Federal Register Vol. 81, No.6,

Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 6 (January 11, 2016)

Page Range1115-1290
FR Document

81_FR_6
Current View
Page and SubjectPDF
81 FR 1186 - Sunshine Act MeetingsPDF
81 FR 1163 - Sunshine Act Meeting NoticePDF
81 FR 1167 - Chlorinated Isocyanurates From the People's Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2013-2014PDF
81 FR 1165 - Certain Hot-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat Products From India: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2013-2014PDF
81 FR 1165 - Foreign-Trade Zone (FTZ) 33-Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania; Authorization of Production Activity; DNP Imagingcomm America Corporation, Subzone 33E (Thermal Transfer Ribbon Master Rolls), Mount Pleasant, PennsylvaniaPDF
81 FR 1165 - Foreign-Trade Zone (FTZ) 133-Quad-Cities, Iowa/Illinois; Authorization of Production Activity; CNH Industrial America, LLC; Subzone 133E, (Agricultural and Construction Equipment, Subassemblies and Kits), Burlington and West Burlington, IowaPDF
81 FR 1164 - Foreign-Trade Zone (FTZ) 29-Louisville, Kentucky; Authorization of Production Activity; Custom Quality Services (Liquor Kitting), Louisville, KentuckyPDF
81 FR 1169 - Multilayered Wood Flooring From the People's Republic of China: Preliminary Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review and Intent To Rescind the Review in Part; 2013PDF
81 FR 1189 - Commission To Eliminate Child Abuse and Neglect Fatalities; Commission To Eliminate Child Abuse and Neglect Fatalities; Announcement of MeetingPDF
81 FR 1184 - Adequacy Status of the Dallas-Fort Worth, Texas Reasonable Further Progress 8-Hour Ozone Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets for Transportation Conformity PurposesPDF
81 FR 1185 - Proposed CERCLA Section 122(g)(4) Administrative Settlement Agreement and Order on Consent for the Mercury Refining Superfund Site, Towns of Guilderland and Colonie, Albany County, New YorkPDF
81 FR 1198 - Stillaguamish Tribe of Indians-Amendment to Liquor Control OrdinancePDF
81 FR 1202 - Proposed Information Collection; Commercial Use AuthorizationsPDF
81 FR 1175 - Proposed Information Collection; Comment RequestPDF
81 FR 1274 - Culturally Significant Objects Imported for Exhibition Determinations: “Munch and Expressionism” ExhibitionPDF
81 FR 1120 - Federal Housing Administration (FHA): Removal of 24 CFR 280-Nehemiah Housing Opportunity Grants ProgramPDF
81 FR 1206 - Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993-The Open Group, L.L.C.PDF
81 FR 1206 - Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993-R Consortium, Inc.PDF
81 FR 1234 - In the Matter of Northern States Power Company, MinnesotaPDF
81 FR 1174 - Information Collection; Submission for OMB Review, Comment RequestPDF
81 FR 1194 - Meeting of the National Vaccine Advisory CommitteePDF
81 FR 1201 - Filing of Plats of Survey; NVPDF
81 FR 1279 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Requests for Comments; Clearance of Renewed Approval of Information Collection: Application for Employment With the Federal Aviation AdministrationPDF
81 FR 1279 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Requests for Comments; Clearance of Renewed Approval of Information Collection: Certificated Training Centers-Simulator RulePDF
81 FR 1274 - Culturally Significant Objects Imported for Exhibition Determinations: “Bellissima: Italy and High Fashion 1945-1968” ExhibitionPDF
81 FR 1274 - Culturally Significant Objects Imported for Exhibition Determinations: “Vigée Le Brun: Woman Artist in Revolutionary France” ExhibitionPDF
81 FR 1275 - Notice of Closed Meeting of the Cultural Property Advisory CommitteePDF
81 FR 1280 - Noise Exposure Map Notice; Burlington International Airport; South Burlington, VermontPDF
81 FR 1280 - Office of Commercial Space Transportation; Notice of Extension of Public Scoping Comment Period for the Spaceport Camden Environmental Impact Statement.PDF
81 FR 1202 - Notice of Temporary Closures of Public Lands for the King of the Hammers Race in San Bernardino County, CAPDF
81 FR 1272 - Announcement of Lean for Main Street Training ChallengePDF
81 FR 1289 - Adjustment to Rail Passenger Transportation Liability CapPDF
81 FR 1164 - Annual Wholesale Trade SurveyPDF
81 FR 1281 - Noise Exposure Map Notice; Westfield-Barnes Regional Airport; Westfield, MassachusettsPDF
81 FR 1174 - Technology Advisory Committee; Notice of MeetingPDF
81 FR 1288 - Developing Evidence Based Fatigue Risk Management Guidelines for Emergency Medical ServicesPDF
81 FR 1281 - Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; DiabetesPDF
81 FR 1284 - Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; VisionPDF
81 FR 1172 - Endangered Species; File No. 19288PDF
81 FR 1163 - Idaho Panhandle Resource Advisory CommitteePDF
81 FR 1289 - Departmental Offices; Interest Rate Paid on Cash Deposited to Secure U.S. Immigration and Customs; Enforcement Immigration BondsPDF
81 FR 1205 - Certain Radio Frequency Identification (“RFID”) Products and Components Thereof Institution of InvestigationPDF
81 FR 1204 - Certain DC-DC Controllers and Products Containing Same; Commission Determination To Adopt a Recommended Remand Determination; Issuance of Modified Civil Penalty Order and Termination of Remand Enforcement ProceedingPDF
81 FR 1190 - Agency Forms Undergoing Paperwork Reduction Act ReviewPDF
81 FR 1182 - Combined Notice of FilingsPDF
81 FR 1180 - Twain Resources, LLC; Notice of Preliminary Permit Application Accepted for Filing and Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene, and Competing ApplicationsPDF
81 FR 1180 - City of Azusa, California; Notice of FilingPDF
81 FR 1180 - Colonial Pipeline Company; Notice Of Technical ConferencePDF
81 FR 1181 - Combined Notice of Filings #1PDF
81 FR 1185 - Notice of Open Meeting of the Advisory Committee of the Export-Import Bank of the United States (Ex-Im Bank)PDF
81 FR 1186 - Notice to All Interested Parties of the Termination of the Receivership of 10328, CommunitySouth Bank and Trust, Easley, SCPDF
81 FR 1196 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection; Comment RequestPDF
81 FR 1186 - Notice to All Interested Parties of the Termination of the Receivership of 10289, First Commerce Community Bank, Douglasville, GeorgiaPDF
81 FR 1186 - Notice to All Interested Parties of the Termination of the Receivership of 10207, McIntosh Commercial Bank Carrollton, GAPDF
81 FR 1189 - Agency Forms Undergoing Paperwork Reduction Act ReviewPDF
81 FR 1192 - Agency Forms Undergoing Paperwork Reduction Act ReviewPDF
81 FR 1187 - Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Holding CompaniesPDF
81 FR 1213 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed eCollection eComments Requested; Transactions Among Licensees/Permittees, LimitedPDF
81 FR 1215 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed eCollection eComments Requested; National Tracing Center Trace Request, ATF F 3312.1PDF
81 FR 1218 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed eCollection eComments Requested; Limited Permittee Transaction Report (ATF F 5400.4)PDF
81 FR 1217 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed eCollection eComments Requested; Application and Permit for Importation of Firearms, Ammunition and Defense Articles, ATF F 6, Part II (5330.3B)PDF
81 FR 1222 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed eCollection eComments Requested; New Collection: Census of Victim Service Providers (VSP Census)PDF
81 FR 1121 - Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Inner Harbor Navigation Canal, New Orleans, LAPDF
81 FR 1288 - Notice of Availability of Southwest Light Rail Transit Project Amended Draft Section 4(f) EvaluationPDF
81 FR 1197 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Request for CommentsPDF
81 FR 1191 - Board of Scientific Counselors, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, (BSC, NCIPC)PDF
81 FR 1179 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to the Office of Management and Budget for Review and Approval; Comment Request; Perkins Discretionary Grant Performance ReportPDF
81 FR 1178 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to the Office of Management and Budget for Review and Approval; Comment Request; Mathematics and Science Partnerships Program: Annual Performance ReportPDF
81 FR 1286 - Establishment of an Emergency Relief Docket for Calendar Year 2016PDF
81 FR 1173 - Proposed Information Collection; Comment Request; Southeast Region Permit Family of FormsPDF
81 FR 1257 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend Nasdaq Rule 7015PDF
81 FR 1255 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Extend the Credit Option Margin Pilot Program Through January 17, 2017PDF
81 FR 1260 - Joint Industry Plan; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Amendment to the Options Order Protection and Locked/Crossed Market Plan to Add the EDGX Exchange, Inc. as a ParticipantPDF
81 FR 1251 - Joint Industry Plan; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Amendment to the Plan for the Purpose of Developing and Implementing Procedures Designed To Facilitate the Listing and Trading of Standardized Options To Add EDGX Exchange, Inc. (“EDGX”) as a Plan SponsorPDF
81 FR 1244 - Proposed Collection; Comment RequestPDF
81 FR 1249 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend Rule 7014PDF
81 FR 1268 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change Relating to Fees for Certain CBOE Real-Time Data FeedsPDF
81 FR 1238 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; NASDAQ OMX BX, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend the Retail Price Improvement ProgramPDF
81 FR 1266 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Delay of Implementation of Kill SwitchPDF
81 FR 1261 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; NASDAQ OMX BX, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change to Delay of Implementation of Kill SwitchPDF
81 FR 1252 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; BATS Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend Rule 11.22, Data Products, To Describe IPO Auction ViewerPDF
81 FR 1240 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change To Implement Additional Price Protections in the Opening ProcessPDF
81 FR 1245 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; International Securities Exchange; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Establish the Securities Trader and Securities Trader Principal Registration CategoriesPDF
81 FR 1263 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; ISE Gemini, LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change to Establish the Securities Trader and Securities Trader Principal Registration CategoriesPDF
81 FR 1261 - Proposed Collection; Comment RequestPDF
81 FR 1200 - Sovereignty in Indian EducationPDF
81 FR 1187 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comment Request; ExtensionPDF
81 FR 1238 - New Postal ProductPDF
81 FR 1225 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed eCollection eComments Requested; Approval, With Change, of a Previously Approved Collection; Bioterrorism Preparedness Act: Entity/Individual InformationPDF
81 FR 1221 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed eCollection eComments Requested; Flash/Cancellation/Transfer Notice (I-12)PDF
81 FR 1217 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed eCollection eComments Requested; Extension Without Change, of a Previously Approved Collection Public Safety Officer Medal of Valor (Public Law 107-12)PDF
81 FR 1213 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed eCollection eComments Requested; Extension of a Currently Approved Collection: Census of Juveniles in Residential PlacementPDF
81 FR 1212 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed eCollection eComments Requested; Reinstatement With Change of a Previously Approved Collection: Public Safety Officer's Disability BenefitsPDF
81 FR 1223 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed eCollection eComments Requested; Reinstatement With Change of a Previously Approved Collection: Report of Public Safety Officer's DeathPDF
81 FR 1224 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed eCollection eComments Requested; Reinstatement With Change of a Previously Approved Collection: Claim for Death BenefitsPDF
81 FR 1215 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed eCollection, eComments Requested; Extension Without Change of a Previously Approved Collection Application for Import Quota for Ephedrine, Pseudoephedrine, and Phenylpropanolamine DEA Form 488PDF
81 FR 1219 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed eCollection, eComments Requested; Extension Without Change of a Previously Approved Collection Application for Procurement Quota for a Controlled Substance and for Ephedrine, Pseudoephedrine, and Phenylpropanolamine DEA Form 250PDF
81 FR 1219 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed eCollection, eComments Requested; Extension Without Change of a Previously Approved Collection; Application for Individual Manufacturing Quota for a Basic Class of Controlled Substance and for Ephedrine, Pseudoephedrine, and Phenylpropanolamine DEA Form 189PDF
81 FR 1231 - Investigations Regarding Eligibility To Apply for Worker Adjustment AssistancePDF
81 FR 1226 - Notice of Determinations Regarding Eligibility To Apply for Worker Adjustment AssistancePDF
81 FR 1176 - National Commission on the Future of the Army; Notice of Federal Advisory Committee MeetingPDF
81 FR 1233 - Notice of Intent to Seek Approval to Establish an Information CollectionPDF
81 FR 1223 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed eCollection eComments Requested; National Response Team Customer Satisfaction SurveyPDF
81 FR 1211 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed eCollection eComments Requested; Application for Federal Firearms License (Collector of Curios and Relics)PDF
81 FR 1221 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed eCollection eComments Requested; Certification of Qualifying State Relief From Disabilities ProgramPDF
81 FR 1220 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed eCollection eComments Requested; Appeals of Background ChecksPDF
81 FR 1225 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed eCollection eComments Requested; Report of Stolen or Lost ATF Forms 5400.30, Intrastate Purchase Explosive CouponPDF
81 FR 1214 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed eCollection eComments Requested; Application for National Firearms Examiner AcademyPDF
81 FR 1211 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed eCollection eComments Requested; Application To Register as an Importer of U.S. Munitions Import List ArticlesPDF
81 FR 1216 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed eCollection eComments Requested; Application for Restoration of Firearms PrivilegesPDF
81 FR 1193 - HHS-Operated Risk Adjustment Methodology Meeting; March 25, 2016PDF
81 FR 1210 - Importer of Controlled Substances Registration: Chattem Chemicals Inc.PDF
81 FR 1210 - Manufacturer of Controlled Substances Registration: AMPAC Fine Chemicals LLCPDF
81 FR 1208 - Manufacturer of Controlled Substances Registration: Alltech Associates, Inc.PDF
81 FR 1209 - Manufacturer of Controlled Substances Registration: IRIX Manufacturing, Inc.PDF
81 FR 1207 - Importer of Controlled Substances Application: Sharp Clinical Services, Inc.PDF
81 FR 1207 - Importer of Controlled Substances Application: MyodermPDF
81 FR 1208 - Importer of Controlled Substances Application: HospiraPDF
81 FR 1131 - Numbering Policies for Modern Communications, IP-Enabled Services, Telephone Number Requirements for IP-Enabled, Services Providers, Telephone Number Portability et al.PDF
81 FR 1244 - Northern Lights Fund Trust, et al.; Notice of ApplicationPDF
81 FR 1209 - Importer of Controlled Substances Application: Noramco, Inc.PDF
81 FR 1195 - National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute: Notice of MeetingPDF
81 FR 1195 - National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute: Notice of Closed MeetingPDF
81 FR 1196 - Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development: Notice of Closed MeetingsPDF
81 FR 1195 - National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke: Notice of Closed MeetingsPDF
81 FR 1177 - Notice of Intent To Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement for the Denver Urban Waterways Restoration Study, South Platte River and Tributaries, Denver County, COPDF
81 FR 1176 - Notice of Intent To Grant Exclusive Patent License to Schafer Aerospace; Albuquerque, NMPDF
81 FR 1286 - Petition for Waiver of CompliancePDF
81 FR 1287 - Petition for Waiver of CompliancePDF
81 FR 1182 - Registration Review; Conventional, Biopesticide and Antimicrobial Pesticide Dockets Opened for Review and CommentPDF
81 FR 1116 - List of Approved Spent Fuel Storage Casks: Holtec International, HI-STORM Flood/Wind Multipurpose Storage System, Certificate of Compliance No. 1032, Amendment No. 0, Revision 1PDF
81 FR 1275 - Generalized System of Preferences (GSP): Notice Regarding the 2015/2016 GSP Annual Product ReviewPDF
81 FR 1136 - Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Pennsylvania; Attainment Plan for the North Reading Area for the 2008 Lead National Ambient Air Quality StandardsPDF
81 FR 1122 - Approval of Nebraska's Air Quality State Implementation Plan (SIP); Infrastructure SIP Requirements for the 2008 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard in Regards to Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)-Prongs 1 and 2PDF
81 FR 1277 - 2016 Special 301 Review: Identification of Countries Under Section 182 of the Trade Act of 1974: Request for Public Comment and Announcement of Public HearingPDF
81 FR 1133 - Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; West Virginia; Prevention of Significant Deterioration and Approval of Infrastructure State Implementation Plans for Specific National Ambient Air Quality StandardsPDF
81 FR 1124 - Air Plan Approval; Alabama: Nonattainment New Source ReviewPDF
81 FR 1144 - Air Plan Approval and Air Quality Designation; GA; Redesignation of the Atlanta, GA, 1997 Annual PM2.5PDF
81 FR 1127 - Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Infrastructure and Interstate Transport State Implementation Plan for the 2010 Sulfur Dioxide National Ambient Air Quality StandardsPDF
81 FR 1128 - Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Washington; Removal of Obsolete RegulationsPDF
81 FR 1133 - Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Washington; Removal of Obsolete RegulationsPDF
81 FR 1115 - Federal Awarding Agency Regulatory Implementation of Office of Management and Budget's Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal AwardsPDF
81 FR 1141 - Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Arkansas; New Mexico; Oklahoma; Disapproval of Greenhouse Gas Biomass Deferral, Step 2 and Minor Source Permitting RequirementsPDF
81 FR 1118 - Schedule of Fees for Access to NOAA Environmental Data, Information, and Related Products and Services; CorrectionPDF

Issue

81 6 Monday, January 11, 2016 Contents Agriculture Agriculture Department See

Forest Service

Antitrust Division Antitrust Division NOTICES Membership Changes under the National Cooperative Research and Production Act: R Consortium, Inc., 1206 2016-00323 The Open Group, L.L.C., 1206-1207 2016-00325 Army Army Department NOTICES Exclusive Patent License Approvals: Schafer Aerospace, Albuquerque, NM, 1176 2016-00203 Census Bureau Census Bureau NOTICES Annual Wholesale Trade Survey, 1164 2016-00300 Centers Disease Centers for Disease Control and Prevention NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 1189-1193 2016-00275 2016-00276 2016-00287 Meetings: Board of Scientific Counselors, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, 1191-1192 2016-00265 Civil Rights Civil Rights Commission NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 1163-1164 2016-00367 Coast Guard Coast Guard RULES Drawbridge Operations: Inner Harbor Navigation Canal, New Orleans, LA, 1121-1122 2016-00268 Commerce Commerce Department See

Census Bureau

See

Foreign-Trade Zones Board

See

International Trade Administration

See

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

Commodity Futures Commodity Futures Trading Commission NOTICES Meetings: Technology Advisory Committee, 1174 2016-00297 Corporation Corporation for National and Community Service NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 1174-1176 2016-00321 2016-00332 Defense Department Defense Department See

Army Department

See

Engineers Corps

NOTICES Meetings: National Commission on the Future of the Army, 1176-1177 2016-00230
Drug Drug Enforcement Administration NOTICES Importers of Controlled Substances; Applications: Hospira, McPherson, KS, 1208 2016-00212 Myoderm, Norristown, PA, 1207 2016-00213 Noramco, Inc., Wilmington, DE, 1209 2016-00209 Sharp Clinical Services, Inc., Phoenixville, PA, 1207 2016-00214 Importers of Controlled Substances; Registration: Chattem Chemicals Inc., Chattanooga, TN, 1210 2016-00218 Manufacturers of Controlled Substances; Registration: Alltech Associates, Inc., Deerfield, IL, 1208-1209 2016-00216 AMPAC Fine Chemicals LLC, Rancho Cordova, CA, 1210-1211 2016-00217 IRIX Manufacturing, Inc., 1209-1210 2016-00215 Education Department Education Department NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Mathematics and Science Partnerships Program -- Annual Performance Report, 1178-1179 2016-00263 Perkins Discretionary Grant Performance Report, 1179-1180 2016-00264 Employment and Training Employment and Training Administration NOTICES Worker Adjustment Assistance Eligibility; Determinations, 1226-1231 2016-00231 Worker Adjustment Assistance Eligibility; Investigations, 1231-1233 2016-00232 Energy Department Energy Department See

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Engineers Engineers Corps NOTICES Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc.: Denver Urban Waterways Restoration Study, South Platte River and Tributaries, Denver County, CO, 1177-1178 2016-00204 Environmental Protection Environmental Protection Agency RULES Air Quality State Implementation Plans; Approvals and Promulgations: Alabama; Nonattainment New Source Review; Air Plan Approval, 1124-1126 2015-33197 Nebraska; Infrastructure SIP Requirements for the Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard, etc., 1122-1123 2015-33301 Texas; Infrastructure and Interstate Transport State Implementation Plan for the Sulfur Dioxide National Ambient Air Quality Standards, 1127-1128 2015-33180 Washington; Removal of Obsolete Regulations, 1128-1131 2015-33177 PROPOSED RULES Air Plan Approvals and Air Quality Designations: Georgia; Redesignation of the Atlanta, GA, Annual PM2.5 Nonattainment Area to Attainment, 1144-1162 2015-33196 Air Quality State Implementation Plans; Approvals and Promulgations: Arkansas; New Mexico; Oklahoma; Disapproval of Greenhouse Gas Biomass Deferral, Step 2 and Minor Source Permitting Requirements, 1141-1144 2015-33098 Pennsylvania; Attainment Plan for the North Reading Area for the Lead National Ambient Air Quality Standards, 1136-1141 2015-33303 Washington; Removal of Obsolete Regulations, 1133 2015-33176 West Virginia; Prevention of Significant Deterioration and Approval of Infrastructure Plans for Specific National Ambient Air Quality Standards, 1133-1135 2015-33198 NOTICES CERCLA Administrative Settlement Agreements and Orders on Consent: Mercury Refining Superfund Site, Towns of Guilderland and Colonie, Albany County, NY, 1185 2016-00338 Registration Review: Conventional, Biopesticide and Antimicrobial Pesticide Dockets, 1182-1184 2016-00184 Transportation Conformity: Dallas-Fort Worth, Texas Reasonable Further Progress 8-Hour Ozone Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets; Adequacy Status, 1184-1185 2016-00339 Export Import Export-Import Bank NOTICES Meetings: Advisory Committee, 1185 2016-00281 Federal Aviation Federal Aviation Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Application for Employment with the Federal Aviation Administration, 1279 2016-00317 Certificated Training Centers—Simulator Rule, 1279 2016-00316 Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc.: Spaceport Camden, 1280-1281 2016-00304 Noise Exposure Maps: Burlington International Airport, South Burlington, VT, 1280 2016-00308 Westfield-Barnes Regional Airport, Westfield, MA, 1281 2016-00299 Federal Communications Federal Communications Commission RULES Numbering Policies for Modern Communications, IP-Enabled Services, Telephone Number Requirements for IP-Enabled, Services Providers, Telephone Number Portability et al., Correction, 1131-1132 2016-00211 Federal Deposit Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation NOTICES Termination of Receiverships: CommunitySouth Bank and Trust, Easley, SC, 1186 2016-00280 First Commerce Community Bank, Douglasville, GA, 1186 2016-00278 McIntosh Commercial Bank, Carrollton, GA, 1186 2016-00277 Federal Election Federal Election Commission NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 1186 2016-00447 Federal Energy Federal Energy Regulatory Commission NOTICES Combined Filings, 1181-1182 2016-00282 2016-00286 Filings: City of Azusa, CA, 1180-1181 2016-00284 Meetings: Colonial Pipeline Co.; Technical Conferences, 1180 2016-00283 Permit Applications: Twain Resources, LLC, 1180 2016-00285 Federal Motor Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration NOTICES Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications: Diabetes, 1281-1284 2016-00295 Vision, 1284-1286 2016-00294 Federal Railroad Federal Railroad Administration NOTICES Establishment of an Emergency Relief Docket for Calendar Year 2016, 1286-1287 2016-00262 Petitions for Waivers of Compliance: American Short Line and Regional Railroad Assn., 1287 2016-00201 National Railroad Passenger Corp. (Amtrak), 1286 2016-00202 Federal Reserve Federal Reserve System NOTICES Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Holding Companies, 1187 2016-00274 Federal Trade Federal Trade Commission NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 1187-1189 2016-00244 Federal Transit Federal Transit Administration NOTICES Southwest Light Rail Transit Project Amended Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation, 1288 2016-00267 Foreign Trade Foreign-Trade Zones Board NOTICES Authorizations of Production Activity: CNH Industrial America, LLC, Foreign-Trade Zone 133, Quad-Cities, Iowa/Illinois, 1165 2016-00363 Custom Quality Services; Foreign-Trade Zone 29, Louisville, KY, 1164-1165 2016-00362 DNP Imagingcomm America Corp.; Foreign-Trade Zone 33, Pittsburgh, PA, 1165 2016-00364 Forest Forest Service NOTICES Meetings: Idaho Panhandle Resource Advisory Committee, 1163 2016-00292 General Services General Services Administration NOTICES Meetings: Commission to Eliminate Child Abuse and Neglect Fatalities, 1189 2016-00343 Geological Geological Survey NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 1197-1198 2016-00266 Health and Human Health and Human Services Department See

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

See

National Institutes of Health

See

Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration

NOTICES Meetings: HHS-Operated Risk Adjustment Methodology, 1193-1194 2016-00219 National Vaccine Advisory Committee, 1194-1195 2016-00319
Homeland Homeland Security Department See

Coast Guard

Housing Housing and Urban Development Department RULES Federal Housing Administration: Removal of Nehemiah Housing Opportunity Grants Program, 1120-1121 2016-00327 Indian Affairs Indian Affairs Bureau NOTICES Liquor Control Ordinances: Stillaguamish Tribe of Indians, 1198-1200 2016-00334 Sovereignty in Indian Education, 1200-1201 2016-00245 Interior Interior Department See

Geological Survey

See

Indian Affairs Bureau

See

Land Management Bureau

See

National Park Service

International Trade Adm International Trade Administration NOTICES Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Investigations, Orders, or Reviews: Certain Hot-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat Products from India, 1165-1167 2016-00365 Chlorinated Isocyanurates from the People's Republic of China, 1167-1169 2016-00366 Multilayered Wood Flooring from the People's Republic of China, 1169-1172 2016-00356 International Trade Com International Trade Commission NOTICES Investigations; Determinations, Modifications, and Rulings, etc.: Certain DC-DC Controllers and Products Containing Same, 1204-1205 2016-00288 Certain Radio Frequency Identification Products and Components Thereof, 1205-1206 2016-00289 Justice Department Justice Department See

Antitrust Division

See

Drug Enforcement Administration

NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Appeals of Background Checks, 1220 2016-00225 Application and Permit for Importation of Firearms, Ammunition and Defense Articles, 1217 2016-00270 Application for Federal Firearms License (Collector of Curios and Relics), 1211 2016-00227 Application for Import Quota for Ephedrine, Pseudoephedrine, and Phenylpropanolamine, 1215 2016-00235 Application for Individual Manufacturing Quota for a Basic Class of Controlled Substance and for Ephedrine, Pseudoephedrine, and Phenylpropanolamine, 1219-1220 2016-00233 Application for National Firearms Examiner Academy, 1214 2016-00223 Application for Procurement Quota for a Controlled Substance and for Ephedrine, Pseudoephedrine, and Phenylpropanolamine, 1219 2016-00234 Application for Restoration of Firearms Privileges, 1216 2016-00221 Application to Register as an Importer of U.S. Munitions Import List Articles, 1211-1212 2016-00222 Bioterrorism Preparedness Act — Entity/Individual Information, 1225 2016-00242 Census of Juveniles in Residential Placement, 1213-1214 2016-00239 Census of Victim Service Providers, 1222 2016-00269 Certification of Qualifying State Relief from Disabilities Program, 1221-1222 2016-00226 Claim for Death Benefits, 1224-1225 2016-00236 Flash/Cancellation/Transfer Notice (I-12), 1221 2016-00241 Limited Permittee Transaction Report, 1218-1219 2016-00271 National Response Team Customer Satisfaction Survey, 1223-1224 2016-00228 National Tracing Center Trace Request, 1215-1216 2016-00272 Public Safety Officer Medal of Valor, 1217-1218 2016-00240 Public Safety Officer's Disability Benefits, 1212 2016-00238 Report of Public Safety Officer's Death, 1223 2016-00237 Report of Stolen or Lost, Intrastate Purchase Explosive Coupon, 1225-1226 2016-00224 Transactions Among Licensees/Permittees, Limited, 1213 2016-00273
Labor Department Labor Department See

Employment and Training Administration

Land Land Management Bureau NOTICES Plats of Survey: Nevada, 1201-1202 2016-00318 Temporary Closures of Public Lands: King of the Hammers Race, San Bernardino County, CA, 1202 2016-00303 National Highway National Highway Traffic Safety Administration NOTICES Meetings: Developing Evidence Based Fatigue Risk Management Guidelines for Emergency Medical Services, 1288-1289 2016-00296 National Institute National Institutes of Health NOTICES Meetings: Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, 1196 2016-00206 National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, 1195 2016-00207 2016-00208 National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, 1195-1196 2016-00205 National Oceanic National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RULES Schedule of Fees for Access to NOAA Environmental Data, Information, and Related Products and Services; Correction, 1118-1120 2015-32958 NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Southeast Region Permit Family of Forms, 1173-1174 2016-00261 Permits: Endangered Species; File No. 19288, 1172-1173 2016-00293 National Park National Park Service NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Commercial Use Authorizations, 1202-1204 2016-00333 National Science National Science Foundation NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 1233-1234 2016-00229 Nuclear Regulatory Nuclear Regulatory Commission RULES List of Approved Spent Fuel Storage Casks: Holtec International, HI-STORM Flood/Wind Multipurpose Storage System, Certificate of Compliance No. 1032, Amendment No. 0, Revision 1, 1116-1118 2016-00163 NOTICES Confirmatory Orders: Northern States Power Co., Minnesota, 1234-1238 2016-00322 Postal Regulatory Postal Regulatory Commission NOTICES New Postal Products, 1238 2016-00243 Securities Securities and Exchange Commission NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 1244, 1261 2016-00246 2016-00256 Applications: Northern Lights Fund Trust, et al., 1244-1245 2016-00210 Joint Industry Plans, 1251-1252 2016-00257 Self-Regulatory Organizations; Proposed Rule Changes: BATS Exchange, Inc., 1252-1255 2016-00250 Chicago Board Options Exchange, Inc., 1255-1257, 1268-1272 2016-00254 2016-00259 EDGX Exchange, Inc., 1260-1261 2016-00258 International Securities Exchange, 1245-1249 2016-00248 ISE Gemini, LLC, 1263-1266 2016-00247 NASDAQ OMX BX, Inc., 1238-1240, 1261-1263 2016-00251 2016-00253 NASDAQ Stock Market, LLC, 1240-1244, 1249-1251, 1257-1260, 1266-1268 2016-00249 2016-00252 2016-00255 2016-00260 Small Business Small Business Administration RULES Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards, 1115 2015-33168 NOTICES Lean for Main Street Training Challenge, 1272-1274 2016-00302 State Department State Department NOTICES Culturally Significant Objects Imported for Exhibition: Bellissima; Italy and High Fashion 1945-1968, 1274 2016-00312 Munch and Expressionism; Correction, 1274 2016-00331 Vigee Le Brun; Woman Artist in Revolutionary France, 1274 2016-00311 Meetings: Cultural Property Advisory Committee, 1275 2016-00309 Substance Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 1196-1197 2016-00279 Trade Representative Trade Representative, Office of United States NOTICES 2015/2016 Generalized System of Preferences Annual Product Review, 1275-1276 2016-00088 Public Hearings: 2016 Special Review -- Identification of Countries that Deny Effective Intellectual Property Rights Protection, 1277-1278 2015-33278 Transportation Department Transportation Department See

Federal Aviation Administration

See

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

See

Federal Railroad Administration

See

Federal Transit Administration

See

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

NOTICES Adjustment to Rail Passenger Transportation Liability Cap, 1289 2016-00301
Treasury Treasury Department NOTICES Interest Rate Paid on Cash Deposited To Secure U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Immigration Bonds, 1289-1290 2016-00291 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 LISTSERV electronic mailing list, go to http://listserv.access.thefederalregister.org and select Online mailing list archives, FEDREGTOC-L, Join or leave the list (or change settings); then follow the instructions.

81 6 Monday, January 11, 2016 Rules and Regulations SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION 2 CFR Part 2701 13 CFR Part 143 RIN 3245-AG62 Federal Awarding Agency Regulatory Implementation of Office of Management and Budget's Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards AGENCY:

U.S. Small Business Administration.

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

The U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) publishes this rule to adopt as a final rule, with one change, a joint interim final rule published with the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for all Federal award-making agencies that implemented guidance on Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance). This rule is necessary to incorporate into regulation and thus bring into effect the Uniform Guidance as required by OMB for the SBA.

DATES:

This rule is effective February 10, 2016.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

William G. Bethel, Director, Office of Grants Management, Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street SW., Washington, DC 20416 at (202) 205-7198 or [email protected]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

On December 19, 2014, OMB and SBA issued an interim final rule that implemented for all Federal award-making agencies the final guidance on Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance) (79 FR 75867, 76080-76081, December 19, 2014). In that interim final rule, Federal awarding agencies, including the SBA, joined together to implement the Uniform Guidance in their respective chapters of title 2 of the CFR, and, where approved by OMB, implemented any exceptions to the Uniform Guidance by including the relevant language in their regulations. Where applicable, agencies provided additional language beyond that included in 2 CFR part 200, consistent with their existing policy, to provide more detail with respect to how they intend to implement the policy, where appropriate.

In addition, the interim final rule made technical corrections to the Uniform Guidance, where needed, to ensure that particular language in the final guidance matched with the Council on Financial Assistance Reform's intent and to avoid any erroneous implementation of the guidance. The interim final rule went into effect on December 26, 2014. The public comment period for the interim final rule closed on February 17, 2015.

The SBA publishes this final rule to adopt the provisions of the interim final rule. The SBA adopted six exceptions to the Uniform Guidance and two implementing provisions, all of which were codified in 2 CFR part 2701. The SBA did not receive any public comments on its regulations. Accordingly, the SBA makes no substantive changes to the interim final rule. However, in order to reflect organizational changes that have occurred at SBA since the publication of the interim final rule and to provide for greater stability during periods of political transition, SBA is in this final rule reallocating responsibility for serving as the Agency's Single Audit Senior Accountable Official from the Chief Administrative Officer to the Deputy Chief Operating Officer.

Compliance With Executive Order 12866, the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. Ch. 35), and the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612) Executive Order 12866

Pursuant to Executive Order 12866, OMB has determined this final rule to be not significant.

Paperwork Reduction Act

This rule contains no collections of information subject to the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. Ch. 3506). Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person is required to respond to, nor shall any person be subject to a penalty for failure to comply with a collection of information subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act unless that collection displays a currently valid OMB Control Number.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

Because notice and opportunity for comment are not required pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553 or any other law, the analytical requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) are inapplicable. Therefore, a regulatory flexibility analysis is not required and has not been prepared.

List of Subjects in 2 CFR Part 2701

Administrative practice and procedure, Grant administration, Grant programs.

Accordingly, the interim rule amending 2 CFR part 2701 and 13 CFR part 143, which was published at 79 FR 75867 on December 19, 2014, is adopted as a final rule with the following change:

PART 2701—UNIFORM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, COST PRINCIPLES, AND AUDIT REQUIREMENTS FOR FEDERAL AWARDS 1. The authority citation for part 2701 continues to read as follows: Authority:

15 U.S.C. 634(b)(6), 2 CFR part 200.

2. Revise § 2701.513 to read as follows:
§ 2701.513 Responsibilities.

For SBA, the Single Audit Senior Accountable Official is the Deputy Chief Operating Officer. The Single Audit Liaison is the Director, Office of Grants Management.

Maria Contreras-Sweet, Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2015-33168 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 10 CFR Part 72 [NRC-2015-0134] RIN 3150-AJ62 List of Approved Spent Fuel Storage Casks: Holtec International, HI-STORM Flood/Wind Multipurpose Storage System, Certificate of Compliance No. 1032, Amendment No. 0, Revision 1 AGENCY:

Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

ACTION:

Direct final rule; confirmation of effective date.

SUMMARY:

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is confirming the effective date of April 25, 2016, for the direct final rule that was published in the Federal Register on September 28, 2015. This direct final rule amended the NRC's spent fuel storage regulations by revising the Holtec International (Holtec), HI-STORM (Holtec International Storage Module) Flood/Wind (FW) Multipurpose Canister Storage (MPC) Storage System listing within the “List of approved spent fuel storage casks” to add Amendment No. 0, Revision 1, to Certificate of Compliance (CoC) No. 1032. This revision corrects the CoC's expiration date (editorial change), clarifies heat load limits for helium backfill ranges, clarifies the wording for the Limiting Condition for Operation (LCO) on vent blockage, and revises the vacuum drying system heat load.

DATES:

Effective date: The effective date of April 25, 2016, for the direct final rule published September 28, 2015 (80 FR 58195), is confirmed.

ADDRESSES:

Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2015-0134 when contacting the NRC about the availability of information for this action. You may obtain publicly-available information related to this action by any of the following methods:

Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2015-0134. Address questions about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher; telephone: 301-415-3463; email: [email protected] For technical questions, contact the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document.

NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS): You may obtain publicly-available documents online in the ADAMS Public Documents collection at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. To begin the search, select “ADAMS Public Documents” and then select “Begin Web-based ADAMS Search.” For problems with ADAMS, please contact the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR) reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by email to [email protected]

NRC's PDR: You may examine and purchase copies of public documents at the NRC's PDR, Room O-1F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Solomon Sahle, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-3781; email: [email protected]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Discussion

On September 28, 2015 (80 FR 58195), the NRC published a direct final rule amending its regulations in § 72.214 of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations by revising the Holtec HI-STORM FW MPC Storage System listing within the “List of approved spent fuel storage casks” to add Amendment No. 0, Revision 1, to CoC No. 1032. This revision corrects the CoC's expiration date (editorial change), clarifies heat load limits for helium backfill ranges, clarifies the wording for the LCO on vent blockage, and revises the vacuum drying system heat load.

II. Public Comments on Companion Proposed Rule

In the direct final rule, the NRC stated that if no significant adverse comments were received, the direct final rule would become effective on April 25, 2016. The NRC received public comments from private citizens on the companion proposed rule (80 FR 58222). Electronic copies of these comments can be obtained from the Federal Rulemaking Web site, http://www.regulations.gov, by searching for Docket ID NRC-2015-0134. The comments also are available in ADAMS under Accession Nos. ML15296A243, ML15296A241, ML15296A242, ML15299A281, ML15307A612, ML15307A615, ML15307A608, ML15307A609, ML15307A610, and ML15307A611. For the reasons discussed in more detail in Section III, “Public Comment Analysis,” of this document, none of the comments received are considered significant adverse comments.

III. Public Comment Analysis

The NRC received comments on the proposed rule, many raising multiple and overlapping issues. As explained in the September 28, 2015, direct final rule, the NRC would withdraw the direct final rule only if it received a “significant adverse comment.” This is a comment where the commenter explains why the rule would be inappropriate, including challenges to the rule's underlying premise or approach, or would be ineffective or unacceptable without a change.

In this instance, the NRC determined that none of the comments submitted on the proposed rule are significant adverse comments. The comments were either beyond the scope of this rulemaking or already addressed by the NRC staff's safety evaluation report (SER) (ADAMS Accession No. ML15124A644). The NRC has not made any changes to the direct final rule as a result of the public comments. However, the NRC is taking this opportunity to respond to the comments in an effort to clarify information about the 10 CFR part 72 CoC rulemaking process, and the limited nature of this revision.

For rulemakings amending or revising a CoC, the scope of the rulemaking is limited to the specific changes requested by the applicant in the request for the amendment or revision. Therefore, comments about the system, or spent fuel storage in general that are not applicable to the changes requested by the applicant, are outside the scope of this rulemaking. Comments about details of the particular system that is the subject of the rulemaking, but that are not being addressed by the specific changes requested, have already been resolved in prior rulemakings. Persons who have questions or concerns about prior rulemakings and the resulting final rules may consider the NRC's petition for rulemaking process under 10 CFR 2.802. Additionally, safety concerns about any NRC-regulated activity may be reported to the NRC in accordance with the guidance posted on the NRC's public Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/about-nrc/regulatory/allegations/safety-concern.html. This Web site provides information on how to notify the NRC of emergency or non-emergency issues.

The NRC identified the following issues raised in the comments, and the NRC's responses to these issues follow.

Comment 1

Two comments received from one commenter requested the NRC deny this revision request, expressing concern with the thickness of the canisters. The commenter stated that European systems have a more robust design and that NRC should require the same. The commenter expressed concern that the NRC's approval would not be protective of public health and safety.

NRC Response

The comment is out of scope for this revision. It is a general comment recommending that United States' manufacturers utilize some design features used in some European systems. The European systems cited are designed for a different application than dry cask storage systems authorized by 10 CFR 72 Subpart K, “General License for Storage of Spent Fuel at Power Reactor Sites.” The HI-STORM FW MPC Storage System was evaluated by the NRC staff to acceptably protect the public health and safety on July 14, 2011 (ADAMS Accession No. ML111950103). The Revision 1 changes were evaluated by the NRC staff to ensure that the HI-STORM FW MPC Storage System will continue to protect the public health and safety. These evaluations were performed in accordance with the NRC's existing part 72 regulations. Requests to revise the underlying part 72 requirements are beyond the scope of this revision request.

Comment 2

Two comments, which read “good”, appeared to indicate support for the rule.

NRC Response

The NRC acknowledges the comments. Because the comments appear to support the rule, the comments are not considered significant adverse comments.

Comment 3

Two commenters expressed concern regarding the vent size, stating that the vents are disproportionately small for such large casks, and poorly located. The commenters also stated that 50% blockage of the vents is unacceptable regardless of temperature, and that, instead, vents should be totally unblocked to be considered operable. The commenters also expressed concern with the protocols for vents that are not operable within 24 hours. The commenters also objected to a perceived inconsistent application of ASME code standards to the CoC.

NRC Response

The HI-STORM FW MPC Storage System design, including the vent size and location, were evaluated by the NRC staff in the initial approval (ADAMS Accession No. ML111950103). The system was ultimately determined to be acceptable because the applicant demonstrated that the system could maintain the spent nuclear fuel below regulatory limits with up to 50% blockage of the inlet and out vents for an indefinite time as long as the spent fuel storage cask heat removal system remains operable. Although this revision includes clarifying changes to the LCO vent blockage language, there are no changes in this revision that impact the underlying analysis evaluated in the initial approval. Additionally, there is no specific information in the comment that would cause the NRC to reevaluate this analysis. Therefore, this comment is not considered a significant adverse comment.

Comment 4

One commenter requested withdrawal of the revision due to concerns that the environmental assessment (EA) that accompanied the rule was inadequate. The commenter expressed concern that, because the EA for this rule tiered off of an EA performed for the 1990 rulemaking that added the general license for storage of spent fuel at power reactor sites, the EA is outdated. The commenter noted that using an outdated EA raises the question of whether the EA is valid in light of the Fukushima disaster that occurred in Japan on March 11, 2011. In addition to withdrawal of the rule, the commenter also requested that a new environmental impact assessment be commissioned, and that all current projects meet at least the minimum standards employed at Fukushima.

NRC Response

This comment is not a significant adverse comment as it fails to present any specific challenge to the EA performed in support of this rule. As noted in the comment, the NRC performed an EA in support of this revision. That EA tiered off of an earlier EA completed to support changes to the part 72 rule that added the general license provisions, but considered environmental impacts specific to this revision. Both of these EAs concluded with a finding of no significant environmental impact. This comment does not provide any specific environmental information relating to the storage of spent fuel at Fukushima that would invalidate the finding of no significant impact in this EA or the earlier EA or that would cause the NRC to reevaluate the environmental impacts associated with this revision to this CoC. Moreover, the staff is unaware of any information that would challenge the findings made in these EAs.

Comment 5

Comments were also received which neither supported nor opposed the rule, but instead, contained numerous questions about this CoC system and other similar CoC systems. Although these comments are not significant adverse comments, and in many instances fall outside the scope of this specific rulemaking, the NRC is taking this opportunity to attempt to address the questions received.

One commenter asked about temperature values included in the Appendix A Technical Specifications (TS) page 3.1.2-2. The commenter noted that a previous CoC included one temperature value as 137 degrees F, while this CoC TS identifies it as 139 degrees F, but does not reflect it as a revision. The commenter asked which temperature value is correct and the implication of the temperature difference. The commenter also asked how relevant ambient air temperature is to underground systems such as the Holtec HI-STORM UMAX system.

NRC Response

The temperature addressed in the comment is correctly listed as 139 degrees F which is applicable to CoC 1032, Amendment No. 0. This temperature was changed to 137 degrees F in CoC 1032, Amendment No. 1. The HI-STORM UMAX is a different system from the HI-STORM FW MPC Storage System and as such has a different thermal design.

Comment 6

Another commenter requested an explanation as to the vendor's statement in the application regarding additional flexibility associated with the limits to the use of vacuum drying to casks at lower heat loads.

NRC Response

In the application for this revision, the applicant contends that lowering this temperature limit provides additional conservatism (margin) that would allow the applicant the flexibility to implement some changes under the 10 CFR 72.48 process rather than through the amendment process. The NRC staff evaluated the lower temperature limit in its preliminary SER (ADAMS Accession No. ML15124A644), and found the lower limit acceptable.

Comment 7

Finally, there were several questions asked about the relationship between this revision and the HI-STORM UMAX system and/or the implications of the changes proposed here to potential uses at the San Onofre Generating Station (SONGS). Questions included whether this change addresses the impacts of using the HI-STORM FW system MPC-37 in the HI-STORM UMAX system, and whether it involves “the proposed San Onofre configuration of only installing 1/2 underground.” The commenter questioned what CoC is approved for use in the HI-STORM UMAX system. Another question asked was whether this change allows “MPC-37 canister thickness increases (such as a change from 0.5” to 0.625” proposed for San Onofre) without requiring a license amendment.”

NRC Response

There is no relationship between this revision and the HI-STORM UMAX system. Each system is separately reviewed and certified in accordance with 10 CFR part 72. General licensees may use the certified systems identified in 10 CFR 72.214 subject to meeting certain requirements in 10 CFR part 72. Therefore, the changes in this revision are applicable only to the HI-STORM FW MPC system, CoC No. 1032, and are not applicable to the HI-STORM UMAX system that is intended to be used at SONGS. Nothing in this revision impacts anything associated with the HI-STORM UMAX system; therefore, this revision does not impact the thickness of the canisters in the HI-STORM UMAX system, or the placement of the UMAX system. Additionally, although this rule is a revision to the HI-STORM FW MPC system, nothing in this revision impacts the thickness of the canisters in the HI-STORM FW MPC system.

For these reasons, the NRC staff has concluded that the comments received on the companion proposed rule for the Holtec HI-STORM FW MPC Storage System listing within the “List of approved spent fuel storage casks” to add Amendment No. 0, Revision 1, to CoC No. 1032, are not significant adverse comments as defined in NUREG/BR-0053, Revision 6, “United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Regulations Handbook” (ADAMS Accession No. ML052720461). Therefore, this rule will become effective as scheduled.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 31st day of December 2015.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Cindy Bladey, Chief, Rules, Announcements, and Directives Branch, Division of Administrative Services, Office of Administration.
[FR Doc. 2016-00163 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 15 CFR Part 950 [Docket No. 150202106-5999-03] RIN 0648-BE86 Schedule of Fees for Access to NOAA Environmental Data, Information, and Related Products and Services; Correction AGENCY:

National Environmental Satellite, Data and Information Service (NESDIS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Department of Commerce.

ACTION:

Final rule; correcting amendment.

SUMMARY:

This action corrects the NESDIS FY 2016 schedule of fees for the sale of its data, information, and related products and services to users. NESDIS is authorized under the United States Code to assess fees, up to fair market value, for access to environmental data, information, and products derived from, collected, and/or archived by NOAA. This action corrects one user fee, titled the Department of Commerce Certification. In the October 22, 2015, final rule, the fee was incorrectly listed as $16.00. The correct user fee should be $116.00.

DATES:

Effective January 11, 2016.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

James Lewis (301) 713-7073.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

NESDIS operates NOAA's National Center for Environmental Information (NCEI). Through NCEI, NESDIS provides and ensures timely access to global environmental data from satellites and other sources, provides information services, and develops science products. NESDIS maintains some 1,300 databases containing over 2,400 environmental variables at NCEI and seven World Data Centers. These centers respond to over 2,000,000 requests for these data and products annually from over 70 countries. This collection of environmental data and products is growing rapidly, both in size and sophistication, and as a result the associated costs have increased.

Users have the ability to access the data offline, online and through the NESDIS e-Commerce System (NeS) online store. Our ability to provide data, information, products and services depends on user fees.

New Fee Schedule

In an October 22, 2015, final rule (80 FR 63914), NESDIS established a new schedule of fees for the sale of its data, information, and related products and services to users (“October 2015 Fee Schedule Rule”). NESDIS revised the fee schedule that has been in effect since 2013 to ensure that the fees accurately reflect the costs of providing access to the environmental data, information, and related products and services. The new fee schedule lists both the current fee charged for each item and the new fee to be charged to users that took effect beginning November 23, 2015. The schedule applies to the listed services provided by NESDIS on or after this date, except for products and services covered by a subscription agreement in effect as of this date that extends beyond this date. In those cases, the increased fees will apply upon renewal of the subscription agreement or at the earliest amendment date provided by the agreement.

NESDIS will continue to review the user fees periodically, and will revise such fees as necessary. Any future changes in the user fees and their effective date will be announced through notice in the Federal Register.

Need for Correction

The October 2015 Fee Schedule Rule contains one fee—which appears in a table in Appendix A to Part 950—that was reported incorrectly. The Department of Commerce Certification Fee was listed as $16.00. The last rule had the rate incorrectly listed. The correct fee for this service is $116.00. We now are setting out the entire table with the corrected fee to provide clarity for the public.

Classification

The correction this action makes is minor and merely updates a typographical error within the original final rule. This rule has been determined to be not significant for purposes of E.O. 12866.

The provisions of the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 553) requiring notice of proposed rulemaking and the opportunity for public comment are inapplicable because this rule falls within the public property exception of subparagraph (a)(2) of section 553, as it relates only to the assessment of fees, as authorized by 15 U.S.C. 1534, that accurately reflect the costs of providing access to publicly available environmental data, information, and related products. Further, no other law requires that a notice of proposed rulemaking and an opportunity for public comment be given for this rule. Because a notice of proposed rulemaking and an opportunity for public comment are not required to be given for this rule under 5 U.S.C. 553 or by any other law, the requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) are not applicable. Accordingly, no Regulatory Flexibility Analysis is required and none has been prepared.

List of Subjects in 15 CFR Part 950

Organization and functions (Government agencies).

Dated: December 17, 2015. Cherish Johnson, Chief, Financial Officer (CFO/CAO).

For the reasons set forth above, 15 CFR part 950 is corrected by making the following correcting amendment:

PART 950—ENVIRONMENTAL DATA AND INFORMATION 1. The authority citation for part 950 continues to read as follows: Authority:

(5 U.S.C. 552, 553). Reorganization Plan No. 4 of 1970.

2. Appendix A to part 950 is revised to read as follows: Appendix A to Part 950—Schedule of User Fees for Access to NOAA Environmental Data Name of product/Data/Publication/Information/Service Current fee New fee NOAA National Center for Environmental Information: Department of Commerce Certification $86.00 $116.00 General Certification 72.00 92.00 Paper Copy 2.00 3.00 Data Poster 18.00 18.00 Shipping Service 4.00 8.00 Rush Order Fee 60.00 60.00 Super Rush Order Fee 100.00 100.00 Foreign Handling Fee 67.00 43.00 NEXRAD Doppler Radar Color Prints 14.00 21.00 Paper Copy from Electronic Media 6.00 8.00 Offline In-Situ Digital Data 124.00 175.00 Microfilm Copy (roll to paper) per frame from existing film 14.00 20.00 Satellite Image Product 73.00 92.00 Offline Satellite, Radar, and Model Digital Data (average unit size is 1 terabyte) 615.00 753.00 Conventional CD-ROM/DVD 60.00 110.00 Specialized CD-ROM/DVD 131.00 208.00 CD-ROM/DVD Copy, Offline 30.00 43.00 CD-ROM/DVD Copy, Online Store 15.00 16.00 Facsimile Service 78.00 89.00 Order Handling 8.00 11.00 Non-Digital Order Consultation 6.00 10.00 Digital Order Consultation 18.00 28.00 Non-Serial Publications 27.00 32.00 Non-Standard Data; Select/Copy to CD, DVD or Electronic Transfer, Specialized, Offline 59.00 77.00 Digital and Non-Digital Off-the-Shelf Products, Online 9.00 13.00 Digital and Non-Digital Off-the-Shelf Products, Offline 11.00 17.00 Order Consultation Fee 2.00 4.00 Handling and Packing Fee 8.00 12.00 World Ocean Database-World Ocean Atlas 2009 DVDs 15.00 (*) Mini Poster 1.00 2.00 Icosahedron Globe 1.00 1.00 Convert Data to Standard Image 6.00 8.00 Single Orbit OLS & Subset 18.00 19.00 Single Orbit OLS & Subset, Additional Orbits 5.00 6.00 Geolocated Data 47.00 50.00 Subset of Pre-existing Geolocated Data 28.00 32.00 Global Nighttime Lights Annual Composite from One Satellite 74,032.00 74,924.00 Most Recent DMSP-OLS Thermal Band/Cloud Cover Mosaics from Multiple Satellites 259.00 (*) Daily or Nightly Global Mosaics (visible & thermal band, single spectral band or environmental data) 241.00 332.00 Global Nighttime Lights Lunar Cycle 6,531.00 8,259.00 Radiance Calibrated Global DMSP-OLS Nighttime Lights Annual Composite from One Satellite 82,075.00 (*) Research Data Series CD-ROM/DVD 25.00 25.00 Custom Analog Plotter Prints 60.00 (*) NOS Bathymetric Maps and Miscellaneous Archived Publication Inventory 7.00 8.00 Global Annual Composite of Nighttime Lights in Monthly Increments From One Satellite 8,305.00 10,794.00 High Definition Geomagnetic Model 20,060.00 20,262.00 Provision of Global Nighttime VIIRS day/night band data in geotiff format 55,727.00 Provision of Global Nighttime VIIRS day/night band data in HDF5 Format 27,888.00 Provision of regional data from the VIIRS instrument on a daily basis 14,306.00 * Reflects a product no longer offered.
[FR Doc. 2015-32958 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 a.m.] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT 24 CFR Parts 200, 280, and 570 [Docket No. FR-5878-F-01] RIN 2502-AJ31 Federal Housing Administration (FHA): Removal of 24 CFR 280—Nehemiah Housing Opportunity Grants Program AGENCY:

Office of the Deputy Secretary, HUD.

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

Through this rule, HUD removes the regulations for its Nehemiah Housing Opportunity Grants Program (NHOP). Under NHOP, HUD was authorized to make grants to nonprofit organizations to be used to provide loans to families purchasing homes constructed or substantially renovated in accordance with a HUD-approved program. In 1990, authority for NHOP was repealed by the National Affordable Housing Act. HUD removed obsolete NHOP regulations in 1996 but maintained regulatory provisions deemed necessary for the administration of existing NHOP grants. Currently, HUD administers only one NHOP grant agreement. As a result, HUD has determined that the remaining NHOP regulations are unnecessary. The existing grant and loans made under NHOP will continue to be governed by the regulations that existed immediately before the effective date of this final rule.

DATES:

Effective: February 10, 2016.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Camille E. Acevedo, Associate General Counsel for Legislation and Regulations, Office of General Counsel, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street SW., Room 10276, Washington, DC 20410; telephone 202-708-1793 (this is not a toll-free number). Persons with hearing or speech impairments may access this number through TTY by calling the Federal Relay Service at 800-877-8389 (this is a toll-free number).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

Established under title VI of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1987 (Pub. L. 100-242, approved February 5, 1988) (12 U.S.C. 17151), NHOP authorized HUD to make grants to nonprofit organizations to enable them to provide loans to families purchasing homes constructed or substantially rehabilitated in accordance with a HUD-approved program. Loans provided under NHOP were required to be secured by a second mortgage on the property involved that was held by HUD but that did not bear interest. On July 13, 1989 (54 FR 22248), HUD published regulations implementing NHOP and codified these regulations in part 280 of title 24 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR).

Section 289(a) of the National Affordable Housing Act (Pub. L. 101-625, approved November 28, 1990) (42 U.S.C. 12839), however, repealed authority for NHOP. On August 19, 1996 (61 FR 42952), HUD published a final rule removing obsolete sections of 24 CFR part 280, but maintained those provisions deemed necessary to the administration of existing NHOP grants. As of the date of this publication, however, HUD maintains one NHOP grant agreement and has 1,028 active Nehemiah loans. Based on this, HUD has determined that there is no longer a need to maintain 24 CFR part 280. As a result, and consistent with Executive Order 13563, dated January 18, 2011, entitled “Improving Regulations and Regulatory Review,” 1 HUD is removing 24 CFR part 280. The existing grant and loans made under NHOP will continue to be governed by the regulations that existed immediately before the effective date of this final rule.

1 Executive Order 13563 was published in the Federal Register on January 21, 2011, at 76 FR 3821 and directs that heads of Federal departments and agencies review existing regulations to remove those that are obsolete or no longer necessary.

This final rule also removes a cross-reference to 24 CFR part 280 that is codified in HUD's Community Development Block Grant regulations, 24 CFR part 570.

II. Justification for Final Rulemaking

HUD generally publishes a rule for public comment before issuing a final rule for effect, in accordance with HUD's own regulations on rulemaking in 24 CFR part 10. However, part 10 provides for exceptions to the general rule if the agency finds good cause to omit advance notice and public participation. The good cause requirement is satisfied when prior public procedure is impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest. (See 24 CFR 10.1.)

HUD finds that public notice and comment are not necessary for this rulemaking because the authority to provide assistance under NHOP has been repealed and assistance is no longer being provided under the program. Therefore, the regulations being removed by this final rule are no longer operative. For these reasons, HUD has determined that it is unnecessary to delay the effectiveness of this rule in order to solicit prior public comment.

III. Findings and Certification Regulatory Flexibility Act

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) generally requires an agency to conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to notice and comment rulemaking requirements, unless the agency certifies that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Because HUD has determined that good cause exists to issue this rule without prior public comment, this rule is not subject to the requirement to publish an initial or final regulatory flexibility analysis under the RFA as part of such action.

Unfunded Mandates Reform

Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) 2 requires that an agency prepare a budgetary impact statement before promulgating a rule that includes a Federal mandate 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 in any 1year. If a budgetary impact statement is required, section 205 of UMRA also requires an agency to identify and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives before promulgating a rule.3 However, the UMRA applies only to rules for which an agency publishes a general notice of proposed rulemaking pursuant to the Administrative Procedure Act (APA).4 As discussed above, HUD has determined for good cause that the APA does not require general notice and public comment on this rule and, therefore, the UMRA does not apply to this final rule.

2 2 U.S.C. 1532.

3 2 U.S.C. 1534.

4 2 U.S.C. 1532(a).

Executive Order 13132, Federalism

Executive Order 13132 (entitled “Federalism”) prohibits an agency from publishing any rule that has federalism implications if the rule either imposes substantial direct compliance costs on State and local governments and is not required by statute, or the rule preempts State law, unless the agency meets the consultation and funding requirements of section 6 of the Executive order. This final rule will not have federalism implications and would not impose substantial direct compliance costs on State and local governments or preempt State law within the meaning of the Executive order.

Environmental Review

This final rule does not direct, provide for assistance or loan and mortgage insurance for, or otherwise govern or regulate real property acquisition, disposition, leasing, rehabilitation, alteration, demolition, or new construction or establish, revise, or provide for standards for construction or construction materials, manufactured housing, or occupancy. Accordingly, under 24 CFR 50.19(c)(1), this final rule is categorically excluded from environmental review under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321).

List of Subjects 24 CFR Part 200

Administrative practice and procedure, Claims, Equal employment opportunity, Fair housing, Housing standards, Incorporation by reference, Lead poisoning, Loan programs—housing and community development, Mortgage insurance, Organization and functions (Government agencies), Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Social security, Unemployment compensation, Wages.

24 CFR Part 280

Community development, Grant programs—housing and community development, Loan programs—housing and community development, Low and moderate income housing, Nonprofit organizations, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

24 CFR Part 570

Administrative practice and procedure, American Samoa, Community development block grants, Grant programs-education, Grant programs-housing and community development, Guam, Indians, Loan programs-housing and community development, Low and moderate income housing, Northern Mariana Islands, Pacific Islands Trust Territory, Puerto Rico, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Student aid, Virgin Islands.

For the reasons set forth in the preamble, and under the authority of 42 U.S.C. 3535(d), HUD amends 24 CFR parts 200, 280 and 570 as follows:

PART 200—INTRODUCTION TO FHA PROGRAMS 1. The authority citation for part 200 continues to read as follows: Authority:

12 U.S.C. 1702-1715z-21; 42 U.S.C. 3535(d).

2. Add § 200.1301(h) to read as follows:
§ 200.1301 Expiring programs—Savings clause.

(h) Any existing loan assistance (including recapture of loan assistance), ongoing participation, or insured loans under the program listed in this paragraph will continue to be governed by the regulations in effect as they existed immediately before February 10, 2016 (24 CFR part 280, 2015 Edition):

(1) Part 280, Mortgage Insurance and Assistance Payments for Home Ownership and Project Rehabilitation (12 U.S.C. 17151).

(2) [Reserved]

SUBCHAPTER E [REMOVED AND RESERVED] 3. Remove and reserve subchapter E, consisting of part 280.
PART 570—COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANTS 4. The authority citation for part 570 continues to read as follows: Authority:

42 U.S.C. 3535(d) and 5301-5320.

5. In § 570.703, revise paragraph (j) to read as follows:
§ 570.703 Eligible activities.

(j) Construction of housing by non-profit organizations for homeownership under section 17(d) of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (Housing Development Grants Program, 24 CFR part 850).

Dated: December 22, 2015. Nani A. Coloretti, Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-00327 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4210-67-P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 117 [Docket No. USCG-2015-1119] Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Inner Harbor Navigation Canal, New Orleans, LA AGENCY:

Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION:

Notice of deviation from drawbridge regulation.

SUMMARY:

The Coast Guard has issued a temporary deviation from the operating schedule that governs the US 90 (Danziger) vertical lift span drawbridge across the Inner Harbor Navigation Canal, mile 3.10 at New Orleans, Orleans Parish, Louisiana. The deviation is necessary to conduct field measurements and other preparations for repairs and maintenance that are scheduled for later in the year. This deviation allows the bridge to remain closed-to-navigation for nine days. During this closure, the bridge will open with at least four hours notice except during scheduled curfew times.

DATES:

This deviation is effective from 7 p.m. on January 22, 2016, until 7 p.m. on January 31, 2016.

ADDRESSES:

The docket for this deviation, [USCG-2015-1119] is available at http://www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

If you have questions on this temporary deviation, call or email Jim Wetherington, Bridge Administration Branch, Coast Guard, telephone (504) 671-2128, email [email protected]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The Contractor, C.E.C., Inc., for the Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development (LDOTD), requested a temporary deviation from the operating schedule of the US 90 (Danziger) vertical lift span drawbridge across the Inner Harbor Navigation Canal, mile 3.10 at New Orleans, Orleans Parish, Louisiana. The deviation was requested for the purpose of conducting field measurements and other preparations for repairs and maintenance that are scheduled for later in the year. The vertical clearance of the vertical lift span bridge is 50 feet above mean high water in the closed-to-navigation position and 120 feet in the open-to-navigation position. The bridge is governed by 33 CFR 117.458(b).

This deviation is effective from 7 p.m. on January 22, 2016, until 7 p.m. on January 31, 2016. This deviation allows the bridge to remain closed-to-navigation daily except that the bridge will open if at least four hours notice is given except Monday through Friday from 7 a.m.-8:30 a.m. and from 5 p.m.-6:30 p.m., daily. During the closure period, the contractor will make every effort to minimize the delays to mariners by opening the bridge with less than four hour notice whenever possible. However, the bridge is not required to open with less than a four-hour notice. Marine traffic, when allowed to pass, should pass at the slowest safe speed.

Navigation on the waterway consists of small tugs with and without tows, commercial vessels, and recreational craft, including sailboats.

Vessels able to pass through the bridge in the closed-to-navigation position may do so at anytime. The bridge will be able to open for emergencies, and there is no immediate alternate route. The Coast Guard will also inform the users of the waterways through our Local and Broadcast Notices to Mariners of the change in operating schedule for the bridge so that vessels can arrange their transits to minimize any impact caused by the temporary deviation.

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

Dated: January 5, 2016. David M. Frank, Bridge Administrator, Eighth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2016-00268 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R07-OAR-2015-0710; FRL-9941-04-Region 7] Approval of Nebraska's Air Quality State Implementation Plan (SIP); Infrastructure SIP Requirements for the 2008 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard in Regards to Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)—Prongs 1 and 2 AGENCY:

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking final action to approve elements of a State Implementation Plan (SIP) submission from the State of Nebraska addressing the applicable requirements of Clean Air Act (CAA) section 110 for the 2008 National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for Ozone (O3). CAA section 110 requires that each state adopt and submit a SIP to support implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of each new or revised NAAQS promulgated by EPA. These SIPs are commonly referred to as “infrastructure” SIPs. The infrastructure requirements are designed to ensure that the structural components of each state's air quality management program are adequate to meet the state's responsibilities under the CAA. Specifically, EPA is approving Nebraska's SIP as it relates to section 110 (a)(2)(D)(i)(I) prongs 1 and 2, for the 2008 O3 NAAQS.

DATES:

This final rule is effective on February 10, 2016.

ADDRESSES:

EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID No. EPA-R07-OAR-2015-0710. 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 electronically at www.regulations.gov and at EPA Region 7, 11201 Renner Boulevard, Lenexa, Kansas 66219. Please schedule an appointment during normal business hours with the contact listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. For additional information and general guidance, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Mr. Gregory Crable, Air Planning and Development Branch, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 7, 11201 Renner Boulevard, Lenexa, KS 66219; telephone number: (913) 551-7391; email address: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Throughout this document, the terms “we,” “us,” or “our” refer to EPA. This section provides additional information by addressing the following:

I. Background II. Summary of SIP Revision III. Final Action IV. Statutory and Executive Order Review I. Background

On November 16, 2015 (80 FR 70721), EPA published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPR) for the State of Nebraska. The NPR proposed approval of Nebraska's submission that provides the basic elements specified in section 110(a)(2) of the CAA, or portions thereof, necessary to implement, maintain, and enforce the 2008 O3 NAAQS. Specifically, the NPR proposed approval of section 110 (a)(2)(D)(i)(I) prongs 1 and 2, for the 2008 O3 NAAQS.

II. Summary of SIP Revision

On February 11, 2013, EPA received a SIP submission from the state of Nebraska that addressed the infrastructure elements specified in section 110(a)(2) for the 2008 O3 NAAQS. On September 15, 2015 (80 FR 55266) EPA approved the following infrastructure elements, or portions thereof: 110(a)(2)(A), (B), (C), (D)(i)(II) (prong 3), (D)(ii), (E), (F), (G), (H), (J), (K), (L), and (M) which are necessary to implement, maintain, and enforce the 2008 O3 NAAQS, as a revision to the Nebraska SIP, and disapproved section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II)- prong 4, as it relates to the protection of visibility. At that time, EPA did not take action on section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)- prongs 1 and 2. Specific requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)- prongs 1 and 2 of the CAA and the rationale for EPA's proposed action to approve these specific provisions of the SIP submission, not previously acted on, is explained in the NPR and will not be restated here. The public comment period for the notice of proposed rulemaking (NPR) closed on December 16, 2015. EPA received no comments on the NPR.

III. Final Action

EPA is approving Nebraska's February 11, 2013, submission addressing the requirements of the CAA sections 110(a)(1) and (2) as applicable to the 2008 O3 NAAQS. Specifically, EPA approves section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)—prongs 1 and 2, which are necessary to implement, maintain, and enforce the 2008 O3 NAAQS, as a revision to the Nebraska SIP. As EPA noted in the NPR, this final action fulfills EPA's commitment to take final action as to Nebraska's SIP submission addressing 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), as set forth by the court in Sierra Club v. McCarthy, 4:14-cv-05091-YGR (N.D. Cal. May 15, 2015).

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Review

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

• Does not provide 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 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 CAA, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by March 11, 2016. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2)).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

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

Dated: December 22, 2015. Mark Hague, Regional Administrator, Region 7.

For the reasons stated in the preamble, EPA amends 40 CFR part 52 as set forth below:

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 CC—Nebraska 2. In § 52.1420(e), the table is amended by adding entry (31) to read as follows:
§ 52.1420 Identification of Plan.

(e) * * *

EPA—Approved Nebraska Nonregulatory Provisions Name of nonregulatory SIP provision Applicable geographic area or nonattainment area State
  • submittal
  • date
  • EPA approval date Explanation
    *         *         *         *         *         *         * (31) Section 110(a)(2) Infrastructure Requirements for the 2008 O3 NAAQS Statewide 2/11/13 1/11/2016 [Insert Federal Register citation] [EPA-R07-OAR-2015-0710; 9941-04-Region 7] This action addresses the following CAA elements: 110(a)(2)(D)(i) (I)—Prongs 1 and 2.
    [FR Doc. 2015-33301 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R04-OAR-2012-0079; FRL-9940-89-Region 4] Air Plan Approval; Alabama: Nonattainment New Source Review AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking final action to approve portions of a revision to the Alabama State Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted by the Alabama Department of Environmental Management (ADEM) to EPA on May 2, 2011. The SIP revision modifies Alabama's nonattainment new source review (NNSR) regulations in their entirety to be consistent with the federal new source review (NSR) regulations for the implementation of the criteria pollutant national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS). EPA is approving portions of the NNSR rule changes in Alabama's May 2, 2011, SIP revision because the Agency has determined that the changes are consistent with the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) and federal regulations regarding NNSR permitting.

    DATES:

    This rule will be effective February 10, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket Identification No. EPA-R04-OAR-2012-0079. All documents in the docket are listed on the www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, i.e., Confidential Business Information or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically through www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Air Regulatory Management Section, Air Planning and Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. EPA requests that if at all possible, you contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's official hours of business are Monday through Friday 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding Federal holidays.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For information regarding the Alabama SIP, contact Mr. D. Brad Akers, Air Regulatory Management Section, Air Planning and Implementation Branch, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, Region 4, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. Mr. Akers can be reached by telephone at (404) 562-9089 or via electronic mail at [email protected]. For information regarding NSR, contact Ms. Yolanda Adams, Air Permits Section, at the same address above. Telephone number: (404) 562-9214; email address: [email protected].

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background

    EPA is taking final action to approve the portion of Alabama's May 2, 2011, SIP revision that makes changes to Alabama's NNSR program, set forth at ADEM Administrative Code, Division 3, Chapter 14, Subchapter .05 (ADEM Rule 335-3-14-.05), which applies to the construction and modification of any major stationary source in or near a nonattainment area (NAA) as required by part D of title I of the CAA. Alabama's NNSR regulations at ADEM Rule 335-3-14-.05 were originally approved into the SIP on November 26, 1979 (see 44 FR 67375), with periodic revisions approved through December 8, 2000 (see 65 FR 76938). Alabama's May 2, 2011, SIP revision modifies the State's NNSR regulations in their entirety 1 with a new version that reflects changes to the federal NNSR regulations at 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 51.165,2 including provisions promulgated in the following federal rules: (1) “Requirements for Preparation, Adoption and Submittal of Implementation Plans; Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Standards of Performance for New Stationary Sources,” Final Rule, 57 FR 32314 (July 21, 1992) (hereafter referred to as the Wisconsin Electric Power Company (WEPCO) Rule); (2) “Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) and Nonattainment New Source Review (NSR): Baseline Emissions Determination, Actual-to-Future-Actual Methodology, Plantwide Applicability Limitations, Clean Units, Pollution Control Projects,” Final Rule, 67 FR 80186 (December 31, 2002) (hereafter referred to as the NSR Reform Rule); (3) “Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) and Non-Attainment New Source Review (NSR): Reconsideration,” Final Rule, 68 FR 63021 (November 7, 2003) (hereafter referred to as the Reconsideration Rule); (4) “Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) and Non-Attainment New Source Review (NSR): Removal of Vacated Elements,” Final Rule, 72 FR 32526 (June 13, 2007) (hereafter referred to as the Vacated Elements Rule); (4) “Prevention of Significant Deterioration and Nonattainment New Source Review: Reasonable Possibility in Recordkeeping,” Final Rule, 72 FR 72607 (December 21, 2007), (hereafter referred to as the Reasonable Possibility Rule); (5) “Final Rule To Implement the 8-Hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard—Phase 2; Final Rule To Implement Certain Aspects of the 1990 Amendments Relating to New Source Review and Prevention of Significant Deterioration as They Apply in Carbon Monoxide, Particulate Matter and Ozone NAAQS; Final Rule for Reformulated Gasoline,” Final Rule, 70 FR 71612 (November 29, 2005) (hereafter referred to as the Phase 2 Rule); (6) “Implementation of the New Source Review (NSR) Program for Particulate Matter Less Than 2.5 Micrometers (PM2.5),” Final Rule, 73 FR 28321 (May 16, 2008) (hereafter referred to as the NSR PM2.5 Rule); (7) “Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) for Particulate Matter Less Than 2.5 Micrometers (PM2.5)—Increments, Significant Impact Levels (SILs) and Significant Monitoring Concentration (SMC),” Final Rule, 75 FR 64864 (October 20, 2010) (hereafter referred to as the PM2.5 PSD Increments-SILs-SMC Rule 3 ); and (8) “Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) and Nonattainment New Source Review (NSR): Reconsideration of Inclusion of Fugitive Emissions; Interim Rule; Stay and Revisions”, Interim Rule, 76 FR 17548 (March 30, 2011) (hereafter referred to as the Fugitive Emissions Interim Rule).

    1 Some portions of the 2011 version of the regulations now being approved were previously approved by EPA. These portions remain the same in substance but may have undergone administrative updates and renumbering in the 2011 version.

    2 EPA's regulations governing the implementation of NSR permitting programs are contained in 40 CFR 51.160-51.166; 52.21, 52.24; and part 51, appendix S. The CAA NSR program is composed of three separate programs: PSD, NNSR, and Minor NSR. PSD is established in part C of title I of the CAA and applies in areas that meet the NAAQS—“attainment areas”—as well as areas where there is insufficient information to determine if the area meets the NAAQS—“unclassifiable areas.” The NNSR program is established in part D of title I of the CAA and applies in areas that are not in attainment of the NAAQS—“nonattainment areas.” The Minor NSR program addresses construction or modification activities that do not qualify as “major” and applies regardless of the designation of the area in which a source is located. Together, these programs are referred to as the NSR programs.

    3 The D.C. Circuit vacated the portions of the PM2.5 PSD Increment-SILs-SMC Rule addressing the SMC and SILs (and remanded the SILs portion to EPA for further consideration) for PSD, but left the PM2.5 SILs in place for the NSR program in the table in § 51.165(b)(2). See Sierra Club v. EPA, 705 F.3d 458 (D.C. Cir. 2013).

    EPA is not, however, approving into the Alabama SIP the portion of ADEM Rule 335-3-14-.05(1)(k) stating “excluding ethanol production facilities that produce ethanol by natural fermentation,” which Alabama promulgated pursuant to the federal rule entitled “Prevention of Significant Deterioration, Nonattainment New Source Review, and Title V: Treatment of Certain Ethanol Production Facilities Under the `Major Emitting Facility' Definition,” Final Rule, 72 FR 24060 (May 1, 2007) (or the Ethanol Rule).4 EPA is also not acting on the provision at Rule 335-3-14-.05(2)(c)3 that excludes fugitive emissions from the determinion of creditable emission increases and decreases.5 Finally, EPA is not acting on changes to ADEM's rules regarding the PM2.5 significant impact levels (SILs) for PSD at Rule 335-3-14-.04(8)(h)1., the NNSR interpollutant offset ratios at ADEM Rule 335-3-14-.05(3)(g)1-4 and the sentence including those ratios which states “Interpollutant offsets shall be determined based upon the following ratios,” or the “actual-to-potential” NNSR applicability test at ADEM Rule 335-3-14-.05(1)(h), all of which ADEM withdrew from EPA's consideration subsequent to the May 2, 2011 submittal.6

    4 Alabama's changes to its NNSR regulations (at 335-3-14-.05(1)(k)) exclude “chemical process plants” that produce ethanol through a natural fermentation process from the NSR major source permitting requirement as promulgated in the Ethanol Rule (as amended at 40 CFR 51.165). See 72 FR 24060 (May 1, 2007). However, due to a petition by Natural Resources Defense Council to reconsider the rule, EPA is not proposing to take action to approve this provision into the Alabama SIP at this time. Pending final resolution, EPA will make a final determination on action regarding this portion of Alabama's SIP revision.

    5 The provision in question was originally approved into the CFR in the December 19, 2008 (73 FR 77882) final rule concerning the treatment of fugitive emissions for the purposes of NSR applicability. On April 24, 2009, EPA agreed to reconsider the approach to handling fugitive emissions and granted a 3-month administrative stay of the December 19, 2008 rule. After several stays, this provision was stayed indefinitely in the March 30, 2011 (76 FR 17548) Fugitive Emissions Interim Rule, pending a final reconsideration from EPA. For more information on fugitive emissions in NSR, see the September 1, 2015 proposed rulemaking (80 FR 52701) or refer to the Docket for this rulemaking.

    6 For more information on the withdrawal of these elements from the initial May 2, 2011, submittal, see the September 1, 2015, proposed rulemaking (80 FR 52701) or refer to the Docket for this rulemaking.

    On September 1, 2015, EPA published a proposed rulemaking to approve the aforementioned changes to the Alabama NNSR program at ADEM Rule 335-3-14-.05. See 80 FR 52701. Comments on the proposed rulemaking were due on or before October 1, 2015. No comments, adverse or otherwise, were received on EPA's September 1, 2015, proposed rulemaking. Pursuant to section 110 of the CAA, EPA is now taking final action to approve the changes to Alabama's NNSR program as provided in the September 1, 2015, proposed rulemaking. The proposed rulemaking contains more detailed information regarding Alabama's SIP revision being approved today, and the rationale for this final action. More detailed information on the NNSR program can be found in the September 1, 2015, proposed rulemaking as well as the aforementioned final rulemakings.

    II. This Action

    Alabama currently has a SIP-approved NSR program for new and modified stationary sources found in ADEM regulations at Chapter 335-3-14. ADEM's NNSR preconstruction regulations are found at Chapter 335-3-14-.05 and apply to major stationary sources or modifications constructed in or impacting upon a nonattainment area as required under part D of title I of the CAA with respect to the NAAQS. The changes to Chapter 335-3-14-.05 that EPA is now approving into the SIP were provided to update the existing provisions to be consistent with the current federal NNSR rules, including the WEPCO Rule, 2002 NSR Reform Rule (and associated Reconsideration Rule and Vacated Elements Rule), Phase 2 Rule, NSR PM2.5 Rule, PM2.5 PSD-Increment-SILs-SMC Rule, and Fugitive Emissions Interim Rule. These changes to ADEM's regulations became state effective on May 23, 2011.

    III. Incorporation by Reference

    In this rule, EPA is finalizing regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, EPA is finalizing the incorporation by reference of portions of ADEM Regulation Chapter 335-3-14-.05 entitled “Air Permits Authorizing Construction in or Near Non-Attainment Areas,” effective May 23, 2011, with revisions and additions to applicability, definitions, permitting requirements, offset rules, area classifications, air quality models, control technology review, air quality monitoring, source information, source obligation, innovative control technology, and actuals plantwide applicability limits, and with administrative changes throughout. EPA has made, and will continue to make, these documents generally available electronically through www.regulations.gov and/or in hard copy at the EPA Region 4 office (see the ADDRESSES section of this preamble for more information).

    IV. Final Action

    EPA is taking final action to approve the portions of Alabama's May 2, 2011, submission that make changes to Alabama's SIP-approved NNSR regulations set forth at ADEM Rule 335-3-14-.05, with the exceptions noted above. ADEM submitted the proposed changes to its NNSR SIP to be consistent with amendments to the federal regulations made by the WEPCO Rule, the 2002 NSR Reform Rule (and associated Reconsideration Rule and Vacated Elements Rule), Phase 2 Rule, NSR PM2.5 Rule, PM2.5 PSD Increment-SILs-SMC Rule, and the Fugitive Emissions Interim Rule. The Agency is approving these changes to the Alabama SIP because they are consistent with section 110 of the CAA and EPA regulations.

    V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    The SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land or in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, the rule does not have tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor will it impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.

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

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by March 11, 2016. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. See section 307(b)(2).

    List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide, Nitrogen oxides, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: December 18, 2015. 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 B—Alabama 2. Section 52.50(c) is amended under Chapter 335-3-14 by revising the entry for “Section 335-3-14-.05” to read as follows:
    § 52.50 Identification of plan.

    (c) * * *

    EPA-Approved Alabama Regulations State citation Title/subject State
  • effective
  • date
  • EPA approval date Explanation
    *         *         *         *         *         *         * Chapter No. 335-3-14 Air Permits *         *         *         *         *         *         * Section 335-3-14-.05 Air Permits Authorizing Construction in or Near Nonattainment Areas 5/23/2011 1/11/2016 [Insert citation of publication] With the exception of: The portion of 335-3-14-.05(1)(k) stating “excluding ethanol production facilities that produce ethanol by natural fermentation”; and 335-3-14-.05(2)(c)3 (addressing fugitive emission increases and decreases). Also with the exception of the state-withdrawn elements: 335-3-14-.05(1)(h) (the actual-to-potential test for projects that only involve existing emissions units); the last sentence at 335-3-14-.05(3)(g), stating “Interpollutant offsets shall be determined based upon the following ratios”; and the NNSR interpollutant ratios at 335-3-14-.05(3)(g)1-4. *         *         *         *         *         *         *
    [FR Doc. 2015-33197 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R06-OAR-2013-0388; FRL-9940-86-Region 6] Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Infrastructure and Interstate Transport State Implementation Plan for the 2010 Sulfur Dioxide National Ambient Air Quality Standards AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving elements of a State Implementation Plan (SIP) submission from the State of Texas for the Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). The submittal addresses how the existing SIP provides for implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of the 2010 SO2 NAAQS (infrastructure SIP or i-SIP). This i-SIP ensures that the State's SIP is adequate to meet the state's responsibilities under the Federal Clean Air Act (CAA).

    DATES:

    This final rule is effective on February 10, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID No. EPA-R06-OAR-2013-0388. 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 either electronically through http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at EPA Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Nevine Salem, 214-665-7222, [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Throughout this document wherever “we,” “us,” or “our” is used, we mean the EPA.

    I. Background

    The background for this action is discussed in detail in our October 6, 2015 proposal (80 FR 60314). In that document, we proposed to approve portions of the SIP submittal from the State of Texas adopted on April 23, 2013, and submitted on May 6, 2013. The submittal addresses how the existing SIP provides for implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of the 2010 SO2 NAAQS. This i-SIP ensures that the State's SIP is adequate to meet the state's responsibilities under the CAA. We did not receive any comments regarding our proposal.

    II. Final Action

    EPA is approving portions of the May 6, 2013, infrastructure SIP submission from Texas, which addresses the requirements of CAA sections 110(a)(1) and (2) as applicable to the 2010 SO2 NAAQS. Specifically, EPA is approving the following infrastructure elements, or portions thereof: 110(a)(2)(A), (B), (C), (D)(i)(II) (PSD portion), D(ii), (E), (F), (G), (H), (J), (K), (L), and (M). EPA is not taking action on: The portion pertaining to section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), which concerns interstate pollution transport affecting attainment and maintenance of the NAAQS and the portion pertaining to section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) pertaining to visibility protection.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    • Is not subject to requirements of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent with the 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 March 11, 2016. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of this action for the purposed 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, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur dioxide.

    Dated: December 23, 2015. Samuel Coleman, Acting Regional Administrator, Region 6.

    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 SS—Texas
    2. In § 52.2270(e), the second table titled “EPA Approved Nonregulatory Provisions and Quasi-Regulatory Measures in the Texas SIP” is amended by adding an entry at the end for “Infrastructure and Transport SIP Revision for the 2010 SO2 NAAQS” to read as follows:
    § 52.2270 Identification of plan.

    (e) * * *

    EPA Approved Nonregulatory Provisions and Quasi-Regulatory Measures in the Texas SIP Name of SIP provision Applicable
  • geographic or
  • nonattainment
  • area
  • State
  • submittal/
  • effective
  • date
  • EPA approval date Comments
    *         *         *         *         *         *         * Infrastructure and Transport SIP Revision for the 2010 SO2 NAAQS Statewide 5/6/2013 1/11/2016 [Insert Federal Register citation] Approval for CAA elements 110(a)(2)(A), (B), (C), (D)(i)(II) (PSD portion), D(ii), (E), (F), (G), (H), (J), (K), (L), and (M).
    [FR Doc. 2015-33180 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R10-OAR-2015-0813; FRL-9940-93-Region 10] Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Washington; Removal of Obsolete Regulations AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Direct final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking direct final action to remove outdated rules in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) for the State of Washington because they are unnecessary or obsolete. The EPA is also clarifying regulations to reflect updated citations and more recent air quality monitoring data. This direct final action makes no substantive changes to the State Implementation Plan (SIP) and imposes no new requirements.

    DATES:

    This rule is effective on March 11, 2016, without further notice, unless the EPA receives adverse comment by February 10, 2016. If the EPA receives adverse comment, we will publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal Register informing the public that the rule will not take effect.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R10-OAR-2015-0813, at http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Jeff Hunt, EPA Region 10, (206) 553-0256, [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Throughout this document whenever “we,” “us,” or “our” are used, it is intended to refer to the EPA.

    I. Introduction

    This action is being taken pursuant to Executive Order 13563—Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review. It is intended to reduce the number of pages in the CFR by identifying those rules in 40 CFR part 52, subpart WW, for the State of Washington that are duplicative, outdated, or obsolete. These rules no longer have any use or legal effect because they have been superseded by subsequently approved SIP revisions. This action also amends certain rules by revising outdated citations and updating provisions based on more recent ambient air quality monitoring data. One aspect of the EPA's action removes historical information found in the “Original Identification of plan” section in 40 CFR 52.2477. This section is no longer necessary because the EPA promulgated administrative rule actions to replace these paragraphs with summary tables in 40 CFR 52.2470 (78 FR 17108, March 20, 2013). These summary tables describe the regulations, source-specific actions, and non-regulatory requirements which comprise the SIP.

    II. Removal of Obsolete or Unnecessary Rules and Clarifications to Certain Rules

    The EPA reviewed the following regulations and found that they should be removed or revised for the reasons set forth as follows:

    A. Section 52.2471 Classification of Regions

    In a submission received on September 22, 2014, included in the docket for this action, the Washington Department of Ecology (Ecology) reviewed air quality monitoring data for nitrogen dioxide (NO2) and ozone with respect to classifying regions under 40 CFR 51.150. That section classifies regions based on air quality information for purposes of establishing requirements for emergency episode plans. The air quality information in 40 CFR 52.2471 regarding classification of regions in the State of Washington was last updated by the EPA on June 5, 1980 (45 FR 37836). Ecology confirmed that the classifications in § 52.2471 remain correct for NO2 based on 2012-2014 monitoring data. Ecology also confirmed that the classifications for ozone remain correct for all Air Quality Control Regions in Washington, except one. Based on a review of 2012-2014 data, Ecology noted that the classification for the Washington portion of the Portland Interstate Air Quality Control Region is out of date. The EPA reviewed the 2012-2014 data used by Ecology, as well as more recent 2013-2015 data included in the docket for this action. We agree with Ecology's analysis that the Washington portion of the Portland Interstate Air Quality Control Region should be reclassified to Priority III based on more recent air quality monitoring data. The reclassification of the Washington portion of the Portland Interstate Air Quality Control Region from Priority I to Priority III will have no significant impact on the SIP because the current emergency episode plan covers the entire state and remains unchanged in the SIP since the EPA's last approval (58 FR 4578, January 15, 1993).

    The EPA also reviewed air quality monitoring data for carbon monoxide. Concentrations of carbon monoxide in ambient air have plummeted in the thirty-five years since the EPA's last update to the classifications in § 52.2471, primarily due to improved Federal engine standards for motor vehicles. The highest 8-hour concentration observed at all monitors in Washington from 2013-2015 was 2.4 parts per million (ppm), which is well below the 8-hour carbon monoxide National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) of 9 ppm and well below the Priority I classification level of 12 ppm. Similarly, the highest 1-hour concentration observed at all monitors in Washington from 2013-2015 was 4 ppm, which is well below the 1-hour carbon monoxide NAAQS of 35 ppm and well below the Priority I classification level of 48 ppm. The EPA is therefore reclassifying all carbon monoxide areas in Washington as Priority III, the lowest classification level. As discussed above, this update to the classification levels will have no significant impact on the SIP because the current emergency episode plan covering the entire state remains unchanged in the SIP since the EPA's last approval. At this time, we are not assessing the classification levels for other pollutants (particulate matter and sulfur dioxide) because the data analysis required to do so, including consideration of any potential exceptional events, is beyond the scope of this action.

    B. Section 52.2472 Extensions

    This section extended the attainment date for the Spokane and Wallula particulate matter (PM10) nonattainment areas until December 31, 1995 (60 FR 47280, September 12, 1995). In subsequent actions, the EPA redesignated both of these areas to attainment of the PM10 NAAQS (70 FR 38029, July 1, 2005 and 70 FR 50212, August 26, 2005), making this section obsolete. The EPA is therefore removing this section.

    C. Section 52.2473 Approval Status

    This section, last updated February 23, 1982 (47 FR 7840), is out of date. The second sentence addresses the geographic applicability of the regulations in the Washington SIP. Applicability is now addressed in the tables in § 52.2470, and this sentence is out of date and is being removed (see 79 FR 59653, October 3, 2014). The fourth sentence describes ozone-related reasonably available control technology (RACT) requirements under the 1977 Clean Air Act (CAA). This sentence is being removed because the EPA subsequently approved Washington SIP revisions for the ozone NAAQS under the requirements of the 1990 CAA (see 40 CFR 52.2470(c) and (e)). Similarly, the fifth sentence in this section is also out of date and is being removed. It describes the requirements of the emission offset interpretive rule as it applies to permitting new sources in a nonattainment area, published January 16, 1979 (44 FR 3274). This concern became obsolete when the EPA approved Washington Administrative Code (WAC) 173-400-091 “Voluntary limits on emissions” and WAC 173-400-112 “Requirements for new sources in nonattainment areas” (60 FR 28726, June 2, 1995). More recently, the EPA approved updates to Washington's nonattainment new source review permitting program as meeting all CAA requirements on November 7, 2014 (79 FR 59653).

    D. Section 52.2474 General Requirements

    This section, addressing public availability of emission data, is out of date (40 FR 55334, November 28, 1975), and is being removed. On October 3, 2014, the EPA approved WAC 173-400-175 “Public Information” as meeting the requirements of the CAA, including making ambient air quality data and emission data available to the public (79 FR 59653). For a full discussion, please see the proposed approval of WAC 173-400-175 (79 FR 39351, 39357, July 10, 2014).

    E. Section 52.2475 Approval of Plans

    This section is no longer necessary because the EPA replaced the historical information contained in this section with summary tables in § 52.2470 (78 FR 17108, March 20, 2013). These summary tables describe the regulations, source-specific actions, and non-regulatory requirements which comprise the SIP, including a history of attainment plan and visibility protection SIP submittals. The EPA reviewed § 52.2475 to verify that all relevant historical information in this section is contained in § 52.2470. The EPA is therefore removing § 52.2475.

    F. Section 52.2477 Original Identification of Plan Section

    Paragraphs (b) and (c) of § 52.2477, originally designated as 40 CFR 52.2470(b) and (c), contain historical information about the EPA's approval actions for the Washington SIP which occurred from January 28, 1972 until March 20, 2013. On March 20, 2013, the EPA reorganized the Identification of plan section (§ 52.2470) for subpart WW by listing and summarizing Washington's currently approved SIP requirements in § 52.2470(a) through (e) (78 FR 17110). Paragraphs (b) and (c) of § 52.2477 are being removed because the EPA has determined that it is no longer necessary to codify the information found in these paragraphs. Paragraph (a) of § 52.2477 is being amended to state that this historical information will continue to be made available in the CFR annual editions, title 40, part 52 (years 1996 through 2012). These annual editions are available on line at the following url address: http://www.thefederalregister.org/fdsys/browse/collectionCfr.action?collectionCode=CFR.

    G. Section 52.2495 Voluntary Limits on Potential To Emit

    This section discusses the mechanisms for issuance of voluntary limits on potential to emit in Washington. In 1995, the EPA approved this regulation (with a state effective date of September 20, 1993) as meeting the requirements for Federally-enforceable state operating permit programs set forth in 54 FR 27274 (June 28, 1989), with respect to criteria pollutants and pollutants regulated under the PSD program under section 110 of the CAA (as part of the SIP) and with respect to hazardous air pollutants under section 112(l) of the CAA (as part of Ecology's CAA section 112 program and not as part of the SIP). See 60 FR 9805 (proposed action); 60 FR 28726 (final action). Subsequent to that approval, Ecology made minor changes to WAC 173-400-091. The EPA approved these minor changes to the Washington SIP in 2014 with respect to criteria pollutants and pollutants regulated under the PSD program (referred to as “regulated NSR pollutants”). See 79 FR 39351, 39354 (July 10, 2014) (proposed action); 79 FR 59653 (final action). The 1993 version of WAC 173-400-091 continues to be the approved version for purposes of section 112(l). The EPA is amending § 52.2495 to make it clear that WAC 173-400-091 remains approved under both sections 110 and 112(l) of the CAA, and that the SIP-approved version is identified in § 52.2470(c). The EPA is also deleting the reference in § 52.2495 to 40 CFR 51.104(e) because that paragraph has been repealed.

    III. Final Action

    The EPA has determined that the above referenced rules should be removed or revised at this time. The EPA is publishing this rule without prior proposal because the Agency views this as a noncontroversial action and anticipates no adverse comment. However, in the “Proposed Rules” section of this Federal Register, the EPA is publishing a separate document that will serve as the proposal to approve the SIP revision if adverse comments are filed. This rule will be effective on March 11, 2016 without further notice unless the EPA receives adverse comment by February 10, 2016. If the EPA receives adverse comment, the EPA will publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal Register informing the public that the rule will not take effect. The EPA will address all public comments in a subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule. The EPA will not institute a second comment period on this action. Any parties interested in commenting must do so at this time. Please note that if the EPA receives adverse comment on an amendment, paragraph, or section of this rule and if that provision may be severed from the remainder of the rule, the EPA may adopt as final those provisions of the rule that are not the subject of an adverse comment.

    IV. Statutory and Executive Orders 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, the 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 the EPA with the discretionary authority to address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).

    The SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land in Washington except as specifically noted below and is also not approved to apply in any other area where the EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, the rule does not have tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). Washington's SIP is approved to apply on non-trust land within the exterior boundaries of the Puyallup Indian Reservation, also known as the 1873 Survey Area. Under the Puyallup Tribe of Indians Settlement Act of 1989, 25 U.S.C. 1773, Congress explicitly provided state and local agencies in Washington authority over activities on non-trust lands within the 1873 Survey Area.

    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 March 11, 2016. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action. Parties with objections to this direct final rule are encouraged to file a comment in response to the parallel notice of proposed rulemaking for this action published in the proposed rules section of this Federal Register, rather than file an immediate petition for judicial review of this direct final rule, so that 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, Incorporate by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Particulate matter, Reporting and Recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: December 21, 2015. Michelle L. Pirzadeh, Acting Regional Administrator, Region 10.

    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 WW—Washington 2. Section 52.2471 is revised to read as follows:
    § 52.2471 Classification of regions.

    The Washington plan was evaluated on the basis of the following classifications:

    Air quality control region Pollutant Particulate matter Sulfur oxides Nitrogen
  • dioxide
  • Carbon
  • monoxide
  • Ozone
    Eastern Washington-Northern Idaho Interstate I IA III III III Northern Washington Intrastate II III III III III Olympic-Northwest Washington Intrastate II II III III III Portland Interstate I IA III III III Puget Sound Intrastate I IA III III I South Central Washington Intrastate I III III III III
    § 52.2472 [Removed and Reserved]
    3. Section 52.2472 is removed and reserved. 4. Section 52.2473 is revised to read as follows:
    § 52.2473 Approval status.

    With the exceptions set forth in this subpart, the Administrator approves Washington's plan for the attainment and maintenance of the national standards under section 110 of the Clean Air Act. Furthermore, the Administrator finds that the plan satisfies all requirements of part D, title 1, of the Clean Air Act.

    §§ 52.2474 and 52.2475 [Removed and Reserved]
    4. Sections 52.2474 and 52.2475 are removed and reserved 5. Section 52.2477 is revised to read as follows:
    § 52.2477 Original identification of plan section.

    (a) This section identified the original “Air Implementation Plan for the State of Washington” and all revisions submitted by Washington that were Federally approved prior to March 20, 2013. The information in this section is available in the 40 CFR, part 52, Volume 3 of 3 (§§ 52.2020 to End) edition revised as of July 1, 2012.

    (b) [Reserved]

    (c) [Reserved]

    6. Section 52.2495 is revised to read as follows:
    § 52.2495 Voluntary limits on potential to emit.

    (a) Terms and conditions of regulatory orders covering regulated NSR pollutants (as defined in 40 CFR 52.21(b)), issued pursuant to WAC 173-400-091 “Voluntary limits on emissions” and in accordance with the provisions of WAC 173-400-091, WAC 173-400-105 “Records, monitoring, and reporting,” and WAC 173-400-171 “Public involvement,” shall be applicable requirements of the Federally-approved Washington SIP for the purposes of section 113 of the Clean Air Act and shall be enforceable by EPA and by any person in the same manner as other requirements of the SIP. Such regulatory orders issued pursuant to WAC 173-400-091 are part of the Washington SIP and shall be submitted to EPA Region 10 in accordance with the requirements of 40 CFR 51.326. The EPA-approved provisions of the WAC are identified in 40 CFR 52.2470(c).

    (b) Terms and conditions of regulatory orders covering hazardous air pollutants (as defined in 40 CFR 63.2), issued pursuant to WAC 173-400-091 “Voluntary limits on emissions,” as in effect on September 20, 1993, and in accordance with the provisions of WAC 173-400-091, WAC 173-400-105 “Records, monitoring, and reporting,” and WAC 173-400-171 “Public involvement,” shall be applicable requirements of the Federally-approved Washington section 112(l) program for the purposes of section 113 of the Clean Air Act and shall be enforceable by EPA and by any person in the same manner as other requirements of section 112.

    [FR Doc. 2015-33177 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 47 CFR Part 52 [WC Docket No. 13-97, 04-36, 07-243, 10-90 and CC Docket No. 95-116, 01-92, and 99-200; FCC 15-70] Numbering Policies for Modern Communications, IP-Enabled Services, Telephone Number Requirements for IP-Enabled, Services Providers, Telephone Number Portability et al. AGENCY:

    Federal Communications Commission.

    ACTION:

    Final rule; correction

    SUMMARY:

    The Commission published in the Federal Register of October 29, 2015, a document concerning an (Order) establishing an authorization process to enable interconnected VoIP providers that choose direct access to request numbers directly from the Numbering Administrators. Next, this document sets forth several conditions designed to minimize number exhaust and preserve the integrity of the numbering system. Finally, this document modifies Commission's rules in order to permit VoIP Positioning Center (VPC) providers to obtain pseudo-Automatic Number Identification (p-ANI) codes directly from the Numbering Administrators for purposes of providing E911 services. These relatively modest steps will have lasting, positive impacts for consumers and the communications industry as we continue to undergo technology transitions.

    DATES:

    Effective January 11, 2016,

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Marilyn Jones, Wireline Competition Bureau, Competition Policy Division, (202) 418-1580, or send an email to [email protected].

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Commission published a document in the Federal Register of October 29, 2015, (80 FR 66454), amending § 52.5 of the Commission's rules.

    In Final rule FR Doc. 2015-20900 published on October 29, 2015, (80 FR 66477), make the following correction. On page 66477, in the third column, paragraph 2 in § 52.5, remove the title “Central office code administration” and revise it to read “Definitions”.

    Federal Communications Commission. Sheryl Todd, Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00211 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
    81 6 Monday, January 11, 2016 Proposed Rules ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R10-OAR-2015-0813: FRL-9940-92-Region 10] Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Washington; Removal of Obsolete Regulations AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Proposed rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to remove outdated rules in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) for the State of Washington because they are unnecessary or obsolete. The EPA is also proposing to clarify regulations to reflect updated citations and more recent air quality monitoring data. These proposed actions make no substantive changes to the State Implementation Plan (SIP) and impose no new requirements. In the Final Rules section of this Federal Register, the EPA is approving these determinations as a direct final rule without prior proposal because the Agency views this as a noncontroversial action and anticipates no adverse comments. A detailed rationale for the approval is set forth in the direct final rule. If no adverse comments are received in response to this action, no further activity is contemplated. If the EPA receives adverse comments, the direct final rule will be withdrawn and all public comments received will be addressed in a subsequent final rule based on this proposed rule. The EPA will not institute a second comment period. Any parties interested in commenting on this action should do so at this time.

    DATES:

    Comments must be received on or before February 10, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R10-OAR-2015-0813, at http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Jeff Hunt, EPA Region 10, (206) 553-0256, [email protected].

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    For further information, please see the information provided in the direct final action, with the same title, that is located in the “Rules and Regulations” section of this Federal Register. Please note that if the EPA receives adverse comment on an amendment, paragraph, or section of this rule and if that provision may be severed from the remainder of the rule, the EPA may adopt as final those provisions of the rule that are not the subject of an adverse comment.

    Dated: December 21, 2015. Michelle L. Pirzadeh, Acting Regional Administrator, Region 10.
    [FR Doc. 2015-33176 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R03-OAR-2015-0539; FR-9940-85-Region 3] Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; West Virginia; Prevention of Significant Deterioration and Approval of Infrastructure State Implementation Plans for Specific National Ambient Air Quality Standards AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Proposed rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection (WVDEP) for the State of West Virginia on June 3, 2015.

    This revision pertains to West Virginia's Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) permit program regulations for preconstruction permitting requirements for major sources. The revision includes a change in West Virginia's PSD regulations related to emissions of fine particulate matter (PM2.5). The State's June 3, 2015 submittal satisfies its obligations pursuant to an earlier rulemaking in which EPA granted final conditional approval of West Virginia's PSD implementing regulations. This action also addresses specific infrastructure program elements specified in Clean Air Act (CAA) section 110(a)(2) necessary to implement, maintain, and enforce the national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS). This action is being taken under the CAA.

    DATES:

    Written comments must be received on or before February 10, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA-R03-OAR-2015-0539 by one of the following methods:

    A. www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.

    B. Email: [email protected]

    C. Mail: EPA-R03-OAR-2015-0539, Amy Johansen, Acting Associate Director, Office of Permits and State Programs, Mailcode 3AP10, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.

    D. Hand Delivery: At the previously-listed EPA Region III address. Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information.

    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R03-OAR-2015-0539. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change, and may be made available online at www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov or email. The www.regulations.gov Web site is an “anonymous access” system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email comment directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov, your email address will be automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.

    Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the www.regulations.gov index. 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 either electronically in www.regulations.gov or in hard copy during normal business hours at the Air Protection Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. Copies of the State submittals are available at the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection, Division of Air Quality, 601 57th Street SE., Charleston, West Virginia 25304.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Mr. Paul Wentworth, (215) 814-2183, or by email at [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Background

    The WVDEP submitted a SIP revision to EPA on June 3, 2015. This SIP revision request, if approved, would revise West Virginia's currently-approved PSD program by amending Series 14 under Title 45 of West Virginia Code of State Rules (45CSR14). West Virginia is amending 45CSR14 in response to changes EPA made to the NAAQS for PM2.5 that affect certain aspects of the PSD program requirements.

    On May 16, 2008, EPA promulgated a rule to implement the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS, including changes to the New Source Review (NSR) program (the 2008 NSR PM2.5 Rule). See 73 FR 28321. The 2008 NSR PM2.5 Rule revised the NSR program requirements to establish the framework for implementing preconstruction permit review for the PM2.5 NAAQS in both attainment and nonattainment areas.1 The 2008 NSR PM2.5 rule: (1) Required NSR permits to address directly emitted PM2.5 and precursor pollutants; (2) established significant emission rates for direct PM2.5 and precursor pollutants (sulfur dioxide (SO2) and oxides of nitrogen (NOX)); (3) required states to account for gases that condense to form particles (condensables) in PM2.5 emission limits; and (4) established certain PSD program requirements. EPA's NSR requirements specific to PM2.5 have been subject to litigation in the United States Court of Appeal for the D.C. Circuit and to some subsequent revisions by EPA. For a detailed discussion of the NSR requirements for PM2.5 as relevant to this rulemaking for West Virginia's PSD provisions, see EPA's analysis and discussion in Technical Support Document; State of West Virginia, West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection; Division of Air Quality; Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) SIP Revision Request (the WV PSD TSD) which is included in the docket for this proposed action (EPA-R03-OAR-2015-0539) and is available online at www.regulations.gov.

    1 The PSD permitting program is the NSR permit program in areas attaining a particular NAAQS.

    In an earlier rulemaking action, EPA granted final condition approval of revisions to 45CSR14 made by West Virginia to address requirements of the CAA, 40 CFR 51.166 and the 2008 NSR PM2.5 Rule. See 80 FR 36483 (June 25, 2015). EPA's conditional approval was based upon West Virginia's commitment to include in its PSD regulations at 45CSR14 a significant monitoring concentration (SMC) of zero micrograms per cubic meter for PM2.5 to be consistent with federal PSD requirements. Id. EPA provided a detailed discussion of the changes West Virginia made to its PSD regulations in 45CSR14 to be consistent with the federal PSD program at 40 CFR 51.166 and the 2008 NSR PM2.5 Rule in our proposed conditional approval of West Virginia's June 6, 2012 and July 1, 2014 SIP submissions (the 2012 and 2014 submissions) which contained several revisions to 45 CSR14. See 80 FR 16612 (March 30, 2015). West Virginia's June 3, 2015 SIP submittal that is the subject of this action includes an amended 45CSR14 for West Virginia's PSD program that was revised to include the PM2.5 SMC at zero micrograms per cubic meter and to address the deficiency noted in EPA's proposed conditional approval of 45CSR14. Id. With its June 3, 2015 submittal, West Virginia has made all of the changes to its PSD implementing regulations necessary to address PM2.5 as prescribed by the CAA, 40 CFR 51.166, and the 2008 NSR PM2.5 Rule.

    In this action, EPA is also proposing to approve several of West Virginia's infrastructure SIPs as meeting PSD elements of section 110(a)(2) of the CAA for the 1997 ozone and PM2.5 NAAQS, the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS, the 2008 lead and ozone NAAQS, and the 2010 nitrogen dioxide (NO2) and SO2 NAAQS.

    II. Summary of SIP Revision and EPA Analysis A. Summary of SIP Revision

    The SIP revision submitted by WVDEP on June 3, 2015 pertains to revisions to its PSD permit program regulations at 45CSR14-16.7.c that establish a SMC value of zero micrograms per cubic meter for PM2.5.

    B. EPA Analysis

    EPA finds the revisions to 45CSR14 contained in the June 3, 2015 submittal are consistent with the federal PSD program in the CAA and in 40 CFR 51.166(i)(5)(i)(c) pertaining specifically to the SMC for PM2.5. The WV PSD TSD contains EPA's detailed discussion and analysis of the June 3, 2015 submittal and how it meets requirements for a PM2.5 SMC specifically and the requirements of 40 CFR 51.166 and the 2008 NSR PM2.5 Rule in general. The WV PSD TSD is included in the docket for this proposed action (EPA-R03-OAR-2015-0539) and is available online at www.regulations.gov.

    Because this submission fulfills the commitment made by West Virginia in the final conditional approval of West Virginia's earlier submittals of revisions to 45CSR14 (i.e., the 2012 and 2014 submissions), EPA proposes full approval of West Virginia's PSD regulations at 45CSR14 in its entirety as 45CSR14 meets requirements in the CAA and its implementing regulations and proposes to remove the prior conditional approval. See 80 FR 36483 (final conditional approval of the 2012 and 2014 submissions of revisions to 45CSR14).

    Similarly, because West Virginia's regulations at 45CSR14 fully meet the federal requirements for PSD in the CAA and in 40 CFR 51.166 as discussed in the WV PSD TSD, EPA also finds that West Virginia's PSD program addresses specific PSD-related portions of infrastructure program elements in section 110(a)(2) of the CAA for the 1997 ozone and PM2.5 NAAQS, the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS, the 2008 lead and ozone NAAQS, and the 2010 NO2 and SO2 NAAQS. Thus, EPA proposes to approve several of West Virginia's SIP submissions as addressing PSD requirements in section 110(a)(2) of the CAA for these NAAQS. The WV PSD TSD contains a detailed discussion of the relevant West Virginia infrastructure SIP submissions, EPA's prior rulemaking action on those infrastructure SIPs, and EPA's rationale for finding those SIP submittals address PSD elements of section 110(a)(2) for the 1997 ozone and PM2.5 NAAQS, the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS, the 2008 lead and ozone NAAQS, and the 2010 NO2 and SO2 NAAQS.2 EPA is soliciting public comments on the issues discussed in this document. These comments will be considered before taking final action.

    2 As mentioned previously, the WV PSD TSD is included in the docket for this proposed action (EPA-R03-OAR-2015-0539) and is available online at www.regulations.gov.

    III. Proposed Action

    EPA is proposing to approve West Virginia's June 3, 2015 SIP submittal containing revised PSD permit program implementation regulations at 45CSR14. In a previous rulemaking action, EPA evaluated 45CSR14 and found the provisions are consistent with the federal PSD permit program requirements at 40 CFR 51.166 with the exception of West Virginia's omission of a PM2.5 SMC at zero micrograms per cubic meter. See 80 FR 36483. With the June 3, 2015 SIP submittal of the revised West Virginia PSD regulations at 45CSR14 which now contain the PM2.5 SMC, West Virginia's PSD regulations are consistent with federal PSD requirements. EPA proposes to remove the conditional approval of the 2012 and 2014 submissions and fully approve 45CSR14. EPA is also proposing to determine that West Virginia's infrastructure SIP submittals for the 1997 ozone and PM2.5 NAAQS, the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS, the 2008 lead and ozone NAAQS, and the 2010 NO2 and SO2 NAAQS meet PSD related requirements in section 110(a)(2) of the CAA. Finally, EPA proposes to remove the prior narrow disapproval of the West Virginia infrastructure SIPs for the 1997 ozone and PM2.5 NAAQS, the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS, and the 2008 lead and ozone NAAQS for not addressing fully all PSD requirements for section 110(a)(2) of the CAA.

    IV. Incorporation by Reference

    In this proposed action, the EPA is proposing to include in a final EPA rule, regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is proposing to incorporate by reference the West Virginia regulations at 45CSR14 regarding the PSD permitting requirements as discussed in section III of this preamble. The EPA has made, and will continue to make, these documents generally available electronically through www.regulations.com and/or in hard copy at the appropriate EPA office (see the ADDRESSES section of this preamble for more information).

    V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the 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 proposed action:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    In addition, this proposed rule, relating to West Virginia's PSD program and to several West Virginia infrastructure SIPs, does not have tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in the state, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.

    List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

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

    Authority:

    42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    Dated: December 21, 2015. Shawn M. Garvin, Regional Administrator, Region III.
    [FR Doc. 2015-33198 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R03-OAR-2015-0773; FRL-9941-07-Region 3] Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Pennsylvania; Attainment Plan for the North Reading Area for the 2008 Lead National Ambient Air Quality Standards AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Proposed rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a state implementation plan (SIP) revision submitted by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania (the Commonwealth or Pennsylvania). This revision pertains to the Commonwealth's attainment plan for the North Reading nonattainment area (“North Reading Area” or “Area”) for the 2008 lead national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS), and includes a base year emissions inventory, an analysis of reasonably available control measures (RACM) (including reasonably available control technology (RACT)), a plan for reasonable further progress (RFP), a modeling demonstration of lead NAAQS attainment, and contingency measures. This action is being taken under the Clean Air Act (CAA).

    DATES:

    Written comments must be received on or before February 10, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA-R03-OAR-2015-0773 by one of the following methods:

    A. www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.

    B. Email: [email protected]

    C. Mail: EPA-R03-OAR-2015-0773, Cristina Fernandez, Associate Director, Office of Air Program Planning, Mailcode 3AP30, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.

    D. Hand Delivery: At the previously-listed EPA Region III address. Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information.

    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R03-OAR-2015-0773. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change, and may be made available online at www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI, or otherwise protected, through www.regulations.gov or email. The www.regulations.gov Web site is an “anonymous access” system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email comment directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov, your email address will be automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.

    Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the www.regulations.gov index. 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 in www.regulations.gov or may be viewed during normal business hours at the Air Protection Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. Copies of the State submittal are available at the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection, Bureau of Air Quality Control, P.O. Box 8468, 400 Market Street, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17105.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ellen Schmitt, (215) 814-5787, or by email at [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    On August 12, 2015, the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PADEP) submitted a revision to its SIP for the purpose of demonstrating attainment of the 2008 lead NAAQS in the North Reading Area. Pennsylvania's lead attainment plan for the Area includes a base year emissions inventory, a modeling demonstration of lead NAAQS attainment, an analysis of RACM, RACT, and RFP, and contingency measures. The attainment plan includes portions of two Consent Order and Agreements (COA) between PADEP and Exide Technologies (Exide) and Yuasa Battery, Inc. (Yuasa) which demonstrate how Pennsylvania will achieve and maintain compliance with the 2008 lead NAAQS. The lead attainment plan specifically includes paragraph 3 of the COA between Exide and PADEP, dated June 15, 2015, and paragraphs 5 and 22 of the COA between Yuasa and PADEP, dated June 12, 2015.

    EPA has determined that Pennsylvania's attainment plan for the 2008 lead NAAQS for the North Reading Area meets the applicable requirements of the CAA. Thus, EPA is proposing to approve Pennsylvania's attainment plan for the North Reading Area and paragraphs 3, 5, and 22, respectively, of the COAs between PADEP and Exide and Yuasa, as submitted on August 12, 2015.

    EPA's analysis and findings are discussed for each applicable requirement in this rulemaking action. The three Technical Support Documents (TSDs) for this proposed action contain additional details on the base year inventory, modeling, control strategies, RFP, and contingency measures of the attainment demonstration. Copies of these TSDs can be found in the docket for this proposed action (EPA-R03-OAR-2015-0773) at www.regulations.gov.

    I. Background

    The North Reading attainment plan assesses lead emissions within the Area. Lead is a metal found naturally in the environment and present in some manufactured products. Human exposure to lead can cause a variety of adverse health effects, especially in children.1

    1 A more detailed analysis of adverse health effects associated with lead exposure can be found in the Preamble of the 2008 lead NAAQS final rule, published in the Federal Register on November 12, 2008. See 73 FR 66964.

    Lead is emitted into the air from many sources, encompassing a wide variety of stationary and mobile source types. In the United States, there has been a decrease in the emissions of lead from mobile sources, resulting from the reduction of lead additives to fuel. Most of the lead emissions in the North Reading Area come from permitted stationary sources within the Area.

    On November 12, 2008 (73 FR 66964), EPA established a 2008 primary and secondary lead NAAQS at 0.15 micrograms per cubic meter (µg/m3) based on a maximum arithmetic 3-month mean concentration for a 3-year period. See 40 CFR 50.16. Following promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS, EPA is required by the CAA, as described in section 107(d)(1), to designate areas throughout the United States as attaining or not attaining the NAAQS. On November 22, 2010 (75 FR 71033), EPA published its initial air quality designations and classifications for the 2008 lead NAAQS based upon air quality monitoring data for calendar years 2007-2009. The November 22, 2010 notice included the nonattainment designation of the North Reading Area; an area within Berks County in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, bounded by Alsace Township, Laureldale Borough, and Muhlenberg Township. See 76 FR 72097. The November 22, 2010 designations, including the North Reading Area nonattainment designation, became effective on December 31, 2010.2

    2 EPA completed a second and final round of designations for the 2008 lead NAAQS on November 22, 2011. See 76 FR 72097. No additional areas in Pennsylvania were designated as nonattainment for the 2008 lead NAAQS in the November 22, 2011 designations.

    The designation of the North Reading Area as nonattainment for the 2008 lead NAAQS triggered requirements under section 191(a) of the CAA, requiring Pennsylvania to submit a SIP revision with a plan for how the Area will attain the 2008 lead NAAQS, as expeditiously as practicable, but no later than December 31, 2015.

    II. Summary of SIP Revision

    On August 12, 2015, in accordance with section 172(c) of the CAA, Pennsylvania submitted an attainment plan for the North Reading Area which includes a base year emissions inventory, an attainment demonstration, an analysis of RACM and RACT, provisions for RFP, and contingency measures. The SIP revision also includes paragraph 3 of the COA between Exide and PADEP and paragraphs 5 and 22 of the COA between Yuasa and PADEP. EPA's analysis of the submitted attainment plan includes a review of these elements for the North Reading Area.

    As part of the promulgation of the 2008 lead NAAQS, EPA revised the air monitoring requirements for lead. In accordance with the revised monitoring requirements, air monitors near sources in Pennsylvania that emit one ton per year (tpy) or more were in place by January 2010. The monitoring requirements for lead were further revised on December 27, 2010, when EPA lowered the monitoring requirement for stationary sources down to those that emit 0.5 tpy of lead among other changes. See 75 FR 81126.

    Pennsylvania's lead monitoring network consists of lead monitors that have been designated by EPA as either Reference or Equivalent monitors and are subject to the federal quality assurance requirements of 40 CFR part 58, appendix A. All samplers are located at sites that have met the minimum siting requirements of 40 CFR part 58, appendices D and E.

    PADEP currently operates two ambient air monitors in the North Reading Area. The Laureldale South monitor has been in place since 1976 and the Laureldale North monitor since January 1, 2010.3 As required in 40 CFR 58.10, Pennsylvania must provide EPA with an annual network design plan in order to inform both EPA and the public of any planned changes to the sampling network for the next year. EPA approved Pennsylvania's 2015 Annual Air Quality Monitoring Network Design Plan, the most recent year available at the time of this evaluation, on November 12, 2015.

    3 The Laureldale North monitor (AQS 42-011-0020) is associated with the Exide facility located in Berks County and was installed in accordance with EPA's network design requirements for the 2008 lead NAAQS. 73 FR 66964. EPA reaffirmed placement of lead ambient air monitors in Pennsylvania when approving Pennsylvania's lead infrastructure SIP for the 2008 NAAQS as meeting requirements in section 110(a)(1) and (2) of the CAA. See 79 FR 19009 (April 7, 2014). EPA's approval of the lead infrastructure SIP, particularly regarding the approval of Pennsylvania's monitoring locations for section 110(a)(2)(B), was upheld in 2015 by the United States Court of Appeal for the Third Circuit. Berks County v. EPA, 3rd Cir. No. 14-2913, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 14050 (August 11, 2015).

    1. Emissions Inventory Requirements

    Section 172(c)(3) of the CAA requires a state to submit a SIP that includes a “comprehensive, accurate, current inventory of actual emissions from all sources of the relevant pollutant” in the nonattainment area. In the 2008 lead NAAQS rulemaking on November 12, 2008, EPA finalized guidance related to the emissions inventories requirements for lead. See 73 FR 66964.

    For the base year inventory of actual lead emissions for CAA 172(c)(3), EPA recommends using either 2010 or 2011 as the base year, but does provide flexibility for using other inventory years if states can show another year is more appropriate. Additionally, EPA guidance provides that actual emissions should be used for purposes of the base year inventory.4 PADEP submitted a 2010 inventory for the point sources of lead emissions in the North Reading Area, which includes Exide and Yuasa.

    4See “Addendum to the 2008 Lead NAAQS Implementation Questions and Answers” dated August 10, 2012, which is included in EPA's SIP Toolkit located at www3.epa.gov/airquality/lead/implement.html.

    For the nonpoint sources of lead emissions, PADEP submitted EPA's 2011 National Emissions Inventory (NEI) v2 data as a surrogate for the 2010 inventory. The nonpoint source values for the North Reading Area were calculated using Berks County data apportioned by population.

    EPA reviewed the results, procedures, and methodologies for Pennsylvania's submission and found them to be reasonable for calculating the lead base year inventory for section 172(c)(3) of the CAA and in accordance with 40 CFR 51.117(e). A more detailed description of the PADEP's use and calculation of inventories as well as EPA's analysis of PADEP's base inventory for CAA requirements is included in the TSD prepared in support of this proposed rulemaking action. A copy of the Base Inventory TSD can be found in the docket for this proposed action (EPA-R03-OAR-2015-0773) at www.regulations.gov. In this action, EPA is proposing to approve the base year emissions inventory submitted by Pennsylvania on August 12, 2015, as it meets requirements in section 172(c)(3) of the CAA.

    2. Attainment Planning Modeling

    Section 172(c)(4) of the CAA and the lead SIP regulations found at 40 CFR 51.117 require states to employ atmospheric dispersion modeling for the demonstration of attainment of the lead NAAQS for areas in the vicinity of point sources listed in 40 CFR 51.117(a)(1), as expeditiously as practicable. The demonstration must meet the requirements of 40 CFR 51.112 and part 51, appendix W, and include inventory data, modeling results, and emissions reduction analyses on which the state has based its projected attainment. All these requirements comprise the “attainment plan” that is required for lead nonattainment areas.

    As part of a state's attainment plan, 40 CFR 51.117(a) provides that states must include an analysis showing that the SIP will attain and maintain the standard in areas in the vicinity of certain point sources that are emitting significant emissions of lead and also in “[a]ny other area that has lead air concentrations in excess of the national ambient air quality standard concentration.” These sources include primary and secondary lead smelters, primary copper smelters, lead gasoline additive plants, lead-acid storage battery manufacturing plants, and any other stationary source that emits 25 or more tpy of lead or lead compounds measured as elemental lead. 40 CFR 51.117(a)(1). In doing this analysis, EPA expects a state will take into consideration all sources of lead emissions within the nonattainment area that may be required to be controlled.

    In its SIP submittal, Pennsylvania identified one facility as having the potential to emit 0.5 tpy or more of lead in the North Reading Area. This facility, Exide Technologies, a secondary lead smelter, was included in PADEP's modeling analysis. Yuasa, a lead-acid battery assembly plant located across the street from Exide, was also included in the modeling analysis. Lead emissions from nonpoint sources and mobile sources were also examined but found to be insignificant and while included in PADEP's lead inventory, they were not included in the lead modeling demonstration due to their insignificance.

    In accordance with 40 CFR part 51, appendix W, PADEP completed an air-dispersion modeling analysis for base year and future year emission inventories representing Exide and Yuasa, with reported lead emissions in 2010 and projected emissions for 2015. The 2015 lead emissions were used in the modeled attainment demonstration to determine if projected lead emission rates would comply with the 2008 lead NAAQS. The 2015 lead emissions for Exide and Yuasa were determined by incorporating emission reductions from the implementation of the control measures set forth in the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Secondary Lead Smelting sources (Secondary Lead Smelting NESHAP) and from the stack-specific emission limits identified in the COAs between Pennsylvania and Exide and Yuasa.5 PADEP modeled seventy-seven lead emission sources for Exide and twenty-seven lead emission sources for Yuasa. Table 1 summarizes 2010 and 2015 lead emissions compiled by the Commonwealth for both Exide and Yuasa.

    5 PADEP's RACM/RACT proposal for Exide, which includes measures that would require the facility to meet the requirements of the Secondary Lead Smelting NESHAP, is contained within Exide's Plan Approval No. 06-05066I.

    Table 1—North Reading Lead Source Emissions Summary (tpy) Lead source 2010 lead emissions (actual) 2015 lead emissions (projected) Exide 1.0417 0.8991 Yuasa 0.1520 0.0850

    EPA has found that PADEP's modeling demonstration was done in accordance with appendix W of 40 CFR part 51 and the modeling indicates that the Area will meet the 2008 lead NAAQS.

    Because the Area had monitored violations of the 2008 lead NAAQS in January 2013, before Exide began idling, the Area will not attain the NAAQS by December 2015 (the Area's attainment date pursuant to section 192 of the CAA) based on ambient air quality over 36 consecutive 3-month periods. However, there have been no monthly periods which have exceeded 0.15 µg/m3 since March 2013.6 7 As such, the 3-month rolling averages from mid-year 2013 and after have been below 0.15 µg/m3 and the Area is on track to meet the 2008 lead NAAQS. EPA and PADEP expect the 2008 lead NAAQS to be attained on the basis of 2014-2016 ambient data as a result of implementation of PADEP's August 12, 2015 SIP revision.

    6 The daily averages used to calculate 3-month averages are given in appendices A-2 and A-3 in PADEP's August 12, 2015 submittal, which can be found in docket for this rulemaking action.

    7 Environmental Protection Agency. Air Quality System Data Mart [internet database] available at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/airs/aqsdatamart. Accessed December 3, 2015.

    The projected 2015 emissions inventory used the maximum allowable lead emissions for both Exide and Yuasa. While Exide is currently idling, it has not installed all of the control measures necessary for the Secondary Lead Smelting NESHAP and its Plan Approval No. 06-05066I. However, pursuant to the COA between Exide and Pennsylvania, Exide cannot resume operations at the facility without demonstrating compliance with the control measures specified in the Plan Approval No. 06-05066I and in its COA. The future year maximum allowable lead emissions were developed from the control measures included in Pennsylvania's attainment plan. However, even if Exide's operations remain idled and controls not installed until it resumes operations, its potential lead emissions while idling will continue to be less than if it were operating under the NESHAP and COA controls and limits.

    EPA has evaluated the information provided in the Commonwealth's attainment plan for the North Reading Area and concludes that the Commonwealth's model attainment demonstration shows current lead control and emission limits will provide for attainment of the 2008 lead NAAQS and the modeling meets the requirements in the CAA and its implementing regulations.

    More detailed information on the modeling system tools and documents used for the model attainment demonstration for the Area and EPA's analysis of PADEP's modeling can be found on the EPA Technology Transfer Network Support Center for Regulatory Atmospheric Modeling (SCRAM), in Pennsylvania's August 12, 2015 submittal, and in the EPA's Modeling TSD which can be found in the docket for this proposed action (EPA-R03-OAR-2015-0773) at www.regulations.gov. 8

    8http://www.epa.gov/ttn/scram/.

    3. RACM, RACT, and RFP Analysis

    According to section 172(c)(1) of the CAA and 40 CFR 51.112, Demonstration of Adequacy, attainment plans shall provide for RACM and RACT and must demonstrate that the measures, rules, and regulations contained in it are adequate to provide for the timely attainment and maintenance of the national standard that it implements.

    In order to bring the North Reading Area into attainment for the 2008 lead NAAQS, Pennsylvania developed and modeled a control strategy for emissions from stacks at stationary sources and fugitive emissions from stationary sources from the two point sources of lead in the nonattainment area. Section IV of Pennsylvania's attainment plan SIP revision details the control measures and emission limits for the North Reading Area.

    Pursuant to section 172(c)(1) of the CAA, attainment plans must provide for the implementation of all RACM as expeditiously as practicable for each nonattainment area. Section 172(c)(1) of the CAA requires RACM and emission reductions from sources through RACT to provide for attainment of the NAAQS. In March 2012, EPA issued guidance titled, “Guide to Developing Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM) for Controlling Lead Emissions” (RACM Guidance).9

    9http://www3.epa.gov/airquality/lead/pdfs/2012ImplementationGuide.pdf.

    In the final rule for the 2008 lead NAAQS, EPA recommended that at least all stationary sources emitting 0.5 tpy or more should undergo a RACT review.10 At the time Pennsylvania was developing its attainment plan SIP, Exide was the only stationary source within the North Reading Area that had the potential to emit 0.5 tpy or more of lead emissions. Therefore, Exide was the only point source within the North Reading Area which PADEP required to complete a RACT analysis. Exide performed a RACT analysis following EPA's RACM guidance for controlling lead emissions which PADEP adopted in Plan Approval No. 06 05066I and proposes as RACT.

    10See 73 FR 67038 (November 12, 2008).

    Exide's RACT analysis is located in appendix C-3 of Pennsylvania's SIP revision. The control measures the PADEP implemented as RACT for Exide include a variety of control measures for the attainment plan which also address requirements in the Secondary Lead Smelting NESHAP. See 77 FR 556 (January 5, 2012).

    A descriptive list of the measures which Exide must implement are included in table 9 of PADEP's SIP revision. EPA's review and analysis of Pennsylvania's RACT proposal for Exide can be found in the Control Strategies, Reasonable Further Progress, and Contingency Measures TSD found in the docket for this proposed action (EPA-R03-OAR-2015-0773) at www.regulations.gov.

    EPA is proposing to approve Pennsylvania's determination that the controls for lead emissions at Exide constitute RACM/RACT because PADEP conducted a reasonable analysis of controls that are technically and economically feasible and set the lowest achievable limits given those controls in accordance with the CAA requirements. By approving these control measures as RACM/RACT for Exide for purposes of the North Reading attainment plan, these control measures will become permanent and federally enforceable and will meet the requirements of the CAA and the 2008 lead NAAQS.

    In addition to the RACT analysis performed for Exide, Pennsylvania evaluated other sources and actions that could contribute meaningful emission reductions for RACM. In order to establish further enforceable controls as RACM to reduce lead emissions from lead point sources and fugitive lead sources, the Commonwealth developed and entered into two separate COAs, one COA with Exide and one COA with Yuasa. These COAs are located within the Pennsylvania attainment SIP revision in appendices C-1 and C-2 and, upon EPA approval of Pennsylvania's submittal, the portions of these COAs submitted for the SIP will become federally enforceable.

    According to PADEP, the COA between Exide and Pennsylvania specifies control measures that have been demonstrated with air dispersion modeling to reduce Exide's lead emission contributions to the North Reading Area. Also in the COA are emission limits that are to be included in the Commonwealth's SIP as limiting factors for lead emissions control from the lead emitting stacks at the Exide facility. The COA limits the total stack lead emissions for Exide to 0.02479667 grams of lead per second (g/s).

    However, Exide has been in an idling state since February 2013, and as a result its lead emissions have been reduced dramatically. Exide submitted to PADEP a deactivation cover letter and Maintenance and Activation Plan on January 31, 2014, which indicated that only two lead-emitting sources remain active during the facility's idling state. Source 131 Lime Storage Bin and Source 132 Plant Roadways continue to operate under the controls currently identified in the facility's Title V operating permit. In 2014, under this idled state, Exide emitted a total of 0.00004 tpy of lead, reflecting significant reductions from its prior lead emissions due to idling.

    Included in the COA between Pennsylvania and Exide is the requirement that Exide shall not resume operation of any portion of the facility until Exide has completed all of the modification work specified in Exide's Plan Approval No. 06-05066I, which includes all requirements for the Secondary Lead Smelting NESHAP.

    According to PADEP's attainment plan, the COA between Yuasa and Pennsylvania specifies control measures that have been demonstrated with air dispersion modeling to reduce Yuasa's contribution to lead emissions in the North Reading Area. The COA with Yuasa includes emission limits as well as requirements for stack testing, recordkeeping, monitoring, and progress reports. The COA limits the total stack lead emissions for Yuasa to 0.002279522 g/s, to which Yuasa must adhere by December 31, 2015. Yuasa must demonstrate compliance with these limits, via reference method stack testing, by no later than June 30, 2016.

    Upon EPA final approval of the Pennsylvania lead attainment plan SIP revision for the North Reading Area, the limits and measures (in paragraph 3 for Exide and paragraphs 5 and 22 for Yuasa) within the COAs for Exide and Yuasa will become federally enforceable. EPA finds the measures contained in the COAs for Yuasa and Exide provide for implementation of all RACM as expeditiously as practicable to provide for attainment of the 2008 lead NAAQS in accordance with the requirements in section 172(c)(1) of the CAA and its implementing regulations. Further details of EPA's review of the RACM for Yuasa and Exide is provided in the Control Strategies, Reasonable Further Progress, and Contingency Measures TSD found in the docket for this proposed action (EPA-R03-OAR-2015-0773) at www.regulations.gov.

    In accordance with section 172(c)(2) of the CAA, attainment plans must also provide for RFP. Section 171(1) of the CAA defines RFP as annual incremental reductions in emissions of the relevant air pollutants as required by Title I, Part D of the CAA, or emission reductions that may reasonably be required by EPA to ensure attainment of the applicable NAAQS by the applicable date.11 EPA believes that RFP for lead nonattainment areas should be met by “adherence to an ambitious compliance schedule” which is expected to periodically yield significant emission reductions, and as appropriate, linear progress.12

    11 Incremental reductions in lead emissions are not specified in Part D.

    12See 73 FR 67038 (November 12, 2008).

    In its August 12, 2015 submittal, PADEP presented the COAs with Exide and Yuasa as providing for RFP. Overall, EPA finds that the control strategies for both Exide and Yuasa will provide for immediate reductions in lead emissions in the Area. Yuasa's reductions will be implemented by December 2015. Although Exide's reductions in lead from the control strategies in the COA have not been implemented yet, the plant has no lead smelting in operation and thus reductions in lead have already occurred. While the lead emissions reductions are not staggered or phased and therefore the ambient air quality concentrations are not expected to decrease over a long period of time, the lead reductions have already most notably occurred after Exide began its idling state in February 2013. Since shortly after Exide began idling, all of the North Reading Area's ambient air monitors have been reporting 3-month rolling averages well below the 2008 lead NAAQS. As ambient air quality concentrations have dropped, and have remained, below 0.15 µg/m 3, EPA believes that the Area has made RFP towards attainment.

    As provided in the COA between Exide and PADEP, if Exide seeks to resume its lead smelting operations at its facility, Exide would first need to comply with all of the control measures necessary to comply with the Secondary Lead Smelting NESHAP as well as the control measures specified in the COA. Upon implementation of these control strategies, Pennsylvania's modeling shows the ambient air quality concentrations should continue below the attainment level. Therefore, the Area should continue to attain the 2008 lead NAAQS whether Exide is operating or not and EPA thus finds that PADEP has met its RFP requirements for the North Reading Area.

    In summary, EPA finds the Pennsylvania attainment plan for North Reading Area meets CAA requirements in section 172 of the CAA for RACM/RACT and RFP. Further EPA analysis and reasoning supporting EPA's conclusion is available in the Control Strategies, Reasonable Further Progress, and Contingency Measures TSD found in the docket for this proposed action (EPA-R03-OAR-2015-0773) at www.regulations.gov.

    4. Contingency Measures

    As required by section 172(c)(9) of the CAA, an attainment demonstration must include contingency measures to be implemented if EPA determines that the nonattainment area in question has failed to make RFP or if the area fails to attain the NAAQS by the attainment date in December 2015. These measures must be fully adopted rules or control measures that can be implemented quickly and without additional EPA or state action if the area fails to meet RFP requirements or fails to meet it attainment date. Contingency measures should contain trigger mechanisms and an implementation schedule. In addition, these measures should not already be included in the SIP control strategy for attaining the standard.13

    13See 73 FR 67038 (November 12, 2008).

    For the North Reading Area attainment plan, Pennsylvania's SIP submission provides that if the air quality data for any 3-month rolling period after the implementation of the control measures identified in the COAs and Plan Approval No. 06-05066I exceed the 0.15 µg/m3 lead NAAQS, at least one of the contingency measures set forth in the COAs shall be implemented.

    The COA between Pennsylvania and Exide includes for contingency measures: Upgrade of existing fugitive dust control devices; increase existing lead emission stack heights; increased frequency of plant roadway surface cleaning; and an investigative study.14 PADEP will use two types of triggers, ambient air quality and emission events, for the implementation of contingency measures in the North Reading Area. Detailed information regarding the contingency measure actions and contingency measure triggers for Exide and Yuasa as well as EPA's analysis of these contingency measures for compliance with CAA requirements, can be found in the Control Strategies, Reasonable Further Progress, and Contingency Measures TSD located in the docket for this proposed action (EPA-R03-OAR-2015-0773) at www.regulations.gov.

    14 The COA between Pennsylvania and Yuasa includes an investigative study as a contingency measure for Yuasa. Appendix C-2 in PADEP's August 12, 2015 submittal, which can be found in docket for this rulemaking action.

    EPA finds these contingency measure triggers and actions will help ensure compliance with the 2008 lead NAAQS and meet the requirements of section 172(c)(9) of the CAA to ensure continued attainment of the NAAQS if any events occur interfering with attainment. EPA proposes to approve Pennsylvania's SIP revision as meeting section 172(c)(9) of the CAA.

    III. Proposed Action

    EPA's review of Pennsylvania's August 12, 2015 SIP revision for the attainment plan for the North Reading Area satisfies the applicable requirements of the CAA identified in EPA's final 2008 lead NAAQS rule and in section 172 of the CAA and its implementation regulations.15 EPA finds the attainment plan will result in attainment of the 0.15 µg/m3 standard for the 2008 lead NAAQS in the North Reading Area. EPA is proposing to approve the Pennsylvania SIP revision, which was submitted on August 12, 2015, for the North Reading nonattainment area for the 2008 lead NAAQS and includes the attainment demonstration, base year emissions inventory, RACM/RACT and RFP analyses, and contingency measures. EPA also proposes to approve for inclusion in the Pennsylvania SIP paragraph 3 of the COA between Exide and PADEP, dated June 15, 2015 and paragraphs 5 and 22 of the COA, dated June 12, 2012, between Yuasa and PADEP, as control measures for the attainment plan. EPA is soliciting public comments on the issues discussed in this document. These comments will be considered before taking final action.

    15 Section 172(c)(5) of the CAA requires permits for the construction and operation of new and modified major stationary sources anywhere in a nonattainment area. The Pennsylvania SIP includes provisions consistent with the federal requirements, set forth at 40 CFR 51.165, for nonattainment new source review (NSR). Yuasa is considered a natural minor for purposes of nonattainment NSR for all pollutants, including lead.

    IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the 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 proposed action:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    In addition, this proposed rule regarding PADEP's lead attainment plan for the North Reading Area, does not have tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in the state, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.

    List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Lead.

    Authority:

    42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    Dated: December 21, 2015. Shawn M. Garvin, Regional Administrator, Region III.
    [FR Doc. 2015-33303 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R06-OAR-2015-0783; FRL-9940-79-Region 6] Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Arkansas; New Mexico; Oklahoma; Disapproval of Greenhouse Gas Biomass Deferral, Step 2 and Minor Source Permitting Requirements AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Proposed rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to disapprove severable portions of the February 6, 2012 Oklahoma State Implementation Plan (SIP) submittal that are now inconsistent with federal laws due to intervening decisions by the United States Courts and EPA rulemaking. This submittal establishes Minor New Source Review permitting requirements for greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and includes Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) permitting provisions for sources that are classified as major, and, thus, required to obtain a PSD permit, based solely on their potential GHG emissions. The PSD permitting provisions also require a PSD permit for modifications of otherwise major sources because they increased only GHG above applicable levels. Additionally, we are proposing to disapprove severable portions of SIP submittals for the States of Arkansas, New Mexico, and Oklahoma addressing the EPA's July 20, 2011 rule deferring PSD requirements for carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from bioenergy and other biogenic sources (“Biomass Deferral”). We are proposing to disapprove the provisions adopting the Biomass Deferral because the deferral has expired, so the provisions are no longer consistent with federal laws. The EPA is proposing this disapproval under section 110 and part C of the Act.

    DATES:

    Written comments must be received on or before February 10, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments, identified by Docket No. EPA-R06-OAR-2015-0783, at http://www.regulations.gov or via email to [email protected] Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA 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 Ms. Adina Wiley, (214) 665-2115, [email protected] 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.

    Docket: The index to the docket for this action is available electronically at www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at the EPA Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas. While all documents in the docket are listed in the index, some information may be publicly available only at the hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted material), and some may not be publicly available at either location (e.g., CBI).

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ms. Adina Wiley, (214) 665-2115, [email protected] To inspect the hard copy materials, please schedule an appointment with Ms. Adina Wiley or Mr. Bill Deese at 214-665-7253.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Throughout this document wherever “we,” “us,” or “our” is used, we mean the EPA.

    I. Background A. The February 6, 2012 Oklahoma SIP Submittal

    On February 6, 2012, Oklahoma submitted revisions to the Oklahoma permitting programs for approval by the EPA into the Oklahoma SIP, including new Minor New Source Review (NSR) permitting requirements for GHG emissions at OAC 252:100-7-2.1 and revisions to the Oklahoma PSD program at OAC 252:100-8-31 (the definition of “subject to regulation”) to require PSD permits for sources solely because of GHG emissions. In addition, the submittal included many other updates to the Oklahoma SIP, unrelated to GHG permitting, which the EPA is addressing in separate actions. However, today's action only addresses the provisions for GHG permitting that are inconsistent with federal laws.

    B. The November 6, 2012 Arkansas SIP Submittal

    On November 6, 2012, Arkansas submitted revisions to the Arkansas Pollution Control and Ecology Commission's Regulations, Chapters 2, 4 and 9 for approval by the EPA into the Arkansas SIP. The EPA finalized our approval of the submitted revisions to the Arkansas PSD program at Regulation 19, Chapter 9 that provide the State of Arkansas with the authority to issue PSD permits governing GHG emissions on April 2, 2013, at 63 FR 19596. The EPA finalized approval of the other parts of the submittal on March 4, 2015, with the exception of the severable components of the submittal at Regulation 19, Chapter 4 specific to the Arkansas Minor NSR program, and the severable portion of the definition of “CO2 Equivalent Emissions” implementing the Biomass Deferral at Regulation 19, Chapter 2. Today's action only addresses the severable portion of the definition of “CO2 Equivalent Emissions” at Regulation 19, Chapter 2 submitted on November 6, 2012. The EPA will address the revisions to the Arkansas Minor NSR program at Regulation 19, Chapter 4 in a separate action, at a later date.

    C. The January 8, 2013 New Mexico SIP Submittal

    On January 8, 2013, New Mexico submitted regulations specific to the New Mexico PSD permitting program for approval by the EPA into the New Mexico SIP. The EPA finalized approval of a portion of this submittal pertaining to plantwide applicability limits for GHGs on December 11, 2013, at 78 FR 75253. The submittal also included revisions to the PSD permitting provisions that were adopted on January 7, 2013, at 20.2.74 NMAC to defer the application of the PSD requirements to CO2 emissions from bioenergy and other biogenic stationary sources consistent with the Biomass Deferral. The revisions to 20.2.74 NMAC to adopt the Biomass Deferral that are the subject of today's rulemaking are the only portions of the submittal remaining before the EPA for review and approval.

    D. The January 18, 2013 Oklahoma SIP Submittal

    On January 18, 2013, Oklahoma submitted revisions to the Oklahoma regulations for approval by the EPA into the Oklahoma SIP that included provisions in the general definitions at OAC 252:100-1-3 and OAC 252:100-8-31 to defer the application of the PSD requirements to biogenic CO2 emissions from bioenergy and other biogenic stationary sources that are the subject of today's rulemaking. The submittal also included many other updates to the Oklahoma SIP which the EPA is addressing in separate actions.

    II. The EPA's Evaluation A. Oklahoma SIP Submission Addressing Permitting of GHG Emissions in Oklahoma

    On February 6, 2012, the Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality submitted a revision to the Oklahoma SIP that included, among other things, provisions to regulate the emissions of GHGs in construction permitting programs. The revisions to the Oklahoma Minor Source Permitting Program at OAC 252:100-7-2.1 establish a mechanism for sources in Oklahoma to take enforceable emissions limitations on GHGs to avoid becoming a major source for GHG emissions under the Oklahoma PSD program. The revisions to the Oklahoma PSD program at OAC 252:100-8-31 adopted a new definition of “subject to regulation” to identify when emissions of GHGs would be regulated under the PSD program. The revisions to the Oklahoma PSD program submitted were consistent with the EPA's June 3, 2010, final rule “Prevention of Significant Deterioration and Title V Greenhouse Gas Tailoring Rule” (75 FR 31514) (hereafter referred to as the “Tailoring Rule”).

    The Tailoring Rule phased in permitting requirements for GHG emissions from stationary sources under the CAA PSD and title V permitting programs. In Step 1 of the Tailoring Rule, which began on January 2, 2011, the EPA limited application of PSD and title V requirements to sources of GHG emissions only if they were subject to PSD or title V “anyway” due to their emissions of pollutants other than GHGs. These sources are referred to as “anyway sources.” In Step 2 of the Tailoring Rule, which began on July 1, 2011, the PSD and title V permitting requirements under the CAA applied to some sources that were classified as major, and, thus, required to obtain a permit, based solely on their GHG emissions or potential to emit GHGs, and to modifications of otherwise major sources that required a PSD permit because they increased only GHG emissions above the level in the EPA regulations. We generally describe the sources covered by PSD during Step 2 of the Tailoring Rule as “Step 2 sources.”

    On June 23, 2014, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a decision in Utility Air Regulatory Group (UARG) v. EPA, 134 S. Ct. 2427, addressing the application of PSD and title V permitting requirements to GHG emissions. The U.S. Supreme Court held that the EPA may not treat GHGs as an air pollutant for the specific purpose of determining whether a source is a major source (or a modification thereof) and thus required to obtain a PSD or title V permit. The Court also said that the EPA could continue to require that PSD permits, otherwise required based on emissions of pollutants other than GHGs, contain limitations on GHG emissions based on the application of Best Available Control Technology (BACT). With respect to PSD, the ruling effectively upheld PSD permitting requirements for GHG emissions under Step 1 of the Tailoring Rule for “anyway sources,” and invalidated PSD permitting requirements for Step 2 sources.

    In accordance with the Supreme Court decision, on April 10, 2015, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (the DC Circuit) issued an Amended Judgment vacating the regulations that implemented Step 2 of the Tailoring Rule, but not the regulations that implement Step 1 of that rule. With respect to Step 2 sources, the DC Circuit's amended judgment ordered that the EPA regulations under review (including 40 CFR 51.166(b)(48)(v) and 40 CFR 52.21(b)(49)(v)) be vacated “to the extent they require a stationary source to obtain a PSD permit if greenhouse gases are the only pollutant (i) that the source emits or has the potential to emit above the applicable major source thresholds, or (ii) for which there is a significant emissions increase from a modification.”

    The EPA promulgated a final rule on August 19, 2015, removing the PSD permitting provisions for Step 2 sources from the federal regulations that the DC Circuit specifically identified as vacated (40 CFR 51.166(b)(48)(v) and 52.21(b)(49)(v)). Consistent with our August 19, 2015 final rule, the EPA is proposing to disapprove the submitted revisions at OAC 252:100-7-2.1 and OAC 252:100-8-31 that pertain to the minor source permitting of GHGs and the PSD permitting of Step 2 sources.

    B. SIP Submissions Addressing the GHG Biomass Deferral in Arkansas, New Mexico and Oklahoma

    On July 20, 2011, the EPA finalized a rulemaking entitled “Deferral for CO2 Emissions From Bioenergy and Other Biogenic Sources Under the Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) and Title V Programs”. (76 FR 43490) (“Biomass Deferral”). This rule deferred (for three years) the applicability of PSD and title V requirements CO2 emissions from biogenic sources.1 On July 12, 2013, the DC Circuit, in Center for Biological Diversity v. EPA, 722 F.3d 401, vacated the provisions of the Biomass Deferral. Due to a series of extension requests and rehearing proceedings, the court did not issue its mandate making the vacatur effective until August 10, 2015. However, the Biomass Deferral expired by its own terms on July 21, 2014. For both reasons, the Biomass Deferral is no longer applicable under federal laws.

    1 Emissions of CO2 from a stationary source directly resulting from the combustion or decomposition of biologically-based materials other than fossil fuels and mineral sources of carbon (e.g., calcium carbonate) and biologically-based material (nonfossilized and biodegradable organic material originating from plants, animals or micro-organisms [including products, by-products, residues and waste from agriculture, forestry and related industries as well as the nonfossilized and biodegradable organic fractions of industrial and municipal wastes, including gases and liquids recovered from the decomposition of non-fossilized and biodegradable organic material]).

    Our analysis, available in our Technical Support Document in the rulemaking docket, finds that the States of Arkansas, New Mexico and Oklahoma each adopted and submitted as revisions to their respective SIPs, provisions that were substantively consistent with the requirements of the EPA's now-expired Biomass Deferral. However, because the deferral expired on July 21, 2014, and the court issued its mandate, these provisions are no longer available for use under federal PSD regulations and should not be approved into a state's PSD SIP. For that reason, we are proposing to disapprove these provisions.

    C. Evaluation of the Submitted Revisions Under Section 110 of the CAA

    The EPA has an obligation under section 110 of the CAA to act on submitted SIP revisions unless these revisions are withdrawn by the State. Because these provisions have not yet been withdrawn from our consideration, the EPA has a duty to act on the submitted provisions pertaining to the PSD permitting of Step 2 sources in the Oklahoma SIP and the provisions incorporating the now-expired Biomass Deferral into the Arkansas, New Mexico and Oklahoma SIPs. Our proposed action today will disapprove these provisions because the provisions are no longer valid under federal law or consistent with federal regulations; as such, our action today will not undermine the respective SIPs, PSD programs, or any other requirement of the CAA.

    III. Proposed Action

    We are proposing to disapprove severable portions of the February 6, 2012 Oklahoma SIP submittal establishing GHG permitting requirements for minor sources and Step 2 PSD sources. The EPA has made the preliminary determination that these revisions to the Oklahoma SIP should be disapproved because they establish permitting requirements that are inconsistent with federal laws. Therefore, under section 110 and part C of the Act, and for the reasons presented above, the EPA is proposing to disapprove the following revisions:

    • Substantive revisions to the Oklahoma SIP establishing Minor NSR GHG permitting requirements at OAC 252:100-7-2.1 as submitted on February 6, 2012; and

    • Substantive revisions to the Oklahoma PSD program in OAC 252:100-8-31 establishing PSD permitting requirements for Step 2 sources at paragraph (E) of the definition of “subject to regulation” as submitted on February 6, 2012.

    We are also proposing to disapprove severable portions of the November 6, 2012 Arkansas SIP submittal, the January 8, 2013 New Mexico SIP, and the January 18, 2013 Oklahoma SIP submittal that include the Biomass Deferral in the Arkansas, New Mexico, and Oklahoma PSD programs. The EPA has made the preliminary determination that these revisions to the Arkansas, New Mexico, and Oklahoma SIPs should be disapproved because the Biomass Deferral has expired and adoption or implementation of these provisions is no longer consistent with federal regulations for PSD permitting. Therefore, under section 110 and part C of the Act, and for the reasons presented above, the EPA is proposing to disapprove the following revisions:

    • Substantive revisions to the Arkansas SIP definition of “CO2 Equivalent Emissions” at Regulation 19, Chapter 2 to implement the Biomass Deferral as submitted on November 6, 2012; and

    • Substantive revisions to the New Mexico SIP definition of “Subject to Regulation” at 20.2.74.7 (AZ)(2)(a) NMAC to implement the Biomass Deferral as submitted on January 8, 2013.

    • Substantive revisions to the Oklahoma SIP definitions of “carbon dioxide equivalent emissions” at OAC 252:100-1-3 and “subject to regulation” at OAC 252:100-8-31 as submitted on January 18, 2013.

    The EPA is proposing to disapprove the revisions listed because the submitted provisions are no longer consistent with federal laws. There will be no sanctions or punitive measures taken as a result of our finalization of this proposed disapproval.

    IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, the EPA's role is to approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this action merely proposes to disapprove state law as not meeting Federal requirements for the regulation and permitting of GHG emissions.

    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.

    B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)

    This action does not impose an information collection burden under the PRA. There is no burden imposed under the PRA because this action proposes to disapprove submitted revisions that are no longer consistent with federal laws for the regulation and permitting of GHG emissions.

    C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

    I certify that this action will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA. This action will not impose any requirements on small entities. This action proposes to disapprove submitted revisions that are no longer consistent with federal laws for the regulation and permitting of GHG emissions, and therefore will have no impact on small entities.

    D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)

    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. The action imposes no enforceable duty on any state, local or tribal governments or the private sector. This action proposes to disapprove submitted revisions that are no longer consistent with federal laws for the regulation and permitting of GHG emissions, and therefore will have no impact on small governments.

    E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    This action does not have federalism implications. It will not have substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship between the national government and the states, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.

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

    This action does not have tribal implications as specified in Executive Order 13175. This action proposes to disapprove provisions of state law that are no longer consistent with federal laws for the regulation and permitting of GHG emissions; there are no requirements or responsibilities added or removed from Indian Tribal Governments. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this action.

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

    The EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 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 disapproves state permitting provisions that are inconsistent with federal laws for the regulation and permitting of GHG emissions.

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

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

    I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)

    This rulemaking does not involve technical standards.

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

    The EPA believes the human health or environmental risk addressed by this action will not have potential disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects on minority, low-income or indigenous populations. This action is not subject to Executive Order 12898 because it disapproves state permitting provisions that are inconsistent with federal laws for the regulation and permitting of GHG emissions.

    List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

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

    Authority:

    42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    Dated: December 17, 2015. Ron Curry, Regional Administrator, Region 6.
    [FR Doc. 2015-33098 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 [EPA-R04-OAR-2013-0084; FRL-9940-88-Region 4] Air Plan Approval and Air Quality Designation; GA; Redesignation of the Atlanta, GA, 1997 Annual PM2.5 Nonattainment Area to Attainment AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Proposed rule.

    SUMMARY:

    On August 30, 2012, the Georgia Department of Natural Resources, through the Georgia Environmental Protection Division (GA EPD), submitted a request for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to redesignate the Atlanta, Georgia, fine particulate matter (PM2.5) nonattainment area (hereafter referred to as the “Atlanta Area” or “Area”) to attainment for the 1997 Annual PM2.5 national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) and to approve a state implementation plan (SIP) revision containing a maintenance plan for the Atlanta Area. EPA is proposing to determine that the Atlanta Area is continuing to attain the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS; to approve Georgia's plan for maintaining the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS in the Atlanta Area (maintenance plan), including the associated motor vehicle emission budgets (MVEBs) for nitrogen oxides (NOX) and PM2.5 for the year 2024, into Georgia's SIP; and to redesignate the Atlanta Area to attainment for the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA is also notifying the public of the status of EPA's adequacy determination for the Atlanta Area.

    DATES:

    Comments must be received on or before February 1, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R04-OAR-2013-0084, by one of the following methods:

    1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.

    2. Email: [email protected]

    3. Fax: (404) 562-9019.

    4. Mail: EPA-R04-OAR-2013-0084, 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.

    5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Ms. Lynorae Benjamin, Chief, 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. Such deliveries are only accepted during the Regional Office's normal hours of operation. The Regional Office's official hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding Federal holidays.

    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R04-OAR-2013-0084. EPA policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change and may be made available online at www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit through www.regulations.gov or email, information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected. The www.regulations.gov Web site is an “anonymous access” system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email comment directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov, your email address will be automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. For additional information about EPA's public docket visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.

    Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some information may not be 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 either electronically in 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:

    Joel Huey, 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. Joel Huey may be reached by phone at (404) 562-9104 or via electronic mail at [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Table of Contents I. What are the actions EPA is proposing to take? II. What is the background for EPA's proposed actions? III. What are the criteria for redesignation? IV. Why is EPA proposing these actions? V. What is EPA's analysis of the request? VI. What is the effect of the January 4, 2013, D.C. Circuit decision regarding PM2.5 implementation under subpart 4? VII. What is EPA's analysis of Georgia's proposed NOX and PM2.5 MVEBs for the Atlanta Area? VIII. What is the status of EPA's adequacy determination for the proposed NOX and PM2.5 MVEBs for 2024 for the Atlanta area? IX. Proposed Actions on the Redesignation Request and Maintenance Plan SIP Revisions Including Approval of the NOX and PM2.5 MVEBs for 2024 for the Atlanta Area. X. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews I. What are the actions EPA is proposing to take?

    EPA is proposing to take the following three separate but related actions, one of which involves multiple elements: (1) To determine that the Atlanta Area is continuing to attain the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS; (2) to approve Georgia's plan for maintaining the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS for the Atlanta Area (maintenance plan), including the associated MVEBs, into Georgia SIP; and (3) to redesignate the Atlanta Area to attainment for the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA is also notifying the public of the status of EPA's adequacy determination for the MVEBs for the Atlanta Area. The Atlanta Area is comprised of twenty whole counties and two partial counties in Georgia: Barrow, Bartow, Carroll, Cherokee, Clayton, Cobb, Coweta, DeKalb, Douglas, Fayette, Forsyth, Fulton, Gwinnett, Hall, Henry, Newton, Paulding, Rockdale, Spalding, Walton, and portions of Heard and Putnam Counties. Today's proposed actions are summarized below and described in great detail in this notice of proposed rulemaking.

    EPA is making the preliminary determination that the Atlanta Area is continuing to attain the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS based on recent air quality data 1 and proposing to approve Georgia's 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS maintenance plan for the Atlanta Area (such approval being one of the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) criteria for redesignation to attainment status). The maintenance plan is designed to help keep the Atlanta Area in attainment for the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS through 2024. As explained in Section V below, EPA is also proposing to determine that attainment can be maintained through 2025. The maintenance plan that EPA is proposing to approve today includes on-road MVEBs for the mobile source contribution of NOX and direct PM2.5 to the air quality problem in the Atlanta Area for transportation conformity purposes. EPA is proposing to approve the 2024 MVEBs for NOX and PM2.5 for the Atlanta Area and incorporate them in to the Georgia SIP.

    1 As discussed in section V below, this proposed determination is also based on EPA's December 8, 2011, determination that the Atlanta Area was attaining the standard at that time. 76 FR 76620.

    EPA also proposes to determine that the Atlanta Area has met the requirements for redesignation under section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. Accordingly, in this action, EPA is proposing to approve a request to change the legal designation of the Barrow, Bartow, Carroll, Cherokee, Clayton, Cobb, Coweta, DeKalb, Douglas, Fayette, Forsyth, Fulton, Gwinnett, Hall, Henry, Newton, Paulding, Rockdale, Spalding, Walton, and portions of Heard and Putnam Counties in Georgia from nonattainment to attainment for the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS.

    EPA is also notifying the public of the status of EPA's adequacy process for the 2024 NOX and PM2.5 MVEBs for the Atlanta Area. The Adequacy comment period began on February 21, 2013, with EPA's posting of the availability of Georgia's submission on EPA's Adequacy Web site (http://www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/transconf/currsips.htm#atlanta0221). The Adequacy comment period for these MVEBs closed on March 25, 2013. No comments, adverse or otherwise, were received through the Adequacy process. Please see section VIII of this proposed rulemaking for further explanation of this process and for more details on the MVEBs.

    In summary, today's notice of proposed rulemaking is in response to Georgia's August 30, 2012, redesignation request and associated SIP submission that address the specific issues summarized above and the necessary elements for redesignation described in section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA.

    II. What is the background for EPA's proposed actions?

    Fine particle pollution can be emitted directly or formed secondarily in the atmosphere.2 The main precursors of secondary PM2.5 are sulfur dioxide (SO2), NOX, ammonia, and volatile organic compounds (VOC). See 72 FR 20586, 20589 (April 25, 2007). Sulfates are a type of secondary particle formed from SO2 emissions of power plants and industrial facilities. Nitrates, another common type of secondary particle, are formed from NOX emissions of power plants, automobiles, and other combustion sources.

    2 Fine particulate matter, or PM2.5, refers to airborne particles less than or equal to 2.5 micrometers in diameter. Although treated as a single pollutant, fine particles come from many different sources and are composed of many different compounds. In the Atlanta Area, one of the largest components of PM2.5 is sulfate, which is formed through various chemical reactions from the precursor SO2. The other major component of PM2.5 is organic carbon, which originates predominantly from biogenic emission sources. Nitrate, which is formed from the precursor NOX, is also a component of PM2.5. Crustal materials from windblown dust and elemental carbon from combustion sources are less significant contributors to total PM2.5. VOCs, also precursors for PM, are emitted from a variety of sources, including motor vehicles, chemical plants, refineries, factories, consumer and commercial products, and other industrial sources. VOCs also are emitted by natural sources such as vegetation.

    On July 18, 1997, EPA promulgated the first air quality standards for PM2.5. EPA promulgated an annual standard at a level of 15 micrograms per cubic meter (μg/m3), based on a 3-year average of annual mean PM2.5 concentrations. In the same rulemaking, EPA promulgated a 24-hour standard of 65 μg/m3, based on a 3-year average of the 98th percentile of 24-hour concentrations. On October 17, 2006, EPA retained the annual average NAAQS at 15 μg/m3 but revised the 24-hour NAAQS to 35 μg/m3, based again on the 3-year average of the 98th percentile of 24-hour concentrations.3 See 71 FR 61144. Under EPA regulations at 40 CFR part 50, the primary and secondary 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS are attained when the annual arithmetic mean concentration, as determined in accordance with 40 CFR part 50, Appendix N, is less than or equal to 15.0 µg/m3 at all relevant monitoring sites in the subject area averaged over a 3-year period.

    3 In response to legal challenges of the annual standard promulgated in 2006, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (D.C. Circuit) remanded that NAAQS to EPA for further consideration. See American Farm Bureau Federation and National Pork Producers Council, et al. v. EPA, 559 F.3d 512 (D.C. Cir. 2009). However, given that the 1997 and 2006 Annual NAAQS are essentially identical, attainment of the 1997 Annual NAAQS would also indicate attainment of the remanded 2006 Annual NAAQS.

    On January 5, 2005, and supplemented on April 14, 2005, EPA designated the Atlanta Area as nonattainment for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. See 70 FR 944 and 70 FR 19844, respectively. On November 13, 2009, EPA promulgated designations for the 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS established in 2006 and designated all counties of the Atlanta Area as unclassifiable/attainment for that standard. See 74 FR 58688. EPA did not promulgate designations for the 2006 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS because that NAAQS was essentially identical to the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS. The November 13, 2009, action also clarified that all counties of the Atlanta Area were designated unclassifiable/attainment for the 1997 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS through the designations promulgated on January 5, 2005. Therefore, the Area is designated nonattainment for the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS, and today's action only addresses that designation.

    All 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS areas were originally designated under subpart 1 of title I, part D, of the CAA. Subpart 1 contains the general requirements for nonattainment areas for any pollutant governed by a NAAQS and is less prescriptive than the other subparts of title I, part D. On April 25, 2007, EPA promulgated its Clean Air Fine Particle Implementation Rule, codified at 40 CFR part 51, subpart Z, in which the Agency provided guidance for state and tribal plans to implement the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. See 72 FR 20664. This rule, at 40 CFR 51.1004(c), specifies some of the regulatory results of attaining the NAAQS, as discussed below. The D.C. Circuit remanded the Clean Air Fine Particle Implementation Rule and the final rule entitled “Implementation of the New Source Review (NSR) Program for Particulate Matter Less than 2.5 Micrometers (PM2.5)” (73 FR 28321, May 16, 2008) (collectively, “1997 PM2.5 Implementation Rules”) to EPA on January 4, 2013, in Natural Resources Defense Council v. EPA, 706 F.3d 428 (D.C. Cir. 2013). The Court found that EPA erred in implementing the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS pursuant to the general implementation provisions of subpart 1 of Part D of Title I of the CAA rather than the particulate matter-specific provisions of subpart 4 of part D of title I. The effect of the Court's ruling on this proposed redesignation action is discussed in detail in Section VI of this notice.

    The 3-year ambient air quality data for 2008-2010 indicated no violations of the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS for the Atlanta Area. As a result, on August 30, 2012, Georgia requested redesignation of the Atlanta Area to attainment for the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS. The redesignation request includes three years of ambient air quality data, certified as quality-assured by the State of Georgia, for the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS for 2008-2010, indicating that the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS had been achieved for the Atlanta Area. Under the CAA, nonattainment areas may be redesignated to attainment if sufficient quality-assured data is available for the Administrator to determine that the area has attained the standard and the area meets the other CAA redesignation requirements in section 107(d)(3)(E). The Atlanta Area's design value,4 based on data from 2008 through 2010, is below 15.0 µg/m3, which demonstrates attainment of the standard. While annual PM2.5 concentrations are dependent on a variety of conditions, the overall improvement in annual PM2.5 concentrations in the Atlanta Area can be attributed to the reduction of pollutant emissions, as discussed in more detail in Section V of this proposed rulemaking.

    4 Design values are the metrics that are compared to the NAAQS levels to determine attainment. The annual design value is calculated as the average of three consecutive annual means. See 40 CFR part 50, Appendix N.

    III. What are the criteria for redesignation?

    The CAA provides the requirements for redesignating a nonattainment area to attainment. Specifically, section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA allows for redesignation provided the following criteria are met: (1) The Administrator determines that the area has attained the applicable NAAQS; (2) the Administrator has fully approved the applicable implementation plan for the area under section 110(k); (3) the Administrator determines that the improvement in air quality is due to permanent and enforceable reductions in emissions resulting from implementation of the applicable SIP and applicable Federal air pollutant control regulations and other permanent and enforceable reductions; (4) the Administrator has fully approved a maintenance plan for the area as meeting the requirements of section 175A; and (5) the state containing such area has met all requirements applicable to the area under section 110 and part D of title I of the CAA.

    On April 16, 1992, EPA provided guidance on redesignation in the General Preamble for the Implementation of title I of the CAA Amendments of 1990 (57 FR 13498), and the Agency supplemented this guidance on April 28, 1992 (57 FR 18070). EPA has provided further guidance on processing redesignation requests in the following documents:

    1. “Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to Attainment,” Memorandum from John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality Management Division, September 4, 1992 (hereafter referred to as the “Calcagni Memorandum”);

    2. “State Implementation Plan (SIP) Actions Submitted in Response to Clean Air Act (CAA) Deadlines,” Memorandum from John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality Management Division, October 28, 1992; and

    3. “Part D New Source Review (Part D NSR) Requirements for Areas Requesting Redesignation to Attainment,” Memorandum from Mary D. Nichols, Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, October 14, 1994.

    IV. Why is EPA proposing these actions?

    On August 30, 2012, the State of Georgia, through the GA EPD, requested that EPA redesignate the Atlanta Area to attainment for the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA's evaluation indicates that the Area has attained the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS and meets the requirements for redesignation set forth in section 107(d)(3)(E), including the maintenance plan requirements under section 175A of the CAA. As a result, EPA is proposing to take the three related actions summarized in section I of this notice.

    V. What is EPA's analysis of the request?

    As stated above, in accordance with the CAA, EPA proposes in today's action to: (1) Make the determination that the Atlanta Area continues to attain the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS; (2) approve the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS maintenance plan for the Atlanta Area, including the associated MVEBs, into the Georgia SIP as described below; and (3) redesignate the Atlanta Area to attainment for the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS. The five redesignation criteria provided under CAA section 107(d)(3)(E) are discussed in greater detail for the Atlanta Area in the following paragraphs of this section.

    Criteria (1)—The Atlanta Area Has Attained the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS

    For redesignating a nonattainment area to attainment, the CAA requires EPA to determine that the area has attained the applicable NAAQS (CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(i)). For PM2.5, an area may be considered to be attaining the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS if it meets the standards, as determined in accordance with 40 CFR 50.13 and Appendix N of part 50, based on three complete, consecutive calendar years of quality-assured air quality monitoring data. To attain these NAAQS, the 3-year average of the annual arithmetic mean concentration, as determined in accordance with 40 CFR part 50, Appendix N, must be less than or equal to 15.0 µg/m3 at all relevant monitoring sites in the subject area over a 3-year period. The relevant data must be collected and quality-assured in accordance with 40 CFR part 58 and recorded in the EPA Air Quality System (AQS) database. The monitors generally should have remained at the same location for the duration of the monitoring period required for demonstrating attainment.

    On December 8, 2011, EPA determined that the Atlanta Area was attaining the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS and that the Area had attained the NAAQS by the applicable attainment date of April 5, 2010.5 See 76 FR 76620. For that action, EPA reviewed PM2.5 monitoring data from monitoring stations in the Atlanta Area for the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS for 2007 through 2010. Those data were quality-assured and recorded in AQS. For today's proposed action, EPA has reviewed all PM2.5 monitoring data after 2010 from the seven PM2.5 monitoring stations, and that data indicates that the Atlanta Area continues to attain the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS.

    5 The design value for an area is the highest 3-year average of annual mean concentrations recorded at any monitor in the area. Therefore, the 3-year design value for the period on which Georgia based its redesignation request (2008-2010) for the Atlanta Area is 12.9 μg/m3, which is below the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS. Additional details can be found in EPA's final clean data determination for the Atlanta Area. See 76 FR 76620 (December 8, 2011).

    As shown in Table 1 below, the monitors in the Atlanta Area that have collected complete data since 2010 all have three-year average PM2.5 concentrations (i.e., design values) that are in attainment with the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS and are trending downward overall. The most recent available design value is for 2014 and is based on the 3-year period 2012-2014. The Fire Station No. 8 monitor had incomplete data during the 3rd quarter of 2012 and is not eligible for the high value data substitution test in 40 CFR part 50, Appendix N. However, based upon the analysis described in the monitoring Technical Support Document (TSD) located in the docket for today's action, EPA has preliminarily determined that the upper end of the probable range for the 2014 design value at the Fire Station No. 8 monitor (11.1 µg/m3) is well below the NAAQS. On the basis of this review, EPA has preliminarily concluded that the Atlanta Area continues to meet the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS of 15.0 µg/m3 for the period 2012-2014, the most recent 3-year period of certified data availability.

    Table 1—Design Value Concentrations for the Atlanta Area for the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS [μg/m3] Location Site ID 3-Year design values 2008-2010 2009-2011 2010-2012 2011-2013 2012-2014 Georgia DOT 13-063-0091 12.9 12.6 12.3 11.1 10.3 GA National Guard 13-067-0003 12.3 * 11.7 * 11.3 * 10.4 10.0 Powder Springs # 13-067-0004 * 11.9 * 11.3 11.1 NA NA South DeKalb 13-089-0002 12.1 11.9 11.5 10.5 9.9 Police Dept. # 13-089-2001 12.3 * 11.8 * 11.3 NA NA E. Rivers School # 13-121-0032 12.3 * 11.8 * 11.3 NA NA Fire Station No. 8 13-121-0039 * 11.4 13.2 13.0 * 11.6 * 11.0 Gwinnett Tech 13-135-0002 12.1 * 11.6 * 11.2 * 10.1 9.5 Gainesville 13-139-0003 11.2 10.7 10.4 9.5 8.9 Yorkville 13-223-0003 11.0 * 10.6 * 10.3 * 9.3 8.7 * Data is incomplete. # Monitor shut down at the end of 2012 in accordance the State's federally approved monitoring network plan.

    The most recent data indicate the Atlanta Area continues to attain the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS beyond the submitted 3-year attainment period of 2008-2010. If the Area does not continue to attain before EPA finalizes the redesignation, EPA will not go forward with the redesignation. As discussed in more detail below, GA EPD has committed to continue monitoring in this Area in accordance with 40 CFR part 58.

    Criteria (5)—Georgia Has Met All Applicable Requirements Under Section 110 and Part D of the CAA; and Criteria (2)—Georgia Has a Fully Approved SIP Under Section 110(k) for the Atlanta Area

    For redesignating a nonattainment area to attainment, the CAA requires EPA to determine that the state has met all applicable requirements under section 110 and part D of title I of the CAA (CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(v)) and that the state has a fully approved SIP under section 110(k) for the area (CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii)). EPA proposes to find that Georgia has met all applicable SIP requirements for the Atlanta Area under section 110 of the CAA (general SIP requirements) and that the Georgia SIP satisfies the criterion that it meets applicable SIP requirements for purposes of redesignation under part D of title I of the CAA (requirements specific to 1997 Annual PM2.5 nonattainment areas) in accordance with section 107(d)(3)(E)(v). Further, EPA proposes to determine that the SIP is fully approved with respect to all requirements applicable for purposes of redesignation in accordance with section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii). In making these determinations, EPA ascertained which requirements are applicable to the Area and, if applicable, that they are fully approved under section 110(k). SIPs must be fully approved only with respect to requirements that were applicable prior to submittal of the complete redesignation request.

    a. The Atlanta Area Has Met All Applicable Requirements Under Section 110 and Part D of the CAA

    General SIP requirements. Section 110(a)(2) of title I of the CAA delineates the general requirements for a SIP, which include enforceable emissions limitations and other control measures, means, or techniques; provisions for the establishment and operation of appropriate devices necessary to collect data on ambient air quality; and programs to enforce the limitations. General SIP elements and requirements are delineated in section 110(a)(2) of title I, part A of the CAA. These requirements include, but are not limited to, the following: Submittal of a SIP that has been adopted by the state after reasonable public notice and hearing; provisions for establishment and operation of appropriate procedures needed to monitor ambient air quality; implementation of a source permit program; provisions for the implementation of part C requirements (Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD)) and provisions for the implementation of part D requirements (NSR permit programs); provisions for air pollution modeling; and provisions for public and local agency participation in planning and emission control rule development.

    Section 110(a)(2)(D) requires that SIPs contain certain measures to prevent sources in a state from significantly contributing to air quality problems in another state. To implement this provision, EPA has required certain states to establish programs to address the interstate transport of air pollutants. The section 110(a)(2)(D) requirements for a state are not linked with a particular nonattainment area's designation and classification in that state. EPA believes that the requirements linked with a particular nonattainment area's designation and classification are the relevant measures to evaluate in reviewing a redesignation request. The transport SIP submittal requirements, where applicable, continue to apply to a state regardless of the designation of any one particular area in the state. Thus, EPA does not believe that the CAA's interstate transport requirements should be construed to be applicable requirements for purposes of redesignation.

    In addition, EPA believes other section 110 elements that are neither connected with nonattainment plan submissions nor linked with an area's attainment status are not applicable requirements for purposes of redesignation. The area will still be subject to these requirements after the area is redesignated. The section 110 and part D requirements which are linked with a particular area's designation and classification are the relevant measures to evaluate in reviewing a redesignation request. This approach is consistent with EPA's existing policy on applicability (i.e., for redesignations) of conformity and oxygenated fuels requirements, as well as with section 184 ozone transport requirements. See Reading, Pennsylvania, proposed and final rulemakings (61 FR 53174-53176, October 10, 1996), (62 FR 24826, May 7, 1997); Cleveland-Akron-Loraine, Ohio, final rulemaking (61 FR 20458, May 7, 1996); and Tampa, Florida, final rulemaking at (60 FR 62748, December 7, 1995). See also the discussion on this issue in the Cincinnati, Ohio, redesignation (65 FR 37890, June 19, 2000) and in the Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, redesignation (66 FR 50399, October 19, 2001).

    In any event, on October 25, 2012, EPA approved all infrastructure SIP elements required under section 110(a)(2) for the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS with the exception of the visibility element under section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) (also known as “prong 4”). See 77 FR 65125. EPA approved prong 4 for the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS on May 7, 2014. See 79 FR 26143. These requirements are statewide requirements that are not linked to the PM2.5 nonattainment status of the Atlanta Area, and thus, as stated above, EPA does not believe these section 110 elements to be applicable for purposes of this redesignation. Therefore, EPA believes it has approved all SIP elements under section 110 that must be approved as a prerequisite for the redesignation to attainment of the Atlanta Area.

    Title I, Part D, subpart 1 applicable SIP requirements. EPA proposes to determine that the Georgia SIP meets the applicable SIP requirements for the Atlanta Area for purposes of redesignation under part D of the CAA. Subpart 1 of part D, found in sections 172-176 of the CAA, sets forth the basic nonattainment requirements applicable to all nonattainment areas. All areas that were designated nonattainment for the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS were designated under subpart 1 of the CAA. For purposes of evaluating this redesignation request, the applicable part D, subpart 1 SIP requirements for all nonattainment areas are contained in sections 172(c)(1)-(9) and in section 176. A thorough discussion of the requirements contained in sections 172 and 176 can be found in the General Preamble for Implementation of title I. See 57 FR 13498 (April 16, 1992). Section VI of this proposed rulemaking notice discusses the relationship between this proposed redesignation action and subpart 4 of Part D.

    Subpart 1 Section 172 Requirements. Section 172(c)(1) requires the plans for all nonattainment areas to provide for the implementation of all reasonably available control measures (RACM) as expeditiously as practicable and to provide for attainment of the NAAQS. EPA interprets this requirement to impose a duty on all nonattainment areas to consider all available control measures and to adopt and implement such measures as are reasonably available for implementation in each area as components of the area's attainment demonstration. Under section 172, states with nonattainment areas must submit plans providing for timely attainment and meeting a variety of other requirements. However, pursuant to 40 CFR 51.1004(c), EPA's final determination that the Atlanta Area is attaining the PM2.5 standard suspended Georgia's obligation to submit most of the attainment planning requirements that would otherwise apply.

    EPA's longstanding interpretation of the nonattainment planning requirements of section 172 is that once an area is attaining the NAAQS, those requirements are not “applicable” for purposes of CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii) and therefore need not be approved into the SIP before EPA can redesignate the area. In the 1992 General Preamble for Implementation of Title I, EPA set forth its interpretation of applicable requirements for purposes of evaluating redesignation requests when an area is attaining a standard. See 57 FR 13498, 13564 (April 16, 1992). EPA noted that the requirements for reasonable further progress (RFP) and other measures designed to provide for attainment do not apply in evaluating redesignation requests because those nonattainment planning requirements “have no meaning” for an area that has already attained the standard. Id. This interpretation was also set forth in the Calcagni Memorandum. EPA's understanding of section 172 also forms the basis of its Clean Data Policy, which was articulated with regard to PM2.5 in 40 CFR 51.1004(c), and suspends a state's obligation to submit most of the attainment planning requirements that would otherwise apply, including an attainment demonstration and planning SIPs to provide for RFP, RACM, and contingency measures under section 172(c)(9).6 Courts have upheld EPA's interpretation of section 172(c)(1)'s “reasonably available” control measures and control technology as meaning only those controls that advance attainment, which precludes the need to require additional measures where an area is already attaining. NRDC v. EPA, 571 F.3d 1245, 1252 (D.C. Cir. 2009); Sierra Club v. EPA, 294 F.3d 155, 162 (D.C. Cir. 2002); Sierra Club v. EPA, 314 F.3d 735, 744 (5th Cir. 2002).

    6 This regulation was promulgated as part of the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS implementation rule that was subsequently challenged and remanded in NRDC v. EPA, 706 F.3d 428 (D.C. Cir. 2013), as discussed in Section VI of this notice. However, the Clean Data Policy portion of the implementation rule was not at issue in that case.

    Therefore, because attainment has been reached in the Atlanta Area, no additional measures are needed to provide for attainment, and section 172(c)(1) requirements for an attainment demonstration and RACM are no longer considered to be applicable for purposes of redesignation as long as the Area continues to attain the standard until redesignation. The section 172(c)(2) requirement that nonattainment plans contain provisions promoting reasonable further progress toward attainment is also not relevant for purposes of redesignation because EPA has determined that the Atlanta Area has monitored attainment of the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS. In addition, because the Atlanta Area has attained the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS and is no longer subject to a RFP requirement, the requirement to submit the section 172(c)(9) contingency measures is not applicable for purposes of redesignation. Section 172(c)(6) requires the SIP to contain control measures necessary to provide for attainment of the NAAQS. Because attainment has been reached, no additional measures are needed to provide for attainment.

    Section 172(c)(3) requires submission for approval a comprehensive, accurate, and current inventory of actual emissions. On March 1, 2012, EPA approved Georgia's 2002 base-year emissions inventory for the Atlanta Area. See 77 FR 12487.

    Section 172(c)(4) requires the identification and quantification of allowable emissions for major new and modified stationary sources to be allowed in an area, and section 172(c)(5) requires source permits for the construction and operation of new and modified major stationary sources anywhere in the nonattainment area. EPA has determined that, since PSD requirements will apply after redesignation, areas being redesignated need not comply with the requirement that a NSR program be approved prior to redesignation, provided that the area demonstrates maintenance of the NAAQS without part D NSR. A more detailed rationale for this view is described in a memorandum from Mary Nichols, Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, dated October 14, 1994, entitled “Part D New Source Review Requirements for Areas Requesting Redesignation to Attainment.” Georgia has demonstrated that the Atlanta Area will be able to maintain the NAAQS without part D NSR in effect, and therefore Georgia need not have fully approved part D NSR programs prior to approval of the redesignation request. Georgia's PSD program will become effective in the Atlanta Area upon redesignation to attainment.

    Section 172(c)(7) requires the SIP to meet the applicable provisions of section 110(a)(2). As noted above, EPA believes the Georgia SIP meets the requirements of section 110(a)(2) applicable for purposes of redesignation.

    176 Conformity Requirements. Section 176(c) of the CAA requires states to establish criteria and procedures to ensure that federally-supported or funded projects conform to the air quality planning goals in the applicable SIP. The requirement to determine conformity applies to transportation plans, programs, and projects that are developed, funded, or approved under title 23 of the United States Code (U.S.C.) and the Federal Transit Act (transportation conformity) as well as to all other federally-supported or funded projects (general conformity). State transportation conformity SIP revisions must be consistent with federal conformity regulations relating to consultation, enforcement, and enforceability that EPA promulgated pursuant to its authority under the CAA.

    EPA believes that it is reasonable to interpret the conformity SIP requirements 7 as not applying for purposes of evaluating the redesignation request under section 107(d) because state conformity rules are still required after redesignation and federal conformity rules apply where state rules have not been approved. See Wall v. EPA, 265 F.3d 426 (upholding this interpretation) (6th Cir. 2001); See 60 FR 62748 (December 7, 1995). Nonetheless, Georgia has an approved conformity SIP for the Atlanta Area. See 77 FR 35866 (June 15, 2012).

    7 CAA Section 176(c)(4)(E) requires states to submit revisions to their SIPs to reflect certain federal criteria and procedures for determining transportation conformity. Transportation conformity SIPs are different from the motor vehicle emission budgets that are established in control strategy SIPs and maintenance plans.

    Thus, for the reasons discussed above, the Atlanta Area has satisfied all applicable requirements for purposes of redesignation under section 110 and part D of the CAA.

    b. The Atlanta Area Has a Fully Approved Applicable SIP Under Section 110(k) of the CAA

    EPA has fully approved the applicable Georgia SIP for the Atlanta Area for the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS under section 110(k) of the CAA for all requirements applicable for purposes of redesignation. EPA may rely on prior SIP approvals in approving a redesignation request (see Calcagni Memorandum at p. 3; Southwestern Pennsylvania Growth Alliance v. Browner, 144 F.3d 984 (6th Cir. 1998); Wall, 265 F.3d 426) plus any additional measures it may approve in conjunction with a redesignation action. See 68 FR 25426 (May 12, 2003) and citations therein. Following passage of the CAA of 1970, Georgia has adopted and submitted, and EPA has fully approved at various times, provisions addressing the various SIP elements applicable for the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS in the Atlanta Area (e.g., 77 FR 65125 (October 25, 2012)).

    As indicated above, EPA believes that the section 110 elements that are neither connected with nonattainment plan submissions nor linked to the area's nonattainment status are not applicable requirements for purposes of redesignation. EPA has approved all part D requirements applicable for purposes of this redesignation.

    Criteria (3)—The Air Quality Improvement in the Atlanta Area Is Due to Permanent and Enforceable Reductions in Emissions Resulting From Implementation of the SIP and Applicable Federal Air Pollution Control Regulations and Other Permanent and Enforceable Reductions

    For redesignating a nonattainment area to attainment, the CAA requires EPA to determine that the air quality improvement in the area is due to permanent and enforceable reductions in emissions resulting from implementation of the SIP and applicable Federal air pollution control regulations and other permanent and enforceable reductions (CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(iii)). EPA has preliminarily determined that Georgia has demonstrated that the observed air quality improvement in the Atlanta Area is due to permanent and enforceable reductions in emissions resulting from implementation of the SIP and Federal measures.

    Federal measures enacted in recent years have resulted in permanent emission reductions in particulate matter and its precursors. Most of these emission reductions are enforceable through regulations. A few non-regulatory measures also result in emission reductions. The Federal measures that have been implemented include:

    Tier 2 vehicle standards and low-sulfur gasoline. Implementation of the Tier 2 vehicle standards began in 2004, and as newer, cleaner cars enter the national fleet, these standards continue to significantly reduce NOX emissions. The standards require all classes of passenger vehicles in any manufacturer's fleet to meet an average standard of 0.07 grams of NOX per mile. In addition, starting in January of 2006, the Tier 2 rule reduced the allowable sulfur content of gasoline to 30 parts per million (ppm). Most gasoline sold prior to this had a sulfur content of approximately 300 ppm. EPA expects that these standards will reduce NOX emissions from vehicles by approximately 74 percent by 2030, translating to nearly 3 million tons annually by 2030.

    Heavy-duty gasoline and diesel highway vehicle standards & ultra low-sulfur diesel rule. On October 6, 2000, EPA promulgated a rule to reduce NOX and VOC emissions from heavy-duty gasoline and diesel highway vehicles that began to take effect in 2004. See 65 FR 59896. On January 18, 2001, EPA promulgated a second phase of standards and testing procedures which began in 2007 to reduce particulate matter emissions from heavy-duty highway engines and reduced the maximum highway diesel fuel sulfur content from 500 ppm to 15 ppm. See 66 FR 5002. The total program should achieve a 90 percent reduction in PM emissions and a 95 percent reduction in NOX emissions for new engines using low-sulfur diesel, compared to existing engines using higher-content sulfur diesel. EPA expects that this rule will reduce NOX emissions by 2.6 million tons by 2030 when the heavy-duty vehicle fleet is completely replaced with newer heavy-duty vehicles that comply with these emission standards.

    Non-road, large spark-ignition engines and recreational engines standards. The non-road spark-ignition and recreational engine standards, effective in July 2003, regulate NOX, hydrocarbons, and carbon monoxide from groups of previously unregulated non-road engines. These engine standards apply to large spark-ignition engines (e.g., forklifts and airport ground service equipment), recreational vehicles (e.g., off-highway motorcycles and all-terrain-vehicles), and recreational marine diesel engines sold in the United States and imported after the effective date of these standards. When all of the non-road spark-ignition and recreational engine standards are fully implemented, an overall 72 percent reduction in hydrocarbons, 80 percent reduction in NOX, and 56 percent reduction in carbon monoxide emissions are expected by 2020. These controls help reduce ambient concentrations of PM2.5.

    Large non-road diesel engine standards. This rule, which applies to diesel engines used in industries such as construction, agriculture, and mining, was promulgated in 2004 and fully phased in by 2014. This rule reduced allowable non-road diesel fuel sulfur levels from approximately 3,000 ppm to 500 ppm in 2007 and further reduced those levels to 15 ppm starting in 2010 (a 99 percent reduction). This rule also achieved significant reductions of up to 90 percent for NOX and particulate matter emissions nationwide.

    NO X SIP Call. On October 27, 1998 (63 FR 57356), EPA issued the NOX SIP Call requiring the District of Columbia and 22 states to reduce emissions of NOX, a precursor to ozone and PM2.5 pollution, and providing a mechanism (the NOX Budget Trading Program) that states could use to achieve those reductions. Affected states were required to comply with Phase I of the SIP Call beginning in 2004 and Phase II beginning in 2007. By the end of 2008, ozone season NOX emissions from sources subject to the NOX SIP Call dropped by 62 percent from 2000 emissions levels. All NOX SIP Call states have SIPs that currently satisfy their obligations under the NOX SIP Call, and EPA will continue to enforce the requirements of the NOX SIP Call.

    CAIR and CSAPR. In its redesignation request and maintenance plan, the State identified the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) as a permanent and enforceable measure that contributed to attainment in the Atlanta Area. Moreover, by 2007, the beginning of the attainment time period identified by Georgia, CAIR had been promulgated and was achieving emission reductions. CAIR created regional cap-and-trade programs to reduce SO2 and NOX emissions in 27 eastern states, including Georgia, that contributed to downwind nonattainment or interfered with maintenance of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS and the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. See 70 FR 25162 (May 12, 2005).

    In 2007 the State promulgated Georgia Rules 391-3-1-.02(2)(sss)—“Multipollutant Rule” (Rule (sss)) and 391-3-1-.02(2)(uuu)—“SO2 Emissions from Electric Steam Utility Steam Generating Units” (Rule (uuu)) in response to CAIR. Rule (sss) requires the installation and operation of flue gas desulfurization (FGD) to control SO2 emissions and selective catalytic reduction (SCR) to control NOX emissions on the majority of the coal-fired electric generating units (EGUs) in Georgia, and Rule (uuu) requires a 95 percent reduction in SO2 emissions from those EGUs. Thus, Rules (sss) and (uuu) act as companion rules for the reduction of SO2 emissions, with Rule (sss) requiring control equipment installation and Rule (uuu) imposing SO2 emission limitations. Georgia designed Rules (sss) and (uuu) to require emissions reductions consistent with achieving the reductions mandated by CAIR's original compliance schedule beginning in 2009. The implementation dates for Rules (sss) and (uuu) are phased-in across the covered EGUs, starting on December 31, 2008, for Rule (sss) and January 1, 2010, for Rule (uuu).8 By installing and operating FGD and SCR controls in accordance with Rule (sss), Georgia EGUs also met the requirements of CAIR.

    8 Rule (sss) established the following 2008-2010 deadlines for FGD operation: December 31, 2008, at Plant Bowen Units 3 and 4, Plant Hammond Units 1 through 4, Plant Wansley Unit 1, and Plant Yates Unit 1; June 1, 2009, at Plant Bowen Unit 2; December 31, 2009, at Plant Wansley Unit 2; and June 1, 2010, at Plant Bowen Unit 1. The Rule established the following 2008-2010 deadlines for SCR operation: December 31, 2008, at Plant Bowen Units 3 and 4, Plant Hammond Unit 4, and Plant Wansley Unit 1; June 1, 2009, at Plant Bowen Unit 2; December 31, 2009, at Plant Wansley Unit 2; and June 1, 2010, at Plant Bowen Unit 1. Plants Bowen and Wansley are located in the Atlanta Area, and Plant Hammond is located in Floyd County, Georgia, which is adjacent to the northwestern portion of the Atlanta Area.

    In 2008 the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (D.C. Circuit) initially vacated CAIR, North Carolina v. EPA, 531 F.3d 896 (D.C. Cir. 2008), but ultimately remanded the rule to EPA without vacatur to preserve the environmental benefits provided by CAIR, North Carolina v. EPA, 550 F.3d 1176, 1178 (D.C. Cir. 2008). On August 8, 2011 (76 FR 48208), acting on the D.C. Circuit's remand, EPA promulgated the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR) to replace CAIR and thus to address the interstate transport of emissions contributing to nonattainment and interfering with maintenance of the two air quality standards covered by CAIR as well as the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. CSAPR requires substantial reductions of SO2 and NOX emissions from EGUs in 28 states in the Eastern United States. As a general matter, because CSAPR is CAIR's replacement, emissions reductions associated with CAIR will for most areas be made permanent and enforceable through implementation of CSAPR.

    Numerous parties filed petitions for review of CSAPR in the D.C. Circuit, and on August 21, 2012, the court issued its ruling, vacating and remanding CSAPR to EPA and ordering continued implementation of CAIR. EME Homer City Generation, L.P. v. EPA, 696 F.3d 7, 38 (D.C. Cir. 2012). The D.C. Circuit's vacatur of CSAPR was reversed by the United States Supreme Court on April 29, 2014, and the case was remanded 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, but invalidated without vacating some of the CSAPR budgets as to a number of states. EME Homer City Generation, L.P. v. EPA, 795 F.3d 118 (D.C. Cir. 2015) (EME Homer City II). The remanded budgets include the Phase 2 SO2 emissions budgets for Georgia. The Phase 2 annual and ozone season NOX budgets for Georgia are not affected by the Court's decision. The litigation over CSAPR ultimately delayed implementation of that rule for three years, from January 1, 2012, when CSAPR's cap-and-trade programs were originally scheduled to replace the CAIR cap-and-trade programs, to January 1, 2015. Thus, the rule's Phase 2 budgets were originally promulgated to begin on January 1, 2014, and are now scheduled to begin on January 1, 2017. CSAPR will continue to operate under the existing emissions budgets until EPA addresses the D.C. Circuit's remand.

    Although the State identified CAIR as a permanent and enforceable measure that contributed to attainment of the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS in the Atlanta Area, EPA is proposing to approve the redesignation of the Atlanta Area without relying the SO2 emissions reductions associated with CAIR at Georgia EGUs as having led to attainment of the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS or contributing to maintenance of that standard.9 In so doing, we are proposing to determine that the D.C. Circuit's invalidation of the Georgia CSAPR Phase 2 SO2 emissions budgets does not bar today's proposed redesignation. The Court's decision did not affect Georgia's CSAPR Phase 2 annual NOX emissions budgets; therefore, CSAPR ensures that the NOX emissions reductions associated with CAIR at Georgia EGUs are permanent and enforceable.10

    9 The improvement in PM2.5 air quality in the Area from nonattainment to attainment is not due to CSAPR emissions reductions because, as noted above, CSAPR did not go into effect until January 1, 2015, after the Area was already attaining the standard.

    10 CAIR and CSAPR established annual NOX and SO2 budgets to address nonattainment and interference with maintenance of the PM2.5 standard because, as discussed above in Section II, NOX and SO2 are two primary PM2.5 precursors.

    In its redesignation request, Georgia noted that a number of states significantly contributed to PM2.5 concentrations in the Atlanta Area based on EPA air quality modeling. EPA identified the Atlanta Area as an area that was significantly impacted by pollution transported from other states in both CAIR and CSAPR, and these rules greatly reduced the tons of SO2 emissions generated in the states upwind of the Atlanta Area. The air quality modeling performed for the CAIR rulemaking identified the following seven states as having significantly contributed to PM2.5 concentrations in the Atlanta Area: Alabama, Florida, Indiana, Kentucky, Ohio, South Carolina, and Tennessee. See 70 FR 25162, 25247-49 (May 12, 2005). The total annual SO2 emissions generated by EGUs in these seven states in 2004, prior to the promulgation of CAIR in 2005, was approximately 3,814,790 tons. Even though the first phase of CAIR implementation for SO2 did not begin until 2010, many sources began reducing their emissions well in advance of the first compliance deadline because of the incentives offered by CAIR for early compliance with the rule. Therefore, by 2008, the total annual SO2 emissions generated by EGUs in the seven states significantly contributing to nonattainment in the Atlanta Area was approximately 2,636,952 tons, and by 2010, that volume had decreased to approximately 1,814,572 tons.11 The vast majority of the SO2 emission reductions in the states upwind of the Atlanta Area achieved by CAIR, and made permanent by CSAPR, are unaffected by the D.C. Circuit's remand of CSAPR.12

    11 This data was collected through the Acid Rain Program and is available on EPA's CAMD Web site at http://www2.epa.gov/airmarkets.

    12 Only two of the seven state Phase 2 SO2 budgets were remanded by the D.C. Circuit in EME Homer City II, and the emissions from these two states represented only 19.5 percent (515,165 tons) of the total SO2 EGU emissions from the seven significantly contributing states in 2008, 19.3 percent (375,913 tons) in 2009, and 16.5 percent (298,803 tons) in 2010. The CSAPR Phase 2 SO2 budgets for the remaining five states, and the emissions reductions those budgets require, are unaffected by the Court's remand and are permanent and enforceable. Moreover, updated air quality modeling performed for the CSAPR rulemaking identified additional states that interfered with Atlanta's attainment of the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS, and SO2 emission reductions from those additional states are unaffected by the D.C. Circuit's remand. 76 FR 48207, 48241 (August 8, 2011).

    Regarding the impact of SO2 emission reductions from Georgia EGUs associated with CAIR, EPA is proposing to determine that the Atlanta Area would have attained the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS even without those in-state EGU reductions. The Agency has reviewed an analysis submitted by the State on January 10, 2015, and revised on November 3, 2015, evaluating the sensitivity of PM2.5 concentrations in the Area to SO2 reductions associated with Rule (sss).13 The analysis was based on photochemical modeling conducted by the Visibility Improvement State and Tribal Association of the Southeast (VISTAS). The State used this modeling to determine the sensitivity of PM2.5 concentrations at the ten air quality monitors in the Atlanta Area to reductions in SO2 emissions from certain Georgia EGUs. The State then estimated, for each monitor, the air quality impact of the SO2 emission reductions from Georgia Rule (sss),14 and thus from CAIR, that occurred during the relevant time period. Georgia estimated that the SO2 controls in place due to Rule (sss) by the end of 2009 reduced the 2008-2010 Annual PM2.5 design value by approximately 0.6 µg/m3. Adding this impact to the highest 2008-2010 design value for the Atlanta Area, 13.6 µg/m3 for the Fire Station No. 8 site (with data substitution),15 yields a maximum PM2.5 concentration of 14.2 µg/m3, meeting the 1997 Annual PM2.5 standard of 15 µg/m3. The State therefore concluded that the Area would have attained the standard in the 2008-2010 timeframe even without the SO2 emission reductions, in place by the end of 2009, from Georgia Rule (sss).

    13 GA EPD, Sensitivity of Annual PM2.5 in Atlanta to SO2 Emission Reductions Resulting from Georgia's Multipollutant Rule [391-3-1-.02(2)(sss)] (attachment to a November 3, 2015, email from James Boylan, GA EPD, to Joel Huey, EPA Region 4, included in the docket for this action).

    14 By the end of 2009, Rule (sss) required FGD operation at Plant Bowen Units 2 through 4, Plant Hammond Units 1 through 4, Plant Wansley Units 1 and 2, and Plant Yates Unit 1.

    15 EPA's Clean Data Determination for the Atlanta Area describes this data substitution. See 76 FR 76620 (December 8, 2011).

    EPA proposes to agree with this analysis and believes that adding the 0.6 µg/m3 value to the 2008-2010 design value is a reasonable estimate of the actual impact of the SO2 emissions reductions due to Rule (sss) and CAIR at Georgia EGUs. For more information about Georgia's sensitivity analysis and EPA's review of that analysis, see the Rule (sss) impact TSD included in the docket for this action.16

    16 EPA Region 4, Technical Support Document for Georgia Rule (sss) Impact Analysis (November 2015).

    State Measures. The State identified Rules (sss) and (uuu) and the State's April 16, 2008 smoke management plan as state control measures that contributed to attainment of the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS in the Atlanta Area. Although Georgia describes these state measures in the section of its submittal devoted to “permanent and enforceable” reductions under CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(iii), “enforceable” means federally enforceable. Therefore, state measures that are not approved by EPA into a state's SIP are not “enforceable” for purposes of the CAA. However, EPA does not believe that the state measures' lack of enforceability poses a bar to proposed approval of the redesignation of the Atlanta Area.

    First, as discussed above, EPA proposes to agree with the State's sensitivity analysis demonstrating that the Area would have attained the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS even without the SO2 emission reductions associated with the installation of SO2 controls on Georgia EGUs subject to Rule (sss) and CAIR. To the extent that the controls required by Rule (sss) also achieved annual NOX reductions, CSAPR makes those reductions permanent and federally enforceable with its federal implementation plan (FIP) regarding Georgia's annual NOX emissions budget, which was not affected by the D.C. Circuit's recent remand of other state budgets.17 Second, to the extent that Rule (uuu) resulted in any reductions before its January 1, 2010, compliance date, Georgia's sensitivity analysis assumed that the FGD controls required by Rule (sss) achieve the 95 percent reduction in SO2 emissions required by Rule (uuu). Because Georgia's sensitivity analysis demonstrates that Rule (sss) was not necessary for attainment of the NAAQS in the Atlanta Area using emissions reductions associated with a 95 percent reduction in SO2, the same reduction required by Rule (uuu), the analysis also demonstrates that Rule (uuu) was not necessary for attainment prior to January 1, 2010. Finally, with regard to the State's smoke management plan, that measure is focused on protection of Georgia's forest land. While the SMP may result in some direct PM emission reductions, such reductions are likely to be modest because the SMP is not an emission reduction measure. The SMP was developed as tool to minimize the public health and environmental impacts of smoke intrusion into populated areas through better management of fires that are important to forests and agricultural resources. In addition, the State deemed it important to have an SMP in place for the purpose of flagging unusually large forest fires as exceptional events (which could impact an area's ability to show maintenance through attaining design values). The rule therefore has more impact on rural areas than an urban environment such as Atlanta, where direct PM2.5 emissions from fires make up less than one percent of the total direct PM2.5 emissions from fires across the State.18 For these reasons, EPA has not relied on these state-only rules as a basis for proposing approval of the redesignation request and associated maintenance plan.

    17 76 FR 48208, August 8, 2011.

    18See 2011 emissions inventory information available at http://www3.epa.gov/ttn/chief/eiinformation.html. Georgia also stated that the measure is not necessary for the continued maintenance of attainment in the Atlanta Area.

    Criteria (4)—The Atlanta Area Has a Fully Approved Maintenance Plan Pursuant to Section 175A of the CAA

    For redesignating a nonattainment area to attainment, the CAA requires EPA to determine that the area has a fully approved maintenance plan pursuant to section 175A of the CAA (CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(iv)). In conjunction with its request to redesignate the Atlanta Area to attainment for the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS, GA EPD submitted a SIP revision to provide for the maintenance of the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS for at least 10 years after the effective date of redesignation to attainment. EPA believes that this maintenance plan meets the requirements for approval under section 175A of the CAA for the reasons discussed below.

    a. What is required in a maintenance plan?

    Section 175A of the CAA sets forth the elements of a maintenance plan for areas seeking redesignation from nonattainment to attainment. Under section 175A, the plan must demonstrate continued attainment of the applicable NAAQS for at least 10 years after the Administrator approves a redesignation to attainment. Eight years after the redesignation, GA EPD must submit a revised maintenance plan which demonstrates that attainment will continue to be maintained for the 10 years following the initial 10-year period. To address the possibility of future NAAQS violations, the maintenance plan must contain such contingency measures, as EPA deems necessary, to assure prompt correction of any future 1997 Annual PM2.5 violations. The Calcagni Memorandum provides further guidance on the content of a maintenance plan, explaining that a maintenance plan should address five requirements: The attainment emissions inventory, maintenance demonstration, monitoring, verification of continued attainment, and a contingency plan. As is discussed below, EPA proposes to find that GA EPD's maintenance plan includes all the necessary components and is thus proposing to approve it as a revision to the Georgia SIP.

    b. Attainment Emissions Inventory

    As noted earlier, EPA has previously determined that the Atlanta Area attained the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS based on monitoring data for the 3-year period from 2008-2010. Today, EPA is proposing to determine that the Atlanta Area has continued to attain the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS up to the most recent 3-year period quality-assured monitoring data, 2012-2014. In its maintenance plan, the State selected 2008 as the attainment emission inventory year. The attainment inventory identifies a level of emissions in the Area that is sufficient to attain the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS. GA EPD began development of the attainment inventory by first generating a baseline emissions inventory for the Atlanta Area. As noted above, the year 2008 was chosen as the base year for developing a comprehensive emissions inventory for direct PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursors SO2 and NOX. To support maintenance through 2024, Georgia prepared emissions projections for the years 2014, 2017, 2020, and 2024.

    The emissions inventories are composed of four major types of sources: Point, area, on-road mobile, and non-road mobile. With the exception of on-road emissions, Georgia obtained the 2008 base-year emissions inventory from the National Emissions Inventory 2008 Version 1.5 (http://www3.epa.gov/ttnchie1/net/2008inventory.html). Georgia used EPA's MOVES2010a mobile source emissions model to generate 2008 on-road mobile source emissions. The 2008 actual SO2, NOX, and PM2.5 emissions for the Atlanta Area, as well as the emissions projections through 2024, were developed consistent with EPA guidance and are summarized in Tables 3.1 and 4 through 7.1 of the following subsection discussing the maintenance demonstration.

    Section 175A requires a state seeking redesignation to attainment to submit a SIP revision to provide for the maintenance of the NAAQS in the Area “for at least 10 years after the redesignation.” EPA has interpreted this as a showing of maintenance “for a period of ten years following redesignation.” Calcagni Memorandum, p. 9. Where the emissions inventory method of showing maintenance is used, the purpose is to show that emissions during the maintenance period will not increase over the attainment year inventory. Calcagni Memorandum, pp. 9-10.

    As discussed in detail below, Georgia's maintenance plan submission expressly documents that the Area's overall emissions inventories will remain well below the attainment year inventories through 2024. Although the State's maintenance demonstration includes projected emissions reductions from Georgia Rules (sss) and (uuu), EPA believes the plan still demonstrates maintenance as discussed in the following subsection.

    In addition, for the reasons set forth below, EPA believes that the Area will continue to maintain the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS at least through 2025. Thus, if EPA finalizes its proposed approval of the redesignation request and maintenance plans in 2015, the approval will be based upon this showing, in accordance with section 175A, and EPA's analysis described herein, that the State's maintenance plan provides for maintenance for at least ten years after redesignation.

    c. Maintenance Demonstration

    The August 30, 2012, submittal includes a maintenance demonstration for the Atlanta Area through 2024. This demonstration uses 2008 as the attainment year; identifies 2024 as the “out year;” and includes future emission inventory projections for point, area, on-road mobile, and non-road mobile sources in the Atlanta Area for 2014, 2017, 2020, and 2024 (see Tables 3-7, below). The emissions projections for 2014 and 2020 provide reference points for periodic assessment of maintenance of the NAAQS and were estimated using 2008 actuals and 2017 and 2024 projections. Appendix C of Georgia's 2012 submittal describes the methodology used by the State to prepare the actual and projected emissions inventories.

    The future emissions inventory projections in the State's maintenance demonstration include reductions from the implementation of Georgia Rules (sss) and (uuu). However, as discussed above, these two State rules are not permanent and enforceable measures for the purposes of redesignation. EPA therefore recalculated the projected 2014, 2017, 2020, and 2024 point source emissions in the Atlanta Area by removing projected Rule (sss) and Rule (uuu) NOX, SO2, and PM2.5 emissions reductions 19 and replacing these reductions with only those NOX, SO2, and PM2.5 reductions from permanent and enforceable shutdowns at Plant Branch Units 1 through 4 and Plant Yates Units 1 through 5 and from permanent and enforceable conversions from coal to natural gas at Plant Yates Units 6 and 7.20 Georgia did not incorporate the emissions reductions resulting from these shutdowns and conversions in its maintenance demonstration because they were not anticipated by the State at the time of its 2012 submittal.

    19 Although, as discussed above, the NOX emission reductions associated with Rule (sss) are permanent and enforceable through CSAPR, EPA recalculated the projected point source emissions without anticipated Rule (sss) NOX reductions to generate a conservative maintenance demonstration.

    20 Georgia Power retired Plant Branch Unit 2 in September 2013; retired Plant Branch Units 1, 3, and 4 and Plant Yates Units 1-5 in April 2015; and converted Plant Yates Units 6 and 7 from coal to natural gas in May 2015. Georgia Power certified under penalty of law that the retirements are permanent in Retired Unit Exemption (RUE) forms submitted to EPA under the Acid Rain, CAIR, and CSAPR programs. The Plant Yates retirements and conversions occurred through a Title V permit amendment effective on August 29, 2014. Yates Steam-Electric Generating Plant Part 70 Operating Permit Amendment No. 4911-077-0001-V-03-5. This Title V permit amendment and the RUE forms discussed above are included in the docket.

    EPA removed the emissions reductions attributed to Georgia Rules (sss) and (uuu) from the State's emissions projections by assuming that NOX, SO2, and PM2.5 emissions from EGUs in the Atlanta Area were not reduced through Rules (sss) and (uuu) after 2008 and added the reductions from the aforementioned shutdowns and conversions.21 Table 2.1 identifies the EGU emissions included in the State's maintenance demonstration, and Table 2.2 identifies the EGU emissions included in EPA's recalculated point source emission projections for the Atlanta Area.

    21 EPA estimated the emissions reductions associated with Rules (sss) and (uuu) and with the shutdowns and conversions to natural gas using emissions projections provided by GA EPD on November 13, 2015. These projections are included in the docket for today's action.

    .

    Table 2.1—EGU Emissions, Actual (2008) and Projected for the Atlanta Area [Tons] Pollutant 2008 2014 2017 2020 2024 SO2 410,496 169,176 48,516 49,781 50,413 NOX 76,178 40,535 22,713 23,372 23,702 PM2.5 4,938 3,760 3,171 3,296 3,358 Table 2.2—EGU Emissions, Actual (2008) and Projected for the Atlanta Area, Revised To Include Only EGU Shutdowns and Natural Gas Conversions [Tons] Pollutant 2008 2014 2017 2020 2024 SO2 410,496 294,859 237,040 243,210 246,294 NOX 76,177 58,173 49,171 50,519 51,193 PM2.5 4,937 4,724 4,618 4,781 4,862

    Table 3.1 shows the 2008 actual point source emissions and the projected future year point source emissions in the Atlanta Area provided by the State in its 2012 submittal. Table 3.2 shows the 2008 actual point source emissions and projected future year point source emissions using EPA's EGU projections shown in Table 2.2, above.

    Table 3.1—Point Source Emissions, Actual (2008) and Projected for the Atlanta Area [Tons] Pollutant 2008 2014 2017 2020 2024 SO2 413,478 172,170 51,697 52,601 53,803 NOX 80,785 45,489 27,867 28,535 29,423 PM2.5 5,637 4,541 3,993 4,120 4,288 Table 3.2—Point Source Emissions, Actual (2008) and Projected for the Atlanta Area, Revised To Include Only EGU Shutdowns and Natural Gas Conversions [Tons] Pollutant 2008 2014 2017 2020 2024 SO2 413,478 297,974 240,221 246,530 249,684 NOX 80,785 63,145 54,325 56,051 56,914 PM2.5 5,637 5,506 5,440 5,675 5,792

    Tables 4 through 6 show the actual and projected non-point, on-road mobile, and non-road mobile source emissions for the Atlanta Area as provided in the State's 2012 submittal. These emissions are not impacted by Rules (sss) and (uuu) because these rules only apply to certain EGUs.

    Table 4—Non-point Source Emission, Actual (2008) and Projected for the Atlanta Area [Tons] Pollutant 2008 2014 2017 2020 2024 SO2 10,237 10,557 10,717 10,884 11,107 NOX 21,193 23,531 24,698 25,916 27,537 PM2.5 35,686 40,052 42,232 44,072 46,520 Table 5—On-Road Mobile Source Emissions, Actual (2008) and Projected for the Atlanta Area [Tons] Pollutant 2008 2014 2017 2020 2024 SO2 725 629 581 533 469 NOX 128,955 93,806 76,258 58,675 35,272 PM2.5 4,662 3,529 2,963 2,397 1,642 Table 6—Non-Road Emissions, Actual (2008) and Projected for the Atlanta Area [Tons] Pollutant 2008 2014 2017 2020 2024 SO2 1,675 1,516 1,437 1,553 1,708 NOX 40,599 34,086 30,835 29,747 28,298 PM2.5 2,827 2,360 2,127 1,967 1,755

    Below, Table 7.1 shows the 2008 actual emissions from all source sectors and the projected future year emissions from all source sectors in the Atlanta Area provided by the State. Table 7.2 reflects EPA's revisions to the point-source emissions projections shown in Table 3.2, above.

    Table 7.1—All Sector Emissions, Actual (2008) and Projected Emissions for the Atlanta Area [Tons] Pollutant 2008 2014 2017 2020 2024 SO2 426,115 184,873 64,433 65,572 67,088 NOX 271,531 196,912 159,659 142,873 120,530 PM2.5 48,811 50,482 51,316 52,556 54,205 Table 7.2—All Sector Emissions, Actual (2008) and Projected Emissions for the Atlanta Area, Revised With EPA's Point-Source Emissions Projections [Tons] 22 Pollutant 2008 2014 2017 2020 2024 SO2 426,115 310,677 252,957 257,248 262,969 NOX 271,531 214,589 186,117 173,715 157,179 PM2.5 48,811 51,446 52,763 54,299 56,348

    The results of EPA's analysis, shown in Table 7.2, show that future emissions for NOX and SO2 are expected to be well below 2008 “attainment level” emissions without Georgia Rules (sss) and (uuu), while direct PM2.5 emissions are expected to increase slightly. In situations where local emissions are the primary contributor to nonattainment, such as the Atlanta Area, if the future projected emissions in the nonattainment area remain at or below the baseline emissions in the nonattainment area, then the ambient air quality standard should not be exceeded in the future. As explained below, EPA proposes to find that the overall emission projections illustrate that the Atlanta Area is expected to continue to attain the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS through 2025. Moreover, as noted earlier, the Atlanta Area was identified in EPA's federal interstate transport rulemakings—CAIR and CSAPR—as an area that was projected to have problems with nonattainment and maintenance of the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS due to transported pollution from other states. Continued implementation of CSAPR in the vast majority of those upwind states will also help the Atlanta Area maintain the standard.

    22 The revised emission projections reflect no emission reductions from EGUs beyond 2008 other than the permanent and enforceable emission reductions that have occurred due to the shutdowns and conversions identified above.

    As shown in Table 7.2, EPA projects that SO2 and NOX emissions will decline by approximately 38 percent and 42 percent, respectively, from 2008 to 2024 without Georgia Rules (sss) and (uuu). This decrease is due to the implementation of Federal controls during the first half of the maintenance period and to the permanent and enforceable shutdowns and conversions discussed above. Emissions of PM2.5 are expected to increase by approximately 15.4 percent (7,537 tons) from 2008 through 2024 due to projected increases in non-point source PM2.5 emissions. Therefore, EPA further evaluated whether the increase in PM2.5 emissions, in combination with the decreases in SO2 and NOX emissions, would provide for maintenance of the standard.

    Because the relationship between pollutant emissions and ambient air quality is different for each of the three pollutants, the changes in emissions for each pollutant must be weighted according to the air quality impact of each pollutant. To evaluate this relationship, the State examined speciation data available from the EPA Air Explorer Web site for 2007-2009 for the DeKalb County monitor (13-089-0002). The 3-year average of this data suggests that ambient PM2.5 in Atlanta consists of approximately 40.7 percent sulfate; 1.2 percent nitrate; 50.1 percent organic particulate matter (which consists of directly-emitted primary organic matter and atmospherically formed secondary organic aerosol); 4.2 percent miscellaneous inorganic particulate matter; and 3.7 percent other types of particulate matter. Therefore, using a conservative assumption that all of the organic particulate matter is primary organic matter, the direct PM2.5 species make up approximately 54.3 percent of the total ambient PM2.5.

    A conservative approach assumes the full ambient concentration of organic particulate matter plus miscellaneous inorganic particulate matter will vary in accordance with changes in total nonattainment area emissions of direct PM2.5. This analysis thus assumes that the component of ambient PM2.5 attributable to direct PM2.5 species will increase by the same percentage as the percentage increase in direct PM2.5 emissions projected for the Atlanta Area (i.e., 15.4 percent). The baseline concentration is conservatively assumed to be 15.0 µg/m3, and direct PM2.5 is estimated to contribute 54.3 percent, or 8.1 µg/m3, of that baseline. Thus, a 15.4 percent increase in the 8.1 µg/m3 of the direct PM2.5 component would suggest a resulting 1.2 µg/m3 increase in the ambient concentration. As discussed earlier, the highest 2008-2010 design value for the Atlanta Area was 13.6 µg/m3 (with data substitution) and the 2011-2014 design value is 11.1 µg/m3 (with data substitution). Thus, even if the design value were to increase by 1.2 µg/m3, the standard of 15 µg/m3 would still be met. Furthermore, the projected increase in direct PM2.5 emissions (approximately 7,537 tons) will be at least partially, if not fully, offset by a significant decrease in sulfate and nitrate emissions, resulting in a continued decrease in the PM2.5 design values in the Atlanta Area. As shown in Table 7.2, EPA expects that, at a minimum, SO2 and NOX emissions will decrease by approximately 163,146 tons and 114,352 tons, respectively, from 2008 through 2024.

    A maintenance plan requires the state to show that projected future year overall emissions will not exceed the level of emissions which led the Area to attain the NAAQS. For the reasons discussed above, EPA believes that the projected emissions demonstrate that the Atlanta Area will continue to attain for the duration of the maintenance plan.

    While GA EPD's maintenance plan projects maintenance of the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS through 2024, as noted above, EPA believes that the Atlanta Area will continue to maintain the standard at least through the year 2025 for several reasons: All of the federal regulatory requirements that enabled the Area to attain the NAAQS will continue to be in effect and enforceable after the 10-year maintenance period; the most recent maximum potential annual PM2.5 design value (for the period 2012 to 2014) for the Area, 11.1 µg/m3,23 is well below the standard of 15.0 µg/m3; and overall emissions are projected to decline significantly through 2024. Because it is highly improbable that emissions will suddenly increase after 2024 and exceed attainment year inventory levels in 2025, EPA expects the projected downward trend in pollutant emissions in the Atlanta Area to continue to demonstrate maintenance of the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS through at least the year 2025.

    23 As noted earlier, due to incomplete data at one monitoring site during the third quarter of 2012, EPA conducted a statistical analysis to determine a maximum potential design value of 11.1 µg/m3 for the period 2012 to 2014. The analysis is described in detail in the monitoring TSD included in the docket for this rulemaking.

    d. Monitoring Network

    There are currently seven monitors measuring ambient PM2.5 in the Atlanta Area. GA EPD has committed to continue operation of the monitors in the Atlanta Area in compliance with 40 CFR part 58 and have thus addressed the requirement for monitoring. EPA approved Georgia's 2014 monitoring plan on November 7, 2014.

    e. Verification of Continued Attainment

    The State of Georgia, through the GA EPD, has the legal authority to enforce and implement the requirements of the Atlanta Area 1997 Annual PM2.5 maintenance plan. This includes the authority to adopt, implement, and enforce any subsequent emissions control contingency measures determined to be necessary to correct future PM2.5 attainment problems.

    GA EPD will track the progress of the maintenance plan by performing future reviews of triennial emission inventories for the Atlanta Area as required in the Air Emissions Reporting Rule (AERR) and Consolidated Emissions Reporting Rule (CERR). For these periodic inventories, GA EPD will review the assumptions made for the purpose of the maintenance demonstration concerning projected growth of activity levels. If any of these assumptions appear to have changed substantially, then GA EPD will re-project emissions for the Atlanta Area.

    f. Contingency Measures in the Maintenance Plan

    Section 175A of the CAA requires that a maintenance plan include such contingency measures as EPA deems necessary to assure that the state will promptly correct a violation of the NAAQS that occurs after redesignation. The maintenance plan should identify the contingency measures to be adopted, a schedule and procedure for adoption and implementation, and a time limit for action by the State. A state should also identify specific indicators to be used to determine when the contingency measures need to be implemented. The maintenance plan must include a requirement that a state will implement all measures with respect to control of the pollutant that were contained in the SIP before redesignation of the area to attainment in accordance with section 175A(d).

    The contingency measures included in Georgia's maintenance plan for the Atlanta Area include a triggering mechanism to determine when contingency measures are needed and a process of developing and implementing appropriate control measures. GA EPD will use actual ambient monitoring data to determine whether a trigger event has occurred and when contingency measures should be implemented. Georgia's trigger mechanisms include two tiers: Tier I and Tier II.

    A Tier I trigger is activated when any of the following conditions occurs:

    • The previous calendar year's annual average PM2.5 concentration exceeds the standard by 1.5 µg/m3 or more;

    • The annual mean PM2.5 concentration in each of the previous two consecutive calendar years exceeds the NAAQS by 0.5 µg/m3 or more;

    • The total maintenance area SO2 emissions in the most recent NEI exceeds the corresponding attainment-year inventory by more than 10.0 percent;

    • The total maintenance area PM2.5 emissions in the most recent NEI exceed the corresponding attainment-year inventory by more than 30.0 percent.

    A Tier II trigger is activated when any violation of the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS at any federal reference method (FRM) monitor in the Atlanta maintenance area is recorded, based on quality-assured monitoring data.

    In the event of either a Tier I or Tier II trigger, GA EPD will conduct a comprehensive study as expeditiously as practicable, but no later than nine months after the trigger is activated. GA EPD will evaluate a Tier I condition, if it occurs, to determine the causes of the ambient PM2.5 or emissions inventory increase and to determine if a Tier II condition is likely to occur. GA EPD will evaluate a Tier I condition, if it occurs, to determine the cause of the trigger and determine if the cause(s) of the ambient PM2.5 increase and to determine if the increase is likely to continue. Through the comprehensive study, GA EPD will attempt to determine whether the trigger condition is due to local emissions, emissions from elsewhere, or a combination of these. The study will also include a determination regarding the emissions control measures that may be necessary to prevent or correct a violation of the NAAQS.

    GA EPD will implement any required measures as expeditiously as practicable, taking into consideration the ease of implementation and the technical and economic feasibility of selected measures. Previously adopted controls, which have not yet realized emission reductions and which are not relied upon in the maintenance demonstration, will be implemented within 24 months from trigger activation.24 If the study determines that such previously adopted emission control programs are not sufficient to address any violation of the NAAQS, EPD will adopt additional rules or controls to require further emission reductions. Any additional rules or controls to address a violation would be adopted and implemented within 24 months of trigger activation and will be submitted to EPA for approval into Georgia's SIP.

    24 In a September 23, 2013, letter to EPA, the State clarified the timing and content of its contingency measures included in the maintenance plan for the Atlanta Area. In this letter, the State reaffirmed its commitment to address and correct any violation of the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS as expeditiously as practicable and to do so no later than 24 months from the trigger activation.

    In any event, if a Tier II trigger is activated, EPD will consult and seek review from EPA on the analysis to determine the cause of the violation. The contingency measure(s) will be selected from the following types of emission controls or from any other control deemed appropriate and effective at the time the selection is made by EPD:

    • RACM for sources of SO2 and PM2.5;

    • Reasonably Available Control Technologies (RACT) for point sources of SO2 and PM2.5;

    • Expansion of RACM/RACT to areas of transport within the State;

    • Mobile source measures; and

    • Additional SO2 and/or PM2.5 reduction measures yet to be identified.

    In addition to the triggers indicated above, Georgia will monitor regional emissions through the CERR and AERR and compare them to the projected inventories and the attainment year inventory. In the August 30, 2012, submittal, the State acknowledges that the contingency plan requires the implementation of all measures contained in the SIP for the Area prior to redesignation. The State also notes that these measures are currently in effect and may be evaluated by the State to determine if they are adequate or up-to-date.

    EPA has preliminarily concluded that the maintenance plan adequately addresses the five basic components required: The attainment emissions inventory, maintenance demonstration, monitoring, verification of continued attainment, and a contingency plan. Therefore, the maintenance plan SIP revision submitted by GA EPD for the Atlanta Area meets the requirements of section 175A of the CAA and is approvable.

    VI. What is the effect of the January 4, 2013, D.C. Circuit decision regarding PM2.5 implementation under subpart 4? a. Background

    As discussed in Section II of this notice, the D.C. Circuit remanded the 1997 PM2.5 Implementation Rule to EPA on January 4, 2013, in Natural Resources Defense Council v. EPA, 706 F.3d 428. The Court found that EPA erred in implementing the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS pursuant to the general implementation provisions of subpart 1 of part D of Title I of the CAA rather than the particulate matter-specific provisions of subpart 4 of part D of Title I.

    For the purposes of evaluating Georgia's redesignation request for the Atlanta Area, to the extent that implementation under subpart 4 would impose additional requirements for areas designated nonattainment, EPA believes that those requirements are not “applicable” for the purposes of CAA section 107(d)(3)(E), and thus EPA is not required to consider subpart 4 requirements with respect to the redesignation of the Atlanta Area. Under its longstanding interpretation of the CAA, EPA has interpreted section 107(d)(3)(E) to mean, as a threshold matter, that the part D provisions which are “applicable” and which must be approved in order for EPA to redesignate an area include only those which came due prior to a state's submittal of a complete redesignation request. See “Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to Attainment,” Memorandum from John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality Management Division, September 4, 1992 (Calcagni memorandum). See also “State Implementation Plan (SIP) Requirements for Areas Submitting Requests for the plan and Redesignation to Attainment of the Ozone and Carbon Monoxide (CO) National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) on or after November 15, 1992,” Memorandum from Michael Shapiro, Acting Assistant Administrator, Air and Radiation, September 17, 1993 (Shapiro memorandum); Final Redesignation of Detroit-Ann Arbor, (60 FR 12459, 12465-66, March 7, 1995); Final Redesignation of St. Louis, Missouri, (68 FR 25418, 25424-27, May 12, 2003); Sierra Club v. EPA, 375 F.3d 537, 541 (7th Cir. 2004) (upholding EPA's redesignation rulemaking applying this interpretation and expressly rejecting Sierra Club's view that the meaning of “applicable” under the statute is “whatever should have been in the plan at the time of attainment rather than whatever actually was in already implemented or due at the time of attainment”).25 In this case, at the time that Georgia submitted its redesignation request on August 30, 2012, requirements under subpart 4 were not due, and indeed, were not yet known to apply.

    25 Applicable requirements of the CAA that come due subsequent to the area's submittal of a complete redesignation request remain applicable until a redesignation is approved, but are not required as a prerequisite to redesignation. Section 175A(c) of the CAA.

    On June 2, 2014, EPA published a rule entitled “Identification of Nonattainment Classification and Deadlines for Submission of State Implementation Plan (SIP) Provisions for the 1997 Fine Particle (PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS” (“Classification and Deadlines Rule”). 79 FR 31,566.26 In that rule, the Agency responded to the DC Circuit's January 2013 decision by establishing classifications for PM2.5 nonattainment areas under subpart 4, and by establishing a new SIP submission date of December 31, 2014, for moderate area attainment plans and for any additional attainment-related or nonattainment new source review plans necessary for areas to comply with the requirements applicable under subpart 4. Id. at 31,567-70. Therefore, when Georgia submitted its request in August 2012, the deadline for submitting a SIP to meet the Act's subpart 4 requirements had not yet passed, and those requirements are therefore not applicable for purposes of evaluating Georgia's request for redesignation.

    26 Judicial review of EPA's Classification and Deadlines Rule is pending in the D.C. Circuit. At the time of this notice, briefing and oral arguments in that case have concluded but a decision has not yet been issued by the Court. See WildEarth Guardians v. EPA, No. 14-1145 (D.C. Circuit, argued November 6, 2015).

    b. Subpart 4 Requirements and the Atlanta Area Redesignation Request

    Even though the substantive requirements of subpart 4 were not applicable requirements that Georgia was required to have met at the time of its redesignation request submission, EPA believes that even the imposition of those substantive requirements would not pose a bar to the redesignation of the Atlanta Area. The additional requirements found in subpart 4 are either designed to help an area achieve attainment (also known as “attainment planning requirements”) or are related to new source permitting. None of these additional requirements are applicable for purposes of evaluating a redesignation from nonattainment to attainment under EPA's long-standing interpretation of CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii) and (v).

    As background, EPA notes that subpart 4 incorporates components of subpart 1 of part D, which contains general air quality planning requirements for areas designated as nonattainment. See section 172(c). Subpart 4 itself contains specific planning and scheduling requirements for PM1027 nonattainment areas, and under the Court's January 4, 2013, decision in NRDC v. EPA, these same statutory requirements also apply for PM2.5 nonattainment areas.28 In the General Preamble, EPA's longstanding general guidance interpreting the 1990 amendments to the CAA,29 EPA discussed the relationship of subpart 1 and subpart 4 SIP requirements and pointed out that subpart 1 requirements were to an extent “subsumed by, or integrally related to, the more specific PM-10 requirements.” See 57 FR 13538 (April 16, 1992). The subpart 1 requirements include, among other things, provisions for attainment demonstrations, RACM, RFP, emissions inventories, and contingency measures.

    27 PM10 refers to particles nominally 10 micrometers in diameter or smaller.

    28 In explaining their decision, the court reasoned that the plain meaning of the CAA requires implementation of the 1997 p.m.2.5 NAAQS under subpart 4 because PM2.5 particles fall within the statutory definition of PM10 and are thus subject to the same statutory requirements. The EPA has proposed its interpretation of subpart 4 requirements as applied to the PM2.5 NAAQS in its proposal rule entitled “Fine Particulate Matter National Ambient Air Quality Standards: State Implementation Plan Requirements” (80 FR 15340, March 23, 2015).

    29

    As noted above, in the Classification and Deadlines Rule, EPA initially classified all areas designated nonattainment for either the 1997 or the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS as “moderate” nonattainment areas. Additional requirements that would apply to the Atlanta Area as a moderate nonattainment area are therefore Sections 189(a) and (c), including the following: (1) An approved permit program for construction of new and modified major stationary sources (section 189(a)(1)(A)); (2) an attainment demonstration (section 189(a)(1)(B)); (3) provisions for RACM (section 189(a)(1)(C)); and (4) quantitative milestones demonstrating RFP toward attainment by the applicable attainment date (section 189(c)).30

    30 EPA's proposed implementation rule (80 FR 15340 (March 23, 2015)) includes, among other things, the Agency's proposed interpretation of these moderate area requirements for purposes of PM2.5 NAAQS implementation.

    The permit requirements of subpart 4, as contained in section 189(a)(1)(A), refer to and apply the subpart 1 permit provisions requirements of sections 172 and 173 to PM10, without adding to them. Consequently, EPA believes that section 189(a)(1)(A) does not itself impose for redesignation purposes any additional requirements for moderate areas beyond those contained in subpart 1.31 In any event, in the context of redesignation, EPA has long relied on the interpretation that a fully approved nonattainment new source review program is not considered an applicable requirement for redesignation, provided the area can maintain the standard with a PSD program after redesignation. A detailed rationale for this view is described in a memorandum from Mary Nichols, Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, dated October 14, 1994, entitled “Part D New Source Review Requirements for Areas Requesting Redesignation to Attainment.” See also rulemakings for Detroit, Michigan (60 FR 12467-12468, March 7, 1995); Cleveland-Akron-Lorain, Ohio (61 FR 20458, 20469-20470, May 7, 1996); Louisville, Kentucky (66 FR 53665, October 23, 2001); and Grand Rapids, Michigan (61 FR 31834-31837, June 21, 1996).

    31 The potential effect of section 189(e) on section 189(a)(1)(A) for purposes of evaluating this redesignation is discussed below.

    With respect to the specific attainment planning requirements under subpart 4,32 EPA applies the same interpretation that it applies to attainment planning requirements under subpart 1 or any of other pollutant-specific subparts. That is, under its long-standing interpretation of the CAA, where an area is already attaining the standard, EPA does not consider those attainment-planning requirements to be applicable for purposes of evaluating a request for redesignation because requirements that are designed to help an area achieve attainment no longer have meaning where an area is already meeting the standard.

    32 These planning requirements include the attainment demonstration, quantitative milestone requirements, and RACM analysis.

    Thus, at the time of Georgia's submission of its redesignation request, the requirement for the Atlanta Area to comply with subpart 4 had not yet come due and was, therefore, not applicable for purposes of EPA's evaluation of the redesignation. Moreover, even if Georgia had been required to comply with those subpart 4 requirements, the additional substantive requirements for a moderate nonattainment area under subpart 4 were not applicable for purposes of redesignation anyway, given EPA's long-standing interpretation of the applicability of certain requirements to areas that are attaining the NAAQS.

    c. Subpart 4 and Control of PM2.5 Precursors

    As noted previously, EPA does not believe that the requirement to comply with subpart 4 applied to the Atlanta Area redesignation request because that request was submitted prior to the moderate area SIP submission date of December 31, 2014. However, even if the requirements of subpart 4 were to apply to the Atlanta Area, EPA nevertheless believes that the additional requirements of subpart 4 would not pose an obstacle to our approval of Georgia's request to redesignate the Atlanta Area. Specifically, EPA proposes to determine that, because the Atlanta Area is attaining the standard, no additional controls of any PM2.5 precursors would be required. Under either subpart 1 or subpart 4, for purposes of demonstrating attainment as expeditiously as practicable, a state is required to evaluate all economically and technologically feasible control measures for direct PM emissions and precursor emissions, and adopt those measures that are deemed reasonably available. Relevant precursors to PM2.5 pollution include SO2, NOx, VOC and ammonia. Moreover, CAA section 189(e) in subpart 4 specifically provides that control requirements for major stationary sources of direct PM10 shall also apply to PM10 precursors from those sources, except where EPA determines that major stationary sources of such precursors “do not contribute significantly to PM10 levels which exceed the standard in the area.”

    Under subpart 1 and EPA's prior implementation rule, all major stationary sources of PM2.5 precursors were subject to regulation, with the exception of ammonia and VOC. Thus, assuming subpart 4 requirements are applicable for purposes of evaluating this redesignation request, EPA is analyzing here whether additional controls of ammonia and VOC from major stationary sources are required under section 189(e) of subpart 4 in order to redesignate the area for the 1997 PM2.5 standard. As explained below, EPA does not believe that any additional controls of ammonia and VOC are required in the context of this redesignation.

    In the General Preamble, EPA discusses its approach to implementing section 189(e). See 57 FR 13538 (April 16, 1992). With regard to precursor regulation under section 189(e), the General Preamble explicitly stated that control of VOCs under other Act requirements may suffice to relieve a state from the need to adopt precursor controls under section 189(e). See 57 FR 13542. EPA in this rulemaking proposes to determine that even if not explicitly addressed by the State in its submission, the State does not need to take further action with respect to ammonia and VOCs as precursors to satisfy the requirements of section 189(e). This proposed determination is based on our findings that: (1) The Atlanta Area contains only one major stationary source of ammonia (Owens Corning, Fairburn Plant), and (2) existing major stationary sources of VOC are adequately controlled under other provisions of the CAA regulating the ozone NAAQS.33 In the alternative, EPA proposes to determine that, under the express exception provisions of section 189(e), and in the context of the redesignation of the Area, which is attaining the 1997 Annual PM2.5 standard, at present ammonia and VOC precursors from major stationary sources do not contribute significantly to levels exceeding the 1997 PM2.5 standard in the Atlanta Area. See 57 FR 13539.

    33 The Atlanta Area has reduced VOC emissions through the implementation of various control programs including various on-road and non-road motor vehicle control programs.

    As noted earlier, EPA determined in December 2011 that the Atlanta Area was attaining the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS and that the Area had attained the NAAQS by the applicable attainment date of April 5, 2010. 76 FR 76620. Under EPA's regulations, a determination of attainment, also known as a clean data determination, suspends the CAA's requirements to submit an attainment demonstration, including an analysis of reasonably available control measures and control technology; reasonable further progress; and contingency measures. Under subpart 4, Georgia's plan for attaining the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS in the Atlanta Area would have had to consider all PM2.5 precursors, including VOC and ammonia, and whether there were control measures, including for existing sources under section 189(e), available that would have advanced the area's attainment goals. However, because the Atlanta Area has already attained the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS, the state's requirement to submit a plan demonstrating how the area would attain has been suspended, and, moreover, the area has shown that it has attained with its current approach to regulation of PM2.5 precursors. Therefore, EPA believes that it is reasonable to conclude in the context of this redesignation that there is no need to revisit the attainment control strategy with respect to the treatment of precursors. In addition, as noted below, EPA has analyzed projections of VOC and ammonia emissions in the area and has determined that VOC emissions are projected to decrease sharply over the maintenance period and ammonia emissions, which are emitted in marginal amounts in the Atlanta area, are projected to increase only slightly. Accordingly, EPA does not view the January 4, 2013, decision of the Court as precluding redesignation of the Atlanta Area to attainment for the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS. In sum, even if Georgia were required to address precursors for the Atlanta Area under subpart 4 rather than under subpart 1, EPA would still conclude that the area had met all applicable requirements for purposes of redesignation in accordance with section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii) and (v).

    d. Maintenance Plan and Evaluation of Precursors

    EPA proposes to determine that the State's maintenance plan shows continued maintenance of the standard by tracking the levels of the precursors whose control brought about attainment of the 1997 PM2.5 standard in the Atlanta Area. EPA therefore believes that the only additional consideration related to the maintenance plan requirements that results from the Court's January 4, 2013, decision is that of assessing the potential role of VOC and ammonia in demonstrating continued maintenance in this Area. As explained below, based upon documentation provided by Georgia and supporting information, EPA believes that the maintenance plan for the Atlanta Area need not include any additional emission reductions of VOC or ammonia in order to provide for continued maintenance of the standard.

    First, as noted above in EPA's discussion of section 189(e), VOC emission levels in this area have historically been well-controlled under SIP requirements related to ozone and other pollutants. Second, total ammonia emissions throughout the Atlanta Area are projected to be approximately 13,620 tons per year in 2020. See Table 8 below. This amount of ammonia emissions is relatively low in comparison to the total amounts of SO2, NOX, and even direct PM2.5 emissions from sources in the Area. Third, as described below, available information shows that no precursor, including VOC and ammonia, is expected to increase significantly over the maintenance period so as to interfere with or undermine the State's maintenance demonstration.

    The emissions inventories used in the regulatory impact analysis (RIA) for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS, included in the docket for today's action, show that VOC emissions are projected to decrease by 52,813.38 tpy and that ammonia emissions are projected to increase by 91.89 tpy in the Area between 2007 and 2020. See Table 8, below. Thus, emissions of VOC are projected to decrease by 30 percent, and emissions of ammonia are projected to remain about the same, increasing by less than one percent.

    34 These emissions estimates were taken from the emissions inventories developed for the regulatory impact analysis for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.

    Table 8—Comparison of 2007 and 2020 VOC and Ammonia Emission Totals by Source Sector (tpy) for the Area 34 Source sector VOC 2007 2020 Net Change Ammonia 2007 2020 Net Change Nonpoint 76,274.51 74,736.27 −1,538.24 10,220.59 11,535.64 1,315.05 Non-road 28,433.41 16,376.46 −12,056.95 31.17 38.96 7.79 Onroad 64,157.97 25,202.79 −38,955.18 2,587.41 1,570.67 −1,016.74 Point 6,639.28 6,376.27 −263.01 689.03 474.82 −214.21 Total 175,505.17 122,691.79 −52,813.38 13,528.20 13,620.09 91.89

    While the RIA emissions inventories are only projected out to 2020, there is no reason to believe that this overall downward trend would not continue through 2025. Given that the Atlanta Area is already attaining the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS even with the current level of emissions from sources in the Area, the overall trend of emissions inventories is consistent with continued attainment.

    In addition, available air quality data and modeling analyses show continued maintenance of the standard during the maintenance period. As noted in section V, above, the Atlanta Area recorded a maximum potential annual PM2.5 design value of 11.1 μg/m3 during 2012-2014, the most recent three years available with quality-assured and certified ambient air monitoring data. This is well below the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS of 15 µg/m3. Moreover, the modeling analysis conducted for the RIA for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS indicates that the design value for this area is expected to continue to decline through 2020. In the RIA analysis, the 2020 modeled design value for the Atlanta Area is 9.4 µg/m3. Given the decrease in overall precursor emissions projected through 2024, and expected through 2025, it is reasonable to conclude that the monitored PM2.5 concentration in this area will also continue to decrease through 2025.

    Thus, EPA believes that there is ample justification to conclude that the Atlanta Area should be redesignated, even taking into consideration the emissions of VOC and ammonia potentially relevant to PM2.5. After consideration of the DC Circuit's January 4, 2013, decision, and for the reasons set forth in this notice, EPA continues to propose approval of the State's maintenance plan and its request to redesignate the Atlanta Area to attainment for the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS.

    VII. What is EPA's Analysis of Georgia's Proposed NOX and PM2.5 MVEBs for the Atlanta Area?

    Under section 176(c) of the CAA, new transportation plans, programs, and projects, such as the construction of new highways, must “conform” to (i.e., be consistent with) the part of the state's air quality plan that addresses pollution from cars and trucks. Conformity to the SIP means that transportation activities will not cause new air quality violations, worsen existing violations, or delay timely attainment of the NAAQS or any interim milestones. If a transportation plan does not conform, most new projects that would expand the capacity of roadways cannot go forward. Regulations at 40 CFR part 93 set forth EPA policy, criteria, and procedures for demonstrating and assuring conformity of such transportation activities to a SIP. The regional emissions analysis is one, but not the only, requirement for implementing transportation conformity. Transportation conformity is a requirement for nonattainment and maintenance areas. Maintenance areas are areas that were previously nonattainment for a particular NAAQS but have since been redesignated to attainment with an approved maintenance plan for that NAAQS.

    Under the CAA, states are required to submit, at various times, control strategy SIPs and maintenance plans for nonattainment areas. These control strategy SIPs (including RFP and attainment demonstration) and maintenance plans create MVEBs for criteria pollutants and/or their precursors to address pollution from cars and trucks. Per 40 CFR part 93, a MVEB must be established for the last year of the maintenance plan. A state may adopt MVEBs for other years as well. A MVEB is the portion of the total allowable emissions in the maintenance demonstration that is allocated to highway and transit vehicle use and emissions. See 40 CFR 93.101. The MVEBs serve as a ceiling on emissions from an area's planned transportation system. The MVEBs concept is further explained in the preamble to the November 24, 1993, Transportation Conformity Rule. See 58 FR 62188. The preamble also describes how to establish the MVEBs in the SIP and how to revise the MVEBs.

    After interagency consultation with the transportation partners for the Atlanta Area, Georgia has elected to develop MVEBs for NOX and PM2.5 for the entire Area. Georgia has developed these MVEBs, as required, for the last year of its maintenance plan, 2024. The NOX and PM2.5 MVEBs were developed in consultation with the transportation partners and were added to account for uncertainties in population growth, changes in model vehicle miles traveled and new emission factor models. Further details are provided below to explain how the MVEBs for 2024 were derived.

    The State estimated the worst case daily motor vehicle projections for NOX and PM2.5 in 2024 and set the MVEBs at this level. The worst-case daily motor vehicle emissions projection for PM2.5 is 2,281 tons (38.9 percent above the projected 2024 on-road emissions), and the worst-case daily motor vehicle emissions projection for NOX is 44,430 tons (26 percent above the projected 2024 on-road emissions). The proposed NOX and PM2.5 MVEBs for the Atlanta Area are identified in Table 9, below. On-road emissions of SO2 are considered de minimis; therefore, no budget for SO2 is required. See 70 FR 24280, 24283 (May 6, 2005).

    Table 9—Proposed Atlanta Area NOX and PM2.5 MVEBs [tpy] NOX PM2.5 2024 On-Road Mobile Emissions 35,272 1,642 2024 Safety Margin Allocated 9,158 2024 Total Motor Vehicle Budget 44,430 2,281

    The 9,158 ton difference in the NOX projections is well within the NOX “safety margin.” 35 Under 40 CFR 93.101, the term “safety margin” is the difference between the attainment level (from all sources) and the projected level of emissions (from all sources) in the maintenance plan. The safety margin can be allocated to the transportation sector; however, the total emissions must remain below the attainment level.

    35 The difference between the 2024 NOX emissions projected by EPA and 2008 actual NOX emissions (i.e., NOX safety margin) is approximately 114,352 tons.

    Although there is no apparent safety margin for PM2.5 because overall emissions of direct PM2.5 from all source categories are projected to increase by approximately 15 percent from 2008 to 2024 (see Table 7.2), the on-road mobile NOX and PM2.5 emissions are projected to decrease by approximately 72 percent and 65 percent, respectively (see Table 5) due to the federal mobile source measures discussed in Section V. Table 10, below, shows that the percentage of the PM2.5 on-road mobile source emissions as compared to the overall PM2.5 emissions from all sectors trends downward from 9.6 percent in 2008 to 3.0 percent in 2024.

    Table 10—PM2.5 On-Road Mobile Sources Emissions Comparison to the Total PM2.5 Emissions From All Sectors for the Atlanta Area [Tons per year] 2008 2014 2017 2020 2024 PM2.5 emissions—on-road mobile 4,662 3,529 2,963 2,397 1,642 Total PM2.5 emissions—all sectors 48,811 51,256 52,478 54,285 55,188 On-road mobile % of total PM2.5 emissions 9.6 6.9 5.7 4.4 3.0

    As discussed in Section V, EPA believes that Area will maintain the NAAQS through 2025 and that the impact of the projected increase in PM2.5 emissions will be overcompensated by the projected decreases in the emissions of SO2 and NOX. Furthermore, even if mobile source emissions are equal to the worst-case scenario MVEBs in 2024, the Atlanta Area will maintain the PM2.5 standard. Applying the projected 15 percent increase in direct PM2.5 emissions to the proposed 2024 MVEB (2,281 tpy) yields a value of 2,623 tpy which is 44 percent less than the 2008 attainment level of on-road mobile emissions (4,662 tpy).

    Through this rulemaking, EPA is proposing to approve the MVEBs for NOX and PM2.5 for 2024 for the Atlanta Area because EPA has determined that the Area maintains the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS with the emissions at the levels of the budgets. Once the MVEBs for the Atlanta Area are approved or found adequate (whichever is completed first), they must be used for future conformity determinations. After thorough review, EPA has determined that the budgets meet the adequacy criteria, as outlined in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4). Therefore, EPA is proposing to approve the budgets because they are consistent with maintenance of the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS through 2024.

    VIII. What is the Status of EPA's Adequacy Determination for the Proposed NOX and PM2.5 MVEBs for 2024 for the Atlanta Area?

    When reviewing submitted “control strategy” SIPs or maintenance plans containing MVEB, EPA may affirmatively find the MVEB contained therein adequate for use in determining transportation conformity. Once EPA affirmatively finds the submitted MVEB is adequate for transportation conformity purposes, that MVEBs must be used by state and federal agencies in determining whether proposed transportation projects conform to the SIP as required by section 176(c) of the CAA.

    EPA's substantive criteria for determining adequacy of MVEBs are set out in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4). The process for determining adequacy consists of three basic steps: Public notification of a SIP submission, a public comment period, and EPA's adequacy determination. This process for determining the adequacy of submitted MVEBs for transportation conformity purposes was initially outlined in EPA's May 14, 1999, guidance entitled “Conformity Guidance on Implementation of March 2, 1999, Conformity Court Decision.” EPA adopted regulations to codify the adequacy process in rulemaking entitled “Transportation Conformity Rule Amendments for the New 8-Hour Ozone and PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standards and Miscellaneous Revisions for Existing Areas; Transportation Conformity Rule Amendments: Response to Court Decision and Additional Rule Changes”; July 1, 2004 (69 FR 40004). Additional information on the adequacy process for transportation conformity purposes is available in the proposed rule entitled “Transportation Conformity Rule Amendments: Response to Court Decision and Additional Rule Changes”; June 30, 2003 (68 FR 38974, 38984).

    As discussed earlier, Georgia's maintenance plan submission includes NOX and PM2.5 MVEBs for the Atlanta Area for 2024, the last year of the maintenance plan. EPA reviewed the NOX and PM2.5 MVEBs through the adequacy process, and the adequacy of the MVEBs was open for public comment on EPA's adequacy Web site on February 21, 2013, found at: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/transconf/currsips.htm. The EPA public comment period on adequacy for the MVEBs for 2024 for Atlanta Area closed on March 25, 2013. EPA did not receive any comments on the adequacy of the MVEBs, nor did EPA receive any requests for the SIP submittal.

    EPA intends to make its determination on the adequacy of the 2024 MVEBs for the Atlanta Area for transportation conformity purposes in the near future by completing the adequacy process that was started on February 21, 2013. After EPA finds the 2024 MVEBs adequate under 40 CFR 93.118(f)(1)(iv) or takes final action to approve them into the Georgia SIP under 40 CFR 93.118(f)(2)(iii), the new MVEBs for NOX and PM2.5 must be used for future transportation conformity determinations. For required regional emissions analysis years that involve 2024 or beyond, the applicable budgets will be the new 2024 MVEBs established in the maintenance plan.

    IX. Proposed Actions on the Redesignation Request and Maintenance Plan SIP Revisions Including Approval of the NOX and PM2.5 MVEBs for 2024 for the Atlanta Area

    On December 8, 2011, EPA determined that the Atlanta Area was attaining the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. See 76 FR 76620. EPA is now proposing to take three separate but related actions regarding the redesignation and maintenance of the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS for the Atlanta Area.

    First, EPA is proposing to determine, based upon review of quality-assured and certified ambient monitoring data for the 2008-2010 period, and review of data in AQS for 2011 through 2014 that the Atlanta Area continues to attain the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS. Second, EPA proposing to approve the maintenance plan for the Atlanta Area, including the NOX and PM2.5 MVEBs for 2024, into the Georgia SIP (under section 175A). As described above, the maintenance plan demonstrates that the Area will continue to maintain the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS, and the budgets meet all of the adequacy criteria contained in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4) and (5). Third, EPA is proposing to approve Georgia's request for redesignation of the Atlanta Area from nonattainment to attainment for the 1997 p.m.2.5 NAAQS based upon the preliminary determination that the Area has met the requirements for redesignation under CAA section 107(d)(3)(E). Further, as part of today's action, EPA is describing the status of its adequacy determination for the 2024 NOX and VOC MVEBs in accordance with 40 CFR 93.118(f)(1). Within 24 months from the effective date of EPA's adequacy determination for the MVEBs or the publication date for the final rule for this action, whichever is earlier, the transportation partners will need to demonstrate conformity to the new NOX and VOC MVEBs pursuant to 40 CFR 93.104(e).

    If finalized, approval of Georgia's redesignation request for the Atlanta Area would change the official designation of Barrow, Bartow, Carroll, Cherokee, Clayton, Cobb, Coweta, DeKalb, Douglas, Fayette, Forsyth, Fulton, Gwinnett, Hall, Henry, Newton, Paulding, Rockdale, Spalding, Walton, and portions of Heard and Putnam Counties in Georgia, as found at 40 CFR part 81, from nonattainment to attainment for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS.

    X. 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 Act and applicable Federal regulations. See 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, these proposed actions merely approve state law as meeting federal requirements and do not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that reason, these proposed actions:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    • will not have disproportionate human health or environmental effects 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 as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor will it impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.

    List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen oxides, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.

    40 CFR Part 81

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control.

    Authority:

    42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    Dated: December 22, 2015. Heather McTeer Toney, Regional Administrator, Region 4.
    [FR Doc. 2015-33196 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    81 6 Monday, January 11, 2016 Notices DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Forest Service Idaho Panhandle Resource Advisory Committee AGENCY:

    Forest Service, USDA.

    ACTION:

    Notice of meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    The Idaho Panhandle Resource Advisory Committee (RAC) will meet in Coeur d'Alene, Idaho. 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: http://www.fs.usda.gov/main/ipnf/workingtogether/advisorycommittees.

    DATES:

    The meeting will be held February 19, 2016 at 9:00 a.m.

    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 meeting will be held at the Idaho Panhandle National Forests Supervisor's Office located at 3815 Schreiber Way, Coeur d'Alene, Idaho 83815.

    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 Idaho Panhandle national Forests Supervisor's Office in Coeur d'Alene, Idaho. Please call ahead to facilitate entry into the building.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Shoshana Cooper, RAC Coordinator, by phone at 208-765-7211 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 meeting is:

    1. Proposal review and recommendations.

    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 Janury 31, 2016 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 Shoshana Cooper, RAC Coordinator, 3815 Schreiber Way, Coeur d'Alene, Idaho 83815; or by email to [email protected], or via facsimile to 208-765-7426.

    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: January 5, 2016. Mary Farnsworth, Forest Supervisor.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00292 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3411-15-P
    COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS Sunshine Act Meeting Notice AGENCY:

    United States Commission on Civil Rights.

    ACTION:

    Briefing notice.

    DATES:

    Date and Time: Friday, January 22, 2016; 9:00 a.m.-5:30 p.m. EST.

    ADDRESSES:

    Place: National Place Building, 1331 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., 11th Floor, Suite 1150, Washington, DC 20245.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Mauro Morales, Staff Director at Telephone: (202) 376-7700, TTY: (202) 376-8116.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This briefing is open to the public. Please contact the above for call-in information to telephonically attend the briefing. Hearing-impaired persons who will attend the briefing and require the services of a sign language interpreter should contact Pamela Dunston at (202) 376-8105 or at [email protected] at least seven business days before the scheduled date of the meeting.

    During the briefing, Commissioners will ask questions and discuss the briefing topic with the panelists. The public may submit written comments on the topic of the briefing to the above address for 30 days after the briefing. Please direct your comments to the attention of the “Staff Director” and clearly mark “Briefing Comments Inside” on the outside of the envelope. Please note we are unable to return any comments or submitted materials. Comments may also be submitted by email to [email protected]

    Topic: Briefing on Environmental Justice: Toxic Materials, Poor Economies, and the Impact to Low-Income, Minority Communities; A review of the Environmental Protection Agency's Civil Rights Enforcement of Environmental Justice in the Context of Title VI, E.O. 12,989 and the Coal Ash Rule.

    I. Introductory Remarks. 9:00 a.m. II. Presentations. 9:20 a.m.-9:45 a.m.: Community Leaders and Advocates Speakers' Remarks III. Panel I. 9:50 a.m.-11:05 a.m.: Government Officials Speakers' Remarks and Questions from Commissioners IV. Panel II. 11:10 a.m.-12:25 p.m.: Health Issues Speakers' Remarks and Questions from Commissioners V. LUNCH—12:30 p.m.-1:15 p.m. VI. Panel III. 1:20 p.m.-2:35 p.m.: Coal Industry Officials Speakers' Remarks and Questions from Commissioners VII. Panel IV. 2:40 p.m.-3:55 p.m.: Community Activists and Advocates Speakers' Remarks and Questions from Commissioners VIII. Panel V. 4:00 p.m.-5:25 p.m.: Environmental Justice Speakers' Remarks and Questions from Commissioners IX. Adjourn Briefing—5:30 p.m. Dated: January 6, 2016. David Mussatt, Chief, Regional Programs Unit.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00367 Filed 1-7-16; 11:15 am] BILLING CODE 6335-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Bureau of the Census [Docket Number 151216999-5999-01] Annual Wholesale Trade Survey AGENCY:

    Bureau of the Census, Department of Commerce.

    ACTION:

    Notice of determination.

    SUMMARY:

    The United States Department of Commerce's Bureau of the Census (Census Bureau) publishes this notice to announce that the Director of the Census Bureau has determined the need to conduct the 2015 Annual Wholesale Trade Survey (AWTS). The AWTS covers employer firms with establishments located in the United States and classified in the Wholesale Trade sector as defined by the 2007 North American Industry Classification System (NAICS). Through this survey, the Census Bureau will collect data covering annual sales, e-commerce sales, purchases, total operating expenses, year-end inventories held both inside and outside the United States, commissions, total operating revenue, and gross selling value, for three components of wholesale activity: Wholesale distributors; manufacturers' sales branches and offices; and agents, brokers, and electronic markets. These data are collected to provide a sound statistical basis for the formation of policy by various government agencies. Results will be available for use for a variety of public and business needs such as economic and market analysis, company performance, and forecasting future demand. The Census Bureau conducts the AWTS to provide continuing and timely national statistical data on wholesale trade annually.

    ADDRESSES:

    The Census Bureau will provide electronic worksheets to businesses included in the survey. Additional copies are available upon written request to the Director, U.S. Census Bureau, Washington, DC 20233-0101.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Susan Pozzanghera, Economy Wide Statistics Division, at (301) 763-7169 or by email at [email protected].

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Sections 131 and 182 of Title 13 of the United States Code (U.S.C.) authorize the Census Bureau to take surveys that are necessary to produce current data on the subjects covered by the Economic Census. Sections 224 and 225 of Title 13 make response to the AWTS mandatory. As part of this authorization, the Census Bureau conducts the AWTS to provide continuing and timely national statistical data on wholesale trade activity every year for the period between economic censuses. The AWTS covers employer firms with establishments located in the United States and classified in the Wholesale Trade sector as defined by the 2007 NAICS. The 2015 AWTS will collect data for three components of wholesale activity: Wholesale distributors; manufacturers' sales branches and offices; and agents, brokers, and electronic markets. For wholesale distributors, the Census Bureau will collect data covering sales, e-commerce sales, year-end inventories held inside and outside the United States, purchases, and total operating expenses. For manufacturers' sales branches and offices, the Census Bureau will collect data covering annual sales, e-commerce sales, year-end inventories held inside and outside the United States and total operating expenses. For agents, brokers, and electronic markets, the Census Bureau will collect data covering commissions, total operating revenue, gross selling value, and total operating expenses. The Census Bureau has determined that this survey is necessary, as these data are not available publicly on a timely basis from non-governmental or other government sources. Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 29 minutes per response.

    Firms were selected for the AWTS survey using a stratified random sample based on industry groupings and annual sales size. In an effort to streamline operations and conserve taxpayer time and money, the 2015 AWTS will be a paperless-based collection. We will provide electronic reporting instructions to the firms covered by this survey in March 2016 and will require their response by April 27, 2016. We will continue to provide guidance and instructions on reporting without forms using the secure Centurion system and secure email. Firms' responses to the AWTS are required by law (13 U.S.C. Sections 224 and 225), and the responses are confidential (13 U.S.C. Section 9). The sample of firms selected will provide, with measurable reliability, statistics on annual sales, e-commerce sales, purchases, total operating expenses, year-end inventories held both inside and outside the Unites States, commissions, total operating revenue, and gross selling value, for 2015.

    The data collected in this survey will be similar to that collected in the past and within the general scope and nature of those inquiries covered in the quinquennial economic census, which was most recently conducted in 2012. These data are collected to provide a sound statistical basis for the formation of policy by various government agencies. Results will be available for use for a variety of public and business needs such as economic and market analysis, company performance, and forecasting future demand.

    Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person is required to respond to, nor shall a person be subject to a penalty for failure to comply with, a collection of information subject to the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) unless that collection of information displays a current valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number. In accordance with the PRA, 44 U.S.C. 3501-3521, OMB approved the AWTS under OMB control number 0607-0195.

    Based upon the foregoing, I have directed that the annual survey be conducted for the purpose of collecting these data.

    Dated: January 5, 2016. John H. Thompson, Director, Bureau of the Census.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00300 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-07-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Foreign-Trade Zones Board [B-59-2015] Foreign-Trade Zone (FTZ) 29—Louisville, Kentucky; Authorization of Production Activity; Custom Quality Services (Liquor Kitting), Louisville, Kentucky

    On September 2, 2015, the Louisville & Jefferson County Riverport Authority, grantee of FTZ 29, submitted a notification of proposed production activity to the FTZ Board on behalf of Custom Quality Services, within Site 1, in Louisville, Kentucky.

    The notification was processed in accordance with the regulations of the FTZ Board (15 CFR part 400), including notice in the Federal Register inviting public comment (80 FR 55086, September 14, 2015). The FTZ Board has determined that no further review of the activity is warranted at this time. The production activity described in the notification is authorized, subject to the FTZ Act and the Board's regulations, including Section 400.14.

    Dated: December 31, 2015. Andrew McGilvray, Executive Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00362 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Foreign-Trade Zones Board [B-63-2015] Foreign-Trade Zone (FTZ) 33—Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania; Authorization of Production Activity; DNP Imagingcomm America Corporation, Subzone 33E (Thermal Transfer Ribbon Master Rolls), Mount Pleasant, Pennsylvania

    On September 4, 2015, DNP Imagingcomm America Corporation (DNP), operator of Subzone 33E, submitted a notification of proposed production activity to the Foreign-Trade Zones (FTZ) Board for its facility within Subzone 33E, in Mount Pleasant, Pennsylvania.

    The notification was processed in accordance with the regulations of the FTZ Board (15 CFR part 400), including notice in the Federal Register inviting public comment (80 FR 57785, September 25, 2015). The FTZ Board has determined that no further review of the proposed activity is warranted at this time. The production activity described in the notification is authorized, subject to the FTZ Act and the Board's regulations, including Section 400.14, and further subject to a restriction requiring that all foreign-status polyethylene terephthalate (PET) film subject to an antidumping/countervailing duty (AD/CVD) order, proceeding, or suspension of liquidation under AD/CVD procedures admitted for DNP's production activity be re-exported (entry for U.S. consumption is not allowed for thermal transfer ribbon master rolls made from PET film subject to an AD/CVD order, proceeding, or suspension of liquidation under AD/CVD procedures). Activity beyond this scope of authority would require further authorization from the FTZ Board.

    Dated: January 4, 2016. Andrew McGilvray, Executive Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00364 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Foreign-Trade Zones Board [B-58-2015] Foreign-Trade Zone (FTZ) 133—Quad-Cities, Iowa/Illinois; Authorization of Production Activity; CNH Industrial America, LLC; Subzone 133E, (Agricultural and Construction Equipment, Subassemblies and Kits), Burlington and West Burlington, Iowa

    On September 2, 2015, CNH Industrial America, LLC, operator of Subzone 133E, submitted a notification of proposed production activity to the Foreign-Trade Zones (FTZ) Board for its facilities within Subzone 133E, in Burlington and West Burlington, Iowa.

    The notification was processed in accordance with the regulations of the FTZ Board (15 CFR part 400), including notice in the Federal Register inviting public comment (80 FR 54519, September 10, 2015). The FTZ Board has determined that no further review of the activity is warranted at this time. The production activity described in the notification is authorized, subject to the FTZ Act and the Board's regulations, including Section 400.14.

    Dated: December 31, 2015. Andrew McGilvray, Executive Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00363 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-533-820] Certain Hot-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat Products From India: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2013-2014 AGENCY:

    Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.

    SUMMARY:

    On September 10, 2015, the Department of Commerce (the Department) published the preliminary results of the administrative review of the antidumping duty (AD) order on certain hot-rolled carbon steel flat products (hot-rolled steel) from India.1 We received no comments or requests for a hearing. Therefore, for the final results, we continue to find that Ispat Industries Ltd. (Ispat), JSW Steel Ltd. (JSW), JSW Ispat Steel Ltd. (JSW Ispat), and Tata Steel Ltd. (Tata) had no shipments of the subject merchandise, and, therefore, no reviewable transactions, during the period of review (POR).

    1See Certain Hot-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat Products from India: Notice of Preliminary Results of 2013-2014 Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 80 FR 54521 (September 10, 2015) (Preliminary Results).

    DATES:

    Effective Date: January 11, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    George McMahon or Eric Greynolds, AD/CVD Operations Office III, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-1167 and (202) 482-6071, respectively.

    Background

    On September 10, 2015, the Department published the Preliminary Results. The POR is December 1, 2013, through November 30, 2014. We invited interested parties to comment on the Preliminary Results. We received no comments from any party. The Department conducted this administrative review in accordance with section 751(a)(2) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act).

    Scope of the Order

    For purposes of this order, the products covered are certain hot-rolled carbon steel flat products of a rectangular shape, of a width of 0.5 inch or greater, neither clad, plated, nor coated with metal and whether or not painted, varnished, or coated with plastics or other non-metallic substances, in coils (whether or not in successively superimposed layers), regardless of thickness, and in straight lengths of a thickness of less than 4.75 mm and of a width measuring at least 10 times the thickness. Universal mill plate (i.e., flat-rolled products rolled on four faces or in a closed box pass, of a width exceeding 150 mm, but not exceeding 1250 mm, and of a thickness of not less than 4.0 mm, not in coils and without patterns in relief) of a thickness not less than 4.0 mm is not included within the scope of this order.

    Specifically included in the scope of this order are vacuum-degassed, fully stabilized (commonly referred to as interstitial-free (IF)) steels, high-strength low-alloy (HSLA) steels, and the substrate for motor lamination steels. IF steels are recognized as low-carbon steels with micro-alloying levels of elements such as titanium or niobium (also commonly referred to as columbium), or both, added to stabilize carbon and nitrogen elements. HSLA steels are recognized as steels with micro-alloying levels of elements such as chromium, copper, niobium, vanadium, and molybdenum. The substrate for motor lamination steels contains micro-alloying levels of elements such as silicon and aluminum.

    Steel products included in the scope of this order, regardless of definitions in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS), are products in which: (i) Iron predominates, by weight, over each of the other contained elements; (ii) the carbon content is 2 percent or less, by weight; and (iii) none of the elements listed below exceeds the quantity, by weight, respectively indicated:

    1.80 percent of manganese, or 2.25 percent of silicon, or 1.00 percent of copper, or 0.50 percent of aluminum, or 1.25 percent of chromium, or 0.30 percent of cobalt, or 0.40 percent of lead, or 1.25 percent of nickel, or 0.30 percent of tungsten, or 0.10 percent of molybdenum, or 0.10 percent of niobium, or 0.15 percent of vanadium, or 0.15 percent of zirconium

    All products that meet the physical and chemical description provided above are within the scope of this order unless otherwise excluded. The following products, by way of example, are outside or specifically excluded from the scope of this order:

    • Alloy hot-rolled carbon steel products in which at least one of the chemical elements exceeds those listed above (including, e.g., American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) specifications A543, A387, A514, A517, A506).

    • Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE)/American Iron & Steel Institute (AISI) grades of series 2300 and higher.

    • Ball bearings steels, as defined in the HTSUS.

    • Tool steels, as defined in the HTSUS.

    • Silico-manganese (as defined in the HTSUS) or silicon electrical steel with a silicon level exceeding 2.25 percent.

    • ASTM specifications A710 and A736.

    • United States Steel (USS) Abrasion-resistant steels (USS AR 400, USS AR 500).

    • All products (proprietary or otherwise) based on an alloy ASTM specification (sample specifications: ASTM A506, A507).

    • Non-rectangular shapes, not in coils, which are the result of having been processed by cutting or stamping and which have assumed the character of articles or products classified outside chapter 72 of the HTSUS.

    The merchandise subject to this order is currently classifiable in the HTSUS at subheadings: 7208.10.15.00, 7208.10.30.00, 7208.10.60.00, 7208.25.30.00, 7208.25.60.00, 7208.26.00.30, 7208.26.00.60, 7208.27.00.30, 7208.27.00.60, 7208.36.00.30, 7208.36.00.60, 7208.37.00.30, 7208.37.00.60, 7208.38.00.15, 7208.38.00.30, 7208.38.00.90, 7208.39.00.15, 7208.39.00.30, 7208.39.00.90, 7208.40.60.30, 7208.40.60.60, 7208.53.00.00, 7208.54.00.00, 7208.90.00.00, 7211.14.00.90, 7211.19.15.00, 7211.19.20.00, 7211.19.30.00, 7211.19.45.00, 7211.19.60.00, 7211.19.75.30, 7211.19.75.60, and 7211.19.75.90. Certain hot-rolled carbon steel covered by this order, including: Vacuum-degassed fully stabilized; high-strength low-alloy; and the substrate for motor lamination steel may also enter under the following tariff numbers: 7225.11.00.00, 7225.19.00.00, 7225.30.30.50, 7225.30.70.00, 7225.40.70.00, 7225.99.00.90, 7226.11.10.00, 7226.11.90.30, 7226.11.90.60, 7226.19.10.00, 7226.19.90.00, 7226.91.50.00, 7226.91.70.00, 7226.91.80.00, and 7226.99.00.00. Subject merchandise may also enter under 7210.70.30.00, 7210.90.90.00, 7211.14.00.30, 7212.40.10.00, 7212.40.50.00, and 7212.50.00.00. Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the Department's written description of the merchandise subject to this proceeding is dispositive.

    Final Determination of No Shipments

    As noted above, the Department received no comments concerning the Preliminary Results on the record of this segment of the proceeding. As there are no changes from, or comments on, the Preliminary Results, the Department finds that there is no reason to modify its analysis. Thus, we continue to find that Ispat, JSW, JSW Ispat, and Tata had no shipments of the subject merchandise, and, therefore, no reviewable transactions, during the POR. Accordingly, no decision memorandum accompanies this Federal Register notice. For further details of the issues addressed in this proceeding, see the Preliminary Results and the accompanying Preliminary Decision Memorandum.2

    2See Memorandum to Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, from Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, titled “Certain Hot-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat Products from India: Decision Memorandum for the Preliminary Results of the Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2013-2014,” dated September 2, 2015 (Preliminary Decision Memorandum). The Preliminary Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly at: http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/index.html.

    Assessment Rates

    Upon issuance of the final results of this administrative review, the Department shall determine, and CBP shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries, in accordance with section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.212. The Department intends to issue assessment instructions to CBP 15 days after publication of the final results of this review.

    The Department clarified its “automatic assessment” regulation on May 6, 2003.3 If applicable, this clarification will apply to all entries of subject merchandise during the POR produced or exported by Ispat, JSW, JSW Ispat, and Tata, for which these companies did not know that its merchandise was destined for the United States. In such instances, we will instruct CBP to liquidate these un-reviewed entries at the all others rate established in the less-than fair-value (LTFV) investigation, as amended, which is 38.72 percent,4 if there is no rate for the intermediary company(ies) involved in the transaction. These cash deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice.5

    3See Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 68 FR 23954 (May 6, 2003) (Assessment Policy Notice).

    4See Notice of Amended Final Antidumping Duty Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Antidumping Duty Order: Certain Hot-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat Products from India, 66 FR 60194 (December 3, 2001) (Amended Final Determination).

    5See Assessment Policy Notice for a full discussion of this clarification.

    Cash Deposit Requirements

    The following cash deposit requirements will be effective upon publication of the final results of this administrative review for all shipments of subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication of the final results of this administrative review, as provided by section 751(a)(2) of the Act: (1) The cash deposit rates for respondents noted above, which claimed no shipments, will remain unchanged from the rates assigned to the companies in the most recently completed review of the companies; (2) for merchandise exported by manufacturers or exporters not covered in this administrative review but covered in a prior segment of the proceeding, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the company-specific rate published for the most recently completed segment of this proceeding; (3) if the exporter is not a firm covered in this review, a prior review, or the original investigation, but the manufacturer is, the cash deposit rate will be the rate established for the most recently completed segment of this proceeding for the manufacturer of the subject merchandise; and (4) the cash deposit rate for all other manufacturers or exporters will continue to be 38.72 percent, the all-others rate established in the Amended Final Determination. These cash deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice.

    Notification to Importers

    This notice serves as a final reminder to importers of their responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate regarding the reimbursement of antidumping and/or countervailing duties prior to liquidation of the relevant entries during this POR. Failure to comply with this requirement could result in the Department's presumption that reimbursement of antidumping and/or countervailing duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of doubled antidumping duties.

    Administrative Protective Order

    This notice also serves as a 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(a)(3), which continues to govern business proprietary information in this segment of the proceeding. Timely written notification of the return/destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and terms of an APO is a violation, which is subject to sanction.

    We are issuing and publishing this notice in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.213(h).

    Dated: December 30, 2015. Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00365 Filed 1-8-16; 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: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2013-2014 AGENCY:

    Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.

    SUMMARY:

    On July 8, 2015, the Department of Commerce (“the Department”) published its Preliminary Results of the administrative review of the antidumping duty order on chlorinated isocyanurates (“chloro isos”) from the People's Republic of China (“PRC”).1 The period of review (POR) is June 1, 2013, through May 31, 2014. This review covers three producers/exporters: (1) Heze Huayi Chemical Co. Ltd. (“Heze Huayi”); (2) Hebei Jiheng Chemical Co., Ltd. and Hebei Jiheng Baikang Chemical Industry Co., Ltd. (collectively, “Jiheng”); and (3) Juancheng Kangtai Chemical Co., Ltd. (“Kangtai”). We invited parties to comment on our Preliminary Results. Based on our analysis of the comments received, we made certain changes to our margin calculations for all three respondents. The final dumping margins for this review are listed in the “Final Results” section below.

    1See Chlorinated Isocyanurates From the People's Republic of China: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2013-2014, 80 FR 39060 (July 8, 2015) (Preliminary Results).

    DATES:

    Effective date: January 11, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Sean Carey, AD/CVD Operations, Office VII, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-3964.

    Background

    On July 8, 2015, the Department published its Preliminary Results. The Department verified the questionnaire responses of Heze Huayi from September 14 through September 18, 2015.2 On September 21 through September 25, 2015, the Department verified the questionnaire responses of Jiheng.3

    2See Memorandum to the File, “Verification of the Sales Response of Heze Huayi Chemical Company, Ltd. in the Antidumping Administrative Review of Chlorinated Isocyanurates from the People's Republic of China,” (October 20, 2015) (“Heze Huayi Verification Report”).

    3See Memorandum to the File, “Verification of the Sales Response of Hebei Jiheng Chemical Company, Ltd. in the Antidumping Administrative Review of Chlorinated Isocyanurates from the People's Republic of China,” (November 5, 2015) (“Jiheng Verification Report”).

    On September 30, 2015, the Department extended the deadline for the final results in this administrative review until December 7, 2015.4 On November 10, 2015, we fully extended the deadline for the final results.5 Because we miscalculated this extended deadline, we corrected the date to January 4, 2015 which is 180 days from the date of publication of the preliminary results and the maximum allowed under section 751(a)(3)(A) of Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (“the Act”).6

    4See Memorandum to Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, “Chlorinated Isocyanurates from the People's Republic of China: Extension of Deadline for Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review,” (September 30, 2015).

    5See Memorandum to Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, “Chlorinated Isocyanurates from the People's Republic of China: Extension of Deadline for Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review,” (November 10, 2015).

    6See Memorandum to the File, “Chlorinated Isocyanurates from the People's Republic of China: Correction of Extension of Deadline for Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review” (November 20, 2015).

    On November 13, 2015, Clearon Corp. and Occidental Chemical Corp. (collectively, “Petitioners”) and Jiheng submitted case briefs.7 On November 18, 2015, Jiheng, and Heze Huayi and Kangtai submitted rebuttal briefs.8

    7See “The Administrative Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on Chlorinated Isocyanurates from the People's Republic of China: Case Brief of Clearon Corp. and Occidental Chemical Corporation,” (November 13, 2015) (“Petitioners' Case Brief”); and, “Chlorinated Isocyanurates from the People's Republic of China: Case Brief,” (November 13, 2015) (“Jiheng's Case Brief”).

    8See “Chlorinated Isocyanurates from the People's Republic of China: Rebuttal Brief,” (November 18, 2015) (“Jiheng's Rebuttal Brief”); and, “Certain Chlorinated Isocyanurates from the People's Republic of China Rebuttal Brief,” (November 18, 2015) (“Kangtai's and Heze Huayi's Rebuttal Brief”).

    Scope of the Order

    The products covered by the order are chlorinated isos, which are derivatives of cyanuric acid, described as chlorinated s-triazine triones. Chlorinated isos are currently classifiable under subheadings 2933.69.6015, 2933.69.6021, 2933.69.6050, 3808.40.50, 3808.50.40 and 3808.94.5000 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States. 9 Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of merchandise subject to the scope is dispositive. For a full description of the scope of the order, see Issues and Decision Memorandum.

    9See Memorandum to Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, “Decision Memorandum for the Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review: Chlorinated Isocyanurates from the People's Republic of China; 2013-2014,” (“Issues and Decision Memorandum”) issued concurrently with this notice for a complete description of the scope of the Order.

    Analysis of Comments Received

    All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs filed by parties in this review are addressed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum, which is hereby adopted by this notice. A list of the issues that parties raised and to which we responded in the Issues and Decision Memorandum follows as an appendix to this notice. 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 Issues and Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly on the Internet at http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/. The signed Issues and Decision Memorandum and electronic versions of the Issues and Decision Memorandum are identical in content.

    Changes Since the Preliminary Results

    Based on a review of the record and comments received from interested parties regarding our Preliminary Results, we have made revisions to the margin calculations for all companies.10

    10See Issues and Decision Memorandum, at 3.

    Adjustments for Countervailable Subsidies

    Because no respondent established eligibility for an adjustment under section 777A(f) of the Act for countervailable domestic subsidies, the Department, for these final results, did not make an adjustment pursuant to section 777A(f) of the Act for countervailable domestic subsidies.11

    11See Preliminary Results, and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum, at 24.

    Pursuant to section 772(c)(1)(C) of the Act, the Department made an adjustment for countervailable export subsidies.12 For Heze Huayi and Jiheng, we made adjustments to reported U.S. prices.13 The adjustment for Kangtai is zero because no countervailable export subsidies were found in the final determination of the CVD investigation. For the PRC-wide entity, since the entity is not currently under review, its rate is not subject to change.14

    12See Chlorinated Isocyanurates From the People's Republic of China: Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination; 2012, 79 FR 56560 (September 22, 2014), and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum, at “Analysis of Programs” section.

    13See Preliminary Results, and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum, at 24; Memorandum to the File, “Analysis for the Preliminary Results of the 2013-2014 Administrative Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on Chlorinated Isocyanurates from the People's Republic of China: Heze Huayi Chemical Co. Ltd.,” June 30, 2015, at “Export Subsidy Offset” section, unchanged for these final results; and, Memorandum to the File, “Analysis for the Preliminary Results of the 2013-2014 Administrative Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on Chlorinated Isocyanurates from the People's Republic of China: Hebei Jiheng Chemical Co., Ltd.,” June 30, 2015, at “Export Subsidy Offset” section, unchanged for these final results.

    14See Antidumping Proceedings: Announcement of Change in Department Practice for Respondent Selection in Antidumping Duty Proceedings and Conditional Review of the Nonmarket Economy Entity in NME Antidumping Duty Proceedings, 78 FR 65963, 65969-70 (November 4, 2013).

    Final Results

    We determine that the following weighted-average dumping margins exist for the POR:

    Exporter Weight-
  • average
  • dumping
  • margin
  • percentage
  • Heze Huayi Chemical Co., Ltd 0.00 Hebei Jiheng Chemical Co., Ltd 1.15 Juancheng Kangtai Chemical Co., Ltd 0.00
    Assessment Rates

    The Department will determine, and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries covered by this review. The Department intends to issue assessment instructions to CBP 15 days after the publication date of these final results of this review. In accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), we are calculating importer- (or customer-) specific assessment rates for the merchandise subject to this review.

    For each individually examined respondent whose weighted-average dumping margin is above de minimis (i.e., 0.50 percent), the Department will calculate importer-specific assessment rates on the basis of the ratio of the total amount of dumping calculated for the importer's examined sales and the total entered value of sales.15 We will instruct CBP to assess antidumping duties on all appropriate entries covered by this review when the importer-specific assessment rate is above de minimis. Where either the respondent's weighted-average dumping margin is zero or de minimis, or an importer-specific assessment rate is zero or de minimis, we will instruct CBP to liquidate the appropriate entries without regard to antidumping duties.

    15See Antidumping Proceedings: Calculation of the Weighted-Average Dumping Margin and Assessment Rate in Certain Antidumping Proceedings: Final Modification, 77 FR 8101 (February 14, 2012).

    Cash Deposit Requirements

    The following cash deposit requirements will be effective upon publication of the final results of this administrative review for shipments of the subject merchandise from the PRC entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date, as provided by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act): (1) For the exporter's listed above, the cash deposit rate will be the rate established in the final results of this review (except, if the rate is zero or de minimis, a zero cash deposit rate will be required for that company); (2) for previously investigated or reviewed PRC and non-PRC exporters not listed above that have separate rates, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the existing producer/exporter-specific rate published for the most recent period; (3) for all PRC exporters of subject merchandise that have not been found to be eligible for a separate rate, the cash deposit rate will be the PRC-wide rate of 285.63 percent; 16 and (4) for all non-PRC exporters of subject merchandise which have not received their own rate, the cash deposit rate will be the rate applicable to the PRC exporter(s) that supplied that non-PRC exporter. These deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice.

    16 For an explanation on the derivation of the PRC-wide rate, see Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Chlorinated Isocyanurates From the People's Republic of China, 70 FR 24502, 24505 (May 10, 2005).

    Disclosure

    We will disclose the calculations performed regarding these final results within five days of the date of publication of this notice in this proceeding in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).

    Notification to Importers

    This notice serves as a final reminder to importers of their responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f) to file a certificate regarding the reimbursement of antidumping duties prior to liquidation of the relevant entries during this POR. Failure to comply with this requirement could result in the Department's presumption that reimbursement of antidumping duties has occurred and that subsequent assessment of doubled antidumping duties.

    Administrative Protective Order 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(a)(3), which continues to govern business proprietary information in this segment of the proceeding. Timely written notification of the return or destruction of APO materials, or conversion to judicial protective order, is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and terms of an APO is a violation which is subject to sanction.

    Notification to Interested Parties

    This administrative review and notice are issued and published in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.213(h).

    Dated: January 4, 2016. Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. Appendix—Issues and Decision Memorandum Summary Background Scope of the Order Changes Since the Preliminary Results Discussion of the Issues Comment 1: Surrogate Value for the Raw Material Input Chlorine Comment 2: Surrogate Value for the Raw Material Input Urea Comment 3: Surrogate Value for the By-Product Hydrogen Comment 4: Surrogate Financial Ratios Comment 5: By-Product Offset for Ammonium Sulfate Comment 6: Calculation of Jiheng's Indirect Selling Expenses Comment 7: Calculation of Ocean Freight Recommendation
    [FR Doc. 2016-00366 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [C-570-971] Multilayered Wood Flooring From the People's Republic of China: Preliminary Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review and Intent To Rescind the Review in Part; 2013 AGENCY:

    Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Commerce (the Department) is conducting an administrative review of the countervailing duty (CVD) order on multilayered wood flooring (wood flooring) from the People's Republic of China (PRC). The period of review (POR) is January 1, 2013, through December 31, 2013. We preliminarily find that the mandatory respondents, Dalian Penghong Floor Products Co., Ltd. (Penghong) and The Lizhong Wood Industry Limited Company of Shanghai (Lizhong) (also known as “Shanghai Lizhong Wood Products Co., Ltd.”), received countervailable subsidies during the POR. Interested parties are invited to comment on these preliminary results.

    DATES:

    Effective Date: January 11, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Mary Kolberg, AD/CVD Operations, Office I, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-1785.

    Scope of the Order

    Multilayered wood flooring is composed of an assembly of two or more layers or plies of wood veneer(s) 1 in combination with a core. Imports of the subject merchandise are provided for under the following subheadings of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS): 4412.31.0520; 4412.31.0540; 4412.31.0560; 4412.31.2510; 4412.31.2520; 4412.31.4040; 4412.31.4050; 4412.31.4060; 4412.31.4070; 4412.31.5125; 4412.31.5135; 4412.31.5155; 4412.31.5165; 4412.31.6000; 4412.31.9100; 4412.32.0520; 4412.32.0540; 4412.32.0560; 4412.32.2510; 4412.32.2520; 4412.32.3125; 4412.32.3135; 4412.32.3155; 4412.32.3165; 4412.32.3175; 4412.32.3185; 4412.32.5600; 4412.39.1000; 4412.39.3000; 4412.39.4011; 4412.39.4012; 4412.39.4019; 4412.39.4031; 4412.39.4032; 4412.39.4039; 4412.39.4051; 4412.39.4052; 4412.39.4059; 4412.39.4061; 4412.39.4062; 4412.39.4069; 4412.39.5010; 4412.39.5030; 4412.39.5050; 4412.94.1030; 4412.94.1050; 4412.94.3105; 4412.94.3111; 4412.94.3121; 4412.94.3131; 4412.94.3141; 4412.94.3160; 4412.94.3171; 4412.94.4100; 4412.94.5100; 4412.94.6000; 4412.94.7000; 4412.94.8000; 4412.94.9000; 4412.94.9500; 4412.99.0600; 4412.99.1020; 4412.99.1030; 4412.99.1040; 4412.99.3110; 4412.99.3120; 4412.99.3130; 4412.99.3140; 4412.99.3150; 4412.99.3160; 4412.99.3170; 4412.99.4100; 4412.99.5100; 4412.99.5710; 4412.99.6000; 4412.99.7000; 4412.99.8000; 4412.99.9000; 4412.99.9500; 4418.71.2000; 4418.71.9000; 4418.72.2000; and 4418.72.9500.

    1 A “veneer” is a thin slice of wood, rotary cut, sliced or sawed from a log, bolt or flitch. Veneer is referred to as a ply when assembled.

    While HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written product description remains dispositive.

    A full description of the scope of the order is contained in the memorandum from Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, to Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, “Decision Memorandum for Preliminary Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review: Multilayered Wood Flooring from the People's Republic of China” dated concurrently with this notice (Preliminary Decision Memorandum), which is hereby adopted by this notice.

    The Preliminary Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on file electronically via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS). ACCESS is available to registered users at https://access.trade.gov and in the Central Records Unit, Room B8024 of the main Department building. In addition, a complete version of the Preliminary Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly on the Internet at http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/index.html. The signed Preliminary Decision Memorandum and the electronic versions of the Preliminary Decision Memorandum are identical in content.

    Intent To Rescind Administrative Review, in Part

    We received timely filed no-shipment certifications from Zhejiang Shuimojiangnan New Material Technology Co., Ltd. on April 3, 2015, and from Tongxiang Jisheng Import and Export Co., Ltd., Jiangsu Guyu International Trading Co., Ltd., Jiangsu Mingle Flooring Co., Ltd., Shenyang Senwang Wooden Industry Co., Ltd., Changbai Mountain Development and Protection Zone Hongtu Wood Industrial Co, Ltd., and Linyi Bonn Flooring Manufacturing Co., Ltd. on April 6, 2015.2 Because there is no evidence on the record to indicate that these companies had entries of subject merchandise during the POR, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(3), we intend to rescind the review with respect to these companies. A final decision regarding whether to rescind the review of these companies will be made in the final results of this review.

    2See letter from Zhejiang Shuimojiangnan New Material Technology Co., Ltd., “Multilayered Wood Flooring from the People's Republic of China-No Sales Certification,” dated April 3, 2015; see also letter from Tongxiang Jisheng Import and Export Co., Ltd., Jiangsu Guyu International Trading Co., Ltd., Jiangsu Mingle Flooring CO., Ltd., Shenyang Senwang Wooden Industry Co., Ltd., Changbai Mountain Development and Protection Zone Hongtu Wood Industrial Co., Ltd., and Linyi Bonn Flooring Manufacturing Co., Ltd., “Multilayered Wood Flooring from the People's Republic of China: Submission of No Shipment Certifications,” dated April 6, 2015.

    Methodology

    We are conducting this review in accordance with section 751(a)(1)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). For each of the subsidy programs found to be countervailable, we preliminarily find that there is a subsidy, i.e., a government-provided financial contribution that gives rise to a benefit to the recipient, and that the subsidy is specific.3 For a full description of the methodology underlying our conclusions, see Preliminary Decision Memorandum.

    3See sections 771(5)(B) and (D) of the Act regarding financial contribution; section 771(5)(E) of the Act regarding benefit; and, section 771(5A) of the Act regarding specificity.

    Preliminary Results of the Review

    In accordance with 19 CFR 351.221(b)(4)(i), we calculated a countervailable subsidy rate for each of the mandatory respondents, Penghong and Lizhong.

    For the non-selected respondents, we have followed the Department's practice, which is to base the subsidy rates on an average of the subsidy rates calculated for those companies selected for individual review, excluding de minimis rates or rates based entirely on adverse facts available.4 In this case, we have preliminarily assigned to the non-selected respondents the simple average of the rates calculated for Penghong and Lizhong due to inconsistent units of measure in the publicly ranged quantity and value data provided by Penghong and Lizhong.

    4See, e.g., Certain Pasta From Italy: Preliminary Results of the 13th (2008) Countervailing Duty Administrative Review, 75 FR 18806, 18811 (April 13, 2010), unchanged in Certain Pasta from Italy: Final Results of the 13th (2008) Countervailing Duty Administrative Review, 75 FR 37386 (June 29, 2010).

    We preliminarily find the countervailable subsidy rates for the producers/exporters under review to be as follows: 5

    5 The Department published a Correction of Notice of Initiation, 80 FR 11166 (March 2, 2015) and removed Zhejiang Layo Wood Industry Co. Ltd(“Layo Wood”) because this company was excluded from the countervailing duty order in the investigation.

    Producer/Exporter Net subsidy rate
  • (percent)
  • Dalian Penghong Floor Products Co., Ltd. (Penghong) 1.97 Shanghai Lizhong Wood Products Co., Ltd. (aka The Lizhong Wood Industry Limited Company of Shanghai); Linyi Youyou Wood Co., Ltd 0.89 A&W (Shanghai) Woods Co., Ltd 1.43 Anhui Longhua Bamboo Product Co., Ltd 1.43 Armstrong Wood Products (Kunshan) Co., Ltd 1.43 Baishan Huafeng Wood Product Co., Ltd 1.43 Baiying Furniture Manufacturer Co., Ltd 1.43 Baroque Timber Industries (Zhongshan) Co., Ltd 1.43 Benxi Wood Company 1.43 Changbai Mountain Development and Protection Zone Hongtu Wood Industrial Co., Ltd 1.43 Changzhou Hawd Flooring Co., Ltd 1.43 Cheng Hang Wood Co., Ltd 1.43 Chinafloors Timber (China) Co., Ltd 1.43 Dalian Dajen Wood Co., Ltd 1.43 Dalian Huade Wood Product Co., Ltd 1.43 Dalian Huilong Wooden Products Co., Ltd 1.43 Dalian Jiuyuan Wood Industry Co., Ltd 1.43 Dalian Kemian Wood Industry Co., Ltd 1.43 Dalian Shumaike Floor Manufacturing Co., Ltd 1.43 Dalian Xinjinghua Wood Co., Ltd 1.43 Dasso Industrial Group Co., Ltd 1.43 Dazhuang Floor Co. (dba Dasso Industrial Group Co., Ltd.) 1.43 Dongtai Fuan Universal Dynamics LLC 1.43 Dun Hua City Jisen Wood Industry Co., Ltd 1.43 Dun Hua Sen Tai Wood Co., Ltd 1.43 Dunhua City Dexin Wood Industry Co., Ltd 1.43 Dunhua City Hongyuan Wood Industry Co., Ltd 1.43 Dunhua City Wanrong Wood Industry Co., Ltd 1.43 Dunhua Jisheng Wood Industry Co., Ltd 1.43 Dunhua Shengda Wood Industry Co., Ltd 1.43 Era Solar Co., Ltd 1.43 Fine Furniture (Shanghai) Limited 1.43 Fu Lik Timber (HK) Co., Ltd 1.43 Fusong Jinlong Wooden Group Co., Ltd 1.43 Fusong Qianqiu Wooden Product Co., Ltd 1.43 GTP International Ltd 1.43 Guangdong Fu Lin Timber Technology Limited 1.43 Guangdong Yihua Timber Industry Co., Ltd 1.43 Guangzhou Homebon Timber Manufacturing Co., Ltd 1.43 Guangzhou Panyu Kangda Board Co., Ltd 1.43 Guangzhou Panyu Shatou Trading Co., Ltd 1.43 Guangzhou Panyu Southern Star Co., Ltd 1.43 HaiLin LinJing Wooden Products, Ltd 1.43 HaiLin XinCheng Wooden Products, Ltd 1.43 Hangzhou Dazhuang Floor Co., Ltd. (dba Dasso Industrial Group Co., Ltd.) 1.43 Hangzhou Hanje Tec Co., Ltd 1.43 Hangzhou Zhengtian Industrial Co., Ltd 1.43 Henan Xingwangjia Technology Co., Ltd 1.43 Hunchun Forest Wolf Wooden Industry Co., Ltd 1.43 Hunchun Xingjia Wooden Flooring Inc 1.43 Huzhou Chenghang Wood Co., Ltd 1.43 Huzhou Fulinmen Imp. & Exp. Co., Ltd 1.43 Huzhou Fuma Wood Co., Ltd 1.43 Huzhou Jesonwood Co., Ltd 1.43 Huzhou Ruifeng Imp. & Exp. Co., Ltd 1.43 Huzhou Sunergy World Trade Co., Ltd 1.43 Jiafeng Wood (Suzhou) Co., Ltd 1.43 Jiangsu Guyu International Trading Co., Ltd 1.43 Jiangsu Mingle Flooring Co., Ltd 1.43 Jiangsu Senmao Bamboo and Wood Industry Co., Ltd 1.43 Jiangsu Simba Flooring Co., Ltd 1.43 Jiangsu Yuhui International Trade Co., Ltd 1.43 Jiashan HuiJiaLe Decoration Material Co., Ltd 1.43 Jiaxing Hengtong Wood Co., Ltd 1.43 Jilin Forest Industry Jinqiao Flooring Group Co., Ltd 1.43 Jilin Xinyuan Wooden Industry Co., Ltd 1.43 Karly Wood Product Limited 1.43 Kemian Wood Industry (Kunshan) Co., Ltd 1.43 Linyi Anying Wood Co., Ltd 1.43 Linyi Bonn Flooring Manufacturing Co., Ltd 1.43 Mudanjiang Bosen Wood Industry Co., Ltd 1.43 Nakahiro Jyou Sei Furniture (Dalian) Co., Ltd 1.43 Nanjing Minglin Wooden Industry Co., Ltd 1.43 Ningbo Qixin Solar Electrical Appliance Co., Ltd 1.43 Ningbo Tianyi Bamboo & Wood Products Co., Ltd 1.43 Pinge Timber Manufacturing (Zhejiang) Co., Ltd 1.43 Power Dekor Group Co., Ltd 1.43 Puli Trading Limited 1.43 Qingdao Barry Flooring Co., Ltd 1.43 Riverside Plywood Corporation 1.43 Samling Riverside Co., Ltd 1.43 Shanghai Anxin (Weiguang) Timber Co., Ltd 1.43 Shanghai Eswell Timber Co., Ltd 1.43 Shanghai Lairunde Wood Co., Ltd 1.43 Shanghai New Sihe Wood Co., Ltd 1.43 Shanghai Shenlin Corporation 1.43 Shenyang Haobainian Wooden Co., Ltd 1.43 Shenyang Senwang Wooden Industry Co., Ltd 1.43 Shenzhenshi Huanwei Woods Co., Ltd 1.43 Sino-Maple (JiangSu) Co., Ltd 1.43 Suzhou Anxin Weiguang Timber Co., Ltd 1.43 Suzhou Dongda Wood Co., Ltd 6 1.43 Tongxiang Jisheng Import and Export Co., Ltd 1.43 Vicwood Industry (Suzhou) Co. Ltd 1.43 Xiamen Yung De Ornament Co., Ltd 1.43 Xuzhou Antop International Trade Co., Ltd 1.43 Xuzhou Shenghe Wood Co., Ltd 1.43 Yekalon Industry, Inc 1.43 Yingyi-Nature (Kunshan) Wood Industry Co., Ltd 1.43 Yixing Lion-King Timber Industry Co., Ltd 1.43 Zhejiang Anji Xinfeng Bamboo and Wood Co., Ltd 1.43 Zhejiang Biyork Wood Co., Ltd 1.43 Zhejiang Dadongwu Green Home Wood Co., Ltd 1.43 Zhejiang Desheng Wood Industry Co., Ltd 1.43 Zhejiang Fudeli Timber Industry Co., Ltd 1.43 Zhejiang Fuerjia Wooden Co., Ltd 1.43 Zhejiang Fuma Warm Technology Co., Ltd 1.43 Zhejiang Haoyun Wooden Co., Ltd 1.43 Zhejiang Jeson Wood Co., Ltd 1.43 Zhejiang Longsen Lumbering Co., Ltd 1.43 Zhejiang Shiyou Timber Co., Ltd 1.43 Zhejiang Shuimojiangnan 1.43 Zhejiang Tianzhen Bamboo & Wood Development Co., Ltd 1.43
    Disclosure and Public Comment

    We will disclose to parties in this proceeding the calculations performed in reaching the preliminary results within five days of publication of these preliminary results.7 Interested parties may submit written comments (case briefs) on the preliminary results no later than 30 days from the date of publication of this Federal Register notice, and rebuttal comments (rebuttal briefs) within five days after the time limit for filing case briefs.8 Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.309(d)(2), rebuttal briefs must be limited to issues raised in the case briefs. Parties who submit arguments are requested to submit with the argument: (1) A statement of the issue; (2) a brief summary of the argument; and (3) a table of authorities.

    6See Multilayered Wood Flooring from the People's Republic of China: Final Results and Partial Rescission of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review: 2012 (80 FR 41007, July 14, 2015) and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum at 23-24. We have omitted Anhui Suzhou Dongda Wood Co., Ltd. and Yixing Lion-King Timber Industry from the notice because we have now included the correct spelling of these companies. Zhejiang Shuimojiangnan is also known as Zhejiang Shuimojiangnan New Material Technology Co., Ltd. Dongtai Fuan Universal Dynamics LLC and Zhejiang Longsen Lumbering Co., Ltd. were listed twice in the Initiation Notice.

    7See 19 CFR 351.224(b).

    8See 19 CFR 351.309(c)(1)(ii) and 351.309(d)(1).

    Interested parties who wish to request a hearing, or to participate if one is requested, must submit a written request to the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, within 30 days after the date of publication of this notice.9 Requests should contain the party's name, address, and telephone number, the number of participants, and a list of the issues to be discussed. If the Department receives a request for a hearing, we will inform parties of the scheduled date for the hearing which will be held at the U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230, at a time and location to be determined.10 Parties should confirm by telephone the date, time, and location of the hearing.

    9See 19 CFR 351.310(c).

    10See 19 CFR 351.310.

    Parties are reminded that briefs and hearing requests are to be filed electronically using ACCESS and that electronically filed documents must be received successfully in their entirety by 5 p.m. Eastern Time on the due date.

    Unless the deadline is extended pursuant to section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act, we intend to issue the final results of this administrative review, including the results of our analysis of the issues raised by the parties in their comments, within 120 days after publication of these preliminary results.

    Assessment Rates

    Consistent with section 751(a)(1) of the Act, upon issuance of the final results, the Department shall determine, and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) shall assess, countervailing duties on all appropriate entries covered by this review. We intend to issue instructions to CBP 15 days after publication of the final results of this review.

    Cash Deposit Requirements

    Also in accordance with section 751(a)(1) of the Act, the Department intends to instruct CBP to collect cash deposits of estimated countervailing duties in the amounts shown above for each of the respective companies listed above. For all non-reviewed firms, we will instruct CBP to continue to collect cash deposits at the most recent company specific or all-others rate applicable to the company. These cash deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice.

    This administrative review and notice are in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.213.

    Dated: December 31, 2015. Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. Appendix—List of Topics Discussed in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum 1. Summary 2. Background 3. Scope of the Order 4. Intent to Rescind, in Part, the Administrative Review 5. Subsidies Valuation Information 6. Analysis of Programs 7. Recommendation
    [FR Doc. 2016-00356 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XD853 Endangered Species; File No. 19288 AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Notice; issuance of permit.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given that Dr. Mark Flint, University of Florida, School of Forest Resources and Conservation, 529 Ellsberry Road, Apollo Beach, FL 33572 has been issued a permit to take loggerhead (Caretta caretta), Kemp's ridley (Lepidochelys kempii), green (Chelonia mydas), and hawksbill (Eretmochelys imbricata) sea turtles for purposes of scientific research.

    ADDRESSES:

    The permit and related documents are available for review upon written request or by appointment in the Permits and Conservation Division, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, 1315 East-West Highway, Room 13705, Silver Spring, MD 20910; phone (301) 427-8401; fax (301) 713-0376.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Arturo Herrera or Amy Hapeman, (301) 427-8401.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    On March 25, 2015, notice was published in the Federal Register (80 FR 15751) that a request for a scientific research permit to take loggerhead, Kemp's ridley, green, and hawksbill sea turtles had been submitted by the above-named individual. The requested permit has been issued under the authority of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (ESA; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) and the regulations governing the taking, importing, and exporting of endangered and threatened species (50 CFR parts 222-226).

    Dr. Flint has been issued a five-year permit to conduct research in Tampa Bay, Florida to determine the distribution and health status of the resident population of sea turtles in the region. Up to 200 sea turtles annually may be counted during vessel surveys and subsequently hand captured and have the following procedures performed: measure, weigh, flipper and passive integrated transponder tag, blood sample, lavage, internal and external biopsy sample, laparoscopy and associated transport, and/or ultrasound. The permit is valid until December 31, 2020.

    Issuance of this permit, as required by the ESA, was based on a finding that such permit (1) was applied for in good faith, (2) will not operate to the disadvantage of such endangered or threatened species, and (3) is consistent with the purposes and policies set forth in section 2 of the ESA.

    Dated: January 5, 2016. Julia Harrison, Chief, Permits and Conservation Division, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00293 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Proposed Information Collection; Comment Request; Southeast Region Permit Family of Forms 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 (PRA) of 1995.

    DATES:

    Written comments must be submitted on or before March 11, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Direct all written comments to Jennifer Jessup, Departmental Paperwork Clearance Officer, Department of Commerce, Room 6616, 14th and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230 (or via the Internet at [email protected]).

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Requests for additional information or copies of the information collection instrument and instructions should be directed to Adam Bailey, National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), Southeast Regional Office (SERO), 263 13th Avenue South, St. Petersburg, FL 33701, (727) 824-5305 or [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Abstract

    This request is for a revision to the existing reporting requirements approved under OMB Control No. 0648-0205, Southeast Region Permit Family of Forms. The SERO Permits Office (Southeast Permits Office) administers Federal fishing permits in the Gulf of Mexico (Gulf), South Atlantic, and Caribbean Sea under the authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, 16 U.S.C. 1801. The Southeast Permits Office proposes to revise two parts of the collection-of-information approved under OMB Control Number 0648-0205.

    Currently, NMFS requires fishermen (respondents) to display one adhesive decal on their vessel indicating that they have a Federal fishing permit in at least one of two Gulf fisheries; the applicable permits are the Charter Vessel/Headboat Permit for Gulf Reef Fish, the Charter Vessel/Headboat Permit for Gulf Coastal Migratory Pelagic fish, and their respective Historical Captain endorsements. NMFS proposes to revise OMB Control Number 0648-0205 to split the single decal covering both fisheries into two decals, with one decal administered with each specific fishery permit or endorsement. In addition, this revision also addresses a new fee of $10 per decal to cover administrative costs, as required by NOAA Finance Handbook, Exhibit 9-1. The Federal Permit Application for Vessels Fishing in the Exclusive Economic Zone would also be revised to reflect the new fee. The decal is currently issued at no cost to permit applicants. These decals allow individuals and law enforcement officials to easily identify vessels that have Federal permits.

    NMFS estimates this revision could affect up to 1,331 respondents (applicants), which is the total number of permitted charter and headboat vessels in these limited access fisheries, including the Historical Captain endorsements for each fishery. The maximum number of permits and endorsements at this time is 2,645. Generally, the 1,331 respondents have a set of 2 permits, but it is not required. Each of the two permits or endorsements that a respondent may have can be split up and held by two respondents. Some of these have been split up and that is why there is an odd number of permits, and the number of respondents is not exactly half of the maximum number of permits and endorsements.

    Because of the new fee and instructions, NMFS has revised the time burden required to indicate which permit the respondent is renewing or transferring up to 30 seconds. The time burden estimated for this part of the revision is 11.1 hours annually. Although it is not expected, all 1,331 respondents could potentially renew, or transfer or obtain 2 different permits or endorsements, requiring up to 2 decals to be purchased. NMFS estimates the total annual cost at up to $26,450.

    The Southeast Permits Office is also proposing to collect additional information on five applications for economic analysis and for purposes of notifying respondents. These data include race, sex, and business type and ownership information, as well as email addresses and the option to provide cellular contact information for digital notifications. The revision will also include a small business certification section, so NMFS can determine if the respondent is a small or large business according to standards established by the Small Business Administration.

    These proposed revisions will not change the current cost burden but will increase the annual time burden for respondents. NMFS estimates this revision could affect up to 6,641 respondents across the 5 applications being revised, which includes the 1,331 respondents described above. The time burden estimated for this part of the revision is 925.9 hours annually.

    NMFS estimates that the requested revision would add 0 respondents, 6,641 responses, 937 burden hours, and $26,450 in total costs annually to the collection-of-information under OMB Control Number 0648-0205.

    II. Method of Collection

    Respondents complete applications on paper forms, and then can either mail or bring applications to the Southeast Permits Office. Online application renewals are currently available only for some of the permits included on the Federal Permit Application for Vessels Fishing in the Exclusive Economic Zone. The Southeast Permits Office can mail applications and instructions or they can be downloaded from the Southeast Permits Office Web site at sero.nmfs.noaa.gov/permits. The Southeast Permits Office cannot send or receive applications by fax or email, because applications must have an original signature, which is not possible by fax or email.

    III. Data

    OMB Control Number: 0648-0205.

    Form Number(s): None.

    Type of Review: Regular submission (revision of current information collection).

    Affected Public: Business or other for-profit organizations.

    Estimated Number of Respondents: 6,641.

    Estimated Time per Response: Vessel Application, 39 minutes; Dealer Application, 29 minutes; Operator Card, 21 minutes; Wreckfish Application, 21 minutes; Aquaculture Live Rock Application, 21 minutes.

    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 7,023.

    Estimated Total Annual Cost to Public: $483,828 in recordkeeping or 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: January 5, 2016. Sarah Brabson, NOAA PRA Clearance Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00261 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION Technology Advisory Committee; Notice of Meeting AGENCY:

    Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice of Meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    The Commodity Futures Trading Commission (“CFTC” or “Commission”) announces that on Tuesday, January 26, 2016, from 9:45 a.m. to 3:45 p.m., the CFTC's Technology Advisory Committee (“TAC”) will hold a public meeting at the CFTC's Washington, DC headquarters. The TAC will discuss: (1) The Commission's proposed Regulation Automated Trading (“Reg AT”); (2) swap data standardization and harmonization; and (3) blockchain and the potential application of distributed ledger technology to the derivatives market.

    DATES:

    The meeting will be held on Tuesday, January 26, 2016 from 9:45 a.m. to 3:45 p.m. Members of the public who wish to submit written statements in connection with the meeting should submit them by Tuesday, January 26, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    The meeting will take place in the Conference Center at the CFTC's headquarters, Three Lafayette Centre, 1155 21st Street NW., Washington, DC 20581. Written statements should be submitted by mail to: Commodity Futures Trading Commission, Three Lafayette Centre, 1155 21st Street NW., Washington, DC 20581, attention: Office of the Secretary, or by electronic mail to: [email protected] Please use the title “Technology Advisory Committee” in any written statement you submit. Any statements submitted in connection with the committee meeting will be made available to the public, including publication on the CFTC Web site, at http://www.cftc.gov.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ward P. Griffin, TAC Designated Federal Officer, Commodity Futures Trading Commission, Three Lafayette Centre, 1155 21st Street NW., Washington, DC 20581, (202) 418-5425.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The meeting will be open to the public with seating on a first-come, first-served basis. Members of the public may also listen to the meeting by telephone by calling a domestic toll-free telephone or international toll or toll-free number to connect to a live, listen-only audio feed. Call-in participants should be prepared to provide their first name, last name, and affiliation.

    Domestic Toll Free: 1-866-844-9416.

    International Toll and Toll Free: Will be posted on the CFTC's Web site, http://www.cftc.gov, on the page for the meeting, under Related Documents.

    Pass Code/Pin Code: CFTC.

    After the meeting, a transcript of the meeting will be published through a link on the CFTC's Web site, http://www.cftc.gov. All written submissions provided to the CFTC in any form will also be published on the CFTC's Web site. Persons requiring special accommodations to attend the meeting because of a disability should notify the contact person above.

    Authority:

    5 U.S.C. app. 2 § 10(a)(2).

    Dated: January 6, 2016. Robert N. Sidman, Deputy Secretary of the Commission.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00297 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6351-01-P
    CORPORATION FOR NATIONAL AND COMMUNITY SERVICE Information Collection; Submission for OMB Review, Comment Request AGENCY:

    Corporation for National and Community Service.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Corporation for National and Community Service (CNCS) has submitted a public information collection request (ICR) entitled Operation AmeriCorps Evaluation for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Pub. L. 104-13, (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35). Copies of this ICR, with applicable supporting documentation, may be obtained by calling the Corporation for National and Community Service, Joseph Breems, at 202-606-6992 or email to [email protected] Individuals who use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TTY-TDD) may call 1-800-833-3722 between 8:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. Eastern Time, Monday through Friday.

    DATES:

    Comments may be submitted, identified by the title of the information collection activity, within February 10, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Comments may be submitted, identified by the title of the information collection activity, to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attn: Ms. Sharon Mar, OMB Desk Officer for the Corporation for National and Community Service, by either of the following two methods within 30 days from the date of publication in the Federal Register:

    (1) By fax to: 202-395-6974, Attention: Ms. Sharon Mar, OMB Desk Officer for the Corporation for National and Community Service; or

    (2) By email to: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The OMB is particularly interested in comments which:

    • Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of CNCS, including whether the information will have practical utility;

    • Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

    • Propose ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

    • Propose 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

    A 60-day Notice requesting public comment was published in the Federal Register on 10/26/2015 at 2015-27155 FR 65219. This comment period ended 12/28/2015. No public comments were received from this Notice. Description: This two year evaluation seeks to assess the implementation of the new Operation AmeriCorps initiative, and to report on early results from the intended outcomes of each grantee's project. The evaluation will examine the extent to which multiple streams of national service are integrated and complement one another in each project; determine whether and how community capacity is being developed and sustained; and examine the Operation AmeriCorps grant making process to determine if this type of grant could be successfully used in future grants competitions. Researchers from CNCS will collect qualitative and quantitative data from grantees and their partners, AmeriCorps members, member supervisors, and program beneficiaries. Operation AmeriCorps grantees are required to participate in the evaluation as a condition of grant award.

    Type of Review: New.

    Agency: Corporation for National and Community Service.

    Title: Operation AmeriCorps Evaluation.

    OMB Number: TBD.

    Agency Number: None.

    Affected Public: Organizations receiving Operation AmeriCorps grants and their partners involved in implementing the grant, including: The legal applicant organization; the legal sub-applicant organization; key operating partners identified by the legal applicant and/or sub-applicant; peripheral supporting organizations identified by key operating partners and the legal applicant and/or sub-applicant; AmeriCorps members working on an Operation AmeriCorps project; member supervisors working on an Operation AmeriCorps project; beneficiaries being served by an Operation AmeriCorps project.

    Total Respondents: 340 total for this two year evaluation (170 per year) (all respondents may or may not be unique depending on individuals selected by grantee to respond to each instrument each year).

    Frequency: Two times annually for survey; two times annually for grantee interviews; one time annually for focus groups.

    Average Time per Response: Averages 30 minutes for the survey; 60-90 minutes per interview; 60 minutes per focus group.

    Estimated Total Burden Hours: 420 hours (25,200 minutes) total for this two-year evaluation (210 hours or 12,600 minutes per year).

    Total Burden Cost (capital/startup): None.

    Total Burden Cost (operating/maintenance): None.

    Dated: January 6, 2016. Mary Hyde, Director of Research and Evaluation.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00321 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6050-28-P
    CORPORATION FOR NATIONAL AND COMMUNITY SERVICE Proposed Information Collection; Comment Request AGENCY:

    Corporation for National and Community Service.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Corporation for National and Community Service (CNCS), as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, conducts a pre-clearance consultation program to provide the general public and federal agencies with an opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing collections of information in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA95) (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)). This program helps to ensure that requested data can be provided in the desired format, reporting burden (time and financial resources) is minimized, collection instruments are clearly understood, and the impact of collection requirement on respondents can be properly assessed.

    Currently, CNCS is soliciting comments concerning its proposed renewal of the Baseline Questionnaire for Caregivers. This instrument will be administered to caregivers of Senior Companion Program service recipients (respite service and independent living service) to assess their demographic characteristics, psycho-social health and wellbeing, and their physical health. Participation is completely voluntary participation is not considered as a factor in obtaining grant funding support from Senior Corps.

    Copies of the information collection request can be obtained by contacting the office listed in the Addresses section of this notice.

    DATES:

    Written comments must be submitted to the individual and office listed in the ADDRESSES section by March 11, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments, identified by the title of the information collection activity, by any of the following methods:

    (1) By mail sent to: Corporation for National and Community Service, Office of Research and Evaluation; Attention Anthony Nerino, Research Analyst, #10913A; 1201 New York Avenue NW., Washington, DC, 20525.

    (2) By hand delivery or by courier to the CNCS mailroom at Room 8100 at the mail address given in paragraph (1) above, between 9:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. Eastern Time, Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

    (3) Electronically through www.regulations.gov.

    Individuals who use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TTY-TDD) may call 1-800-833-3722 between 8:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. Eastern Time, Monday through Friday.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Anthony Nerino, (202) 606-3913, or by email at [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    CNCS is particularly interested in comments that:

    • Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of CNCS, including whether the information will have practical utility;

    • Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

    • Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

    • Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are expected to respond, including the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology (e.g., permitting electronic submissions of responses).

    Background

    CNCS is submitting a modification to the statement of work outlining technical assistance to implement a study of caregivers of SCP respite service and SCP independent living services. Additionally, CNCS seeks to assess the long term impact of participation in the Foster Grandparent Program (FGP) and the Senior Companion Program (SCP) on caregivers satisfaction, health related outcomes and psycho-social outcomes.

    This project involves a survey of caregivers to individuals who are recipients of independent living services, and caregivers to individuals receiving respite care services. Potential survey respondents will be drawn from a list of registered beneficiaries provided by a sample of SCP grantees. SCP and FGP members will be drawn from a list of registered members provided by a sample of SCP and FGP grantees. Potential interview respondents will include, caregivers SCP respite and independent services. Survey data will be collected using a multi-modal survey methods including phone surveys, paper surveys and on-line surveys.

    Quantitative data analysis will include descriptive statistics and inferential analysis of survey responses by respondent characteristics. Analyses will focus on identifying demographic factors of recipients and members, and on self-reported health status and psycho-social factors including self-efficacy, loneliness and depression.

    Current Action

    This is a new information collection request. CNCS seeks public comment on a new data collection instrument and a set of interview questions developed for this project. The instrument and interview questionnaire has been designed by the contractor for this project and represents an information collection instrument specific to the modified Statement of Work and modified project goals.

    Type of Review: New.

    Agency: Corporation for National and Community Service.

    Title: Baseline Questionnaire for Caregivers.

    OMB Number: New.

    Agency Number: None.

    Affected Public: Caregivers of Senior Corps SCP respite services and independent living services.

    Total Respondents: 900.

    Frequency: One time.

    Average Time per Response: Average time 30 minutes.

    Respondent category Number Time Total hours SCP Caregiver Survey 900 30 minutes 450

    Estimated Total Burden Hours: 450 hours.

    Total Burden Cost (capital/startup): None.

    Total Burden Cost (operating/maintenance): None.

    Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and/or included in the request for Office of Management and Budget approval of the information collection request; they will also become a matter of public record.

    Dated: January 4, 2016. Mikel Herrington, Acting Director, Senior Corps.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00332 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6050-28-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Department of the Army Notice of Intent To Grant Exclusive Patent License to Schafer Aerospace; Albuquerque, NM AGENCY:

    Department of the Army, DoD.

    ACTION:

    Notice of intent.

    SUMMARY:

    In compliance with 35 U.S.C. 209(e) and 37 CFR 404.7(a)(1)(i), the Department of the Army hereby gives notice of its intent to grant to Schafer Aerospace; a corporation having its principle place of business at 2309 Renard Place SE., Suite 300, Albuquerque, NM 87106, exclusive license in the field of fiber laser array systems with specific application in the areas of laser communication, beam aberration correction, Light Detection and Ranging (LIDAR/LADAR), beam steering (random access) and precision pointing and tracking. The proposed license would be relative to the following:

    • U.S. Patent Number 9,223,091 entitled “Light Beam Collimator Particularly Suitable for a Densely Packed Array”, Inventor Beresnev, Issue Date Dec. 29, 2015.

    DATES:

    The prospective exclusive license may be granted unless within fifteen (15) days from the date of this published notice, the U.S. Army Research Laboratory receives written objections including evidence and argument that establish that the grant of the license would not be consistent with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 209 and 37 CFR 404.7. Competing applications completed and received by the U.S. Army Research Laboratory within fifteen (15) days from the date of this published notice will also be treated as objections to the grant of the contemplated exclusive license.

    Objections submitted in response to this notice will not be made available to the public for inspection and, to the extent permitted by law, will not be released under the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 552.

    ADDRESSES:

    Send written objections to U.S. Army Research Laboratory Technology Transfer and Outreach Office, RDRL-DPT/Thomas Mulkern, Building 321 Room 110, Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD 21005-5425.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Thomas Mulkern, (410) 278-0889, E-Mail: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    None.

    Brenda S. Bowen, Army Federal Register Liaison Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00203 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3710-08-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Office of the Secretary National Commission on the Future of the Army; Notice of Federal Advisory Committee Meeting AGENCY:

    Deputy Chief Management Officer, Department of Defense (DoD).

    ACTION:

    Notice of Federal Advisory Committee Meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    The DoD is publishing this notice to announce a meeting of the National Commission on the Future of the Army (“the Commission”). The meeting will be open to the public.

    DATES:

    Date of the Open Meeting: Thursday, January 28, 2016, from 2:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m.

    ADDRESSES:

    Address of Open Meeting, January 28, 2016: Room 285, State Services Organization, Hall of States, 444 North Capitol Street NW., Suite 237, Washington, DC 20001.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Mr. Don Tison, Designated Federal Officer, National Commission on the Future of the Army, 700 Army Pentagon, Room 3E406, Washington, DC 20310-0700, Email: [email protected]. Desk (703) 692-9099. Facsimile (703) 697-8242.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This meeting will be held under the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) of 1972 (5 U.S.C., Appendix, as amended), the Government in the Sunshine Act of 1976 (5 U.S.C. 552b, as amended), and 41 CFR 102-3.150.

    Purpose of Meetings

    During the open meeting on Thursday, January 28, 2016, the Commission will publicly release their final report.

    Agendas

    January 28, 2016—Open Meeting: The Commission will hold an open meeting to provide comments and announce the release of the Commission's final report.

    Meeting Accessibility

    Pursuant to 41 CFR 102-3.140 through 102-3.165 and the availability of space, the meeting scheduled for January 28, 2016 from 2:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. at the Hall of States is open to the public. Seating is limited and pre-registration is strongly encouraged. Media representatives are also encouraged to register. Members of the media must comply with the rules of photography and video filming published by the State Services Organization and George Washington University. The closest public parking facility is on the property, for an hourly fee. The Union Station metro is a two-block walk. Visitors should keep their belongings with them at all times.

    Additional Information

    The DoD sponsor for the Commission is the Deputy Chief Management Officer. The Commission is tasked to submit a report, containing a comprehensive study and recommendations, by February 1, 2016 to the President of the United States and the Congressional defense committees. The report will contain a detailed statement of the findings and conclusions of the Commission, together with its recommendations for such legislation and administrative actions it may consider appropriate in light of the results of the study. The comprehensive study of the structure of the Army will determine whether, and how, the structure should be modified to best fulfill current and anticipated mission requirements for the Army in a manner consistent with available resources.

    Dated: January 5, 2016. Aaron Siegel, Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00230 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001-06-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers Notice of Intent To Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement for the Denver Urban Waterways Restoration Study, South Platte River and Tributaries, Denver County, CO AGENCY:

    Department of the Army, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, DoD.

    ACTION:

    Notice of intent.

    SUMMARY:

    Pursuant to section 102(2)(C) of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969, as amended, and the Council on Environmental Quality's (CEQ) regulations for implementing the procedural provisions of NEPA, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), Omaha District, intends to prepare a feasibility study with integrated environmental impact statement (EIS) that analyzes and discloses effects associated with actions to provide ecosystem restoration along the South Platte River and flood risk management actions along two South Platte River tributaries (Harvard Gulch and Weir Gulch).

    DATES:

    Submit written comments on the scope of the issues and alternatives to be considered in the EIS on or before February 19, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Send written scoping comments, requests to be added to the mailing list, or requests for sign language interpretation for the hearing impaired or other special assistance needs to Ms. Tiffany Vanosdall by telephone: (402) 995-2695, by mail: 1616 Capitol Avenue, Omaha, NE 68102-4901, or by email: [email protected]

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For further information and/or questions about the proposed feasibility study with integrated EIS, please contact Mr. Luke Wallace by telephone: (402) 995-2692, by mail: 1616 Capitol Avenue, Omaha, NE 68102-4901, or by email: [email protected] For inquiries from the media, please contact the USACE Omaha District Public Affairs Officer, Mr. Tom O'Hara by telephone: (402) 995-2416, by mail: 1616 Capitol Avenue, Omaha, NE 68102-4901, or by email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    USACE is issuing this notice pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.

    Public Meetings: Public scoping meetings for the various study reaches will be held from 5:30-7:30 p.m. MDT at the following locations:

    Harvard Gulch: Wednesday, January 13, 2016—Harvard Gulch Recreation Center, 550 East Iliff Avenue, Denver, CO 80210.

    South Platte River: Wednesday, January 20, 2016—REI, 1416 Platte Street, Denver, CO 80202.

    Weir Gulch: Tuesday, February 2, 2016—Barnum Recreation Center, 360 Hooker Street, Denver, CO 80219.

    Background Information

    The Unified City and County of Denver and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Omaha District (Corps) are conducting a feasibility study for ecosystem restoration along the South Platte River and flood risk management along two of its tributaries, Weir Gulch and Harvard Gulch, in the City and County of Denver. The ecosystem portion of the study will optimize federally significant resources including habitat for migratory birds, wetlands and riparian habitat, and aquatic resources of the South Platte River and its tributaries. The geographic scope of the study area includes the South Platte River from 6th Avenue to 58th Avenue, Weir Gulch from Sheridan Boulevard east to the confluence with the South Platte River, and Harvard Gulch from Colorado Boulevard west to the confluence with the South Platte River.

    The purpose of the project along the South Platte River is to address loss of riparian, wetland and in-channel habitat associated with urban development. There is a need to provide a functioning habitat corridor through Denver for migratory birds, as well as wetland and aquatic species. The purpose of the project along the Harvard Gulch and Weir Gulch tributaries to the South Platte River is to address flood risk issues in order to reduce flood and life safety risks along each stream. Urban development within the floodplain in both gulches consists of approximately 1,180 structures and an associated 9,150 people at risk of flooding. The report will be a final response to the study authority.

    The City and County of Denver covers approximately 153 square miles which is only 0.15 percent of the State's area, but is densely populated with approximately 12 percent of the State's population; the total metropolitan area population (2.4 million) is approximately 50 percent of the State's population. Population growth has been rapid.

    Denver County lies approximately 10 miles east of the Front Range of the Rocky Mountains. This heavily influences the County's weather. Denver has a semi-arid climate with all four seasons discernible. Average annual precipitation is 16 inches. The natural land cover is primarily short-grass prairie and semi-desert.

    For approximately 10 river miles the South Platte River flows north through Denver. Its tributaries in Denver include Cherry Creek, smaller Bear Creek, and still smaller Weir Gulch, Lakewood Gulch, Sanderson Gulch, Harvard Gulch, and West Harvard Gulch.

    The Harvard Gulch watershed is an east bank tributary to the South Platte River located in southeast Denver. The 7.43-square mile drainage basin is 72.5 percent within the City and County of Denver and 27.5 percent in Arapahoe County. The major drainage way has a perennial base flow and follows a path along Harvard Avenue until reaching Logan Street where it is conveyed underground in Wesley Avenue to the outfall at the South Platte River.

    The Weir Gulch watershed is a west bank tributary to the South Platte River in Denver and has a drainage area of approximately 7.7 square miles at the confluence with the South Platte River.

    As required by CEQ's implementing regulations, all reasonable alternatives to the proposed Federal action that meet the purpose and need will be considered in the EIS. These alternatives will include no action and a range of reasonable alternatives for improving the South Platte ecosystem and reducing flood risk on Harvard and Weir Gulch. Appropriate mitigation measures will be incorporated into the proposed action and reasonable alternatives. The EIS will analyze and disclose environmental impacts associated with the proposed Federal action and alternatives together with engineering, operations and maintenance, social, and economic considerations. The public is invited and encouraged to identify issues and effects they believe should be addressed in the EIS and reasonable alternatives for ecosystem restoration along the South Platte River and flood risk management along Harvard Gulch and Weir Gulch.

    Public Disclosure Statement

    The Corps believes it is important to inform the public of the environmental review process. To assist the Corps in identifying and considering issues related to the proposed Federal action, comments made during formal scoping and later on the draft EIS should be as specific as possible. Reviewers must structure their participation in the environmental review of the proposal so that it is meaningful and alerts the Corps to the reviewers' position and contentions. It is very important that those interested in this proposed Federal action participate by the close of the scoping period so that substantive comments and objections are made available to the Corps at a time when they can meaningfully consider and respond to them.

    If you wish to comment, you can mail or email your comments as indicated under the Addresses section. Before including your name, address, phone number, email address, or any other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment including your personal identifying information may be made available to the public at any time.

    While you can request in your comment for us to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.

    Brenda S. Bowen, Army Federal Register Liaison Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00204 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3720-58-P
    DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION [Docket No. ED-2015-ICCD-0127] Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to the Office of Management and Budget for Review and Approval; Comment Request; Mathematics and Science Partnerships Program: Annual Performance Report AGENCY:

    Office of Elementary and Secondary Education (OESE), Department of Education (ED).

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. chapter 3501 et seq.), ED is proposing a revision of an existing information collection.

    DATES:

    Interested persons are invited to submit comments on or before February 10, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    To access and review all the documents related to the information collection listed in this notice, please use http://www.regulations.gov by searching the Docket ID number ED-2015-ICCD-0127. Comments submitted in response to this notice should be submitted electronically through the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov by selecting the Docket ID number or via postal mail, commercial delivery, or hand delivery. Please note that comments submitted by fax or email and those submitted after the comment period will not be accepted. Written requests for information or comments submitted by postal mail or delivery should be addressed to the Director of the Information Collection Clearance Division, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., LBJ, Room 2E115, Washington, DC 20202-4537.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For specific questions related to collection activities, please contact Inas El-Sabban, 202-205-3810.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Department of Education (ED), in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)), provides the general public and Federal agencies with an opportunity to comment on proposed, revised, and continuing collections of information. This helps the Department assess the impact of its information collection requirements and minimize the public's reporting burden. It also helps the public understand the Department's information collection requirements and provide the requested data in the desired format. ED is soliciting comments on the proposed information collection request (ICR) that is described below. The Department of Education is especially interested in public comment addressing the following issues: (1) Is this collection necessary to the proper functions of the Department; (2) will this information be processed and used in a timely manner; (3) is the estimate of burden accurate; (4) how might the Department enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (5) how might the Department minimize the burden of this collection on the respondents, including through the use of information technology. Please note that written comments received in response to this notice will be considered public records.

    Title of Collection: Mathematics and Science Partnerships Program: Annual Performance Report.

    OMB Control Number: 1810-0669.

    Type of Review: A revision of an existing information collection.

    Respondents/Affected Public: State, Local and Tribal Government.

    Total Estimated Number of Annual Responses: 450.

    Total Estimated Number of Annual Burden Hours: 4,500.

    Abstract: The Mathematics and Science Partnerships program is a formula grant program to the States in which states make competitive awards to projects. The authorizing legislation, Title II, Part B, Section 2202 (f) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 as amended by the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, requires all locally funded projects to report annually to the Secretary documenting progress towards goals and objectives. The Annual Performance Report (APR) is an online reporting tool. Annual reporting requirements include impact on increasing teacher learning and student achievement; standard descriptive information on the MSP projects; the professional development participants; the professional development models, content, and processes; the evaluation plans; and lessons learned. By structuring the reporting so that all MSPs are required to provide standardized data, the program office is better able to examine outcomes across funded partnerships. The primary objective of the proposed revision is to reduce burden on reporting entities while ensuring that needed data continue to be collected. Proposed revisions include removing items that duplicate information, condensing sections of the APR that require substantial project burden to complete, and clarifying reporting instructions to improve quality of responses.

    Dated: January 5, 2016. Tomakie Washington, Acting Director, Information Collection Clearance Division, Office of the Chief Privacy Officer, Office of Management.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00263 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4000-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION [Docket No.: ED-2015-ICCD-0128] Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to the Office of Management and Budget for Review and Approval; Comment Request; Perkins Discretionary Grant Performance Report AGENCY:

    Office of Career Technical and Adult Education (OCTAE), Department of Education (ED).

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. chapter 3501 et seq.), ED is proposing an extension of an existing information collection.

    DATES:

    Interested persons are invited to submit comments on or before February 10, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    To access and review all the documents related to the information collection listed in this notice, please use http://www.regulations.gov by searching the Docket ID number ED-2015-ICCD-0128. Comments submitted in response to this notice should be submitted electronically through the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov by selecting the Docket ID number or via postal mail, commercial delivery, or hand delivery. Please note that comments submitted by fax or email and those submitted after the comment period will not be accepted. Written requests for information or comments submitted by postal mail or delivery should be addressed to the Director of the Information Collection Clearance Division, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., LBJ, Room 2E115, Washington, DC 20202-4537.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For specific questions related to collection activities, please contact Laura Messenger, 202-245-7840.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Department of Education (ED), in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)), provides the general public and Federal agencies with an opportunity to comment on proposed, revised, and continuing collections of information. This helps the Department assess the impact of its information collection requirements and minimize the public's reporting burden. It also helps the public understand the Department's information collection requirements and provide the requested data in the desired format. ED is soliciting comments on the proposed information collection request (ICR) that is described below. The Department of Education is especially interested in public comment addressing the following issues: (1) Is this collection necessary to the proper functions of the Department; (2) will this information be processed and used in a timely manner; (3) is the estimate of burden accurate; (4) how might the Department enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (5) how might the Department minimize the burden of this collection on the respondents, including through the use of information technology. Please note that written comments received in response to this notice will be considered public records.

    Title of Collection: Perkins Discretionary Grant Performance Report.

    OMB Control Number: 1830-0574.

    Type of Review: An extension of an existing information collection.

    Respondents/Affected Public: State, Local and Tribal Governments.

    Total Estimated Number of Annual Responses: 88.

    Total Estimated Number of Annual Burden Hours: 1,556.

    Abstract: The purpose of this information collection package—the Perkins Discretionary Grant Performance Report—is to gather narrative, financial, and performance data on all discretionary programs administered by the Office of Career, Technical, and Adult Education's Division of Academic and Technical Education (OCTAE-DATE), as required by the Education Department General Administrative Regulations (EDGAR 34 CFR 74.51, 74.52, 75.118, 75.253, 75.590, and 80.40). The Perkins Discretionary Grant Performance Report will be used by all OCTAE-DATE discretionary grant recipients in lieu of the ED 524B Grant Performance Report and Instructions because the ED 524B is not compatible with OCTAE-DATE's Perkins Information Management System.

    The Perkins Discretionary Grant Performance Report is (a) submitted electronically via OCTAE-DATE's Perkins Web Portal; (b) stored in OCTAE-DATE's Improving Program Performance Database; and (c) accessed through OCTAE-DATE's Perkins Information Management System (PIMS). The Perkins Information Management System includes an administrative console that enables OCTAE-DATE staff to—a) query the system by grantee, by program, and by state; (b) view narrative, financial, and performance data within and across programs; and (c) create customized reports.

    The Perkins Discretionary Grant Performance Report is a generic, single reporting instrument that combines all of the EDGAR performance and financial reporting requirements for discretionary grant recipients funded under the Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education Act of 2006 (P.L. 109-270). Recipients of multi-year discretionary grants must submit interim performance reports, usually annually, for each year funding has been approved in order to receive a continuation award. The annual performance report should demonstrate whether substantial progress has been made toward meeting the approved goals and objectives of the project. OCTAE-DATE also requires recipients of “forward funded” grants that are awarded funds for their entire multi-year project up-front in a single grant award to submit an annual performance report.

    Dated: January 5, 2016. Tomakie Washington, Acting Director, Information Collection Clearance Division, Office of the Chief Privacy Officer, Office of Management.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00264 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4000-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Project No. 14653-000] Twain Resources, LLC; Notice of Preliminary Permit Application Accepted for Filing and Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene, and Competing Applications

    On December 10, 2014, Twain Resources, LLC, filed an application for a preliminary permit, pursuant to section 4(f) of the Federal Power Act (FPA), proposing to study the feasibility of the Easygo Hydroelectric Project (Easygo Project or project) to be located in an inactive underground mine adjacent to Morgan Creek near the City of Bishop, in Inyo County, California. The sole purpose of a preliminary permit, if issued, is to grant the permit holder priority to file a license application during the permit term. A preliminary permit does not authorize the permit holder to perform any land-disturbing activities or otherwise enter upon lands or waters owned by others without the owners' express permission.

    The proposed project would consist of the following: (1) An existing 12-foot-high by 12-foot-wide by 30-foot-thick reinforced concrete plug inside a 12,000-foot-long mine access tunnel capable of storing water up to 1,320 feet of gross head; (2) a 200-acre-foot in-mine reservoir that backs up water inside the mine to a maximum elevation of 9,400 feet above sea level; (3) a 24-inch or 18-inch steel penstock through the concrete plug connecting to a 1,500 kilowatt impulse turbine; (4) a 1.573 kilovolt-amp generator; (5) an approximately 2,500-foot-long transmission line connecting the generator to a California Edison-owned substation; and (6) appurtenant facilities. The estimated annual generation of the Easygo Project would be 5,600 megawatt-hours.

    Applicant Contact: Mr. Doug Hicks, 280 Floreca Way, Reno, Nevada 89511, phone (775) 997-3429.

    FERC Contact: Joseph Hassell; phone: (202) 502-8079.

    Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, competing applications (without notices of intent), or notices of intent to file competing applications: 60 days from the issuance of this notice. Competing applications and notices of intent must meet the requirements of 18 CFR 4.36.

    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file comments, motions to intervene, notices of intent, and competing applications using the Commission's eFiling system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can submit brief comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior registration, using the eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You must include your name and contact information at the end of your comments. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at [email protected], (866) 208-3676 (toll free), or (202) 502-8659 (TTY). In lieu of electronic filing, please send a paper copy to: Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426. The first page of any filing should include docket number P-14653-000.

    More information about this project, including a copy of the application, can be viewed or printed on the “eLibrary” link of Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp. Enter the docket number (P-14653) in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support.

    Dated: January 5, 2016. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00285 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. Is16-61-000] Colonial Pipeline Company; Notice Of Technical Conference

    Take notice that the Commission will convene a technical conference on January 26, 2016, at 9:00 a.m. (EDT), in a room to be designated at the offices of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.

    At the technical conference, the Commission Staff and the parties to the proceeding should be prepared to discuss all issues set for technical conference as established in the December 3, 2015 Order (Colonial Pipeline Company, 153 FERC ¶ 61,270 (2015).

    Advanced registration is required for all attendees. Attendees may register in advance at the following Web page: https://www.ferc.gov/whats-new/registration/01-26-16-form.asp. Attendees should allow time to pass through building security procedures before the 9:00 a.m. (Eastern Time) start time of the technical conference. In addition, information on this event will be posted on the Calendar of Events on the Commission's Web site, www.ferc.gov, prior to the event.

    Commission conferences are accessible under section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. For accessibility accommodations please send an email to [email protected] or call toll free 1-866-208-3372 (voice) or 202-502-8659 (TTY); or send a fax to 202-208-2106 with the required accommodations.

    For more information about this technical conference, please contact Adrianne Cook, 202-502-8849, [email protected] or David Faerberg, 202-502-8275, [email protected].

    Dated: January 5, 2016. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00283 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. NJ16-7-000] City of Azusa, California; Notice of Filing

    Take notice that on December 29, 2015, City of Azusa, California submitted its tariff filing: City of Azusa, California 2016 Transmission Revenue Balancing Account Adjustment and Existing Transmission Contracts Update to be effective 1/1/2016.

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the Applicant and all the parties in this proceeding.

    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the “eFiling” link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 5 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.

    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the “eLibrary” link and is available for electronic review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an “eSubscription” link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive email notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please email [email protected], or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on January 19, 2016.

    Dated: January 5, 2016. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00284 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Combined Notice of Filings #1

    Take notice that the Commission received the following exempt wholesale generator filings:

    Docket Numbers: EG16-33-000.

    Applicants: Frontier Windpower, LLC.

    Description: Notice of Self-Certification as an Exempt Wholesale Generator of Frontier Windpower, LLC.

    Filed Date: 1/4/16.

    Accession Number: 20160104-5439.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/25/16.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER13-415-004.

    Applicants: Anahau Energy, LLC.

    Description: Triennial market power update of Anahau Energy, LLC for Southwest region.

    Filed Date: 12/31/15.

    Accession Number: 20151231-5409.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/29/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-1832-001.

    Applicants: Duke Energy Florida, LLC.

    Description: Compliance filing: ROE Settlement Revised IA's (2014) to be effective 5/1/2014.

    Filed Date: 12/21/15.

    Accession Number: 20151221-5229.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/11/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-762-005; ER15-760-004; ER15-1579-003; ER15-1582-004; ER15-1914-005; ER15-2680-001; ER15-2679-001.

    Applicants: Sierra Solar Greenworks LLC, Western Antelope Blue Sky Ranch A LLC, 67RK 8me LLC, 65HK 8me LLC, 87RL 8me LLC, Sandstone Solar LLC, Latigo Wind Park, LLC.

    Description: Notice of Non-Material Change in Status of Sierra Solar Greenworks LLC, et al.

    Filed Date: 1/4/16.

    Accession Number: 20160104-5550.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/25/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-1196-005.

    Applicants: Nevada Power Company.

    Description: Compliance filing: OATT Energy Imbalance Market (Definitions-Sched 9-Attach P) to be effective 2/16/2016.

    Filed Date: 1/4/16.

    Accession Number: 20160104-5421.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/25/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-1429-002.

    Applicants: Emera Maine.

    Description: Compliance filing: Modify Record Content to be effective 6/1/2015.

    Filed Date: 1/4/16.

    Accession Number: 20160104-5438.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/25/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-1618-002.

    Applicants: Duke Energy Florida, LLC.

    Description: Compliance filing: ROE Settlement Revised IA's (2015) to be effective 5/1/2015.

    Filed Date: 12/21/15.

    Accession Number: 20151221-5260.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/11/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-1896-003.

    Applicants: Eden Solar LLC.

    Description: Notice of Non-Material Change in Status of Eden Solar, LLC.

    Filed Date: 1/4/16.

    Accession Number: 20160104-5551.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/25/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-1914-004.

    Applicants: 87RL 8me LLC.

    Description: Compliance filing: 87RL 8me LLC MBR Tariff to be effective 8/1/2015.

    Filed Date: 11/18/15.

    Accession Number: 20151118-5208.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/26/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-2231-001.

    Applicants: Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC, Duke Energy Florida, LLC.

    Description: Compliance filing: DEF ROE Settlement Filing to be effective 1/1/2015.

    Filed Date: 12/21/15.

    Accession Number: 20151221-5206.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/11/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-681-000.

    Applicants: Eden Solar LLC.

    Description: Tariff Cancellation: Eden Solar, LLC Notice of Cancellation to be effective 1/15/2016.

    Filed Date: 1/4/16.

    Accession Number: 20160104-5414.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/25/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-682-000.

    Applicants: PacifiCorp.

    Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: OATT Revised Sections (EIM Available Balancing Capacity 2) to be effective 2/16/2016.

    Filed Date: 1/4/16.

    Accession Number: 20160104-5420.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/25/16.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric securities filings:

    Docket Numbers: ES16-9-000.

    Applicants: New York State Electric & Gas Corporation.

    Description: Amendment to December 10, 2015 Application for Authorization to Issue Short Term Debt of New York State Electric & Gas Corporation.

    Filed Date: 12/24/15.

    Accession Number: 20151224-5073.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/14/16.

    Docket Numbers: ES16-10-000.

    Applicants: Rochester Gas & Electric Corporation.

    Description: Amendment to December 10, 2015 Application for Authorization to Issue Short Term Debt of Rochester Gas and Electric Corporation.

    Filed Date: 12/24/15.

    Accession Number: 20151224-5074.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/14/16.

    Docket Numbers: ES16-12-000.

    Applicants: Kansas Gas and Electric Company.

    Description: Supplement to December 11, 2015 Application under Section 204 of the Federal Power Act of Kansas Gas and Electric Company.

    Filed Date: 12/23/15.

    Accession Number: 20151223-5100.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/13/16.

    Docket Numbers: ES16-13-000.

    Applicants: Kansas Gas and Electric Company.

    Description: Supplement to December 11, 2015 Application under Section 204 of the Federal Power Act of Kansas Gas and Electric Company.

    Filed Date: 12/23/15.

    Accession Number: 20151223-5099.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/13/16.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following foreign utility company status filings:

    Docket Numbers: FC13-8-000.

    Applicants: Ituiutaba Bioenergia Ltda.

    Description: Notification of Non-Material Change in Status of BP Bioenergia Ituiutaba Ltda.

    Filed Date: 1/4/16.

    Accession Number: 20160104-5546.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/25/16.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the links or querying the docket number.

    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and § 385.214) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the proceeding.

    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

    Dated: January 5, 2016. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00282 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Combined Notice of Filings

    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:

    Filings Instituting Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: PR16-10-000.

    Applicants: Columbia Gas of Ohio, Inc.

    Description: Tariff filing per 284.123(b)(1)/.: COH SOC to be effective 11/30/2015; Filing Type: 980.

    Filed Date: 12/24/15.

    Accession Number: 201512245052.

    Comments/Protests Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/14/16.

    Docket Numbers: RP16-356-000.

    Applicants: Equitrans, L.P.

    Description: Section 4(d) Rate Filing: Negotiated Capacity Release Agreements—01/01/2016 to be effective 1/1/2016.

    Filed Date: 1/4/16.

    Accession Number: 20160104-5440.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/19/16.

    Docket Numbers: RP16-357-000.

    Applicants: Iroquois Gas Transmission System, L.P.

    Description: Section 4(d) Rate Filing: 01/04/16 Negotiated Rates—Mercuria Energy Gas Trading LLC (RTS) 7540-02 to be effective 1/1/2016.

    Filed Date: 1/4/16.

    Accession Number: 20160104-5447.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/19/16.

    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the proceeding.

    Filings in Existing Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP16-140-001.

    Applicants: Eastern Shore Natural Gas Company.

    Description: Compliance filing Filing to Comply with Order Accepting Non-Conforming Agreement to be effective 11/30/2015.

    Filed Date: 12/22/15.

    Accession Number: 20151222-5143.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/4/16.

    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: January 5, 2016. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00286 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0762; FRL-9939-60] Registration Review; Conventional, Biopesticide and Antimicrobial Pesticide Dockets Opened for Review and Comment AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    With this document, EPA is opening the public comment period for several registration reviews. Registration review is EPA's periodic review of pesticide registrations to ensure that each pesticide continues to satisfy the statutory standard for registration, that is, the pesticide can perform its intended function without unreasonable adverse effects on human health or the environment. Registration review dockets contain information that will assist the public in understanding the types of information and issues that the Agency may consider during the course of registration review. Through this program, EPA is ensuring that each pesticide's registration is based on current scientific and other knowledge, including its effects on human health and the environment.

    DATES:

    Comments must be received on or before March 11, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments identified by the docket identification (ID) number for the specific pesticide of interest provided in the table in Unit III. A., by one of the following methods:

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

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

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

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For pesticide specific information contact: The person identified as a contact in the table in Unit III. A. Also include the docket ID number listed in the table in Unit III. A. for the pesticide of interest.

    For general information contact: Richard Dumas, Pesticide Re-Evaluation Division (7508P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number: (703) 308-8015; email address: [email protected]

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

    This action is directed to the public in general, and may be of interest to a wide range of stakeholders including environmental, human health, farmworker, and agricultural advocates; the chemical industry; pesticide users; and members of the public interested in the sale, distribution, or use of pesticides. Since others also may be interested, the Agency has not attempted to describe all the specific entities that may be affected by this action.

    B. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?

    1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through regulations.gov or email. Clearly mark the part or all of the information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information on a disk or CD-ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM as CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket. Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.

    2. Tips for preparing your comments. When preparing and submitting your comments, see the commenting tips at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/comments.html.

    3. Environmental justice. EPA seeks to achieve environmental justice, the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of any group, including minority and/or low income populations, in the development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies. To help address potential environmental justice issues, the Agency seeks information on any groups or segments of the population who, as a result of their location, cultural practices, or other factors, may have atypical or disproportionately high and adverse human health impacts or environmental effects from exposure to the pesticides discussed in this document, compared to the general population.

    II. Authority

    EPA is initiating its review of the pesticides identified in this document pursuant to section 3(g) of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) (7 U.S.C. 136a(g)) and the Procedural Regulations for Registration Review at 40 CFR part 155, subpart C. Section 3(g) of FIFRA provides, among other things, that the registrations of pesticides are to be reviewed every 15 years. Under FIFRA, a pesticide product may be registered, or remain registered only if it meets the statutory standard for registration given in FIFRA section 3(c)(5) (7 U.S.C. 136a(c)(5)). When used in accordance with widespread and commonly recognized practice, the pesticide product must perform its intended function without unreasonable adverse effects on the environment; that is, without any unreasonable risk to man or the environment, or a human dietary risk from residues that result from the use of a pesticide in or on food.

    III. Registration Reviews A. What action is the Agency taking?

    As directed by FIFRA section 3(g), EPA is reviewing the pesticide registrations identified in the table in this unit to assure that they continue to satisfy the FIFRA standard for registration—that is, they can still be used without unreasonable adverse effects on human health or the environment. A pesticide's registration review begins when the Agency establishes a docket for the pesticide's registration review case and opens the docket for public review and comment. At present, EPA is opening registration review dockets for the cases identified in the following table.

    Table—Registration Review Dockets Opening Registration review case name and No. Docket ID No. Contact and contact information Chlorophacinone, 2100 EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0778 Christina Motilall, [email protected], (703) 603-0522. Cyproconazole, 7011 EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0462 Miguel Zavala, [email protected], (703) 347-0504. Difenoconazole, 7014 EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0401 Maria Piansay, [email protected], (703) 308-8063. Diphacinone, and salts, 2205 EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0777 Christina Motilall, [email protected], (703) 603-0522. Diphenylamine, 2210 EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0749 Roy Johnson, [email protected], (703) 347-0492. Diuron, 0046 EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0077 Katherine St. Clair, [email protected], (703) 347-8778. Endothall, and salts, 2245 EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0591 Garland Waleko, [email protected], (703) 308-8049. Fenbuconazole, 7012 EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0716 Nathan Sell, [email protected], (703) 347-8020. Flumetralin, 4119 EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0076 Katherine St. Clair, [email protected], (703) 347-8778. Fluoxastrobin, 7044 EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0295 Bilin Basu, [email protected], (703) 347-0325. Ipconazole, 7041 EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0590 Brittany Pruitt, [email protected], (703) 347-0289. Metconazole, 7049 EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0013 Jordan Page, [email protected], (703) 347-0467. Nicarbazin, 7628 EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0101 Bonnie Adler, [email protected], (703) 308-8523. Trimedlure, 6045 EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0616 Gina Burnett, [email protected], (703) 605-0513. Paramenthune 3,8-diol, 6017 EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0693 Colin Walsh, [email protected], (703) 308-0298. Propiconazole, 3125 EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0459 Linsey Walsh, [email protected], (703) 347-8030. Prothioconazole, 7054 EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0474 Brian Kettl, [email protected], (703) 347-0535. Strychnine, 3133 EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0754 Susan Bartow, [email protected], (703) 603-0065. Tebuconazole, 7004 EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0378 Jose Gayoso, [email protected], (703) 347-8652. Uniconazole, 7007 EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0729 Susan Bartow, [email protected], (703) 603-0065. Warfarin, and its sodium salt, 0011 EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0481 Caitlin Newcamp, [email protected], (703) 347-0325. Buctenopage against Xanthomonas campestris pv. vesicatoria, 6510 and Pseudomonas syringae pv., 6509 EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0702 Kathleen Martin, [email protected], (703) 308-2857. B. Docket Content

    1. Review dockets. The registration review dockets contain information that the Agency may consider in the course of the registration review. The Agency may include information from its files including, but not limited to, the following information:

    • An overview of the registration review case status.

    • A list of current product registrations and registrants.

    Federal Register notices regarding any pending registration actions.

    Federal Register notices regarding current or pending tolerances.

    • Risk assessments.

    • Bibliographies concerning current registrations.

    • Summaries of incident data.

    • Any other pertinent data or information.

    Each docket contains a document summarizing what the Agency currently knows about the pesticide case and a preliminary work plan for anticipated data and assessment needs. Additional documents provide more detailed information. During this public comment period, the Agency is asking that interested persons identify any additional information they believe the Agency should consider during the registration review of these pesticides. The Agency identifies in each docket the areas where public comment is specifically requested, though comment in any area is welcome.

    2. Other related information. More information on these cases, including the active ingredients for each case, may be located in the registration review schedule on the Agency's Web site at http://www.epa.gov/oppsrrd1/registration_review/schedule.htm. Information on the Agency's registration review program and its implementing regulation may be seen at http://www.epa.gov/oppsrrd1/registration_review.

    3. Information submission requirements. Anyone may submit data or information in response to this document. To be considered during a pesticide's registration review, the submitted data or information must meet the following requirements:

    • To ensure that EPA will consider data or information submitted, interested persons must submit the data or information during the comment period. The Agency may, at its discretion, consider data or information submitted at a later date.

    • The data or information submitted must be presented in a legible and useable form. For example, an English translation must accompany any material that is not in English, and a written transcript must accompany any information submitted as an audiographic or videographic record. Written material may be submitted in paper or electronic form.

    • Submitters must clearly identify the source of any submitted data or information.

    • Submitters may request the Agency to reconsider data or information that the Agency rejected in a previous review. However, submitters must explain why they believe the Agency should reconsider the data or information in the pesticide's registration review.

    As provided in 40 CFR 155.58, the registration review docket for each pesticide case will remain publicly accessible through the duration of the registration review process; that is, until all actions required in the final decision on the registration review case have been completed.

    Authority:

    7 U.S.C. 136 et seq.

    Dated: December 24, 2015. Richard P. Keigwin, Jr., Director, Pesticide Re-Evaluation Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00184 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [FRL-9941-22-Region 6] Adequacy Status of the Dallas-Fort Worth, Texas Reasonable Further Progress 8-Hour Ozone Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets for Transportation Conformity Purposes AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Notice of adequacy.

    SUMMARY:

    EPA is notifying the public that it has found that the motor vehicle emissions budgets (MVEBs) in the Dallas-Fort Worth, Texas (DFW) Reasonable Further Progress (RFP) State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision, submitted on July 10, 2015 by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) are adequate for transportation conformity purposes. As a result of EPA's finding, the DFW area must use these budgets for future conformity determinations.

    DATES:

    These budgets are effective January 26, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    The essential information in this notice will be available at EPA's conformity Web site: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/transconf/adequacy.htm. You may also contact Mr. Jeffrey Riley, Air Planning Section (6PD-L), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733, telephone (214) 665-8542, Email address: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Throughout this document “we,” “us,” and “our” refers to EPA. The word “budget(s)” refers to the mobile source emissions budget for volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and the mobile source emissions budget for nitrogen oxides (NOX).

    On July 10, 2015, we received a SIP revision from the TCEQ. This revision consisted of an RFP SIP for the DFW ozone nonattainment area. This submission established MVEBs for the DFW area for the year 2017. The MVEB is the amount of emissions allowed in the state implementation plan for on-road motor vehicles; it establishes an emissions ceiling for the regional transportation network. The MVEBs are provided in Table 1:

    Table 1—Dallas-Fort Worth Reasonable Further Progress NOX and VOC MVEBS [Summer season tons per day] 2017 NOX 148.36 VOC 77.18

    On August 25, 2015, EPA posted the availability of the DFW area MVEBs on EPA's Web site for the purpose of soliciting public comments, as part of the adequacy process. The comment period closed on September 24, 2015, and we received no comments.

    Today's notice is simply an announcement of a finding that EPA has already made. EPA Region 6 sent a letter to TCEQ on December 10, 2015, finding that the MVEBs in the DFW RFP SIP, submitted on July 10, 2015 are adequate and must be used for transportation conformity determinations in the DFW area. This finding has also been announced on EPA's conformity Web site: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/transconf/adequacy.htm.

    Transportation conformity is required by section 176(c) of the Clean Air Act. EPA's conformity rule, 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 93, requires that transportation plans, programs and projects conform to state air quality implementation plans and establishes the criteria and procedures for determining whether or not they do so. Conformity to a SIP means that transportation activities will not produce new air quality violations, worsen existing violations, or delay timely attainment of the national ambient air quality standards.

    The criteria by which EPA determines whether a SIP's MVEB is adequate for transportation conformity purposes are outlined in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4). We have also described the process for determining the adequacy of submitted SIP budgets in our July 1, 2004, final rulemaking entitled, “Transportation Conformity Rule Amendments for the New 8-hour Ozone and PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standards and Miscellaneous Revisions for Existing Areas; Transportation Conformity Rule Amendments: Response to Court Decision and Additional Rule Changes” (69 FR 40004). Please note that an adequacy review is separate from EPA's completeness review, and it should not be used to prejudge EPA's ultimate approval of the DFW RFP SIP revision submittal. Even if EPA finds the budgets adequate, the DFW RFP SIP revision submittal could later be disapproved.

    Within 24 months from the effective date of this notice, the DFW-area transportation partners, such as the North Central Texas Council of Governments, will need to demonstrate conformity to the new MVEBs if the demonstration has not already been made, pursuant to 40 CFR 93.104(e). See, 73 FR 4419 (January 24, 2008).

    Authority:

    42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    Dated: December 29, 2015. Samuel Coleman, Acting Regional Administrator, Region 6.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00339 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [FRL 9941-18-Region 2] Proposed CERCLA Section 122(g)(4) Administrative Settlement Agreement and Order on Consent for the Mercury Refining Superfund Site, Towns of Guilderland and Colonie, Albany County, New York AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Notice; request for public comment.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with Section 122(i) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980, as amended (“CERCLA”), 42 U.S.C. 9622(i), notice is hereby given by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”), Region 2, of a proposed de minimis administrative settlement agreement and order on consent pursuant to Section 122(g)(4) of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. 9622(g)(4). The settlement agreement also includes settlement of claims under the Federal Priority Statute, 31 U.S.C. 3713 (“FPS”), and the Federal Debt Collection Procedures Act, 28 U.S.C. 3301, et seq. (“FDCPA”) under the authority of the Attorney General of the United States to compromise and settle claims of the United States. The settlement is between EPA, Yates Foil USA, Inc., and Craig Yates pertaining to the Mercury Refining Superfund Site (“Site”) located in the Towns of Guilderland and Colonie, Albany County, New York. The settlement requires Yates Foil USA, Inc. and Craig Yates to pay $275,000 to the EPA Hazardous Substance Superfund in reimbursement of response costs incurred by the EPA at the Site. The settlement includes a covenant not to sue pursuant to Sections 106 and 107 of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. 9606 and 9607, relating to the Site, the FPS, 31 U.S.C. 3713, and the FDCPA, 28 U.S.C. 3301 et seq., subject to standard reservations, and protection from contribution actions or claims as provided by Sections 113(f)(2) and 122(g)(5) of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. 9613(f)(2) and 9622(g)(5). For thirty (30) days following the date of publication of this notice, EPA will receive written comments relating to the settlement. EPA will consider all comments received and may modify or withdraw its consent to the settlement if comments received disclose facts or considerations that indicate that the proposed settlement is inappropriate, improper, or inadequate. EPA's response to any comments received will be available for public inspection at EPA Region II, 290 Broadway, New York, New York 10007-1866.

    DATES:

    Comments must be submitted on or before February 10, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    The proposed settlement is available for public inspection at EPA Region 2 offices at 290 Broadway, New York, New York 10007-1866. Comments should be sent to the individual identified below and should reference the Mercury Refining Superfund Site, Index No. CERCLA-02-2015-2020. To request a copy of the proposed settlement agreement, please contact the individual identified below.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Sharon E. Kivowitz, Assistant Regional Counsel, New York/Caribbean Superfund Branch, Office of Regional Counsel, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 17th Floor, 290 Broadway, New York, New York 10007-1866. Telephone: 212-637-3183. E-Mail: [email protected]

    Dated: December 30, 2015. Walter Mugdan, Director, Emergency and Remedial Response Division, EPA, Region 2.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00338 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    EXPORT-IMPORT BANK OF THE UNITED STATES Notice of Open Meeting of the Advisory Committee of the Export-Import Bank of the United States (Ex-Im Bank) SUMMARY:

    The Advisory Committee was established by Public Law 98-181, November 30, 1983, to advise the Export-Import Bank on its programs and to provide comments for inclusion in the report on competitiveness of the Export-Import Bank of the United States to Congress.

    Time and Place: Wednesday, January 20, 2016 from 9:30 a.m. until 3:30 p.m. A break for lunch will be at the expense of the attendee. Security processing will be necessary for reentry into the building. The meeting will be held at Ex-Im Bank in the Main Conference Room—11th Floor, 811 Vermont Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20571.

    Agenda: Agenda items include updates for the Advisory Committee members regarding: 2015 Reauthorization Law, EXIMs business and pipeline, and EXIMs report on competitiveness to Congress.

    Public Participation: The meeting will be open to public participation, and 10 minutes will be set aside for oral questions or comments. Members of the public may also file written statement(s) before or after the meeting. If you plan to attend, a photo ID must be presented at the guard's desk as part of the clearance process into the building, you may contact Tia Pitt at [email protected] placed on an attendee list. If any person wishes auxiliary aids (such as a sign language interpreter) or other special accommodations, please email Tia Pitt at [email protected] by January 14, 2016.

    Members of the Press: For members of the Press planning to attend the meeting, a photo ID must be presented at the guard's desk as part of the clearance process into the building please email Niki Shepperd at [email protected] to be placed on an attendee list.

    Further Information: For further information, contact Tia Pitt, 811 Vermont Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20571, at [email protected].

    Lloyd Ellis, Program Specialist, Office of the General Counsel.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00281 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6690-01-P
    FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION Notice to All Interested Parties of the Termination of the Receivership of 10328, CommunitySouth Bank and Trust, Easley, SC

    NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”) as Receiver for CommunitySouth Bank and Trust, Easley, SC (“the Receiver”) intends to terminate its receivership for said institution. The FDIC was appointed receiver of McIntosh Commercial Bank on January 21, 2011. The liquidation of the receivership assets has been completed. To the extent permitted by available funds and in accordance with law, the Receiver will be making a final dividend payment to proven creditors.

    Based upon the foregoing, the Receiver has determined that the continued existence of the receivership will serve no useful purpose. Consequently, notice is given that the receivership shall be terminated, to be effective no sooner than thirty days after the date of this Notice. If any person wishes to comment concerning the termination of the receivership, such comment must be made in writing and sent within thirty days of the date of this Notice to: Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, Division of Resolutions and Receiverships, Attention: Receivership Oversight Department 32.1, 1601 Bryan Street, Dallas, TX 75201.

    No comments concerning the termination of this receivership will be considered which are not sent within this time frame.

    Dated: January 6, 2016. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. Robert E. Feldman, Executive Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00280 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6714-01-P
    FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION Notice to All Interested Parties of the Termination of the Receivership of 10289, First Commerce Community Bank, Douglasville, Georgia

    NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”) as Receiver for First Commerce Community Bank, Douglasville, Georgia (“the Receiver”) intends to terminate its receivership for said institution. The FDIC was appointed receiver of First Commerce Community Bank on September 17, 2010. The liquidation of the receivership assets has been completed. To the extent permitted by available funds and in accordance with law, the Receiver will be making a final dividend payment to proven creditors.

    Based upon the foregoing, the Receiver has determined that the continued existence of the receivership will serve no useful purpose. Consequently, notice is given that the receivership shall be terminated, to be effective no sooner than thirty days after the date of this Notice. If any person wishes to comment concerning the termination of the receivership, such comment must be made in writing and sent within thirty days of the date of this Notice to: Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, Division of Resolutions and Receiverships, Attention: Receivership Oversight Department 32.1, 1601 Bryan Street, Dallas, TX 75201.

    No comments concerning the termination of this receivership will be considered which are not sent within this time frame.

    Dated: January 6, 2016. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. Robert E. Feldman, Executive Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00278 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6714-01-P
    FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION Notice to All Interested Parties of the Termination of the Receivership of 10207, McIntosh Commercial Bank Carrollton, GA

    NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”) as Receiver for McIntosh Commercial Bank, Carrollton, GA (“the Receiver”) intends to terminate its receivership for said institution. The FDIC was appointed receiver of McIntosh Commercial Bank on March 26, 2010. The liquidation of the receivership assets has been completed. To the extent permitted by available funds and in accordance with law, the Receiver will be making a final dividend payment to proven creditors.

    Based upon the foregoing, the Receiver has determined that the continued existence of the receivership will serve no useful purpose. Consequently, notice is given that the receivership shall be terminated, to be effective no sooner than thirty days after the date of this Notice. If any person wishes to comment concerning the termination of the receivership, such comment must be made in writing and sent within thirty days of the date of this Notice to: Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, Division of Resolutions and Receiverships, Attention: Receivership Oversight Department 32.1, 1601 Bryan Street, Dallas, TX 75201.

    No comments concerning the termination of this receivership will be considered which are not sent within this time frame.

    Dated: January 6, 2016. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. Robert E. Feldman, Executive Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00277 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6714-01-P
    FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION Sunshine Act Meetings AGENCY:

    Federal Election Commission

    DATE & TIME:

    Thursday, January 14, 2016 at 10:00 a.m.

    PLACE:

    999 E Street NW., Washington, DC (ninth floor).

    STATUS:

    This meeting will be open to the public.

    ITEMS TO BE DISCUSSED:

    Correction and Approval of Minutes for November 10 and 17, 2015 Remarks by Chairman Matthew S. Petersen Draft Advisory Opinion 2015-13: Senator Harry Reid Draft Advisory Opinion 2015-14: Hillary for America Draft Advisory Opinion 2015-15: WeSupportThat.com Audit Division Recommendation Memorandum on the Utah State Democratic Committee (USDC) (A13-10) Management and Administrative Matters

    Individuals who plan to attend and require special assistance, such as sign language interpretation or other reasonable accommodations, should contact Shawn Woodhead Werth, Secretary and Clerk, at (202) 694-1040, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting date.

    PERSON TO CONTACT FOR INFORMATION:

    Judith Ingram, Press Officer, Telephone: (202) 694-1220

    Shawn Woodhead Werth, Secretary and Clerk of the Commission.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00447 Filed 1-7-16; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE 6715-01-P
    FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Holding Companies

    The companies listed in this notice have applied to the Board for approval, pursuant to the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 1841 et seq.) (BHC Act), Regulation Y (12 CFR part 225), and all other applicable statutes and regulations to become a bank holding company and/or to acquire the assets or the ownership of, control of, or the power to vote shares of a bank or bank holding company and all of the banks and nonbanking companies owned by the bank holding company, including the companies listed below.

    The applications listed below, as well as other related filings required by the Board, are available for immediate inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The applications will also be available for inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their views in writing on the standards enumerated in the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1842(c)). If the proposal also involves the acquisition of a nonbanking company, the review also includes whether the acquisition of the nonbanking company complies with the standards in section 4 of the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1843). Unless otherwise noted, nonbanking activities will be conducted throughout the United States.

    Unless otherwise noted, comments regarding each of these applications must be received at the Reserve Bank indicated or the offices of the Board of Governors not later than February 5, 2016.

    A. Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta (Chapelle Davis, Assistant Vice President) 1000 Peachtree Street NE., Atlanta, Georgia 30309, or [email protected]:

    1. Fidelity Southern Corporation, Atlanta, Georgia; to merge with American Enterprise Bankshares, Inc., and thereby acquire American Enterprise Bank, both in Jacksonville, Florida.

    B. Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis (Yvonne Sparks, Community Development Officer) P.O. Box 442, St. Louis, Missouri 63166-2034:

    1. Allendale Bancorp, Inc., Allendale, Illinois; to acquire 100 percent of the voting shares of First State Bank of West Salem, West Salem, Illinois.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, January 6, 2016. Michael J. Lewandowski, Associate Secretary of the Board.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00274 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6210-01-P
    FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Extension AGENCY:

    Federal Trade Commission (“Commission” or “FTC”).

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The information collection requirements described below will be submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (“OMB”) for review, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act (“PRA”). The FTC seeks public comments on its proposal to extend for an additional three years the current PRA clearance for information collection requirements contained in its Alternative Fuels Rule. That clearance expires on June 30, 2016.

    DATES:

    Comments must be submitted on or before March 11, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Interested parties may file a comment online or on paper, by following the instructions in the Request for Comment part of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below. Write “Paperwork Comment: FTC File No. P134200” on your comment, and file your comment online at https://ftcpublic.commentworks.com/ftc/altfuelspra by following the instructions on the web-based form. If you prefer to file your comment on paper, mail your comment to the following address: Federal Trade Commission, Office of the Secretary, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Suite CC-5610 (Annex J), Washington, DC 20580, or deliver your comment to the following address: Federal Trade Commission, Office of the Secretary, Constitution Center, 400 7th Street SW., 5th Floor, Suite 5610 (Annex J), Washington, DC 20024.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Requests for additional information or copies of the proposed information requirements for the Alternative Fuels Rule should be directed to Hampton Newsome, Attorney, (202) 326-2889, Division of Enforcement, Bureau of Consumer Protection, Federal Trade Commission, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20580.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Under the PRA, 44 U.S.C. 3501-3521, federal agencies must obtain approval from OMB for each collection of information they conduct or sponsor. “Collection of information” means agency requests or requirements that members of the public submit reports, keep records, or provide information to a third party. 44 U.S.C. 3502(3), 5 CFR 1320.3(c). As required by section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA, the FTC is providing this opportunity for public comment before requesting that OMB extend the existing PRA clearance for the Alternative Fuels Rule, 16 CFR part 309 (OMB Control Number 3084-0094).

    The Rule, which implements the Energy Policy Act of 1992, Public Law 102-486, and as revised by the Commission's 2013 final amendments,1 requires disclosure of specific information on labels posted on fuel dispensers for non-liquid alternative fuels. To ensure the accuracy of these disclosures, the Rule also requires that sellers maintain records substantiating product-specific disclosures they include on these labels.

    1 78 FR 23832 (April 23, 2013). The final amendments consolidated the FTC's alternative fueled vehicles (AFV) labels with the then new fuel economy labels required by the EPA thereby eliminating the FTC's separate labeling requirements for used AFV labels.

    It is common practice for alternative fuel industry members to determine and monitor fuel ratings in the normal course of their business activities. This is because industry members must know and determine the fuel ratings of their products in order to monitor quality and to decide how to market them. “Burden” for PRA purposes is defined to exclude effort that would be expended regardless of any regulatory requirement. 5 CFR 1320.2(b)(2). Moreover, as originally anticipated when the Rule was promulgated in 1995, many of the information collection requirements and the originally estimated hours were associated with one-time start up tasks of implementing standard systems and processes.

    Other factors also limit the burden associated with the Rule. Certification may be a one-time event or require only infrequent revision. Disclosures on electric vehicle fuel dispensing systems may be useable for several years. Nonetheless, there is still some burden associated with posting labels. There also will be some minimal burden associated with new or revised certification of fuel ratings and recordkeeping.

    I. Annual Hours Burden

    4,190 total burden hours

    Certification: Staff estimates that the Rule's fuel rating certification requirements will affect approximately 550 industry members (compressed natural gas producers and distributors and manufacturers of electric vehicle fuel dispensing systems) and consume approximately one hour each per year for a total of 550 hours.

    Recordkeeping: Staff estimates that all 13,000 industry members (all non-liquid fuel producers, distributors, and retailers) will be subject to the Rule's recordkeeping requirements (associated with fuel rating certification) and that compliance will require approximately one-tenth hour each per year for a total of 1,300 hours.

    Labeling: Staff estimates that labeling requirements will affect approximately nine of every ten industry members (or roughly 11,700 members out of 13,000), but that the number of annually affected members is approximately 2,340 because labels may remain effective for several years (staff assumes that in any given year approximately 20% of 11,700 industry members will need to replace their labels). Staff estimates that industry members require approximately one hour each per year for labeling their fuel dispensers for a total of 2,340 hours.

    Thus, estimated total burden for non-liquid alternative fuels is 4,190 hours (550 + 1,300 + 2,340).

    II. Labor Costs

    $106,145

    Labor costs are derived by applying appropriate hourly cost figures to the burden hours described above. According to Bureau of Labor Statistics data for 2014 (most recent available whole-year information),2 the average compensation for fuel system operators is $30.37 per hour; and $10.90 per hour for automotive service attendants. These are factored into the FTC's estimates and assumptions below.

    2 The wage estimates in this Notice are based on mean hourly wages found at http://www.bls.gov/news.release/ocwage.nr0.htm (“Occupational Employment and Wages—May 2014,” U.S. Department of Labor, released March 2015, Table 1 (“National employment and wage data from the Occupational Employment Statistics survey by occupation, May 2014”).

    Certification and labeling: Recordkeeping will be performed by fuel system operators, i.e., producers and distributors of fuels. Estimated associated labor costs would be $87,769. [(550 certification hours + 2,340 labeling hours) × $30.37]

    Recordkeeping: Only 1/6 of the total recordkeeping hours will be performed by fuel system operators (1/6 of 1,300 hours = approximately 217 hours; 217 hours × $30.37 = $6,590); the other 5/6 is attributable to service station employees (5/6 of 1,300 hours = approximately 1,083 hours; 1,083 hours × $10.90 = $11,805). Thus, the labor cost due to recordkeeping for affected industry is approximately $18,395 ($6,590 for fuel system operators + $11,805 for service station employees).

    Associated labor cost: $106,164 ($87,769 for certification and labeling costs + $18,395 for recordkeeping costs).

    III. Non-Labor Cost Burden

    Staff believes that there are no current start-up costs associated with the Rule, inasmuch as the Rule has been in effect since 1995. Industry members, therefore, have in place the capital equipment and means necessary to determine automotive fuel ratings and comply with the Rule. Industry members, however, incur the cost of procuring fuel dispenser labels to comply with the Rule.

    The estimated annual fuel labeling cost, based on estimates of approximately 5,000 fuel dispensers (assumptions: An estimated 20% of 12,500 total fuel retailers need to replace labels in any given year with an approximate five-year life for labels—i.e., 2,500 retailers—multiplied by an average of two dispensers per retailer) at thirty-eight cents for each label (per industry sources), is $1,900 ($0.38 × 5,000).

    IV. Request for Comment

    You can file a comment online or on paper. For the Commission to consider your comment, we must receive it on or before March 11, 2016. Write “Paperwork Comment: FTC File No. P134200” on your comment. Your comment—including your name and your state—will be placed on the public record of this proceeding, including, to the extent practicable, on the public Commission Web site, at http://www.ftc.gov/os/publiccomments.shtm. As a matter of discretion, the Commission tries to remove individuals' home contact information from comments before placing them on the Commission Web site.

    Because your comment will be made public, you are solely responsible for making sure that your comment doesn't include any sensitive personal information, like anyone's Social Security number, date of birth, driver's license number or other state identification number or foreign country equivalent, passport number, financial account number, or credit or debit card number. You are also solely responsible for making sure that your comment doesn't include any sensitive health information, like medical records or other individually identifiable health information. In addition, don't include any “[t]rade secret or any commercial or financial information which is . . . privileged or confidential” as provided in Section 6(f) of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. 46(f), and FTC Rule 4.10(a)(2), 16 CFR 4.10(a)(2).

    If you want the Commission to give your comment confidential treatment, you must file it in paper form, with a request for confidential treatment, and you have to follow the procedure explained in FTC Rule 4.9(c)).3 Your comment will be kept confidential only if the FTC General Counsel grants your request in accordance with the law and the public interest.

    3 In particular, the written request for confidential treatment that accompanies the comment must include the factual and legal basis for the request, and must identify the specific portions of the comment to be withheld from the public record. See FTC Rule 4.9(c), CFR 4.9(c), 16 CFR 4.9(c).

    Postal mail addressed to the Commission is subject to delay due to heightened security screening. As a result, we encourage you to submit your comments online, or to send them to the Commission by courier or overnight service. To make sure that the Commission considers your online comment, you must file it at https://ftcpublic.commentworks.com/ftc/altfuelspra, by following the instructions on the web-based form. When this Notice appears at http://www.regulations.gov/#!home, you also may file a comment through that Web site.

    If you file your comment on paper, write “Paperwork Comment: FTC File No. P134200” on your comment and on the envelope, and mail it to the following address: Federal Trade Commission, Office of the Secretary, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Suite CC-5610 (Annex J), Washington, DC 20580, or deliver your comment to the following address: Federal Trade Commission, Office of the Secretary, Constitution Center, 400 7th Street SW., 5th Floor, Suite 5610 (Annex J), Washington, DC 20024. If possible, submit your paper comment to the Commission by courier or overnight service.

    Visit the Commission Web site at http://www.ftc.gov to read this Notice. The FTC Act and other laws that the Commission administers permit the collection of public comments to consider and use in this proceeding as appropriate. The Commission will consider all timely and responsive public comments that it receives on or before March 11, 2016. For information on the Commission's privacy policy, including routine uses permitted by the Privacy Act, see http://www.ftc.gov/ftc/privacy.htm.

    The FTC invites comments on: (1) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information.

    David C. Shonka, Acting General Counsel.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00244 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6750-01-P
    GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION [Notice-CECANF-2016-01; Docket No. 2016-0004; Sequence No. 1] Commission To Eliminate Child Abuse and Neglect Fatalities; Commission To Eliminate Child Abuse and Neglect Fatalities; Announcement of Meeting AGENCY:

    Commission To Eliminate Child Abuse and Neglect Fatalities, GSA.

    ACTION:

    Meeting notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Commission to Eliminate Child Abuse and Neglect Fatalities (CECANF), a Federal Advisory Committee established by the Protect Our Kids Act of 2012, will hold conference calls open to the public on the following dates: Thursday, January 14, 2016 and Saturday, January 16, 2016.

    DATES:

    The meeting on Thursday, January 14, 2016 will be held from 5:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m., Eastern Standard Time (EST). The meeting on Saturday, January 16, 2016 will be held from 2:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m., Eastern Standard Time (EST).

    ADDRESSES:

    CECANF will convene these meetings via conference call. Submit comments identified by “Notice-CECANF-2016-01,” by either of the following methods:

    Regulations.gov: http://www.regulations.gov. Submit comments via the Federal eRulemaking portal by searching for “Notice-CECANF-2016-01.” Select the link “Comment Now” that corresponds with “Notice-CECANF-2016-01.” Follow the instructions provided on the screen. Please include your name, organization name (if any), and “Notice-CECANF-2016-01” on your attached document.

    Mail: U.S. General Services Administration, 1800 F Street NW., Room 7003D, Washington, DC 20405, Attention: Tom Hodnett (CD) for CECANF.

    Instructions: Please submit comments only and cite “Notice-CECANF-2016-01” in all correspondence related to this notice. 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 http://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:

    Visit the CECANF Web site at https://eliminatechildabusefatalities.sites.usa.gov/ or contact Patricia Brincefield, Communications Director, at 202-818-9596, General Services Administration, 1800 F Street NW., Room 7003D, Washington, DC 20405, Attention: Tom Hodnett (CD) for CECANF.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background: CECANF was established to develop a national strategy and recommendations for reducing fatalities resulting from child abuse and neglect.

    Agenda: Commission members will deliberate on the final report.

    Attendance at the Meetings: Individuals interested in participating by teleconference should dial 1-888-289-4573 and then enter 6966324#. Detailed meeting minutes will be posted within 90 days of the meeting. Members of the public will not have the opportunity to ask questions or otherwise participate in the meeting.

    However, members of the public wishing to comment should follow the steps detailed under the heading ADDRESSES in this publication or contact us via the CECANF Web site at https://eliminatechildabusefatalities.sites.usa.gov/contact-us/.

    The reason CECANF is providing less than 15 calendar days' notice for this meeting is because of the short timeframe allowed for Commissioners to hold a final deliberation on the draft report before its publication date.

    Dated: January 5, 2016. Karen White, Executive Assistant.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00343 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6820-34-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [30Day-16-0604] Agency Forms Undergoing Paperwork Reduction Act Review

    The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has submitted the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. The notice for the proposed information collection is published to obtain comments from the public and affected agencies.

    Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information are encouraged. Your comments should address any of the following: (a) 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; (b) Evaluate the accuracy of the agencies estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (c) Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; (d) 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; and (e) Assess information collection costs.

    To request additional information on the proposed project or to obtain a copy of the information collection plan and instruments, call (404) 639-7570 or send an email to [email protected]. Written comments and/or suggestions regarding the items contained in this notice should be directed to the Attention: CDC Desk Officer, Office of Management and Budget, Washington, DC 20503 or by fax to (202) 395-5806. Written comments should be received within 30 days of this notice.

    Proposed Project

    The School-Associated Violent Death Surveillance System (SAVD)—Revision (OMB Control No. 0920-0604, expiration 04/30/2016)—National Center for Injury Prevention and Control (NCIPC), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

    Background and Brief Description

    School-associated violence, particularly homicides and suicides that occur in schools, has been a significant public concern for several years. Despite the important role of schools as a setting for violence research and prevention interventions, relatively little scientific or systematic work has been conducted to describe the nature and level of fatal violence associated with schools. Public health and education officials have had to rely on limited local studies and estimated numbers to describe the extent of school-associated violent death. As a result, the U.S. Department of Education (DOE) requested assistance from the Division of Violence Prevention (DVP)/National Center for Injury Prevention and Control (NCIPC) in establishing an ongoing surveillance system of school-associated violent deaths (SAVD) in the United States with the goal of tracking and monitoring the extent of this problem on an ongoing basis. The SAVD surveillance system remains the only systematic effort to document school-associated violent deaths on a national basis. Data from the SAVD surveillance system are intended to contribute to the understanding of fatal violence associated with schools, guide further research in the area, and help direct ongoing and future prevention programs.

    The data collection methodology involves investigators reviewing public records and published press reports concerning each SAVD. For each identified case, investigators will interview an investigating law enforcement official and a school official who are knowledgeable about the case in question. Researchers will request information on both the victim and alleged offender(s)—including demographic data, their academic and criminal records, and their relationship to one another. They will also collect data on the time and location of the death; the circumstances, motive, and method of the fatal injury; and the security and violence prevention activities in the school and community where the death occurred, before and after the fatal injury event. Additionally, law enforcement reports on each case are obtained. The study population will include the victims and offenders from all identified events in which there was a school-associated violent death in the U.S.

    The surveillance system will continue to contribute to the understanding of fatal violence associated with schools, guide further research in the area, and help direct ongoing and future prevention programs. Data collected through the surveillance system will be reviewed and used by CDC, the US Department of Education, the US Department of Justice, and other outside agencies and organizations.

    OMB approval is requested for three years. The only cost to respondents will be time spent on the telephone responding to the survey.

    Estimated Annualized Burden Hours Type of respondent Form name Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • responses per
  • respondent
  • Average
  • burden per
  • response
  • (in hours)
  • Total burden hours
  • (in hours)
  • Law Enforcement Officer Law Enforcement Interview Tool 35 1 65/60 38 School Official School Official Interview Tool 35 1 65/60 38 Total 76
    Leroy A. Richardson, Chief, Information Collection Review Office, Office of Scientific Integrity, Office of the Associate Director for Science, Office of the Director, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00276 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4163-18-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [30Day-16-0941] Agency Forms Undergoing Paperwork Reduction Act Review

    The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has submitted the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. The notice for the proposed information collection is published to obtain comments from the public and affected agencies.

    Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information are encouraged. Your comments should address any of the following: (a) 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; (b) Evaluate the accuracy of the agencies estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (c) Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; (d) 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; and (e) Assess information collection costs.

    To request additional information on the proposed project or to obtain a copy of the information collection plan and instruments, call (404) 639-7570 or send an email to [email protected] Written comments and/or suggestions regarding the items contained in this notice should be directed to the Attention: CDC Desk Officer, Office of Management and Budget, Washington, DC 20503 or by fax to (202) 395-5806. Written comments should be received within 30 days of this notice.

    Proposed Project

    Evaluation of Dating Matters®: Strategies to Promote Healthy Teen Relationships—Revision (OMB# 0920-0941, expiration date 5/30/2016)—National Center for Injury Prevention and Control (NCIPC), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

    Background and Brief Description

    The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) is seeking a revision request that will enable continued longitudinal follow-up for CDC's teen dating violence (TDV) prevention initiative, Dating Matters®: Strategies to Promote Healthy Teen Relationships. Approval of this revision request will allow us to continue to assess the effectiveness of the CDC-developed comprehensive approach to TDV for longer-term follow-up as the students in our sample age and their engagement in dating relationships increases. The current evaluation of Dating Matters® tests a comprehensive approach to prevent TDV among youth in high-risk urban communities. In order to address gaps in effective prevention programming for youth in urban communities with high crime and economic disadvantage, who may be at highest risk for TDV perpetration and victimization, Dating Matters® focuses on middle school youth with universal primary prevention strategies aimed at building a foundation of healthy relationship skills before dating and/or TDV is initiated.

    All data collected as part of this request will be used in the longitudinal outcome evaluation of the Dating Matters® initiative. No teen dating violence comprehensive program has been developed and implemented specifically for high risk urban communities. Further, no other data source exists to examine the effectiveness of the Dating Matters® initiative for preventing dating violence. The evaluation utilizes a cluster randomized design in which 46 schools in four funded communities (Alameda County, California; Baltimore, Maryland; Broward County, Florida; and, Chicago, Illinois), were randomized to either Dating Matters® or standard practice.

    CDC seeks to continue evaluation activities in these four communities. Therefore, this data collection is critical to understand the effectiveness, feasibility, and cost of Dating Matters® and to inform decisions about disseminating the program to other communities.

    OMB approval is requested for three years for this revision. The only cost to respondents will be time spent on responding to the survey. A total of 4,399 respondents will be approached on an annual basis with an average estimated burden of 45/60 minutes per respondent per year (3,299 burden hours).

    Estimated Annualized Burden Hours Type of respondent Form name Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • responses per
  • respondent
  • Average
  • burden per
  • response
  • (hours)
  • Student Program Participant Student Outcome Survey Follow-up 4,399 1 45/60
    Leroy A. Richardson, Chief, Information Collection Review Office, Office of Scientific Integrity, Office of the Associate Director for Science, Office of the Director, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00287 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4163-18-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Board of Scientific Counselors, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, (BSC, NCIPC)

    In accordance with Section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463), the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) announces, the following meeting of the aforementioned committee:

    Time and Date: 9:00 a.m.-3:00 p.m., EST, January 28, 2016 (OPEN).

    Public Comment Time and Date: 1:00 p.m.-2:30 p.m.*, EST, January 28, 2016.

    * Please note that the public comment period ends at the time indicated above or following the last call for comments, whichever is earlier. Members of the public who want to submit comments must pre-register by January 18, 2016 to [email protected] All requests must contain the name, address, email address, organizational affiliation of the speaker, and the topic being addressed with accompanying written comments. Written comments should be limited to one page single spaced with 1 inch margins.

    Members of the public must indicate at pre-registration whether they would like to deliver oral remarks in addition to written comment. Comments may be delivered in person or by phone and will be assigned on a first come-first served basis until all time slots are filled. Speakers providing public comment must call in or be present at the beginning of the public comment period. All public comments will be limited to two minutes per speaker. Since the number of time slots is limited, it is requested that each organization register one speaker to represent their organization. Both oral and written comments will be included in the official record of the meeting.

    Place: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Building 21, Auditorium B-3, 1600 Clifton Road NE., Atlanta, GA 30329.

    Audio Conference toll-free dial-in Number: 1-888-469-1243, Participant Code: 4709506, TTY accessible link: http://www.captionedtext.com/client/event.aspx?CustomerID=1891&EventID=2812716.

    CDC encourages participation by persons with disabilities. Captions and participation by persons with communications challenges will be available online via Relay Conference Captioning. To view the online captions at the start time of the event, please login for captioning at http://www.captionedtext.com/client/event.aspx?CustomerID=1891&EventID=2812716.

    Requests for accommodations, questions, or comments on accessibility (Section 508) compliance may be directed to Tonia Lindley, [email protected].

    Status: The meeting as designated above will be open to the public limited only by the space available. The meeting room will accommodate up to 200 people. See instructions above regarding pre-registration and delivering public comment.

    Purpose: The Board will: (1) Conduct, encourage, cooperate with, and assist other appropriate public health authorities, scientific institutions, and scientists in the conduct of research, investigations, experiments, demonstrations, and studies relating to the causes, diagnosis, treatment, control, and prevention of physical and mental diseases, and other impairments; (2) assist States and their political subdivisions in preventing and suppressing communicable and non-communicable diseases and other preventable conditions and in promoting health and well-being; and (3) conduct and assist in research and control activities related to injury.

    The Board of Scientific Counselors makes recommendations regarding policies, strategies, objectives, and priorities; and reviews progress toward injury prevention goals and provides evidence in injury prevention-related research and programs. The Board also provides advice on the appropriate balance of intramural and extramural research, the structure, progress and performance of intramural programs. The Board is designed to provide guidance on extramural scientific program matters, including the: (1) Review of extramural research concepts for funding opportunity announcements; (2) conduct of Secondary Peer Review of extramural research grants, cooperative agreements, and contracts applications received in response to the funding opportunity announcements as it relates to the Center's programmatic balance and mission; (3) submission of secondary review recommendations to the Center Director of applications to be considered for funding support; (4) review of research portfolios, and (5) review of program proposals.

    Matters for Discussion: The Board of Scientific Counselors will discuss the draft recommendations in the CDC Guideline for Prescribing Opioids for Chronic Pain (Guideline), as well as observations formulated in the Opioid Guideline Workgroup Report. There will be 90 minutes allotted for public comments at the end of the session. See above instructions on pre-registration for public comment. A transcript of the meeting and public comments received at the meeting will be posted to the docket at www.regulations.gov (Docket No. CDC-2015-0112).

    Agenda items are subject to change as priorities dictate.

    Contact Person for More Information: Arlene Greenspan, Dr.P.H., M.P.H., P.T. Associate Director for Science, NCIPC, CDC, 4770 Buford Highway NE., Mailstop F-63, Atlanta, GA 30341, Telephone (770) 488-4696; Email [email protected]

    The Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, has been delegated the authority to sign Federal Register notices pertaining to announcements of meetings and other committee management activities, for both the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry.

    Elaine L. Baker, Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00265 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4163-18-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [30Day-16-16BM] Agency Forms Undergoing Paperwork Reduction Act Review

    The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has submitted the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. The notice for the proposed information collection is published to obtain comments from the public and affected agencies.

    Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information are encouraged. Your comments should address any of the following: (a) 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; (b) Evaluate the accuracy of the agencies estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (c) Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; (d) 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; and (e) Assess information collection costs.

    To request additional information on the proposed project or to obtain a copy of the information collection plan and instruments, call (404) 639-7570 or send an email to [email protected]. Written comments and/or suggestions regarding the items contained in this notice should be directed to the Attention: CDC Desk Officer, Office of Management and Budget, Washington, DC 20503 or by fax to (202) 395-5806. Written comments should be received within 30 days of this notice.

    Proposed Project

    Airline and Maritime Conveyance Manifest Orders—Existing Information Collection in use without an OMB Control Number—Division of Global Migration and Quarantine, National Center for Emerging Zoonotic and Infectious Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

    Background and Brief Description

    Under the Public Health Service Act (42 United States Code 264) and under 42 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) § 71.32(b) and 42 CFR 70.2, CDC can order airlines and maritime lines operating conveyances arriving from another country or traveling between states to submit a record for passengers and crew that CDC believes were exposed to co-traveler infected with a communicable disease of public health concern.

    Stopping a communicable disease outbreak—whether it is naturally occurring or intentionally caused—requires the use of the most rapid and effective public health tools available. Basic public health practices, such as collaborating with airlines in the identification and notification of potentially exposed contacts, are critical tools in the fight against the introduction, transmission, and spread of communicable diseases in the United States.

    The collection of comprehensive, pertinent contact information enables Quarantine Public Health Officers in CDC's Division of Global Migration and Quarantine (DGMQ) to notify state and local health departments in order for them to make contact with individuals who may have been exposed to a contagious person during travel and identify appropriate next steps.

    In the event that there is a confirmed case of communicable disease of public health concern aboard an aircraft or ship, CDC collects manifest information for those passengers and crew at risk for exposure. This specific manifest information collection differs depending on the communicable disease that is confirmed during air or maritime travel. CDC then uses this passenger and crew manifest information to coordinate with state and local health departments so they can follow-up with residents who live or are currently located in their jurisdiction. In general, state and local health departments are responsible for the contact investigations. In rare cases, CDC may use the manifest data to perform the contact investigation directly. In either case, CDC works with state and local health departments to ensure individuals are contacted and provided appropriate public health follow-up.

    CDC estimates that for each traveler manifest ordered, airlines require approximately six hours to review the order, search their records, and send those records to CDC. There is no cost to respondents other than their time perform these actions. CDC does not have a specified format for these submissions. The total estimated burden to respondents as a result of this information collection is 750 hours per year. While CDC has included maritime conveyance manifest orders in the public health rationale for this information collection, these orders are rare and are not included in the burden table.

    Estimated Annualized Burden Hours Type of respondent Form name Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • responses per
  • respondent
  • Average
  • burden per
  • response
  • (in hours)
  • Airline Medical Officer or Equivalent Domestic TB Manifest Template 1 1 360/60 Airline Medical Officer or Equivalent Domestic Non-TB Manifest Template 28 1 360/60 Airline Medical Officer or Equivalent International TB Manifest Template 67 1 360/60 Airline Medical Officer or Equivalent International Non-TB Manifest Template 29 1 360/60
    Leroy A. Richardson, Chief, Information Collection Review Office, Office of Scientific Integrity, Office of the Associate Director for Science, Office of the Director, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00275 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4163-18-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES [CMS-9935-N] HHS-Operated Risk Adjustment Methodology Meeting; March 25, 2016 AGENCY:

    Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice of meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice announces a meeting on the HHS-operated risk adjustment program, which is open to the public. The purpose of this stakeholder meeting is to solicit feedback on the HHS-operated risk adjustment methodology and to discuss potential improvements to the HHS risk adjustment methodology for the 2018 benefit year and beyond. This meeting, the “HHS-operated Risk Adjustment Methodology Conference,” will allow issuers, States, and other interested parties to discuss the contents of a White Paper to be published in advance of this meeting. This meeting will also provide an opportunity for participants to ask clarifying questions. The comments and information HHS obtains through this meeting may be used in future policy making for the HHS risk adjustment program.

    DATES:

    Date of Meeting: March 25, 2016 from 9:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Eastern daylight time (e.d.t.).

    Deadline for Onsite Participation: March 18, 2016, 5:00 p.m., e.d.t.

    Deadline for Webinar Meeting Participation: March 23, 2016, 5:00 p.m. e.d.t.

    Deadline for Requesting Special Accommodations: March 18, 2016, 5:00 p.m. e.d.t.

    Meeting Address: The meeting will be held at the CMS Single Site campus, 7500 Security Boulevard, Baltimore, MD 21244.

    Registration: Registration will be on a first-come, first-serve basis, limited to two (2) participants per organization for the onsite location participation, and three (3) participants per organization for the webinar participation. Each individual can only register for either the onsite location participation or webinar participation. To change a registration option from onsite to webinar participation, the registrant must cancel the existing registration (onsite or webinar) before attempting to register for the other option.

    Registration Instructions: To register to attend the meeting either onsite or through webinar participation, visit the Registration for Technical Assistance Portal (REGTAP) at www.REGTAP.info. If not already a REGTAP user, register as a new user, log in and go to “My Dashboard” and select “Training Events” to register for the onsite or webinar event for the HHS-operated Risk Adjustment Methodology Meeting. Registrants can only register to attend the meeting onsite at CMS or remotely by webinar.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For further information, please send inquiries about the logistics of the meeting to [email protected] Users should submit inquiries and comments pertaining to content covered during the meeting to www.REGTAP.info. To submit an inquiry in REGTAP, select “Submit an Inquiry” from “My Dashboard” then select “HHS-operated Risk Adjustment Methodology Meeting” from the Event Title dropdown menu and enter the question or comment. Users can submit their comments and upload attachments as needed. REGTAP will send the user an acknowledgement upon receipt of the comment. The CCIIO's Press Office at (202) 690-6145 will handle all press inquiries.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background

    This notice announces a meeting on the HHS-operated risk adjustment program to discuss potential improvements to the HHS risk adjustment methodology for the 2018 benefit year and beyond. This meeting will focus on the permanent risk adjustment program under section 1343 of the Affordable Care Act when HHS is operating a risk adjustment program on behalf of a State (referred to as the HHS-operated risk adjustment program).

    We are committed to stakeholder engagement in developing the detailed processes of the HHS-operated risk adjustment program. The purpose of this meeting is to share information with issuers, States, and interested parties about the risk adjustment methodology, offer an opportunity for these stakeholders to comment on key elements of the risk adjustment methodology, and discuss potential improvements to the HHS risk adjustment methodology for the 2018 benefit year and beyond.

    II. Meeting Agenda

    The HHS-operated Risk Adjustment Methodology Conference will share information with stakeholders including issuers, States, and interested parties about the HHS-operated risk adjustment methodology and gather feedback on a White Paper on the HHS-operated risk adjustment methodology that will be issued in March 2016. The HHS-operated Risk Adjustment Methodology Conference will focus on an overview of the HHS-operated risk adjustment methodology and other international risk adjustment models, what we have learned from the 2014 benefit year of the risk adjustment program and specific areas of potential refinements to the methodology. The meeting is open to the public, but attendance is limited to the space available. There are capabilities for remote access. Persons wishing to attend this meeting must register by the date listed in the DATES section, and register using the information in the “REGISTRATION” section.

    III. Security, Building, and Parking Guidelines

    The meeting is open to the public, but attendance is limited to the space available. Persons wishing to attend this meeting must register by using the instructions in the “REGISTRATION” section of this notice by the date specified in the DATES section of this notice.

    This meeting will be held in a Federal government building; therefore, Federal security measures are applicable. We recommend that confirmed registrants arrive reasonably early, but no earlier than 45 minutes prior to the start of the meeting, to allow additional time to clear security. Security measures include the following:

    • Presentation of government-issued photographic identification to the Federal Protective Service or Guard Service personnel.

    • Inspection of vehicle's interior and exterior (this includes engine and trunk inspection) at the entrance to the grounds. Parking permits and instructions will be issued after the vehicle inspection.

    • Inspection, via metal detector or other applicable means of all persons brought entering the building. We note that all items brought into CMS, whether personal or for the purpose of presentation or to support a presentation, are subject to inspection. We cannot assume responsibility for coordinating the receipt, transfer, transport, storage, set-up, safety, or timely arrival of any personal belongings or items used for presentation or to support a presentation.

    Note:

    Individuals who are not registered in advance will not be permitted to enter the building and will be unable to attend the meeting. The public may not enter the building earlier than 45 minutes prior to the convening of the meeting.

    All visitors must be escorted in areas other than the lower and first floor levels in the Central Building.

    Dated: January 4, 2016. Andrew Slavitt, Acting Administrator, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00219 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4120-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Meeting of the National Vaccine Advisory Committee AGENCY:

    National Vaccine Program Office, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Health, Office of the Secretary, Department of Health and Human Services.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    As stipulated by the Federal Advisory Committee Act, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is hereby giving notice that the National Vaccine Advisory Committee (NVAC) will hold a meeting February 2-3, 2016. The meeting is open to the public. However, pre-registration is required for both public attendance and public comment. Individuals who wish to attend the meeting and/or participate in the public comment session should register at http://www.hhs.gov/nvpo/nvac/meetings/upcomingmeetings/. Participants may also register by emailing [email protected] or by calling 202-690-5566 and providing their name, organization, and email address.

    DATES:

    The meeting will be held on February 2-3, 2016. The meeting times and agenda will be posted on the NVAC Web site at http://www.hhs.gov/nvpo/nvac/meetings/upcomingmeetings/ as soon as they become available.

    ADDRESSES:

    U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Hubert H. Humphrey Building, the Great Hall, 200 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20201.

    The meeting can also be accessed through a live webcast the day of the meeting. For more information, visit http://www.hhs.gov/nvpo/nvac/meetings/upcomingmeetings/index.html.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    National Vaccine Program Office, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Room 715-H, Hubert H. Humphrey Building, 200 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20201. Phone: (202) 690-5566; email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Pursuant to Section 2101 of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 300aa-1), the Secretary of Health and Human Services was mandated to establish the National Vaccine Program to achieve optimal prevention of human infectious diseases through immunization and to achieve optimal prevention against adverse reactions to vaccines. The NVAC was established to provide advice and make recommendations to the Director of the National Vaccine Program on matters related to the Program's responsibilities. The Assistant Secretary for Health serves as Director of the National Vaccine Program.

    The February 2016 NVAC meeting agenda will include discussions on mechanisms to support vaccine development and innovation, vaccine pricing and purchasing behaviors in the private vaccine market, and quality measures for adult immunizations. The NVAC will hear an update on progress towards a mid-course review of the 2010 National Vaccine Plan, as well as an update from the NVAC Maternal Immunizations Working Group. Committee members also will be provided information on ongoing Departmental efforts to support the pre-departure vaccination of U.S.-bound refugees. Please note that agenda items are subject to change as priorities dictate. Information on the final meeting agenda will be posted prior to the meeting on the NVAC Web site: http://www.hhs.gov/nvpo/nvac.

    Public attendance at the meeting is limited to the available space. Individuals who plan to attend in person and need special assistance, such as sign language interpretation or other reasonable accommodations, should notify the National Vaccine Program Office at the address/phone listed above at least one week prior to the meeting. For those unable to attend in person, a live webcast will be available. More information on registration and accessing the webcast can be found at http://www.hhs.gov/nvpo/nvac/meetings/upcomingmeetings/.

    Members of the public will have the opportunity to provide comments at the NVAC meeting during the public comment periods designated on the agenda. Public comments made during the meeting will be limited to three minutes per person to ensure time is allotted for all those wishing to speak. Individuals are also welcome to submit their written comments. Written comments should not exceed three pages in length. It is requested that individuals submitting written comments email their comments to the National Vaccine Program Office ([email protected]) at least five business days prior to the meeting.

    Dated: January 5, 2016. Bruce Gellin, Executive Secretary, National Vaccine Advisory Committee, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Health, Director, National Vaccine Program Office.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00319 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4150-44-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute: 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 Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Special Emphasis Panel; Lung Vascular Barrier Integrity PPG Review Meeting.

    Date: February 4, 2016.

    Time: 10:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 7196, Bethesda, MD 20892, (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: Charles Joyce, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Office of Scientific Review/DERA, National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 7196, Bethesda, MD 20892-7924, 301-435-0288 [email protected].

    (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: January 5, 2016. Michelle Trout, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00207 Filed 1-8-16; 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 10, 2016.

    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, Bethesda, MD 20892.

    Closed: 1:00 p.m. to 4:30 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Porter Neuroscience Research Center, Building 35A, Convent Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892.

    Contact Person: Jodi Black, Ph.D., Acting Director, Division of Extramural Research Activities, National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 7104, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435-0260, [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: January 5, 2016. Michelle Trout, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00208 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke: Notice of Closed Meetings

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following meetings.

    The meetings will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke Special Emphasis Panel; NIH/NINDS BRAIN Initiative: X02 Teleconference.

    Date: January 14, 2016.

    Time: 1:00 p.m. to 2:30 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Neuroscience Center, 6001 Executive Boulevard, Rockville, MD 20852 (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: Ernest W. Lyons, Ph.D., Scientific Review Administrator, Scientific Review Branch, NINDS/NIH/DHHS, Neuroscience Center, 6001 Executive Blvd., Suite 3208, MSC 9529, Bethesda, MD 20892-9529, 301-496-4056, [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. 93.853, Clinical Research Related to Neurological Disorders; 93.854, Biological Basis Research in the Neurosciences, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: January 5, 2016. Melanie J. Gray, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00205 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development: Notice of Closed Meetings

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following meetings.

    The meetings will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in section 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Initial Review Group; Health, Behavior, and Context Subcommittee.

    Date: February 9, 2016.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Residence Inn Bethesda, 7335 Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20814.

    Contact Person: Priscah Mujuru, DRPH, MPH, Scientific Review Officer, Scientific Review Branch, Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, NIH, 6100 Executive Boulevard, Suite 5B01, Bethesda, MD 20892-7510, 301-435-6908, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Initial Review Group; Health, Behavior, and Context Subcommittee.

    Date: February 26, 2016.

    Time: 8:30 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Doubletree Hotel Washington, 1515 Rhode Island Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20005.

    Contact Person: Marita R. Hopmann, Ph.D., Scientific Review Administrator, Scientific Review Branch, National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, NIH, 6100 Executive Boulevard, Room 5b01, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435-6911, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Initial Review Group; Health, Behavior, and Context Subcommittee.

    Date: March 4, 2016.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Embassy Suites at the Chevy Chase Pavilion, 4300 Military Road NW., Washington, DC 20015.

    Contact Person: Joanna Kubler-Kielb, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Scientific Review Branch, Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, 6100 Executive Boulevard, Room 5B01, Bethesda, MD 20892-7510, 301-435-6916, [email protected].

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.864, Population Research; 93.865, Research for Mothers and Children; 93.929, Center for Medical Rehabilitation Research; 93.209, Contraception and Infertility Loan Repayment Program, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: January 5, 2016. Michelle Trout, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00206 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection; Comment Request

    In compliance with Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 concerning opportunity for public comment on proposed collections of information, the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) will publish periodic summaries of proposed projects. To request more information on the proposed projects or to obtain a copy of the information collection plans, call the SAMHSA Reports Clearance Officer on (240) 276-1243.

    Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed collections of information are necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information; (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.

    Proposed Project: Survey of Current and Alumni SAMHSA Fellows of the Minority Fellowship Program (MFP) (OMB No. 0930-0304)—REVISION

    SAMHSA is requesting approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to revise the collection of surveys of current and alumni MFP fellows to include current and alumni fellows from the Now Is The Time-MFP-Youth (NITT-MFP-Y) and NITT-MFP-Addiction Counselors (NITT-MFP-AC) grant programs. These surveys would gather information about current and alumni fellows in all three programs that will help SAMHSA meet its responsibilities under the Government Performance and Results Modernization Act for gathering, analyzing, and interpreting information about government-funded programs such as the MFP, the NITT-MFP-Y, and the NITT-MFP-AC.

    In 1973, in response to a substantial lack of ethnic and racial minorities in the mental health professions, the Center for Minority Health at the National Institute of Mental Health established the MFP. Since its move to SAMHSA in 1992, the MFP has continued to facilitate the entry of graduate students and psychiatric residents into mental health careers and has increased the number of psychology, psychiatry, nursing, and social work professionals trained to provide mental health and substance abuse services to minority groups. In 2014, funds were appropriated to expand the traditional MFP to include two programs to support the President's NITT initiative: NITT-MFP-Y and NITT-MFP-AC. These programs provide stipends and tuition support to students pursuing master's level training in behavioral health fields like psychology, social work, professional counseling, marriage and family therapy, nursing, and addiction/substance abuse counseling, thus directly supporting the NITT goal of increasing behavioral health services for youth and contributing to making schools safer. The traditional MFP offers sustained grants to six national behavioral health professional associations: The American Association of Marriage and Family Therapy (AAMFT), the American Nurses Association (ANA), the American Psychiatric Association (ApA), the American Psychological Association (APA), the Council on Social Work Education (CSWE), and the National Board for Certified Counselors and Affiliates (NBCC). The grantees for the NITT-MFP-Y program are the AAFMT, ANA, APA, CSWE, and NBCC, and the grantees for the NITT-MFP-AC program are the NAADAC—Association for Addiction Professionals and NBCC.

    This package includes two survey instruments, the Current SAMHSA MFP Fellows survey and the MFP Alumni survey, which have previously been administered to current and alumni fellows of the traditional MFP grant program. SAMHSA is requesting approval from OMB to include respondents (i.e., fellows) from the NITT-MFP-Y and NITT-MFP-AC programs and to add 13 and 10 questions to the Current SAMHSA MFP Fellows and MFP Alumni surveys, respectively. Although the aims of the traditional MFP and the NITT-MFPs are similar, some aspects of the NITT-MFPs are unique. For example, the focus on master's-level students (versus doctoral) and on providing culturally competent behavioral health services specifically to youth and transition-aged young adults. Thus, approval is requested to add questions to the surveys to ensure that the information needed to evaluate the NITT-MFPs is captured. The surveys will include appropriate skip patterns so that traditional MFP fellows are not asked questions that do not apply to them.

    The two online surveys (with the option for a hard copy mailed through the U.S. Postal Service) will be used with the following stakeholders in the MFP grant programs:

    1. Current SAMHSA MFP Fellows (n=428)

    a. Current traditional MFP Fellows currently receiving support during their doctoral-level training or psychiatric residency will be asked about their experiences in the MFP (from recruitment into the program through their participation in the various activities provided by the grantees).

    b. Current NITT-MFP-Y and NITT-MFP-AC Fellows currently receiving support during the final year of their master's programs in behavioral health or related field will be asked about their experiences in the MFP (from recruitment into the program through their participation in the various activities provided by the grantees).

    2. MFP Alumni (n=1,440)

    a. Traditional MFP Alumni who participated in the MFP during the time the program was administered by SAMHSA will be asked about their previous experiences as fellows in the MFP and also about their subsequent involvement and leadership in their professions.

    b. NITT-MFP-Y and NITT-MFP-AC Alumni who participated in the MFP during their master's program will be asked about their previous experiences as fellows in the MFP and also about their subsequent involvement and leadership in their professions.

    The information gathered by these two surveys will be used to gain insights into, and to document, impacts that the MFP has had and is having on current and former MFP fellows, and contributions and impacts that the current and former fellows are making in their work. The surveys include questions to assess the following measures: Completion of the fellowship program (e.g., completion of MFP goals, number of mentors, total mentored hours); post-fellowship employment (e.g., employment types and fields, targeted service populations); increase in skills/knowledge (e.g., number of certifications obtained, number of continuing education hours); and contributions to the field (e.g., number of professional publications).

    The survey data will also be utilized in an evaluation of the NITT-MFP programs. The requested additional questions will allow the evaluation to assess the overall success of the SAMHSA NITT initiative in enhancing the behavioral health workforce in terms of the number of master's level behavioral health specialists trained with MFP support, their competencies and characteristics, and their capacity to meet behavioral health workforce needs. The evaluation will also explore whether the program results in increased knowledge, skills, and aptitude among NITT-MFP fellows to provide culturally competent behavioral health services to underserved, at risk children, adolescents, and transition-age youth (ages 16-25); and how these new behavioral health professionals are sustained in the workforce.

    The total annual burden estimate for conducting the surveys is shown below:

    Survey name Number of
  • respondents
  • Responses per
  • respondent
  • Total number of responses Hours per
  • response
  • Total burden hours
    SAMHSA MFP Current Fellows Survey 428 1 428 0.42 180 SAMHSA MFP Alumni Survey 1,440 1 1,440 0.75 1,080 Totals a 1,868 1,868 1,260 a This is an unduplicated count of total respondents.

    Send comments to Summer King, SAMHSA Reports Clearance Officer, Room 2-1057, One Choke Cherry Road, Rockville, MD 20857 or email a copy at [email protected] Written comments should be received by March 11, 2016.

    Summer King, Statistician.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00279 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4162-20-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Geological Survey [GX16BA02EEW0200] Agency Information Collection Activities: Request for Comments AGENCY:

    U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice of extension of a currently approved information collection, (1028-0103).

    SUMMARY:

    We (the U.S. Geological Survey) are notifying the public that we have submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) the information collection request (ICR) described below. To comply with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) and as part of our continuing efforts to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, we invite the general public to take this opportunity to comment on this ICR. This collection is scheduled to expire on January 31, 2016.

    DATES:

    To ensure that your comments on this ICR are considered, OMB must receive them on or before February 10, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Please submit written comments on this information collection directly to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attention: Desk Officer for the Department of the Interior, via email: ([email protected]); or by fax (202) 395-5806; and identify your submission with `OMB Control Number 1028-0103 USA National Phenology Network—The Nature's Notebook Plant and Animal Observing Program'. Please also forward a copy of your comments and suggestions on this information collection to the Information Collection Clearance Officer, U.S. Geological Survey, 12201 Sunrise Valley Drive MS 807, Reston, VA 20192 (mail); (703) 648-7195 (fax); or [email protected] (email). Please reference `OMB Information Collection 1028-0103: USA National Phenology Network—The Nature's Notebook Plant and Animal Observing Program' in all correspondence.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Jake Weltzin, U.S. Geological Survey, 325 BioSciences East, 1311 East 4th Street, Tucson, AZ 85721 (mail); (520) 626-3821 (phone); or [email protected] (email). You may also find information about this ICR at www.reginfo.gov.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Abstract

    The USA National Phenology Network (USA-NPN) is a program sponsored by the USGS that uses standardized forms for tracking plant and animal activity as part of a project called Nature's Notebook. The Nature's Notebook forms are used to record phenology (e.g., timing of leafing or flowering of plants and reproduction or migration of animals) as part of a nationwide effort to understand and predict how plants and animals respond to environmental variation and changes in weather and climate. Contemporary data collected through Nature's Notebook are quality-checked, described and made publicly available. Data are used to inform decision-making in a variety of contexts, including agriculture, drought monitoring, and wildfire risk assessment. Phenological information is also critical for the management of wildlife, invasive species, and agricultural pests, and for understanding and managing risks to human health and welfare, including allergies, asthma, and vector-borne diseases. Participants may contribute phenology information to Nature's Notebook through a browser-based web application or via mobile applications for iPhone and Android operating systems, meeting GPEA requirements. The web application interface consists several components: User registration, a searchable list of 1,016 plant and animal species which can be observed; a “profile” for each species that contains information about the species including its description and the appropriate monitoring protocols; a series of interfaces for registering as an observer, registering a site, registering plants and animals at a site, generating datasheets to take to the field, and a data entry page that mimics the datasheets.

    II. Data

    OMB Control Number: 1028-0103.

    Form Number: Various (12 forms).

    Title: USA National Phenology Network—The Nature's Notebook Plant and Animal Observing Program.

    Type of Request: Extension without change of a currently approved information collection.

    Respondent Obligation: Voluntary.

    Frequency of Collection: On occasion. During the Spring and Fall seasons when phenology is changing quickly, we recommend respondents make observations once or twice per week as conditions allow.

    Description of Respondents: Members of the public, and state and local government workers.

    Estimated Total Number of Annual Responses: We project that 6,378 responders will register with Nature's Notebook, and of those 638 will watch the training videos. The same 6,378 responders will contribute 2,407,120 observation records. In total, this will result in 2,414,136 responses.

    Estimated Time per Response: When joining the program, responders spend 13 minutes each to register and read guidelines and 83 minutes to watch all training videos. After that responders may spend about 2 minutes per record to observe and submit phenophase status record.

    Estimated Annual Burden Hours: 82,502.

    Estimated Reporting and Recordkeeping “Non-Hour Cost” Burden: $11,274.

    Public Disclosure Statement: The PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq.) provides that an agency may not conduct or sponsor and you are not required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

    Comments: On August 7, 2015, we published a Federal Register notice (80 FR 47511) announcing that we would submit this ICR to OMB for approval and soliciting comments. The comment period closed on October 6, 2015. We received no comments.

    III. Request for Comments

    We again invite comments concerning this ICR as to: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the agency to perform its duties, including whether the information is useful; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information; (c) how to enhance the quality, usefulness, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) how to minimize the burden on the respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

    Please note that comments submitted in response to this notice are a matter of public record. Before including your personal mailing address, phone number, email address, or other personally identifiable information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment, including your personally identifiable information, may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us and the OMB in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that it will be done.

    Jake Weltzin, Program Manager, Status & Trends Program and Executive Director, USA National Phenology Network.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00266 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4338-11-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Indian Affairs [167 A2100DD/AAKC001030/A0A501010.999900] Stillaguamish Tribe of Indians—Amendment to Liquor Control Ordinance AGENCY:

    Bureau of Indian Affairs, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice publishes the Stillaguamish Tribe of Indians Liquor Control Ordinance. The ordinance allows the Tribe to manufacture beer, and allows for the sale, distribution, and tribal taxation of beer within the jurisdiction of the Stillaguamish Tribe of Indians. This Ordinance repeals and replaces the previous liquor control ordinance published in the Federal Register on June 12, 2012 (77 FR 34982).

    DATES:

    This ordinance is effective January 11, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Mr. Gregory Norton, Tribal Government Officer, Northwest Regional Office, Bureau of Indian Affairs, 911 NE 11th Avenue, Portland, OR 97232; Telephone: (503) 231-6702; Fax: (503) 231-2201, or Ms. Laurel Iron Cloud, Chief, Division of Tribal Government Services, Office of Indian Services, Bureau of Indian Affairs, 1849 C Street NW., MS-4513-MIB, Washington, DC 20240; Telephone: (202) 513-7641.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Pursuant to the Act of August 15, 1953, Public Law 83-277, 67 Stat. 586, 18 U.S.C. 1161, as interpreted by the Supreme Court in Rice v. Rehner, 463 U.S. 713 (1983), the Secretary of the Interior shall certify and publish in the Federal Register notice of adopted liquor ordinances for the purpose of regulating liquor transactions in Indian country. The Stillaguamish Tribe of Indians duly adopted Resolution Number 2015/099 on May 28, 2015.

    This notice is published in accordance with the authority delegated by the Secretary of the Interior to the Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs. I certify that the Stillaguamish Tribe of Indians duly adopted this amendment to the Stillaguamish Tribe of Indians Liquor Ordinance by Resolution Number 2015/099 on May 28, 2015.

    Dated: December 21, 2015. Kevin K. Washburn, Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs. SUBCHAPTER 600 STILLAGUAMISH TRIBE OF INDIANS LIQUOR CONTROL ORDINANCE GENERAL PROVISIONS 3.06.600  General Purpose

    The Stillaguamish Tribe of Indians (Tribe) has a significant interest in protecting the health, safety and general welfare of its members, the residents within the Tribe's Indian Country and those persons and businesses doing business on and/or visiting the Tribe's Indian Country. The purpose of the Ordinance is to exercise the Tribe's jurisdiction to regulate the sale, manufacturing, distribution, and taxation of liquor within the Tribe's Indian Country in conformity with any compact between the Tribe and the State of Washington, Article 10 of the Treaty of Point Elliott of 1855, 12 Stat. 927, to which the Tribe is a party, and in conformity with 18 U.S.C. 1161, and to raise revenues to fund health, safety and general welfare programs and services provided to Tribal members and residents of and visitors to land within the Tribe's territorial jurisdiction.

    The authority to protect the Tribe as a sovereign political entity and to adopt the Ordinance codified herein is vested in the Stillaguamish Tribe of Indians, Board of Directors under Article III and Article V, Sec. 1 of the Constitution, which Board has enumerated authority under Article V, Sec. 1 (a) to enact a comprehensive law and order code which provides for tribal civil and criminal jurisdiction; under Article V Sec. 1(b) to administer the affairs and assets of the Tribe, including tribal lands and funds; under Article V, Section 1(d) to provide for taxes, assessments, permits and license fees upon members and non-members within the Tribe's jurisdiction; and under Article V Sec. l(h), to exercise other necessary powers to fulfill the Board's obligations, responsibilities and purposes as the governing body of the Tribe; and in the inherent sovereignty of the Stillaguamish Tribe of Indians to regulate its own territory and activities therein.

    The need exists for strict tribal regulation and control over liquor distribution, manufacturing, sales and taxation within the Tribe's Indian Country. Therefore, in the public interest and for the welfare of the people of the Stillaguamish Tribe of Indians, its employees, the residents of and visitors to Indian Country, the Stillaguamish Board of Directors, in the exercise of its authority under the Tribe's Constitution, declares its purpose by the provisions of this Subchapter to regulate the sale, manufacturing and distribution of liquor.

    3.06.601  Scope

    (1) This Subchapter shall apply to the full extent of the sovereign jurisdiction of the Tribe.

    (2) Compliance with this Subchapter is hereby made a condition of the use of any land or premises within the Tribe's Indian Country.

    (3) Any person who resides, conducts business, engages in a business transaction, receives benefits from the Tribe, acts under tribal authority, or enters the Tribe's Indian Country shall be deemed to have consented to the following:

    (a) To be bound by the terms of this Subchapter;

    (b) To the exercise of the exclusive jurisdiction of the Stillaguamish tribal Court for legal actions arising pursuant to this Subchapter; and

    (c) To detainment, service of summons and process, and search and seizure, in conjunction with legal actions arising pursuant to this Subchapter.

    (4) No portion of this Ordinance and Subchapter shall be construed as contrary to Federal law.

    3.06.602  Repeal of Prior Liquor Control Laws

    (1) All ordinances and resolutions of the Tribe regulating, authorizing, prohibiting or in any way dealing with the sale of liquor heretofore enacted or now in effect are hereby repealed and are declared to be of no further force and effect, with the exception of the provisions of the Stillaguamish Tribe of Indians Law and Order Code, including but not limited to the provisions of Chapter 8.40, Alcohol-Related Offenses.

    (2) The provisions of this Subchapter shall be prospective only from the date of its effectiveness. Nothing contained herein shall be deemed to revoke any presently existing valid license or permit or renewal thereof previously issued by the Washington State Liquor Control Board or the exercise of privilege given thereunder to any retailer subject to the provisions of this Subchapter.

    3.06.603  Definitions

    All definitions of the Taxation Code Section 3.06.201 apply herein unless the terms are otherwise defined in this Subchapter. For purposes of this Subchapter, whenever any of the following words, terms or definitions is used herein, they shall have the meaning ascribed to them in this Subchapter:

    (1) “Brewer” or “brewery” means any person engaged in the business of manufacturing beer and malt liquor and as such terms are further defined in the Revised Code of Washington in RCW 66.04.010.

    (2) “Indian Country,” consistent with the meaning given in 18 U.S.C. 1151 means: (a) all land within the limits of the Stillaguamish Indian Reservation under the jurisdiction of the United States government, notwithstanding the issuance of any patent, and, including rights of way running through the reservation; and (b) all Indian allotments or other lands held in trust for the Tribe or a member of the Tribe, including rights of way running through the same.

    (3) “Liquor” means the four varieties of liquor (alcohol, spirits, wine, and beer), and all fermented, spirituous, vinous, or malt liquor, or combinations thereof, and mixed liquor, a part of which is fermented, spirituous, vinous or malt liquor, or otherwise intoxicating; and as such term and the four varieties thereof are further defined in the Revised Code of Washington in RCW 66.04.010.

    (4) “Malt beverage” or “malt liquor” means any beverage such as beer, ale, lager beer, stout, and porter obtained by the alcoholic fermentation of an infusion or decoction of pure hops, or pure extract of hops and pure barley malt or other wholesome grain or cereal in pure water containing not more than eight percent of alcohol by weight, and not less than one-half of one percent of alcohol by volume. For purposes this Subchapter, any such beverage containing more than eight percent of alcohol by weight shall be referred to as “strong beer.”

    (5) “Manufacturer” means a person engaged in the preparation and manufacturing of liquor for sale, in any form whatsoever.

    (6) “Sale” and “sell” means the same as such terms are defined in the Revised Code of Washington in RCW 66.04.010.

    (7) “Tribal retailer” means a liquor retailer wholly owned by the Stillaguamish Tribe of Indians and located in Indian Country.

    (8) “Tribally-licensed retailer” means a person who has a business license from the Tribe to sell liquor at retail from a business located in Indian Country.

    3.06.604 Stillaguamish Tax Commission

    The Board hereby authorizes the Tax Commission of the Stillaguamish Tribe of Indians to administer this Subchapter, including general control, management and supervision of all liquor sales, manufacturing, and distribution, places of sale and sales outlets, and to exercise all of the powers and accomplish all of the purposes thereof as hereinafter set forth any do the following acts and things for and on behalf of and in the name of the Tribe:

    (1) Adopting and enforcing rules and regulations for the purpose of carrying into effect the provisions of this Subchapter the performance of its functions;

    (2) Collecting, auditing and issuing fees, licenses, taxes and permits; and

    (3) Performing all matters and things incidental to and necessary to conduct its business and carry out its duties and functions under this Subchapter.

    LICENSE REQUIRED 3.06.610 License Required of Tribal Retailers and Tribally-licensed Retailers

    Every person engaging in the business of selling, manufacturing, or distributing liquor within the Tribe's Indian Country, including but not limited to a brewery, shall secure a business license from the Tribe in the manner provided for by Subchapter 100 of this Title (“Business Licenses”) and otherwise comply with all provisions of Subchapter 100.

    3.06.611 Prohibitions

    (1) The manufacture, purchase, sale, and dealing in liquor within Tribe's Indian Country by any person, party, firm, or corporation except pursuant to the control, licensing, and regulation of the Stillaguamish Tax Commission, is hereby declared unlawful. Without limitation as to any other penalties and fines that may apply, any violation of this subsection is an infraction punishable by a fine of up to five hundred dollars ($500.00).

    (2) Every person engaging in the business of manufacturing, distributing or selling liquor within the Tribe's Indian Country shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 8.40, Alcohol-Related Offenses, of the Stillaguamish Tribe of Indians Law and Order Code, the provisions of which are re-affirmed and are specifically incorporated herein by this reference. Any violation of this subsection is punishable pursuant to the penalty provisions of Chapter 8.40, Alcohol-Related Offenses of the Stillaguamish Tribe of Indians Law and Order Code.

    3.06.612 Conformity with State Law as Required

    Tribal retailers and tribally-licensed retailers shall comply with any applicable Washington State liquor law standards to the extent required by 18 U.S.C. 1161 and the Agreement Between the Washington State Liquor Control Board and the Stillaguamish Indian Tribe for Purchase and Resale of Liquor in Indian Country (“Agreement”), if any. To the extent provisions of this Subchapter conflict with the Agreement, the terms of the Agreement control.

    TAXATION 3.06.620 Tribal Liquor Tax

    The Tribe expressly reserves its inherent sovereign right to regulate the use and sale of liquor through the imposition of tribal taxes thereon. The Board hereby authorizes and expressly reserves its authority to impose a tribal Liquor Tax on sales of all alcoholic beverages, including packaged and retail sales of liquor, wine, and beer, at a rate determined to be fair and equitable by the Board through independent action.

    3.06.621 Liquor Sales Not Subject to Tribal Retail Sales Tax

    The Tribe's Retail Sales Tax shall not apply to retail sales of liquor.

    ADMINISTRATION 3.06.630 Severability

    If any section, provision, phrase, addition, word, sentence or amendment of this Subchapter or its application to any person is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the other provisions or applications of this Subchapter that can be given effect without the invalid application, and to that end the provisions of this Subchapter are declared severable.

    3.06.631 Nondiscrimination

    No provision of this Subchapter shall be construed as imposing a regulation or tax that discriminates on the basis of whether a retail liquor establishment is owned, managed or operated by a member of the Tribe.

    3.06.632 Effective Date

    This Subchapter shall be and become effective upon publication by the United States Department of the Interior's certification in the Federal Register.

    3.06.633 Sovereign Immunity

    Nothing in this Subchapter shall be construed as a waiver or limitation of the inherent sovereign immunity of the Tribe.

    Ordinance 2008/060 enacting this Title 3, Chapter 6 took effect on April 30, 2008, at 6:00 p.m. upon the approval of its provisions by the Board of Directors of the Stillaguamish Tribe of Indians, which date was April 28, 2008. Title 3, Chapter 6 of the Tribe's Law and Order Code was repealed and replaced with this Title, as amended by resolution 2011/048, enacted by the Board of Directors of the Stillaguamish Tribe of Indians on April 14, 2011, as amended by resolution 2012/146 dated September 27, 2012, as amended by resolution 2015/099 dated May 28, 2015.

    [FR Doc. 2016-00334 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4337-15-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Indian Affairs [167 A2100DD/AAKC001030/A0A501010.999900] Sovereignty in Indian Education AGENCY:

    Bureau of Indian Affairs, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice of availability and request for proposals; extension of deadline.

    SUMMARY:

    The Bureau of Indian Education (BIE) previously announced the availability of enhancement funds to Tribes and their Tribal education departments (TEDs) to promote Tribal control and operation of BIE-funded schools on their reservations. This notice extends the deadline for Tribes with at least one BIE-funded school on their reservation to submit grant proposals.

    DATES:

    Grant proposals must be received by January 13, 2016, at 4 p.m. Eastern Time. The BIE will hold pre-grant proposal training sessions. See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for more information.

    ADDRESSES:

    Complete details on requirements for proposals and the evaluation and selection process can be found on the BIE Web site at http://www.bie.edu. Submit grant applications to the Bureau of Indian Education, Attn: Ms. Wendy Greyeyes, 1849 C Street NW., MS-4655-MIB, Washington, DC 20240. Email submissions will be accepted at this address: [email protected] Limit email submissions to attachments compatible with Microsoft Office Word 2007 or later and files with a .pdf file extension. Email submissions may not exceed 3MB total in size. Fax submissions will not be accepted.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ms. Wendy Greyeyes, Bureau of Indian Education, Office of the Director, Washington, DC 20240, (202) 208-5810.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    See the notice published on December 7, 2015, (80 FR 76031) for background information.

    Grant proposals are due January 13, 2016, at 4:00 p.m. Eastern Time. The proposal should be packaged for delivery to permit timely arrival. The proposal package should be sent or hand delivered to the address in the ADDRESSES section of this notice.

    Faxed applications will not be accepted. Email submissions will be accepted at the address in the ADDRESSES section of this notice. Email submissions are limited to attachments compatible with Microsoft Office Word 2007 or later or files with a .pdf file extension. Email submissions may not exceed 3MB total in size.

    Proposals submitted by Federal Express or Express Mail should be sent two or more days prior to the closing date. The proposal package should be sent to the address shown in the ADDRESSES section of this notice. The Tribe is solely responsible for ensuring its proposal arrives in a timely manner.

    Dated: December 18, 2015. Kevin K. Washburn, Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00245 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4337-15-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Land Management [LLNV952000 L14400000.BJ0000.LXSSF2210000.241A; 13-08807; MO# 4500089233; TAS: 16X1109] Filing of Plats of Survey; NV AGENCY:

    Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The purpose of this notice is to inform the public and interested State and local government officials of the filing of Plats of Survey in Nevada.

    DATES:

    Effective Dates: Unless otherwise stated filing is effective at 10:00 a.m. on the dates indicated below.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Michael O. Harmening, Chief, Branch of Geographic Sciences, Bureau of Land Management, Nevada State Office, 1340 Financial Blvd., Reno, NV 89502-7147, phone: 775-861-6490. Persons who use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8339 to contact the above individual during normal business hours. The FIRS is available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, to leave a message or question with the above individual. You will receive a reply during normal business hours.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    1. The Plat of Survey of the following described lands was officially filed at the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Nevada State Office, Reno, Nevada on August 26, 2015:

    The plat, in 1 sheet, representing the dependent resurvey of a portion of the subdivisional lines and a portion of the subdivision-of-section lines of section 32, and the further subdivision of section 32, Township 22 South, Range 60 East, Mount Diablo Meridian, under Group No. 930, was accepted August 25, 2015. This survey was executed to meet certain administrative needs of the Bureau of Land Management.

    2. The Plat of Survey of the following described lands was officially filed at the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Nevada State Office, Reno, Nevada on October 8, 2015:

    The plat, in 6 sheets, representing the dependent resurvey of the Mount Diablo Base Line, through a portion of Range 37 East and through Range 38 East, the south boundary, portions of the east and west boundaries, a portion of the subdivisional lines and Mineral Survey Nos. 1739 and 2688 and the independent resurvey of portions of the east and west boundaries and a portion of the subdivisional lines, Township 1 South, Range 38 East, Mount Diablo Meridian, under Group No. 911, was accepted September 29, 2015. This survey was executed to meet certain administrative needs of the Bureau of Land Management.

    3. The Plat of Survey of the following described lands was officially filed at the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Nevada State Office, Reno, Nevada on October 8, 2015:

    The plat, in 1 sheet, representing the dependent resurvey of the Mount Diablo Base Line, through a portion of Range 38 1/2 East, and a portion of the subdivisional lines and the independent resurvey of a portion of the subdivisional lines, Township 1 South, Range 39 East, Mount Diablo Meridian, under Group No. 911, was accepted September 29, 2015. This survey was executed to meet certain administrative needs of the Bureau of Land Management.

    4. The Plat of Survey of the following described lands was officially filed at the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Nevada State Office, Reno, Nevada on October 9, 2015:

    The plat, in 7 sheets, representing the dependent resurvey of the Mount Diablo Base Line, through Range 38 1/2 East and a portion of Range 39 East, the south boundary, a portion of the east boundary, a portion of the subdivisional lines and portions of certain mineral surveys and the independent resurvey of a portion of the subdivisional lines, Township 1 South, Range 39 East, Mount Diablo Meridian, under Group No. 926, was accepted September 30, 2015. This survey was executed to meet certain administrative needs of the Bureau of Land Management.

    5. The Supplemental Plat of the following described lands was officially filed at the BLM Nevada State Office, Reno, Nevada on December 2, 2015:

    The supplemental plat, in 1 sheet, showing the amended lottings in section 17, Township 19 South, Range 60 East, of the Mount Diablo Meridian, Nevada, under Group No. 960, was accepted November 30, 2015. This supplemental plat was prepared to accommodate the transfer of public lands to the State of Nevada, under provisions of Public Law 113-291.

    The surveys and supplemental plat listed above are now the basic record for describing the lands for all authorized purposes. These records have been placed in the open files in the BLM Nevada State Office and are available to the public as a matter of information. Copies of the surveys and related field notes may be furnished to the public upon payment of the appropriate fees.

    Dated: January 4, 2016. Michael O. Harmening, Chief Cadastral Surveyor, Nevada.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00318 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-HC-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Land Management [LLCAD08000 L12200000.EA0000 241A; ] Notice of Temporary Closures of Public Lands for the King of the Hammers Race in San Bernardino County, CA AGENCY:

    Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    As authorized under the provisions of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) is giving notice that certain public lands near Twentynine Palms, California, will be temporarily closed to all public use to provide for public safety during the 2016 King of the Hammers Race Event.

    DATES:

    Closure periods to all public use are January 31, 2016, through February 6, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Brian Bellew, (916) 978-4653, email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This closure applies to all public use, including pedestrian use and vehicles. The public lands affected by this closure are described as follows:

    Land Description San Bernardino Meridian T. 5 N., R. 2 E., Secs. 1, 2, 11, 12, and 13. T. 6 N., R. 2 E., Secs. 1, 12, 13, 14, 23 through 27, 34, and 35. T. 4 N., R. 3 E., Sec. 1, lot 1 in NE1/4, lot 2 in NE1/4, lot 1 in NW1/4, lot 2 in NW1/4, NW1/4SW1/4, and SE1/4; Sec. 2; Sec. 12, N1/2 and SE1/4. T. 5 N., R. 3 E., Secs. 5 and 6; Sec. 7, unsurveyed; Sec. 8, E1/2 and W1/2, unsurveyed; Secs. 13 and 14; Sec. 17, NE1/4, W1/2, unsurveyed, and SE1/4, unsurveyed; Secs. 18, 19, and 20; Sec. 21, E1/2 and W1/2, unsurveyed; Secs. 22 through 28; Sec. 29, NE1/4, W1/2, unsurveyed, and SE1/4, unsurveyed; Sec. 34, E1/2, unsurveyed and W1/2; Sec. 35, NE1/4, W1/2, unsurveyed, and SE1/4, unsurveyed; Sec. 36, SW1/4, unsurveyed. T. 6 N., R. 3 E., Secs. 5 through 8, 17 through 20, 29, and 30. T. 7 N., R. 3 E., Secs. 30 and 31; Sec. 32, except that portion within MS 6715; Sec. 33. T. 4 N., R. 4 E., Secs. 1 through 11, 15, and 17; Sec. 18, lot 1 in NW1/4, lot 2 in NW1/4, and NE1/4; Sec. 20, lots 1 through 8; Secs. 21 through 24, 26, 27, and 28. T. 5 N., R. 4 E., Secs. 18, 19, and 29 through 32. T. 4 N., R. 5 E., Secs. 2 through 6, 8 and 9; Sec. 10, unsurveyed; Secs. 11 and 12; Secs. 13, 14, and 15, all unsurveyed; Sec. 16; Secs. 17, 20 through 24, 26 through 29, and 32 through 35, all unsurveyed. T. 5 N., R. 5 E., Secs. 32 and 34.

    The area described aggregates 71,065 acres, more or less, in San Bernardino County, California.

    The closure notice and a map of the closure area will be posted at the Barstow Field Office and on the BLM Web site: http://www.blm.gov/ca/st/en/fo/barstow_field.html. Roads leading into the public lands under closure will be posted to notify the public of the closure.

    Exceptions: Closure restrictions do not apply to event officials, event participants, registered spectators, medical and rescue personnel, law enforcement, and agency personnel monitoring the events.

    Enforcement: Any person who violates this closure may be tried before a United States Magistrate and fined in accordance with 18 U.S.C. 3571 and imprisoned for no more than 12 months under 43 U.S.C. 1733(a) and 43 CFR 8360.0-7, or both. In accordance with 43 CFR 8365.1-7, State or local officials may also impose penalties for violations of California law.

    Authority:

    43 CFR 8360.0-7 and 8364.1

    Thomas Pogacnik, Deputy State Director for Resources.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00303 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-40-P
    DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR National Park Service [NPS-WASO-BSD-CONC-20037; PPWOBSADC0, PPMVSCS1Y.Y00000 (166)] Proposed Information Collection; Commercial Use Authorizations Agency:

    National Park Service, Interior.

    Action:

    Notice and request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    We (National Park Service, NPS) will ask the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to approve the information collection described below. As required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 and as part of our continuing efforts to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, we invite the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on this IC. This IC is scheduled to expire on August 31, 2016. We may not conduct or sponsor and a person is not required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a valid OMB control number.

    DATES:

    To ensure we are able to consider your comments, we must receive them on or before March 11, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Please send your comments on the ICR to Madonna L. Baucum, Information Collection Clearance Officer, National Park Service, 12201 Sunrise Valley Drive, Room 2C114, Mail Stop 242, Reston, VA 20192 (mail); or [email protected] (email). Please reference OMB Control Number “1024-0268, CUA” in the subject line of your comments.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Samantha Towery, National Park Service, 12795 West Alameda Parkway, Lakewood, CO 80228; by fax at 303/987-6901; or via email at [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Abstract

    The purpose of this information collection is to assist the NPS in managing the Commercial Use Authorization Program. Conducting commercial operations in a unit of the National Park System without a contract, permit, commercial use authorization, or some other written agreement is prohibited. Section 418, Public Law 105-391 (54 U.S.C. 101925) gives the Secretary of the Interior the authority to authorize a private person, corporation, or other entity to provide services to visitors in units of the National Park System through a Commercial Use Authorization (CUA). Such authorizations are not considered concession contracts. We authorize commercial operations that originate and operate entirely within a park (in-park); commercial operations that provide services originating and terminating outside of the park boundaries; organized children's camps, outdoor clubs, and nonprofit institutions; and other uses as the Secretary determines appropriate. The commercial operations include a range of services, such as mountain climbing guides, boat repair services, transportation services and tours, canoe livery operations, hunting guides, retail sales, equipment rentals, catering services, and dozens of other visitor services.

    Section 418 limits CUAs to:

    • Commercial operations with annual gross receipts of not more than $25,000 resulting from services originating and provided solely within a unit of the National Park System;

    • Incidental use of resources of the unit by commercial operations which provide services originating and terminating outside of the boundaries of the unit; or

    • Uses by organized children's camps, outdoor clubs and nonprofit institutions (including back country use) and such other uses as the Secretary determines appropriate.

    The legislative mandate of the NPS, found at 54 U.S.C. 1100101, is to preserve America's natural wonders unimpaired for future generations, while also making them available for the enjoyment of visitors. Meeting this mandate requires the NPS to balance preservation with use. Maintaining a good balance requires both information and limits. The information requested will allow the unit manager to evaluate requests for a commercial use to determine impact on the resources and the appropriateness of the activity.

    We collect information on the CUA Application (Form 10-550), the CUA Annual Report (Form 10-660), and CUA Monthly Report (Form 10-660A). We use the information from these forms to:

    • Manage the program and operations.

    • Determine the qualifications and abilities of the commercial operators to provide a high quality, safe, and enjoyable experience for park visitors.

    • Determine the impact on the parks natural and cultural resources.

    • Manage the use and impact of multiple operators.

    The information requested will allow the NPS to evaluate requests for a commercial use authorization and determine the suitability of the applicants to safely and effectively provide an appropriate service to the visiting public. It will also enable the NPS to manage the activity in a manner that protects the natural and cultural resources and the park visitor. Management includes, but is not limited to, managing the number of permits issued, determining the location and time that the activity occurs, and requiring the appropriate visitor protections including insurance, equipment, training, and procedures.

    Regulations resulting in information collection required for a Commercial Use Authorization:

    36 CFR 1.6—Permits 36 CFR 2—Resource Protection, Public Use and Recreation 36 CFR 5—Commercial and Private Operations 36 CFR 7—Special Regulations 36 CFR 13—National Park System Units in Alaska II. Data

    OMB Number: 1024-0268.

    Title: Commercial Use Authorization.

    Form(s): 10-550, “Commercial Use Authorization Application and Instructions”, 10-660, “Commercial Use Authorization Annual Report and Instructions”, and 10-660A, “Commercial Use Authorization Monthly Report and Instructions”.

    Type of Request: Extension of a Currently Approved Collection.

    Description of Respondents: Respondents will be individuals or small businesses that wish to provide a commercial service to visitors in areas of the National Park System.

    Respondent Obligation: Mandatory.

    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours:

    Annual
  • respondents
  • Total annual
  • responses
  • Average time
  • per response
  • (hours)
  • Total annual
  • burden hours
  • Form 10-550, “Commercial Use Authorization Application and Instructions” Individual 100 100 2.5 250 Private Sector 5,150 5,150 2.5 12,875 Form 10-660, “Commercial Use Authorization Annual Report and Instructions” Individual 100 100 8 125 Private Sector 7,000 7,000 8 8,750 Form 10-660A, “Commercial Use Authorization Monthly Report and Instructions” Individual 100 900 .75 675 Private Sector 7,000 63,000 .75 47,250 Totals: 12,350 12,350 69,925

    Estimated Annual Nonhour Burden Cost: $525,000 ($100 × 5,250 Forms 10-550, “Commercial Use Authorization Application and Instructions” per year).

    III. Comments

    We invite comments concerning this information collection on:

    • Whether or not the collection of information is necessary, including whether or not the information will have practical utility;

    • The accuracy of the burden for this collection of information;

    • Ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

    • Ways to minimize the burden to respondents, including use of automated information techniques or other forms of information technology.

    Please note that the comments submitted in response to this notice are a matter of public record. We will include or summarize each comment in our request to OMB to approve this IC. Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment, including your personal identifying information, may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that it will be done.

    Dated: January 4, 2016. Madonna L. Baucum, Information Collection Clearance Officer, National Park Service.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00333 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-EH-P
    INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation No. 337-TA-698 (Remand)] Certain DC-DC Controllers and Products Containing Same; Commission Determination To Adopt a Recommended Remand Determination; Issuance of Modified Civil Penalty Order and Termination of Remand Enforcement Proceeding AGENCY:

    U.S. International Trade Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade Commission has determined to adopt a remand recommended determination (“RRD”) of the presiding administrative law judge (“ALJ”) adding eleven (11) days to the total number of days enforcement respondent uPI Semiconductor Corporation (“uPI”) of Hsinchu, Taiwan, violated the August 13, 2010 consent order (“the Consent Order”). The Commission has adopted the RRD as a final determination of the Commission, issued a modified civil penalty order in the amount of $650,000 directed against uPI, and has terminated the remand enforcement proceeding.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Clint Gerdine, Office of the General Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW., Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 708-2310. Copies of non-confidential documents filed in connection with this investigation are or will be available for inspection during official business hours (8:45 a.m. to 5:15 p.m.) in the Office of the Secretary, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW., Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 205-2000. General information concerning the Commission may also be obtained by accessing its Internet server at http://www.usitc.gov. The public record for this investigation may be viewed on the Commission's electronic docket (EDIS) at http://edis.usitc.gov. Hearing-impaired persons are advised that information on this matter can be obtained by contacting the Commission's TDD terminal on (202) 205-1810.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Commission ordered this remand enforcement proceeding on April 8, 2015, in view of the Federal Circuit's decision in uPI Semiconductor Corp. v. ITC and Richtek Technology Corp. v. ITC, 767 F.3d 1372 (Fed. Cir. 2014). See Comm'n Order (Apr. 8, 2015). The Commission instituted the original enforcement proceeding on September 6, 2011, based on an enforcement complaint filed by Richtek Technology Corp. of Hsinchu, Taiwan, and Richtek USA, Inc. of San Jose, California (collectively “Richtek”). 76 FR 55109-10. The complaint alleged violations of the August 13, 2010, consent orders issued in the underlying investigation by the continued practice of prohibited activities such as importing, offering for sale, and selling for importation into the United States DC-DC controllers or products containing the same that infringe one or more of U.S. Patent Nos. 7,315,190 (“the '190 patent”); 6,414,470 (“the 's '470 patent”); and 7,132,717 (“the '717 patent”); or that contain or use Richtek's asserted trade secrets. The Commission's notice of institution of enforcement proceedings named uPI and Sapphire Technology Limited (“Sapphire”) of Shatin, Hong Kong as respondents. The Office of Unfair Import Investigations participated in the enforcement proceeding. Sapphire was later terminated from the enforcement proceeding based on a settlement agreement.

    On June 8, 2012, the presiding administrative law judge (“ALJ”) issued his enforcement initial determination (“EID”) finding a violation of the Consent Order by uPI. The ALJ found importation and sale of accused products that infringe all asserted claims of the patents at issue, and importation and sale of formerly accused products that contain or use Richtek's asserted trade secrets. He found that uPI's products developed after the consent order issued (“post-Consent Order products”) did not misappropriate Richtek's asserted trade secrets. Also, he recommended enforcement measures for uPI's violation that included the following: (1) Modifying the Consent Order to clarify that the Order applies (and has always applied) to all uPI affiliates, past, present, or future; and (2) imposing a civil penalty of $750,000 against uPI.

    The Commission did not review the EID with respect to the trade secret allegations, but did review the EID as to certain patent infringement allegations and the number of violation days. On November 14, 2012, after review, the Commission determined to affirm-in-part, reverse-in-part, modify-in-part, and vacate-in-part the EID's findings under review. The Commission affirmed the ALJ's finding that uPI violated the consent order, and imposed a civil penalty of $620,000 on respondent uPI for violation of the Consent Order on 62 days. The Commission also affirmed the ALJ's finding of direct infringement of claims 1-11 and 26-27 of the '190 patent with respect to uPI's formerly accused products. The Commission also vacated the ALJ's finding that uPI does not induce infringement of claims 1-11 and 26-27 of the 190 patent. The Commission also determined to reverse the ALJ's finding that claims 29 and 34 of the 470 patent are directly infringed by respondent uPI's accused DC-DC controllers and products containing the same, and determined that Richtek waived any allegations of indirect infringement with respect to the '470 patent. This action resulted in a finding of no violation of the Consent Order with respect to the '470 patent. Further, the Commission vacated as moot the portion of the EID relating to the '717 patent because the asserted claims 1-3 and 6-9 were cancelled by issuance of Ex Parte Reexamination Certificate No. U.S. 7,132,717 C1 on October 3, 2012. The Commission also affirmed the ALJ's finding that uPI's formerly accused products contained or used Richtek's asserted trade secrets to violate the Consent Order, but that uPI's post-Consent Order products did not misappropriate Richtek's asserted trade secrets.

    Both uPI and Richtek timely appealed the Commission's final determination. The Federal Circuit issued its opinion in the two appeals on September 25, 2014. See 767 F.3d 1372. The Court affirmed the Commission's findings regarding uPI's appeal with a slight modification, but regarding Richtek's appeal, the Court reversed the Commission's determination that uPI did not violate the Consent Order based on trade secret misappropriation with respect to uPI's post-Consent Order products. Id. Specifically, the Court found that, on the record provided, substantial evidence did not support the Commission's conclusion that uPI's post-Consent Order products were independently developed. Id. at 1383. Also specifically, regarding uPI's appeal and before deciding Richtek's appeal, the Court reduced the number of days of violation by eight (8) days to fifty-four (54) days. Id. at 1380. The Court remanded the case to the Commission for further proceedings with respect to violation of the Consent Order. Id. at 1383. On December 1, 2014, the Court denied uPI's petition for rehearing of the Court's finding of no independent development of uPI's post-Consent Order products. The mandate of the Court issued on November 17, 2014, with respect to uPI's appeal (Appeal No. 13-1157) and on December 8, 2014, with respect to Richtek's appeal (Appeal No. 13-1159).

    In its order of April 8, 2015, the Commission remanded the case to a presiding administrative law judge and ordered the presiding ALJ to:

    make findings and issue a remand recommended determination (“RRD”) concerning the total number of days an importation or sale in the United States occurred in violation of the Consent Order in accordance with the Federal Circuit decision in uPI Semiconductor Corp. v. ITC and Richtek Technology Corp. v. ITC, 767 F.3d 1372 (Fed. Cir. 2014), taking into account (1) any additional violation days with respect to the post-Consent Order products Richtek specifically accused (see EID at 9 n.6); and (2) the subtraction of eight (8) violation days with respect to the formerly accused products. The RRD will also recommend a total civil penalty amount based on the previous daily penalty of $10,000 per day of violation. Comm'n Order. On April 20, 2015, Richtek filed a motion for reconsideration of the Commission's Remand Order with respect to the amount of the daily penalty and on May 7, 2015, the motion was denied. See Comm'n Order Denying Motion. On October 8, 2015, the presiding ALJ issued his RRD finding that after the eight-day subtraction, eleven (11) days, associated with post-Consent Order products, should be added to the number of days (54) uPI violated the Consent Order to make the total sixty-five (65) days in violation, and accordingly increased the total civil penalty amount to $650,000 based on the daily penalty of $10,000. On October 19, 2015, Richtek submitted comments regarding the RRD which reiterated the same arguments made in its denied motion for reconsideration. Id. On October 26, 2015, uPI and the Commission investigative attorney each filed a reply to Richtek's comments.

    The Commission has determined to adopt the RRD as a final determination of the Commission and has issued a modified civil penalty order in the amount of $650,000 directed against uPI. The Commission has rejected the arguments regarding the amount of the daily penalty made by Richtek in its submitted comments for the same reasons given in the Commission's Order denying Richtek's motion for reconsideration. The Commission has terminated the remand enforcement proceeding.

    The authority for the Commission's determination is contained in section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337, and in Part 210 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, 19 CFR part 210.

    By order of the Commission.

    Issued: January 6, 2016. Lisa R. Barton, Secretary to the Commission.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00288 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020-02-P
    INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation No. 337-TA-979] Certain Radio Frequency Identification (“RFID”) Products and Components Thereof Institution of Investigation AGENCY:

    U.S. International Trade Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given that a complaint was filed with the U.S. International Trade Commission on December 4, 2015, under section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337, on behalf of Neology, Inc. of Poway, California. A supplement to the complaint was filed on December 22, 2015. The complaint, as supplemented, alleges violations of section 337 based upon the importation into the United States, the sale for importation, and the sale within the United States after importation of certain radio frequency identification (“RFID”) products and components thereof by reason of infringement of certain claims of U.S. Patent No. 8,325,044 (“the '044 patent”); U.S. Patent No. 8,587,436 (“the '436 patent”); and U.S. Patent No. 7,119,664 (“the '664 patent”). The complaint further alleges that an industry in the United States exists as required by subsection (a)(2) of section 337.

    The complainant requests that the Commission institute an investigation and, after the investigation, issue a limited exclusion order and cease and desist orders.

    ADDRESSES:

    The complaint, except for any confidential information contained therein, is available for inspection during official business hours (8:45 a.m. to 5:15 p.m.) in the Office of the Secretary, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW., Room 112, Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 205-2000. Hearing impaired individuals are advised that information on this matter can be obtained by contacting the Commission's TDD terminal on (202) 205-1810. Persons with mobility impairments who will need special assistance in gaining access to the Commission should contact the Office of the Secretary at (202) 205-2000. General information concerning the Commission may also be obtained by accessing its internet server at http://www.usitc.gov. The public record for this investigation may be viewed on the Commission's electronic docket (EDIS) at http://edis.usitc.gov.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    The Office of Unfair Import Investigations, U.S. International Trade Commission, telephone (202) 205-2560.

    Authority:

    The authority for institution of this investigation is contained in section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, and in section 210.10 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, 19 CFR 210.10 (2015).

    Scope of Investigation: Having considered the complaint, the U.S. International Trade Commission, on January 5, 2016, ordered that

    (1) Pursuant to subsection (b) of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, an investigation be instituted to determine whether there is a violation of subsection (a)(1)(B) of section 337 in the importation into the United States, the sale for importation, or the sale within the United States after importation of certain radio frequency identification (“RFID”) products and components thereof by reason of infringement of one or more of claims 13, 14, and 25 of the '044 patent; claims 1-4, 6-12, and 14-18 of the '436 patent; and claims 1, 2, 9-12, 14-18, and 26-28 of the '664 patent, and whether an industry in the United States exists as required by subsection (a)(2) of section 337;

    (2) For the purpose of the investigation so instituted, the following are hereby named as parties upon which this notice of investigation shall be served:

    (a) The complainant is: Neology, Inc., 12760 Danielson Court, Suite A, Poway, CA 92064.

    (b) The respondents are the following entities alleged to be in violation of section 337, and are the parties upon which the complaint is to be served:

    Kapsch TrafficCom IVHS, Inc., 8201 Greensboro Drive, Suite 1002, McLean, VA 22102.

    Kapsch TrafficCom IVHS Holding Corp., 8201 Greensboro Drive, Suite 1002, McLean, VA 22102.

    Kapsch TrafficCom IVHS Technologies Holding Corp., 8201 Greensboro Drive, Suite 1002, McLean, VA 22102.

    Kapsch TrafficCom U.S. Corp., 8201 Greensboro Drive, Suite 1002, McLean, VA 22102.

    Kapsch TrafficCom Holding Corp., 8201 Greensboro Drive, Suite 1002, McLean, VA 22102.

    Kapsch TrafficCom Canada, Inc., 6020 Ambler Drive, Mississauga, ON L4W 2P1, Canada.

    Star Systems International, Ltd., Unit A01, 24/F Gold King Industrial Building, 35-41 Tai Lin Pai Road, Kwai Chung, Hong Kong.

    STAR RFID Co., Ltd., 1 Charoenrat Road, Thung Wat Don, Sathon, Bangkok 10120 Thailand.

    (c) The Office of Unfair Import Investigations, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW., Suite 401, Washington, DC 20436;

    (3) Pursuant to Commission Rule 210.50(b)(1), 19 CFR 210.50(b)(1), the presiding administrative law judge shall take evidence or other information and hear arguments from the parties and other interested persons with respect to the public interest in this investigation, as appropriate, and provide the Commission with findings of fact and a recommended determination on this issue, which shall be limited to the statutory public interest factors set forth in 19 U.S.C. 1337(d)(1), (f)(1), (g)(1);

    (4) For the investigation so instituted, the Chief Administrative Law Judge, U.S. International Trade Commission, shall designate the presiding Administrative Law Judge.

    Responses to the complaint and the notice of investigation must be submitted by the named respondents in accordance with section 210.13 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, 19 CFR 210.13. Pursuant to 19 CFR 201.16(e) and 210.13(a), such responses will be considered by the Commission if received not later than 20 days after the date of service by the Commission of the complaint and the notice of investigation. Extensions of time for submitting responses to the complaint and the notice of investigation will not be granted unless good cause therefor is shown.

    Failure of a respondent to file a timely response to each allegation in the complaint and in this notice may be deemed to constitute a waiver of the right to appear and contest the allegations of the complaint and this notice, and to authorize the administrative law judge and the Commission, without further notice to the respondent, to find the facts to be as alleged in the complaint and this notice and to enter an initial determination and a final determination containing such findings, and may result in the issuance of an exclusion order or a cease and desist order or both directed against the respondent.

    By order of the Commission.

    Issued: January 6, 2016. Lisa R. Barton, Secretary to the Commission.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00289 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020-02-P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Antitrust Division Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993—R Consortium, Inc.

    Notice is hereby given that, on December 3, 2015, pursuant to section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301 et seq. (“the Act”), R Consortium, Inc. (“R Consortium”) has filed written notifications simultaneously with the Attorney General and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing changes in its membership. The notifications were filed for the purpose of extending the Act's provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages under specified circumstances. Specifically, 0965688 BC LTD., Surrey, British Columbia, CANADA, has been added as a party to this venture.

    No other changes have been made in either the membership or planned activity of the group research project. Membership in this group research project remains open, and R Consortium intends to file additional written notifications disclosing all changes in membership.

    On September 15, 2015, R Consortium filed its original notification pursuant to section 6(a) of the Act. The Department of Justice published a notice in the Federal Register pursuant to section 6(b) of the Act on October 2, 2015 (80 FR 59815).

    Patricia A. Brink, Director of Civil Enforcement, Antitrust Division.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00323 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Antitrust Division Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993—The Open Group, L.L.C.

    Notice is hereby given that, on December 8, 2015, pursuant to section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301 et seq. (“the Act”), The Open Group, L.L.C. (“TOG”) has filed written notifications simultaneously with the Attorney General and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing changes in its membership. The notifications were filed for the purpose of extending the Act's provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages under specified circumstances.

    Specifically, AEGIS.net, Inc., Rockville, MD; Air Force Research Laboratory, Kirtland AFB, NM; Aoyama Gakuin University, Tokyo, JAPAN; Bank of Zambia, Lusaka, ZAMBIA; Dunstan Thomas Consulting, Ltd., Portsmouth, UNITED KINGDOM; Front Metrics Technologies Pvt. Ltd., Pune, INDIA; Geco, Inc., Mesa, AZ; Inspur Co., Ltd., Beijing, PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA; IAB BVBA, Boutersem, BELGIUM; Intelligent Training de Columbia, Bogota, COLOMBIA; Joint Tactical Network Center, San Diego, CA; M J Anniss, Ltd., Nairn, UNITED KINGDOM; PLANAD Consultoria em Gestão Empreserial Ltda., São Paulo, BRAZIL; SIGMAXYZ Inc., Tokyo, JAPAN; S.P. Jain Institute of Management Research, Mumbai, INDIA; Universidad Continental, Huancayo, PERU; University of Dayton Research Institute, Dayton, OH; Vencore, Inc., Lexington Park, MD; Vigillence, Inc., McLean, VA; and White Cloud Software Ltd., Bowen Island, CANADA, have been added as parties to this venture.

    Also, Architecture Capability Assurance Strategic Group, Palo Alto, CA; ATSI S.A., Zabierzow, POLAND; AXE, Inc., Nakagyo-ku, JAPAN; Bell Helicopter Textron Inc., Fort Worth, TX; CS Interactive Training, Pretoria, SOUTH AFRICA; EXELIS, Inc., Clifton, NJ; Fairchild Controls Corporation, Frederick, MD; Hoople Limited, Hereford, UNITED KINGDOM; Howell Instruments, Inc., Fort Worth, TX; Indra Colombia, Bogota, COLOMBIA; Kamehameha Schools-Trustees of the Estate of Bernice Pauahi Bishop, Honolulu, HI; Korea Software Technology Association, Gyeonggi-Do, REPUBLIC OF KOREA; Mobile Reasoning, Inc., Lenaxa, KS; Nippon Telegraph & Telephone Corporation, Tokyo, JAPAN; Online Business Systems, Winnepeg, CANADA; PreterLex Limited, Cambridge, UNITED KINGDOM; University of Nordland, Oslo, NORWAY; VIP Apps Consulting Limited, Hertfordshire, UNITED KINGDOM; and World Vision International, Monrovia, CA, have withdrawn as parties to this venture.

    In addition, Hewlett Packard Company has changed its name to Hewlett Packard Enterprises, Cupertino, CA.

    No other changes have been made in either the membership or planned activity of the group research project. Membership in this group research project remains open, and TOG intends to file additional written notifications disclosing all changes in membership.

    On April 21, 1997, TOG filed its original notification pursuant to section 6(a) of the Act. The Department of Justice published a notice in the Federal Register pursuant to section 6(b) of the Act on June 13, 1997 (62 FR 32371).

    The last notification was filed with the Department on September 9, 2015. A notice was published in the Federal Register pursuant to section 6(b) of the Act on October 2, 2015 (80 FR 59816).

    Patricia A. Brink, Director of Civil Enforcement, Antitrust Division.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00325 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Drug Enforcement Administration [Docket No. DEA-392] Importer of Controlled Substances Application: Sharp Clinical Services, Inc. ACTION:

    Notice of application.

    DATES:

    Registered bulk manufacturers of the affected basic class, and applicants therefore, may file written comments on or objections to the issuance of the proposed registration in accordance with 21 CFR 1301.34(a) on or before February 10, 2016. Such persons may also file a written request for a hearing on the application pursuant to 21 CFR 1301.43 on or before February 10, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Written comments should be sent to: Drug Enforcement Administration, Attention: DEA Federal Register Representative/ODW, 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152. Request for hearings should be sent to: Drug Enforcement Administration, Attention: Hearing Clerk/LJ, 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Attorney General has delegated her authority under the Controlled Substances Act to the Administrator of the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), 28 CFR 0.100(b). Authority to exercise all necessary functions with respect to the promulgation and implementation of 21 CFR part 1301, incident to the registration of manufacturers, distributors, dispensers, importers, and exporters of controlled substances (other than final orders in connection with suspension, denial, or revocation of registration) has been redelegated to the Deputy Assistant Administrator of the DEA Office of Diversion Control (“Deputy Assistant Administrator”) pursuant to section 7 of 28 CFR part 0, appendix to subpart R.

    In accordance with 21 CFR 1301.34(a), this is notice that on July 29, 2015, Sharp Clinical Services, Inc., 300 Kimberton Road, Phoenixville, Pennsylvania 19460 applied to be registered as an importer of marihuana (7360), a basic class of controlled substance listed in schedule I.

    The company plans to import finished pharmaceutical products containing cannabis extracts in dosage form for clinical trial studies.

    This compound is listed under drug code 7360. No other activity for this drug code is authorized for this registration. Approval of permits applications will occur only when the registrant's business activity is consistent with what is authorized under 21 U.S.C. 952(a)(2). Authorization will not extend to the import of FDA approved or non-approved finished dosage forms for commercial sale.

    Dated: January 4, 2016. Louis J. Milione, Deputy Assistant Administrator.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00214 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-09-P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Drug Enforcement Administration [Docket No. DEA-392] Importer of Controlled Substances Application: Myoderm ACTION:

    Notice of application.

    DATES:

    Registered bulk manufacturers of the affected basic classes, and applicants therefore, may file written comments on or objections to the issuance of the proposed registration in accordance with 21 CFR 1301.34(a) on or before February 10, 2016. Such persons may also file a written request for a hearing on the application pursuant to 21 CFR 1301.43 on or before February 10, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Written comments should be sent to: Drug Enforcement Administration, Attention: DEA Federal Register Representative/ODW, 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152. Request for hearings should be sent to: Drug Enforcement Administration, Attention: Hearing Clerk/LJ, 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Attorney General has delegated her authority under the Controlled Substances Act to the Administrator of the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), 28 CFR 0.100(b). Authority to exercise all necessary functions with respect to the promulgation and implementation of 21 CFR part 1301, incident to the registration of manufacturers, distributors, dispensers, importers, and exporters of controlled substances (other than final orders in connection with suspension, denial, or revocation of registration) has been redelegated to the Deputy Assistant Administrator of the DEA Office of Diversion Control (“Deputy Assistant Administrator”) pursuant to section 7 of 28 CFR part 0, appendix to subpart R.

    In accordance with 21 CFR 1301.34(a), this is notice that on October 9, 2015, Myoderm, 48 East Main Street, Norristown, Pennsylvania 19401 applied to be registered as an importer of the following basic classes of controlled substances:

    Controlled substance Schedule Amphetamine (1100) II Lisdexamfetamine (1205) II Methylphenidate (1724) II Pentobarbital (2270) II Nabilone (7379) II Codeine (9050) II Oxycodone (9143) II Hydromorphone (9150) II Hydrocodone (9193) II Levomethorphan (9210) II Meperidine (9230) II Methadone (9250) II Methadone intermediate (9254) II Morphine (9300) II Oxymorphone (9652) II Fentanyl (9801) II

    The company plans to import the listed controlled substances in finished dosage form for clinical trials, research, and analytical purposes.

    The import of the above listed basic classes of controlled substances will be granted only for analytical testing, research, and clinical trials. This authorization does not extend to the import of a finished FDA approved or non-approved dosage form for commercial sale.

    Dated: January 4, 2016. Louis J. Milione, <E T="03">Deputy Assistant Administrator.</E>
    [FR Doc. 2016-00213 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-09-P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Drug Enforcement Administration [Docket No. DEA-392] Importer of Controlled Substances Application: Hospira ACTION:

    Notice of application.

    DATES:

    Registered bulk manufacturers of the affected basic class, and applicants therefore, may file written comments on or objections to the issuance of the proposed registration in accordance with 21 CFR 1301.34(a) on or before February 10, 2016. Such persons may also file a written request for a hearing on the application pursuant to 21 CFR 1301.43 on or before February 10, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Written comments should be sent to: Drug Enforcement Administration, Attention: DEA Federal Register Representative/ODW, 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152. Request for hearings should be sent to: Drug Enforcement Administration, Attention: Hearing Clerk/LJ, 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Attorney General has delegated her authority under the Controlled Substances Act to the Administrator of the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), 28 CFR 0.100(b). Authority to exercise all necessary functions with respect to the promulgation and implementation of 21 CFR part 1301, incident to the registration of manufacturers, distributors, dispensers, importers, and exporters of controlled substances (other than final orders in connection with suspension, denial, or revocation of registration) has been redelegated to the Deputy Assistant Administrator of the DEA Office of Diversion Control (“Deputy Assistant Administrator”) pursuant to section 7 of 28 CFR part 0, appendix to subpart R.

    In accordance with 21 CFR 1301.34(a), this is notice that on October 1, 2015, Hospira, 1776 North Centennial Drive, McPherson, Kansas 67460-1247 applied to be registered as an importer of remifentanil (9739), a basic class of controlled substance listed in schedule II.

    The company plans to import remifentanil for use in dosage form manufacturing. Placement of this drug code onto the company's registration does not translate into automatic approval of subsequent permit applications to import controlled substances. Approval of permit applications will occur only when the registrant's business activity is consistent with what is authorized under to 21 U.S.C. 952(a)(2). Authorization will not extend to the import of FDA approved or non-approved finished dosage forms for commercial sale.

    Dated: January 4, 2016. Louis J. Milione, Deputy Assistant Administrator.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00212 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-09-P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Drug Enforcement Administration [Docket No. DEA-392] Manufacturer of Controlled Substances Registration: Alltech Associates, Inc. ACTION:

    Notice of registration.

    SUMMARY:

    Alltech Associates, Inc. applied to be registered as a manufacturer of certain basic classes of controlled substances. The Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) grants Alltech Associates, Inc. registration as a manufacturer of those controlled substances.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    By notice dated August 10, 2015, and published in the Federal Register on August 18, 2015, 80 FR 50041, Alltech Associates, Inc., 2051 Waukegan Road, Deerfield, Illinois 60015 applied to be registered as a manufacturer of certain basic classes of controlled substances. No comments or objections were submitted for this notice.

    The DEA has considered the factors in 21 U.S.C. 823(a) and determined that the registration of Alltech Associates, Inc. to manufacture the basic classes of controlled substances is consistent with the public interest and with United States obligations under international treaties, conventions, or protocols in effect on May 1, 1971. The DEA investigated the company's maintenance of effective controls against diversion by inspecting and testing the company's physical security systems, verifying the company's compliance with state and local laws, and reviewing the company's background and history.

    Therefore, pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 823(a), and in accordance with 21 CFR 1301.33, the above-named company is granted registration as a bulk manufacturer of the following basic classes of controlled substances:

    Controlled substance Schedule Methcathinone (1237) I N-Ethylamphetamine (1475) I N,N-Dimethylamphetamine (1480) I 4-Methylaminorex (cis isomer) (1590) I Gamma Hydroxybutyric Acid (2010) I Alpha-ethyltryptamine (7249) I Lysergic acid diethylamide (7315) I 2,5-Dimethoxy-4-(n)-propylthiophenethylamine (2C-T-7) (7348) I Tetrahydrocannabinols (7370) I Mescaline (7381) I 4-Bromo-2,5-dimethoxyamphetamine (7391) I 4-Bromo-2,5-dimethoxyphenethylamine (7392) I 4-Methyl-2,5-dimethoxyamphetamine (7395) I 2,5-Dimethoxyamphetamine (7396) I 2,5-Dimethoxy-4-ethylamphetamine (7399) I 3,4-Methylenedioxyamphetamine (7400) I N-Hydroxy-3,4-methylenedioxyamphetamine (7402) I 3,4-Methylenedioxy-N-ethylamphetamine (7404) I 3,4-Methylenedioxymethamphetamine (7405) I 4-Methoxyamphetamine (7411) I 5-Methoxy-N-N-dimethyltryptamine (7431) I Alpha-methyltryptamine (7432) I Bufotenine (7433) I Diethyltryptamine (7434) I Dimethyltryptamine (7435) I Psilocybin (7437) I Psilocyn (7438) I 5-Methoxy-N,N-diisopropyltryptamine (7439) I N-Ethyl-1-phenylcyclohexylamine (7455) I 1-(1-Phenylcyclohexyl)pyrrolidine (7458) I 1-[1-(2-Thienyl)cyclohexyl]piperidine (7470) I 2-(2,5-Dimethoxy-4-ethylphenyl) ethanamine (2C-E) (7509) I 2-(2,5-Dimethoxyphenyl) ethanamine (2C-H) (7517) I 2-(4-Iodo-2,5-dimethoxyphenyl) ethanamine (2C-I) (7518) I 2-(4-Isopropylthio)-2,5-dimethoxyphenyl) ethanamine (2C-T-4) (7532) I Dihydromorphine (9145) I Heroin (9200) I Normorphine (9313) I Methamphetamine (1105) II 1-Phenylcyclohexylamine (7460) II Phencyclidine (7471) II Phenylacetone (8501) II 1-Piperidinocyclohexanecarbonitrile (8603) II Cocaine (9041) II Codeine (9050) II Dihydrocodeine (9120) II Ecgonine (9180) II Meperidine intermediate-B (9233) II Morphine (9300) II Noroxymorphone (9668) II

    The company plans to manufacture high purity drug standards used for analytical applications only in clinical, toxicological, and forensic laboratories and for distribution to its customers.

    Dated: January 4, 2016. Louis J. Milione, Deputy Assistant Administrator.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00216 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-09-P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Drug Enforcement Administration [Docket No. DEA-392] Importer of Controlled Substances Application: Noramco, Inc. ACTION:

    Notice of application.

    DATES:

    Registered bulk manufacturers of the affected basic classes, and applicants therefore, may file written comments on or objections to the issuance of the proposed registration in accordance with 21 CFR 1301.34(a) on or before February 10, 2016. Such persons may also file a written request for a hearing on the application pursuant to 21 CFR 1301.43 on or before February 10, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Written comments should be sent to: Drug Enforcement Administration, Attention: DEA Federal Register Representative/ODW, 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152. Request for hearings should be sent to: Drug Enforcement Administration, Attention: Hearing Clerk/LJ, 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152. Comments and request for hearings on applications to import narcotic raw material are not appropriate. 72 FR 3417 (January 25, 2007).

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Attorney General has delegated her authority under the Controlled Substances Act to the Administrator of the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), 28 CFR 0.100(b). Authority to exercise all necessary functions with respect to the promulgation and implementation of 21 CFR part 1301, incident to the registration of manufacturers, distributors, dispensers, importers, and exporters of controlled substances (other than final orders in connection with suspension, denial, or revocation of registration) has been redelegated to the Deputy Assistant Administrator of the DEA Office of Diversion Control (“Deputy Assistant Administrator”) pursuant to section 7 of 28 CFR part 0, appendix to subpart R.

    In accordance with 21 CFR 1301.34(a), this is notice that on August 4, 2015, Noramco, Inc., 500 Swedes Landing Road, Wilmington, Delaware 19801-4417, applied to be registered as an importer of the following basic classes of controlled substances:

    Controlled substance Schedule Phenylacetone (8501) II Opium, raw (9600) II Poppy Straw Concentrate (9670) II Tapentadol (9780) II

    The company plans to import opium raw (9600) and poppy straw concentrate (9670) to bulk manufacture other controlled substances for distribution to its customers. The company plans to import an intermediate form of tapentadol (9780) to bulk manufacture tapentadol (9780) for distribution to its customers. The company plans to import phenylacetone (8501) in bulk for the manufacture of a controlled substance.

    Dated: January 4, 2016. Louis J. Milione, <E T="03">Deputy Assistant Administrator.</E>
    [FR Doc. 2016-00209 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-09-P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Drug Enforcement Administration [Docket No. DEA-392] Manufacturer of Controlled Substances Registration: IRIX Manufacturing, Inc. ACTION:

    Notice of registration.

    SUMMARY:

    IRIX Manufacturing, Inc. applied to be registered as a manufacturer of certain basic classes of controlled substances. The Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) grants IRIX Manufacturing, Inc. registration as a manufacturer of those controlled substances.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    By notice dated August 10, 2015, and published in the Federal Register on August 18, 2015, 80 FR 50035, IRIX Manufacturing, Inc., 309 Delaware Street, Building 1106, Greenville, South Carolina 29605 applied to be registered as a manufacturer of certain basic classes of controlled substances. No comments or objections were submitted for this notice.

    The DEA has considered the factors in 21 U.S.C. 823(a) and determined that the registration of IRIX Manufacturing, Inc. to manufacture the basic classes of controlled substances is consistent with the public interest and with United States obligations under international treaties, conventions, or protocols in effect on May 1, 1971. The DEA investigated the company's maintenance of effective controls against diversion by inspecting and testing the company's physical security systems, verifying the company's compliance with state and local laws, and reviewing the company's background and history.

    Therefore, pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 823(a), and in accordance with 21 CFR 1301.33, the above-named company is granted registration as a bulk manufacturer of the following basic classes of controlled substances:

    Controlled substance Schedule Marihuana (7360) I Tetrahydrocannabinols (7370) I

    The company plans to manufacture the above-listed controlled substances synthetically as Active Pharmaceutical Ingredients (API) for clinical trials.

    Dated: January 4, 2016. Louis J. Milione, Deputy Assistant Administrator.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00215 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-09-P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Drug Enforcement Administration [Docket No. DEA-392] Importer of Controlled Substances Registration: Chattem Chemicals Inc. ACTION:

    Notice of registration.

    SUMMARY:

    Chattem Chemicals Inc. applied to be registered as an importer of certain basic classes of controlled substances. The Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) grants Chattem Chemicals Inc. registration as an importer of those controlled substances.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    By notice dated September 1, 2015, and published in the Federal Register on September 9, 2015, 80 FR 54326, Chattem Chemicals Inc., 3801 St. Elmo Avenue, Chattanooga, Tennessee 37409 applied to be registered as an importer of certain basic classes of controlled substances. Comments and requests for hearings on applications to import narcotic raw material are not appropriate. 72 FR 3417 (January 25, 2007). No comments or objections were submitted for this notice.

    The DEA has considered the factors in 21 U.S.C. 823, 952(a) and 958(a) and determined that the registration of Chattem Chemicals Inc. to import the basic classes of controlled substances is consistent with the public interest and with United States obligations under international treaties, conventions, or protocols in effect on May 1, 1971. The DEA investigated the company's maintenance of effective controls against diversion by inspecting and testing the company's physical security systems, verifying the company's compliance with state and local laws, and reviewing the company's background and history.

    Therefore, pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 952(a) and 958(a), and in accordance with 21 CFR 1301.34, the above-named company is granted registration as an importer of the following basic classes of controlled substances:

    Controlled substance Schedule Methamphetamine (1105) II 4-Anilino-N-phenethyl-4-piperidine (ANPP) (8333) II Phenylacetone (8501) II Opium, raw (9600) II Poppy Straw Concentrate (9670) II Tapentadol (9780) II

    The company plans to import the listed controlled substances to bulk manufacture other controlled substances for distribution to its customers. The company plans to import an intermediate form of tapentadol (9780), to bulk manufacture tapentadol (9780) for distribution to its customers. The company plans to import phenylacetone (8501) in bulk for the manufacture of a controlled substance.

    Dated: January 4, 2016. Louis J. Milione, Deputy Assistant Administrator.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00218 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-09-P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Drug Enforcement Administration [Docket No. DEA-392] Manufacturer of Controlled Substances Registration: AMPAC Fine Chemicals LLC ACTION:

    Notice of registration.

    SUMMARY:

    AMPAC Fine Chemicals LLC applied to be registered as a manufacturer of certain basic classes of controlled substances. The Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) grants AMPAC Fine Chemicals LLC registration as a manufacturer of those controlled substances.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    By notice dated June 25, 2015, and published in the Federal Register on July 6, 2015, 80 FR 38467, AMPAC Fine Chemicals LLC, Highway 50 and Hazel Avenue, Building 05001, Rancho Cordova, California 95670 applied to be registered as a manufacturer of certain basic classes of controlled substances. No comments or objections were submitted for this notice.

    The DEA has considered the factors in 21 U.S.C. 823(a) and determined that the registration of AMPAC Fine Chemicals LLC to manufacture the basic classes of controlled substances is consistent with the public interest and with United States obligations under international treaties, conventions, or protocols in effect on May 1, 1971. The DEA investigated the company's maintenance of effective controls against diversion by inspecting and testing the company's physical security systems, verifying the company's compliance with state and local laws, and reviewing the company's background and history.

    Therefore, pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 823(a), and in accordance with 21 CFR 1301.33, the above-named company is granted registration as a bulk manufacturer of the following basic classes of controlled substances:

    Controlled substance Schedule Methylphenidate (1724) II Thebaine (9333) II Poppy Straw Concentrate (9670) II Tapentadol (9780) II

    The company is a contract manufacturer. In reference to Poppy Straw Concentrate the company will manufacture thebaine intermediates for sale to its customers for further manufacture. No other activity for this drug code is authorized for this registration.

    Dated: January 4, 2016. Louis J. Milione, Deputy Assistant Administrator.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00217 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-09-P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE [OMB Number 1140-0038] Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed eCollection eComments Requested; Application for Federal Firearms License (Collector of Curios and Relics) AGENCY:

    Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, Department of Justice.

    ACTION:

    30-day notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Justice (DOJ), Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), will submit the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. The proposed information collection was previously published in the Federal Register 80 FR 67792, on November 3, 2015, allowing for a 60-day comment period.

    DATES:

    Comments are encouraged and will be accepted for an additional 30 days until February 10, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    If you have additional comments especially on the estimated public burden or associated response time, suggestions, or need a copy of the proposed information collection instrument with instructions or additional information, please Tracey Robertson, Chief, Federal Firearms Licensing Center, 244 Needy Road, Martinsburg, WV 25405, at: [email protected].

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The collection is conducted in a manner consistent with 5 CFR 1320.10. Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information are encouraged. Your comments should address one or more of the following four points:

    • 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;

    • 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;

    • Evaluate whether and if so how the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected can be enhanced; and

    • 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 of a currently approved collection.

    2. The Title of the Form/Collection: Application for Federal Firearms License (Collector of Curios and Relics.

    3. The agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of the Department sponsoring the collection:

    Form number: ATF F 7CR (5310.16).

    Component: Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, U.S. Department of Justice.

    4. Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as well as a brief abstract:

    Primary: Individuals or households.

    Other: None.

    Abstract: The form is used by the public when applying for a Federal firearms license to collect curios and relics to facilitate a personal collection in interstate and foreign commerce. The information requested on the form establishes eligibility for the license.

    5. An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated for an average respondent to respond: An estimated 5,200 respondents will take 15 minutes to complete the questionnaire.

    6. An estimate of the total public burden (in hours) associated with the collection: The estimated annual public burden associated with this collection is 1300 hours.

    If additional information is required contact: Jerri Murray, Department Clearance Officer, United States Department of Justice, Justice Management Division, Policy and Planning Staff, Two Constitution Square, 145 N Street NE., Room 3E-405B, Washington, DC 20530.

    Dated: January 5, 2016. Jerri Murray, Department Clearance Officer for PRA, U.S. Department of Justice.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00227 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-FY-P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE [OMB Number 1140-0009] Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed eCollection eComments Requested; Application To Register as an Importer of U.S. Munitions Import List Articles AGENCY:

    Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, Department of Justice.

    ACTION:

    60-Day notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Justice (DOJ), Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), will submit the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

    DATES:

    Comments are encouraged and will be accepted for 60 days until March 11, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    If you have additional comments especially on the estimated public burden or associated response time, suggestions, or need a copy of the proposed information collection instrument with instructions or additional information, please contact Desiree M. Dickinson, Industry Liaison, ATF Firearms and Explosives Imports Branch, 244 Needy Road, Martinsburg, WV 25405 at email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information are encouraged. Your comments should address one or more of the following four points:

    • 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;

    • 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;

    • Evaluate whether and if so how the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected can be enhanced; and

    • 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 (check justification or form 83): Revision of a currently approved collection.

    2. The Title of the Form/Collection: Application to Register as an Importer of U.S. Munitions Import List Articles

    3. The agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of the Department sponsoring the collection:

    Form number (if applicable): ATF Form 4587 (5330.4)

    Component: Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, U.S. Department of Justice.

    4. Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as well as a brief abstract:

    Primary: Business or other non-profit.

    Other (if applicable): None.

    Abstract: The purpose of this information collection is to allow ATF to determine if the registrant qualifies to engage in the business of importing a firearm or firearms, ammunition, and the implements of war, and to facilitate the collection of registration fees.

    5. An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated for an average respondent to respond: An estimated 300 respondents will take 30 minutes to complete the survey.

    6. An estimate of the total public burden (in hours) associated with the collection: The estimated annual public burden associated with this collection is 150 hours.

    If additional information is required contact: Jerri Murray, Department Clearance Officer, United States Department of Justice, Justice Management Division, Policy and Planning Staff, Two Constitution Square, 145 N Street NE., Room 3E-405B, Washington, DC 20530.

    Dated: January 5, 2016. Jerri Murray, Department Clearance Officer for PRA, U.S. Department of Justice.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00222 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-FY-P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE [OMB Number 1121-0166] Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed eCollection eComments Requested; Reinstatement With Change of a Previously Approved Collection: Public Safety Officer's Disability Benefits AGENCY:

    Office of Justice Programs, DOT.

    ACTION:

    60-Day notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Justice (DOJ), Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Assistance will be submitting the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

    DATES:

    Comments are encouraged and will be accepted for 60 days until March 11, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    If you have additional comments especially on the estimated public burden or associated response time, suggestions, or need a copy of the proposed information collection instrument with instructions or additional information, please contact: Chris Casto by mail at Bureau of Justice Assistance, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice, 810 7th Street NW., Washington, DC 20531; or by email at [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information are encouraged. Your comments should address one or more of the following four points:

    —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; —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; —Evaluate whether and if so how the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected can be enhanced; and —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: Reinstatement with change of a previously approved collection

    2. The Title of the Form/Collection: Public Safety Officer's Disability Benefits

    3. The agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of the Department sponsoring the collection: Bureau of Justice Assistance. Office of Justice Programs, United States Department of Justice

    4. Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as well as a brief abstract:

    Primary: Public safety officers who were permanently and totally disabled in the line of duty.

    Abstract: BJA's Public Safety Officers' Benefits (PSOB) Office will use the PSOB Disability Application information to confirm the eligibility of applicants to receive Public Safety Officers' Disability Benefits. Eligibility is dependent on several factors, including public safety officer status, injury sustained in the line of duty, and the total and permanent nature of the line of duty injury. In addition, information to help the PSOB Office identify individuals is collected, such as Social Security numbers, telephone numbers, and email addresses. Changes to the application form have been made in an effort to streamline the application process and eliminate requests for information that are either irrelevant or already being collected by other means.

    5. An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated for an average respondent to respond:

    It is estimated that not more than 100 respondents will apply a year. Each application takes approximately 300 minutes.

    6. An estimate of the total public burden (in hours) associated with the collection: The Total Annual Reporting Burden: 100 × 300 minutes per application = 30,000 minutes/by 60 minutes per hour = 500 hours.

    If additional information is required contact: Jerri Murray, Department Clearance Officer, United States Department of Justice, Justice Management Division, Policy and Planning Staff, Two Constitution Square, 145 N Street NE., 3E.405B, Washington, DC 20530.

    Dated: January 5, 2016. Jerri Murray, Department Clearance Officer for PRA, U.S. Department of Justice.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00238 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-18-P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE [OMB Number 1140-0075] Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed eCollection eComments Requested; Transactions Among Licensees/Permittees, Limited AGENCY:

    Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, Department of Justice.

    ACTION:

    60-Day notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Justice (DOJ), Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), will submit the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

    DATES:

    Comments are encouraged and will be accepted for 60 days until March 11, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    If you have additional comments especially on the estimated public burden or associated response time, suggestions, or need a copy of the proposed information collection instrument with instructions or additional information, please contact Anita Scheddel, Program Analyst, Explosives Industry Programs Branch, 99 New York Ave. NE., Washington, DC 20226 at email: [email protected].

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information are encouraged. Your comments should address one or more of the following four points:

    • 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;

    • 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;

    • Evaluate whether and if so how the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected can be enhanced; and

    • 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 (check justification or form 83): Extension of a currently approved collection.

    2. The Title of the Form/Collection: Transactions Among Licensees/Permittees, Limited

    3. The agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of the Department sponsoring the collection:

    Form number (if applicable): None.

    Component: Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, U.S. Department of Justice.

    4. Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as well as a brief abstract:

    Primary: Business or other for-profit.

    Other (if applicable): None.

    Abstract: Specific requirements for licensees and permittees regarding limited explosive permits are outlined in this information collection. The transactions are stated in #1. of this supporting statement. This information will be used by ATF to implement the provisions of the Safe Explosives Act.

    5. An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated for an average respondent to respond: An estimated 125 respondents will take 30 minutes to complete the survey.

    6. An estimate of the total public burden (in hours) associated with the collection: The estimated annual public burden associated with this collection is 63 hours.

    If additional information is required contact: Jerri Murray, Department Clearance Officer, United States Department of Justice, Justice Management Division, Policy and Planning Staff, Two Constitution Square, 145 N Street NE., Room 3E-405B, Washington, DC 20530.

    Dated: January 6, 2016. Jerri Murray, Department Clearance Officer for PRA, U.S. Department of Justice.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00273 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-FY-P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE [OMB Number 1121-0218] Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed eCollection eComments Requested; Extension of a Currently Approved Collection: Census of Juveniles in Residential Placement AGENCY:

    Office of Justice Programs, Department of Justice.

    ACTION:

    30-day notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, will be submitting the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. The proposed information collection is published to obtain comments from the public and affected agencies. This proposed information collection was previously published in the Federal Register 1t Volume 80 FR 66568, on October 29, 2015, allowing for a 60 day comment period.

    DATES:

    Comments are encouraged and will be accepted for 30 days until February 10, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    If you have comments, especially on the estimated public burden or associated response time, suggestions, or need a copy of the proposed information collection instrument with instructions or additional information, please contact: Brecht Donoghue, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice, 810 Seventh Street NW., Washington, DC 20531 or [email protected] Written comments and/or suggestions can also be directed to the Office of Management and Budget, Officer of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attention Department of Justice Desk Officer, Washington, DC 20503 or send to [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information are encouraged. Your comments should address one or more of the following four points:

    —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; —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; —Evaluate whether and if so how the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected can be enhanced; and —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 of a currently approved collection.

    2. The Title of the Form/Collection: Census of Juveniles in Residential Placement.

    3. The agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of the Department sponsoring the collection: The form number is CJ-14, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, United States Department of Justice.

    4. Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as well as a brief abstract: The primary respondents are state agencies, local governments, non-profit organizations, and for-profit organizations. This census will be sent to facilities that hold juvenile delinquent and/or juvenile status offenders. It requests information on juvenile offender characteristics (age, sex, race, ethnicity); state of origin; placing agencies for these youth; government level; and the legal status. The data collected is used to inform the Nation's understanding of youth placed out of the home due to some contact with the juvenile justice system.

    5. An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated for an average respondent to respond: It is estimated that 2,386 respondents will complete a 3.625-hour questionnaire.

    6. An estimate of the total public burden (in hours) associated with the collection: The estimated public burden associated with this application is 8,630.5 hours.

    If additional information is required contact: Jerri Murray, Department Clearance Officer, United States Department of Justice, Justice Management Division, Policy and Planning Staff, Two Constitution Square, 145 N Street NE., 3E.405B, Washington, DC 20530.

    Dated: January 5, 2016. Jerri Murray, Department Clearance Officer for PRA, U.S. Department of Justice.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00239 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-18-P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE [OMB Number 1140-0049] Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed eCollection eComments Requested; Application for National Firearms Examiner Academy AGENCY:

    Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, Department of Justice.

    ACTION:

    60-Day notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Justice (DOJ), Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), will submit the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

    DATES:

    Comments are encouraged and will be accepted for 60 days until March 11, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    If you have additional comments especially on the estimated public burden or associated response time, suggestions, or need a copy of the proposed information collection instrument with instructions or additional information, please contact Sheila Hopkins, Program Manager, National Laboratory Center, 6000 Ammendale Road, Ammendale, MD 20705 at email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information are encouraged. Your comments should address one or more of the following four points:

    • 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;

    • 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;

    • Evaluate whether and if so how the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected can be enhanced; and

    • 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 (check justification or form 83): Revision of a currently approved collection.

    2. The Title of the Form/Collection: Application for National Firearms Examiner Academy.

    3. The agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of the Department sponsoring the collection:

    Form number (if applicable): ATF F 6330.1.

    Component: Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, U.S. Department of Justice.

    4. Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as well as a brief abstract: Primary: State, Local or Tribal Government.

    Other (if applicable): Federal Government.

    Abstract: The Office of Science and Technology, Forensic Services offers the National Firearms Examiner Academy (NFEA) training program for entry level firearms and toolmark examiners. This program is designed in part to address the critical law enforcement needs of the services provided by firearms and toolmark examiners, and is to be offered qualified applicants from state, local, and federal law enforcement agencies and to newly appointed ATF firearms and toolmark examiners.

    5. An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated for an average respondent to respond: An estimated 75 respondents will take 12 minutes to complete the survey.

    6. An estimate of the total public burden (in hours) associated with the collection: The estimated annual public burden associated with this collection is 15 hours.

    If additional information is required contact: Jerri Murray, Department Clearance Officer, United States Department of Justice, Justice Management Division, Policy and Planning Staff, Two Constitution Square, 145 N Street NE., Room 3E-405B, Washington, DC 20530.

    Dated: January 5, 2016. Jerri Murray, Department Clearance Officer for PRA, U.S. Department of Justice.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00223 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-FY-P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE [OMB Number 1117-0047] Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed eCollection, eComments Requested; Extension Without Change of a Previously Approved Collection Application for Import Quota for Ephedrine, Pseudoephedrine, and Phenylpropanolamine DEA Form 488 AGENCY:

    Drug Enforcement Administration, Department of Justice.

    ACTION:

    30-day notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Justice (DOJ), Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), will be submitting the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. This proposed information collection was previously published in the Federal Register at 80 FR 67422, on November 2, 2015, allowing for a 60 day comment period.

    DATES:

    Comments are encouraged and will be accepted for an additional 30 days until February 10, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    If you have comments on the estimated public burden or associated response time, suggestions, or need a copy of the proposed information collection instrument with instructions or additional information, please contact Barbara J. Boockholdt, Office of Diversion Control, Drug Enforcement Administration; Mailing Address: 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152; Telephone: (202) 598-6812. Written comments and/or suggestions can also be directed to the Office of Management and Budget, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attention Department of Justice Desk Officer, Washington, DC 20503 or sent to [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information are encouraged. Your comments should address one or more of the following four points:

    —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; —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; —Evaluate whether and if so how the quality, utility, and clarity of the information proposed to be collected can be enhanced; and —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 forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. Overview of This Information Collection

    1. Type of Information Collection: Extension of a currently approved collection.

    2. Title of the Form/Collection: Application for Import Quota for Ephedrine, Pseudoephedrine, and Phenylpropanolamine.

    3. The agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of the Department sponsoring the collection: DEA Form: 488. The applicable component within the Department of Justice is the Drug Enforcement Administration, Office of Diversion Control.

    4. Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as well as a brief abstract:

    Affected public (Primary): Business or other for-profit.

    Affected public (Other): Not-for-profit institutions; Federal, State, local, and tribal governments.

    Abstract: Title 21, United States Code (U.S.C.), Section 952, and Title 21, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), § 1315.34 require that persons who desire to import the List I chemicals Ephedrine, Pseudoephedrine, or Phenylpropanolamine during the next calendar year shall apply to DEA on DEA Form 488 for an import quota for those List I chemicals.

    5. An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated for an average respondent to respond: The DEA estimates that 35 persons complete 80 DEA Forms 488 annually for this collection at 1 hour per form, for an annual burden of 80 hours. Respondents complete a separate DEA Form 488 for each List I chemical for which quota is sought.

    6. An estimate of the total public burden (in hours) associated with the proposed collection: The DEA estimates that this collection takes 80 annual burden hours.

    If additional information is required please contact: Jerri Murray, Department Clearance Officer, United States Department of Justice, Justice Management Division, Policy and Planning Staff, Two Constitution Square, 145 N Street NE., Suite 3E.405B, Washington, DC 20530.

    Dated: January 5, 2016. Jerri Murray, Department Clearance Officer for PRA, U.S. Department of Justice.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00235 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-09-P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE [OMB Number 1140-0043] Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed eCollection eComments Requested; National Tracing Center Trace Request, ATF F 3312.1 AGENCY:

    Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, Department of Justice.

    ACTION:

    60-Day notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Justice (DOJ), Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), will submit the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

    DATES:

    Comments are encouraged and will be accepted for 60 days until March 11, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    If you have additional comments especially on the estimated public burden or associated response time, suggestions, or need a copy of the proposed information collection instrument with instructions or additional information, please contact Larry Penninger, Jr., National Tracing Center, 244 Needy Road, Martinsburg, WV 25405, at telephone number of email: 1-800-788-7133 or [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information are encouraged. Your comments should address one or more of the following four points:

    • 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;

    • 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;

    • Evaluate whether and if so how the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected can be enhanced; and

    • 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 (check justification or form 83): Revision of a currently approved collection.

    2. The Title of the Form/Collection: National Tracing Center Trace Request.

    3. The agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of the Department sponsoring the collection:

    Form number (if applicable): ATF F 3312.1.

    Component: Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, U.S. Department of Justice.

    4. Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as well as a brief abstract:

    Primary: Federal Government.

    Other (if applicable): State, Local, or Tribal Government.

    Abstract: The ATF Form 3312.1 is used by Federal, State, local and certain foreign law enforcement officials to request that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) trace firearms used or suspected to have been used in crimes.

    5. An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated for an average respondent to respond: An estimated 6,103 respondents will take 6 minutes to complete the survey.

    6. An estimate of the total public burden (in hours) associated with the collection:

    7. The estimated annual public burden associated with this collection is 34,448 hours.

    If additional information is required contact: Jerri Murray, Department Clearance Officer, United States Department of Justice, Justice Management Division, Policy and Planning Staff, Two Constitution Square, 145 N Street NE., Room 3E-405B, Washington, DC 20530.

    Dated: January 6, 2016. Jerri Murray, Department Clearance Officer for PRA, U.S. Department of Justice.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00272 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-FY-P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE [OMB Number 1140-0002] Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed eCollection eComments Requested; Application for Restoration of Firearms Privileges AGENCY:

    Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, Department of Justice.

    ACTION:

    60-Day notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Justice (DOJ), Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), will submit the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

    DATES:

    Comments are encouraged and will be accepted for 60 days until March 11, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    If you have additional comments especially on the estimated public burden or associated response time, suggestions, or need a copy of the proposed information collection instrument with instructions or additional information, please contact Laurie O'Lena, Program Manager, ATF National Center for Explosives Training and Research Corporal Road, Bldg. 3750 Redstone Arsenal, Huntsville, AL 35898 at email: Laura.O'[email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information are encouraged. Your comments should address one or more of the following four points:

    • 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;

    • 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;

    • Evaluate whether and if so how the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected can be enhanced; and

    • 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 (check justification or form 83): Extension of a currently approved collection.

    2. The Title of the Form/Collection: Application for Restoration of Firearms Privileges.

    3. The agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of the Department sponsoring the collection:

    Form number (if applicable): ATF F 3210.1.

    Component: Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, U.S. Department of Justice.

    4. Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as well as a brief abstract:

    Primary: Individuals or households.

    Other (if applicable): None.

    Abstract: The information requested is collected to fulfill the requirements of 18 U.S.C. Chapter 44. Under Federal law, individuals prohibited from purchasing, possessing, receiving, or transporting firearms are permitted to apply for restoration of their firearms privileges. The information to be supplied must identify the specifics of the applicant's appeal for restoration of privileges. The information is investigated, processed, examined, and stored initially at ATF Headquarters.

    5. An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated for an average respondent to respond: An estimated 250 respondents will take 30 minutes to complete the survey.

    6. An estimate of the total public burden (in hours) associated with the collection: The estimated annual public burden associated with this collection is 125 hours.

    If additional information is required contact: Jerri Murray, Department Clearance Officer, United States Department of Justice, Justice Management Division, Policy and Planning Staff, Two Constitution Square, 145 N Street NE., Room 3E-405B, Washington, DC 20530.

    Dated: January 5, 2016. Jerri Murray, Department Clearance Officer for PRA, U.S. Department of Justice.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00221 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-FY-P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE [OMB Number 1140-0006] Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed eCollection eComments Requested; Application and Permit for Importation of Firearms, Ammunition and Defense Articles, ATF F 6, Part II (5330.3B) AGENCY:

    Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, Department of Justice.

    ACTION:

    60-Day notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Justice (DOJ), Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), will submit the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

    DATES:

    Comments are encouraged and will be accepted for 60 days until March 11, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    If you have additional comments especially on the estimated public burden or associated response time, suggestions, or need a copy of the proposed information collection instrument with instructions or additional information, please contact Desiree Dickinson, Industry Liaison, Firearms and Explosives Imports Branch, 244 Needy Road, Martinsburg, WV 25405, at email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information are encouraged. Your comments should address one or more of the following four points:

    • 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;

    • 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;

    • Evaluate whether and if so how the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected can be enhanced; and

    • 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 (check justification or form 83): Revision of a currently approved collection.

    2. The Title of the Form/Collection: Application and Permit for Importation of Firearms, Ammunition and Defense Articles.

    3. The agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of the Department sponsoring the collection:

    Form number (if applicable): ATF F 6, Part II (5330.3B).

    Component: Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, U.S. Department of Justice.

    4. Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as well as a brief abstract:

    Primary: Individuals or households.

    Other (if applicable): Business or other for-profit; Federal Government; State, Local, or Tribal Government.

    Abstract: The form is used to determine if the article(s) described on the application qualifies for importation by the importer, and to serve as the authorization for the importer. In addition, information may be disclosed to other Federal, State, foreign and local law enforcement and regulatory agency personnel to verify information on the application, and to aid in the performance of their duties with respect to the enforcement and regulation of firearms and/or ammunition where such disclosure is not prohibited by law.

    5. An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated for an average respondent to respond: An estimated 400 respondents will take 30 minutes to complete the survey.

    6. An estimate of the total public burden (in hours) associated with the collection: The estimated annual public burden associated with this collection is 200 hours.

    If additional information is required contact: Jerri Murray, Department Clearance Officer, United States Department of Justice, Justice Management Division, Policy and Planning Staff, Two Constitution Square, 145 N Street NE., Room 3E-405B, Washington, DC 20530.

    Dated: January 6, 2016. Jerri Murray, Department Clearance Officer for PRA, U.S. Department of Justice.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00270 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-FY-P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE [OMB Number 1121-0259] Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed eCollection eComments Requested; Extension Without Change, of a Previously Approved Collection Public Safety Officer Medal of Valor (Public Law 107-12) AGENCY:

    Bureau of Justice Assistance, Department of Justice.

    ACTION:

    30-Day notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Justice (DOJ), Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Assistance, will be submitting the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. This proposed information collection was previously published in the Federal Register at 80 FR 68878, on November 6, 2015, allowing for a 60 day comment period.

    DATES:

    Comments are encouraged and will be accepted for an additional 30 days until February 10, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    If you have additional comments on the estimated burden to facilities covered by the standards to comply with the regulation's reporting requirements, suggestions, or need additional information, please contact Gregory Joy, Bureau of Justice Assistance, 810 Seventh Street NW., Washington, DC 20531. Written comments and/or suggestions can also be directed to the Office of Management and Budget, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attention Department of Justice Desk Officer, Washington, DC 20503 or sent to [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information are encouraged. Your comments should address one or more of the following four points:

    —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; —Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; —Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and/or —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 of a currently approved collection.

    2. The Title of the Form/Collection: Public Safety Officer Medal of Valor (Public Law 107-12).

    3. The agency form number: The application process is managed through the Internet, using the Office of Justice Programs' (OJP) MOV online application system at: https://www.bja.gov/programs/medalofvalor/index.html.

    4. Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as well as a brief abstract: The information that is being collected is solicited from federal, state, local and tribal public safety agencies, who wish to nominate their personnel to receive the Public Safety Officer Medal of Valor (MOV). This information is provided on a voluntary basis, includes agency and nominee information along with details about the events for which the nominees are to be consider when determining who will be recommended to receive the MOV.

    5. An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated for an average respondent to respond: Over the last four application submission periods, (2011-2012 thru 2014-2015), there were a total of 514 applications received. Taking this number into account, the average number of applications that are anticipated to be received on an annual basis is 128.5. This number does not factor in the ongoing outreach efforts (e.g. marketing and social medial outreach) that are intended to increase the number of annual submissions. In addition, it is projected that the application submission process takes approximately 25 minutes. This would include, reviewing the fields of required and optional information, arranging the information and populating the online application form.

    6. An estimate of the total public burden (in hours) associated with the collection: Base upon the average number of submissions over the last 4 years, and the estimated time required to complete each submission, the estimated annual public burden would be 53.54 hours.

    a. 128.5 × 25 minutes = 3,212.5 minutes/60 = 53.54 hours.

    If additional information is required contact: Jerri Murray, Department Clearance Officer, United States Department of Justice, Justice Management Division, Policy and Planning Staff, Two Constitution Square, 145 N Street NE., 3E.405B, Washington, DC 20530.

    Dated: January 5, 2016. Jerri Murray, Department Clearance Officer for PRA, U.S. Department of Justice.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00240 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-18-P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE [OMB Number 1140-0025] Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed eCollection eComments Requested; Limited Permittee Transaction Report (ATF F 5400.4) AGENCY:

    Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, Department of Justice.

    ACTION:

    60-Day notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Justice (DOJ), Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), will submit the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

    DATES:

    Comments are encouraged and will be accepted for 60 days until March 11, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    If you have additional comments especially on the estimated public burden or associated response time, suggestions, or need a copy of the proposed information collection instrument with instructions or additional information, please contact Anita Scheddel, Program Analyst, Explosives Industry Programs Branch, 99 New York Ave. NE., Washington, DC 20226 at email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information are encouraged. Your comments should address one or more of the following four points:

    • 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;

    • 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;

    • Evaluate whether and if so how the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected can be enhanced; and

    • 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 (check justification or form 83): Extension of a currently approved collection.

    2. The Title of the Form/Collection: Limited Permittee Transaction Report

    3. The agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of the Department sponsoring the collection:

    Form number (if applicable): ATF F 5400.4.

    Component: Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, U.S. Department of Justice.

    4. Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as well as a brief abstract:

    Primary: Individuals or households.

    Other (if applicable): Businesses or other non-profit.

    Abstract: The purpose of this collection is to enable ATF to determine whether limited permittees have exceeded the number of receipts of explosives materials they are allowed and to determine the eligibility of such persons to purchase explosive materials.

    5. An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated for an average respondent to respond: An estimated 125 respondents will take 20 minutes to complete the survey.

    6. An estimate of the total public burden (in hours) associated with the collection: The estimated annual public burden associated with this collection is 250 hours.

    If additional information is required contact: Jerri Murray, Department Clearance Officer, United States Department of Justice, Justice Management Division, Policy and Planning Staff, Two Constitution Square, 145 N Street NE., Room 3E-405B, Washington, DC 20530.

    Dated: January 6, 2016. Jerri Murray, Department Clearance Officer for PRA, U.S. Department of Justice.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00271 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-FY-P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE [OMB Number 1117-0008] Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed eCollection, eComments Requested; Extension Without Change of a Previously Approved Collection Application for Procurement Quota for a Controlled Substance and for Ephedrine, Pseudoephedrine, and Phenylpropanolamine DEA Form 250 AGENCY:

    Drug Enforcement Administration, Department of Justice.

    ACTION:

    60-Day notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Justice (DOJ), Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), will be submitting the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

    DATES:

    Comments are encouraged and will be accepted for 60 days until March 11, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    If you have comments on the estimated public burden or associated response time, suggestions, or need a copy of the proposed information collection instrument with instructions or additional information, please contact Barbara J. Boockholdt, Office of Diversion Control, Drug Enforcement Administration; Mailing Address: 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152; Telephone: (202) 598-6812.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information are encouraged. Your comments should address one or more of the following four points:

    —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; —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; —Evaluate whether and if so how the quality, utility, and clarity of the information proposed to be collected can be enhanced; and —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 forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. Overview of This Information Collection

    1. Type of Information Collection: Extension of a currently approved collection.

    2. Title of the Form/Collection: Application for Procurement Quota for Controlled Substance and for Ephedrine, Pseudoephedrine, and Phenylpropanolamine (DEA Form 250).

    3. The agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of the Department sponsoring the collection: Form Number: DEA Form 250. The applicable component within the Department of Justice is the Drug Enforcement Administration, Office of Diversion Control.

    4. Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as well as a brief abstract:

    Affected public (Primary): Business or other for-profit.

    Affected public (Other): None.

    Abstract: Any United States companies that desire to use any basic class of controlled substances listed in schedule I or II or the List I chemicals ephedrine, pseudoephedrine, or phenylpropanolamine for purposes of manufacturing during the next calendar year shall apply on DEA Form 250 for a procurement quota for such class.

    5. An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated for an average respondent to respond: The DEA estimates that each form takes 0.5 hours to complete. In total, 417 respondents submit 2,960 responses, with each response taking 0.5 hours to complete.

    6. An estimate of the total public burden (in hours) associated with the proposed collection: The DEA estimates that this collection takes 1,480 annual burden hours.

    If additional information is required please contact: Jerri Murray, Department Clearance Officer, United States Department of Justice, Justice Management Division, Policy and Planning Staff, Two Constitution Square, 145 N Street NE., Suite 3E.405B, Washington, DC 20530.

    Dated: January 5, 2016. Jerri Murray, Department Clearance Officer for PRA, U.S. Department of Justice.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00234 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-09-P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE [OMB Number 1117-0006] Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed eCollection, eComments Requested; Extension Without Change of a Previously Approved Collection; Application for Individual Manufacturing Quota for a Basic Class of Controlled Substance and for Ephedrine, Pseudoephedrine, and Phenylpropanolamine DEA Form 189 AGENCY:

    Drug Enforcement Administration, Department of Justice.

    ACTION:

    60-Day notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Justice (DOJ), Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), will be submitting the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

    DATES:

    Comments are encouraged and will be accepted for 60 days until March 11, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    If you have comments on the estimated public burden or associated response time, suggestions, or need a copy of the proposed information collection instrument with instructions or additional information, please contact Barbara J. Boockholdt, Office of Diversion Control, Drug Enforcement Administration; Mailing Address: 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152; Telephone: (202) 598-6812.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information are encouraged. Your comments should address one or more of the following four points:

    — 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; — 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; — Evaluate whether and if so how the quality, utility, and clarity of the information proposed to be collected can be enhanced; and — 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 forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. Overview of This Information Collection

    1. Type of Information Collection: Extension of a currently approved collection.

    2. Title of the Form/Collection: Application for Individual Manufacturing Quota for a Basic Class of Controlled Substance and for Ephedrine, Pseudoephedrine, and Phenylpropanolamine (DEA Form 189).

    3. The agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of the Department sponsoring the collection: Form Number: DEA Form 189. The applicable component within the Department of Justice is the Drug Enforcement Administration, Office of Diversion Control.

    4. Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as well as a brief abstract:

    Affected public (Primary): Business or other for-profit.

    Affected public (Other): None.

    Abstract: The Controlled Substance Act (CSA) require that any person who is registered to manufacture any basic class of controlled substances listed in Schedule I or II and who desires to manufacture a quantity of such class; or who desires to manufacture using the List I chemicals ephedrine, pseudoephedrine, or phenylpropanolamine, must complete the DEA Form 189 online, for a manufacturing quota for such quantity of such class or List I chemical.

    5. An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated for an average respondent to respond: The DEA estimates that each form takes 0.5 hours to complete. In total, 34 respondents submit 660 responses, with each response taking 0.5 hours to complete.

    6. An estimate of the total public burden (in hours) associated with the proposed collection: The DEA estimates that this collection takes 330 annual burden hours.

    If additional information is required please contact: Jerri Murray, Department Clearance Officer, United States Department of Justice, Justice Management Division, Policy and Planning Staff, Two Constitution Square, 145 N Street NE., Suite 3E.405B, Washington, DC 20530.

    Dated: January 5, 2016. Jerri Murray, <E T="03">Department Clearance Officer for PRA, U.S. Department of Justice.</E>
    [FR Doc. 2016-00233 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-09-P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE [OMB Number 1140-0081] Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed eCollection eComments Requested; Appeals of Background Checks AGENCY:

    Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, Department of Justice.

    ACTION:

    60-Day notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Justice (DOJ), Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), will submit the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. The proposed information collection is published to obtain comments from the public and affected agencies.

    DATES:

    Comments are encouraged and will be accepted for 60 days until March 11, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    If you have additional comments especially on the estimated public burden or associated response time, suggestions, or need a copy of the proposed information collection instrument with instructions or additional information, please contact Shawn Stevens, Federal Explosives Licensing Center, 244 Needy Road, Martinsburg, WV 25405, at email or telephone number: [email protected] or 1-877-283-3352.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information are encouraged. Your comments should address one or more of the following four points:

    • 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;

    • 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;

    • Evaluate whether and if so how the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected can be enhanced; and

    • 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 (check justification or form 83): Extension of a currently approved collection.

    2. The Title of the Form/Collection: Appeals of Background Checks.

    3. The agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of the Department sponsoring the collection:

    Form number (if applicable): None.

    Component: Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, U.S. Department of Justice.

    4. Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as well as a brief abstract:

    Primary: Individuals or households.

    Other (if applicable): Businesses or other non-profit.

    Abstract: This collection allows responsible person or employee to challenge an adverse background check determination by submitting appropriate documentation to the ATF.

    5. An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated for an average respondent to respond: An estimated 500 respondents will take 2 hours to complete the survey.

    6. An estimate of the total public burden (in hours) associated with the collection: The estimated annual public burden associated with this collection is 1,000 hours.

    If additional information is required contact: Jerri Murray, Department Clearance Officer, United States Department of Justice, Justice Management Division, Policy and Planning Staff, Two Constitution Square, 145 N Street NE., Room 3E-405B, Washington, DC 20530.

    Dated: January 5, 2016. Jerri Murray, Department Clearance Officer for PRA, U.S. Department of Justice.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00225 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-FY-P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE [OMB Number 1110-NEW] Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed eCollection eComments Requested; Flash/Cancellation/Transfer Notice (I-12) AGENCY:

    Federal Bureau of Investigation, Department of Justice.

    ACTION:

    30-day notice.

    SUMMARY:

    Department of Justice (DOJ), Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Criminal Justice Information Services (CJIS) Division will be submitting the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. This proposed information collection was previously published in the Federal Register at 80 FR 57643, on September 24, 2015, allowing for a 60 day comment period.

    DATES:

    Comments are encouraged and will be accepted for an additional 30 days until February 10, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    If you have additional comments especially on the estimated public burden or associated response time, suggestions, or need a copy of the proposed information collection instrument with instructions or additional information, please contact Gerry Lynn Brovey, Supervisory Information Liaison Specialist, FBI, CJIS, Resources Management Section, Administrative Unit, Module C-2, 1000 Custer Hollow Road, Clarksburg, West Virginia, 26306 (facsimile: 304-625-5093). Written comments and/or suggestions can also be directed to the Office of Management and Budget, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attention Department of Justice Desk Officer, Washington, DC 20503 or sent to [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information are encouraged. Your comments should address one or more of the following four points:

    —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; —Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; —Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and/or —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: Approval of existing collection in use without an OMB control number.

    (2) Title of the Form/Collection: Flash/Cancellation/Transfer Notice.

    (3) Agency form number: I-12.

    (4) Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as well as a brief abstract: Primary: City, county, state, federal and tribal law enforcement agencies. This collection is needed to indicate on an individual's identity history that the individual is being supervised to ensure the supervisory agency is notified of any additional criminal activity. Acceptable data is stored as part of the Next Generation Identification (NGI) system of the FBI.

    (5) An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated for an average respondent to respond: It is estimated that 6,104 respondents will complete each form within approximately 8 minutes.

    (6) An estimate of the total public burden (in hours) associated with the collection: There are an estimated 25,733 total annual burden hours associated with this collection.

    If additional information is required contact: Jerri Murray, Department Clearance Officer, United States Department of Justice, Justice Management Division, Policy and Planning Staff, Two Constitution Square, 145 N Street NE., 3E.405B, Washington, DC 20530.

    Dated: January 5, 2016. Jerri Murray, Department Clearance Officer for PRA, U.S. Department of Justice.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00241 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-02-P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE [OMB Number 1140-0094] Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed eCollection eComments Requested; Certification of Qualifying State Relief From Disabilities Program AGENCY:

    Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, Department of Justice.

    ACTION:

    60-Day notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Justice (DOJ), Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), will submit the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

    DATES:

    Comments are encouraged and will be accepted for 60 days until March 11, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    If you have additional comments especially on the estimated public burden or associated response time, suggestions, or need a copy of the proposed information collection instrument with instructions or additional information, please contact Carolyn King, Program Manager, Firearms Explosives Industry Division, 99 New York Avenue NE., Washington, DC 20226, at telephone number or email: 202-648-7825 or [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information are encouraged. Your comments should address one or more of the following four points:

    • 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;

    • 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;

    • Evaluate whether and if so how the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected can be enhanced; and

    • 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 (check justification or form 83): Revision of a currently approved collection.

    2. The Title of the Form/Collection: Certification of Qualifying State Relief from Disabilities Program.

    3. The agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of the Department sponsoring the collection: Form number (if applicable): ATF Form 3210.12.

    Component: Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, U.S. Department of Justice.

    4. Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as well as a brief abstract: Primary: State, Local, or Tribal Government.

    Other (if applicable): None.

    Abstract: This form is to be used by a State to certify to the U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) that it has established a qualifying mental health relief from firearms disabilities program that satisfies certain minimum criteria established by the NICS Improvement Amendment Act of 2007, Public Law 110-180, Section 105, enacted January 8, 2008 (NIAA). This certification is required for States to be eligible for certain grants authorized by the NIAA.

    5. An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated for an average respondent to respond: An estimated 50 respondents will take 15 minutes to complete the survey.

    6. An estimate of the total public burden (in hours) associated with the collection: The estimated annual public burden associated with this collection is 13 hours.

    If additional information is required contact: Jerri Murray, Department Clearance Officer, United States Department of Justice, Justice Management Division, Policy and Planning Staff, Two Constitution Square, 145 N Street NE., Room 3E-405B, Washington, DC 20530.

    Dated: January 5, 2016. Jerri Murray, Department Clearance Officer for PRA, U.S. Department of Justice.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00226 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-FY-P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE [OMB Number 1121-New] Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed eCollection eComments Requested; New Collection: Census of Victim Service Providers (VSP Census) AGENCY:

    Bureau of Justice Statistics, Department of Justice.

    ACTION:

    60-Day notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Justice (DOJ), Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics, will be submitting the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

    DATES:

    Comments are encouraged and will be accepted for 60 days until March 11, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    If you have additional comments especially on the estimated public burden or associated response time, suggestions, or need a copy of the proposed information collection instrument with instructions or additional information, please contact Lynn Langton, Statistician, Bureau of Justice Statistics, 810 Seventh Street NW., Washington, DC 20531 (email: [email protected]; telephone: 202-353-3328).

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information are encouraged. Your comments should address one or more of the following four points:

    —Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Bureau of Justice Statistics, including whether the information will have practical utility; —Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; —Evaluate whether and if so how the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected can be enhanced; and —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: New collection.

    (2) The Title of the Form/Collection: Census of Victim Service Providers.

    (3) The agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of the Department sponsoring the collection: The form numbers for the collection are VSP-1, VSP-2, and VSP-3. The applicable component within the Department of Justice is the Bureau of Justice Statistics, in the Office of Justice Programs.

    (4) Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as well as a brief abstract: Organizations that have been identified as providing services to victims of crime or abuse will be asked to respond. The Census of Victim Service Providers is the first national collection to gather data on the characteristics, functions, and resources of entities that provide assistance to victims of crime or abuse.

    (5) An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated for an average respondent to respond: An estimated 31,000 victim service providers will be asked to respond to the survey. About 15% of entities will no longer be in business or no longer serving victims and these respondents will be ineligible to complete the survey instrument. For the remaining 26,350 victim service providers, it will take the average interviewed respondent an estimated 20 minutes to respond.

    (6) An estimate of the total public burden (in hours) associated with the collection: There are an estimated 8,783 total burden hours associated with this collection.

    If additional information is required contact: Jerri Murray, Department Clearance Officer, United States Department of Justice, Justice Management Division, Policy and Planning Staff, Two Constitution Square, 145 N Street NE., 3E.405B, Washington, DC 20530.

    Dated: January 6, 2016. Jerri Murray, Department Clearance Officer for PRA, U.S. Department of Justice.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00269 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-18-P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE [OMB Number 1121-0025] Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed eCollection eComments Requested; Reinstatement With Change of a Previously Approved Collection: Report of Public Safety Officer's Death AGENCY:

    Office of Justice Programs, Department of Justice.

    ACTION:

    60-Day notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Justice (DOJ), Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Assistance will be submitting the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

    DATES:

    Comments are encouraged and will be accepted for 60 days until March 11, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    If you have additional comments especially on the estimated public burden or associated response time, suggestions, or need a copy of the proposed information collection instrument with instructions or additional information, please contact: Chris Casto by mail at Bureau of Justice Assistance, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice, 810 7th Street NW., Washington, DC 20531; or by email at [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information are encouraged. Your comments should address one or more of the following four points:

    —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; —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; —Evaluate whether and if so how the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected can be enhanced; and —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: Reinstatement with change of a previously approved collection.

    2. The Title of the Form/Collection: Report of Public Safety Offices Death.

    3. The agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of the Department sponsoring the collection: Bureau of Justice Assistance. Office of Justice Programs, United States Department of Justice.

    4. Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as well as a brief abstract: Primary: Public safety agencies experiencing the death of a public safety officer according to the PSOB Act.

    Abstract: BJA's Public Safety Officers' Benefits (PSOB) Office will use the PSOB Report of Public Safety Officer's Death Form information to confirm the eligibility of applicants to receive Public Safety Officers' Death Benefits. Eligibility is dependent on several factors, including public safety officer status, an injury sustained in the line of duty, and the claimant status in the beneficiary hierarchy according to the PSOB Act. In addition, information to help the PSOB Office identify an individual is collected, such as Social Security numbers, telephone numbers, and email addresses. Changes to the report form have been made in an effort to streamline the application process and eliminate requests for information that are either irrelevant or already being collected by other means.

    5. An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated for an average respondent to respond: It is estimated that not more than 350 respondents will apply a year. Each application takes approximately 240 minutes.

    6. An estimate of the total public burden (in hours) associated with the collection: The Total Annual Reporting Burden: 350 × 240 minutes per application = 84,000 minutes/by 60 minutes per hour = 1,400 hours.

    If additional information is required contact: Jerri Murray, Department Clearance Officer, United States Department of Justice, Justice Management Division, Policy and Planning Staff, Two Constitution Square, 145 N Street NE., 3E.405B, Washington, DC 20530.

    Dated: January 5, 2016. Jerri Murray, Department Clearance Officer for PRA, U.S. Department of Justice.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00237 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-18-P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE [OMB Number 1140-0091] Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed eCollection eComments Requested; National Response Team Customer Satisfaction Survey AGENCY:

    Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, Department of Justice.

    ACTION:

    30-Day notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Justice (DOJ), Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), will submit the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. The proposed information collection was previously published in the Federal Register at 80 FR 67791, on November 3, 2015, allowing for a 60-day comment period.

    DATES:

    Comments are encouraged and will be accepted for an additional 30 days until February 10, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    If you have additional comments especially on the estimated public burden or associated response time, suggestions, or need a copy of the proposed information collection instrument with instructions or additional information, please contact Joe Romano, Program Analyst, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, 99 New York Avenue NE., Washington, DC 20226 at: [email protected] and 202-648-7134.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The collection is conducted in a manner consistent with 5 CFR 1320.6. Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information are encouraged. Your comments should address one or more of the following four points:

    • 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;

    • 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;

    • Evaluate whether and if so how the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected can be enhanced; and

    • 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 of a currently approved collection.

    2. The Title of the Form/Collection: National Response Team Customer Satisfaction Survey.

    3. The agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of the Department sponsoring the collection:

    Form number: None.

    Component: Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, U.S. Department of Justice.

    4. Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as well as a brief abstract:

    Primary: Individuals or households.

    Other: None.

    Abstract: The National Response Team (NRT) survey is used to support a Bureau performance measure and to assess strengths and weaknesses of a major program of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.

    5. An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated for an average respondent to respond: An estimated 20 respondents will take 10 minutes to complete the questionnaire.

    6. An estimate of the total public burden (in hours) associated with the collection: The estimated annual public burden associated with this collection is 5 hours.

    If additional information is required contact: Jerri Murray, Department Clearance Officer, United States Department of Justice, Justice Management Division, Policy and Planning Staff, Two Constitution Square, 145 N Street NE., Room 3E-405B, Washington, DC 20530.

    Dated: January 5, 2016. Jerri Murray, Department Clearance Officer for PRA, U.S. Department of Justice.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00228 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-FY-P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE [OMB Number 1121-0024] Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed eCollection eComments Requested; Reinstatement With Change of a Previously Approved Collection: Claim for Death Benefits AGENCY:

    Office of Justice Programs, Department of Justice.

    ACTION:

    60-Day notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Justice (DOJ), Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Assistance will be submitting the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

    DATES:

    Comments are encouraged and will be accepted for 60 days until March 11, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    If you have additional comments especially on the estimated public burden or associated response time, suggestions, or need a copy of the proposed information collection instrument with instructions or additional information, please contact: Chris Casto by mail at Bureau of Justice Assistance, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice, 810 7th Street NW., Washington, DC 20531; or by email at [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information are encouraged. Your comments should address one or more of the following four points:

    —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; —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; —Evaluate whether and if so how the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected can be enhanced; and —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: Reinstatement with change of a previously approved collection

    2. The Title of the Form/Collection: Claim for Death Benefits

    3. The agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of the Department sponsoring the collection: Bureau of Justice Assistance. Office of Justice Programs, United States Department of Justice

    4. Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as well as a brief abstract:

    Primary: Eligible survivors of fallen public safety officers.

    Abstract: BJA's Public Safety Officers' Benefits (PSOB) Office will use the PSOB Claim Form information to confirm the eligibility of applicants to receive Public Safety Officers' Death Benefits. Eligibility is dependent on several factors, including public safety officer status, an injury sustained in the line of duty, and the claimant status in the beneficiary hierarchy according to the PSOB Act. In addition, information to help the PSOB Office identify an individual is collected, such as Social Security numbers, telephone numbers, and email addresses. Changes to the claim form have been made in an effort to streamline the application process and eliminate requests for information that are either irrelevant or already being collected by other means.

    5. An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated for an average respondent to respond: It is estimated that not more than 350 respondents will apply a year. Each application takes approximately 120 minutes.

    6. An estimate of the total public burden (in hours) associated with the collection: The Total Annual Reporting Burden: 350 × 120 minutes per application = 42,000 minutes/by 60 minutes per hour = 700 hours.

    If additional information is required contact: Jerri Murray, Department Clearance Officer, United States Department of Justice, Justice Management Division, Policy and Planning Staff, Two Constitution Square, 145 N Street NE., 3E.405B, Washington, DC 20530.

    Dated: January 5, 2016. Jerri Murray, Department Clearance Officer for PRA, U.S. Department of Justice.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00236 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-18-P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE [OMB Number 1110-0039] Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed eCollection eComments Requested; Approval, With Change, of a Previously Approved Collection; Bioterrorism Preparedness Act: Entity/Individual Information AGENCY:

    Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Department of Justice.

    ACTION:

    30-Day notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Criminal Justice Information Services Division will submit the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and clearance in accordance with established review procedures of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. This proposed information collection was previously published in the Federal Register at 80 FR 65800, on October 27, 2015, allowing for a 60-day comment period.

    DATES:

    Comments are encouraged and will be accepted for an additional 30 days until February 10, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Written comments and/or suggestions regarding the items contained in this notice, especially the estimated public burden and associated response time, should be directed to John E. Strovers, Global Operations Section, CJIS Division Intelligence Group, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Criminal Justice Information Services Division, (CJIS), Module D-3, 1000 Custer Hollow Road, Clarksburg, West Virginia 26306; facsimile (304) 625-2198. Written comments and/or suggestions can also be directed to the Office of Management and Budget, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attention Department of Justice Desk Officer, Washington, DC 20530 or sent to [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information are encouraged. Comments 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 of other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.

    Overview of this information collection:

    (1) Type of information collection: Extension of current collection.

    (2) The title of the form/collection: Federal Bureau of Investigation Bioterrorism Preparedness Act: Entity/Individual Information.

    (3) The agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of the department sponsoring the collection: Forms FD-961; Criminal Justice Information Services Division, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Department of Justice.

    (4) Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as well as a brief abstract: Primary: City, county, state, federal, individuals, business or other for profit, and not-for-profit institute. This collection is needed to receive names and other identifying information submitted by individuals requesting access to specific agents or toxins, and consult with appropriate officials of the Department of Health and Human Services and the Department of Agriculture as to whether certain individuals specified in the provisions should be denied access to or granted limited access to specific agents.

    (5) An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated for an average respondent to respond: There are approximately 4,635 (FY 2015) respondents at 45 minutes for the FD-961 Form.

    (6) An estimate of the total public burden (in hours) associated with this collection: There are approximately 3,476 hours, annual burden, associated with this information collection.

    If additional information is required contact: Jerri Murray, Department Clearance Officer, United States Department of Justice, Justice Management Division, Policy and Planning Staff, Two Constitution Square, 145 N Street NE., Room 3E.405B, Washington, DC 20530.

    Dated: January 5, 2016. Jerri Murray, Department Clearance Officer for PRA, U.S. Department of Justice.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00242 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-02-P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE [OMB Number 1140-0077] Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed eCollection eComments Requested; Report of Stolen or Lost ATF Forms 5400.30, Intrastate Purchase Explosive Coupon AGENCY:

    Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, Department of Justice.

    ACTION:

    60-Day notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Justice (DOJ), Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), will submit the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

    DATES:

    Comments are encouraged and will be accepted for 60 days until March 11, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    If you have additional comments especially on the estimated public burden or associated response time, suggestions, or need a copy of the proposed information collection instrument with instructions or additional information, please contact Christopher Reeves, Chief, Federal Firearms Licensing Center, 244 Needy Road, Martinsburg, WV 25405, at: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information are encouraged. Your comments should address one or more of the following four points:

    • 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;

    • 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;

    • Evaluate whether and if so how the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected can be enhanced; and

    • 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 (check justification or form 83): Extension of a currently approved collection.

    2. The Title of the Form/Collection: Report of Stolen or Lost ATF Forms 5400.30, Intrastate Purchase Explosive Coupon.

    3. The agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of the Department sponsoring the collection:

    Form number (if applicable): ATF Form 5400.30.

    Component: Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, U.S. Department of Justice.

    4. Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as well as a brief abstract:

    Primary: Business or other for-profit.

    Other (if applicable): Individuals or households.

    Abstract: When any Intrastate Purchase of Explosives Coupon is stolen, lost or destroyed, the person losing possession will, upon discovery of the theft, loss or destruction, immediately, but in all cases before 24 hours have elapsed since discovery, report the matter to the Director, Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.

    5. An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated for an average respondent to respond: An estimated 10 respondents will take 20 minutes to complete the survey.

    6. An estimate of the total public burden (in hours) associated with the collection: The estimated annual public burden associated with this collection is 3.5 hours.

    If additional information is required contact: Jerri Murray, Department Clearance Officer, United States Department of Justice, Justice Management Division, Policy and Planning Staff, Two Constitution Square, 145 N Street NE., Room 3E-405B, Washington, DC 20530.

    Dated: January 5, 2016. Jerri Murray, Department Clearance Officer for PRA, U.S. Department of Justice.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00224 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-FY-P
    DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration Notice of Determinations Regarding Eligibility To Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance

    In accordance with Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended (19 U.S.C. 2273) the Department of Labor herein presents summaries of determinations regarding eligibility to apply for trade adjustment assistance for workers by (TA-W) number issued during the period of November 9, 2015 through December 11, 2015.

    In order for an affirmative determination to be made for workers of a primary firm and a certification issued regarding eligibility to apply for worker adjustment assistance, each of the group eligibility requirements of Section 222(a) of the Act must be met.

    I. Under Section 222(a)(2)(A), the following must be satisfied:

    (1) A significant number or proportion of the workers in such workers' firm have become totally or partially separated, or are threatened to become totally or partially separated;

    (2) the sales or production, or both, of such firm have decreased absolutely; and

    (3) One of the following must be satisfied:

    (A) imports of articles or services like or directly competitive with articles produced or services supplied by such firm have increased;

    (B) imports of articles like or directly competitive with articles into which one or more component parts produced by such firm are directly incorporated, have increased;

    (C) imports of articles directly incorporating one or more component parts produced outside the United States that are like or directly competitive with imports of articles incorporating one or more component parts produced by such firm have increased;

    (D) imports of articles like or directly competitive with articles which are produced directly using services supplied by such firm, have increased; and

    (4) the increase in imports contributed importantly to such workers' separation or threat of separation and to the decline in the sales or production of such firm; or

    II. Section 222(a)(2)(B) all of the following must be satisfied:

    (1) A significant number or proportion of the workers in such workers' firm have become totally or partially separated, or are threatened to become totally or partially separated;

    (2) One of the following must be satisfied:

    (A) There has been a shift by the workers' firm to a foreign country in the production of articles or supply of services like or directly competitive with those produced/supplied by the workers' firm;

    (B) there has been an acquisition from a foreign country by the workers' firm of articles/services that are like or directly competitive with those produced/supplied by the workers' firm; and

    (3) the shift/acquisition contributed importantly to the workers' separation or threat of separation.

    In order for an affirmative determination to be made for adversely affected secondary workers of a firm and a certification issued regarding eligibility to apply for worker adjustment assistance, each of the group eligibility requirements of Section 222(b) of the Act must be met.

    (1) a significant number or proportion of the workers in the workers' firm have become totally or partially separated, or are threatened to become totally or partially separated;

    (2) the workers' firm is a Supplier or Downstream Producer to a firm that employed a group of workers who received a certification of eligibility under Section 222(a) of the Act, and such supply or production is related to the article or service that was the basis for such certification; and

    (3) either—

    (A) the workers' firm is a supplier and the component parts it supplied to the firm described in paragraph (2) accounted for at least 20 percent of the production or sales of the workers' firm; or

    (B) a loss of business by the workers' firm with the firm described in paragraph (2) contributed importantly to the workers' separation or threat of separation.

    In order for an affirmative determination to be made for adversely affected workers in firms identified by the International Trade Commission and a certification issued regarding eligibility to apply for worker adjustment assistance, each of the group eligibility requirements of Section 222(e) of the Act must be met.

    (1) the workers' firm is publicly identified by name by the International Trade Commission as a member of a domestic industry in an investigation resulting in—

    (A) an affirmative determination of serious injury or threat thereof under section 202(b)(1);

    (B) an affirmative determination of market disruption or threat thereof under section 421(b)(1); or

    (C) an affirmative final determination of material injury or threat thereof under section 705(b)(1)(A) or 735(b)(1)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1671d(b)(1)(A) and 1673d(b)(1)(A));

    (2) the petition is filed during the 1-year period beginning on the date on which—

    (A) a summary of the report submitted to the President by the International Trade Commission under section 202(f)(1) with respect to the affirmative determination described in paragraph (1)(A) is published in the Federal Register under section 202(f)(3); or

    (B) notice of an affirmative determination described in subparagraph (1) is published in the Federal Register; and

    (3) the workers have become totally or partially separated from the workers' firm within—

    (A) the 1-year period described in paragraph (2); or

    (B) notwithstanding section 223(b)(1), the 1-year period preceding the 1-year period described in paragraph (2).

    Affirmative Determinations for Worker Adjustment Assistance

    The following certifications have been issued. The date following the company name and location of each determination references the impact date for all workers of such determination.

    The following certifications have been issued. The requirements of Section 222(a)(2)(A) (increased imports) of the Trade Act have been met.

    TA-W No. Subject firm Location Impact date 85,295 Bimbo Bakeries USA, Inc., BBU, Inc., Earthgrains Baking Companies, Inc Sioux City, IA May 7, 2013. 85,516 Bimbo Bakeries USA, Inc., BBU, Inc Fresno, CA September 3, 2013. 85,959 Wirerope Works Inc., Manpower, Depasquale Staffing Services Williamsport, PA April 24, 2014. 86,099 Mohawk Industries, Ambassador Personnel Landrum, SC June 16, 2014. 90,015 StarTek USA, Inc Greeley, CO January 1, 2014. 90,050 TPUSA—FHCS, Inc Fairmont, WV January 1, 2014. 90,056 Parker Hannifin Corporation, Racor Division, Aerotek, Ambassador Personnel Beaufort, SC November 10, 2014. 90,078 Feralloy Corporation, St. Louis Division Granite City, IL January 1, 2014. 90,131 A.P. Green Refractories, Inc., A.P. Green Industries, Inc., Harbison Walker International, Inc., etc Oak Hill, OH January 1, 2014. 90,161 Boardman LLC, Top Notch, Preferred Personnel Wichita, KS January 1, 2014. 90,281 Verso Corporation, Wickliffe Mill, Select Staffing, U.S., Security Associates and ABBCO Janito Wickliffe, KY January 1, 2014. 90,298 Roaring Spring Blank Book Company, Roaring Spring Paper Products Martinsburg, PA January 1, 2014. 90,327 Kyklos Bearing International, LLC Sandusky, OH January 1, 2014. 91,008 Expera Old Town, LLC, Expera Specialty Solutions, LLC, Red Shield Acquisition, etc Old Town, ME September 30, 2014.

    The following certifications have been issued. The requirements of Section 222(a)(2)(B) (shift in production or services) of the Trade Act have been met.

    TA-W No. Subject firm Location Impact date 85,097 Dex Media, Super Media Services LLC, Advantage Technical Resourcing (TAC) Middleton, MA February 21, 2013. 85,394 Merck Sharp & Dohme Corporation, Merck & Co., Inc., Medicinal Chemistry Group, Agile-1, Jones Lang LaSalle Rahway, NJ June 24, 2013. 85,586 Delta Dental of Pennsylvania, Data Entry Division Mechanicsburg, PA October 9, 2013. 85,601 Pitney Bowes Inc., U.S. Mailing Division, North American Order Management Department Troy, NY October 7, 2013. 85,656 Sprint/United Management Company, Enterprise Testing Services, IBM Overland Park, KS November 18, 2013. 85,752 Lear Corporation, Corporate Division, Shared Services—Accounts Payable Southfield, MI January 6, 2014. 85,829 Sony Puerto Rico, Inc., Brenda Marrero & Associate Group and Innova Industrial Contractor Guaynabo, PR February 10, 2014. 85,992 Verizon, Customer Service Help Desk Support Cary, NC May 6, 2014. 86,069 Schlumberger Technology Corporation, Journey Management Center Operators, Advantage Staffing, ICONMA, LLC, etc Kellyville, OK June 4, 2014. 86,071 INVISTA S.A.R.L., ABM Athens, GA June 5, 2014. 86,075 EPIC Technologies, LLC, NEO Technologies Solutions El Paso, TX July 13, 2014. 90,002 Caterpillar Inc., Advanced Components Systems Division, &Building KK, etc East Peoria, IL January 1, 2014. 90,037 Bush Industries, Inc., Mason Drive Facility, Express Employment Professionals, US Security Assoc Jamestown, NY September 20, 2015. 90,037A Kelly Services, Bush Industries, Inc Jamestown, NY January 1, 2014. 90,037B Bush Industries, Inc., Allen Street Facility, Express Employment Professionals, US Security Assoc Jamestown, NY September 20, 2015. 90,037C Kelly Services, Bush Industries, Inc., Allen Street Facility Jamestown, NY January 1, 2014. 90,039 Flik Hospitality Group, North America, Mondelez International Wilkes-Barre, PA January 1, 2014. 90,041 Powerex Inc Youngwood, PA April 21, 2014. 90,065 Capital One US Card Operations, Capital One Services II LLC, Capital One Services, LLC, etc Tigard, OR January 1, 2014. 90,075 Symantec Corporation, Technical Support, Veritas Software Corporation, Pro Unlimited, Inc., etc Springfield, OR January 1, 2014. 90,079 A & H Sportswear Co., Inc Nazareth, PA January 1, 2014. 90,083 Hewlett Packard Company, Global Procurement Division, ADEA Solutions, etc Corvallis, OR January 1, 2014. 90,084 Pacific Interpreters, Language Line Services, Languageline, LLC, SlingShot Connections Portland, OR January 1, 2014. 90,087 ClosetMaid, Emerson Electric Company, Volt Workforce Solutions, Select Staffing Chino, CA January 1, 2014. 90,089 Delphi Connection Systems, LLC, Delphi Automotive, LLC Irvine, CA January 1, 2014. 90,093 T-Shirt International, Inc Culloden, WV November 3, 2014. 90,097 Sandvik Mining and Construction USA, LLC, Sandvik, Inc., Work Personnel Services Bristol, VA January 1, 2014. 90,115 Maersk Agency USA, Inc., Finance Division, Talent Bridge Charlotte, NC January 1, 2014. 90,115A Maersk Agency USA, Inc., Finance Division The Woodlands, TX January 1, 2014. 90,115B Maersk Agency USA, Inc., Finance Division Florham Park, NJ January 1, 2014. 90,119 DFS Corporate Services, LLC, Business Technology Student Loan Production Support Division & DSL, etc Pittsford, NY January 1, 2014. 90,141 Capital One US Card Operations, Capital One Services II, LLC, Capital One, National Association Sioux Falls, SD January 1, 2014. 90,145 MasterCard International Incorporated Purchase, NY January 1, 2014. 90,147 Exterran Energy Solutions, LP, American Staff Corp., Employee Solutions, etc Broken Arrow, OK January 1, 2014. 90,156 Boston Scientific, EP Technologies, Barrett Business Services San Jose, CA January 1, 2014. 90,156A Boston Scientific, Target Therapeutics, Barrett Business Services Fremont, CA January 1, 2014. 90,166 Dresser, Inc., Dresser Masoneilan, General Electric Measurement and Control, etc Avon, MA May 9, 2015. 90,166A Kelly Services, NEED, Op Amp, Softek, Aerotek, and APN Software Solutions, Dresser Masoneilan, General Electric Measurement and Control, etc Avon, MA January 1, 2014. 90,168 Transamerica Life Insurance Company, Enterprise Business Services, Computer Sciences Corporation, etc Los Angeles, CA January 1, 2014. 90,170 Startek, Inc., Account Temps Agency Greenwood Village, CO January 1, 2014. 90,224 Texas Health Care, P.L.L.C Fort Worth, TX January 1, 2014. 90,226 Toyota Tsusho America, Inc., Pasona, Robert Half, Top Chicago, Delta Search Group, etc Farmington Hills, MI January 1, 2014. 90,234 Parker Hannifin Corporation, Medical Systems Division, Kimco Staffing Anaheim, CA January 1, 2014. 90,262 NCO Financial Systems, Inc., Expert Global Solutions, EGS Financial Care, Inc St. Joseph, MO January 1, 2014. 90,265 Osram Sylvania, Inc., Victory Personnel Services, Inc., Yoh Services, LLC Wellsboro, PA December 14, 2015. 90,279 Swiss Re America Holding Corporation, Finance Overland Park, KS January 1, 2014. 90,299 Leon Interiors, Inc., Leon Plastics, Inc. Employment Group, Adecco, Manpower, Aerotek, etc Grand Rapids, MI January 1, 2014. 90,321 Metso Minerals Industries, Inc, Metso Corporation York, PA January 1, 2014. 90,331 Kimco Realty Corporation New Hyde Park, NY January 1, 2014. 91,006 Vocollect, Inc., Honeywell International, Inc., Cortech, GDKN Corporation, Manpower, etc Monroeville, PA September 30, 2014. 91,007 Joy Global, Inc Brook Park, OH September 30, 2014. 91,009 PI. U.S. Holding, Inc., Rheem Sales Company, Inc., Rheem Manufacturing Company, etc Fort Smith, AR October 25, 2015. 91,017 American Airlines, Inc., Texas Aero Engine Services, LLC Fort Worth, TX October 2, 2014. 91,027 Indiana Marujun, LLC, Adecco, First Call Winchester, IN October 2, 2014. 91,030 Mitsubishi Motors North America, Inc., Mitsubishi Motors Corporation Manufacturing Division, ETG, etc Normal, IL October 6, 2014. 91,042 Airboss Defense Inc., Vermont Division, AirBoss of America Milton, VT October 8, 2014. 91,052 EnerSys Energy Products, Inc., EnerSys, Corporate Care Warrensburg, MO October 13, 2014. 91,055 Emerson Tool Company, Finance and Administration Divisions St. Louis, MO October 15, 2014. 91,056 Visual Citi Inc Lindenhurst, NY October 15, 2014. 91,067 Ulticom, Inc., Mitel US Holdings, Inc Mount Laurel, NJ October 21, 2014. 91,079 HBW Leads LLC Salem, OR October 27, 2014. 91,085 YP Advertising & Publishing LLC, Maryland Heights, Missouri Division, Digital Operations Group, etc Maryland Heights, MO October 29, 2014. 91,111 Parker Hannifin Corporation, Intertech Drive, Gear Pump Division, Aerotek Youngstown, OH October 30, 2014. 91,172 Wheelock Manufacturing Inc Morocco, IN November 23, 2014.

    The following certifications have been issued. The requirements of Section 222(b) (supplier to a firm whose workers are certified eligible to apply for TAA) of the Trade Act have been met.

    TA-W No. Subject firm Location Impact date 85,040 S&S Transportation, Inc Lincoln, ME January 28, 2013. 90,284 Bloomington Normal Seating Company, People Link Normal, IL January 1, 2014.

    The following certifications have been issued. The requirements of Section 222(b) (downstream producer for a firm whose workers are certified eligible to apply for TAA) of the Trade Act have been met.

    TA-W No. Subject firm Location Impact date 90,036 Bush Industries of Pennsylvania, Inc., Labor Ready Erie, PA September 20, 2015. 90,036A Kelly Services, Bush Industries of Pennsylvania, Inc Erie, PA January 1, 2014. Negative Determinations for Worker Adjustment Assistance

    In the following cases, the investigation revealed that the eligibility criteria for worker adjustment assistance have not been met for the reasons specified.

    The investigation revealed that the criterion under paragraph (a)(1), or (b)(1), or (c)(1) (employment decline or threat of separation) of section 222 has not been met.

    TA-W No. Subject firm Location Impact date 85,706 Quality Auto Electric, Inc Knoxville, TN 86,036 Flowers Bakeries, LLC Waterloo, IA 90,128 Market Strategies Clifton Park, NY 90,179 Leedon Webbing Co., Inc., ADD Temps Central Falls, RI 90,282 L&M Radiator, Inc Independence, IA

    The investigation revealed that the criteria under paragraphs (a)(2)(A)(i) (decline in sales or production, or both) and (a)(2)(B) (shift in production or services to a foreign country) of section 222 have not been met.

    TA-W No. Subject firm Location Impact date 85,165 Esterline Memtron Input Components, Esterline Technologies, Trillium Frankenmuth, MI 85,815 Peak Oilfield Services Company Nikiski, AK 86,134 Thorpe Plant Services, Inc., ESCI Broken Arrow, OK

    The investigation revealed that the criteria under paragraphs (a)(2)(A) (increased imports) and (a)(2)(B) (shift in production or services to a foreign country) of section 222 have not been met.

    TA-W No. Subject firm Location Impact date 85,064 Southside Manufacturing Blairs, VA 85,075 Duro Textiles, LLC, Finishing and Print Plants, Patriarch Partners, LLC, LT Staffing, etc Fall River, MA 85,093 Specialty Foods Group, Inc., Ron's Staffing Chicago, IL 85,114 Predator Systems, Inc., Curtiss-Wright Controls, Aerotek Commercial Staffing Boca Raton, FL 85,158 Cox Communications California LLC, Retention Group, Zero Chaos Rancho Santa Margarita, CA 85,290 Rigaku Innovative Technologies, Inc., Rigaku America Holding Company, SAXS Systems Auburn Hills, MI 85,384 Verizon California, Inc Long Beach, CA 85,403 BAE Systems Aerospace &amp; Defense Group, Inc., Protection Systems Division, The Job Shop McKee, KY 85,403A BAE Systems Aerospace &amp; Defense Group, Inc., Protection Systems Division, The Job Shop Annville, KY 85,448 UnitedHealth One, UnitedHealth Group, Golden Rule Insurance Company Lawrenceville, IL 85,448A UnitedHealth One, UnitedHealth Group, Golden Rule Insurance Company Indianapolis, IN 85,448B UnitedHealth One, UnitedHealth Group, Golden Rule Insurance Company Green Bay, WI 85,517 M&D Industries, Inc Clarendon, PA 85,543 Momentive Performance Materials Quartz, Inc., Quartz and Ceramics, Momentive Performance Materials, Inc Hebron, OH 85,649 Oshkosh Defense, LLC, Oshkosh Corporation, Accountemps, STS Technical Services, etc Oshkosh, WI 85,670 Verizon Communications, Livesource Directory Assistance Operators Erie, PA 85,769 Rural Metro Ambulance Salem, OR 85,775 Laredo Petroleum, Inc., Rowland Group Farmers Branch, TX 85,791 MWI Veterinary Supply Co., MWI Veterinary Supply, Inc., Ambassador, Express Pros, Mega Force, etc Warsaw, NC 85,825 OxyHeal Health Group, Inc., Traumatic Brain Injury Program (TBI) Camp Lejeune, NC 85,838 Bethany Christian Services, Transitional Foster Care, Bethany Christian Services USA Holland, MI 85,925 Bimbo Bakeries USA, Inc., BBU, Inc Fullerton, CA 85,932 Mohican Mills, Inc., Fab Industries Corporation, Tallent Force Lincolnton, NC 85,942 Halliburton, Drilling Fluids, Oil Field Technical Services, Oil Consultants Limited Pocasset, OK 85,985 Covidien LP, Covidien, PLC, Medical Device Division Pompano Bay, FL 86,000 Cudd Pumping Services, Inc., RPC, Inc., Megalodon Services, Inc Seminole, OK 86,013 Samson Resources Corporation, Allred Construction, Accounting Principals, Addison Group, etc Tulsa, OK 86,021 The Shredder Company LLC Canutillo, TX 86,023 Team Oil Tools, LP, Tulsa Manufacturing Tulsa, OK 86,051 Archer Pressure Pumping, LLC Union City, OK 86,110 Allen Logging Company Forks, WA 86,131 WPX Energy Services Company, LLC, WPX Energy, Inc Tulsa, OK 90,005 Genesis Administrative Services LLC, Genesis Healthcare LLC Albuquerque, NM 90,031 CUDD Pressure Control, Inc., Canton District, RPC, Inc Canton, PA 90,074 IPS Engineering, LLC, Aerotek and the Rowland Group Tulsa, OK 90,237 YellowPages.com, LLC, San Francisco Division, Digital Operations Group, YP LLC, etc San Francisco, CA Determinations Terminating Investigations of Petitions for Worker Adjustment Assistance

    After notice of the petitions was published in the Federal Register and on the Department's Web site, as required by Section 221 of the Act (19 U.S.C. 2271), the Department initiated investigations of these petitions.

    The following determinations terminating investigations were issued because the petitioner has requested that the petition be withdrawn.

    TA-W No. Subject firm Location Impact date 85,957 Tatung Company of America, Inc Carson, CA 90,049 Muffett and Sons Fencing, LLC Zillah, WA 90,053 Wheelock Manufacturing Morocco, IN 90,289 Hess Services Hays, KS 91,050 Concentrix Greenville, SC 91,059 Gordon Bros. Supply, Inc Stroud, OK 91,063 Unipower, LLC Coral Springs, FL

    The following determinations terminating investigations were issued in cases where these petitions were not filed in accordance with the requirements of 29 CFR 90.11. Every petition filed by workers must be signed by at least three individuals of the petitioning worker group. Petitioners separated more than one year prior to the date of the petition cannot be covered under a certification of a petition under Section 223(b), and therefore, may not be part of a petitioning worker group. For one or more of these reasons, these petitions were deemed invalid.

    TA-W No. Subject firm Location Impact date 90,134 Brown Brothers Harriman & Co New York, NY 90,270 Milano Design Concept, Inc Los Angeles, CA

    The following determinations terminating investigations were issued because the petitioning groups of workers are covered by active certifications. Consequently, further investigation in these cases would serve no purpose since the petitioning group of workers cannot be covered by more than one certification at a time.

    TA-W No. Subject firm Location Impact date 90,094 Dex Media, Super Media Services LLC, Advantage Technical Resourcing (Formerly TAC) Middleton, MA 90,294 U.S. Steel Tubular Products, Inc., Tubular Processing Houston Operations, United States Steel Corporation Houston, TX 90,304 U.S. Steel Oilwell Services, LLC, Offshore Operations-Houston Houston, TX 91,039 Foxconn Assembly, LLC Houston, TX

    The following determinations terminating investigations were issued because the petitions are the subject of ongoing investigations under petitions filed earlier covering the same petitioners.

    TA-W No. Subject firm Location Impact date 90,140 Century Aluminum of West Virginia, Inc Ravenswood, WV 91,127 Avery Dennison Covina, CA

    I hereby certify that the aforementioned determinations were issued during the period of November 9, 2015 through December 11, 2015. These determinations are available on the Department's Web site www.tradeact/taa/taa_search_form.cfm under the searchable listing of determinations or by calling the Office of Trade Adjustment Assistance toll free at 888-365-6822.

    Signed at Washington, DC, this 16th day of December 2015. Jessica R. Webster, Certifying Officer, Office of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00231 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P
    DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration Investigations Regarding Eligibility To Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance

    Petitions have been filed with the Secretary of Labor under Section 221(a) of the Trade Act of 1974 (“the Act”) and are identified in the Appendix to this notice. Upon receipt of these petitions, the Director of the Office of Trade Adjustment Assistance, Employment and Training Administration, has instituted investigations pursuant to Section 221(a) of the Act.

    The purpose of each of the investigations is to determine whether the workers are eligible to apply for adjustment assistance under Title II, Chapter 2, of the Act. The investigations will further relate, as appropriate, to the determination of the date on which total or partial separations began or threatened to begin and the subdivision of the firm involved.

    The petitioners or any other persons showing a substantial interest in the subject matter of the investigations may request a public hearing, provided such request is filed in writing with the Director, Office of Trade Adjustment Assistance, at the address shown below, no later than January 21, 2016.

    Interested persons are invited to submit written comments regarding the subject matter of the investigations to the Director, Office of Trade Adjustment Assistance, at the address shown below, not later than January 21, 2016.

    The petitions filed in this case are available for inspection at the Office of the Director, Office of Trade Adjustment Assistance, Employment and Training Administration, U.S. Department of Labor, Room N-5428, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20210.

    Signed at Washington, DC, this 16th day of December 2015. Jessica R. Webster, Certifying Officer, Office of Trade Adjustment Assistance. APPENDIX 102 TAA Petitions Instituted Between 11/9/15 and 12/11/15 TA-W Subject firm (petitioners) Location Date of
  • institution
  • Date of
  • petition
  • 91116 Warner Home Video (Company) Burbank, CA 11/09/15 11/06/15 91117 Altairnano (Company) Reno, NV 11/09/15 11/08/15 91118 Zurn Industries (Union) Erie, PA 11/09/15 11/08/15 91119 TAPI Puerto Rico (State/One-Stop) Guayama, PR 11/09/15 11/09/15 91120 Inteva Products (Union) North Kansas City, MO 11/10/15 10/30/15 91121 REC Silicon ASA (Company) Silver Bow, MT 11/10/15 11/04/15 91122 Alcoa Intalco Works (Union) Ferndale, WA 11/10/15 11/09/15 91123 3M Brookville (State/One-Stop) Brookville, OH 11/10/15 11/05/15 91124 ARM Inc. (Workers) Olympia, WA 11/10/15 11/09/15 91125 Alcoa Wenatchee Works (Union) Malaga, WA 11/12/15 11/06/15 91126 Thomson Reuters (State/One-Stop) Valhalla, NY 11/12/15 11/06/15 91127 Avery Dennison (State/One-Stop) Covina, CA 11/12/15 11/03/15 91128 AirDye Solutions LLC (Workers) Harrisonburg, VA 11/12/15 11/03/15 91129 WestRock Services, Inc. (Company) Coshocton, OH 11/12/15 11/10/15 91130 Trinseo LLC (State/One-Stop) Gales Ferry, CT 11/12/15 11/10/15 91131 Areo Precision Products (Company) Summerville, SC 11/12/15 11/11/15 91132 Century Aluminum of South Carolina Inc. (Company) Goose Creek, SC 11/12/15 11/11/15 91133 Verizon Enterprise Solutions (Workers) San Antonio, TX 11/12/15 11/11/15 91134 Meritor (Company) Heath, OH 11/12/15 11/12/15 91135 ShopKo Store Support Center (Workers) Green Bay, WI 11/13/15 11/12/15 91136 Neenah Paper, Inc. (State/One-Stop) Fitchburg, MA 11/13/15 11/13/15 91137 Baker Hughes (State/One-Stop) San Antonio, TX 11/13/15 11/10/15 91138 GrafTech International Holdings, Inc. (Company) Anmoore, WV 11/13/15 11/03/15 91139 Leggett & Platt Springs Manufacturing LLC (State/One-Stop) Colorado Springs, CO 11/16/15 11/13/15 91140 Eagle Wings Industries, Inc. (State/One-Stop) Rantoul, IL 11/16/15 11/13/15 91141 International Paper Mill (Workers) Courtland, AL 11/16/15 11/15/15 91142 BASF Corporation (State/One-Stop) Florham Park, NJ 11/16/15 11/13/15 91143 RBS Citizens Bank National Association dba Citizens Bank, NA (State/One-Stop) Riverside, RI 11/16/15 11/16/15 91144 Micron Technology Puerto Rico (Company) Aguadilla, PR 11/17/15 11/16/15 91145 Joy Global (State/One-Stop) Franklin, PA 11/17/15 11/16/15 91146 Nidec Motor Corporation (State/One-Stop) Paragould, AR 11/17/15 11/16/15 91147 Mayhem (State/One-Stop) Tulsa, OK 11/17/15 11/16/15 91148 XPO Logistics Inc. (State/One-Stop) Portland, OR 11/18/15 11/17/15 91149 Time Customer Service Inc. (State/One-Stop) Tampa, FL 11/18/15 11/17/15 91150 Avery Products Corporation (Company) Meridian, MS 11/18/15 11/17/15 91151 The Directional Drilling Company (State/One-Stop) Casper, WY 11/18/15 11/17/15 91152 PetroChoice (State/One-Stop) Chisholm, MN 11/18/15 11/17/15 91153 Horizon Mud Company (State/One-Stop) Midland, TX 11/18/15 11/17/15 91154 Allen Logging Co. Inc. (State/One-Stop) Forks, WA 11/18/15 11/17/15 91155 Apache Corporation (Workers) Tulsa, OK 11/19/15 11/16/15 91156 Guardian Life Insurance Co (State/One-Stop) Appleton, WI 11/19/15 11/18/15 91157 Warren Steel Holdings, LLC (Union) Warren, OH 11/19/15 11/18/15 91158 Motorola Mobility (Workers) Fort Worth, TX 11/19/15 11/18/15 91159 Century Aluminum (State/One-Stop) Robards, KY 11/19/15 11/18/15 91160 Magnetation LLC (State/One-Stop) Bovey, MN 11/19/15 11/18/15 91161 Cleveland Range LLC, Div. of Manitowoc Foodservice (Company) Fort Wayne, IN 11/19/15 11/18/15 91162 Carlson Wagonlit Travel (State/One-Stop) St. Louis, MO 11/19/15 11/18/15 91163 GE Power and Water (Company) Waukesha, WI 11/20/15 11/18/15 91164 Watts Radiant (State/One-Stop) Springfield, MO 11/20/15 11/19/15 91165 Advanced Energy (State/One-Stop) Bend, OR 11/20/15 11/19/15 91166 DJO Global/Exos (State/One-Stop) Shoreview, MN 11/20/15 11/19/15 91167 De-Sta-Co, Dover Company (Union) Auburn Hills, MI 11/23/15 10/27/15 91168 MPW Industrial Services (Company) Hebron, OH 11/23/15 11/20/15 91169 Technicolor Creative Services (State/One-Stop) Burbank, CA 11/23/15 11/20/15 91170 Enovation Controls (State/One-Stop) Tulsa, OK 11/24/15 11/23/15 91171 Safilo USA (State/One-Stop) Parsippany, NJ 11/24/15 11/23/15 91172 Wheelock Manufacturing Inc. (Company) Morocco, IN 11/24/15 11/23/15 91173 Schlumberger (E & P Wireline) (Workers) Moore, OK 11/24/15 11/23/15 91174 Trinet/SourceMedia (State/One-Stop) New York, NY 11/24/15 11/23/15 91175 Harris Rebar/Ambassador Steel (Workers) Auburn, IN 11/24/15 11/15/15 91176 Tronox (Workers) Hamilton, MS 11/25/15 11/19/15 91177 PTC Alliance (B.F. #1) (Union) Beaver Falls, PA 11/25/15 11/14/15 91178 Energizer (State/One-Stop) Bennington, VT 11/25/15 11/25/15 91179 J.P. Morgan Chase (State/One-Stop) Louisville, KY 11/27/15 11/25/15 91180 Motorola Solutions (Workers) Schaumburg, IL 11/30/15 11/30/15 91181 Horizon Energy Services, LLC (State/One-Stop) Stillwater, OK 11/30/15 11/05/15 91182 Maverick Innovatiive Solutions, LLC (Company) Ashland, OH 11/30/15 11/05/15 91183 Baker Hughes (Workers) Tulsa, OK 11/30/15 11/25/15 91184 BI Technologies—TT Electronics (Company) Fullerton, CA 12/01/15 11/30/15 91185 The NPD Group (Workers) Port Washington, NY 12/02/15 12/01/15 91186 Daikin Applied (State/One-Stop) Auburn, NY 12/02/15 12/01/15 91187 SiHi Pumps (State/One-Stop) Grand Island, NY 12/02/15 12/01/15 91188 NN, Inc.-Autocam Precision Components Group (State/One-Stop) Wheeling, IL 12/02/15 12/02/15 91189 Diversified Well Logging (State/One-Stop) Corpus Christi, TX 12/02/15 10/14/15 91190 D+H (Workers) Bothell, WA 12/03/15 12/02/15 91191 Farrow Innovations LLC (Company) Bryan, TX 12/03/15 11/24/15 91192 Xerox Corporation—Business Services LLC (State/One-Stop) Dallas, TX 12/03/15 12/02/15 91193 Marietta/KIK Corp including Select Temporary Services (State/One-Stop) Los Angeles, CA 12/04/15 12/03/15 91194 Kelly Services, Inc. on-site at Baker Hughes (State/One-Stop) Claremore, OK 12/04/15 12/03/15 91195 NRG Energy, Inc. (Union) Dunkirk, NY 12/07/15 12/04/15 91196 Federal-Mogul (State/One-Stop) Orangeburg, SC 12/07/15 12/04/15 91197 Mercer (State/One-Stop) Dallas, TX 12/07/15 12/04/15 91198 Chester Forest Products/Gardner Chip Mills (Company) Chester, ME 12/07/15 12/04/15 91199 Alliance Resource Partners LLC (Workers) Princeton, IN 12/08/15 12/04/15 91200 Valterra Products, LLC (Workers) Avon Lake, OH 12/08/15 12/08/15 91201 Anthem, Inc. (State/One-Stop) Cape Girardeau, MO 12/08/15 12/08/15 91202 Covidien (Workers) Mansfield, MA 12/08/15 12/07/15 91203 Tango Networks/Trinet (Workers) Frisco, TX 12/08/15 12/07/15 91204 Globo Mobile Technologies Inc. (Workers) Canfield, OH 12/08/15 12/07/15 91205 KBR (State/One-Stop) Houston, TX 12/09/15 12/08/15 91206 TGI Fridays (Company) Carrollton, TX 12/10/15 12/09/15 91207 LG Nano H2O/LG Chem (State/One-Stop) Hawthorne, CA 12/10/15 12/09/15 91208 Lexmark International (Workers) Lexington, KY 12/10/15 12/09/15 91209 L&M Radiator (State/One-Stop) Hibbing, MN 12/10/15 12/09/15 91210 General Securities Services Corporation (State/One-Stop) Babbitt, MN 12/10/15 12/09/15 91211 D+H (Workers) Portland, OR 12/11/15 12/10/15 91212 Amdocs (Workers) Richardson, TX 12/11/15 12/10/15 91213 Superior Rock Bit Company (State/One-Stop) Virginia, MN 12/11/15 12/10/15 91214 Parker Aerospace (State/One-Stop) Liberty Lake, WA 12/11/15 12/10/15 91215 QBE North America (Workers) Sun Prairie, WI 12/11/15 12/03/15 91216 Custom Metal Finishers (State/One-Stop) Mountain View, MO 12/11/15 12/04/15 91217 Flextronics (Company) West Columbia, SC 12/11/15 12/10/15
    [FR Doc. 2016-00232 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P
    NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION Notice of Intent to Seek Approval to Establish an Information Collection AGENCY:

    National Science Foundation.

    ACTION:

    Notice and request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    The National Science Foundation (NSF) is announcing plans to request approval of this collection. In accordance with the requirement of section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-13), we are providing opportunity for public comment on this action. After obtaining and considering public comment, NSF will prepare the submission requesting that OMB approve clearance of this collection for no longer than 3 years.

    Comments: Written comments are invited on (a) whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the NSF, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the NSF's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

    DATES:

    Written comments on this notice must be received by March 11, 2016 to be assured of consideration. Comments received after that date will be considered to the extent practicable.

    For additional information or comments: Contact Suzanne H. Plimpton, Reports Clearance Officer, National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Suite 1265, Arlington, Virginia 22230; telephone (703) 292-7556; or send email to [email protected] Individuals who use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8339, which is accessible 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year (including federal holidays).

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Title of Collection: Nonprofit Research Activities Survey.

    OMB Approval Number: 3145-New.

    Expiration Date: Not applicable.

    Type of Request: Intent to conduct a pilot test for an information collection.

    Abstract: The nonprofit sector is one of four major sectors that perform and/or fund research and development (R&D) in the U.S. Historically, the National Science Foundation (NSF) has combined this sector's data with the business, government, and higher education sector data to estimate total national R&D expenditures via the annual National Patterns of R&D Resources report. The other three sectors are surveyed annually; however, it has been more than 18 years since NSF last collected R&D data from nonprofit organizations.

    The primary objective of the new survey is to fill data gaps in the National Patterns of R&D Resources in such a way that it is compatible with data collected on the business, government, and higher education sectors of the U.S. economy and appropriate for international comparisons. Since the last survey of research activity in the nonprofit sector occurred more than 18 years ago, and because of the more than 21% growth in IRS filings by nonprofits between 2001 and 2011, it is important that a new survey of nonprofit R&D be fielded to update current national estimates for the nonprofit sector.

    The National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics (NCSES) plans to conduct a pilot of the new Nonprofit Research Activities Survey (NPRA). NPRA will collect R&D and other related data from U.S. nonprofit organizations. This survey will collect the following:

    • Total amount spent on R&D activities within nonprofit organizations,

    • Number of employees and R&D employees,

    • Sources of funds for R&D expenditures,

    • Expenditures by field of R&D,

    • Total amount of R&D funding provided to others outside the nonprofit organization,

    • Types of recipients receiving R&D funding, and

    • Funding by field of R&D.

    The process of developing the questionnaire involved several major steps. First, at NSF's request, in February 2014 the Committee on National Statistics convened a steering committee on Measuring R&D Expenditures in the U.S. Nonprofit Sector. Second, NCSES (through its contractor) conducted 23 interviews with representatives of nonprofit organizations. Third, an expert panel was convened in September 2014 for the purpose of helping NSF shape the content and coverage of data related to R&D in the nonprofit sector. Finally, in the summer of 2015 cognitive interviews were conducted with representatives of 28 nonprofit organizations that perform and fund research to test the prenotification letter, a handout that will be included with the letter, and the survey instrument. The pilot test will be a web survey with a paper version of the questionnaire available for download. The initial contact with the nonprofit organizations will be via mail, but the remainder of the contacts will occur via email.

    Use of the information: The primary purpose of this pilot survey is to assess the feasibility of and to test the process of collecting the necessary information prior to the launch of a nationally representative survey planned for 2017. The pilot survey results will not be published. However, NCSES does plan to use the information provided to improve our national estimates of nonprofit research spending in our annual publication National Patterns of R&D Resources.

    Expected respondents: The pilot sample will be 4,000 nonprofit organizations.

    Estimate of burden: We expect a response rate of 80%. Based on the responses from the 28 cognitive interviews, we estimate the full survey to require 10 hours to complete. The response time for nonprofit organizations that do not conduct or fund research should be under 1 hour. We estimate that of the 4,000 organizations surveyed, no more than 700 will identify as performer or funders and submit a full survey response. Therefore our estimate of burden for the pilot survey is 10,300 hours (7,000 hours for the 700 performers and funders; 3,300 for the remainder of the sample).

    Dated: January 5, 2016. Suzanne H. Plimpton, Reports Clearance Officer, National Science Foundation.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00229 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7555-01-P
    NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [EA-14-193; NRC-2015-0289] In the Matter of Northern States Power Company, Minnesota AGENCY:

    Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

    ACTION:

    Confirmatory order; issuance.

    SUMMARY:

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and Northern States Power Company, Minnesota, doing business as Xcel Energy, engaged in mediation as part of the NRC's Alternative Dispute Resolution Program which resulted in a settlement agreement as reflected in the Confirmatory Order (CO) related to Xcel Energy. The purpose of the CO is to ensure that the licensee restores compliance with NRC regulations.

    DATES:

    Effective Date: January 20, 2016

    ADDRESSES:

    Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2015-0289 when contacting the NRC about the availability of information regarding this document. You may obtain publicly-available information related to this action using any of the following methods:

    • Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2015-0289. Address questions about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher; telephone: 301-415-3463; email: [email protected] For technical questions, contact the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document.

    • NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS): You may access publicly available documents online in the ADAMS Public Documents collection at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. To begin the search, select “ADAMS Public Documents” and then select “Begin Web-based ADAMS Search.” For problems with ADAMS, please contact the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR) reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by email to [email protected] The ADAMS accession number for each document referenced in this document (if that document is available in ADAMS) is provided the first time that a document is referenced.

    • NRC's PDR: You may examine and purchase copies of public documents at the NRC's PDR, Room O1-F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Kenneth Lambert, Region III, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Lisle, Illinois, 60532; telephone: 630-810-4376, email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The text of the Order is attached.

    Dated at Lisle, Illinois this 21st day of December, 2015.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

    Cynthia D. Pederson, Regional Administrator.
    Attachment—CONFIRMATORY ORDER MODIFYING LICENSE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION In the Matter of Docket Nos. 50-263; 72-058 Northern States Power Company, Minnesota License No. DPR-22 (Doing business as Xcel Energy) EA-14-193 Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant CONFIRMATORY ORDER MODIFYING LICENSE I.

    Northern States Power Company, Minnesota, doing business as Xcel Energy, (Licensee) is the holder of Reactor Operating License No. DPR-22 issued by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or Commission) pursuant to Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Part 50 on September 8, 1970, and renewed on November 8, 2006. The license authorizes the operation of the Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant (Monticello) in accordance with conditions specified therein. The facility is located on the Licensee's site in Monticello, Minnesota.

    This Confirmatory Order is the result of an agreement reached during an alternative dispute resolution (ADR) mediation session conducted on October 15, 2015.

    II.

    On December 18, 2013, the NRC Office of Investigations (OI), Region III Field Office initiated an investigation (OI Case No. 3-2014-004) to determine whether two contractor technicians at the Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant deliberately failed to perform nondestructive examinations (NDEs) on the Dry Shielded Canisters (DSCs) in accordance with procedural requirements, and to determine whether they falsified records when recording the NDE results. The results of the investigation, completed on November 13, 2014, were sent to Xcel Energy in a letter dated July 23, 2015 (ML15203B187). Based on the review of the OI investigation report the NRC determined that both contractor technicians willfully violated 10 CFR 72.158, “Control of special processes,” and 10 CFR 72.11, “Completeness and accuracy of information.” In addition, the NRC determined the licensee violated Title 10 CFR 72.154(c), “Control of purchased material, equipment, and services.”

    Specifically, on October 17, 2013, an NRC inspector observed, by video display, the NDE liquid penetrant testing (PT) of the outer top cover plate weld for DSCs being conducted by a contractor technician. The inspector believed that the technician failed to comply with procedural requirements in conducting the PT. The inspector reviewed the procedure, confirmed that the PT was not being performed in accordance with the procedure, and notified Monticello management. Monticello management and the NDE contractor management reviewed the video, and concluded the PT was not performed properly. Upon further review, the NRC inspector determined that two contractor NDE technicians were involved in performing the PT examinations. These individuals were involved with examining a total of 66 welds on six DSCs.

    Based on the evidence gathered in the OI investigation, the NRC determined that the two NDE contractors deliberately violated NRC requirements by failing to perform NDE PT of DSCs, a special process, in accordance with procedures by not allowing the developer to dwell for the period of time specified in procedure 12751 QP-9.202, Rev. 1, “Color Contrast Liquid Penetrant Examination using the Solvent-Removable Method.” Their actions caused the licensee to be in violation of Certificate of Compliance 1004, Amendment 10, Technical Specification 1.2.5, “DSC Dye Penetrant Tests of Closure Welds,” which was implemented by the procedure, and 10 CFR 72.158, as NDE testing, a special process, was not accomplished in accordance with the applicable standards and requirements.

    The NRC further determined that the two contractors willfully violated NRC requirements by recording false information concerning developer dwell times on the PT examination report for each NDE. This caused the licensee to be in violation of 10 CFR 72.11(a), which requires information required to be maintained by the licensee to be complete and accurate in all material respects.

    The NRC also determined the licensee failed to assess the effectiveness of the controls of quality by the contractors. Specifically, the licensee did not adequately monitor the work of the contractors performing PT testing on DSCs No. 11 through 16. This caused the licensee to be in violation of 10 CFR 72.154(c), “Control of purchased material, equipment, and services,” which required, in part, that licensees assess the effectiveness of the control of quality by contractors and subcontractors at intervals consistent with the importance, complexity, and quantity of the product or services.

    In response to the NRC's offer, Xcel Energy requested use of the NRC ADR process to resolve differences it had with the NRC. Alternative Dispute Resolution is a process in which a neutral mediator with no decision-making authority assists the parties in reaching an agreement on resolving any differences regarding the dispute. On October 15, 2015, Xcel Energy and the NRC met in an ADR session mediated by a professional mediator, arranged through the Cornell University's Institute on Conflict Resolution.

    III.

    During the ADR session, a preliminary settlement agreement was reached. This Confirmatory Order is issued pursuant to the agreement reached during the ADR process. The elements of the agreement, as signed by both parties, consisted of the following:

    1. The licensee shall restore compliance to 10 CFR part 72 to DSCs 11 through 16 within 5 years of the date the NRC takes final action upon the September 29, 2015, exemption request pending for DSC 16 (ML15275A023), or the exemption request is withdrawn, whichever is earlier.

    2. Within 180 calendar days of the NRC's final action on the docketed exemption request dated September 29, 2015 (ML15275A023), or the date the exemption request is withdrawn, whichever is earlier, the licensee shall submit a project plan to the Director, Division of Nuclear Materials Safety (DNMS), Region III, for returning DSCs 11 through 16 to compliance to 10 CFR part 72.

    3. Within 180 calendar days after submittal of the DSCs 11 through 16 project plan, Xcel Energy shall submit a letter to the Director, DNMS, Region III, regarding progress under the plan, and any non-editorial changes to the plan. A letter providing a progress update and any non-editorial plan changes shall be provided every 360 calendar days thereafter to the Director, DNMS, Region III, until the plan is completed.

    4. Within 90 calendar days of the issuance date of the Confirmatory Order, Xcel Energy shall evaluate Monticello's dry fuel storage procedures and ensure the procedures require direct licensee oversight during the entire evolution of each dye penetrant test performed by contractors on DSC closure welds.

    5. Within 120 calendar days of the issuance date of the Confirmatory Order, Xcel Energy shall ensure and document that all first line supervisors and above, who oversee contractors performing field work in the Xcel Energy nuclear fleet, review the circumstances and lessons learned from the events that gave rise to the Confirmatory Order.

    6. Within 360 calendar days of the issuance date of the Confirmatory Order, the licensee shall assess and document the effectiveness of improvements in oversight of supplemental workers (e.g., contractors) in the Xcel Energy nuclear fleet, including the actions taken in item 5.

    7. Within 540 calendar days of the issuance date of the Confirmatory Order, Xcel Energy shall develop and make a presentation based on the facts and lessons learned from the events that gave rise to the Confirmatory Order, with emphasis on corrective actions taken as a result. Xcel Energy agrees to make this presentation at an appropriate industry forum such that industry personnel across the entirety of the United States would have the opportunity to receive the material. Xcel Energy shall inform the Director, DNMS, Region III, of where the presentation will be made, and shall make the presentation materials available to the NRC for review at least 30 calendar days in advance of the presentation.

    8. Within 360 calendar days of the issuance date of the Confirmatory Order, Xcel Energy shall submit an article to an industry publication, such as UxC Spent Fuel, describing the circumstances of the violation, the root and contributing causes, and the corrective actions. The licensee shall provide a draft to the Director, DNMS, Region III, at least 30 calendar days in advance of the submittal.

    9. Upon completion of all terms of the Confirmatory Order, Xcel Energy shall submit to the NRC a letter discussing its basis for concluding that the Order has been satisfied.

    In addition to the elements described above, Xcel Energy took the following corrective actions:

    1. Xcel Energy revised its nuclear fleet Nuclear Oversight (“NOS”) and Supply Chain procedures to require the establishment of a NOS Project Oversight Plan for any Safety-Related or Augmented Quality fabrication or construction activities performed at the nuclear plant sites under a supplier's Quality Assurance (QA) Program. The NOS procedure for project oversight was also revised to address site project implementation in addition to project component fabrication, and associated project risks. Upfront planning of the level and type NOS oversight is based on those risks.

    2. Xcel Energy created a nuclear fleet procedure for oversight of supplemental personnel (e.g., contractors) based upon the Institute of Nuclear Power Operations (INPO) AP-930 “Supplemental Personnel Process Description,” which includes a requirement that each incoming contract worker have a face-to-face review of station standards, expectations, and requirements with the Maintenance Manager or designee. This includes current and all future contract personnel including contract quality control (QC) inspectors.

    3. Xcel Energy issued a rapid operational experience notice for this event, which prompted a review of the event by Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant staff and shared the event with the nuclear industry through a process called the INPO Consolidated Event System (ICES).

    4. Xcel Energy reviewed its General Access Training to ensure it addresses the consequences of willful violations.

    In exchange for the commitments and corrective actions taken by the licensee, the NRC agrees to the following conditions:

    1. The NRC will consider the Confirmatory Order as an escalated enforcement action for a period of one year from its issuance date.

    2. The NRC will refrain from issuing a Notice of Violation and a proposed imposition of a civil penalty.

    This agreement is binding upon the successors and assigns of Xcel Energy.

    On December 10, 2015, Xcel Energy consented to issuing this Confirmatory Order with the commitments, as described in Section V below. Xcel Energy further agreed that this Confirmatory Order is to be effective 30 calendar days after issuance of the Confirmatory Order and that it has waived its right to a hearing.

    IV.

    Since the licensee agreed to take additional actions to address NRC concerns, as set forth in Section III above, the NRC concluded that its concerns can be resolved through issuance of this Confirmatory Order.

    I find that Xcel Energy's commitments as set forth in Section V are acceptable and necessary and conclude that with these commitments the public health and safety are reasonably assured. In view of the foregoing, I have determined that public health and safety require that Xcel Energy's commitments be confirmed by this Confirmatory Order. Based on the above and Xcel Energy's consent, this Confirmatory Order is effective 30 calendar days after issuance of the Confirmatory Order.

    V.

    Accordingly, pursuant to Sections 104b, 161b, 161i, 161o, 182, and 186 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, and the Commission's regulations in 10 CFR 2.202, 10 CFR part 50 and 10 CFR part 72, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT THE ACTIONS DESCRIBED BELOW WILL BE TAKEN AT MONTICELLO NUCLEAR GENERATING PLANT AND OTHER NUCLEAR PLANTS IN XCEL ENERGY'S FLEET WHERE INDICATED AND THAT LICENSE NO. DPR-22 IS MODIFIED AS FOLLOWS WITH RESPECT TO THE ACTIONS TO BE TAKEN AT THE MONTICELLO NUCLEAR GENERATING PLANT:

    1. The licensee shall restore compliance to 10 CFR part 72 to DSCs 11 through 16 within 5 years of the date the NRC takes final action upon the September 29, 2015, exemption request pending for DSC 16 (ML15275A023), or the exemption request is withdrawn, whichever is earlier.

    2. Within 180 calendar days of the NRC's final action on the docketed exemption request dated September 29, 2015 (ML15275A023), or the date the exemption request is withdrawn, whichever is earlier, the licensee shall submit a project plan to the Director, Division of Nuclear Materials Safety, Region III, for returning DSCs 11 through 16 to compliance to 10 CFR part 72.

    3. Within 180 days after submittal of the DSCs 11 through 16 project plan, Xcel Energy shall submit a letter to the Director, DNMS, Region III, regarding progress under the plan, and any non-editorial changes to the plan. A letter providing a progress update and any non-editorial plan changes shall be provided every 360 calendar days thereafter to the Director, DNMS, Region III, until the plan is completed.

    4. Within 90 calendar days of the issuance date of the Confirmatory Order, Xcel Energy shall evaluate Monticello's dry fuel storage procedures and ensure the procedures require direct licensee oversight during the entire evolution of each dye penetrant test performed by contractors on DSC closure welds.

    5. Within 120 calendar days of the issuance date of the Confirmatory Order, Xcel Energy shall ensure and document that all first line supervisors and above, who oversee contractors performing field work in the Xcel Energy nuclear fleet, review the circumstances and lessons learned from the events that gave rise to the Confirmatory Order.

    6. Within 360 calendar days of the issuance date of the Confirmatory Order, the licensee shall assess and document the effectiveness of improvements in oversight of supplemental workers (e.g., contractors) in the Xcel Energy nuclear fleet, including the actions taken in item 5.

    7. Within 540 calendar days of the issuance date of the Confirmatory Order, Xcel Energy shall develop and make a presentation based on the facts and lessons learned from the events that gave rise to the Confirmatory Order, with emphasis on corrective actions taken as a result. Xcel Energy agrees to make this presentation at an appropriate industry forum such that industry personnel across the entirety of the United States would have the opportunity to receive the material. Xcel Energy shall inform the Director, DNMS, Region III, of where the presentation will be made, and make the presentation materials available to the NRC for review at least 30 calendar days in advance of the presentation.

    8. Within 360 calendar days of the issuance date of the Confirmatory Order, Xcel Energy shall submit an article to an industry publication, such as UxC Spent Fuel, describing the circumstances of the violation, the root and contributing causes, and the corrective actions. The licensee shall provide a draft to the Director, DNMS, Region III, at least 30 calendar days in advance of the submittal.

    9. Upon completion of all terms of the Confirmatory Order, Xcel Energy shall submit to the NRC a letter discussing its basis for concluding that the Order has been satisfied.

    The Regional Administrator, Region III, may, in writing, relax or rescind any of the above conditions upon demonstration by the Licensee of good cause.

    VI.

    Any person adversely affected by this Confirmatory Order, other than Xcel Nuclear, may request a hearing within 30 days of the issuance date of this Confirmatory Order. Where good cause is shown, consideration will be given to extending the time to request a hearing. A request for extension of time must be directed to the Director, Office of Enforcement, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, and include a statement of good cause for the extension.

    All documents filed in NRC adjudicatory proceedings, including a request for hearing, a petition for leave to intervene, any motion or other document filed in the proceeding prior to the submission of a request for hearing or petition to intervene, and documents filed by interested governmental entities participating under 10 CFR 2.315(c), must be filed in accordance with the NRC's E-Filing rule (72 FR 49139; August 28, 2007), as amended by 77 FR 46562; August 3, 2012 (codified in pertinent part at 10 CFR part 2, subpart C). The E-Filing process requires participants to submit and serve all adjudicatory documents over the internet, or in some cases to mail copies on electronic storage media. Participants may not submit paper copies of their filings unless they seek an exemption in accordance with the procedures described below.

    To comply with the procedural requirements of E-Filing, at least ten (10) days prior to the filing deadline, the participant should contact the Office of the Secretary by email at [email protected], or by telephone at 301-415-1677, to (1) request a digital (ID) certificate, which allows the participant (or its counsel or representative) to digitally sign documents and access the E-Submittal server for any proceeding in which it is participating; and (2) advise the Secretary that the participant will be submitting a request or petition for hearing (even in instances in which the participant, or its counsel or representative, already holds an NRC-issued digital ID certificate). Based upon this information, the Secretary will establish an electronic docket for the hearing in this proceeding if the Secretary has not already established an electronic docket.

    Information about applying for a digital ID certificate is available on NRC's public Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html. System requirements for accessing the E-Submittal server are detailed in NRC's “Guidance for Electronic Submission,” which is available on the agency's public Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html. Participants may attempt to use other software not listed on the Web site, but should note that the NRC's E-Filing system does not support unlisted software, and the NRC Meta System Help Desk will not be able to offer assistance in using unlisted software.

    If a participant is electronically submitting a document to the NRC in accordance with the E-Filing rule, the participant must file the document using the NRC's online, Web-based submission form. In order to serve documents through the Electronic Information Exchange (EIE), users will be required to install a Web browser plug-in from the NRC Web site. Further information on the Web-based submission form, including the installation of the Web browser plug-in, is available on the NRC's public Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html.

    Once a participant has obtained a digital ID certificate and a docket has been created, the participant can then submit a request for hearing or petition for leave to intervene through the EIE. Submissions should be in Portable Document Format (PDF) in accordance with NRC guidance available on the NRC's public Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html. A filing is considered complete at the time the documents are submitted through the NRC's E-Filing system. To be timely, an electronic filing must be submitted to the E-Filing system no later than 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time (ET) on the due date. Upon receipt of a transmission, the E-Filing system time-stamps the document and sends the submitter an email notice confirming receipt of the document. The E-Filing system also distributes an email notice that provides access to the document to the NRC's Office of the General Counsel and any others who have advised the Office of the Secretary that they wish to participate in the proceeding, so that the filer need not serve the documents on those participants separately. Therefore, any others who wish to participate in the proceeding (or their counsel or representative) must apply for and receive a digital ID certificate before a hearing request/petition to intervene is filed so that they can obtain access to the document via the E-Filing system.

    A person filing electronically using the NRC's adjudicatory E-Filing system may seek assistance by contacting the NRC Meta System Help Desk through the “Contact Us” link located on the NRC's Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html, by email at [email protected], or by a toll-free call at (866) 672-7640. The NRC Meta System Help Desk is available between 8:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m., ET, Monday through Friday, excluding government holidays.

    Participants who believe that they have a good cause for not submitting documents electronically must file an exemption request, in accordance with 10 CFR 2.302(g), with their initial paper filing requesting authorization to continue to submit documents in paper format. Such filings must be submitted by: (1) First class mail addressed to the Office of the Secretary of the Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff; or (2) courier, express mail, or expedited delivery service to the Office of the Secretary, Sixteenth Floor, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland, 20852, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff. Participants filing a document in this manner are responsible for serving the document on all other participants. Filing is considered complete by first-class mail as of the time of deposit in the mail, or by courier, express mail, or expedited delivery service upon depositing the document with the provider of the service. A presiding officer, having granted an exemption request from using E-Filing, may require a participant or party to use E-Filing if the presiding officer subsequently determines that the reason for granting the exemption from use of E-Filing no longer exists.

    Documents submitted in adjudicatory proceedings will appear in the NRC's electronic hearing docket, which is available to the public at http://ehd1.nrc.gov/ehd/, unless excluded pursuant to an order of the Commission or the presiding officer. Participants are requested not to include personal privacy information, such as social security numbers, home addresses, or home phone numbers in their filings, unless an NRC regulation or other law requires submission of such information. With respect to copyrighted works, participants are requested not to include copyrighted materials in their submission, except for limited excerpts that serve the purpose of the adjudicatory filings and would constitute a Fair Use application.

    If a person other than the licensee requests a hearing, that person shall set forth with particularity the manner in which his interest is adversely affected by this Confirmatory Order and shall address the criteria set forth in 10 CFR 2.309(d) and (f).

    If a hearing is requested by a person whose interest is adversely affected, the Commission will issue a separate Order designating the time and place of any hearings, as appropriate. If a hearing is held, the issue to be considered at such hearing shall be whether this Confirmatory Order should be sustained.

    In the absence of any request for hearing, or written approval of an extension of time in which to request a hearing, the provisions specified in Section V above shall be final 30 days after issuance of the Confirmatory Order without further order or proceedings. If an extension of time for requesting a hearing has been approved, the provisions specified in Section V shall be final when the extension expires if a hearing request has not been received.

    Dated at Lisle, Illinois this 21st day of December, 2015. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Cynthia D. Pederson Regional Administrator.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00322 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
    POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket No. CP2015-75; Order No. 2979] New Postal Product AGENCY:

    Postal Regulatory Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Commission is noticing a recent Postal Service filing concerning a modification to a Global Expedited Package Services 3 negotiated service agreement. This notice informs the public of the filing, invites public comment, and takes other administrative steps.

    DATES:

    Comments are due: January 12, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit comments electronically via the Commission's Filing Online system at http://www.prc.gov. Those who cannot submit comments electronically should contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section by telephone for advice on filing alternatives.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    David A. Trissell, General Counsel, at 202-789-6820.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Table of Contents I. Introduction II. Notice of Filings III. Ordering Paragraphs I. Introduction

    On January 4, 2016, the Postal Service filed notice that it has agreed to a modification to the existing Global Expedited Package Services 3 negotiated service agreement approved in this docket.1 In support of its Notice, the Postal Service includes a redacted copy of the modification and a certification of compliance with 39 U.S.C. 3633(a), as required by 39 CFR 3015.5.

    1 Notice of the United States Postal Service of Filing Modification to Global Expedited Package Services 3 Negotiated Service Agreement, January 4, 2016 (Notice).

    The Postal Service asserts that the modification revises a few articles and replaces Annex 1 to the agreement. Id. at 1. The Postal Service also seeks to incorporate by reference the Application for Non-Public Treatment originally filed in this docket for the protection of information that it has filed under seal. Id. at 1-2.

    II. Notice of Filings

    The Commission invites comments on whether the changes presented in the Postal Service's Notice are consistent with the policies of 39 U.S.C. 3632, 3633, or 3642, 39 CFR 3015.5, and 39 CFR part 3020, subpart B. Comments are due no later than January 12, 2016. The public portions of these filings can be accessed via the Commission's Web site (http://www.prc.gov).

    The Commission appoints Kenneth R. Moeller to represent the interests of the general public (Public Representative) in this docket.

    III. Ordering Paragraphs

    It is ordered:

    1. The Commission reopens Docket No. CP2015-75 for consideration of matters raised by the Postal Service's Notice.

    2. Pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505, the Commission appoints Kenneth R. Moeller to serve as an officer of the Commission (Public Representative) to represent the interests of the general public in this proceeding.

    3. Comments are due no later than January 12, 2016.

    4. The Secretary shall arrange for publication of this order in the Federal Register.

    By the Commission.

    Stacy L. Ruble, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00243 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7710-FW-P
    SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-76829; File No. SR-BX-2015-086] Self-Regulatory Organizations; NASDAQ OMX BX, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend the Retail Price Improvement Program January 5, 2016.

    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”),1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,2 notice is hereby given that on December 22, 2015, NASDAQ OMX BX, Inc. (“BX” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC” or “Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and III below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.

    1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).

    2 17 CFR 240.19b-4.

    I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change

    BX is proposing change to amend BX Rule 4780, which governs the Exchange's Retail Price Improvement Program (“Retail Program”), to distinguish between retail orders routed on behalf of other broker-dealers and retail orders that are routed on behalf of introduced retail accounts that are carried on a fully disclosed basis, as further described below.

    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's Web site at http://nasdaqomxbx.cchwallstreet.com, at the principal office of the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

    II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.

    A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose

    The Exchange proposes to amend BX Rule 4780, which governs the Exchange's Retail Program,3 to distinguish between orders routed on behalf of other broker-dealers and orders routed on behalf of introduced retail accounts that are carried on a fully disclosed basis, as further described below.

    3 The Exchange adopted the Retail Program as BX Rule 4780 in 2014. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 73702 (November 28, 2014), 79 FR 72049 (December 4, 2014) (SR-BX-2014-048).

    The Exchange established the Retail Program in an attempt to attract retail order flow to the Exchange, primarily by offering pricing incentives. Under the Retail Program, Retail Member Organizations 4 are permitted to submit Retail Orders,5 and receive rebates for added liquidity that are higher than the exchanges [sic] standard rebates for added liquidity.6 In addition, RMOs may optionally designate Retail Orders to be identified as Retail on the Exchange's proprietary data feeds.7

    4 A Retail Member Organization is a Member (or a division thereof) that has been approved by the Exchange under BX Rule 4780 to submit Retail Orders.

    5 A Retail Order is an agency order, or riskless principal order that satisfies the criteria of FINRA Rule 5320.03. The Retail Order must reflect trading interest of a natural person with no change made to the terms of the underlying order of the natural person with respect to price (except in the case of a market order that is changed to a marketable limit order) or side of market and that does not originate from a trading algorithm or any other computerized methodology.

    6See BX Rule 7018.

    7See BX Rule 4780(f).

    Exchange Rule 4780(b)(1) currently states that “[t]o qualify as a Retail Member Organization, a Member must conduct a retail business or handle retail orders on behalf of another broker-dealer.” 8 Rather than stating that one way to qualify as an RMO is to handle retail orders on behalf of another broker-dealer, the Exchange proposes to state that a Member may qualify as an RMO if it “routes” retail orders on behalf of another broker-dealer. The Exchange believes that providing routing services on behalf of other broker-dealers with retail order flow was the intended meaning of the provision and that the term “handle” is vague. Thus, the Exchange believes that the description would be better if it referred to routing services provided to another broker-dealer with retail customers. The Exchange also proposes to distinguish such routing services on behalf of another broker-dealer from services provided by broker-dealers that carry retail customer accounts on a fully disclosed basis, as described below.

    8 Emphasis added.

    As background with respect to the proposed change, the Exchange first would like to describe the terms “introducing broker”, “carrying firm” or “carrying broker-dealer”, and “fully disclosed,” as such terms are commonly used in the securities industry. An “introducing” broker-dealer is “one that has a contractual arrangement with another firm, known as the carrying or clearing firm, under which the carrying firm agrees to perform certain services for the introducing firm. Usually, the introducing firm submits its customer accounts and customer orders to the carrying firm, which executes the orders and carries the account. The carrying firm's duties include the proper disposition of the customer funds and securities after the trade date, the custody of customer securities and funds, and the recordkeeping associated with carrying customer accounts.” 9

    9See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 31511 (Nov. 24, 1992), 57 FR 56973 (December 2, 1992).

    Further, a “fully disclosed” introducing arrangement is “distinguished from an omnibus clearing arrangement where the clearing firm maintains one account for all the customer transactions of the introducing firm. In an omnibus relationship, the clearing firm does not know the identity of the customers of the introducing firm. In a fully disclosed clearing arrangement, the clearing firm knows the names, addresses, securities positions and other relevant data as to each customer.” 10

    10Id.

    With respect to a broker-dealer that is routing on behalf of another broker-dealer, the Exchange does not believe that the routing broker-dealer has sufficient information to assess whether orders are truly retail in nature, and thus, requires an RMO routing on behalf of other broker-dealers to maintain additional supervisory procedures and obtain annual attestations, as described below, in order to submit Retail Orders to the Exchange. In contrast, however, if a broker-dealer is carrying a customer account on a fully disclosed basis, then such carrying broker-dealer is required to perform certain diligence regarding such account that the Exchange believes is sufficient to assess whether a customer is a retail customer in order to submit orders on behalf of such a customer to the Exchange as a Retail Order. The carrying broker of an account typically handles orders from its retail customers that are “introduced” by an introducing broker. However, as noted above, in contrast to a typical routing relationship on behalf of another broker- dealer, a carrying broker does obtain a significant level of information regarding each customer introduced by the introducing broker. Accordingly, the Exchange proposes to state in BX Rule 4780(b)(1) that for purposes of BX Rule 4780, “conducting a retail business shall include carrying retail customer accounts on a fully disclosed basis.”

    BX Rule 4780(b)(6) currently states, in part, that “[i]f a Retail Member Organization represents Retail Orders from another broker-dealer customer, the Retail Member Organization's supervisory procedures must be reasonably designed to assure that the orders it receives from such broker-dealer customer that it designates as Retail Orders meet the definition of a Retail Order.” This includes obtaining attestations from the other broker-dealers for whom the RMO routes. In addition to the proposed changes to BX Rule 4780(b)(1) described above, the Exchange proposes to modify the language of BX Rule 4780(b)(6) to again distinguish between an RMO that conducts a retail business because it carries accounts on a fully disclosed basis from an RMO that routes orders on behalf of another broker-dealer. As proposed, the additional attestation requirements of BX Rule 4780(b)(6) would apply to an RMO that does not itself conduct a retail business but routes Retail Orders on behalf of other broker-dealers. In turn, such attestation requirements would not apply to an RMO that carries retail customer accounts on a fully disclosed basis. In connection with this change, the Exchange is proposing various edits to the existing rule text so that the reference is consistently to “other broker-dealers” rather than “broker-dealer customers.”

    The Exchange believes that allowing an RMO that carries retail customer accounts on a fully disclosed basis to submit Retail Orders to the Exchange without obtaining attestations from broker-dealers that might introduce such accounts will encourage participation in the Retail Program. As noted above, the Exchange believes that the carrying broker has sufficient information to itself confirm that orders are Retail Orders without such attestations. The Exchange still believes it is necessary to require the attestation by broker-dealers that route Retail Orders on behalf of other broker- dealers, because, in contrast, such broker-dealers typically do not have a relationship with the retail customer and would not be in position to confirm that such customers are in fact retail customers.

    2. Statutory Basis

    BX believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the provisions of Section 6 of the Act,11 in general, and with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,12 in particular, in that the proposal is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, and to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system.

    11 15 U.S.C. 78f.

    12 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).

    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices because it highlights the parties for whom additional procedures are required because they do not maintain relationships with the end customer (i.e., routing brokers) and still requires the RMO to follow such procedures to ensure that such orders qualify as Retail Orders. As proposed, however, an RMO would not be required to follow such procedures, including obtaining annual attestations, to the extent such RMO actually knows the end customer and carries the account of such customer and thus can itself confirm that the orders qualify as Retail Orders.

    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change will remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system because it will allow RMOs that carry retail customer accounts to participate in the Program without imposing additional attestation requirements that the Exchange did not initially intend to impose upon them. By removing impediments to participation in the Program, the proposed change would permit expanded access of retail customers to the Program.

    B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    BX does not believe that the proposed rule change will result in any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act, as amended. The Exchange believes that the amendment, by increasing the level of participation in the Program, will increase the level of competition around retail executions. The Exchange believes that the transparency and competitiveness of operating a program such as the Program on an exchange market would result in better prices for retail investors and benefits retail investors by expanding the capabilities of Exchanges to encompass practices currently allowed on non-exchange venues.

    C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others

    No written comments were either solicited or received.

    III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action

    The Exchange has filed the proposed rule change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) 13 of the Act and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.14 Because the proposed rule change does not (i) significantly affect the protection of investors or the public interest, (ii) impose any significant burden on competition, and (iii) become operative for 30 days after its filing date, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate if consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest, the proposed rule change has become effective pursuant to 19(b)(3)(A) 15 of the Act and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.16

    13 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).

    14 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).

    15 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).

    16 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is: (i) Necessary or appropriate in the public interest; (ii) for the protection of investors; or (iii) otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.

    IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:

    Electronic Comments

    • Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or

    • Send an email to [email protected]. Please include File Number SR-BX-2015-086 on the subject line.

    Paper Comments

    • Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090.

    All submissions should refer to File Number SR-BX-2015-086. This file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549 on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-BX-2015-086, and should be submitted on or before February 1, 2016.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.17

    17 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    Robert W. Errett, Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-00253 Filed 1-8-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
    SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-76833; File No. SR-NASDAQ-2015-159] Self-Regulatory Organizations; The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change To Implement Additional Price Protections in the Opening Process January 5, 2016.

    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”),1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,2 notice is hereby given that on December 23, 2015, The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC (“Nasdaq” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC” or “Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II, below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.

    1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).

    2 17 CFR 240.19b-4.

    I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of the Substance of the Proposed Rule Change

    The Exchange proposes to add new paragraph (F) to Rule 4752(d)(2), concerning the opening process.

    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's Web site at http://nasdaq.cchwallstreet.com, at the principal office of the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

    II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.

    A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose

    The purpose of this filing is to enhance the price protections provided by Rule 4752(d) in the operation of Nasdaq Opening Cross, Nasdaq's process for opening the market for trading System securities.

    Background

    Rule 4752 concerns Nasdaq's opening process and paragraph (d) of the rule sets forth the processing of the Opening Cross. Specifically, the rule provides that the Opening Cross is initiated at 9:30 a.m. ET, at which time the System attempts to open a security at the price that maximizes the number of shares of MOO,3 LOO,4 OIO,5 Early Market Hours orders,6 and executable quotes and orders to be executed in the Nasdaq Market Center.7 If the System determines that more than one price exists that would maximize such quotes and orders to be executed, the Opening Cross will occur at the price that minimizes any Imbalance.8 If the System determines that more than one price exists that would minimize an Imbalance, the Opening Cross will occur at the entered price at which shares will remain unexecuted in the cross.9 If the System determines that more than one price exists whereby shares will remain unexecuted in the cross, the Opening Cross will occur at the price that minimizes the distance from the bid-ask midpoint of the inside quotation prevailing at 9:30 a.m.10

    3 A “Market On Open” or “MOO” order is an Order Type entered without a price that may be executed only during the Nasdaq Opening Cross. Generally, MOO Orders may be entered, cancelled, and/or modified between 4 a.m. ET and immediately prior to 9:28 a.m. ET. An MOO Order may not be cancelled or modified at or after 9:28 a.m. ET. An MOO Order shall execute only at the price determined by the Nasdaq Opening Cross. See Rule 4702(b)(8).

    4 A “Limit On Open Order” or “LOO Order” is an Order Type entered with a price that may be executed only in the Nasdaq Opening Cross, and only if the price determined by the Nasdaq Opening Cross is equal to or better than the price at which the LOO Order was entered. Subject to the qualifications provided below [sic], LOO Orders may be entered, cancelled, and/or modified between 4 a.m. ET and immediately prior to 9:28 a.m. ET. See Rule 4702(b)(9).

    5 An “Opening Imbalance Only Order” or “OIO Order” is an Order Type entered with a price that may be executed only in the Nasdaq Opening Cross and only against MOO Orders, LOO Orders, or Early Market Hours Orders (as defined in Rule 4752). OIO Orders may be entered between 4:00 a.m. ET until the time of execution of the Nasdaq Opening Cross, but may not be cancelled or modified at or after 9:28 a.m. ET. If the entered price of an OIO Order to buy (sell) is higher than (lower than) the highest bid (lowest offer) on the Nasdaq Book, the price of the OIO Order will be modified repeatedly to equal the highest bid (lowest offer) on the Nasdaq Book; provided, however, that the price of the Order will not be moved beyond its stated limit price. See Rule 4702(b)(10).

    6 An Early Market Hours Order is a Market Hours Order that is entered into the system prior to 9:28 a.m. and which is treated as an Opening Imbalance Only order [sic], as appropriate, for the purposes of the Nasdaq Opening Cross. A Market Hours Order is any order that may be entered into the system and designated with a time-in-force of MIOC, MDAY, MGTC. See Rule 4752(a)(7). See also Rules 4703(a) for a discussion of the Time in Force Order attribute, including MIOC, MDAY, and MGTC.

    7See Rule 4752(d)(2)(A).

    8See Rule 4752(d)(2)(B).

    9See Rule 4752(d)(2)(C).

    10See Rule 4752(d)(2)(D).

    When the Opening Cross price is calculated, Nasdaq applies a boundary within which the cross must execute to ensure that the price derived does not exceed a price reasonably tied to the prevailing market at the time. Specifically, Nasdaq applies a percentage based threshold (“Threshold Percentage”) to a benchmark (“Benchmark Value”) that, when applied to an individual security, determines the price range that a security may cross (“Threshold Range”), outside of which the opening price of a security may not occur.11 If an Opening Cross price of a security would otherwise be outside of the Threshold Range, Nasdaq will adjust the Opening Cross price of the security to a price within the Threshold Range that best satisfies the normal process for determining the Opening Cross price.12 This change happens automatically prior to execution of the Opening Cross, and does not involve any human intervention. All unexecuted shares designated to expire upon the conclusion of the Opening Cross,13 including those that fall outside of the Threshold Range, are cancelled.

    11See Rule 4752(d)(2)(E).

    12See Rules 4752(d)(2)(A)-(D).

    13 These are: MOO, LOO, OIO, and Early Market Hours Orders designated to participate in the Opening Cross. Prior to the Opening Cross, the Exchange maintains a continuous order book and an Opening Cross order book. Orders in the Opening Cross order book may execute only in the Opening Cross process, while Orders in the continuous book may execute during pre-market hours trading, in the Opening Cross, or in regular market hours trading if the Order has a time-in-force that will allow it to remain active.

    The Threshold Percentage and Benchmark Value are set by Nasdaq officials in advance and communicated to Participants.14 Nasdaq may adjust the Threshold Percentage based on Nasdaq's experience with the Opening Cross and on unusual market conditions, such as certain options and derivatives expiration days that are heavily affected by the opening price of Nasdaq securities. Nasdaq publishes the Benchmark Value and Threshold Percentages via its public NasdaqTrader Web site, and sets the Threshold Percentage so that repricing of a security is rare.15 Currently, Nasdaq applies a Threshold Percentage of 10%, which is applied to the Nasdaq Best Bid and Offer (“QBBO”) midpoint and is added to the Nasdaq Offer and subtracted from the Nasdaq Bid to establish the threshold price range. For example, if the QBBO is $10.00 × $11.00, then the midpoint equals 10.50 and the Threshold Percentage is 10%, resulting in a threshold value of $1.05 (10% of $10.50 = $1.05). This value is then added to the offer and subtracted from the bid to obtain the cross's threshold range. In this example, it would result in a lower threshold of $8.95 ($10.00 − $1.05 = $8.95) and an upper threshold of $12.05 ($11.00 + $1.05 = $12.05), thus creating a range of $8.95 to $12.05, within which the cross can occur. This means $8.95 is the lowest price at which the cross can occur and $12.05 is the highest price at which it can occur. The threshold range is dynamic; as the QBBO changes, the threshold price range changes.

    14 As defined by Rule 4701(c).

    15See http://www.nasdaqtrader.com/content/ProductsServices/Trading/Crosses/openclose_faqs.pdf.

    The current price adjustment process under Rule 4752(d)(2)(E) is effective at ensuring the opening price of a security is within a certain range of the QBBO immediately prior to the initiation of the cross in the security; however, the current process does not prevent a cross from occurring at an erroneous price caused by an order or quote entered into the continuous pre-market trading book by a Participant in error that significantly skews the Opening Cross price of a security. This scenario could cause the QBBO to be excessively wide, with one side of the bid/offer significantly distant from the normal range and not representative of the true interest in the security. Nonetheless, the price adjustment process under Rule 4752(d)(2)(E) would allow the Opening Cross price to be set at an erroneous level because it would set the Benchmark Value at the midpoint between the erroneously-priced side of the market and the non-erroneously priced contra side. To illustrate, assume an extreme example as follows: if a security has a bid of $10 set by an Order to buy 100 shares at $10 in pre-market trading with no offer interest until 9:29 a.m., when a Participant erroneously enters an Order to sell 100 shares at $1100, under the current opening process the Benchmark Value of that security would be the midpoint price of $555, which would create a threshold range of $0.0001 by $1155.50.16 Under such extreme circumstances a mispriced open could occur, in which case the parties to an erroneous execution would have to avail themselves of the clearly erroneous trade nullification process of Rule 11890.17

    16 The Exchange will not allow the lower threshold to be a negative amount and will set the lower range value to the lowest value possible, which is $0.0001.

    17 The terms of a transaction executed on Nasdaq are “clearly erroneous” when there is an obvious error in any term, such as price, number of shares or other unit of trading, or identification of the security. A transaction made in clearly erroneous error and cancelled by both parties or determined by Nasdaq to be clearly erroneous will be removed from the consolidated tape. See Rule 11890(a)(1).

    New Protection

    Nasdaq is proposing an additional price protection process designed to avoid mispriced Opening Crosses and the use of the clearly erroneous post-trade nullification process. Once a security has an Opening Cross price set based on the process under Rule 4752(d)(2)(A)-(E), Nasdaq will require the security to pass at least one of three new “tests” in order for the Opening Cross to occur. If a security does not pass any of the three tests no Opening Cross will occur in that security, all Orders in the Opening Cross 18 will be cancelled back to the Participants, and regular market hours trading will begin.

    18See note 13 above. Orders entered in the continuous book eligible to trade in the pre-market session prior to the opening of the security would not be cancelled but would rather continue to rest on the continuous book for potential participation in regular market hours trading.

    The three new tests compare the Opening Cross price as calculated under the current rule to a reference price to ensure that the Opening Cross price is reasonably related to the market and not the product of erroneous Order entry. The reference price range is calculated under each test by applying a threshold set by Nasdaq officials in advance and communicated to Participants (“Price Test Thresholds”). The Price Test Thresholds, like the current Threshold Percentage, will be published via Nasdaq's public NasdaqTrader Web site. Nasdaq may apply different Price Test Thresholds to each of the Opening Cross Price Tests. The Price Test Threshold is applied to different measures under each of the new tests to calculate the range within which the Opening Cross price must fall to pass the test (“Price Test Threshold Range”). Nasdaq is initially setting each of the Price Test Thresholds uniformly at the greater of $0.50 or 10%; however, Nasdaq may adjust the Price Test Thresholds independently of one another.

    Opening Cross Price Test A requires the Opening Cross price of a Nasdaq listed security, other than newly-listed Exchange Traded Products (“ETPs”), to be within a Price Test Threshold Range established by adding and subtracting the Price Test Threshold from the security's prior day Nasdaq Official Closing Price (“NOCP”). Non-Nasdaq listed securities must have an Opening Cross price within a Price Test Threshold Range established by adding and subtracting the Price Test Threshold from the security's prior day consolidated closing price. Unlike newly-listed company stocks that begin trading at some point after the stock market has opened, newly-listed ETPs usually begin trading in the premarket session prior to regular market hours trading on the security's initial day of trading and do not have a prior day's consolidated closing price. For such securities, the Price Test Threshold Range is established by adding and subtracting the Price Test Threshold from the offering price. If the Nasdaq Opening Cross price is higher or lower than the Price Test Threshold Range established under this test, or if a non-ETP Nasdaq listed security does not have a previous day's closing price,19 the security fails the test and Opening Cross Price Test B is performed.

    19 For example, a security may not have a NOCP due to a unit separation.

    Opening Cross Price Test B requires the Opening Cross price of a security to be within a Price Test Threshold Range established by adding and subtracting the Price Test Threshold from the security's Nasdaq last sale (either round or odd lot) occurring after 9:15 a.m. ET but prior to the Opening Cross. If the Opening Cross price is higher or lower than the Price Test Threshold Range established under this test, or if there is no Nasdaq last sale,20 the security fails the test and Opening Cross Price Test C is performed.

    20 A security may not have a Nasdaq last sale because there was no trading in the security during the premarket session.

    Opening Cross Price Test C requires the Opening Cross price to fall within the Price Test Threshold Range established by adding and subtracting the Price Test Threshold from the Nasdaq best bid (for Opening Cross prices that would be higher