office of Acquisition Policy, Office of Governmentwide Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-30701 Filed 12-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6820-EP-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION [OMB Control No. 9000-0135; Docket 2016-0053; Sequence 40] Information Collection; Prospective Subcontractor Requests for Bonds AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Notice of request for public comments regarding an extension to an existing OMB clearance.

    SUMMARY:

    Under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, the Regulatory Secretariat Division will be submitting to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) a request to review and approve an extension of a previously approved information collection concerning subcontractor requests for bonds.

    DATES:

    Submit comments on or before February 21, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit comments identified by Information Collection 9000-0135 by any of the following methods:

    Regulations.gov: http://www.regulations.gov. Submit comments via the Federal eRulemaking portal by searching the OMB control number 9000-0135. Select the link “Comment Now” that corresponds with “Information Collection 9000-0135, Prospective Subcontractor Requests for Bond.” Follow the instructions provided on the screen. Please include your name, company name (if any), and “Information Collection 9000-0135, Prospective Subcontractor Requests for Bond” on your attached document.

    Mail: General Services Administration, Regulatory Secretariat Division (MVCB), 1800 F Street NW., Washington, DC 20405-0001. ATTN: Ms. Flowers/IC 9000-0135.

    Instructions: Please submit comments only and cite Information Collection 9000-0135, in all correspondence related to this collection. Comments received generally will be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal and/or business confidential information provided. To confirm receipt of your comment(s), please check www.regulations.gov, approximately two to three days after submission to verify posting (except allow 30 days for posting of comments submitted by mail).

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ms. Cecelia Davis, Procurement Analyst, Acquisition Policy Division, at 202-219-0202 or email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    A. Purpose

    Part 28 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) contains guidance related to insuring against damages under Federal contracts (e.g., bonds, bid guarantees, etc.). Part 52 contains the corresponding provisions and clauses. These collectively implement the statutory requirement for Federal contractors to report payment bonds under construction contracts subject to 40 U.S.C. chapter 31, subchapter III, Bonds.

    This information collection is mandated by Section 806 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Years 1992 and 1993 (Pub. L. 102-190), as amended by Section 2091 of the Federal Acquisition Streamlining Act of 1994 (Pub. L. 103-335). The clause at 52.228-12, Prospective Subcontractor Requests for Bonds, implements Section 806(a)(3) of Public Law 102-190, as amended, which states that, upon the request of a prospective subcontractor or supplier offering to furnish labor or material under a construction contract for which a payment bond has been furnished pursuant to 40 U.S.C. 31, the contractor shall promptly provide a copy of such payment bond to the requestor.

    Given that payment bonds, in conjunction with performance bonds, are used to secure the contractor's obligations, thereby assuring that payments are made to subcontractors and vendors under the contract, the requester will use information on payment bonds to determine whether to engage in business with that prime contractor.

    B. Annual Reporting Burden

    Number of Respondents: 4,444.

    Responses per Respondent: 2.5.

    Total Annual Responses: 11,110.

    Hours per Response: .34.

    Total Burden Hours: 3,777.

    Frequency: On occasion.

    Affected Public: Construction prime contractors.

    C. Public Comments

    Public comments are particularly invited on: Whether this collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of functions of the FAR, and whether it will have practical utility; whether our estimate of the public burden of this collection of information is accurate, and based on valid assumptions and methodology; ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and ways in which we can minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, through the use of appropriate technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

    Obtaining Copies of Proposals: Requesters may obtain a copy of the information collection documents from the General Services Administration, Regulatory Secretariat Division (MVCB), 1800 F Street NW., Washington, DC 20405, telephone 202-501-4755. Please cite OMB Control Number 9000-0135, Prospective Subcontractor Requests for Bonds, in all correspondence.

    Dated: December 16, 2016. Lorin S. Curit, Director, Federal Acquisition Policy Division, Office of Government-wide Acquisition Policy, Office of Acquisition Policy, Office of Government-wide Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-30702 Filed 12-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6820-EP-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION [OMB Control No. 9000-0034; Docket 2016-0053; Sequence 39] Submission for OMB Review; Examination of Records by Comptroller General and Contract Audit AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Notice of request for comments regarding an extension to an existing OMB clearance.

    SUMMARY:

    Under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, the Regulatory Secretariat Division will be submitting to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) a request to review and approve an extension of a previously approved information collection requirement concerning the examination of records by comptroller general and contract audit. A notice was published in the Federal Register at 81 FR 62502 on September 9, 2016. No comments were received.

    DATES:

    Submit comments on or before January 20, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden to: Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs of OMB, Attention: Desk Officer for GSA, Room 10236, NEOB, Washington, DC 20503. Additionally submit a copy to GSA by any of the following methods:

    Regulations.gov: http://www.regulations.gov. Submit comments via the Federal eRulemaking portal by searching for OMB Control No. 9000-0034. Select the link “Comment Now” that corresponds with “Information Collection 9000-0034, Examination of Records by Comptroller General and Contract Audit.” Follow the instructions provided on the screen. Please include your name, company name (if any), and “Information Collection 9000-0034, Examination of Records by Comptroller General and Contract Audit” on your attached document.

    Mail: General Services Administration, Regulatory Secretariat Division (MVCB), 1800 F Street NW., Washington, DC 20405. ATTN: Ms. Flowers/IC 9000-0034, Examination of Records by Comptroller General and Contract Audit.

    Instructions: Please submit comments only and cite Information Collection 9000-0034, in all correspondence related to this collection. Comments received generally will be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal and/or business confidential information provided. To confirm receipt of your comment(s), please check www.regulations.gov, approximately two to three days after submission to verify posting (except allow 30 days for posting of comments submitted by mail).

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Mr. Michael O. Jackson, Procurement Analyst, Contract Policy Branch, GSA, 202-208-4949 or email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    A. Purpose

    The objective of this information collection, for the examination of records by Comptroller General and contract audit, is to require contractors to maintain certain records and to ensure the Comptroller General and/or agency have access to, and the right to, examine and audit records, which includes: Books, documents, accounting procedures and practices, and other data, regardless of type and regardless of whether such items are in written form, in the form of computer data, or in any other form, for a period of three years after final payment. This information is necessary for examination and audit of contract surveillance, verification of contract pricing, and to provide reimbursement of contractor costs, where applicable. The records retention period is required by the statutory authorities at 10 U.S.C. 2313, 41 U.S.C. 254, and 10 U.S.C. 2306, and are implemented through the following clauses: Audit and Records-Negotiation clause, 52.215-2; Contract Terms and Conditions Required to Implement Statutes or Executive Orders-Commercial Items clause, 52.212-5; and Audit and Records-Sealed Bidding clause, 52.214-26. This information collection does not require contractors to create or maintain any records that the contractor does not normally maintain in its usual course of business.

    B. Annual Reporting Burden

    Respondents: 20,646.

    Responses per Respondent: 9.

    Total Number of Responses: 185,814.

    Hours per Response: 1.0.

    Total Burden Hours: 185,814.

    C. Public Comments

    Public comments are particularly invited on: Whether this collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of functions of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), and whether it will have practical utility; whether our estimate of the public burden of this collection of information is accurate, and based on valid assumptions and methodology and ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected.

    Obtaining Copies of Proposals: Requesters may obtain a copy of the information collection documents from the General Services Administration, Regulatory Secretariat Division (MVCB), 1800 F Street NW., Washington, DC 20405, telephone 202-501-4755. Please cite OMB Control Number 9000-0034, Examination of Records by Comptroller General and Contract Audit, in all correspondence.

    Dated: December 16, 2016. Lorin S. Curit, Director, Federal Acquisition Policy, Office of Government-wide Acquisition Policy, Office of Acquisition Policy, Office of Government-wide Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-30700 Filed 12-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6820-EP-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2010-N-0597] Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Index of Legally Marketed Unapproved New Animal Drugs for Minor Species AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing an opportunity for public comment on the proposed collection of certain information by the Agency. Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (the PRA), Federal Agencies are required to publish notice in the Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information, including each proposed extension of an existing collection of information, and to allow 60 days for public comment in response to the notice. This notice solicits comments on the information collection provisions of FDA regulations related to public index listing of legally marketed unapproved new animal drugs for minor species of animals.

    DATES:

    Submit either electronic or written comments on the collection of information by February 21, 2017.

    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-2010-N-0597 for “Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Index of Legally Marketed Unapproved New Animal Drugs for Minor Species.” 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:

    FDA PRA Staff, Office of Operations, Food and Drug Administration, Three White Flint North, 10A63, 11601 Landsdown St., North Bethesda, MD 20852, [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Under the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), Federal Agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for each collection of information they conduct or sponsor. “Collection of information” is defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR 1320.3(c) and includes Agency requests or requirements that members of the public submit reports, keep records, or provide information to a third party. Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)) requires Federal Agencies to provide a 60-day notice in the Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information, including each proposed extension of an existing collection of information, before submitting the collection to OMB for approval. To comply with this requirement, FDA is publishing notice of the proposed collection of information set forth in this document.

    With respect to the following collection of information, FDA invites comments on these topics: (1) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of FDA's functions, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of FDA's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques, when appropriate, and other forms of information technology.

    Index of Legally Marketed Unapproved New Animal Drugs for Minor Species—21 CFR Part 516 OMB Control Number 0910-0620—Extension

    The Minor Use and Minor Species Animal Health Act of 2004 (MUMS Act) amended the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the FD&C Act) to authorize FDA to establish new regulatory procedures intended to make more medications legally available to veterinarians and animal owners for the treatment of minor animal species (species other than cattle, horses, swine, chickens, turkeys, dogs, and cats), as well as uncommon diseases in major animal species.

    Section 572 of the MUMS Act provided for a public index listing of legally marketed unapproved new animal drugs for minor species. FDA regulations in part 516 (21 CFR part 516) specify, among other things, the criteria and procedures for requesting eligibility for indexing and for requesting addition to the index as well as the annual reporting requirements for index holders.

    FDA estimates the burden of this collection of information as follows:

    Table 1—Estimated Annual Reporting Burden 1 21 CFR part Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • responses per
  • respondent
  • Total annual
  • responses
  • Average
  • burden per
  • response
  • Total hours
    516.119 2 1 2 1 2 516.121 30 2 60 4 240 516.123 3 1 3 8 24 516.125 2 3 6 20 120 516.129 30 2 60 20 1,200 516.141 20 1 20 16 320 516.143 20 1 20 120 2,400 516.145 20 1 20 20 400 516.161 1 1 1 4 4 516.163 1 1 1 2 2 516.165 10 2 20 8 160 Total 4,872 1 There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of information.
    Table 2—Estimated Annual Recordkeeping Burden 1 21 CFR part Number of recordkeepers Number of records per recordkeeper Total annual records Average burden per recordkeeping Total hours 516.141 30 2 60 0.5 (30 minutes) 30 516.165 10 2 20 1 20 Total 50 1 There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of information. Dated: December 13, 2016. Leslie Kux, Associate Commission for Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-30676 Filed 12-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Institute of Allergy And Infectious Diseases; Notice of Closed Meetings

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following meetings.

    The meetings will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The contract proposals and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the contract proposals, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Special Emphasis Panel; NIAID Peer Review Meeting.

    Date: January 13, 2017.

    Time: 11:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate contract proposals.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, 5601 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20892, (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: Kelly Y. Poe, Scientific Review Program, Division of Extramural Activities, Room 3F40B, National Institutes of Health, NIAID, 5601 Fishers Lane, MSC 9823, Bethesda, MD 20892-9823, (240) 669-5036, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Special Emphasis Panel; NIAID Peer Review Meeting.

    Date: January 13, 2017.

    Time: 3:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate contract proposals.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, 5601 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20892, (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: Kelly Y. Poe, Scientific Review Program, Division of Extramural Activities, Room 3F40B, National Institutes of Health, NIAID, 5601 Fishers Lane, MSC 9823, Bethesda, MD 20892-9823, (240) 669-5036, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Special Emphasis Panel; NIAID Peer Review Meeting.

    Date: January 27, 2017.

    Time: 11:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate contract proposals.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, 5601 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20892, (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: Kelly Y. Poe, Scientific Review Program, Division of Extramural Activities, Room 3F40B, National Institutes of Health, NIAID, 5601 Fishers Lane, MSC 9823, Bethesda, MD 20892-9823, (240) 669-5036, [email protected].

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.855, Allergy, Immunology, and Transplantation Research; 93.856, Microbiology and Infectious Diseases Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: December 15, 2016. Natasha M. Copeland, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-30691 Filed 12-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Institute of Mental Health; Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Mental Health Special Emphasis Panel, Applied Research Toward Zero Suicide Healthcare Systems.

    Date: January 13, 2017.

    Time: 2:30 p.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Neuroscience Center, 6001 Executive Boulevard, Rockville, MD 20852 (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: David I. Sommers, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Division of Extramural Activities, National Institute of Mental Health, National Institutes of Health, 6001 Executive Blvd., Room 6154, MSC 9606, Bethesda, MD 20892-9606, 301-443-7861, [email protected]

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program No. 93.242, Mental Health Research Grants, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: December 15, 2016. Melanie J. Pantoja, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-30690 Filed 12-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health Center for Scientific Review; Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel; Epilepsy and Alcohol Dependence.

    Date: December 20, 2016.

    Time: 2:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892, (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: Suzan Nadi, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5217B, MSC 7846, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-435-1259, [email protected].

    This notice is being published less than 15 days prior to the meeting due to the timing limitations imposed by the review and funding cycle.

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.306, Comparative Medicine; 93.333, Clinical Research, 93.306, 93.333, 93.337, 93.393-93.396, 93.837-93.844, 93.846-93.878, 93.892, 93.893, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: December 15, 2016. Sylvia L. Neal, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-30692 Filed 12-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; 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 Heart, Lung, and Blood Advisory 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 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 Heart, Lung, and Blood Advisory Council.

    Date: February 7, 2017.

    Open: 8:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To discuss program policies and issues.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Porter Neuroscience Research Center, Building 35A Convent Drive, Room 640, Bethesda, MD 20892.

    Closed: 1:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Porter Neuroscience Research Center, Building 35A Convent Drive, Room 640, Bethesda, MD 20892.

    Contact Person: Valerie L. Prenger, Ph.D., MPH, Acting Division Director, Division of Extramural Research Activities, National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 7214, Bethesda, MD 20892-7924, 301-435-0270, [email protected].

    Any interested person may file written comments with the committee by forwarding the statement to the Contact Person listed on this notice. The statement should include the name, address, telephone number and when applicable, the business or professional affiliation of the interested person.

    In the interest of security, NIH has instituted stringent procedures for entrance onto the NIH campus. All visitor vehicles, including taxicabs, hotel, and airport shuttles will be inspected before being allowed on campus. Visitors will be asked to show one form of identification (for example, a government-issued photo ID, driver's license, or passport) and to state the purpose of their visit.

    Information is also available on the Institute's/Center's home page: www.nhlbi.nih.gov/meetings/nhlbac/index.htm, where an agenda and any additional information for the meeting will be posted when available.

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.233, National Center for Sleep Disorders Research; 93.837, Heart and Vascular Diseases Research; 93.838, Lung Diseases Research; 93.839, Blood Diseases and Resources Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: December 14, 2016. Michelle Trout, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-30693 Filed 12-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY U.S. Customs and Border Protection Accreditation and Approval of Intertek USA, Inc. as a Commercial Gauger and Laboratory AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Notice of accreditation and approval of Intertek USA, Inc., as a commercial gauger and laboratory.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to CBP regulations, that Intertek USA, Inc., has been approved to gauge petroleum and certain petroleum products and accredited to test petroleum and certain petroleum products for customs purposes for the next three years as of March 15, 2016.

    DATES:

    The accreditation and approval of Intertek USA, Inc., as commercial gauger and laboratory became effective on March 15, 2016. The next triennial inspection date will be scheduled for March 2019.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Approved Gauger and Accredited Laboratories Manager, Laboratories and Scientific Services Directorate, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Suite 1500N, Washington, DC 20229, tel. 202-344-1060.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Notice is hereby given pursuant to 19 CFR 151.12 and 19 CFR 151.13, that Intertek USA, Inc., 109 Sutherland Dr., Chickasaw, AL 36611, has been approved to gauge petroleum and certain petroleum products and accredited to test petroleum and certain petroleum products for customs purposes, in accordance with the provisions of 19 CFR 151.12 and 19 CFR 151.13. Intertek USA, Inc., is approved for the following gauging procedures for petroleum and certain petroleum products from the American Petroleum Institute (API):

    API Chapters Title 3 Tank Gauging. 5 Metering. 7 Temperature Determination. 8 Sampling. 12 Calculations. 14 Natural Gas Fluids Measurements. 17 Maritime Measurement.

    Intertek USA, Inc., is accredited for the following laboratory analysis procedures and methods for petroleum and certain petroleum products set forth by the U.S. Customs and Border Protection Laboratory Methods (CBPL) and American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM):

    CBPL No. ASTM Title 27-01 D287 Standard Test Method for API Gravity of Crude Petroleum and Petroleum Products (Hydrometer Method). 27-02 D1298 Standard Test Method for Density, Relative Density (Specific Gravity), or API Gravity of Crude Petroleum and Liquid Petroleum Products by Hydrometer Method. 27-03 D4006 Standard Test Method for Water in Crude Oil by Distillation. 27-04 D95 Standard Test Method for Water in Petroleum Products and Bituminous Materials by Distillation. 27-06 D473 Standard Test Method for Sediment in Crude Oils and Fuel Oils by the Extraction Method. 27-07 D4807 Standard Test Method for Sediment in Crude Oil by Membrane Filtration. 27-08 D86 Standard Test Method for Distillation of Petroleum Products. 27-11 D445 Standard Test Method for Kinematic Viscosity of Transparent and Opaque Liquids. 27-13 D4294 Standard Test Method for Sulfur in Petroleum and Petroleum Products by Energy-Dispersive X-ray Fluorescence Spectrometry. 27-14 D2622 Standard Test Method for Sulfur in Petroleum Products. 27-46 D5002 Standard Test Method for Density and Relative Density of Crude Oils by Digital Density Analyzer. 27-48 D4052 Standard Test Method for Density and Relative Density of Liquids by Digital Density Meter. 27-50 D93 Standard Test Methods for Flash-Point by Pensky-Martens Closed Cup Tester. 27-53 D2709 Standard Test Method for Water and Sediment in Middle Distillate Fuels by Centrifuge. 27-54 D1796 Standard Test Method for Water and Sediment in Fuel Oils by the Centrifuge Method.

    Anyone wishing to employ this entity to conduct laboratory analyses and gauger services should request and receive written assurances from the entity that it is accredited or approved by the U.S. Customs and Border Protection to conduct the specific test or gauger service requested. Alternatively, inquiries regarding the specific test or gauger service this entity is accredited or approved to perform may be directed to the U.S. Customs and Border Protection by calling (202) 344-1060. The inquiry may also be sent to [email protected] Please reference the Web site listed below for a complete listing of CBP approved gaugers and accredited laboratories. http://www.cbp.gov/about/labs-scientific/commercial-gaugers-and-laboratories.

    Dated: December 9, 2016. Ira S. Reese, Executive Director, Laboratories and Scientific Services Directorate.
    [FR Doc. 2016-30726 Filed 12-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-14-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Office of the Secretary [Docket No. DHS-2016-0095] DHS Data Privacy and Integrity Advisory Committee AGENCY:

    Privacy Office, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Committee Management; Request for Applicants for Appointment to the DHS Data Privacy and Integrity Advisory Committee.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Homeland Security Privacy Office seeks applicants for appointment to the DHS Data Privacy and Integrity Advisory Committee.

    DATES:

    Applications for membership must reach the Department of Homeland Security Privacy Office at the address below on or before January 20, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    If you wish to apply for membership, please submit the documents described below to Sandra Taylor, Designated Federal Officer, DHS Data Privacy and Integrity Advisory Committee, by either of the following methods:

    E-mail: [email protected] Include the Docket Number (DHS-2016-0095) in the subject line of the message.

    Fax: (202) 343-4010

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Sandra Taylor, Designated Federal Officer, DHS Data Privacy and Integrity Advisory Committee, Department of Homeland Security, Washington, DC 20528, by telephone (202) 343-1717, by fax (202) 343-4010, or by email to [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The DHS Data Privacy and Integrity Advisory Committee is an advisory committee established in accordance with the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), 5 U.S.C. Appendix. The Committee was established by the Secretary of Homeland Security under the authority of 6 U.S.C. 451 and provides advice at the request of the Secretary and the DHS Chief Privacy Officer on programmatic, policy, operational, administrative, and technological issues within DHS that relate to personally identifiable information (PII), as well as data integrity and other privacy-related matters. The duties of the Committee are solely advisory in nature. In developing its advice and recommendations, the Committee may, consistent with the requirements of the FACA, conduct studies, inquiries, or briefings in consultation with individuals and groups in the private sector and/or other governmental entities. The Committee typically hosts two public meetings per calendar year.

    Committee Membership: The DHS Privacy Office is seeking nine applicants for terms of three years from the date of appointment. Members are appointed by and serve at the pleasure of the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, and must be specially qualified to serve on the Committee by virtue of their education, training, and experience in the fields of data protection, privacy, and/or emerging technologies, including cybersecurity. Members are expected to actively participate in Committee and Subcommittee activities and to provide material input into Committee research and recommendations. Pursuant to the FACA, the Committee's Charter requires that Committee membership be balanced to include:

    1. Individuals who are currently working in higher education, state or local government, or not-for-profit organizations;

    2. Individuals currently working in for-profit organizations including at least one who shall be familiar with the data privacy-related issues addressed by small- to medium-sized enterprises; and

    3. Other individuals, as determined appropriate by the Secretary.

    Committee members serve as Special Government Employees (SGE) as defined in sect. 202(a) of title 18 U.S.C. As such, they are subject to Federal conflict of interest laws and government-wide standards of conduct regulations. Members must annually file Confidential Financial Disclosure Reports (OGE Form 450) for review and approval by Department ethics officials. DHS may not release these reports or the information in them to the public except under an order issued by a Federal court or as otherwise provided under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. 552a). Committee members are also required to obtain and retain at least a secret-level security clearance as a condition of their appointment. Members are not compensated for their service on the Committee; however, while attending meetings or otherwise engaged in Committee business, members may receive travel expenses and per diem in accordance with Federal regulations.

    Committee History and Activities: All individuals interested in applying for Committee membership should review the history of the Committee's work. The Committee's charter and current membership, transcripts of Committee meetings, and all of the Committee's reports and recommendations to the Department are posted on the Committee's Web page on the DHS Privacy Office Web site (www.dhs.gov/privacy).

    Applying for Membership: If you are interested in applying for membership on the DHS Data Privacy and Integrity Advisory Committee, please submit the following documents to Sandra Taylor, Designated Federal Officer, at the address provided below within 30 days of the date of this notice:

    1. A current resume; and

    2. A letter that explains your qualifications for service on the Committee and describes in detail how your experience is relevant to the Committee's work.

    Your resume and your letter will be weighed equally in the application review process. Please note that by Administration policy, individuals who are registered as Federal lobbyists are not eligible to serve on Federal advisory committees. If you are registered as a Federal lobbyist and you have actively lobbied at any time within the past two years, you are not eligible to apply for membership on the DHS Data Integrity and Privacy Advisory Committee. Applicants selected for membership will be required to certify, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1746, that they are not registered as Federal lobbyists. Please send your documents to Sandra Taylor, Designated Federal Officer, DHS Data Privacy and Integrity Advisory Committee, by either of the following methods:

    E-mail: [email protected] or

    Fax: (202) 343-4010.

    Privacy Act Statement: DHS's Use of Your Information

    Authority: DHS requests that you voluntarily submit this information under its following authorities: the Federal Records Act, 44 U.S.C. 3101; the FACA, 5 U.S.C. appendix; and the Privacy Act of 1974, 5 U.S.C. 552a.

    Principal Purposes: When you apply for appointment to the DHS Data Privacy and Integrity Advisory Committee, DHS collects your name, contact information, and any other personal information that you submit in conjunction with your application. We will use this information to evaluate your candidacy for Committee membership. If you are chosen to serve as a Committee member, your name will appear in publicly-available Committee documents, membership lists, and Committee reports.

    Routine Uses and Sharing: In general, DHS will not use the information you provide for any purpose other than the Principal Purposes, and will not share this information within or outside the agency. In certain circumstances, DHS may share this information on a case-by-case basis as required by law or as necessary for a specific purpose, as described in the DHS/ALL-009 Department of Homeland Security Advisory Committees System of Records Notice (October 3, 2008, 73 FR 63181).

    Effects of Not Providing Information: You may choose not to provide the requested information or to provide only some of the information DHS requests. If you choose not to provide some or all of the requested information, DHS may not be able to consider your application for appointment to the Data Privacy and Integrity Advisory Committee.

    Accessing and Correcting Information: If you are unable to access or correct this information by using the method that you originally used to submit it, you may direct your request in writing to the DHS Chief FOIA Officer at [email protected] Additional instructions are available at http://www.dhs.gov/foiaandintheDHS/ALL-002 Mailing and Other Lists System of Records referenced above.

    Dated: December 16, 2016. Jonathan R. Cantor, Chief Privacy Officer (Acting). Department of Homeland Security.
    [FR Doc. 2016-30737 Filed 12-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Transportation Security Administration Intent To Request Approval From OMB of One New Public Collection of Information: Security Appointment Center (SAC) Visitor Request Form and Foreign National Vetting Request AGENCY:

    Transportation Security Administration, DHS.

    ACTION:

    60-day Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) invites public comment on a new Information Collection Request (ICR) abstracted below that we will submit to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for approval in compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA). The ICR describes the nature of the information collection and its expected burden. The collection involves gathering information from individuals who plan to visit all TSA facilities in the National Capital Region.

    DATES:

    Send your comments by February 21, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Comments may be emailed to [email protected] or delivered to the TSA PRA Officer, Office of Information Technology (OIT), TSA-11, Transportation Security Administration, 601 South 12th Street, Arlington, VA 20598-6011.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:

    Christina A. Walsh at the above address, or by telephone (571) 227-2062.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Comments Invited

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), 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 OMB control number. The ICR documentation is available at http://www.reginfo.gov. Therefore, in preparation for OMB review and approval of the following information collection, TSA is soliciting comments to—

    (1) Evaluate whether the proposed information requirement is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;

    (2) Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden;

    (3) Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

    (4) Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including using appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

    Information Collection Requirement

    The Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is authorized to protect property owned, occupied, or secured by the Federal Government. See 40 U.S.C. 1315. See also 41 CFR 102-81.15 (requires Federal agencies to be responsible for maintaining security at their own or leased facilities). DHS Instruction Manual 121-01-011-01 (Visitor Management for DHS Headquarters and DHS Component Headquarters Facilities (April 19, 2014)) requires all DHS components to vet visitors using the National Crime Information Center (NCIC) Wants & Warrants/Criminal History checks before allowing them access to the building.

    Purpose and Description of Data Collection

    TSA has established a visitor management/vetting process that meets DHS requirements. This process allows TSA to conduct business with visitors and guest workers, while managing risks posed by individuals entering the building who have not been subject to a full employee security background check. Once vetted, TSA's Visitor Management System (VMS) generates temporary paper badges with photographs that visitors must wear when entering TSA facilities in the National Capital Region (NCR) 1 for the duration of their visit.

    1 TSA facilities in the National Capital Region include TSA Headquarters, the Freedom Center, the Transportation Security Integration Facility (TSIF), the Metro Park office complex (Metro Park), and the Annapolis Junction facility (AJ).

    Under TSA's current visitor management/vetting process, visitors seeking to enter the TSA facilities must request access in person or through a current TSA employee by completing TSA Form 2802, Security Appointment Center (SAC) Visitor Request Form. TSA Form 2802 requires that visitors provide their first and last name, date and time of visit, visitor type (DHS or other government visitor), and whether they are a foreign or national visitor. In order to complete the new vetting process, TSA must collect Personally Identifiable Information (PII). The information collection includes the information TSA previously collected, and date of birth and social security number. TSA will use this information to vet visitors via the NCIC Wants & Warrants/Criminal History Checks and maintain records of access to TSA facilities.

    TSA estimates the average annual number of visitors for 2016 through 2018 to be 42,843, with an annual time burden to the public of 714 hours.

    Use of Results

    TSA will use the results to determine the suitability of visitors to the TSA NCR locations. The collection would support the information needs of TSA to comply with security procedures to ensure a safe and secure work environment for TSA facilities' employees, contractors, and visitors.

    Dated: December 15, 2016. Christina A. Walsh, TSA Paperwork Reduction Act Officer, Office of Information Technology.
    [FR Doc. 2016-30662 Filed 12-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-05-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services [OMB Control Number 1615-0025] Agency Information Collection Activities: Waiver of Rights, Privileges, Exemptions and Immunities, Form I-508 & I-508F; Extension, Without Change, of a Currently Approved Collection AGENCY:

    U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, Department of Homeland Security.

    Action:

    60-Day notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Homeland Security (DHS), U.S. Citizenship and Immigration (USCIS) invites the general public and other Federal agencies to comment upon this proposed extension of a currently approved collection of information. In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995, the information collection notice is published in the Federal Register to obtain comments regarding the nature of the information collection, the categories of respondents, the estimated burden (i.e. the time, effort, and resources used by the respondents to respond), the estimated cost to the respondent, and the actual information collection instruments.

    DATES:

    Comments are encouraged and will be accepted for 60 days until February 21, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    All submissions received must include the OMB Control Number 1615-0025 in the body of the letter, the agency name and Docket ID USCIS-2008-0015. To avoid duplicate submissions, please use only one of the following methods to submit comments:

    (1) Online. Submit comments via the Federal eRulemaking Portal Web site at http://www.regulations.gov under e-Docket ID number USCIS-2008-0015;

    (2) Mail. Submit written comments to DHS, USCIS, Office of Policy and Strategy, Chief, Regulatory Coordination Division, 20 Massachusetts Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20529-2140.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    USCIS, Office of Policy and Strategy, Regulatory Coordination Division, Samantha Deshommes, Chief, 20 Massachusetts Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20529-2140, telephone number 202-272-8377 (This is not a toll-free number. Comments are not accepted via telephone message). Please note contact information provided here is solely for questions regarding this notice. It is not for individual case status inquiries. Applicants seeking information about the status of their individual cases can check Case Status Online, available at the USCIS Web site at http://www.uscis.gov, or call the USCIS National Customer Service Center at 800-375-5283 (TTY 800-767-1833).

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Comments

    You may access the information collection instrument with instructions, or additional information by visiting the Federal eRulemaking Portal site at: http://www.regulations.gov and enter USCIS-2008-0015 in the search box. Regardless of the method used for submitting comments or material, all submissions will be posted, without change, to the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov, and will include any personal information you provide. Therefore, submitting this information makes it public. You may wish to consider limiting the amount of personal information that you provide in any voluntary submission you make to DHS. DHS may withhold information provided in comments from public viewing that it determines may impact the privacy of an individual or is offensive. For additional information, please read the Privacy Act notice that is available via the link in the footer of http://www.regulations.gov.

    Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies should address one or more of the following four points:

    (1) Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;

    (2) Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

    (3) Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

    (4) Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.

    Overview of This Information Collection

    (1) Type of Information Collection: Extension, Without Change, of a Currently Approved Collection.

    (2) Title of the Form/Collection: Waiver of Rights, Privileges, Exemptions and Immunities.

    (3) Agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of the DHS sponsoring the collection: I-508, I-508F; USCIS.

    (4) Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as well as a brief abstract: Primary: Individuals or households. This form is used by the USCIS to determine eligibility of an applicant to retain the status of an alien lawfully admitted to the United States for permanent residence.

    (5) An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated for an average respondent to respond: The estimated total number of respondents for the information collection Form I-508 is 1,728 and the estimated hour burden per response is .33 hours. The estimated total number of respondents for the information collection Form I-508F is 200 and the estimated hour burden per response is .33 hours.

    (6) An estimate of the total public burden (in hours) associated with the collection: The total estimated annual hour burden associated with this collection is 636 hours.

    (7) An estimate of the total public burden (in cost) associated with the collection: The estimated total annual cost burden associated with this collection of information is $7,230.

    Dated: December 15, 2016. Samantha Deshommes, Chief, Regulatory Coordination Division, Office of Policy and Strategy, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, Department of Homeland Security.
    [FR Doc. 2016-30706 Filed 12-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-97-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services [OMB Control Number 1615-0026] Agency Information Collection Activities: Application To Adjust Status from Temporary to Permanent Resident, Form I-698; Extension, Without Change, of a Currently Approved Collection AGENCY:

    U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, Department of Homeland Security.

    ACTION:

    30-day notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Homeland Security (DHS), U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) will be submitting the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and clearance in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. The information collection notice was previously published in the Federal Register on October 17, 2016, at 81 FR 71521, allowing for a 60-day public comment period. USCIS received one comment in connection with the 60-day notice.

    DATES:

    The purpose of this notice is to allow an additional 30 days for public comments. Comments are encouraged and will be accepted until January 20, 2017. This process is conducted in accordance with 5 CFR 1320.10.

    ADDRESSES:

    Written comments and/or suggestions regarding the item(s) contained in this notice, especially regarding the estimated public burden and associated response time, must be directed to the OMB USCIS Desk Officer via email at [email protected] Comments may also be submitted via fax at (202) 395-5806. (This is not a toll-free number.) All submissions received must include the agency name and the OMB Control Number 1615-0026.

    You may wish to consider limiting the amount of personal information that you provide in any voluntary submission you make. For additional information please read the Privacy Act notice that is available via the link in the footer of http://www.regulations.gov.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    USCIS, Office of Policy and Strategy, Regulatory Coordination Division, Samantha Deshommes, Chief, 20 Massachusetts Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20529-2140, Telephone number (202) 272-8377 (This is not a toll-free number; comments are not accepted via telephone message.). Please note contact information provided here is solely for questions regarding this notice. It is not for individual case status inquiries. Applicants seeking information about the status of their individual cases can check Case Status Online, available at the USCIS Web site at http://www.uscis.gov, or call the USCIS National Customer Service Center at (800) 375-5283; TTY (800) 767-1833.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Comments

    You may access the information collection instrument with instructions, or additional information by visiting the Federal eRulemaking Portal site at: http://www.regulations.gov and enter USCIS-2008 -0019 in the search box. Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies should address one or more of the following four points:

    (1) Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;

    (2) Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

    (3) Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

    (4) Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.

    Overview of This Information Collection

    (1) Type of Information Collection Request: Extension, Without Change, of a Currently Approved Collection.

    (2) Title of the Form/Collection: Application to Adjust Status from Temporary to Permanent Resident.

    (3) Agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of the DHS sponsoring the collection: Form I-698; USCIS.

    (4) Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as well as a brief abstract: Primary: Individuals or households. The data collected on Form I-698 is used by USCIS to determine the eligibility to adjust an applicant's residence status.

    (5) An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated for an average respondent to respond: The estimated total number of respondents for the information collection Form I-698 is 62 and the estimated hour burden per response is 1 hour and 15 minutes. There are 62 respondents requiring Biometric Processing at an estimated 1 hour and 10 minutes per response.

    (6) An estimate of the total public burden (in hours) associated with the collection: The total estimated annual hour burden associated with this collection is 150 hours.

    (7) An estimate of the total public burden (in cost) associated with the collection: There is an estimated $30,380 annual cost burden associated with this collection of information.

    Dated: December 15, 2016. Samantha Deshommes, Chief, Regulatory Coordination Division, Office of Policy and Strategy, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, Department of Homeland Security.
    [FR Doc. 2016-30707 Filed 12-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-97-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services [OMB Control Number 1615-0106] Agency Information Collection Activities: Petition for Qualifying Family Member of a U-1 Nonimmigrant, Form I-929; Extension, Without Change, of a Currently Approved Collection AGENCY:

    U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, Department of Homeland Security.

    ACTION:

    60-day notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Homeland Security (DHS), U.S. Citizenship and Immigration (USCIS) invites the general public and other Federal agencies to comment upon this proposed extension of a currently approved collection of information. In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995, the information collection notice is published in the Federal Register to obtain comments regarding the nature of the information collection, the categories of respondents, the estimated burden (i.e. the time, effort, and resources used by the respondents to respond), the estimated cost to the respondent, and the actual information collection instruments.

    DATES:

    Comments are encouraged and will be accepted for 60 days until February 21, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    All submissions received must include the OMB Control Number 1615-0106 in the body of the letter, the agency name and Docket ID USCIS-2009-0010. To avoid duplicate submissions, please use only one of the following methods to submit comments:

    (1) Online. Submit comments via the Federal eRulemaking Portal Web site at http://www.regulations.gov under e-Docket ID number USCIS-2009-0010;

    (2) Mail. Submit written comments to DHS, USCIS, Office of Policy and Strategy, Chief, Regulatory Coordination Division, 20 Massachusetts Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20529-2140.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    USCIS, Office of Policy and Strategy, Regulatory Coordination Division, Samantha Deshommes, Chief, 20 Massachusetts Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20529-2140, telephone number 202-272-8377 (This is not a toll-free number. Comments are not accepted via telephone message). Please note contact information provided here is solely for questions regarding this notice. It is not for individual case status inquiries. Applicants seeking information about the status of their individual cases can check Case Status Online, available at the USCIS Web site at http://www.uscis.gov, or call the USCIS National Customer Service Center at 800-375-5283 (TTY 800-767-1833).

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Comments

    You may access the information collection instrument with instructions, or additional information by visiting the Federal eRulemaking Portal site at: http://www.regulations.gov and enter USCIS-2009-0010 in the search box. Regardless of the method used for submitting comments or material, all submissions will be posted, without change, to the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov, and will include any personal information you provide. Therefore, submitting this information makes it public. You may wish to consider limiting the amount of personal information that you provide in any voluntary submission you make to DHS. DHS may withhold information provided in comments from public viewing that it determines may impact the privacy of an individual or is offensive. For additional information, please read the Privacy Act notice that is available via the link in the footer of http://www.regulations.gov.

    Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies should address one or more of the following four points:

    (1) Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;

    (2) Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

    (3) Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

    (4) Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.

    Overview of This Information Collection

    (1) Type of Information Collection: Extension, Without Change, of a Currently Approved Collection.

    (2) Title of the Form/Collection: Petition for Qualifying Family Member of a U-1 Nonimmigrant.

    (3) Agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of the DHS sponsoring the collection: I-929; USCIS.

    (4) Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as well as a brief abstract: Primary: Individuals or households. Section 245(m) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (Act) allows certain qualifying family members who have never held U nonimmigrant status to seek lawful permanent residence or apply for immigrant visas. Before such family members may apply for adjustment of status or seek immigrant visas, the U-1 nonimmigrant who has been granted adjustment of status must file an immigrant petition on behalf of the qualifying family member using Form I-929. Form I-929 is necessary for USCIS to make a determination that the eligibility requirements and conditions are met regarding the qualifying family member.

    (5) An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated for an average respondent to respond: The estimated total number of respondents for the information collection I-929 is 1,244 and the estimated hour burden per response is 1 hour.

    (6) An estimate of the total public burden (in hours) associated with the collection: The total estimated annual hour burden associated with this collection is 1,244 hours.

    (7) An estimate of the total public burden (in cost) associated with the collection: The estimated total annual cost burden associated with this collection of information is $152,390.

    Dated: December 15, 2016. Samantha Deshommes, Chief, Regulatory Coordination Division, Office of Policy and Strategy, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, Department of Homeland Security.
    [FR Doc. 2016-30705 Filed 12-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-97-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT [Docket No. FR-5916-N-22] 60-Day Notice of Proposed Information Collection: Allocation of Operating Subsidies Under the Operating Fund Formula: Data Collection AGENCY:

    Office of the Assistant Secretary for Public and Indian Housing, HUD.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    HUD is seeking approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for the information collection described below. In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act, HUD is requesting comment from all interested parties on the proposed collection of information. The purpose of this notice is to allow for 60 days of public comment.

    DATES:

    Comments Due Date: February 21, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Interested persons are invited to submit comments regarding this proposal. Comments should refer to the proposal by name and/or OMB Control Number and should be sent to: Colette Pollard, Reports Management Officer, QDAM, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street SW., Room 4176, Washington, DC 20410-5000; telephone 202-402-5564 (this is not a toll-free number) or email at [email protected] for a copy of the proposed forms or other available information. Persons with hearing or speech impairments may access this number through TTY by calling the toll-free Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Arlette Mussington, Office of Policy, Programs and Legislative Initiatives, PIH, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street SW., (L'Enfant Plaza, Room 2206), Washington, DC 20410; telephone 202-402-4109, (this is not a toll-free number). Persons with hearing or speech impairments may access this number via TTY by calling the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339. Copies of available documents submitted to OMB may be obtained from Ms. Mussington.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This notice informs the public that HUD is seeking approval from OMB for the information collection described in Section A.

    A. Overview of Information Collection

    Title of Information Collection: Allocation of Operating Subsidies Under the Operating Fund Formula: Data Collection.

    OMB Approval Number: 2577-0029.

    Type of Request: Extension of currently approved collections.

    Form Number: HUD-52722 and HUD-52723.

    Description of the need for the information and proposed use: Public Housing Agencies (PHAs) use this information in budget submissions which are reviewed and approved by HUD field offices as the basis for obligating operating subsidies. This information is necessary to calculate the eligibility for operating subsidies under the Operating Funding Program regulations, as amended. The Operating Fund is designed to provide the amount of operating subsidy needed for well-managed PHAs. PHAs submit the information electronically with these forms.

    Total Estimated Burdens:

    Information collection Number of
  • respondents
  • Frequency of response Responses
  • per annum
  • Burden hours per response Annual burden hours Hourly cost per response Annual cost
    HUD-52722 7,000 1 0.75 5,250 5,250 $30.98 162,645 HUD-52723 7,000 1 0.75 5,250 5,250 30.98 162,645 Total 10,500 325,290
    B. Solicitation of Public Comment

    This notice is soliciting comments from members of the public and affected parties concerning the collection of information described in Section A on the following:

    (1) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;

    (2) The accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information;

    (3) Ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

    (4) Ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond; including through the use of appropriate automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.

    HUD encourages interested parties to submit comment in response to these questions.

    Authority:

    Section 3507 of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35.

    Dated: December 14, 2016. Merrie Nichols-Dixon, Deputy Director, Office of Policy, Programs and Legislative Initiatives.
    [FR Doc. 2016-30741 Filed 12-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4210-67-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT [Docket No. FR-5916-N-23] 60-Day Notice of Proposed Information Collection: Public Housing Contracting With Resident-Owned Business—Application Requirements AGENCY:

    Office of the Assistant Secretary for Public and Indian Housing, HUD.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    HUD is seeking approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for the information collection described below. In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act, HUD is requesting comment from all interested parties on the proposed collection of information. The purpose of this notice is to allow for 60 days of public comment.

    DATES:

    Comments Due Date: February 21, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Interested persons are invited to submit comments regarding this proposal. Comments should refer to the proposal by name and/or OMB Control Number and should be sent to: Colette Pollard, Reports Management Officer, QDAM, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street SW., Room 4176, Washington, DC 20410-5000; telephone 202-402-5564 (this is not a toll-free number) or email at [email protected] for a copy of the proposed forms or other available information. Persons with hearing or speech impairments may access this number through TTY by calling the toll-free Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Arlette Mussington, Office of Policy, Programs and Legislative Initiatives, PIH, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street SW., (L'Enfant Plaza, Room 2206), Washington, DC 20410; telephone 202-402-4109, (this is not a toll-free number). Persons with hearing or speech impairments may access this number via TTY by calling the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339. Copies of available documents submitted to OMB may be obtained from Ms. Mussington.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This notice informs the public that HUD is seeking approval from OMB for the information collection described in Section A.

    A. Overview of Information Collection

    Title of Information Collection: Public Housing Contracting with Resident-Owned Businesses—Application Requirements.

    OMB Approval Number: 2577-0161.

    Type of Request: Reinstatement, with change, of a previously approved collection.

    Form Numbers: N/A.

    Description of the Need for the Information and Its Proposed Use: PHAs that enter into contracts with resident-owned businesses must comply with the requirements/procedures set forth in 24 CFR 963.10, 24 CFR 963.12, 24 CFR 85.36(h), 24 CFR 85.36(i) and other such contract terms that may be applicable to the procurement under the Department's regulations. These requirements include:

    • Certified copies of any State, county, or municipal licenses that may be required of the business to engage in the type of business activity for which it was formed. Where applicable, the PHA must obtain a certified copy of its corporate charter or other organizational document that verifies that the business was properly formed in accordance with State law;

    • Certification that shows the business is owned by residents, disclosure documents that indicate all owners of the business and each owner's percentage of the business along with sufficient evidence sufficient that demonstrates to the satisfaction of the PHA that the business has the ability to perform successfully under the terms and conditions of the proposed contract;

    • Certification as to the number of contracts awarded, and the dollar amount of each contract award received, under the alternative procurement process; and

    • Contract award documents, proof of bonding documents, independent cost estimates and comparable price analyses.

    Members of Affected Public: Public Housing Agencies and Applicable Resident Entrepreneurs.

    Total Estimated Burdens:

    Information collection Number of
  • respondents
  • Frequency of response Responses per annum Burden hour per response Annual burden hours Hourly cost per response Annual cost
    2577-0161 81 1 81 24 1,944 $29.00 $56,376
    B. Solicitation of Public Comment

    This notice is soliciting comments from members of the public and affected parties concerning the collection of information described in Section A on the following:

    (1) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;

    (2) The accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information;

    (3) Ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

    (4) Ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond; including through the use of appropriate automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.

    HUD encourages interested parties to submit comment in response to these questions.

    Authority:

    Section 3507 of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35.

    Dated: December 14, 2016. Merrie Nichols-Dixon, Deputy Director, Office of Policy, Programs and Legislative Initiatives.
    [FR Doc. 2016-30742 Filed 12-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4210-67-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT [Docket No. FR-5916-N-21] 60-Day Notice of Proposed Information Collection: Consolidated Public Housing Certification of Completion AGENCY:

    Office of the Assistant Secretary for Public and Indian Housing, HUD.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    HUD is seeking approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for the information collection described below. In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act, HUD is requesting comment from all interested parties on the proposed collection of information. The purpose of this notice is to allow for 60 days of public comment.

    DATES:

    Comments Due Date: February 21, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Interested persons are invited to submit comments regarding this proposal. Comments should refer to the proposal by name and/or OMB Control Number and should be sent to: Colette Pollard, Reports Management Officer, QDAM, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street SW., Room 4176, Washington, DC 20410-5000; telephone 202-402-3400 (this is not a toll-free number) or email at [email protected] for a copy of the proposed forms or other available information. Persons with hearing or speech impairments may access this number through TTY by calling the toll-free Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Arlette Mussington, Office of Policy, Programs and Legislative Initiatives, PIH, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street SW., (L'Enfant Plaza, Room 2206), Washington, DC 20410; telephone 202-402-4109, (this is not a toll-free number). Persons with hearing or speech impairments may access this number via TTY by calling the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339. Copies of available documents submitted to OMB may be obtained from Ms. Mussington.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This notice informs the public that HUD is seeking approval from OMB for the information collection described in Section A.

    A. Overview of Information Collection

    Title of Information Collection: Consolidated Public Housing Certification of Completion.

    OMB Approval Number: 2577-0021.

    Type of Request: Extension of a currently approved collection.

    Form Numbers: N/A.

    Description of the need for the information and proposed use: Puplic Housing Agencies (PHAs) certify to HUD that contract requirements and standards have been satisfied in a project development and HUD may authorize payment of funds due the contractor/developer. The Certification is submitted by a Public Housing Agency (PHA) to indicate to HUD that contract requirements have been satisfied for a specific project.

    Total Estimated Burdens Information
  • collection
  • Number of
  • respondents
  • Frequency of
  • response
  • Responses
  • per annum
  • Burden hour
  • per response
  • Annual
  • burden hours
  • Hourly cost
  • per response
  • Annual cost
    Certification 58 1 58 1.0 58 $30 $1,740 Total 58 1 58 1.0 58 30 1,740
    B. Solicitation of Public Comment

    This notice is soliciting comments from members of the public and affected parties concerning the collection of information described in Section A on the following:

    (1) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;

    (2) The accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information;

    (3) Ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

    (4) Ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond; including through the use of appropriate automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.

    HUD encourages interested parties to submit comment in response to these questions.

    Authority:

    Section 3507 of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35.

    Dated: December 14, 2016. Merrie Nichols-Dixon, Deputy Director, Office of Policy, Programs and Legislative Initiatives.
    [FR Doc. 2016-30743 Filed 12-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4210-67-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT [Docket No. FR-5951-N-02] Establishment of Tribal Intergovernmental Advisory Committee; Request for Nominations for Tribal Intergovernmental Membership AGENCY:

    Office of the Secretary, HUD.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    On June 23, 2016, HUD published a Federal Register notice announcing its intent to establish a HUD Tribal Intergovernmental Advisory Committee (TIAC), consisting of tribal governmental representatives, to assist HUD to further develop and improve its Indian housing programs. The TIAC is intended to further communications between HUD and Federally recognized Indian tribes on HUD programs, make recommendations to HUD regarding current program regulations, and provide advice in the development of HUD's American Indian and Alaska Native housing priorities. This notice also solicits nominations and explains how persons may be nominated for membership on the TIAC.

    DATES:

    Nominations for Committee membership are due on or before: February 21, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Interested persons are invited to submit nominations for membership on the Tribal Intergovernmental Advisory Committee. There are two methods for submission of nominations as explained below. Additionally, all submissions must refer to the above docket number and title.

    1. Submission of Nominations by Mail. Nominations may be submitted by mail to the Regulations Division, Office of the General Counsel, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 Seventh Street, SW., Room 10276, Washington, DC 20410-0500.

    2. Electronic Submission of Nominations. Interested persons may submit nominations electronically through the Federal eRulemaking Portal at www.regulations.gov. HUD strongly encourages the electronic submission of nominations. Electronic submission allows the maximum time to prepare and submit a nomination, ensures timely receipt by HUD, and enables HUD to make the names immediately available to the public. Nominations submitted electronically through the www.regulations.gov Web site can be viewed by interested members of the public. Individuals should follow the instructions provided on that site to submit nominations electronically.

    Note:

    To receive consideration, nominations must be submitted through one of the two methods specified above. Again, all submissions must refer to the docket number and title of the notice. Facsimile (FAX) nominations are not acceptable.

    Public Inspection of Nominations. All properly submitted nominations and communications submitted to HUD will be available for public inspection and copying between 8 a.m. and 5 p.m. weekdays at the above address. Due to security measures at the HUD Headquarters building, an advance appointment to review the submissions must be scheduled by calling the Regulations Division at (202) 708-3055 (this is not a toll-free number). Individuals with speech or hearing impairments may access this number via TTY by calling the Federal Information Relay Service at (800) 877-8339. Copies of all submissions are available for inspection and downloading at www.regulations.gov.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Heidi J. Frechette, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Native American Programs, Office of Public and Indian Housing, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 Seventh Street SW., Room 4126, Washington, DC 20410-5000, telephone, 202-401-7914 (this is not a toll-free number). Individuals with speech or hearing impairments may access this number via TTY by calling the toll-free Federal Relay Service at 1-800-877-8339.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Background

    Consistent with Executive Order 13175, HUD's Tribal Government-to-Government Consultation Policy recognizes the right of Indian tribes to self-governance, and supports tribal sovereignty and self-determination. The Consultation Policy provides that HUD will engage in regular and meaningful consultation and collaboration with Indian tribal officials in the development of federal policies that have tribal implications, and provides that HUD may establish a standing tribal advisory committee. Executive Orders 13175 and 13647 require Federal agencies to advance tribal self-governance and ensure that the rights of sovereign tribal governments are fully respected by conducting open and candid consultations. HUD establishes the TIAC to further enhance consultation and collaboration with tribal governments. Several Federal agencies have established similar tribal advisory committees, including the Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of Health and Human Services, and the Department of the Treasury. These advisory committees convene periodically during the year to exchange information with agency staff, to provide agencies with an opportunity to notify tribal leaders of activities or policies that could affect Indian tribes, and to provide guidance on consultation.

    II. This Notice

    This notice announces the establishment of the Tribal Intergovernmental Advisory Committee (TIAC) for HUD as part of its commitment to strengthen the unique government-to-government relationship between Federally-recognized American Indian tribes and Federal agencies.

    A. Purpose and Role of the TIAC.

    The purposes of the TIAC are:

    (1) To further facilitate intergovernmental communication between HUD and tribal governments on all HUD programs;

    (2) To make recommendations to HUD regarding current program regulations that may require revision, as well as suggest methods to develop such changes. The TIAC will not, however, negotiate any changes to regulations that are subject to negotiated rulemaking under Section 106 of the Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act (NAHASDA); and

    (3) To advise on the development of HUD's American Indian and Alaska Native (AIAN) housing priorities.

    The role of the TIAC is to provide recommendations and input to HUD, and to provide a vehicle for regular, meaningful consultation and collaboration with tribal governments. It will not replace other means of tribal consultations, but supplement them. HUD will maintain the responsibility to exercise program management, including the drafting of HUD notices and guidance.

    For the purpose of the TIAC, the term “tribal government” means: Any Indian tribe, band, nation, or other organized group or community, including any Alaska Native village or regional or village corporation as defined in or established pursuant to the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (85 Stat. 688; 43 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.) which is recognized as eligible for the special programs and services provided by the United States to Indians because of their special status as Indians as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4).

    B. Charter and Protocols

    The TIAC will develop its own ruling charter and protocols. HUD will provide staff for the TIAC to act as liaisons between TIAC and HUD officials, manage meeting logistics, and provide general support for TIAC activities.

    C. Meetings and Participation

    The Committee will not convene before October 1, 2017. Subject to availability of federal funding, the TIAC will meet in-person at least once a year to discuss agency policies and activities with HUD, set shared priorities, and facilitate further consultation with tribal leaders. HUD may pay for these meetings, including the member's cost to travel to these meetings. The TIAC may meet on a more frequent basis by conference calls or other forms of communication. Additional in-person meetings may be scheduled at HUD's discretion.

    Participation at TIAC meetings will be limited to TIAC members or their alternates. TIAC members must be elected or duly appointed officers of a tribal government, and alternates must be tribal employees with authority to act on behalf of the elected tribal government official. Alternates must be designated in writing by the member's tribal government or elected tribal government official. TIAC members may bring one technical advisor to the meeting at the tribe's expense.

    Meeting minutes will be available on the HUD Web site.

    D. TIAC Membership

    The TIAC will be comprised of HUD representatives and tribal government officials from across the country. The TIAC will be composed of up to six HUD officials (including the Secretary or his or her designee, as well as the Assistant Secretaries for Public and Indian Housing, Policy Development and Research, and Community Planning and Development) and up to fifteen tribal representatives. Up to two tribal members will represent each of the six HUD ONAP regions. Up to three remaining tribal members will serve at-large.

    The Secretary will appoint the members of the TIAC. TIAC tribal delegates will serve a term of 2 years. To ensure continuity between tribal terms, delegates will have a staggered term of appointment. In order to establish a staggered term of appointment, half of the tribal members appointed in the inaugural year of the TIAC will serve 2 years and the other half will serve 3 years. Delegates must designate their preference to serve 2 or 3 years; however, HUD will make the final determination on which members will serve for 3 years. Once these members complete these initial terms, all future committee members will serve two-year terms. Should a member's tenure as a tribal leader come to an end during their appointment to the TIAC, the member's tribe may nominate a replacement.

    E. Objective of the TIAC

    The establishment of the TIAC is intended to enhance government-to-government relationships, communications, and mutual cooperation between HUD and tribal governments and is not intended to, and will not, create any right to administrative or judicial review, or any other right or benefit or trust responsibility, substantive or procedural, enforceable by a party against the United States, its agencies or instrumentalities, its officers or employees, or any other persons.

    III. Request for Nominations

    The Committee will be composed of up to six HUD officials and up to fifteen tribal representatives. Up to two tribal members will represent each of the six HUD ONAP regions. The three remaining tribal members will serve at-large. Only duly elected or appointed tribal leaders may serve as tribal members of the TIAC. Once appointed to the TIAC, tribal leaders may designate an alternate who is a tribal employee and has the authority to act on his or her behalf. One of the tribal members will be selected by the Committee to serve as the chairperson.

    If you are interested in serving as a member of the Committee or in nominating another person to serve as a member of the Committee, you may submit a nomination to HUD in accordance with the ADDRESSES section of this notice. Your nomination for membership on the Committee must include:

    1. The name of your nominee, a description of the interests the nominee would represent, and a description of the nominee's experience and interest in American Indian and Alaska Native housing and community development matters;

    2. Evidence that your nominee is a duly elected or appointed tribal leader and is authorized to represent a tribal government;

    3. A written commitment from the nominee that she or he will actively participate in good faith in the Committee meetings; and

    4. A written preference for serving either a two- or a three-year term on the TIAC.

    HUD will appoint the members of the TIAC from the pool of nominees requested by this notice. HUD will announce its final selections for TIAC membership in a future Federal Register notice. Members will be selected based on proven experience and interest in AIAN housing and community development matters, and whether the interest of the proposed member could be represented adequately by other members.

    In addition to the criteria above, at-large members will be selected based on their ability to represent specific interests that might not be represented by the selected regional members.

    Dated: December 16, 2016. Julián Castro, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-30744 Filed 12-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4210-67-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration [Docket No. FWS-HQ-ES-2016-0004] RIN 0648-XE423 Joint U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service Habitat Conservation Planning Handbook AGENCY:

    Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior; National Marine Fisheries Service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Commerce.

    ACTION:

    Notice of availability.

    SUMMARY:

    We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service (Services), announce the availability of the final revised Habitat Conservation Planning (HCP) Handbook, which describes requirements, procedures, and guidance for permit issuance and conservation plan development for incidental take permits under the Endangered Species Act. The purpose of the newly revised joint HCP Handbook is to instruct the Services on how to assist applicants to develop HCPs in an efficient and effective manner, while ensuring adequate conservation of listed species. Although the Handbook is designed for the Services, it also can be useful to other HCP practitioners, such as applicants, consultants, and partners.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Trish Adams, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (phone: 703-358-2120; email: [email protected]), or Maggie Miller, National Marine Fisheries Service (phone: 301-427-8457; email: [email protected]). People who use a Telecommunications Device for the Deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8339, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Introduction

    We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) (together, the Services), announce the availability of the final revised Habitat Conservation Planning (HCP) Handbook, a joint handbook that describes requirements, procedures, and guidance for permit issuance and conservation plan development for incidental take permits under section 10(a)(1)(B) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.; ESA). The Services issue these ESA section 10(a)(1)(B) incidental take permits and help applicants develop conservation plans as a prerequisite to obtaining these permits.

    The original HCP Handbook was made available via a Federal Register notice on December 2, 1996 (61 FR 63854), and was subsequently revised by addendum, effective July 3, 2000 (65 FR 35242; June 1, 2000). On June 28, 2016, we opened a 60-day comment period for a draft revised joint HCP Handbook, announcing it via the Federal Register (81 FR 41986). During that comment period, we received 54 public comments. We now announce the final revised joint HCP Handbook, which is intended to be more streamlined and user friendly than previous editions. It presents and provides guidance on the HCP process from start to finish.

    Document Availability

    The final joint HCP Handbook is available at: https://www.fws.gov/endangered/esa-library/pdf/HCP_Handbook.pdf (FWS) and http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/laws/esa/policies.htm (NMFS).

    Background

    The purpose of the ESA is to protect and recover threatened and endangered species and the ecosystems on which they depend. Section 9 of the ESA prohibits “take” of any fish or wildlife species listed as endangered. In addition, take of many species listed as threatened is prohibited by regulation. “Take” is defined in ESA section 3 as “to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or to attempt to engage in any such conduct.” Before 1982, the ESA had a mechanism for exempting Federal actions (section 7) from the prohibition on “take”; however, it did not have one for non-Federal activities, except for permits to authorize “take” from scientific research or certain other conservation actions. Thus, non-Federal parties engaging in activities that might result in “take” of listed species risked violating ESA section 9 take prohibitions. Congress recognized the need for a process to reduce conflicts between protection of listed species and economic development, so it amended the ESA in 1982 to add an exemption for “incidental take” of listed species that would result from non-Federal activities (section 10(a)(1)(B)). “Incidental take” is that which is incidental to, and not the purpose of, carrying out an otherwise lawful activity. To obtain a permit under ESA section 10(a)(1)(B), applicants must develop a conservation plan that meets specific requirements identified in ESA section 10 and its regulations (50 CFR 17.22 and 17.32; 50 CFR 222.25, 222.27, and 222.31). Among other requirements, the plan must specify (1) the impacts that are likely to result from “incidental take” and (2) the measures that the permit applicant will undertake to minimize and mitigate such impacts. Conservation plans under section 10(a)(1)(B) have come to be known as habitat conservation plans (HCPs). ESA section 10(a)(2)(B) provides statutory criteria that must be satisfied before the Services can issue an incidental take permit.

    HCP Handbook Purpose

    The purpose of the joint HCP Handbook is to instruct the Services on how to assist applicants to develop HCPs in an efficient and effective manner while ensuring adequate conservation of listed species. The HCP Handbook guides Services staff, phase by phase, through development, implementation, and environmental compliance, using streamlined approaches whenever possible. It draws on past experience to help staff understand regulations and policy and navigate the various processes for completing an HCP and issuing a permit. Although the joint HCP Handbook is designed specifically for Services staff, it also can be helpful to other HCP practitioners, such as applicants, consultants, and partners.

    Summary of Changes From the 1996 Version of the HCP Handbook

    The final revised HCP Handbook reflects current FWS and NMFS HCP practices, guidance, and policies; incorporates lessons from implementing the HCP program over the past 30 years; and provides guidance to assist applicants and the Services to avoid common pitfalls that can delay HCP negotiations and development or processing of incidental take permits.

    The goal is to provide a joint HCP Handbook that helps streamline the process and improve efficiency of the HCP program. To accomplish this, we reorganized the HCP Handbook so that it walks Services staff and stakeholders through each part of the HCP process, from the pre-application stage through incidental take permit issuance and HCP implementation through monitoring and compliance.

    Some of the most significant changes we made include the following:

    (1) Introduced the concept that applicants should “go fast by starting slowly,” which emphasizes the benefits to applicants of thorough pre-planning before jumping directly into HCP development, especially for landscape-level HCPs.

    (2) Focused on the vital review and administrative steps without compromising legal integrity, in order to help streamline the process.

    (3) Clarified the concept of minimizing and mitigating the impacts of taking “to the maximum extent practicable.”

    (4) Ensured consistency with the most recent policies, such as the revised FWS Mitigation Policy, which was announced via a Federal Register notice on November 21, 2016.

    (5) Clarified the use of implementing agreements.

    (6) Updated and clarified permit duration.

    (7) Provided guidance on how to comply with section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (54 U.S.C. 300101 et seq.).

    (8) Provided guidance on addressing climate change.

    (9) Updated and clarified what should be addressed through adaptive management versus changed and unforeseen circumstances.

    (10) Provided guidance on when to initiate the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) process and intra-Service ESA section 7 consultations, and when to seek assistance from the Solicitor or General Counsel.

    (11) Updated and clarified information concerning take analysis, responding to public comments, public notices, permit decision documents, compliance monitoring, and incidental take permit suspension and revocation.

    Final Revisions Made to Draft Handbook and Reponses to Comments

    We published a notice of availability and request for public comment on our draft joint HCP Handbook in the Federal Register on June 28, 2016 (81 FR 41986). There was a 60-day comment period ending August 29, 2016, during which we received 54 comments. We received very complex, thoughtful, and often very detailed comments. Below are our responses to the most frequent comments and those that potentially could be controversial. After considering public comments, we clarified language in the Handbook based on the input we received.

    Comment 1: We received several comments requesting an extension of the 60-day comment period.

    Response 1: We believe that 60 days was sufficient to allow for public input by interested parties on the draft revised HCP Handbook, as the quantity and quality of the substantive comments the Services received attest. Another reason we think the comment period was of sufficient length is that we are developing a revision to an existing Handbook rather than an entirely new product; this revised Handbook largely provides additional information that clarifies the original Handbook.

    Comment 2: The draft HCP Handbook is repetitive and too complex for an applicant or project proponent.

    Response 2: We have taken steps in the final editing process to cut down on the repetitive nature of the HCP Handbook, and we have also cross-referenced