Federal Register Vol. 81, No.62,

Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 62 (March 31, 2016)

Page Range18447-18737
FR Document

81_FR_62
Current View
Page and SubjectPDF
81 FR 18456 - Single Family Housing Guaranteed Loan ProgramPDF
81 FR 18649 - Manufacturer of Controlled Substances Registration: Halo Pharmaceutical, Inc.PDF
81 FR 18447 - Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC): Implementation of Electronic Benefit Transfer-Related ProvisionsPDF
81 FR 18735 - Continuation of the National Emergency With Respect to Significant Malicious Cyber-Enabled ActivitiesPDF
81 FR 18651 - Sunshine Act Meeting NoticePDF
81 FR 18657 - Notice of Submission for Approval: Information Collection 3206-0150; Fingerprint Chart Standard Form 87, SF 87PDF
81 FR 18473 - Changes in Certain Multifamily Mortgage Insurance Premiums and Regulatory Waiver for the 542(c) Risk-Sharing ProgramPDF
81 FR 18471 - Removal of Class A Airspace Area ExclusionPDF
81 FR 18647 - Government in the Sunshine Act Meeting NoticePDF
81 FR 18681 - Finger Lakes Railway Corp.-Acquisition and Operation Exemption-Cayuga County Industrial Development Agency, Onondaga County Industrial Development Agency, Ontario County Industrial Development Agency, Schuyler County Industrial Development Agency, and Yates County Industrial Development AgencyPDF
81 FR 18573 - Approval of Subzone Status, FTZ Networks, Inc., Olive Branch, MSPDF
81 FR 18572 - Foreign-Trade Zone (FTZ) 87-Lake Charles, Louisiana; Notification of Proposed Production Activity; Sasol Chemicals (USA), LLC, Subzone 87E, (Assembly of Ethylene Distillation/Rectification Plant and Ethane Cracker/Reaction Unit; Production of Polyethylene) Westlake and Sulphur, LouisianaPDF
81 FR 18573 - Truck and Bus Tires From the People's Republic of China: Postponement of Preliminary Determination in the Countervailing Duty InvestigationPDF
81 FR 18679 - Interest RatesPDF
81 FR 18679 - Annual Meeting of the Regional Small Business Regulatory Fairness Boards Office of the National OmbudsmanPDF
81 FR 18680 - 30-Day Notice of Proposed Information Collection: Application for Employment as a Locally Employed Staff or Family MemberPDF
81 FR 18526 - Pendimethalin; Tolerance Exemptions; Technical CorrectionPDF
81 FR 18566 - Announcement of Grant and Loan Application DeadlinesPDF
81 FR 18494 - Anchorage Regulations; Port of New YorkPDF
81 FR 18649 - In the Matter of Pacific Gas & Electric Company (Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1 and 2); Notice of Appointment of Adjudicatory EmployeePDF
81 FR 18652 - Duke Energy Florida, Inc. Crystal River, Unit 3PDF
81 FR 18571 - Submission for OMB Review; Comment RequestPDF
81 FR 18692 - Submission for OMB Review; Comment RequestPDF
81 FR 18694 - Submission for OMB Review; Comment RequestPDF
81 FR 18541 - Atlantic Highly Migratory Species; Commercial Aggregated Large Coastal Shark and Hammerhead Shark Management Group Retention Limit AdjustmentPDF
81 FR 18682 - Cayuga County Industrial Development Agency, Onondaga County Industrial Development Agency, Ontario County Industrial Development Agency, Schuyler County Industrial Development Agency, and Yates County Industrial Development Agency-Acquisition Exemption-Finger Lakes Railway Corp.PDF
81 FR 18541 - Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico, and South Atlantic; Snapper-Grouper Resources of the South Atlantic; 2016-2017 Recreational Fishing Season for Black Sea BassPDF
81 FR 18564 - Notice of Request for Revision to and Extension of Approval of an Information Collection; APHIS Pest Reporting and Asian Longhorn Beetle ProgramPDF
81 FR 18681 - CSX Transportation, Inc.-Discontinuance of Service Exemption-in Perry County, KY.PDF
81 FR 18624 - Jim Woodruff ProjectPDF
81 FR 18607 - Notice of Extension of Rate SchedulesPDF
81 FR 18656 - Proposed Submission of Information Collection for OMB Review; Comment Request; Filings for ReconsiderationPDF
81 FR 18600 - Notice of Intent To Prepare a Draft Integrated Feasibility Report Including Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report (Integrated Feasibility Report) for the East San Pedro Bay Ecosystem Restoration Feasibility Study, Los Angeles County, CAPDF
81 FR 18601 - Intent To Prepare a Draft Environmental Impact Statement for The Coastal Texas Protection and Restoration Feasibility StudyPDF
81 FR 18602 - Record of Decision in re Application of Clean Line Energy Partners LLCPDF
81 FR 18608 - Notice of Application From Green Electronics for a Small Business Exemption Regarding Certain Products From the Department of Energy's External Power Supply Energy Conservation StandardsPDF
81 FR 18628 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comment RequestPDF
81 FR 18626 - Change in Bank Control Notices; Acquisitions of Shares of a Bank or Bank Holding CompanyPDF
81 FR 18627 - Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Holding CompaniesPDF
81 FR 18627 - Notice of Proposals To Engage in or To Acquire Companies Engaged in Permissible Nonbanking ActivitiesPDF
81 FR 18643 - Announcement of Requirements and Registration for a Prize Competition Seeking: Detecting the Movement of Soils (Internal Erosion) Within Earthen Dams, Canals, Levees, and their FoundationsPDF
81 FR 18646 - Announcement of Requirements and Registration for a Prize Competition Seeking Downstream Fish Passage at Tall DamsPDF
81 FR 18643 - Notice of Wild Horse and Burro Advisory Board Meeting; CorrectionPDF
81 FR 18643 - Call for Nominations and Comments for the 2016 National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska Oil and Gas Lease SalePDF
81 FR 18565 - Siskiyou County Resource Advisory CommitteePDF
81 FR 18565 - Pike-San Isabel Resource Advisory CommitteePDF
81 FR 18694 - Multiemployer Pension Plan Application To Reduce BenefitsPDF
81 FR 18693 - Proposed Collection; Comment RequestPDF
81 FR 18598 - 36(b)(1) Arms Sales NotificationPDF
81 FR 18683 - Proposed Agency Information Collection Activities; Comment RequestPDF
81 FR 18636 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Application To Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status, Form I-485, and Adjustment of Status Under Section 245(i), Supplement A to Form I-485; Revision of a Currently Approved CollectionPDF
81 FR 18695 - Rules of Practice and ProcedurePDF
81 FR 18559 - Fishery of the Northeastern United States; Bluefish Fishery; 2016-2018 Bluefish SpecificationsPDF
81 FR 18615 - Grande Prairie Wind, LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 AuthorizationPDF
81 FR 18621 - Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC; Maritimes & Northeast Pipeline, LLC; Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review of the Atlantic Bridge ProjectPDF
81 FR 18612 - Golden Pass Products, LLC and Golden Pass Pipeline, LLC; Notice of Availability of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Proposed Golden Pass LNG Export ProjectPDF
81 FR 18612 - Combined Notice of Filings #1PDF
81 FR 18558 - Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act; Seafood Import Monitoring ProgramPDF
81 FR 18618 - Combined Notice of FilingsPDF
81 FR 18634 - Cessation of National Customs Automation Program (NCAP) Test Concerning the Submission of Certain Data Required by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Using the Partner Government Agency (PGA) Message Set Through the Automated Commercial Environment (ACE)PDF
81 FR 18618 - Parrey, LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 AuthorizationPDF
81 FR 18617 - Breadbasket LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 AuthorizationPDF
81 FR 18611 - Jericho Rise Wind Farm LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 AuthorizationPDF
81 FR 18621 - Tenaska Energia de Mexico, S. de R. L. de C.V. ; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 AuthorizationPDF
81 FR 18617 - DifWind Farms Limited V; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 AuthorizationPDF
81 FR 18610 - DifWind Farms Limited II; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 AuthorizationPDF
81 FR 18615 - DifWind Farms Limited I; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 AuthorizationPDF
81 FR 18616 - Eugene Water & Electric Board, Smith Creek Hydro, LLC; Notice of Application for Transfer of License and Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene, and ProtestsPDF
81 FR 18614 - TransCanada Hydro Northeast, Inc.; Notice of Application Accepted for Filing, Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene, and ProtestsPDF
81 FR 18610 - MMP SCO, LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 AuthorizationPDF
81 FR 18614 - VPI Enterprises, Inc.; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 AuthorizationPDF
81 FR 18616 - Calpine Corporation, Dynegy Inc., Eastern Generation, LLC, Homer City Generation, L.P., NRG Power Marketing LLC, GenOn Energy Management, LLC, Carroll County Energy LLC, C.P. Crane LLC, Essential Power, LLC, Essential Power OPP, LLC, Essential Power Rock Springs, LLC, Lakewood Cogeneration, L.P., GDF SUEZ Energy Marketing NA, Inc., Oregon Clean Energy, LLC and Panda Power Generation Infrastructure Fund, LLC v. PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.; Notice of ComplaintPDF
81 FR 18619 - NextEra Energy Power Marketing, LLC and Northeast Energy Associates, a Limited Partnership v. ISO New England Inc.; Notice of Amendment to the ComplaintPDF
81 FR 18615 - Talen Energy Marketing, LLC; Notice of Institution of Section 206 Proceeding and Refund Effective DatePDF
81 FR 18623 - Atlantic Coast Pipeline, LLC; Notice of Amendment to ApplicationPDF
81 FR 18609 - Combined Notice of Filings #1PDF
81 FR 18622 - Combined Notice of Filings #1PDF
81 FR 18618 - Combined Notice of Filings #1PDF
81 FR 18622 - Saddlehorn Pipeline Company, LLC; Notice of Petition for Declaratory OrderPDF
81 FR 18620 - Records Governing Off-the-Record Communications; Public NoticePDF
81 FR 18611 - Energy Resources USA Inc.; Notice of Preliminary Permit Application Accepted for Filing and Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene, and Competing ApplicationsPDF
81 FR 18622 - Notice of Technical ConferencePDF
81 FR 18460 - Airworthiness Directives; Honeywell International Inc. (Type Certificate Previously Held by AlliedSignal Inc., Garrett Turbine Engine Company) Turbofan EnginesPDF
81 FR 18461 - Airworthiness Directives; Weatherly Aircraft Company AirplanesPDF
81 FR 18639 - Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Draft Recovery Plan for the Gulf of Maine Distinct Population Segment of Atlantic SalmonPDF
81 FR 18630 - Proposed Data Collection Submitted for Public Comment and RecommendationsPDF
81 FR 18631 - Agency Forms Undergoing Paperwork Reduction Act ReviewPDF
81 FR 18632 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Submission for OMB Review; Comment RequestPDF
81 FR 18684 - Community Volunteer Income Tax Assistance (VITA) Matching Grant Program-Availability of Application for Federal Financial AssistancePDF
81 FR 18685 - Tax Counseling for the Elderly (TCE) Program Availability of Application PackagesPDF
81 FR 18686 - Proposed Collection; Comment Request For Regulation ProjectPDF
81 FR 18692 - Proposed Information Collection; Comment RequestPDF
81 FR 18687 - Proposed Collection; Comment Request for the Annual Return/Report of Employee Benefit PlanPDF
81 FR 18686 - Proposed Collection; Comment Request for Revenue Procedure 2014-49PDF
81 FR 18685 - Proposed Collection; Comment Request for Schedule H (Form 1040)PDF
81 FR 18691 - Proposed Collection; Comment Request for Information Collection ToolsPDF
81 FR 18684 - Proposed Collection; Comment Request for Regulation ProjectPDF
81 FR 18651 - Information Collection: “Specific Domestic Licenses To Manufacture or Transfer Certain Items Containing Byproduct Material”PDF
81 FR 18650 - Information Collection: NRC Form 277, Request for VisitPDF
81 FR 18480 - Imposition of Special Measure Against FBME Bank Ltd., Formerly Known as the Federal Bank of the Middle East Ltd., as a Financial Institution of Primary Money Laundering ConcernPDF
81 FR 18673 - Notice of Applications for Deregistration Under Section 8(f) of the Investment Company Act of 1940PDF
81 FR 18597 - United States Global Change Research ProgramPDF
81 FR 18658 - Product Change-Priority Mail and First-Class Package Service Negotiated Service AgreementPDF
81 FR 18658 - Product Change-First-Class Package Service Negotiated Service AgreementPDF
81 FR 18660 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; BATS Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Designation of a Longer Period for Commission Action on a Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment No. 2, to List and Trade Shares of the SPDR DoubleLine Short Duration Total Return Tactical ETFPDF
81 FR 18668 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated; Notice of Filing of Amendment No. 1 and Order Granting Accelerated Approval of a Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment No. 1, To Amend Interpretation and Policy .01 to Rule 1.1(ggg) Relating to the Professional Customer DefinitionPDF
81 FR 18665 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; NASDAQ PHLX LLC; Notice of Filing of Amendment No. 1 and Order Granting Accelerated Approval of a Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment No. 1, Relating to the Professional Customer DefinitionPDF
81 FR 18658 - Product Change-Priority Mail Negotiated Service AgreementPDF
81 FR 18657 - Product Change-Priority Mail Negotiated Service AgreementPDF
81 FR 18527 - Hazardous Materials: Reverse Logistics (RRR)PDF
81 FR 18664 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; NASDAQ PHLX LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Delete Rule 756PDF
81 FR 18671 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; NASDAQ PHLX LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend the Exchange's Continuing Education Fee SchedulePDF
81 FR 18658 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC; Order Approving Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment No. 1 Thereto, To Amend Rule 4120PDF
81 FR 18662 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; ICE Clear Credit LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Extend Single Name Backloading Incentive ProgramPDF
81 FR 18660 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; ICE Clear Europe Limited; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change Relating to Equity Futures and OptionsPDF
81 FR 18674 - AMCAP Fund, et al.; Notice of ApplicationPDF
81 FR 18574 - Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to Boost-Backs and Landings of Rockets at Vandenberg Air Force BasePDF
81 FR 18635 - Technical Mapping Advisory CouncilPDF
81 FR 18566 - Hood and Willamette Resource Advisory CommitteePDF
81 FR 18642 - Renewal of Agency Information Collection for Water Delivery and Electric Service Data for the Operation of Irrigation and Power Projects and SystemsPDF
81 FR 18625 - Announcement on the Availability of the IRIS Program General Comments Docket; Announcement of the IRIS Program Public Science Meetings for Calendar Year 2016PDF
81 FR 18447 - Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program: Nutrition Education and Obesity Prevention Grant ProgramPDF
81 FR 18626 - Notice of Agreements FiledPDF
81 FR 18648 - Certain Nanopores and Products Containing the Same: Institution of InvestigationPDF
81 FR 18497 - Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Washington; Update to Materials Incorporated by ReferencePDF
81 FR 18629 - Record of Decision for the Federal Bureau of Investigation Central Records Complex in Winchester County, VirginiaPDF
81 FR 18637 - Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge; Barnstable County, MA; Record of Decision for Final Environmental Impact StatementPDF
81 FR 18598 - Notice of MeetingPDF
81 FR 18464 - Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company AirplanesPDF
81 FR 18456 - Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company AirplanesPDF
81 FR 18469 - Airworthiness Directives; BAE Systems (Operations) Limited AirplanesPDF
81 FR 18649 - In the Matter of All Operating Reactor LicenseesPDF
81 FR 18467 - Airworthiness Directives; Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation (Sikorsky) HelicoptersPDF
81 FR 18544 - Excise Tax; Tractors, Trailers, Trucks, and Tires; Definition of Highway VehiclePDF
81 FR 18701 - Tonnage Regulations AmendmentsPDF

Issue

81 62 Thursday, March 31, 2016 Contents Agriculture Agriculture Department See

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

See

Food and Nutrition Service

See

Forest Service

See

Rural Housing Service

See

Rural Utilities Service

Animal Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 18564-18565 2016-07291 Census Bureau Census Bureau NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 18571-18572 2016-07298 Centers Disease Centers for Disease Control and Prevention NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 18630-18632 2016-07225 2016-07226 Coast Guard Coast Guard RULES Anchorage Regulations; Port of New York, 18494-18496 2016-07307 Tonnage Regulations Amendments, 18702-18734 2016-05623 Commerce Commerce Department See

Census Bureau

See

Foreign-Trade Zones Board

See

International Trade Administration

See

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

Commission Fine Commission of Fine Arts NOTICES Meetings: Commission of Fine Arts, 18598 2016-07114 Defense Department Defense Department See

Engineers Corps

NOTICES Arms Sales, 18598-18600 2016-07267
Drug Drug Enforcement Administration NOTICES Manufacturers of Controlled Substances; Registrations: Halo Pharmaceutical, Inc., 18649 C1--2016--06532 Energy Department Energy Department See

Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Office

See

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

See

Southeastern Power Administration

NOTICES Extension of Rate Schedules, 18607-18608 2016-07288 Record of Decisions: Application of Clean Line Energy Partners LLC, 18602-18607 2016-07282
Energy Efficiency Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Office NOTICES Applications: Green Electronics; Small Business Exemption Regarding Certain Products from the Department of Energy's External Power Supply Energy Conservation Standards, 18608-18609 2016-07281 Engineers Engineers Corps NOTICES Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc.: Coastal Texas Protection and Restoration Feasibility Study, 18601-18602 2016-07283 East San Pedro Bay Ecosystem Restoration Feasibility Study, Los Angeles County, CA, 18600-18601 2016-07284 Environmental Protection Environmental Protection Agency RULES Air Quality Implementation Plans; Approvals and Promulgations: Washington, 18497-18526 2016-07175 Tolerance Exemptions: Pendimethalin; Technical Correction, 18526 2016-07310 NOTICES IRIS Program General Comments Docket and Public Science Meetings, 18625-18626 2016-07181 Federal Aviation Federal Aviation Administration RULES Airworthiness Directives: BAE Systems (Operations) Limited Airplanes, 18469-18471 2016-07020 Honeywell International Inc. (Type Certificate previously held by AlliedSignal Inc., Garrett Turbine Engine Company) Turbofan Engines, 18460-18461 2016-07231 Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation (Sikorsky) Helicopters, 18467-18468 2016-06906 The Boeing Company Airplanes, 18456-18460, 18464-18467 2016-07024 2016-07025 Weatherly Aircraft Company Airplanes, 18461-18464 2016-07228 Removal of Class A Airspace Area Exclusion, 18471-18473 2016-07397 Federal Emergency Federal Emergency Management Agency NOTICES Requests for Nominations: Technical Mapping Advisory Council, 18635-18636 2016-07189 Federal Energy Federal Energy Regulatory Commission NOTICES Application Amendments: Atlantic Coast Pipeline, LLC, 18623-18624 2016-07239 Applications: Eugene Water & Electric Board, Smith Creek Hydro, LLC, 18616 2016-07246 TransCanada Hydro Northeast, Inc., 18614 2016-07245 Combined Filings, 18609-18610, 18612, 18618-18619, 18622-18623 2016-07236 2016-07237 2016-07238 2016-07256 2016-07259 Complaint Amendments: NextEra Energy Power Marketing, LLC and Northeast Energy Associates, LP v. ISO New England Inc., 18619-18620 2016-07241 Complaints: Calpine Corporation, Dynegy Inc., Eastern Generation, LLC, Homer City Generation, L.P., NRG Power Marketing LLC,, 18616-18617 2016-07242 Environmental Assessments; Availability, etc.: Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC; Maritimes & Northeast Pipeline, LLC; Atlantic Bridge Project, 18621-18622 2016-07261 Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc.: Golden Pass Products, LLC and Golden Pass Pipeline, LLC, 18612-18614 2016-07260 Initial Market-Based Rate Filings Including Requests for Blanket Section 204 Authorizations: Breadbasket LLC, 18617-18618 2016-07252 DifWind Farms Limited I, 18615 2016-07247 DifWind Farms Limited II, 18610-18611 2016-07248 DifWind Farms Limited V, 18617 2016-07249 Grande Prairie Wind, LLC, 18615-18616 2016-07262 Jericho Rise Wind Farm LLC, 18611 2016-07251 MMP SCO, LLC, 18610 2016-07244 Parrey, LLC, 18618 2016-07253 Tenaska Energia de Mexico, S. de R. L. de C.V., 18621 2016-07250 VPI Enterprises, Inc., 18614-18615 2016-07243 Meetings: FFP Missouri 12, LLC, etc., 18622 2016-07232 Orders: Talen Energy Marketing, LLC, 18615 2016-07240 Petitions for Declaratory Orders: Saddlehorn Pipeline Co., LLC, 18622 2016-07235 Preliminary Permit Applications: Energy Resources USA Inc., 18611-18612 2016-07233 Records Governing Off-the-Record Communications, 18620-18621 2016-07234 Federal Maritime Federal Maritime Commission NOTICES Agreements Filed, 18626 2016-07177 Federal Railroad Federal Railroad Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 18683-18684 2016-07266 Federal Reserve Federal Reserve System NOTICES Change in Bank Control Notices; Acquisitions of Shares of a Bank or Bank Holding Company, 18626-18627 2016-07278 Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Holding Companies, 18627 2016-07277 Proposals to Engage in or to Acquire Companies Engaged in Permissible Nonbanking Activities, 18627 2016-07276 Federal Trade Federal Trade Commission NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 18628-18629 2016-07280 Financial Crimes Financial Crimes Enforcement Network RULES Imposition of Special Measures: FBME Bank Ltd., formerly known as the Federal Bank of the Middle East Ltd.; Financial Institution of Primary Money Laundering Concern, 18480-18494 2016-07210 Fish Fish and Wildlife Service NOTICES Endangered and Threatened Species: Draft Recovery Plan for the Gulf of Maine Distinct Population Segment of Atlantic Salmon, 18639-18642 2016-07227 Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc.: Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge, Barnstable County, MA, 18637-18639 2016-07158 Food and Nutrition Food and Nutrition Service RULES Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children: Electronic Benefit Transfer, 18447 C1--2016--04261 Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program: Nutrition Education and Obesity Prevention Grant Program, 18447-18456 2016-07179 Foreign Trade Foreign-Trade Zones Board NOTICES Approval of Subzone Status: FTZ Networks, Inc.; Olive Branch, MS, 18573 2016-07317 Proposed Production Activities: Sasol Chemicals (USA); LLC Subzone 87E; Westlake and Sulphur, LA, 18572-18573 2016-07315 Forest Forest Service NOTICES Meetings: Hood and Willamette Resource Advisory Committee, 18566 2016-07188 Pike-San Isabel Resource Advisory Committee, 18565 2016-07270 Siskiyou County Resource Advisory Committee, 18565-18566 2016-07271 General Services General Services Administration NOTICES Record of Decisions: Federal Bureau of Investigation Central Records Complex in Winchester County, VA, 18629-18630 2016-07161 Health and Human Health and Human Services Department See

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

See

Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration

Homeland Homeland Security Department See

Coast Guard

See

Federal Emergency Management Agency

See

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services

See

U.S. Customs and Border Protection

Housing Housing and Urban Development Department RULES Changes in Certain Multifamily Mortgage Insurance Premiums and Regulatory Waiver for the 542(c) Risk-Sharing Program, 18473-18480 2016-07405 Indian Affairs Indian Affairs Bureau NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Water Delivery and Electric Service Data for the Operation of Irrigation and Power Projects and Systems, 18642-18643 2016-07187 Interior Interior Department See

Fish and Wildlife Service

See

Indian Affairs Bureau

See

Land Management Bureau

See

Reclamation Bureau

Internal Revenue Internal Revenue Service PROPOSED RULES Excise Tax: Tractors, Trailers, Trucks, and Tires; Definition of Highway Vehicle, 18544-18558 2016-06881 NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 18685-18687, 18691-18692 2016-07214 2016-07215 2016-07216 2016-07218 2016-07219 Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Annual Return/Report of Employee Benefit Plan, 18687-18691 2016-07217 Regulation Project, 18684-18685 2016-07213 Application for Federal Financial Assistance: Community Volunteer Income Tax Assistance Matching Grant Program, 18684 2016-07221 Tax Counseling for the Elderly Program Availability of Application Packages, 18685 2016-07220 International Trade Adm International Trade Administration NOTICES Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Investigations, Orders, or Reviews: Truck and Bus Tires from the People's Republic of China, 18573-18574 2016-07314 International Trade Com International Trade Commission NOTICES Investigations; Determinations, Modifications, and Rulings, etc.: Certain Nanopores and Products Containing the Same, 18648-18649 2016-07176 Meetings; Sunshine Act, 18647-18648 2016-07358 Justice Department Justice Department See

Drug Enforcement Administration

Land Land Management Bureau NOTICES Meetings: Wild Horse and Burro Advisory Board; Correction, 18643 2016-07273 Requests for Nominations: 2016 National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska Oil and Gas Lease Sale, 18643 2016-07272 National Oceanic National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RULES Atlantic Highly Migratory Species: Commercial Aggregated Large Coastal Shark and Hammerhead Shark Management Group Retention Limit Adjustment, 18541-18543 2016-07294 Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico, and South Atlantic: Snapper-Grouper Resources of the South Atlantic; 2016-2017, 18541 2016-07292 PROPOSED RULES Fisheries of the Northeastern United States: Bluefish Fishery; 2016-2018 Bluefish Specifications, 18559-18563 2016-07263 Seafood Import Monitoring Program, 18558 2016-07258 NOTICES Requests for Nominations: United States Global Change Research Program, 18597-18598 2016-07208 Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities: Boost-Backs and Landings of Rockets at Vandenberg Air Force Base, 18574-18597 2016-07191 Nuclear Regulatory Nuclear Regulatory Commission NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Request for Visit, 18650-18651 2016-07211 Specific Domestic Licenses to Manufacture or Transfer Certain Items Containing Byproduct Material, 18651-18652 2016-07212 Appointment of Adjudicatory Employee: Pacific Gas and Electric Co.; Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1 and 2, 18649-18650 2016-07306 Exemptions: Duke Energy Florida, Inc. Crystal River, Unit 3, 18652-18656 2016-07305 Meetings; Sunshine Act, 18651 2016-07443 Operating Reactor Licensees, 18649 2016-06940 Pension Benefit Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Filings for Reconsideration, 18656-18657 2016-07285 Personnel Personnel Management Office NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Fingerprint Chart Standard Form, 18657 2016-07406 Pipeline Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration RULES Hazardous Materials: Reverse Logistics, 18527-18541 2016-07199 Postal Service Postal Service NOTICES Product Changes: First-Class Package Service Negotiated Service Agreement, 18658 2016-07206 Priority Mail and First-Class Package Service Negotiated Service Agreement, 18658 2016-07207 Priority Mail Negotiated Service Agreement, 18657-18658 2016-07200 2016-07201 2016-07202 Presidential Documents Presidential Documents ADMINISTRATIVE ORDERS Defense and National Security: Cyber-enabled Malicious Activities; Continuation of National Emergency (Notice of March 29, 2016), 18735-18737 2016-07540 Reclamation Reclamation Bureau NOTICES Requirements and Registration for a Prize Competition: Detecting the Movement of Soils (Internal Erosion) Within Earthen Dams, Canals, Levees, and their Foundations, 18643-18645 2016-07275 Downstream Fish Passage at Tall Dams, 18646-18647 2016-07274 Rural Housing Service Rural Housing Service RULES Single Family Housing Guaranteed Loan Program, 18456 C1--2016--07049 Rural Utilities Rural Utilities Service NOTICES Grant and Loan Application Deadlines, 18566-18571 2016-07309 Securities Securities and Exchange Commission NOTICES Applications for Deregistration under the Investment Company Act, 18673-18674 2016-07209 Applications: AMCAP Fund, et al., 18674-18679 2016-07193 Self-Regulatory Organizations; Proposed Rule Changes: BATS Exchange, Inc., 18660 2016-07205 Chicago Board Options Exchange, Inc., 18668-18671 2016-07204 ICE Clear Credit, LLC, 18662-18664 2016-07195 ICE Clear Europe Ltd., 18660-18662 2016-07194 NASDAQ PHLX, LLC, 18664-18667, 18671-18673 2016-07197 2016-07198 2016-07203 The NASDAQ Stock Market, LLC, 18658-18659 2016-07196 Small Business Small Business Administration NOTICES Interest Rates, 18679 2016-07313 Meetings: Regional Small Business Regulatory Fairness Boards, 18679-18680 2016-07312 Southeastern Southeastern Power Administration NOTICES Jim Woodruff Project, 18624-18625 2016-07289 State Department State Department NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Application for Employment as a Locally Employed Staff or Family Member, 18680-18681 2016-07311 Substance Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 18632-18634 2016-07223 Surface Transportation Surface Transportation Board NOTICES Acquisition and Operation Exemptions: Finger Lakes Railway Corp. from Cayuga County Industrial Development Agency, et al., 18681 2016-07320 Acquisition Exemptions: Cayuga County Industrial Development Agency, Onondaga County Industrial Development Agency, et al. from Finger Lakes Railway Corp., 18682-18683 2016-07293 Discontinuance of Service Exemptions: CSX Transportation, Inc.; Perry County, KY, 18681-18682 2016-07290 Transportation Department Transportation Department See

Federal Aviation Administration

See

Federal Railroad Administration

See

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration

Treasury Treasury Department See

Financial Crimes Enforcement Network

See

Internal Revenue Service

NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 18692-18694 2016-07268 2016-07296 2016-07297 Multiemployer Pension Plan Application To Reduce Benefits, 18694-18695 2016-07269
U.S. Citizenship U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status, 18636-18637 2016-07265 Customs U.S. Customs and Border Protection NOTICES Cessation of National Customs Automation Program Test Concerning the Submission of Certain Data Required by the Food and Drug Administration Using the Partner Government Agency Message Set Through the Automated Commercial Environment, 18634-18635 2016-07255 U.S. Sentencing United States Sentencing Commission NOTICES Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18695-18699 2016-07264 Separate Parts In This Issue Part II Homeland Security Department, Coast Guard, 18702-18734 2016-05623 Part III Presidential Documents, 18735-18737 2016-07540 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 62 Thursday, March 31, 2016 Rules and Regulations DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Food and Nutrition Service 7 CFR Part 246 RIN 0584-AE21 Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC): Implementation of Electronic Benefit Transfer-Related Provisions Correction

In rule document 2016-04261 beginning on page 10433 in the issue of Tuesday, March 1, make the following correction:

§ 246.12 [Corrected]

On page 10450, in the second column, in § 246.12(y)(3), in the second line, “May 31, 2016” should read “August 1, 2016”.

[FR Doc. C1-2016-04261 Filed 3-30-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 1505-01-D
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Food and Nutrition Service 7 CFR Part 272 [FNS 2011-0017] RIN 0584-AE07 Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program: Nutrition Education and Obesity Prevention Grant Program AGENCY:

Food and Nutrition Service (FNS), USDA.

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

This rule adopts the interim rule implementing the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) nutrition education and obesity prevention grant program with changes as provided in this rule. This rule also amends SNAP regulations to implement section 28 of the Food and Nutrition Act (FNA) of 2008, as added by section 241 of the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act (HHFKA) of 2010, to award grants to States for provision of nutrition education and obesity prevention programs. These programs provide services for eligible individuals that promote healthy food choices consistent with the current Dietary Guidelines for Americans (DGAs). The rule provides State agencies with requirements for implementing section 28, including the grant award process and describes the process for allocating the Federal grant funding for each State's approved SNAP-Ed plan authorized under the FNA to carry out nutrition education and obesity prevention services each fiscal year. This final rule also implements section 4028 of the Agricultural Act of 2014 (Farm Bill of 2014), which authorizes physical activity promotion in addition to promotion of healthy food choices as part of this nutrition education and obesity prevention program.

DATES:

This rule is effective March 31, 2016.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Jane Duffield, Chief, State Administration Branch, Program Accountability and Administration Division, Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, USDA, 3101 Park Center Drive, Alexandria, VA 22302, [email protected], (703) 605-4385.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Executive Summary A. Purpose of the Regulatory Action

The HHFKA removed the existing nutrition education program under section 11(f) of the FNA (7 U.S.C. 2011 et seq.), commonly known as SNAP Education (SNAP-Ed), and added in its place section 28, the nutrition education and obesity prevention grant program. This rule implements the new program, which the Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) continues to refer to as SNAP-Ed, and seeks to improve its operation and effectiveness to make the program easier for States to administer while improving the health of the low-income population.

The implementation of this program provides a focus on the critical problem of obesity and allows coordinated services to be provided to participants in Federal assistance programs and other low-income persons. This action broadens collaboration efforts and relationships in order to provide more flexibility to include a wider range of evidence-based intervention strategies.

The interim rule published at 78 FR 20411 (April 5, 2013) is adopted as a final rule with changes as provided in this rule.

B. Summary of the Major Provisions of the Regulatory Action in Question Target Population

The FNA defines individuals eligible for SNAP-Ed as those who receive SNAP or National School Lunch/School Breakfast Program free or reduced price benefits, individuals residing in a community with a significant low-income population, and other low-income individuals as defined by the Secretary. FNS decided to include low-income individuals eligible to receive benefits under SNAP or other means-tested Federal assistance programs such as Medicaid or Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), etc., in this definition to ease administrative burden on States. This definition more closely aligns SNAP-Ed with other FNS, Federal and State-administered benefit programs.

Nutrition Education State Plans

This rule requires States to submit a Nutrition Education State Plan (SNAP-Ed Plan) in order to receive a SNAP-Ed grant, essentially the same procedure as before. FNS decided to strengthen SNAP-Ed Plan requirements to better assure that the Plans adequately address HHFKA requirements and public comment. The Plans must: (1) Present valid and data driven needs assessments of the nutrition, physical activity, and obesity prevention needs of the target population; (2) identify the use of funding for evidence-based State or local projects that meet those needs; (3) ensure that interventions are comprehensive in scope and appropriate for the eligible low-income population and communities; (4) recognize the population's constrained resources and potential eligibility for Federal nutrition assistance; and (5) demonstrate and follow evidence-based strategies for effective nutrition education and obesity prevention. The rule allows States to propose implementing annual or multi-year SNAP-Ed Plans of up to three years.

Use of Funds

The FNA permits States to use funds for evidence-based allowable uses identified by the FNS Administrator in consultation with the Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Under this rule, the definitions for nutrition education and obesity prevention services and an evidence-based approach are provided for States to use in their SNAP-Ed programming. These definitions provide States with greater flexibility to include environmental approaches and policy level work in addition to nutrition education, health promotion, and social marketing. Expanding these approaches has the added benefit of supporting more comprehensive anti-obesity efforts in addition to providing greater State flexibility in programming.

Under this rule, States may deliver nutrition education and obesity prevention activities using two or more of these approaches: Individual or group-based nutrition education, health promotion, and intervention strategies; comprehensive, multi-level interventions; and community and public health approaches. To improve program design, States are expected to integrate multiple approaches in implementing their activities.

Coordination

The rule encourages coordination of SNAP-Ed activities with public or privately funded health promotion and nutrition improvement strategies and requires that States describe their coordination activities in their SNAP-Ed Plans. States are strongly encouraged to coordinate with other organizations, particularly other State agencies delivering nutrition assistance programs, to reach low-income individuals through varied approaches.

Funding

1. National Funding

Congress prescribed specific dollar amounts for each of federal fiscal years (FFY) 2011-2015. For the 2016 and subsequent FFY, the total amount will be determined by adjusting the total SNAP-Ed allocation available nationally during the preceding FFY by an amount that is equal to the increase in the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers for the 12-month period ending the preceding June 30, as published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the Department of Labor.

2. Individual State Allocation

This rule provides grants to States through Federal funding authorized specifically for SNAP-Ed grants, requires no State contribution or match, and is the only source of Federal SNAP funds for these activities. This rule encourages States to seek public and private financial contribution for SNAP-Ed activities to leverage the Federal SNAP investment. However, funds in excess of the Federal SNAP-Ed grant are not eligible for SNAP Federal reimbursement. The rule describes the allocation process by which a State receives funds between FFY 2011-2013, based on the State's SNAP-Ed expenditures in FFY year 2009, as reported to the Secretary in February 2010, in proportion to FFY 2009 SNAP-Ed expenditures by all States nationally in that year. For FFY 2014 and subsequent years, the allocation formula is based on a ratio of 1) a State's share of national SNAP-Ed expenditures in FFY 2009 and 2) the percentage of the number of individuals participating in SNAP in the State during the preceding year in relation to the percentage of SNAP participation nationally during that year. The second part of the formula, the ratio of SNAP participation in a State in relation to SNAP participation nationally, will progressively increase as a percentage of the annual State funding from FFY 2014 forward. In FFY 2014, the formula's ratio of State FFY 2009 SNAP-Ed expenditures to SNAP participation was 90/10. A State's FFY 2009 SNAP-Ed expenditure will annually decrease as a factor of the ratio until FFY 2018, when the ratio will be 50/50. The 50/50 ratio shall continue each FFY after 2018. The financial provisions of this rule stabilize SNAP-Ed funding and reduce State administrative burden since no State contribution is required.

II. Background Purpose of the Rule

The HHFKA removed the previously existing nutrition education program under Section 11(f) of the FNA of 2008 (7 U.S.C. 2011 et seq.), known as SNAP-Ed, and adds in its place section 28, the Nutrition Education and Obesity Prevention Grant Program. This rule finalizes codification of the grant program, which FNS continues to refer to as SNAP-Ed, and seeks to improve its operation and effectiveness to make the program easier for States to administer while meeting the needs of the low-income population. The interim rule published at 78 FR 20411 (April 5, 2013), was effective upon publication, providing immediate direction for States, while also allowing for adjustments, based on public comment. It is adopted as a final rule with changes as provided in this rule.

This final rule provides State agencies with final requirements for implementing section 28 of the FNA, including the grant award process and describes the process for allocating the Federal grant funding authorized under the FNA. Section 28 of the FNA requires no State contribution or match, but permits States to seek public and private financial contributions to SNAP-Ed activities. This rule encourages States to seek these contributions to leverage their Federal SNAP investment. The rule encourages greater coordination of projects with other public or privately funded health promotion, nutrition improvement and obesity prevention strategies, including other Federal assistance programs.

Consultations

A requirement of section 28 of the FNA was for FNS to consult with the Director of the CDC and a wide range of stakeholders and experts to identify allowable uses of funds and to strengthen the delivery, oversight and evaluation of nutrition education and obesity prevention services in the development of the rule. FNS conducted an aggressive outreach effort during the development of the interim rule, hosting 25 consultative sessions and obtaining input from more than 150 stakeholders over a 6 month period. The extensive consultation period was instrumental in the development of the SNAP-Ed interim rule and may have contributed to FNS receiving relatively few comments recommending major changes for consideration during the comment period for the interim rule.

Based on the requirements of section 28 of the FNA and the input received during the consultations, the interim rule was formulated to make changes in SNAP-Ed programming in the following areas:

Nutrition Education State Plans

Consistent with prior law, section 28 of the FNA requires State agency submission of a SNAP-Ed Plan in order to receive a grant for the provision of nutrition education and obesity prevention services. Based on stakeholder interest, FNS determined that States may propose to implement annual or multi-year SNAP-Ed Plans that cover a timeframe of up to three years. The timelines associated with Plan development, submission and final reports remained the same as they were prior to changes in the FNA and these timelines were incorporated into the interim rule. The interim rule codified the requirement that SNAP-Ed Plans address the provisions specified by law and meet standards established in the rule, SNAP-Ed Plan Guidance (https://snaped.fns.usda.gov/national-snap-ed/snap-ed-plan-guidance-and-templates), and other FNS policy.

Target Population

Section 28 of the FNA defines individuals eligible for SNAP-Ed services as those who receive SNAP or National School Lunch/School Breakfast Program free or reduced price benefits, individuals residing in a community with a significant low-income population, and other low-income individuals as defined by the Secretary. Some stakeholders recommended that FNS expand the definition of those eligible for SNAP-Ed. In considering that recommendation, FNS decided to define low-income persons for SNAP-Ed as SNAP participants and low-income individuals eligible to receive benefits under SNAP or other means-tested Federal assistance programs such as Medicaid, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), the free and reduced price meals under the National School Lunch Program (NSLP), etc. This definition aligns SNAP-Ed with other FNS, Federal and State-administered benefit programs, allowing the focus to remain on low-income populations while permitting a greater reach to persons residing in communities with a significant low-income population.

Information received during the consultations leading up to the interim rule indicated the need for expanded strategies and data sources to assist in identifying SNAP-Ed target audiences, to address fully the challenges many experienced identifying and reaching their audiences. FNS recognized States' interest in greater flexibility in the methods and data sources to use in identifying their low-income SNAP-Ed population. FNS determined that States may propose several methodologies that use relevant supporting data sources beyond those included in SNAP-Ed Plan Guidance to identify their target audience, including alternative targeting methodologies such as defined areas around a qualifying school, SNAP office or other methodologies.

Use of Funds

FNS received input from stakeholders, including Federal partners, on the definition of nutrition education and obesity prevention services on which to base SNAP-Ed programming under the interim rule. FNS considered these recommendations, the definition used by CDC for obesity prevention services, and the Institute of Medicine's key messages about obesity prevention to define nutrition education and obesity prevention services. The interim rule definition considered the resources available for nutrition education and obesity prevention services, the mission of FNS, and the goal of SNAP-Ed.

Choosing physically active lifestyles along with making healthy food choices for those eligible for SNAP have long been included as goals of SNAP-Ed. SNAP-Ed principles at present also are aligned with the FNA's requirement for promotion of physical activity in addition to healthy food choices. Thus, physical activity choices along with food choices were included in the definition of SNAP-Ed nutrition education and obesity prevention services.

The FNA also required that allowable nutrition education and obesity prevention strategies shall be evidence-based. FNS received feedback on the evidence-based approaches stakeholders thought would move SNAP-Ed into closer alignment with other governmental, institutional, community-based and public health organizations. Stakeholders also encouraged FNS to approve and promote nutrition education and obesity prevention activities that showed promise and could be instrumental in demonstrating the effectiveness of a wide range of approaches to provide these activities. FNS reviewed definitions used by the Institute of Medicine and CDC, and recommendations from commenters to develop the definition of evidence-based activities included in the interim rule.

The FNA further stipulates that funds may be used for evidence-based activities using any or all of these three approaches: individual and group-based strategies; comprehensive multi-level interventions; and/or community and public health approaches. FNS also considered the following to determine how States might best deliver nutrition education and obesity prevention services in SNAP-Ed: use of the social-ecological model to address nutrition education and obesity prevention interventions; community and public health approaches promoted by CDC and other groups; and the 2010 DGAs Social-Ecological Framework for Nutrition and Physical Activity Decisions that illustrates how spheres of influence affect individual and family eating and physical activity choices. FNS decided to permit States to implement one or more of the approaches described in section 28 of the FNA to deliver evidence-based nutrition education and obesity prevention activities in their SNAP-Ed programs. FNS encouraged State agencies in the interim rule to integrate multiple approaches in implementing nutrition education and obesity prevention activities to improve program design.

Coordination

The FNA encourages States to coordinate nutrition education and obesity prevention grant program projects with other public or privately funded health promotion or nutrition improvement strategies as long as the State agency retains administrative control of the projects. FNS expects States to coordinate SNAP-Ed activities with other national, State and local nutrition education and health promotion initiatives and interventions, and requires that an applying State demonstrate such coordination in its SNAP-Ed Plan. FNS recognizes the synergy of coordinating activities and the potential impact of leveraging funding. In addition, States must show in their SNAP-Ed Plans that the Federal funding received from SNAP will remain under the administrative control of the State agency as they coordinate their activities with other organizations.

Although FNS has encouraged States to connect and integrate nutrition education across programs and to implement a variety of nutrition education approaches, stakeholders have advised FNS to more strongly encourage or mandate that State agencies coordinate their SNAP-Ed activities with other projects in their State.

Funding

Section 28 of the FNA altered the manner in which SNAP-Ed funding is determined for States. Because the funding language is specific and prescriptive, FNS has no discretion as to how funds are allocated to States with approved SNAP-Ed Plans. However, FNS has addressed concerns expressed by commenters about the methods used to determine the allocations, the allocation amounts and the reallocation of funds should any State surrender them. The interim rule implemented financial changes retroactive from the enactment of the HHFKA forward, stipulating that SNAP State agencies submitting an approved SNAP-Ed Plan will receive a Federal nutrition education and obesity prevention grant.

Summary of Comments

Eighteen comments to the interim rule were received and are available for public inspection on www.regulations.gov. Representatives from two State agencies, six member organizations, four advocacy/policy groups, as well as six non-affiliated individuals provided comments.

In general, all of the commenters except one were supportive of the rule. The majority of the commenters observed that the interim rule is very consistent with their vision for SNAP-Ed. Several further stated that the rule is clearly responsive to the input that they and many other stakeholders provided during the development of the rule. The commenters acknowledged that the rule adds flexibility and efficiencies to SNAP-Ed programming while ensuring rigorous oversight and facilitating a comprehensive approach to SNAP-Ed. Commenters favorably viewed the provision allowing States to adopt multi-year nutrition education plans as having a positive impact on States' administrative burden. The one negative comment received expressed that there is no need for spending on the program.

Positive feedback was received on three definitions included in the interim rule: nutrition education and obesity prevention services; evidence-based approaches; and target population. One organization recommended that FNS expand the definition of nutrition education and obesity prevention services to include an emphasis on food insecurity as a strategy to improve nutrition and reduce obesity. FNS understands the commenter's interest in addressing food insecurity through SNAP-Ed. However, because receipt of SNAP benefits addresses food insecurity and addressing food insecurity is not a stated purpose for SNAP-Ed in section 28 of the FNA, the recommendation to include additional emphasis on food insecurity will not be included in the final rule. The definition for SNAP nutrition education and obesity prevention at § 272.2(d)(2)(vii)(B) has been improved to enhance clarity.

One organization expressed that States should be allowed to implement strategies that may not have been thoroughly reviewed in scientific literature but may have potential to improve nutrition and reduce obesity. In response to this comment FNS further refined the definition of evidence-based approaches at § 272.2(d)(2)(vii)(B) to indicate that SNAP-Ed services may include emerging strategies or interventions and that these strategies or interventions require justification and evaluation.

This final rule implements section 4028 of the Farm Bill of 2014 which authorizes physical activity promotion along with promotion of healthy food choices as part of SNAP-Ed programming. Language at § 272.2(d)(2)(vii)(C) remains the same as the interim rule because SNAP-Ed has promoted physical activity along with healthy food choices based on the Dietary Guidelines for Americans for some time. Physical activity was included as a required element of a SNAP-Ed Plan at § 272.2(d)(2)(iv), § 272.2(d)(2)(vi) and § 272.2(d)(2)(vii)(D).

The final rule addresses SNAP-Ed provisions of the FNA and HHFKA, however many of the comments relate to routine SNAP-Ed programmatic operations that are more effectively addressed through alternate means rather than through rulemaking. The SNAP-Ed Plan Guidance and other opportunities for additional policy development are available and are the most effective means to address stakeholder concerns that are unrelated to the provisions being implemented through this rule. The final rule at § 272.2 (d)(2)(i) stipulates that SNAP-Ed Plans shall conform to standards established in this regulation, SNAP-Ed Plan Guidance, and other FNS policy. FNS concurs with several comments on the interim rule and is responding by making adjustments in the final rule to address those comments. The comments received on the interim rule were reviewed, categorized and analyzed in six key areas and are discussed below.

Reporting

The Education and Administrative Reporting System (EARS) form is the current means by which States report SNAP-Ed programmatic activity to FNS. The EARS form was devised to collect uniform information about SNAP-Ed activities such as demographic characteristics of participants, topics covered, educational delivery sites, education strategies and resource allocation. EARS is not an evaluation tool but provides FNS with national data to inform management decisions, support policy initiatives, provide documentation for legislative, budget and other requests and support planning within FNS. Four commenters recommended that FNS replace EARS with a more comprehensive reporting and evaluation system that would accommodate collection of data related to new activities included in the FNA. FNS foresees opportunities to improve any reporting form and/or system such as EARS over time. FNS has begun the process of addressing the feasibility of additional data collection through the EARS form or another means that captures SNAP-Ed activities implemented in the past, as well as activities called for in post-HHFKA SNAP-Ed programming. On August 17, 2015, a notice was published in the Federal Register (80 FR 49198), inviting public comment on a revised EARS form that will collect data related to some HHFKA provisions.

The interim rule specified that States are expected to collect and report State and private financial contributions on the EARS form. The possibility exists that an alternative method for the reporting of programmatic and financial data will be identified by FNS. As a result, FNS changed language at § 272.2(d)(2)(xi), Fiscal recordkeeping and reporting requirements, in response to comments received, to indicate that States must submit financial data through the means and in the timeframe specified by FNS. This applies to financial data that is reported on the EARS form as well as other financial data. Reference to the EARS form was deleted. FNS will provide guidance to States outside this rulemaking on the submission of programmatic data such as that collected by EARS and any new data collection that might be implemented.

One organization representing State and Implementing Agencies requested that FNS extend the due date for annual reports. FNS currently does provide flexibility for report submissions in practice on a case by case basis. However FNS, in response to this comment at § 272.2(d)(2)(xiii), changed the due date for Annual Reports from November 30 to January 31 as requested to allow States more time to better analyze and report on Program activities and budget. The reporting of outcomes was added at this section to emphasize that these should be included in Annual Reports.

Target Population

Language was added at § 272.2(d)(2)(v) to modify the definition of the target population to explicitly include individuals residing in communities with a significant low-income population as specified in the FNA. The SNAP-Ed target population is now defined in this final rule as SNAP participants and low-income individuals eligible to receive benefits under SNAP or other means-tested Federal assistance programs and individuals residing in communities with a significant low-income population.

Several groups commented that FNS should make available information on approved alternative targeting strategies for assessing eligible areas and defining target populations. FNS considered this suggestion and included extensive information relevant to this issue in recent SNAP-Ed Plan Guidance. FNS will continue to identify alternative targeting strategies and methodologies and will disseminate the information through SNAP-Ed Plan Guidance and other appropriate means. One advocacy group suggested FNS permit inclusion of large-scale institutional settings and systems, buffer zones, etc., as part of a targeting strategy where there is a significant proportion of potentially eligible individuals. Another organization recommended allowing State-specific criteria to determine target audiences. States may propose these and other targeting strategies for FNS consideration under current SNAP-Ed Plan Guidance, so no changes will be made to the rule in this area.

One State agency provided comments about requiring States to conduct valid and data-driven needs assessments of their target populations to include barriers to accessing healthier options. A member organization further elaborated on the characteristics of the target population that States should consider when conducting needs assessments. These recommendations were incorporated into the rule at § 272.2(d)(2)(iv). In response to the same State agency, FNS added language at § 272.2(d)(2)(vi) requiring States to specify how their evidence-based interventions and strategies meet the assessed needs of their target population.

Evaluation

Several commenters provided suggestions related to evaluations. One recommended expanding approval of formative research and ongoing monitoring costs; two organizations suggested establishing clearer definitions for SNAP-Ed methods, interventions, metrics and evaluation; others commented that FNS should allow greater flexibility in how SNAP-Ed funds may be used for subsequent evaluative purposes. Another recommended continued FNS investment in SNAP-Ed evaluations such as the SNAP Education and Evaluation Studies (WAVEs I and II). These recommendations are relevant and timely but go beyond the scope of the requirements for SNAP-Ed set forth in the FNA and HHFKA. FNS will continue to consider these concerns, as applicable, through other SNAP-Ed policy-making and development processes. FNS did include evaluating programs in addition to planning, implementing, and operating SNAP-Ed programs as an appropriate use of funds at § 272.2(d)(2)(vii).

Several commenters requested that FNS share information about new SNAP-Ed nutrition education and obesity prevention programming that has demonstrated effectiveness or has shown significant promise. FNS agrees with this recommendation and did release with the FFY 2014 Guidance for States in March 2013 the SNAP-Ed Strategies and Interventions: An Obesity Prevention Toolkit for States (https://snaped.fns.usda.gov/snap//SNAP-EdInterventionsToolkit.pdf) developed in conjunction with the National Collaborative for Childhood Obesity Research. This toolkit was designed to help States identify evidence-based obesity prevention policy and environmental change strategies and interventions to include in SNAP-Ed Plans. The toolkit was updated in July 2013, again in May 2014, and will continue to be updated as needed. Also, an inventory of best practices in nutrition education was prepared through a National Institute of Food and Agriculture grant which FNS released in April 2014. Further information on promising and proven nutrition education and obesity prevention strategies for SNAP-Ed will be communicated to States through appropriate channels as they are identified.

Two organizations commented that FNS should encourage States to conduct needs assessment, formative research, interventions and evaluations for three population segments: SNAP participants, persons with incomes less than 130 percent of the Federal Poverty Level (FPL), and persons between 130 and 185 percent of the FPL to expand the target population for interventions and evaluations. Interventions and evaluations conducted in venues that qualify for SNAP-Ed are covered for these three population segments as described in SNAP-Ed Plan Guidance. Other organizations also recommended that: the costs of formative research, pilot testing, and ongoing monitoring and surveillance, and outcome/impact evaluation should be borne fully by SNAP-Ed; the costs of surveys, surveillance and special studies should be fully allowed as reasonable and necessary and not subject to proration when the baselines of different segments or communities impacts SNAP-Ed interventions; and FNS should clarify that the cost of evaluations and State surveys conducted for planning and evaluation include the full SNAP-Ed target population and not be prorated to apply only to persons at less than 130 percent of the FPL.

The SNAP-Ed Plan Guidance includes information about conducting interventions and evaluations and is an appropriate source to provide clarifying information on these topics. Additional focus on evaluation in SNAP-Ed was achieved with: The addition of an evaluation and related resources section to the SNAP-Ed Plan Guidance; the addition of an evaluation section to the SNAP-Ed Strategies and Interventions: An Obesity Prevention Toolkit for States; the development and posting of the guide, Addressing the Challenges of Conducting Effective Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program Education (SNAP-Ed) Evaluations: A Step-by Step Guide (http://www.fns.usda.gov/sites/default/files/SNAPEDWaveII_Guide.pdf), and the addition of an evaluation Web page (https://snaped.fns.usda.gov/professional-development-tools/evaluation) to the SNAP-Ed Connection Web site, a resource for professionals working in SNAP-Ed. FNS will continue to provide evaluation information through existing communication with State agencies and will consider these comments when doing so.

Program Coordination

States were encouraged in the interim rule to coordinate their activities with other public or private entities. Two groups commented that FNS should require rather than encourage States to coordinate activities with other organizations as well as report on the coordination efforts of their sub-grantees. In recent Guidance, FNS sets forth its expectation that States will coordinate SNAP-Ed activities with other groups. FNS believes that by stating its expectation and encouraging States to move forward with their coordination efforts rather than requiring them to form such cooperative relationships, consideration is properly given to the varying levels of existing efforts States have made and their abilities and resources to establish additional partnerships. Reflecting the intent of the HHFKA, States are encouraged at § 272.2(d)(2)(viii) to coordinate obesity prevention, nutrition education, and health promotion initiatives and interventions and must describe such coordination in State SNAP-Ed Plans. Recognizing the importance of coordination of efforts among operators of FNS programs, FNS added language at § 272.2(d)(2)(viii) requiring States to consult and coordinate with State and local operators of other FNS programs to ensure that their SNAP-Ed activities complement the nutrition education and obesity prevention efforts of these programs.

One commenter recommended that the rule further clarify when written agreements between partnering organizations are needed. A change was made at § 272.2(d)(2)(viii) to reflect that the term Memoranda of Understanding is often used interchangeably with Memoranda of Agreement and to clarify that these documents must be available for inspection only when SNAP-Ed funding is being used in collaborative efforts with other programs or organizations.

Other coordination-related recommendations to the interim rule that FNS may explore and address through SNAP-Ed Plan Guidance and other policy-making include suggestions that FNS: Encourage States to inform State and local staff of implementing agency SNAP-Ed efforts; waive SNAP cost allocation requirements when a State Nutrition Action Plan is operational among Federally-funded programs; and require States to describe the processes for coordination between States, other organizations, or contractors providing services. These recommendations will not be included in this final rule.

Funding

The funding provisions of the FNA are prescriptive and were included as such in the interim rule. One implementing agency and three organizations provided funding-related comments and suggestions. The comments and FNS' determinations related to changes in the final rule are listed below.

Recommendation FNS Determination Amend the reallocation methodology No change. Reallocation method is a provision of the FNA and cannot be amended by this rule. Include details on an appeal and dispute resolution process for State disagreement with Federal funding allocations No change. SNAP-Ed allocations are determined through a formula contained in the FNA and is not contestable. Clarify that States do not have the authority to require matching funds No change. This is not a provision of the FNA. Establish protocols for the receipt of non-Federal funds for SNAP-Ed activities and using SNAP-Ed funds as an incentive No change. Recommendation beyond the scope of current regulation but may be addressed through other channels. Include as an allowable SNAP-Ed activity the establishment of State exchanges or expert panels for peer training, technical assistance, and consultation No change. Such activity is currently allowable. Release State allocation numbers when the SNAP-Ed Guidance is released No change. Final State allocations can only be determined when an actual appropriation is received, but estimates based on the President's Budget are provided for planning purposes. Provide provisional approval of implementing agency budgets of greater than two years No change. The rule provides requirements for State agencies, not sub-grantees.

The funding-related sections of the final rule at § 272.2(d)(2)(x), Federal financial participation and allocation of grants, are revised from the interim rule in these areas: deleted the specific funding amounts for FFYs 2011- 2015 since SNAP-Ed funding levels are indicated in the FNA; deleted reference to the two-year period of performance since this language does not appear in the FNA and the information can be communicated to States through other channels; and minimally revised parts to delete non-essential information and to enhance clarity.

In response to the comment of one member organization, at § 272.2(d)(2)(vii)(A), Use of Funds, language was added to specify that State agencies shall provide program oversight and demonstrate program effectiveness regarding SNAP-Ed outcomes and impacts. At § 272.2(d)(2)(x)(B) the word State was added so that all parties are clear that the funds allocated under this grant may be used for State as well as local projects.

Recently concern has been expressed to FNS about identifying SNAP-Ed funds that may be at risk of not being spent in a timely manner and returned to the Federal government. Connected to this concern is identifying opportunities for the potential reallocation of funds should a State(s) surrender them. To address these interests and foster full use of limited resources, language was added at § 272.2(d)(2)(ix) requiring a State as part of the budget process to inform FNS, by the end of the first quarter of each FFY (December 31) of any portion of its prior year allocation that it cannot or does not plan to spend for SNAP-Ed activities by the end of the FFY. This section also is referenced at § 272.2(d)(2)(x)(F) to advise a State that FNS may reallocate unobligated or unexpended funds to another participating State agency if informed that a State will not obligate or expend funds during the period for which funding is available for new obligation by FNS. Other minor changes were made to this section for clarity.

Program Delivery

Several commenters provided suggestions for the final rule related to program delivery. Two organizations recommended that the rule include specific language allowing SNAP-Ed programming to include advice on specific types of food to reduce in the diet consistent with the DGAs. States are permitted, as described in the SNAP-Ed Plan Guidance, to include such programming in their SNAP-Ed Plans. In response to the comments of two organizations, language was added to the definition of SNAP nutrition education and obesity prevention services at § 272.2(d)(2)(vii)(B) to indicate that intervention strategies may focus on limiting, as well as increasing, consumption of certain foods, beverages, and nutrients consistent with the DGAs. The SNAP-Ed Plan Guidance further specifies that FNS has determined that States may not use SNAP-Ed funds to convey negative written, visual, or verbal expressions about any specific brand of food, beverage or commodity. Policy changes regarding specific brands of foods, beverages and commodities are not be included in the final rule.

One State agency recommended that the rule include language that States may use all aspects of the social-ecological model and multi-level interventions. The rule does encourage this but at § 272.2(d)(2)(vii)(B) interpersonal level was added to the levels where SNAP-Ed activities can be conducted. Another organization recommended that FNS work with States denied approval to submit a multi-year plan in order to resolve any concerns. FNS currently does work with States to address concerns that may impede their progress in developing multi-year plans. The recommendation is not included in this rule.

Several organizations commented that FNS should strengthen the language regarding the number and requirements for approaches used in SNAP-Ed activities. These groups recommended that language should be changed from “states are encouraged to integrate” to “states are expected to integrate” multiple approaches in implementing their SNAP-Ed activities. FNS agrees with and supports these comments. The preamble of the final rule makes this change in language under Use of Funds. Additionally at § 272.2(d)(2)(vii)(D) language was changed to specify that SNAP-Ed activities must include evidence-based activities using two or more approaches.

One member organization recommended that FNS invest in technical assistance and training for regional and State SNAP staff to integrate fully comprehensive approaches to behavior change in State SNAP-Ed Plans. FNS does provide training, support and technical assistance to States. States additionally may use their SNAP-Ed funding for staff training. This recommendation will not be included in the final rule. Another organization suggested that FNS solicit and accept comments on the SNAP-Ed Guidance process from States and collaborating partners. States and partners currently may provide recommendations on the Guidance content and development process and FNS sought the input of a virtual work group of stakeholders in the development of recent SNAP-Ed Guidance. This recommendation does not necessitate any changes to the final rule.

Several other recommendations unrelated to the current rule were submitted. These include suggestions for communication improvement between State and local implementing agencies, using reallocated funds for purposes other than those stated in the FNA, discussing point-of-purchase strategies, and expanding the use of SNAP-Ed funds to conduct what might be considered SNAP outreach-related functions. These recommendations which are unrelated to provisions of the FNA, the HHFKA, and the interim rule may be addressed through other communications with States, and are not being addressed in the final rule.

Executive Order 12866 and 13563

Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess all costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public health and safety effects, distributive impacts, and equity). Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting flexibility.

The changes from the interim rule to this final rule were determined to be not significant and thus no further review was required by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) in conformance with Executive Order 12866.

Regulatory Impact Analysis

This rule has been designated as not significant by the Office of Management and Budget; therefore, no Regulatory Impact Analysis is required.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612) requires Agencies to analyze the impact of rulemaking on small entities and consider alternatives that would minimize any significant impacts on a substantial number of small entities. Pursuant to that review, it has been certified that this rule would not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. Currently 53 State agencies receive funding for SNAP-Ed, and this final rule institutes policy oversight and cost reductions required by statute.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public Law 104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the effects of their regulatory actions on State, local and tribal governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, the Department generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost benefit analysis, for proposed and final rules with “Federal mandates” that may result in expenditures by State, local or tribal governments, in the aggregate, or the private sector, of $100 million or more in any one year. When such a statement is needed for a rule, Section 205 of the UMRA generally requires the Department to identify and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and adopt the most cost effective or least burdensome alternative that achieves the objectives of the rule.

This final rule contains no Federal mandates (under the regulatory provisions of Title II of the UMRA) for State, local and tribal governments or the private sector of $100 million or more in any one year. Thus, the rule is not subject to the requirements of sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA.

Executive Order 12372

SNAP is listed in the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Programs under 10.561. For the reasons set forth in 2 CFR chapter IV, SNAP is excluded from the scope of Executive Order 12372, which requires intergovernmental consultation with State and local officials.

Federalism Summary Impact Statement

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

This final rule is necessary to amend SNAP regulations to implement Section 28 of the FNA of 2008, as added by Section 241 of Public Law 111-296, the HHFK Act of 2010. The Department has determined that this rule does not have Federalism implications. This rule does not impose substantial or direct compliance costs on State and local governments. Therefore, under Section 6(b) of the Executive Order, a Federalism summary impact statement is not required.

Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform

This final rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform. This rule is intended to have preemptive effect with respect to any State or local laws, regulations or policies which conflict with its provisions or which would otherwise impede its full and timely implementation. This rule is not intended to have retroactive effect unless so specified in the Effective Dates section of the final rule. Prior to any judicial challenge to the provisions of the final rule, all applicable administrative procedures must be exhausted.

Civil Rights Impact Analysis

FNS has reviewed this final rule in accordance with USDA Regulation 4300-4, “Civil Rights Impact Analysis,” to identify any major civil rights impacts the rule might have on program participants on the basis of age, race, color, national origin, sex or disability. After a careful review of the rule's intent and provisions, FNS has determined that this rule is not expected to affect the participation of protected individuals in SNAP.

Executive Order 13175

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

FNS has assessed the impact of this rule on Indian tribes and determined that this rule does not, to our knowledge, have tribal implications that require tribal consultation under EO 13175. On February 18, 2015 FNS held a webinar for tribal participation and comments. During the comment period, FNS did not receive any comments on the interim rule. If a Tribe requests consultation, FNS will work with the Office of Tribal Relations to ensure meaningful consultation is provided where changes, additions and modifications identified herein are not expressly mandated by Congress.

Paperwork Reduction Act

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

Information Collection for SNAP-Ed requirements will not change under this rule. This final rule contains information collections that have been approved by OMB. The rule does not increase burden hours for State agencies in the preparation of Nutrition Education Plans. Nutrition Education State Plan requirements are included in the State Plan of Operations, OMB 0584-0083, Program, and Budget Summary Statement, and will not change with this rule.

Additionally, State requirements to report on the Education and Administration Reporting System (EARS) information collection form, OMB 0584-0542, will not change under this rule. FNS may determine that future revisions are needed. States will report FY 2014 EARS data by December 31, 2014, thereby negating the necessity for an Information Collection Request as part of this rule.

E-Government Act Compliance

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

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 272

Alaska, Civil rights, Grant programs-social programs, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, Unemployment compensation, Wages.

Accordingly, the interim rule amending 7 CFR part 272 which was published at 78 FR 20411 (April 5, 2013), is adopted as a final rule with the following changes:

PART 272—REQUIREMENTS FOR PARTICIPATING STATE AGENCIES 1. The authority citation for part 272 continues to read as follows: Authority:

7 U.S.C. 2011-2036.

2. In § 272.2: a. Republish paragraph (d)(1)(iii). b. Revise paragraph (d)(2). c. Revise paragraph (e)(6).

The revisions read as follows:

§ 272.2 Plan of operation.

(d) * * *

(1) * * *

(iii) Nutrition Education Plan if the State agency elects to request Federal Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program Education (SNAP-Ed) grant funds to conduct nutrition education and obesity prevention services as discussed in paragraph (d)(2) of this section.

(2) Nutrition Education Plan. If submitted, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program Education (SNAP-Ed) Plan must include the following:

(i) Conform to standards established in this regulation, SNAP-Ed Plan Guidance, and other FNS policy. A State agency may propose to implement an annual or multiyear Plan of up to three years;

(ii) Identify the methods the State will use to notify applicants, participants and eligible individuals to the maximum extent possible of the availability of SNAP-Ed activities in local communities;

(iii) Describe methods the State agency will use to identify its target audience. FNS will consider for approval targeting strategies and supporting data sources included in SNAP-Ed Plan Guidance and alternate targeting strategies and supporting data sources proposed by State agencies;

(iv) Present a valid and data-driven needs assessment of the nutrition, physical activity, and obesity prevention needs of the target population, and their barriers to accessing healthy foods and physical activity. The needs assessment should consider the diverse characteristics of the target population, including race/ethnicity, gender, employment status, housing, language, transportation/mobility needs, and other factors;

(v) Ensure interventions are appropriate for the low-income population defined as SNAP participants and low-income individuals eligible to receive benefits under SNAP or other means-tested Federal assistance programs and individuals residing in communities with a significant low-income population. The interventions must recognize the population's constrained resources and potential eligibility for Federal food assistance;

(vi) Describe the evidence-based nutrition education and obesity prevention services that the State will provide in SNAP-Ed and how the State will deliver those services, either directly or through agreements with other State or local agencies or community organizations, and how the interventions and strategies meet the assessed nutrition, physical activity, and obesity prevention needs of the target population;

(vii) Use of Funds. (A) A State agency must use the SNAP-Ed nutrition education and obesity prevention grant to fund the administrative costs of planning, implementing, operating, and evaluating its SNAP-Ed program in accordance with its approved SNAP-Ed Plan; State agencies shall provide program oversight to ensure integrity of funds and demonstrate program effectiveness regarding SNAP-Ed outcomes and impacts;

(B) Definitions. SNAP nutrition education and obesity prevention services are defined as a combination of educational strategies, accompanied by supporting environmental interventions, demonstrated to facilitate adoption of food and physical activity choices and other nutrition-related behaviors conducive to the health and well-being of SNAP participants and low-income individuals eligible to receive benefits under SNAP or other means-tested Federal assistance programs and individuals residing in communities with a significant low-income population. Nutrition education and obesity prevention services are delivered through multiple venues, often through partnerships, and involve activities at the individual, interpersonal, community, and societal levels. Acceptable policy level interventions are activities that encourage healthier choices based on the current Dietary Guidelines for Americans. Intervention strategies may focus on increasing consumption of certain foods, beverages, or nutrients as well as limiting consumption of certain foods, beverages, or nutrients consistent with the Dietary Guidelines for Americans; SNAP-Ed nutrition education and obesity prevention activities must be evidence-based. An evidence-based approach for nutrition education and obesity prevention is defined as the integration of the best research evidence with best available practice-based evidence. The best research evidence refers to relevant rigorous nutrition and public health nutrition research including systematically reviewed scientific evidence. Practice-based evidence refers to case studies, pilot studies and evidence from the field on nutrition education interventions that demonstrate obesity prevention potential. Evidence may be related to obesity prevention target areas, intervention strategies and/or specific interventions. The target areas are identified in the current Dietary Guidelines for Americans. SNAP-Ed services may also include emerging strategies or interventions, which are community‐ or practitioner‐driven activities that have the potential for obesity prevention, but have not yet been formally evaluated for obesity prevention outcomes. Emerging strategies or interventions require a justification for a novel approach and must be evaluated for effectiveness. Intervention strategies are broad approaches to intervening on specific target areas. Interventions are a specific set of evidence-based, behaviorally-focused activities and/or actions to promote healthy eating and active lifestyles. Evidence-based allowable uses of funds for SNAP-Ed include conducting and evaluating intervention programs, and implementing and measuring the effects of policy, systems and environmental changes in accordance with SNAP-Ed Plan Guidance;

(C) SNAP-Ed activities must promote healthy food and physical activity choices based on the most recent Dietary Guidelines for Americans.

(D) SNAP-Ed activities must include evidence-based activities using two or more of these approaches: individual or group-based nutrition education, health promotion, and intervention strategies; comprehensive, multi-level interventions at multiple complementary organizational and institutional levels; community and public health approaches to improve nutrition and physical activity;

(viii) Include a description of the State's efforts to coordinate activities with national, State, and local nutrition education, obesity prevention, and health promotion initiatives and interventions, whether publicly or privately funded. States must consult and coordinate with State and local operators of other FNS programs, including the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC), the National School Lunch Program, Farm to School, and the Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations, to ensure SNAP-Ed complements the nutrition education and obesity prevention activities of those programs. States may engage in breastfeeding education, promotion, and support that is supplementary to and coordinated with WIC, which has the lead and primary role in all breastfeeding activities among FNS programs. The relationship between the State agency and other organizations it plans to coordinate with for the provision of services, including statewide organizations must be described. Copies of contracts and Memoranda of Agreement or Understanding that involve funds made available under the State agency's Federal SNAP-Ed grant must be available for inspection upon request;

(ix) Include an operating budget for the Federal fiscal year with an estimate of the cost of operation for one or more years, according to the State's approved SNAP-Ed Plan. As part of the budget process, the State must inform FNS by the end of the first quarter of each Federal fiscal year (December 31) of any portion of its prior year allocation that it cannot or does not plan to spend for SNAP-Ed activities by the end of the Federal fiscal year.

(x) Federal financial participation and allocation of grants. (A) A State agency's receipt of a Federal SNAP-Ed grant is contingent on FNS' approval of the State agency's SNAP-Ed Plan. If an adequate Plan is not submitted or an extension granted, FNS may reallocate a State agency's grant among other State agencies with approved Plans. These funds are the only source of Federal funds to States available under section 28 of the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008, as amended, for SNAP nutrition education and obesity prevention services. Funds in excess of the grants are not eligible for SNAP Federal reimbursement. The grant requires no State contribution or match;

(B) Shall identify the uses of funding for State or local projects and show that the funding received shall remain under the administrative control of the State agency;

(C) For each of fiscal years (FY) 2011-2013, each State agency that submitted an approved 2009 SNAP-Ed Plan received a Federal grant based on the State's SNAP-Ed expenditures in FY 2009, as reported to the Secretary in February 2010, in proportion to FY 2009 SNAP-Ed expenditures by all States in that year.

(D) For FY 2014 and subsequent years, the allocation formula (prescribed in section 28(d)(2)(A) of the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008) is based on a ratio of:

(1) A State's share of national SNAP-Ed expenditures in FY 2009 in relation to State SNAP-Ed expenditures nationally (as described in paragraph (d)(2)(x)(C) of this section) and

(2) The percentage of the number of individuals participating in SNAP in the State during the preceding fiscal year in relation to the percentage of SNAP participation nationally during that year.

(E) The second part of the formula applicable to FY 2014 and subsequent years, the ratio of SNAP participation in a State in relation to SNAP participation nationally, will annually increase as a percentage of the annual Federal SNAP-Ed funding. In FY 2014, the formula's ratio of State FY 2009 SNAP-Ed expenditures to SNAP participation was 90/10. SNAP participation will increase as a factor in the funding formula until FY 2018, when the ratio will be 50/50. The 50/50 ratio shall continue after FY 2018.

The allocations to a State for SNAP-Ed grants will be:

(1) For FY 2013, in direct proportion to a State's SNAP-Ed expenditures for FY 2009, as reported in February 2010;

(2) For FY 2014, 90 percent based on a State's FY 2009 SNAP-Ed expenditures, and 10 percent based on the State's share of national SNAP participants for the 12-month period February 1, 2012 to January 31, 2013;

(3) For FY 2015, 80 percent based on a State's FY 2009 SNAP-Ed expenditures, and 20 percent based on the State's share of national SNAP participants for the 12-month period February 1, 2013 to January 31, 2014;

(4) For FY 2016, 70 percent based on a State's FY 2009 SNAP-Ed expenditures, and 30 percent based on the State's share of national SNAP participants for the 12-month period February 1, 2014 to January 31, 2015;

(5) For FY 2017, 60 percent based on a State's FY 2009 SNAP-Ed expenditures, and 40 percent based on the State's share of national SNAP participants for the 12-month period February 1, 2015 to January 31, 2016; and,

(6) For FY 2018 and subsequent years, 50 percent based on a State's FY 2009 SNAP-Ed expenditures, and 50 percent based on the State's share of national SNAP participants for the previous 12-month period ending January 31;

(F) If a participating State agency notifies FNS as required in (ix) above that it will not obligate or expend all of the funds allocated to it for a fiscal year under this section, FNS may reallocate the unobligated or unexpended funds to other participating State agencies that have approved SNAP-Ed Plans during the period for which the funding is available for new obligations by FNS. Reallocated funds received by a State will be considered part of its base FY 2009 allocation for the purpose of determining the State's allocation for the next fiscal year; funds surrendered by a State shall not be considered part of its base FY 2009 allocation for the next fiscal year for the purpose of determining the State's allocation for the next fiscal year.

(xi) Fiscal recordkeeping and reporting requirements. Each participating State agency must meet FNS fiscal recordkeeping and reporting requirements. Total SNAP-Ed expenditures and State, private, and other contributions to SNAP-Ed activities are reported through the financial reporting means and in the timeframe designated by FNS;

(xii) Additional information may be required of the State agency, on an as needed basis, regarding the type of nutrition education and obesity prevention activities offered and the characteristics of the target population served, depending on the contents of the State's SNAP-Ed Plan, to determine whether nutrition education goals are being met;

(xiii) The State agency must submit a SNAP-Ed Annual Report to FNS by January 31 of each year. The report shall describe SNAP-Ed Plan project activities, outcomes, and budget for the prior year.

(e) * * *

(6) The SNAP-Ed Plan shall be signed by the head of the State agency and submitted prior to funding of nutrition education and obesity prevention activities when the State agency elects to request Federal grant funds to conduct these SNAP-Ed activities. The Plan shall be submitted for approval no later than August 15. Approved plans become effective the following FFY October 1 to September 30.

Dated: March 24, 2016. Audrey Rowe, Administrator, Food and Nutrition Service.
[FR Doc. 2016-07179 Filed 3-30-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-30-P
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Rural Housing Service 7 CFR Part 3555 RIN 0575-AD00 Single Family Housing Guaranteed Loan Program Correction

Rule document 2016-07049, beginning on page 17361 in the issue of Tuesday, March 29, 2016, was inadvertently published and is withdrawn from that issue.

[FR Doc. C1-2016-07049 Filed 3-29-16; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE 1505-01-D
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2015-3983; Directorate Identifier 2015-NM-141-AD; Amendment 39-18448; AD 2016-07-03] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes AGENCY:

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain The Boeing Company Model 747-100, 747-100B, 747-100B SUD, 747-200B, 747-300, 747SR, and 747SP series airplanes. This AD was prompted by an evaluation by the design approval holder (DAH) indicating that the upper chords of the upper deck floor beams are subject to widespread fatigue damage (WFD). This AD requires repetitive inspections for cracks at the floor panel attachment fastener holes; repetitive inspections for cracks in the upper and lower chords of the upper deck floor beams at permanent fastener locations; repetitive inspections for cracks in certain repaired and modified areas; and related investigative and corrective actions if necessary. This AD also requires repetitive replacement of the upper chords of the upper deck floor beams, including pre-replacement inspections and corrective action if necessary; and post-replacement repetitive inspections and repair if necessary. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct fatigue cracking of the upper chords of the upper deck floor beams. Undetected cracking could result in large deflection or deformation of the upper deck floor beams, resulting in damage to wire bundles and control cables for the flight control system, and reduced controllability of the airplane. Multiple adjacent severed floor beams could result in rapid decompression of the airplane.

DATES:

This AD is effective May 5, 2016.

The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of May 5, 2016.

ADDRESSES:

For service information identified in this final rule, contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management, P. O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, WA 98124-2207; telephone 206-544-5000, extension 1; fax 206-766-5680; Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You may view this referenced service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 425-227-1221. It is also available on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2015-3983.

Examining the AD Docket

You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2015-3983; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The address for the Docket Office (phone: 800-647-5527) is Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to certain The Boeing Company Model 747-100, 747-100B, 747-100B SUD, 747-200B, 747-300, 747SR, and 747SP series airplanes. The NPRM published in the Federal Register on October 6, 2015 (80 FR 60303) (“the NPRM”). The NPRM was prompted by an evaluation by the DAH indicating that the upper chords of the upper deck floor beams are subject to WFD. The NPRM proposed to require repetitive inspections for cracks at the floor panel attachment fastener holes; repetitive inspections for cracks in the upper and lower chords of the upper deck floor beams at permanent fastener locations; repetitive inspections for cracks in certain repaired and modified areas; and related investigative and corrective actions if necessary. The NPRM also proposed to require repetitive replacement of the upper chords of the upper deck floor beams, including pre-replacement inspections and corrective action if necessary; and post-replacement repetitive inspections and repair if necessary. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct fatigue cracking of the upper chords of the upper deck floor beams. Undetected cracking could result in large deflection or deformation of the upper deck floor beams, resulting in damage to wire bundles and control cables for the flight control system, and reduced controllability of the airplane. Multiple adjacent severed floor beams could result in rapid decompression of the airplane.

Comments

We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing this AD. The following presents the comments received on the NPRM and the FAA's response to each comment. A member of the public supported the NPRM and an anonymous commenter had no objection to the NPRM.

Request To Clarify Credit for Previous Actions

Boeing requested that we clarify that credit for previous actions is limited to those actions that comply with the new proposed requirements of the NPRM. Boeing noted that paragraph (m) of the proposed AD should provide credit for using Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2452, dated April 3, 2003, provided the new requirements specified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2452, Revision 1, dated July 16, 2012, are met.

We agree that clarification is necessary. Paragraph (m) of this AD, “Credit for Previous Actions,” provides credit for actions done before the effective date of this AD using Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2452, dated April 3, 2003, for the corresponding actions required by paragraphs (g), (h), and (i) of this AD. Paragraphs (g), (h), and (i) of this AD refer to Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2452, Revision 1, dated July 16, 2012, as the appropriate source of service information for accomplishing the actions required by those paragraphs. Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2452, Revision 1, dated July 16, 2012, added certain inspection locations. Therefore, for the added inspection locations specified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2452, Revision 1, dated July 16, 2012, paragraph (m) of this AD does not provide credit because Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2452, dated April 3, 2003, cannot be used for those locations. We have revised paragraph (m) of this AD to clarify that although credit is given for using Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2452, dated April 3, 2003, actions required by paragraphs (g), (h), and (i) of this AD that are not identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2452, dated April 3, 2003, must still be done.

Boeing also stated that credit should be given in the NPRM for Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2452, Revision 1, dated July 16, 2012; and Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2852, dated June 22, 2012.

We have not included Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2452, Revision 1, dated July 16, 2012; and Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2852, dated June 22, 2012; in paragraph (m) of this AD because that service information is already cited in paragraphs (g) through (k) of this AD as the only appropriate source of service information for accomplishing the actions required by this AD. As allowed by the phrase, “unless already done,” in paragraph (f) of this AD, if the requirements of this AD have already been accomplished, this AD does not require that those actions be repeated.

Request To Give Credit for Previous Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

Boeing requested that previously approved AMOCs for AD 2005-20-29, Amendment 39-14326 (70 FR 59246, October 12, 2005), be approved for the corresponding provisions of the proposed AD, provided the previously approved AMOCs satisfy the inspection locations and compliance times specified by the proposed AD. Boeing noted that AMOCs would be needed for new inspection locations and compliance times specified in the proposed AD.

We acknowledge that certain AMOCs for AD 2005-20-29, Amendment 39-14326 (70 FR 59246, October 12, 2005), might also address the actions and compliance times required by this AD. However, each individual AMOC would need to be evaluated to ensure the identified unsafe condition is addressed. Any person may request approval of an AMOC under the provisions of paragraph (o) of this AD. We have not changed this final rule in this regard.

Conclusion

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

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

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

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

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

We reviewed the following service information.

• Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2452, Revision 1, dated July 16, 2012. This service information describes procedures for repetitive open hole or surface high frequency eddy current (HFEC) inspections, as applicable, for cracks at the floor panel attachment fastener holes in certain areas and stations; repetitive surface HFEC inspections for cracks in the upper and lower chords of the upper deck floor beams at permanent fastener locations in certain areas and stations; and related investigative and corrective actions. This service information also describes procedures, for airplanes on which certain repairs or modifications are done, for repetitive open hole or surface HFEC inspections, as applicable, for cracks in the repaired and modified areas; and repair.

• Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2852, dated June 22, 2012. This service information describes procedures for repetitive replacement of the upper chords of the upper deck floor beams, including pre-replacement inspections and corrective action, and post-replacement repetitive inspections and repair.

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

Costs of Compliance

We estimate that this AD affects 67 airplanes of U.S. registry.

We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:

Estimated Costs Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per product Cost on U.S. operators Inspections specified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2452, Revision 1, dated July 16, 2012 Up to 884 work-hours × $85 per hour = $75,140, per inspection cycle $0 $75,140, per inspection cycle $5,034,380, per inspection cycle. Replacement specified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2852, dated June 22, 2012 Up to 696 work-hours × $85 per hour = $59,160, per replacement 1 $0 $59,160, per replacement $3,963,720, per replacement. Post-replacement inspections specified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2852, dated June 22, 2012 Up to 586 work-hours × $85 per hour = $49,810, per inspection cycle $0 $49,810, per inspection cycle $3,337,270, per inspection cycle. 1 We currently have no specific cost estimates associated with the parts necessary for the replacement.

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

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

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

Regulatory Findings

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

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

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

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

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

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

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

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

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

§ 39.13 [Amended]
2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): 2016-07-03 The Boeing Company: Amendment 39-18448 ; Docket No. FAA-2015-3983; Directorate Identifier 2015-NM-141-AD. (a) Effective Date

This AD is effective May 5, 2016.

(b) Affected ADs

This AD affects AD 2005-20-29, Amendment 39-14326 (70 FR 59246, October 12, 2005).

(c) Applicability

This AD applies to The Boeing Company Model 747-100, 747-100B, 747-100B SUD, 747-200B, 747-300, 747SR, and 747SP series airplanes; certificated in any category; as identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2852, dated June 22, 2012.

(d) Subject

Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 53, Fuselage.

(e) Unsafe Condition

This AD was prompted by an evaluation by the design approval holder (DAH) indicating that the upper chords of the upper deck floor beams are subject to widespread fatigue damage (WFD). We are issuing this AD to detect and correct fatigue cracking of the upper chords of the upper deck floor beams. Undetected cracking could result in large deflection or deformation of the upper deck floor beams, resulting in damage to wire bundles and control cables for the flight control system, and reduced controllability of the airplane. Multiple adjacent severed floor beams could result in rapid decompression of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Repetitive Inspections of the Upper Chords of the Upper Deck Floor Beams

At the applicable times specified in Tables 1 through 7 of paragraph 1.E., “Compliance,” of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2452, Revision 1, dated July 16, 2012, except as required by paragraph (l)(1) of this AD: Do the inspections specified in paragraphs (g)(1) and (g)(2) of this AD, and do all applicable related investigative and corrective actions, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2452, Revision 1, dated July 16, 2012, except as required by paragraph (l)(2) of this AD. Repeat the inspections specified in paragraphs (g)(1) and (g)(2) of this AD thereafter at the applicable times specified in Tables 1 through 7 of paragraph 1.E., “Compliance,” of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2452, Revision 1, dated July 16, 2012. Do all applicable related investigative and corrective actions before further flight. Doing the inspections required by paragraphs (g)(1) and (g)(2) of this AD terminates the inspections required by paragraphs (m) and (n) of AD 2005-20-29, Amendment 39-14326 (70 FR 59246, October 12, 2005).

(1) Do an open hole or surface high frequency eddy current (HFEC) inspection, as applicable, for cracks at the fastener holes of the floor panel attachment in the applicable areas and stations identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2452, Revision 1, dated July 16, 2012.

(2) Do a surface HFEC inspection for cracks in the upper and lower chords of the upper deck floor beams at permanent fastener locations in the applicable areas and stations identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2452, Revision 1, dated July 16, 2012.

(h) Terminating Modification and Repair for the Inspection Specified in Paragraph (g)(1) of This AD

A fastener hole modification or a fastener hole repair in Area 1 or Area 2 as described in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2452, Revision 1, dated July 16, 2012, terminates the inspection of the fastener holes of the floor panel attachment required by paragraph (g)(1) of this AD for the repaired or modified area only, provided the modification and repair, including related investigative and corrective actions, are done in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2452, Revision 1, dated July 16, 2012, except as required by paragraph (l)(2) of this AD.

(i) Post Modification/Repair Repetitive Inspections

(1) For airplanes on which any fastener hole modification or any fastener hole repair was done as specified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2452: Except as required by paragraph (i)(2) of this AD, at the applicable times specified in Tables 8 and 9 of paragraph 1.E., “Compliance,” of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2452, Revision 1, dated July 16, 2012, or within 1,000 flight cycles after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later, do an open hole or surface HFEC inspection, as applicable, for cracks in the repaired and modified areas, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2452, Revision 1, dated July 16, 2012. If any cracking is found, before further flight, repair using a method approved in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (o) of this AD. Repeat the applicable inspections thereafter at the times specified in Tables 8 and 9 of paragraph 1.E., “Compliance,” of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2452, Revision 1, dated July 16, 2012. Doing an inspection required by this paragraph terminates the inspections required by paragraph (p) of AD 2005-20-29, Amendment 39-14326 (70 FR 59246, October 12, 2005).

(2) For any repair #10 or repair #13 done as specified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2452: Before further flight, do post-repair inspections using a method approved in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (o) of this AD.

(j) Replacement of the Upper Chords of the Upper Deck Floor Beams (Includes Pre-Replacement Inspections)

Replace the upper chords of the upper deck floor beams by doing the actions required by paragraphs (j)(1) and (j)(2) of this AD at the times specified in those paragraphs. Accomplishing the replacement required by this paragraph terminates the inspections required by paragraphs (g) and (i) of this AD.

(1) Before the accumulation of 30,000 total flight cycles, or within 3,000 flight cycles after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later, do an open hole HFEC inspection for cracks at certain fastener locations in the floor beam webs and side of body frames, and do a detailed inspection for cracks of any removed part that will be re-installed, and do all applicable corrective actions, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2852, dated June 22, 2012, except as required by paragraph (l)(2) of this AD. Do all applicable corrective actions before further flight.

(2) Before further flight after accomplishing the inspections required by paragraph (j)(1) of this AD, install new upper chords of the upper deck floor beams and reinforcing straps or angles, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2852, dated June 22, 2012, except as required by paragraph (l)(2) of this AD.

(k) Post-Replacement Repetitive Inspections

For airplanes on which any replacement required by paragraph (j) or (k)(2)(ii) of this AD is done: At the applicable times specified in Tables 2 through 4 in paragraph 1.E., “Compliance,” of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2852, dated June 22, 2012, do HFEC inspections for cracks at the permanent fastener holes and the upper chords of the upper deck floor beams, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2452, Revision 1, dated July 16, 2012.

(1) If any cracking is found during any inspection required by the introductory text of paragraph (k) or paragraph (k)(2)(i) of this AD, before further flight, repair using a method approved in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (o) of this AD.

(2) If no cracking is found during any inspection required by the introductory text of paragraph (k) or paragraph (k)(2)(i) of this AD, do the actions required by paragraphs (k)(2)(i) and (k)(2)(ii) of this AD.

(i) Repeat the inspections specified in paragraph (k) of this AD thereafter at the applicable times specified in Tables 8 and 9 of paragraph 1.E., “Compliance,” of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2452, Revision 1, dated July 16, 2012.

(ii) Within 10,000 flight cycles after accomplishing the initial HFEC inspections required by the introductory text of paragraph (k) of this AD, replace the upper chords of the upper deck floor beams by doing the actions specified in paragraphs (j)(1) and (j)(2) of this AD.

(l) Exceptions to Service Information

(1) Where Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2452, Revision 1, dated July 16, 2012, specifies a compliance time “after the Revision 1 date of this service bulletin,” this AD requires compliance within the specified compliance time after the effective date of this AD.

(2) Where Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2452, Revision 1, dated July 16, 2012; or Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2852, dated June 22, 2012; specifies to contact Boeing for appropriate action: Before further flight, repair using a method approved in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (o) of this AD.

(m) Credit for Previous Actions

This paragraph provides credit for the actions required by paragraphs (g), (h), and (i) of this AD, if those actions were performed before the effective date of this AD using Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2452, dated April 3, 2003. For the actions required by paragraphs (g), (h), and (i) of this AD that are not identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2452, dated April 3, 2003, those actions must still be done. Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2452, dated April 3, 2003, is incorporated by reference in AD 2005-20-29, Amendment 39-14326 (70 FR 59246, October 12, 2005).

(n) Special Flight Permit

Special flight permits, as described in Section 21.197 and Section 21.199 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.197 and 21.199), are not allowed.

(o) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

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

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

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

(p) Related Information

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

(2) Service information identified in this AD that is not incorporated by reference is available at the addresses specified in paragraphs (q)(3) and (q)(4) of this AD.

(q) Material Incorporated by Reference

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

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

(i) Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2452, Revision 1, dated July 16, 2012.

(ii) Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2852, dated June 22, 2012.

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

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

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

Issued in Renton, Washington, on March 20, 2016. Michael Kaszycki, Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2016-07024 Filed 3-30-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2015-2208; Directorate Identifier 2015-NE-19-AD; Amendment 39-18447; AD 2016-07-02] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Honeywell International Inc. (Type Certificate Previously Held by AlliedSignal Inc., Garrett Turbine Engine Company) Turbofan Engines AGENCY:

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain Honeywell International Inc. (Honeywell) TFE731-4, -4R, -5AR, -5BR, and -5R turbofan engines. This AD was prompted by a report of certain interstage turbine transition (ITT) ducts failing to meet containment capability requirements. This AD requires replacing certain ITT ducts. We are issuing this AD to prevent failure of the ITT duct, which could lead to an uncontained part release, damage to the engine, and damage to the airplane.

DATES:

This AD is effective May 5, 2016

The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of May 5, 2016.

ADDRESSES:

For service information identified in this final rule, contact Honeywell International Inc., 111 S 34th Street, Phoenix, AZ 85034-2802; phone: 800-601-3099; Internet: https://myaerospace.honeywell.com/wps/portal/!ut/. You may view this service information at the FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate, 1200 District Avenue, Burlington, MA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 781-238-7125. It is also available on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2015-2208.

Examining the AD Docket

You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2015-2208; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The address for the Docket Office (phone: 800-647-5527) is Document Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Joseph Costa, Aerospace Engineer, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 3960 Paramount Blvd., Lakewood, CA 90712-4137; phone: 562-627-5246; fax: 562-627-5210; email: [email protected]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to Honeywell TFE731-4, -4R, -5AR, -5BR, and -5R turbofan engines with ITT duct, part number (P/N) 3075292-4, installed, with a serial number (S/N) listed in Table 2 of Honeywell Service Bulletin (SB) TFE731-72-3789, Revision 0, dated March 23, 2015. The NPRM published in the Federal Register on October 29, 2015 (80 FR 66481). The NPRM was prompted by report of certain ITT ducts that were not properly heat treated and failed to meet containment capability requirements. The NPRM proposed to require replacing certain ITT ducts. We are issuing this AD to correct the unsafe condition on these products.

Comments

We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing this AD. We received no comments on the NPRM (80 FR 66481, October 29, 2015) or on the determination of the cost to the public.

Conclusion

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

• Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the NPRM (80 FR 66481, October 29, 2015) for correcting the unsafe condition; and

• Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was already proposed in the NPRM (80 FR 66481, October 29, 2015).

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

We reviewed Honeywell SB TFE731-72-3789, Revision 0, dated March 23, 2015. The SB describes procedures for removing affected ITT ducts. This service information is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

Costs of Compliance

We estimate that this AD affects 47 engines installed on airplanes of U.S. registry. We also estimate that it will take about 2 hours per engine to comply with this AD. The average labor rate is $85 per hour. We estimate that replacement parts will cost $15,000 per engine. Based on these figures, we estimate the total cost of the AD to U.S. operators to be $712,990.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

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

Regulatory Findings

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

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

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

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

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

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

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

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

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

§ 39.13 [Amended]
2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): 2016-07-02 Honeywell International Inc. (Type Certificate previously held by AlliedSignal Inc., Garrett Turbine Engine Company): Amendment 39-18447; Docket No. FAA-2015-2208; Directorate Identifier 2015-NE-19-AD. (a) Effective Date

This AD is effective May 5, 2016.

(b) Affected ADs

None.

(c) Applicability

This AD applies to all Honeywell International Inc. (Honeywell) TFE731-4, -4R, -5AR, -5BR, and -5R turbofan engines with an interstage turbine transition (ITT) duct, part number (P/N) 3075292-4, installed, with a serial number (S/N) listed in Table 2 of Honeywell Service Bulletin (SB) TFE731-72-3789, Revision 0, dated March 23, 2015.

(d) Unsafe Condition

This AD was prompted by a report of certain ITT ducts failing to meet containment capability requirements. We are issuing this AD to prevent failure of the ITT duct, which could lead to an uncontained part release, damage to the engine, and damage to the airplane.

(e) Compliance

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

(1) At the next removal of the ITT duct from the engine not to exceed 2,600 hours time-in-service after the effective date of this AD, remove the affected ITT duct and replace with a part eligible for installation.

(2) Reserved.

(f) Definition

For the purpose of this AD, a part eligible for installation is an ITT duct with an S/N that is not listed in Table 2 of Honeywell SB TFE731-72-3789, Revision 0, dated March 23, 2015 or, if listed in Table 2 of this SB, was reworked using Honeywell SB TFE731-72-3789.

(g) Installation Prohibition

After the effective date of this AD, do not install any ITT duct with an S/N listed in Table 2 of Honeywell SB TFE731-72-3789, Revision 0, dated March 23, 2015, onto any engine, unless the ITT duct is marked with the overhaul/repair instructions number “P35864” near the ITT duct P/N and S/N markings.

(h) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

The Manager, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, may approve AMOCs for this AD. Use the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19 to make your request.

(i) Related Information

For more information about this AD, contact Joseph Costa, Aerospace Engineer, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 3960 Paramount Blvd., Lakewood, CA 90712-4137; phone: 562-627-5246; fax: 562-627-5210; email: [email protected]

(j) Material Incorporated by Reference

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

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

(i) Honeywell Service Bulletin TFE731-72-3789, Revision 0, dated March 23, 2015.

(ii) Reserved.

(3) For Honeywell service information identified in this AD, contact Honeywell International Inc., 111 S 34th Street, Phoenix, AZ 85034-2802; phone: 800-601-3099; Internet: https://myaerospace.honeywell.com/wps/portal/!ut/.

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

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

Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on March 21, 2016. Colleen M. D'Alessandro, Manager, Engine & Propeller Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2016-07231 Filed 3-30-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2016-5422; Directorate Identifier 2016-CE-011-AD; Amendment 39-18456; AD 2016-07-11] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Weatherly Aircraft Company Airplanes AGENCY:

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION:

Final rule; request for comments.

SUMMARY:

We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all Weatherly Aircraft Company Models 201, 201A, 201B, 201C, 620, 620A, 620B, 620B-TG, and 620TP airplanes. This AD requires visually inspecting the center and outer wing front spar lower hinge fittings for cracks and corrosion and taking all necessary corrective actions. This AD also requires sending the inspection results to the FAA. This AD was prompted by a report of cracks found on the center wing front spar lower hinge fitting. We are issuing this AD to correct the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES:

This AD is effective April 15, 2016.

We must receive comments on this AD by May 16, 2016.

ADDRESSES:

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

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

Fax: 202-493-2251.

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

Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

Examining the AD Docket

You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-5422; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street address for the Docket Office (phone: 800-647-5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Mike Lee, Aerospace Engineer, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, 3960 Paramount Blvd., Suite 100, Lakewood, California, 90712; phone: (562) 627-5325; fax: (562) 627-5210; email: [email protected]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

Recently, a Weatherly Aircraft Company Model 620B airplane crashed while conducting agricultural operations. Preliminary investigation indicates presence of fatigue cracks in the center wing front spar lower hinge fitting of the accident aircraft. As a result of voluntary operator inspections, an additional cracked fitting in the center wing joint was recently reported.

Investigation reveals that the cracks resulted from fatigue damage on the hinge fitting and that routine maintenance practices are not finding this damage. This condition, if not detected and corrected, could result in failure of the wing front spar lower hinge fittings, which could cause the wing to separate and cause loss of control. We are issuing this AD to correct the unsafe condition on these products.

FAA's Determination

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

AD Requirements

This AD requires visually inspecting the center and outer wing front spar lower hinge fittings for cracks and corrosion and taking all necessary corrective actions. This AD also requires sending the inspection results to the FAA.

Based on the reports received from the AD requirements, we will work with the type certificate holder to evaluate that information to determine whether repetitive inspections are necessary and/or a possible terminating action. Based on this evaluation, we may initiate further rulemaking action to address the unsafe condition identified in this AD.

FAA's Justification and Determination of the Effective Date

An unsafe condition exists that requires the immediate adoption of this AD. The FAA has found that the risk to the flying public justifies waiving notice and comment prior to adoption of this rule because failure of the wing front spar lower hinge fitting could cause the wing to separate from the airplane and cause loss of control. Therefore, we find that notice and opportunity for prior public comment are impracticable and that good cause exists for making this amendment effective in less than 30 days.

Comments Invited

This AD is a final rule that involves requirements affecting flight safety and was not preceded by notice and an opportunity for public comment. However, we invite you to send any written data, views, or arguments about this AD. Send your comments to an address listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include the docket number FAA-2016-5422 and Directorate Identifier 2016-CE-011-AD at the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this AD. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this AD because of those comments.

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

Costs of Compliance

We estimate that this AD affects 95 airplanes of U.S. registry.

We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:

Estimated Costs Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per
  • product
  • Cost on U.S. operators
    Visually inspect the center and outer wing front spar lower hinge fitting 2 work-hours × $85 per hour = $170 N/A $170 $16,150

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

    On-Condition Costs Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per product Replace wing front spar lower hinge fitting 6 work-hours × $85 per hour = $510 per fitting $800 per fitting $1,310 per fitting. Remove corrosion on wing front spar lower hinge fitting 2 work-hours × $85 per hour = $170 N/A $170. Paperwork Reduction Act

    A federal agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, nor shall a person be subject to penalty for failure to comply with a collection of information subject to the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act unless that collection of information displays a current valid OMB control number. The control number for the collection of information required by this AD is 2120-0056. The paperwork cost associated with this AD has been detailed in the Costs of Compliance section of this document and includes time for reviewing instructions, as well as completing and reviewing the collection of information. Therefore, all reporting associated with this AD is mandatory. Comments concerning the accuracy of this burden and suggestions for reducing the burden should be directed to the FAA at 800 Independence Ave. SW., Washington, DC 20591. ATTN: Information Collection Clearance Officer, AES-200.

    Authority for This Rulemaking

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

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

    Regulatory Findings

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

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

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

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

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

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

    List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

    Adoption of the Amendment

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

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

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

    § 39.13 [Amended]
    2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): 2016-07-11 Weatherly Aircraft Company: Amendment 39-18456; Docket No. FAA-2016-5422; Directorate Identifier 2016-CE-011-AD. (a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective April 15, 2016.

    (b) Affected ADs

    None.

    (c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Weatherly Aircraft Company Models 201, 201A, 201B, 201C, 620, 620A, 620B, 620B-TG, and 620TP airplanes, all serial numbers, that:

    (1) have center and outer wing front spar lower hinge fittings, part number 40223 (any dash number configuration), installed; and

    (2) are certificated in any category.

    (d) Subject

    Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC)/Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 57, Wing Attach Fittings.

    (e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by a report of cracks found on the center wing front spar lower hinge fitting. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct cracks and corrosion in the center and outer wing front spar lower hinge fitting, which could cause the fittings to fail. Failure of the wing front spar lower hinge fitting could result in the wing separating from the airplane and loss of control.

    (f) Compliance

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

    (g) Inspection

    Within the next 30 days after April 15, 2016 (the effective date of this AD), do a close visual inspection of the center and outer wing front spar lower hinge fittings for cracks and corrosion. Prior to the inspection do the following:

    (1) Remove the left and right center wing to outer wing joint covers from the airplane.

    (2) Remove the lower forward wing hinge pin bolt caps.

    (h) Replacement

    If any cracks are found during the inspection required in paragraph (g) of this AD, before further flight, replace the cracked wing front spar lower hinge fitting with an airworthy part.

    (i) Repair

    If any corrosion is found during the inspection required in paragraph (g) of this AD, before further flight, remove up to .020 inches of the wing front spar lower hinge fitting material in any direction to repair corrosion. Replace any parts requiring removal of more than .020-inch of wing front spar lower hinge fitting. Any operator may request an alternative to the replacement requirement using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19 and paragraph (m) of this AD.

    (j) Reporting Requirement

    Within the next 10 days after the inspection required in paragraph (g) of this AD or within 10 days after April 15, 2016 (the effective date of this AD), whichever occurs later, report the result of the inspection to the FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), Attn: Mike Lee, Aerospace Engineer, 3960 Paramount Blvd. Suite 100, Lakewood, California, 90712; fax: (562) 627-5210; email: [email protected] Include the following information. Please identify AD 2016-07-11 in the subject line if submitted through email.

    (1) Airplane serial number.

    (2) Hours time-in-service at time of inspection.

    (3) A description of any cracks found.

    (4) A description of any corrosion found.

    (k) Special Flight Permit

    Special flight permits are allowed for this AD per 14 CFR 39.23 for the requirement to remove up to .020 inches of corrosion as required in paragraph (i) of this AD. Special flight permits are prohibited for all other requirements of this AD.

    (l) Paperwork Reduction Act Burden Statement

    A federal agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, nor shall a person be subject to a penalty for failure to comply with a collection of information subject to the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act unless that collection of information displays a current valid OMB Control Number. The OMB Control Number for this information collection is 2120-0056. Public reporting for this collection of information is estimated to be approximately 5 minutes per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, completing and reviewing the collection of information. All responses to this collection of information are mandatory. Comments concerning the accuracy of this burden and suggestions for reducing the burden should be directed to the FAA at: 800 Independence Ave. SW., Washington, DC 20591, Attn: Information Collection Clearance Officer, AES-200.

    (m) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

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

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

    (n) Related Information

    For information on the subject matter of this AD, contact either:

    (1) Weatherly Aircraft Company at phone: (316) 361-0101; email: [email protected]; or

    (2) Mike Lee, Aerospace Engineer, Aerospace Engineer, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, 3960 Paramount Blvd. Suite 100, Lakewood, California, 90712; phone: (562) 627-5325; fax: (562) 627-5210; email: [email protected]

    Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on March 25, 2016. Pat Mullen, Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
    [FR Doc. 2016-07228 Filed 3-30-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2016-5033; Directorate Identifier 2015-NM-118-AD; Amendment 39-18450; AD 2016-07-05] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes AGENCY:

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Final rule; request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain The Boeing Company Model 747-8 series airplanes. This AD requires an inspection to determine if all oxygen components in the passenger oxygen system are installed, installation of new o-rings, and corrective actions if necessary. This AD was prompted by a report that oxygen tube couplings in the passenger oxygen system could be missing or incorrectly installed. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct oxygen leaks from oxygen tube couplings in the passenger oxygen system, which could result in depletion of emergency oxygen at a faster rate than expected, reduce the passengers' and crews' protection from hypoxia at elevated cabin altitudes, and increase the risk of a fire.

    DATES:

    This AD is effective April 15, 2016.

    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of April 15, 2016.

    We must receive comments on this AD by May 16, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

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

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

    Fax: 202-493-2251.

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

    Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

    For service information identified in this final rule, contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management, P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, WA 98124-2207; telephone 206-544-5000, extension 1; fax 206-766-5680; Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You may view this referenced service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 425-227-1221. It is also available on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-5033.

    Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-5033; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street address for the Docket Office (phone: 800-647-5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Susan Monroe, Aerospace Engineer, Cabin Safety and Environmental Systems Branch, ANM-150S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA; phone: 425-917-6457; fax: 425-917-6590; email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Discussion

    We have determined that some Model 747-8 series airplanes could have oxygen components missing or incorrectly installed at oxygen tube couplings attached to the outboard stowage bin support assemblies. The manufacturer believes that these airplanes were delivered with the correct configuration of oxygen components. However, because of an error in an engineering drawing and related parts list, which omitted part number call-outs for some oxygen components, we want to be certain installations are correct and prevent incorrect installation during subsequent rework of the oxygen tubing components. This condition, if not corrected, could result in oxygen leaks from oxygen tube couplings in the passenger oxygen system, which could result in depletion of emergency oxygen at a faster rate than expected, reduce the passengers' and crews' protection from hypoxia at elevated cabin altitudes, and increase the risk of a fire.

    Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    We reviewed Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 747-35-2132, dated June 8, 2015. The service information describes procedures for inspection of passenger oxygen coupler assemblies for missing oxygen components, installation of o-rings, and corrective actions. This service information is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

    FAA's Determination

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

    AD Requirements

    This AD requires accomplishing the actions identified in the service information identified previously. For information on the procedures and compliance times, see this service information at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-5033.

    The phrase “corrective actions” is used in this AD. “Corrective actions” are actions that correct or address any condition found. Corrective actions in an AD could include, for example, repairs.

    This AD also requires sending the inspection results to the Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, FAA.

    FAA's Justification and Determination of the Effective Date

    There are no products of this type currently registered in the United States. However, this rule is necessary to ensure that the described unsafe condition is addressed if any of these products are placed on the U.S. Register in the future. Therefore, we find that notice and opportunity for prior public comment are unnecessary and that good cause exists for making this amendment effective in less than 30 days.

    Comments Invited

    This AD is a final rule that involves requirements affecting flight safety and was not preceded by notice and an opportunity for public comment. However, we invite you to send any written data, views, or arguments about this AD. Send your comments to an address listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include “Docket No. FAA-2016-5033; Directorate Identifier 2015-NM-118-AD” at the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this AD. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this AD because of those comments.

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

    Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 0 airplanes of U.S. registry.

    We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:

    Estimated Costs Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per
  • product
  • Cost on U.S. operators
    Inspection 8 work-hours × $85 per hour = $680 $0 $680 $0 Reporting 1 work-hour × $85 per hour = $85 0 85 0

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

    On-Condition Costs Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per
  • product
  • Corrective Action 8 work-hours × $85 per hour = $680 $6,888 $7,568

    According to the manufacturer, some of the costs of this AD may be covered under warranty, thereby reducing the cost impact on affected individuals. We do not control warranty coverage for affected individuals. As a result, we have included all costs in our cost estimate.

    Paperwork Reduction Act

    A federal agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, nor shall a person be subject to penalty for failure to comply with a collection of information subject to the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act unless that collection of information displays a current valid OMB control number. The control number for the collection of information required by this AD is 2120-0056. The paperwork cost associated with this AD has been detailed in the Costs of Compliance section of this document and includes time for reviewing instructions, as well as completing and reviewing the collection of information. Therefore, all reporting associated with this AD is mandatory. Comments concerning the accuracy of this burden and suggestions for reducing the burden should be directed to the FAA at 800 Independence Ave. SW., Washington, DC 20591, ATTN: Information Collection Clearance Officer, AES-200.

    Authority for This Rulemaking

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

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

    Regulatory Findings

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

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

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

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

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

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

    List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

    Adoption of the Amendment

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

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

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

    § 39.13 [Amended]
    2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): 2016-07-05 The Boeing Company: Amendment 39-18450; Docket No. FAA-2016-5033 Directorate Identifier 2015-NM-118-AD. (a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective April 15, 2016.

    (b) Affected ADs

    None.

    (c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Boeing Model 747-8 series airplanes, certificated in any category, as identified in Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 747-35-2132, dated June 8, 2015.

    (d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 35, Oxygen.

    (e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by a report of oxygen tube couplings in the passenger oxygen system that could be missing or incorrectly installed. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct oxygen leaks from oxygen tube couplings in the passenger oxygen system, which could result in depletion of emergency oxygen at a faster rate than expected, reduce the passengers' and crews' protection from hypoxia at elevated cabin altitudes, and increase the risk of a fire.

    (f) Compliance

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

    (g) Inspection and Corrective Actions

    Within 72 months after the effective date of this AD: Do a general visual inspection to determine if all oxygen components are installed; and do all applicable corrective actions; in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 747-35-2132, dated June 8, 2015. Do all applicable corrective actions before further flight.

    (h) Reporting

    Submit a report of the findings (both positive and negative) of the inspection required by paragraph (g) of this AD to the Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), at the applicable time specified in paragraph (h)(1) or (h)(2) of this AD. The report must include the inspection results, a description of the condition found, and the airplane serial number.

    (1) If the inspection was done on or after the effective date of this AD: Submit the report within 30 days after the inspection.

    (2) If the inspection was done before the effective date of this AD: Submit the report within 30 days after the effective date of this AD.

    (i) Paperwork Reduction Act Burden Statement

    A federal agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, nor shall a person be subject to a penalty for failure to comply with a collection of information subject to the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act unless that collection of information displays a current valid OMB Control Number. The OMB Control Number for this information collection is 2120-0056. Public reporting for this collection of information is estimated to be approximately 5 minutes per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, completing and reviewing the collection of information. All responses to this collection of information are mandatory. Comments concerning the accuracy of this burden and suggestions for reducing the burden should be directed to the FAA at: 800 Independence Ave. SW., Washington, DC 20591, Attn: Information Collection Clearance Officer, AES-200.

    (j) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

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

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

    (3) For service information that contains steps that are labeled as Required for Compliance (RC), the provisions of paragraphs (j)(3)(i) and (j)(3)(ii) apply.

    (i) The steps labeled as RC, including substeps under an RC step and any figures identified in an RC step, must be done to comply with the AD. An AMOC is required for any deviations to RC steps, including substeps and identified figures.

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

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

    (k) Related Information

    For more information about this AD, contact Susan Monroe, Aerospace Engineer, Cabin Safety and Environmental Systems Branch, ANM-150S, FAA, Seattle ACO, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA; phone: 425-917-6457; fax: 425-917-6590; email: [email protected]

    (l) Material Incorporated by Reference

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

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

    (i) Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 747-35-2132, dated June 8, 2015.

    (ii) Reserved.

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

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

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

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on March 20, 2016. Michael Kaszycki, Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
    [FR Doc. 2016-07025 Filed 3-30-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2015-3942; Directorate Identifier 2014-SW-064-AD; Amendment 39-18446; AD 2016-07-01] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation (Sikorsky) Helicopters AGENCY:

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    We are superseding Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2014-07-04R1 for certain Model S-92A helicopters. AD 2014-07-04R1 required repetitive inspections in the upper deck area for incorrectly installed clamps and chafing between the electrical wires and the hydraulic lines and replacing any unairworthy wires or hydraulic lines. This new AD requires altering the wiring system in the upper deck area to correct the unsafe condition described in AD 2014-07-04R1. We are issuing this AD to prevent a fire in an area of the helicopter without extinguishing capability and subsequent loss of control of the helicopter.

    DATES:

    This AD is effective May 5, 2016.

    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of May 5, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    For service information identified in this final rule, contact Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation, Customer Service Engineering, 124 Quarry Road, Trumbull, CT 06611; telephone 1-800-Winged-S or 203-416-4299; email [email protected] You may review service information at the FAA, Office of the Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Room 6N-321, Fort Worth, Texas 76177. It is also on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2015-3942.

    Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov in Docket No. FAA-2015-3942; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, any incorporated-by-reference information, the economic evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The address for the Docket Office (phone: 800-647-5527) is Document Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ian Lucas, Aviation Safety Engineer, Boston Aircraft Certification Office, Engine & Propeller Directorate, FAA, 1200 District Avenue, Burlington, Massachusetts 01803; telephone (781) 238-7757; email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR part 39 to remove AD 2014-07-04R1, Amendment 39-17964 (79 FR 54893, September 15, 2014) and add a new AD. AD 2014-07-04R1 applied to certain serial-numbered Sikorsky S92A helicopters and required repetitively inspecting the upper deck area for incorrectly installed clamps and for chafing between the electrical wires and hydraulic lines.

    The NPRM published in the Federal Register on September 25, 2015 (80 FR 57751). The NPRM was prompted by an alteration developed by Sikorsky that separates and re-routes the engine inlet feeder lines. The NPRM proposed to require this alteration to prevent chafing between the electrical lines and hydraulic hoses, which could result in a fire in an area of the helicopter without extinguishing capability and subsequent loss of control of the helicopter.

    Since the NPRM was issued, the mailing address for the Boston Aircraft Certification Office has changed. We have revised this contact information in this final rule to reflect the new mailing address.

    Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing this AD, but we did not receive any comments on the NPRM (80 FR 57751, September 25, 2015).

    FAA's Determination

    We have reviewed the relevant information and determined that an unsafe condition exists and is likely to exist or develop on other helicopters of these same type designs and that air safety and the public interest require adopting the AD requirements as proposed.

    Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    Sikorsky has issued Special Service Instructions SSI No. 92-070A, Revision A, dated April 25, 2014 (SSI 92-070A), which contains procedures to alter the wiring system in the upper deck area to prevent chafing. This service information is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

    Other Related Service Information

    We also reviewed Sikorsky Alert Service Bulletin ASB 92-20-003, Basic Issue, dated May 5, 2014 (ASB 92-20-003). ASB 92-20-003 specifies a one-time modification of the upper deck wiring harnesses to prevent possible chafing by complying with SSI 92-070A.

    Differences Between This AD and the Service Information

    The service information provides a compliance date of November 5, 2015; this AD requires a compliance time of 150 hours time-in-service. Also, the service information requires submitting certain documentation to the manufacturer, and this AD does not.

    Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD will affect 20 helicopters of U.S. Registry.

    We estimate that operators may incur the following costs in order to comply with this AD. Labor costs are estimated at $85 per work-hour. Rerouting the upper deck wiring system and replacing and installing new parts will take 58 work-hours and $8,000 in required parts, for a total cost of $12,930 per helicopter and $258,600 for the fleet.

    Authority for This Rulemaking

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

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

    Regulatory Findings

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

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

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

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

    (3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska to the extent that a regulatory distinction is required, and

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

    List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

    Adoption of the Amendment

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

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

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

    § 39.13 [Amended]
    2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by removing Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2014-07-04R1, Amendment 39-17964 (79 FR 54893, September 15, 2014), and adding the following new AD: 2016-07-01 Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation: Amendment 39-18446; Docket No. FAA-2015-3942; Directorate Identifier 2014-SW-064-AD. (a) Applicability

    This AD applies to Model S-92A helicopters, serial number 920006 through 920084, certificated in any category.

    (b) Unsafe Condition

    This AD defines the unsafe condition as an incorrectly installed clamp that does not provide adequate clearance to prevent chafing between the high voltage electrical lines and the hydraulic hoses. This condition could result in a fire in an area of the helicopter without extinguishing capability and subsequent loss of control of the helicopter.

    (c) Affected ADs

    This AD supersedes AD 2014-07-04R1, Amendment 39-17964 (79 FR 54893, September 15, 2014).

    (d) Effective Date

    This AD becomes effective May 5, 2016.

    (e) Compliance

    You are responsible for performing each action required by this AD within the specified compliance time unless it has already been accomplished prior to that time.

    (f) Required Actions

    Within 150 hours time-in-service, reroute the left hand and right hand upper deck wiring system by complying with the Instructions, paragraph B, of Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation Special Service Instructions SSI No. 92-070A, Revision A, dated April 25, 2014.

    (g) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Boston Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, may approve AMOCs for this AD. Send your proposal to: Ian Lucas, Aviation Safety Engineer, Engine & Propeller Directorate, FAA, 1200 District Avenue, Burlington, Massachusetts 01803; telephone (781) 238-7757; email [email protected]

    (2) For operations conducted under a 14 CFR part 119 operating certificate or under 14 CFR part 91, subpart K, we suggest that you notify your principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the local flight standards district office or certificate holding district office before operating any aircraft complying with this AD through an AMOC.

    (h) Additional Information

    Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation Alert Service Bulletin ASB 92-20-003, Basic Issue, dated May 5, 2014, which is not incorporated by reference, contains additional information about the subject of this AD. For service information identified in this final rule, contact Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation, Customer Service Engineering, 124 Quarry Road, Trumbull, CT 06611; telephone 1-800-Winged-S or 203-416-4299; email [email protected] You may review a copy of this service information at the FAA, Office of the Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Room 6N-321, Fort Worth, TX 76177.

    (i) Subject

    Joint Aircraft Service Component (JASC) Code: 2910 Main Hydraulic System.

    (j) Material Incorporated by Reference

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

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

    (i) Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation Special Service Instructions SSI No. 92-070A, Revision A, dated April 25, 2014.

    (ii) Reserved.

    (3) For service information identified in this final rule, contact Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation, Customer Service Engineering, 124 Quarry Road, Trumbull, CT 06611; telephone 1-800-Winged-S or 203-416-4299; email [email protected]

    (4) You may view this service information at FAA, Office of the Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy, Room 6N-321, Fort Worth, TX 76177. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call (817) 222-5110.

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

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on March 21, 2016. Scott A. Horn, Acting Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
    [FR Doc. 2016-06906 Filed 3-30-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2015-4212; Directorate Identifier 2015-NM-010-AD; Amendment 39-18451; AD 2016-07-06] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; BAE Systems (Operations) Limited Airplanes AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all BAE Systems (Operations) Limited Model BAe 146 series airplanes and Model Avro 146-RJ series airplanes. This AD was prompted by reports of cracking of the main fitting of the nose landing gear (NLG) and a determination that a new safe-life limitation for affected NLG main fittings has not been mandated. This AD requires replacing affected NLG main fittings that have exceeded the safe-life limitation with a new or serviceable fitting. We are issuing this AD to prevent collapse of the NLG, which if not corrected, could lead to degradation of direction control on the ground or an un-commanded turn to the left, and a consequent loss of control of the airplane on the ground, possibly resulting in damage to the airplane and injury to occupants.

    DATES:

    This AD becomes effective May 5, 2016.

    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of May 5, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    For service information identified in this final rule, contact BAE Systems (Operations) Limited, Customer Information Department, Prestwick International Airport, Ayrshire, KA9 2RW, Scotland, United Kingdom; telephone +44 1292 675207; fax +44 1292 675704; email [email protected]; Internet http://www.baesystems.com/Businesses/RegionalAircraft/index.htm. You may view this referenced service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 425-227-1221. It is also available on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2015-4212.

    Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2015-4212; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street address for the Docket Operations office (telephone 800-647-5527) is Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Todd Thompson, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; telephone 425-227-1175; fax 425-227-1149.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to all BAE Systems (Operations) Limited Model BAe 146 series airplanes and Model Avro 146-RJ series airplanes. The NPRM published in the Federal Register on November 12, 2015 (80 FR 69903) (“the NPRM”).

    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA Airworthiness Directive 2012-0191R1, dated November 6, 2012 (referred to after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or “the MCAI”), to correct an unsafe condition for all BAE Systems (Operations) Limited Model BAe 146 series airplanes and Model Avro 146-RJ series airplanes. The MCAI states:

    Several occurrences of the aeroplane`s Nose Landing Gear (NLG) Main Fitting cracking have been reported. Subsequently in different cases, NLG Main Fitting crack lead to collapsed NLG, locked NLG steering and an aeroplane`s un-commanded steering to the left.

    Cracks in the NLG Bell Housing are not detectable with the NLG fitted to the aeroplane and are difficult to detect during overhaul without substantial disassembly of the gear.

    This condition, if not corrected, could lead to degradation of directional control on the ground or an un-commanded turn to the left and a consequent loss of control of the aeroplane on the ground, possibly resulting in damage to the aeroplane and injury to occupants.

    Prompted by these findings, BAE Systems (Operations) Ltd issued Inspection Service Bulletin (ISB) 32-186 (hereafter referred to as the ISB) to introduce a new safe life of 16,000 flight cycles (FC) for certain NLG main fittings, having a Part Number (P/N) as identified in Paragraph 1A, tables 1, 2 and 3 of the ISB.

    To correct this unsafe condition, EASA issued [EASA] AD 2012-0191 to require implementation of the new safe-life limitation for the affected NLG main fittings and replacement of fittings that have already exceeded the new limit.

    You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2015-4212.

    Comments

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

    Conclusion

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

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

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

    Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    BAE Systems (Operations) Limited has issued Inspection Service Bulletin ISB.32-186, dated April 12, 2012. This service information describes procedures for reviewing airplane records to determine the part number for the NLG main fittings, and determining the compliance times for replacing the NLG main fittings, and replacing the fitting with a new or serviceable fitting. This service information is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

    Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 4 airplanes of U.S. registry.

    We also estimate that it takes about 36 work-hours per product to comply with the basic requirements of this AD. The average labor rate is $85 per work-hour. Required parts will cost $81,000 per product. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of this AD on U.S. operators to be $336,240, or $84,060 per product.

    Authority for This Rulemaking

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

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

    Regulatory Findings

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

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

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

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

    3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska; and

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

    List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

    Adoption of the Amendment

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

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

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

    § 39.13 [Amended]
    2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): 2016-07-06 BAE Systems (Operations) Limited: Amendment 39-18451. Docket No. FAA-2015-4212; Directorate Identifier 2015-NM-010-AD. (a) Effective Date

    This AD becomes effective May 5, 2016.

    (b) Affected ADs

    None.

    (c) Applicability

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

    (d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 05, Time Limits/Maintenance Checks.

    (e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by reports of cracking of the main fitting of the nose landing gear (NLG) and a determination that a new safe-life limitation for affected NLG main fittings has not been mandated. We are issuing this AD to prevent collapse of the NLG, which if not corrected, could lead to degradation of direction control on the ground or an uncommanded turn to the left, and a consequent loss of control of the airplane on the ground, possibly resulting in damage to the airplane and injury to occupants.

    (f) Compliance

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

    (g) Repetitive Replacement of NLG Main Fitting

    At the applicable compliance time specified in paragraphs (g)(1) through (g)(4) of this AD: Replace each affected NLG main fitting, having a part number (P/N) as identified in paragraph 1.A, tables 1., 2., and 3. of BAE Systems (Operations) Limited Inspection Service Bulletin ISB.32-186, dated April 12, 2012, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of that BAE Systems (Operations) Limited Inspection Service Bulletin ISB.32-186, dated April 12, 2012. Thereafter, before the accumulation of 16,000 flight cycles on any affected NLG main fitting having a part number as identified in paragraph 1.A, tables 1., 2., and 3. of BAE Systems (Operations) Limited Inspection Service Bulletin ISB.32-186, dated April 12, 2012, replace each affected NLG main fitting, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of that BAE Systems (Operations) Limited Inspection Service Bulletin ISB.32-186, dated April 12, 2012.

    (1) For NLG main fittings that have accumulated 29,000 flight cycles or more since first installation on an airplane: Within 12 months after the effective date of this AD.

    (2) For NLG main fittings that have accumulated 20,000 flight cycles or more but less than 29,000 flight cycles since first installation on an airplane: Within 24 months after the effective date of this AD.

    (3) For NLG main fittings that have accumulated 16,000 flight cycles or more but less than 20,000 flight cycles since first installation on an airplane: Within 36 months after the effective date of this AD.

    (4) For NLG main fittings that have accumulated less than 16,000 flight cycles since first installation on an airplane: Before accumulating 16,000 flight cycles since first installation on an airplane, or within 36 months after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later.

    (h) Parts Installation Limitation

    As of the effective date of this AD, no person may install an NLG main fitting having a part number identified in paragraph 1.A., tables 1., 2., and 3., of BAE Systems (Operations) Limited Inspection Service Bulletin ISB.32-186, dated April 12, 2012, unless that fitting is in compliance with the requirements of this AD.

    (i) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:

    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information directly to the International Branch, send it to ATTN: Todd Thompson, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; telephone 425-227-1175; fax 425-227-1149. Information may be emailed to: [email protected] Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding district office. The AMOC approval letter must specifically reference this AD.

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

    (j) Related Information

    Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information (MCAI) EASA Airworthiness Directive 2012-0191R1, dated November 6, 2012, for related information. This MCAI may be found in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2015-4212.

    (k) Material Incorporated by Reference

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

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

    (i) BAE Systems (Operations) Limited Inspection Service Bulletin ISB.32-186, dated April 12, 2012.

    (ii) Reserved.

    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact BAE Systems (Operations) Limited, Customer Information Department, Prestwick International Airport, Ayrshire, KA9 2RW, Scotland, United Kingdom; telephone +44 1292 675207; fax +44 1292 675704; email [email protected]; Internet http://www.baesystems.com/Businesses/RegionalAircraft/index.htm.

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

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

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on March 20, 2016. Michael Kaszycki, Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
    [FR Doc. 2016-07020 Filed 3-30-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 71 [Docket No. FAA-2016-5391; Airspace Docket No. 16-AWA-3] RIN 2120-AA66 Removal of Class A Airspace Area Exclusion AGENCY:

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    This action removes a provision in part 71 that excludes from Class A airspace, that portion of U.S. domestic airspace that overlies the Santa Barbara and Farallon Islands and the airspace south of latitude 25°04′00″ North (overlying and in the vicinity of the Florida Keys). The effect of this provision is that the airspace from 18,000 feet MSL up to and including Flight Level (FL) 600 (within the excluded areas) is classified as Class G (uncontrolled) airspace which limits the flexibility for air traffic control operations.

    DATES:

    Effective date 0901 UTC March 31, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    For information on where to obtain copies of rulemaking documents and other information related to this final rule, see “How To Obtain Additional Information” in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Paul Gallant, Airspace Policy Group, Office of Airspace Services, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-8783.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106 describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of the airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority as it removes from 14 CFR 71.33(a) a provision that excludes the airspace in the vicinity of the Santa Barbara and Farallon Islands and the Florida Keys from U.S. Class A airspace in order to maintain the safe and efficient flow of air traffic.

    Background Positive Control Areas

    In 1958, the Civil Aeronautics Board delegated to the Administrator the authority to designate positive control route segments in any portion of the airspace between 17,000 to 35,000 feet, within which certain operational requirements would be applicable. That same year the Administrator designated in 14 CFR part 601 specific airways as positive control airspace, noting that “with experience and the acquisition of more and better equipment, the positive control area will undoubtedly, from time to time, be expanded.” 23 FR 3917 (June 5, 1958).

    In 1962, the FAA redesignated part 601 as part 71. 27 FR 10353 (Oct. 24, 1962). Section 71.15 addressed positive control areas, and § 71.193 (published separately) contained those areas designated as positive control areas. Over several years, the airspace designated as positive control areas continued to expand as anticipated with the FAA's increased capability to control air traffic. In 1965, the FAA established an expansive area of positive control airspace designated the “continental positive control area.” 30 FR 1836 (February 10, 1965). The FAA excluded from that positive control area the airspace over Santa Barbara Island and the Farallon Islands, and the airspace south of the latitude 25°04′00″ North.

    Class A Airspace

    In 1991, the FAA issued a final rule reclassifying “positive control areas” as Class A airspace.1 56 FR 65638, 65639 (Dec. 17, 1991).2 In that final rule, new § 71.33 defined Class A airspace and continued to exclude from Class A airspace that airspace over Santa Barbara Island, the Farallon Islands, and south of latitude 25°04′00″ North that was originally established in 1965.

    1 The reclassification adopted the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) letter classifications. (56 FR 65638; December 17, 1991).

    2 The effective date for the reclassification was September 16, 1993.

    Unless otherwise specified, Class A airspace in the United States consists of that airspace from 18,000 feet MSL up to and including flight level (FL) 600. Unless otherwise authorized, all persons must operate their aircraft under instrument flight rules in airspace designated as Class A and comply with the applicable requirements of 14 CFR part 91. “Class A airspace” includes, in part, “that airspace overlying the waters within 12 nautical miles of the coast of the 48 contiguous States, from 18,000 feet MSL to and including FL600 excluding the states of Alaska and Hawaii, Santa Barbara Island, Farallon Island, and the airspace south of latitude 25°04′00″ North.”

    The airspace excluded from Class A airspace over the Santa Barbara and Farallon Islands and the airspace south of 25°04′00″ North renders those portions of U.S. domestic airspace (i.e., within 12 nautical miles (NM) of the baseline of the United States) as Class G (uncontrolled) airspace, which limits the provision of air traffic control services in those areas.

    As these excluded areas lie within the 12 NM territorial limits of the United States, the airspace would ordinarily be classified as Class A airspace. When the exclusions were implemented decades ago, air traffic control services in the high altitude structure were limited due to lack of radar and radio communications coverage in some areas as well as less demand for those services. This was particularly true in the airspace near the Florida Keys.

    Impact of the Exclusion

    The lack of Class A airspace inside portions of United States domestic airspace impacts the provision of air traffic control services. Although transit of Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) traffic through uncontrolled airspace is permitted when requested by the pilot, Air Traffic Control (ATC) authority within uncontrolled airspace is limited.

    An example of the impacts is the Florida Keys area (that airspace south of latitude 25°04′00″ North) which is under the jurisdiction of the Miami Air Route Traffic Control Center (ARTCC). There are four Air Traffic Service routes that transit the airspace in question. Miami ARTCC cannot use the routes or vector aircraft through the area unless requested by the pilot. This obligates air traffic controllers to vector aircraft around the airspace. Complicating their task is the location of military warning area airspace just to the south of the Florida Keys area. When the warning areas are activated, flights have to be rerouted hundreds of miles around the airspace. With an average of 317 flights per day transiting this airspace, ATC must employ Traffic Management Initiatives (TMI) to manage the volume of traffic. These TMIs increase delays and add to users' operating costs. The Miami ARTCC area has experienced dramatic growth in international air traffic to and through the area which is expected to continue into the future.

    Another example is the Farallon Islands area which is under the jurisdiction of the Oakland ARTCC. This area falls within a corridor of arrivals and departures for international flights to San Francisco, Oakland, and San Jose, which have increased exponentially since the inception of the original exclusion. To circumvent this area of uncontrolled airspace would result in a significant impact both to the Oakland ARTCC and NAS users. Returning the Farallon Islands area to controlled airspace would reduce the workload for air traffic controllers and flight crews, which enhances safety and aids in the management of controlled airspace within the National Airspace System (NAS). In addition NAS users will gain a measurable increase in efficiency with the ability to create flight plans utilizing this area as controlled airspace.

    The Santa Barbara Island exclusion encompasses two navigation fixes and overlaps the boundary of Control Area 1318H which connects to an inbound oceanic route. The close proximity of this exclusion to the Los Angeles terminal area affects Los Angeles ARTCC operations and poses similar impacts to the NAS as described above.

    The Rule

    This action amends Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 by amending section 71.33(a) in 14 CFR part 71 to remove the words “. . . Santa Barbara Island, Farallon Island and the airspace south of latitude 25°04′00″ North.” Subparagraphs (b) and (c) in § 71.33 remain unchanged by this action.

    The FAA is taking this action because the current exclusion severely limits the FAA's ability to provide ATC services in the affected areas of U.S. domestic airspace. The FAA believes that the current Class A airspace exclusion is no longer warranted considering the expansion of radar and radio communications coverage, greater air traffic control system capabilities and increased demand for ATC services in the affected areas since the exclusion was originally promulgated. The current exclusion creates an impediment to providing ATC services and leads to air traffic delays, rerouting of air traffic, increased controller workload and reduced efficiency of the National Airspace System.

    Good Cause for Immediate Adoption

    Section 553(b)(3)(B) of the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C.) authorizes agencies to dispense with notice and comment procedures when the agency for “good cause” finds that those procedures are “impractical, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.” Under this section, an agency, upon finding good cause, may issue a final rule without seeking comment prior to the rulemaking. Based on the information presented above, the FAA has determined that prompt remedial action is necessary to enhance safety and avoid significant adverse impact on the operation of the NAS. Without immediate action, the traveling public will experience substantial flight delays. Therefore, the FAA finds that it is impractical and contrary to the public interest to delay action in order to follow the normal notice and comment procedures.

    Good Cause for Early Effective Date

    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d), publication of a substantive rule shall be made not less than 30 days before its effective date, except as otherwise provided by the agency for good cause found and published with the rule. The FAA is issuing this rule with an effective date of March 31, 2016, which is less than 30 days after publication. The FAA finds good cause because this rule will enhance safety and prevent significant adverse impact on the operation of the NAS.

    Regulatory Notices and Analyses

    Changes to Federal regulations must undergo several economic analyses. First, Executive Order 12866 and Executive Order 13563 direct that each Federal agency shall propose or adopt a regulation only upon a reasoned determination that the benefits of the intended regulation justify its costs. Second, the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (Pub. L. 96-354) requires agencies to analyze the economic impact of regulatory changes on small entities. Third, the Trade Agreements Act (Pub. L. 96-39) prohibits agencies from setting standards that create unnecessary obstacles to the foreign commerce of the United States. In developing U.S. standards, the Trade Act requires agencies to consider international standards and, where appropriate, that they be the basis of U.S. standards. Fourth, the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4) requires agencies to prepare a written assessment of the costs, benefits, and other effects of proposed or final rules that include a Federal mandate likely to result in the expenditure by State, local, or tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100 million or more annually (adjusted for inflation with base year of 1995). This portion of the preamble summarizes the FAA's analysis of the economic impacts of this [proposed/final] rule.

    Department of Transportation Order DOT 2100.5 prescribes policies and procedures for simplification, analysis, and review of regulations. If the expected cost impact is so minimal that a proposed or final rule does not warrant a full evaluation, this order permits that a statement to that effect and the basis for it to be included in the preamble if a full regulatory evaluation of the cost and benefits is not prepared. Such a determination has been made for this rule. Without this rule there will be: An impediment to providing ATC service; traffic will be rerouted; increasing air traffic delays; increase controller workload; resulting in reduced efficiency of the National Airspace System. As current traffic patterns will not change unless this rule is not issued, the economic impact of this rule will be minimal cost.

    FAA has, therefore, determined that this rule is not a “significant regulatory action” as defined in section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, and is not “significant” as defined in DOT's Regulatory Policies and Procedures.

    Regulatory Flexibility Determination

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

    Agencies must perform a review to determine whether a rule will have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. If the agency determines that it will, the agency must prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis as described in the RFA.

    However, if an agency determines that a rule is not expected to have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities, section 605(b) of the RFA provides that the head of the agency may so certify and a regulatory flexibility analysis is not required. The certification must include a statement providing the factual basis for this determination, and the reasoning should be clear.

    This rule is necessary to avoid rerouting current air traffic. The rerouting will increase miles flown, increasing fuel and crew cost. While the rule will likely impact a substantial number of small entities, it will have a minimal economic impact.

    If an agency determines that a rulemaking will not result in a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities, the head of the agency may so certify under section 605(b) of the RFA. Therefore, as provided in section 605(b), the head of the FAA certifies that this rulemaking will not result in a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

    International Trade Impact Assessment

    The Trade Agreements Act of 1979 (Pub. L. 96-39), as amended by the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (Pub. L. 103-465), prohibits Federal agencies from establishing standards or engaging in related activities that create unnecessary obstacles to the foreign commerce of the United States. Pursuant to these Acts, the establishment of standards is not considered an unnecessary obstacle to the foreign commerce of the United States, so long as the standard has a legitimate domestic objective, such as the protection of safety, and does not operate in a manner that excludes imports that meet this objective. The statute also requires consideration of international standards and, where appropriate, that they be the basis for U.S. standards. The FAA has assessed the potential effect of this rule and determined that the rule will have the same impact on international and domestic flights and is a safety rule thus is consistent with the Trade Agreements Act.

    Unfunded Mandates Assessment

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4) requires each Federal agency to prepare a written statement assessing the effects of any Federal mandate in a proposed or final agency rule that may result in an expenditure of $100 million or more (in 1995 dollars) in any one year by State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector; such a mandate is deemed to be a “significant regulatory action.” The FAA currently uses an inflation-adjusted value of $155 million in lieu of $100 million. This rule does not contain such a mandate; therefore, the requirements of Title II of the Act do not apply.

    Environmental Review

    FAA Order 1050.1F identifies FAA actions that are categorically excluded from preparation of an environmental assessment or environmental impact statement under the National Environment Policy Act in the absence of extraordinary circumstances. The FAA has determined this rulemaking action qualifies for the categorical exclusion identified in paragraph 5-6.5a and involves no extraordinary circumstances.

    How To Obtain Additional Information

    An electronic copy of a rulemaking document may be obtained by using the Internet—

    1. Search the Federal eRulemaking Portal (http://www.regulations.gov);

    2. Visit the FAA's Regulations and Policies Web page at http://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/ or

    3. Access the Government Printing Office's Web page at http://www.thefederalregister.org/fdsys/.

    Copies may also be obtained by sending a request (identified by notice, amendment, or docket number of this rulemaking) to the Federal Aviation Administration, Office of Rulemaking, ARM-1, 800 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591, or by calling (202) 267-9680.

    List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

    Adoption of the Amendment

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

    PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS 1. The authority citation for 14 CFR part 71 continues to read as follows: Authority:

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

    2. Amend § 71.33 by revising paragraph (a) to read as follows:
    § 71.33 Class A airspace areas.

    (a) That airspace of the United States, including that airspace overlying the waters within 12 nautical miles of the coast of the 48 contiguous States, from 18,000 feet MSL to and including FL600 excluding the states of Alaska and Hawaii.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on March 29, 2016. Leslie M. Swann, Acting Manager, Airspace Policy Group.
    [FR Doc. 2016-07397 Filed 3-29-16; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT 24 CFR Part 266 [Docket No. FR-5876-N-03] Changes in Certain Multifamily Mortgage Insurance Premiums and Regulatory Waiver for the 542(c) Risk-Sharing Program AGENCY:

    Office of the Assistant Secretary for Housing-Federal Housing Commissioner, HUD.

    ACTION:

    Announcement and waiver.

    SUMMARY:

    On January 28, 2016, HUD published a notice announcing proposed changes to the Fiscal Year (FY) 2016 Mortgage Insurance Premiums (MIPs) for certain FHA Multifamily Housing Insurance programs, for commitments issued or reissued beginning April 1, 2016, and solicited public comments on the announced changes. This document announces that the FY 2016 MIP changes for certain FHA Multifamily Housing Insurance programs, including the 542(b) and 542(c) Risk-Sharing programs, proposed on January 28, 2016, are being implemented for commitments issued or reissued beginning April 1, 2016. These new MIP changes reflect the health of the FHA Multifamily portfolio, simplify the rate structure, and demonstrate HUD's commitment to promote its mission initiatives. The MIP rates for mortgage insurance programs under FHA's Office of Healthcare Programs, including health care facilities and hospital insurance programs, are not changed. This document also addresses the public comments received in response to the proposed MIP changes. Lastly, this MIP document also provides a regulatory waiver for the 542(c) Risk-Sharing program to participate in the FY 2016 MIP changes for commitments issued or reissued beginning April 1, 2016, for the remainder of FY 2016 and for FY 2017.

    DATES:

    Effective Date: The revised MIP will be effective for any firm commitments issued or reissued on or after April 1, 2016. MIP rates will not be modified for any loans that close or reach initial endorsement prior to or on March 31, 2016. MIP rates will not be modified on FHA-insured loans initially or finally endorsed, in conjunction with interest rate reductions, or in conjunction with loan modifications. MIP rates for the 542(c) Risk-Sharing program will be eligible only through FY 2017.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Theodore K. Toon, Director, Office of Multifamily Production, Office of Housing, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street SW., Washington, DC 20410-8000; telephone number: 202-402-8386 (this is not a toll-free number). Hearing- or speech-impaired individuals may access these numbers through TTY by calling the Federal Relay Service at 800-877-8339 (this is a toll-free number).

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Background

    Section 203(c)(1) of the National Housing Act (the Act) authorizes the Secretary to set the premium charge for insurance of mortgages under the various programs in title II of the Act. The range within which the Secretary may set such charges must be between one-fourth of one percent per annum and one percent per annum of the amount of the principal obligation of the mortgage outstanding at any time. (see 12 U.S.C. 1709(c)(1)). HUD's Multifamily Housing Mortgage Insurance regulation at 24 CFR 207.254 provides that HUD must publish a notice of future premium changes in the Federal Register, and provide a 30-day public comment period for the purpose of accepting comments on whether the proposed changes are appropriate.

    On October 2, 2015, HUD published a notice in the Federal Register, at 80 FR 59809, announcing that the MIPs for FHA Multifamily, Health Care Facilities, and Hospital mortgage insurance programs that have commitments to be issued or reissued in FY 2016 would be the same as those published for FY 2015. HUD then published a notice on January 28, 2016, at 81 FR 4926, announcing proposed MIP changes for FY 2016 in certain programs authorized under the Act (12 U.S.C. 1709(c)(1)), and certain other multifamily programs. The January 28, 2016, notice was proposed to promote two of HUD's mission priorities: affordable housing and energy efficiency. HUD sought public comment on the proposed changes, as required by 24 CFR 207.254.

    II. Public Comments

    The public comment period on the January 28, 2016, notice closed on February 29, 2016, and HUD received 19 public comments by the close of the public comment period. Comments were submitted by mortgage lenders, organizations representative of the health care industry and of the home building industry, private citizens, and other interested parties. All public comments can be found on www.regulations.gov under the docket number FR-5876-N-01. The following presents the key issues raised by commenters and HUD's response to these issues.

    Authority

    Comment: One commenter stated that HUD had not demonstrated its authority to implement these MIP changes, and another commenter asked if HUD would be issuing additional regulations to confirm the appropriate MIP.

    HUD Response: We disagree; section 203(c)(1) of the Act authorizes the Secretary to set the premium charge for insurance of mortgages under the various programs in the Act, and 24 CFR 207.254 provides that HUD will implement future multifamily premium changes by publishing a notice in the Federal Register and soliciting public comment for 30 days. HUD has complied with those requirements and no additional regulations must be issued to implement these changes.

    Comment: One commenter observed that MIPs “must be determined based on the prudent management of risk to the government of the potential and severity of mortgage losses.” In other words, the MIPs should be set at levels that are actuarially sufficient to cover expected credit losses and other costs.

    HUD Response: HUD agrees; portfolio and actuarial analysis of the new rate structure demonstrated that premium revenues will exceed losses for the foreseeable future.

    Applicability of New Rates

    Comment: Commenters urged HUD to extend MIP changes to programs under FHA's Office of Healthcare Programs, including the health care facilities and hospital insurance programs, in order to further promote these programs. These commenters suggested that by excluding properties financed under Section 232 and Section 242 programs, HUD misses the opportunity to further the Administration's healthcare objectives.

    HUD Response: HUD will continue to evaluate MIP rates, but is not at this time extending MIP changes to programs under FHA's Office of Healthcare Programs, including the health care facilities and hospital insurance programs under sections 232 and 242, respectively.

    Comment: Commenters asked that the new MIP rates be made available to existing FHA-insured loans on properties that meet or will meet the required standards, to loans undergoing interest rate reductions through HUD's Multifamily Office of Asset Management and Portfolio Oversight (OAMPO), to loan modifications through OAMPO, to loans initially endorsed (closed) but not finally endorsed, and to loans on recently built housing (within the past 5 years) that have or could obtain Energy Star building certification.

    HUD Response: New MIP rates cannot be applied retroactively; each of these scenarios represents already-closed loans. Therefore, the MIP new rates will become effective only for FHA firm commitments issued or reissued, and closed, on or after April 1, 2016.

    Affordability

    Comment: Commenters asked for a change to the requirements to qualify for the MIP rate for Broadly Affordable housing: Properties must have “achievable and underwritten tax credit rents at least 10 percent below comparable market rents.” Commenters recommended that “achievable and” be deleted because of the confusion it could cause.

    HUD Response: HUD disagrees. The phrase (“achievable and underwritten tax credit rents at least 10 percent below comparable market rents”) is necessary in order to differentiate from the maximum or ceiling tax credit rents, and is widely understood in the industry.

    Comment: Commenters recommended that properties with greater than 90 percent affordable units, but without a 10 percent underwritten market rent advantage necessary to qualify as Broadly Affordable, should qualify for the Affordable mixed-income MIP rate of 35 basis points.

    HUD Response: HUD agrees, and has made the change in the final notice.

    Comment: Commenters asked if a property will qualify for the MIP reduction if it has a project-based Section 8 that runs less than 15 years or is not renewed but the owner honors the full 15-year use restriction.

    HUD Response: HUD will be providing the MIP reduction only to properties that have a Section 8 contract and use restriction that run a minimum of 15 years after final endorsement.

    Comment: Commenters recommended that the new MIP rates be available in situations where the property owner accepts Section 8 voucher holders for just the affordable units, rather than an unlimited requirement for the entire property, due to potential property owners' concerns about converting an entire property to Section 8, over time, in what is intended as a mixed- income property. Another commenter stated that in the MIP definition of Affordable there is a requirement that the property owner agree to accept Section 8 voucher holders for the life of the loan, and the commenter requested that this be limited to the 15-year affordability period rather than the life of the loan.

    HUD Response: HUD disagrees, and continues to require that for a property owner to access the MIP rate under the Affordable rate category the property owner must agree to accept voucher holders as residents for all vacancies and for the life of the regulatory agreement.

    Lender Fee Restrictions for Certain MIP Rate Categories (Broadly Affordable and Green/Energy Efficient)

    Comment: Commenters requested that the 5 percent cap on total loan fees be removed, or the threshold significantly increased. The commenters stated that small loans are challenging to originate, underwrite, and service, due to certain fixed lender costs and time requirements, and asked HUD to assess the impact for loans that fall into the $2-5 million range; commenting that the market is familiar with the $5 million small loan limit set by the Federal Housing Finance Agency for the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac small loan programs. One commenter asked that HUD provide underlying information on the need for such a broad limitation.

    HUD Response: The intent is to ensure that the benefits of these MIP rates directly benefit the properties and residents. In FHA's experience, Multifamily Accelerated Processing (MAP) lenders today are generally not charging fees in excess of 5 percent on loans under $5 million, even though they may do so. According to aggregated lender disclosures, just 6 percent of FHA-insured loans under $5 million, originated between FY 2013 and FY 2016, year-to-date, charged fees in excess of 5 percent, and most of these were concentrated in loans under $2 million. Accordingly, HUD does not believe that this limitation will present a burden to MAP lenders.

    Comment: One commenter said that it may be counterproductive to have a loan fee limit on loans over $2 million at precisely the time HUD is encouraging MAP lenders to participate in its Small Building Risk Share Initiative (SBRS).

    HUD Response: Loans originated under Risk Share programs, including SBRS, are exempt from the fee limitations.

    Comment: One commenter asked that loans with firm commitments issued prior to the January 28, 2016, publication of the proposed MIP rates be excluded from the fee limitations.

    HUD Response: The loan fee limitations only apply to loans with FHA firm commitments issued or reissued on or after April 1, 2016. Firm commitments issued prior to that date are exempt from the loan fee limitation (though still subject to disclosure), unless requesting reissuance or modification to utilize the new rates. Any loan accessing the lower rates will also be subject to the loan fee limitation.

    Inclusionary Zoning

    Comment: Commenters wrote that properties subject to inclusionary zoning agreements are only eligible for the reduced MIP rate if the term of the affordability agreement is 30 years or longer, compared to Low Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) or Project-Based Rental Assistance (PBRA) properties in this same rate category, which have minimum compliance periods of 15 years. They asked that the inclusionary zoning compliance period be reduced from 30 years to 15 years.

    HUD Response: The affordability requirements under LIHTC or PBRA/Section 8 are much deeper than those generally required under inclusionary zoning laws. HUD believes, therefore, that the longer affordability requirement (30 years) is reasonable.

    Comment: One industry association opposed using the FHA multifamily insurance programs “to incentivize complicated and controversial inclusionary zoning laws at the local level.” One commenter stated that some studies have shown inclusionary zoning may not be the most cost effective way to address affordability, and can actually lead to fewer units being delivered.

    HUD Response: HUD is not incentivizing inclusionary zoning or other set-aside laws through these rates. Rather, the new structure recognizes affordability in its many forms. HUD will study the effects of these rates for future rate considerations.

    Green/Energy Efficient

    Comment: A number of commenters pointed out that the requirement for a property owner to report building performance 12 months after new construction/substantial rehabilitation is unreasonable, as the property must be occupied, and operate for a full 12 months, before collecting and reporting the data. Further, the requirement may preclude properties from one or more of the performance-based green building certifications recognized for the green/energy efficient MIP rate.

    HUD Response: HUD agrees, and has amended the notice to require reporting of complying building performance “. . . no more than 15 months after completion of new construction, substantial rehabilitation or renovations, or 15 months after break-even occupancy.”

    Comment: Commenters stated that small properties make up the majority of all apartment buildings and often provide housing affordability. Yet properties under 20 units are excluded from getting a 1-100 EnergyStar score from Portfolio Manager, effectively blocking them from taking advantage of the reduced MIP rate. Commenters asked that HUD consider, for the purpose of accessing the Green/Energy Efficient MIP rate, exempting smaller properties from the requirement of a 75+ score on Portfolio Manager, as long as they are or will be certified by one of the recognized, independent green building standards.

    HUD Response: HUD agrees, and has modified the notice. Small properties (under 20 units) must meet one of the recognized independent green building/energy efficiency standards in order to access the Green/Energy Efficient MIP rate, but are exempt from the 75+ Portfolio Manager score requirement.

    Comment: One commenter recommended that HUD consider tiered or graduating MIP rates for varying levels of energy efficiency to encourage all property owners to undertake efficiency retrofits to the extent feasible.

    HUD Response: While HUD agrees with the intent, such a rate structure would be overly complex and challenging to administer. HUD will continue to review rates and opportunities to promote its mission objectives.

    Comment: Multiple commenters presented alternative green building certification standards for consideration, and/or asked what the process will be for approval of green building certification standards beyond those listed in the notice.

    HUD Response: In addition to the recognized standards listed in the notice, HUD will accept “other industry-recognized green building standards in the sole discretion of HUD's Office of Multifamily Production.” Lenders should submit such requests to the Director of Multifamily Production, in HUD headquarters. A committee will review such requests for consideration. In response to the specific requests submitted with public comments, HUD has revised the notice to recognize Passive House certifications, LEED for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance, and Living Building Challenge Certification.

    Comment: Commenters asked about notice references to Real Estate Assessment Center (REAC) protocols for properties not achieving their proposed green building standard or the 75+ Portfolio Manager score. One commenter stated that the REAC protocol should not be unilaterally changed to incorporate tests on whether properties are eligible for MIP reductions. Others asked what actions HUD would pursue for a property's failure to achieve green building certification and a score of 75+ in Portfolio Manager (for example, might actions include 2530 flags or MIP changes).

    HUD Response: HUD is not changing REAC protocols. The intent is not to be punitive, but to ensure compliance with the specified green building certification and efficiency performance standards. Properties that fail to achieve their designated green building standard or the 75+ Portfolio Manager score will be required to submit to HUD a compliance plan and timeline for achieving the required certification and performance, acceptable to HUD. An owner working in good faith and demonstrating progress toward compliance in HUD's discretion will not be flagged in HUD's 2530 previous participation system.

    Comment: Commenters asked that the notice clarify that the person certifying the green building standard be appropriately credentialed, and stated that a Capital Needs Assessment (CNA) provider may or may not be able to provide an energy design certification, unless they are licensed/accredited per the Energy Auditor requirements.

    HUD Response: HUD agrees, and has struck CNA provider as a qualified certifier of a green building standard or energy design certification. The CNA provider may certify, if appropriately credentialed, in their capacity as architect, engineer, energy auditor, and/or approved certifier under the specified green building standard.

    Comment: Commenters recommended that HUD delete the phrase “and maintain” in reference to recognized green building certifications, because the notice requires a property to not only achieve, but to maintain one of the recognized, independent green building certification standards, yet the named green building rating systems are all design and construction standards and do not include provisions for maintaining the certification.

    HUD Response: HUD agrees, and has modified the notice to strike “and maintain” from the green building certification requirement.

    Comment: A commenter asked for clarification on the requirement for a property accessing the Green/Energy Efficient MIP rate to achieve and maintain the 75+ Portfolio Manager score.

    HUD Response: A property accessing the Green/Energy Efficient MIP rate will be required to maintain its efficiency performance. The property owner will submit its 1-100 ENERGY STAR score from EPA's Portfolio Manager report to HUD, annually.

    Comment: Commenters stated the notice's required score of 75+ on EPA's Portfolio Manager will be a “moving target” as the underlying database of properties recalibrates the scores, and asked how an owner can certify to this target.

    HUD Response: The Portfolio Manager data set and underlying algorithm, and therefore the resulting scores, will not be changed for the foreseeable future, according to EPA. The objective is to ensure sustained property performance. If, in the future, the 1-100 ENERGY STAR score is recalibrated, properties may demonstrate ongoing compliance by providing a copy of the Portfolio Manager report showing building consumption/performance has been maintained, even if the resulting score under a recalibrated scale is less than 75. Properties applying for the MIP rate will have to comply with the current standard score requirement that is applicable at that time.

    Comment: One commenter asked why a property that can meet both the Broadly Affordable and the Green/Energy Efficient requirements is not rewarded through a further rate reduction.

    HUD Response: The rates offered under those two rate categories are the lowest allowed by statute, so not further reductions can be offered at this time.

    Comment: One commenter asked whether the reduction in MIP for Green/Energy Efficient buildings have to be from private investment, or if the energy upgrades can be paid be from a government program such as DOE Weatherization or a similar State program.

    HUD Response: While it is anticipated that many property owners may utilize the additional mortgage proceeds made possible by the lower MIP to retrofit properties to meet the stringent efficiency standards required, an owner is not required to do so. Energy efficiency retrofits can be paid from any public or private source of funds, subject to limitations on other debt established by the FHA MAP program.

    General

    Comment: One commenter asked that HUD's posted data identify current loans in its portfolio in the new MIP rate categories, to allow a viewer to determine which loans in the portfolio would qualify for which rates.

    HUD Response: HUD does not have the level of detail in its dataset to allow this identification. All loans originated under the new rate structure will be identified by rate category.

    Comment: One commenter suggested that the new MIP rate structure would disadvantage market rate properties, disproportionately harming rental properties in secondary and tertiary markets.

    HUD Response: The largest reduction from current rates to those effective April 1, 2016, is for market rate properties that are, or choose to, retrofit to a recognized green building/energy efficiency standard. This rate category was added specifically to recognize and promote green and energy efficient properties, whether affordable or market rate.

    Comment: A commenter observed that the negative subsidy rates for MIP since FY 2013 show that the multifamily programs are generating more than enough revenue to cover losses, and requested that HUD review the MIPs for all of its loan programs, and set the levels at the rate necessary to cover losses and costs to the program.

    HUD Response: HUD has and will continue to review its MIP rates.

    Comment: Commenters requested clarification with regard to the notice's reference to the upfront capitalized MIP for construction loans and the absence of a reference to a “look back” after final closing that recalculates MIP at 1 percent of the actual outstanding amount.

    HUD Response: For New Construction and Substantial Rehabilitation transactions, the upfront capitalized MIP is the applicable annual MIP rate, times the loan amount, times the number of years of construction, rounded up to the nearest full year for partial years.

    Comment: One commenter stated that there may be an advantage for risk-share lenders compared to MAP lenders, on tax credit projects in markets where tax credit rents are close to market rents (less than 10 percent advantage), and the rate for MAP lender originated loans will be 35 basis points, while risk-share loans qualify as Broadly Affordable at 25 basis points.

    HUD Response: The risk share program is an affordable lending program by statute, and is therefore categorically qualified for the lowest MIP rate. In the limited cases where the described scenario may apply, we do not believe the 10 basis points differential will be enough to skew the market away from MAP lending. HUD will continue to explore the potential disparity raised by the commenter, and may consider changes to address the issue in a subsequent MIP notice.

    Comment: One commenter raised concerns about the impact of Executive Order 13690 and the new Federal Flood Risk Management Standard (FFRMS) on housing affordability when implemented and applied to new FHA-insured loans for new construction and substantial rehabilitation, Community Development Block Grants (CDBG), and HOME Investment Partnerships Program funds.

    HUD Comment: Executive Order 13690 and the new FFRMS are outside the scope of this notice. Any actions implementing the Executive order will be the subject of a separate publication.

    III. Final Notice

    This notice adopts the proposed changes in the January 28, 2016 notice. Specifically, HUD is adopting changes to FY 2016 MIPs for FHA-insured loans on properties under specific Multifamily Mortgage Insurance programs effective on April 1, 2016. The new annual multifamily mortgage insurance rates will be structured as four categories, as follows, and as illustrated on the table below. Under this rate structure, portfolio and actuarial analysis demonstrates that premium revenues will exceed losses for the foreseeable future. HUD has made minor changes in response to comments received, as discussed below.

    A. Market Rate Housing

    Upfront and annual MIP rates will remain unchanged for all FHA-insured multifamily loan types on market rate properties, except properties that meet the criteria below for green and energy efficient housing.

    B. Broadly Affordable Housing

    Annual MIPs will change from the current rates generally between 45 and 50 basis points,1 to 25 basis points for all multifamily FHA-insured loan types that meet the criteria in this section.

    1 Except in the case of a 207/223(f) refinance or purchase that has a current upfront capitalized MIP basis points of 100.

    All loans originated by Housing Finance Agencies under FHA's Section 542(c) Risk-Sharing program, and by Qualified Participating Entities including Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac under FHA's Section 542(b) Risk-Sharing program, will be eligible for this 25 basis points rate, multiplied by the percentage risk assumed by FHA (see table below). For all others to qualify, the property must have Section 8 assistance or another recorded affordability restriction, and/or Low-Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTC).

    These projects must either:

    • Have at least 90 percent of units covered by a Section 8 PBRA contract or other State or Federal rental assistance program contract serving very low income residents, with a remaining term of at least 15 years; or

    • Have at least 90 percent of its units covered by an affordability use restriction under the LIHTC program or a similar State or locally sponsored program, with achievable and underwritten tax credit rents at least 10 percent below comparable market rents, and with a recorded regulatory agreement in effect for at least 15 years after final endorsement and monitored by a public entity.

    To ensure that the benefits of these MIP rates directly benefit the affordable housing properties and residents, lenders submitting applications for loans using this MIP rate are limited, in the total loan fees they may charge on any loan greater than $2 million, to no more than 5 percent of the insured loan amount. Loan fees include (a) origination and placement fees as permitted by the Multifamily Accelerated Processing (MAP) Guide; 2 plus (b) trade profit, trade premium or marketing gain earned on the sale of the Government National Mortgage Association (GNMA) security at a value above par, even if the security sale is delayed until after endorsement; minus (c) loan fees applied by the mortgagee to its legal expenses incurred in connection with loan closing.

    2http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD?src=/program_offices/administration/hudclips/guidebooks/hsg-GB4430.

    C. Affordable Housing

    Annual MIPs will change from current rates generally between 45 and 70 basis points,3 to 35 basis points for all multifamily FHA-insured loan types. To qualify, the property must provide a set-aside of affordable units as defined below, and agree to accept voucher holders:

    3 Except in the case of a 207/223(f) refinance or purchase that has a current upfront capitalized MIP basis points of 100.

    • Inclusionary Zoning, Density Bonus Set-asides, and Other Local Affordability Restrictions: Property owners shall submit with the FHA mortgage insurance application evidence of a deed covenant or housing ordinance on “inclusionary zoning” at the subject property to evidence the requirement for affordable unit set-asides. A minimum of 10 percent of the units must be affordable to, at most, a family at 80 percent Area Median Income (AMI), with rents sized to be affordable at 30 percent of the income at that level. The affordability set-aside must be on site, be in effect for at least 30 years after final endorsement of the FHA-insured mortgage, be monitored by public authority, and be recorded in a regulatory agreement;

    • Project has between 10 percent and 90 percent of units covered by a Section 8 PBRA contract or other State or Federal rental assistance program contract serving very low-income residents, with a remaining term of at least 15 years;

    • Project has between 10 percent and 90 percent of its units covered by an affordability use restriction under the LIHTC program or similar State or locally sponsored program, with rents sized at no greater than 30 percent of the income eligible for occupancy under the LIHTC program, with a recorded regulatory agreement in effect for at least 15 years after final endorsement and monitored by a public entity; or

    • Project has at least 90 percent of its units covered by an affordability use restriction under the LIHTC program or similar State or locally sponsored program, but without the rent advantage required to qualify as Broadly Affordable (achievable and underwritten tax credit rents at least 10 percent below comparable market rents), and with a recorded regulatory agreement in effect for at least 15 years after final endorsement and monitored by a public entity.

    To qualify for this MIP rate, the project owner must also agree to accept voucher holders under the Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program or other Federal program voucher holders as residents for vacancies in units not covered by project-based Section 8, and execute a rider to the FHA regulatory agreement, acceptable to HUD, evidencing the owner's agreement to accept Section 8 vouchers for the life of the regulatory agreement.

    Change: In response to public comments, HUD added the forth bullet providing an extra class of properties to those that are eligible for this affordable housing MIP rate.

    D. Green and Energy Efficient Housing

    Annual MIPs will change from current rates generally between 45 and 70 basis points,4 to 25 basis points for all multifamily FHA-insured loan types. Projects will access this rate to encourage owners to adopt higher standards for construction, rehabilitation, repairs, maintenance, and property operations that are more energy efficient and sustainable than traditional approaches to such activities. The lower rate will incentivize owners to implement measures that result in projects with greater energy and water efficiency, reduced operating costs, improved indoor air quality and resident comfort, and reduced overall impact on the environment. It is anticipated that mortgage proceeds will be used to retrofit properties to meet the stringent efficiency standards required to access this lower MIP premium. For properties that have already achieved a green building standard and that are refinancing with this lower MIP premium, proceeds may be used to complete further efficiency upgrades, and/or to retrofit to the next-level green certification standards.

    4 Except in the case of a 207/223(f) refinance or purchase that has a current upfront capitalized MIP basis points of 100.

    To qualify, upon application for FHA mortgage insurance, the owner must evidence that the project has achieved, or the owner must certify that it will pursue and achieve, an industry-recognized standard for green building. Acceptable, independently verified standards include the Enterprise Green Communities Criteria; U.S. Green Building Council's LEED-H, LEED-H Midrise, LEED-NC, or LEED for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance; ENERGY STAR certification; EarthCraft House; EarthCraft Multifamily; Earth Advantage New Homes; Greenpoint Rated New Home; Greenpoint Rated Existing Home (Whole House or Whole Building label); the National Green Building Standard (NGBS); Passive Building Certification or EnerPHit Retrofits certification from the Passive House Institute US (PHIUS), International Passive House Association, or the Passive House Institute; and Living Building Challenge Certification from the International Living Future Institute, or other industry-recognized green building standards, in the sole discretion of HUD's Office of Multifamily Production.

    Further, the owner must certify that it has achieved, or will pursue, achieve, and maintain a score of 75 or better on the 1-100 ENERGY STAR score, using EPA's Portfolio Manager. The reasonableness of achieving and maintaining the specified, independent green building standard, and the score of 75 or better in Portfolio Manager, must be verified by the independent conclusion of the qualified assessor preparing the physical condition assessment, and supported by the physical condition assessment report and recommendations, ASHRAE level II energy audit (required for existing structures only), and plans for new construction, or rehabilitation, repairs, and operations and maintenance. The physical condition assessment report submitted with the mortgage insurance application must include a certification from the architect, engineer, or energy auditor that the planned scope of work is reasonably sufficient to achieve and maintain the specified certification.

    Additionally, the owner must submit to HUD evidence that the specified, independent green building standard has been achieved, and provide a copy of the Portfolio Manager report showing building performance at or above 75, when those standards have been achieved, and no more than 15 months after completion of new construction, substantial rehabilitation or renovations or 15 months after break-even occupancy. If not achieved, HUD may impose protocols to ensure the owner brings the property into compliance, similar to protocols used by REAC for unacceptable property standards. The owner must submit the Portfolio Manager report annually to HUD showing that the property has maintained its efficiency performance. Note that properties of less than 20 units may qualify for this MIP rate by achieving an industry-recognized standard for green building, as described above, but are exempt from the requirement to achieve a score of 75 or better on the 1-100 ENERGY STAR score.

    To ensure that the benefits of these MIP rates directly benefit the properties and residents, lenders submitting applications for loans using this MIP rate are limited in the total loan fees they may charge on any loan greater than $2 million, to no more than 5 percent of the insured loan amount. Loan fees include (a) origination and placement fees as permitted by the MAP Guide; plus (b) trade profit, trade premium or marketing gain earned on the sale of the GNMA security at a value above par, even if the security sale is delayed until after endorsement; minus (c) loan fees applied by the mortgagee to its legal expenses incurred in connection with loan closing.

    Change: In response to public comments, HUD makes the following changes:

    • Deletes the phrase “and maintain” in reference to the owner providing evidence that the project has achieved an industry-recognized standard for green building.

    • Adds to the list of certifications Passive House certifications, LEED for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance, and Living Building Challenge Certification, and clarifies that other industry-recognized green building standards will be approved at the discretion of HUD's Office of Multifamily Production.

    • Clarifies that a CNA provider may only certify a physical condition assessment report, if appropriately credentialed, in their capacity as architect, engineer, energy auditor, and/or approved certifier under the specified green building standard.

    • Amends the time frame for providing the report showing compliance with building performance after completion of new construction, substantial rehabilitation, or renovations from no more than 12 months to no more than 15 months. HUD also provides that such report may be provided 15 months after break-even occupancy.

    • Requires that owners submit the Portfolio Manager report annually to HUD showing that the property has maintained its efficiency performance.

    • Provides that while small properties (under 20 units) must meet one of the recognized independent green building/energy efficiency standards in order to access the Green/Energy Efficient MIP rate, small properties are exempt from the requirement to achieve a score of 75 or better on the 1-100 ENERGY STAR score.

    IV. MIPs for Certain FHA's Multifamily Mortgage Insurance Programs for April 1, 2016

    The chart below details the MIP rates for each rate category, and each type of FHA multifamily mortgage insurance covered under this notice. This notice does not change MIP rates for programs under FHA's Office of Healthcare Programs, including health care facilities and hospital insurance programs.

    FHA Multifamily Mortgage Insurance Premiums By Rate Category FHA Multifamily mortgage insurance program Current
  • upfront
  • capitalized
  • MIP *
  • basis
  • points
  • Apr 1, 2016,
  • upfront
  • capitalized MIP *
  • basis
  • points
  • Current
  • annual MIP
  • basis
  • points
  • Apr 1, 2016, annual MIP
  • basis points
  • MARKET RATE HOUSING Unchanged Unchanged 207 Multifamily New Constr/Sub Rehab w/o LIHTC 70 70 70 70 207 Manufactured Home Parks w/o LIHTC 70 70 70 70 221(d)(4) New Constr/Sub Rehab w/o LIHTC 65 65 65 65 220 Urban Renewal Housing w/o LIHTC 70 70 70 70 213 Cooperative 70 70 70 70 207/223(f) Refi or Purchase for Apts. w/o LIHTC 100 100 60 60 223(a)(7) Refi of Apts. w/o LIHTC 50 50 50 50 231 Elderly Housing w/o LIHTC 70 70 70 70 241(a) Supplemental Loans for Apts. coop w/o LIHTC 95 95 95 95 BROADLY AFFORDABLE HOUSING 25 25 207 New Constr/Sub Rehab w 90 percent+ LIHTC, or 90 percent+ Section 8 45 25 45 25 207 Manufactured Home Parks w 90 percent+ LIHTC, or 90 percent+ Section 8 45 25 45 25 221(d)(4) New Constr/Sub Rehab w 90 percent+ LIHTC, or 90 percent+ Section 8 45 25 45 25 220 Urban Renewal Housing w 90 percent+ LIHTC, or 90 percent+ Section 8 45 25 45 25 207/223(f) Refi or Purchase w 90 percent+ LIHTC, or 90 percent+ Section 8 100 25 45 25 223(a)(7) Refi w 90 percent+ LIHTC, or 90 percent+ Section 8 50 25 45 25 231 Elderly Housing w 90 percent+ LIHTC, or 90 percent+ Section 8 45 25 45 25 241(a) for Apts./coop w 90 percent+ LIHTC, or 90 percent+ Section 8 45 25 45 25 Section 542(b) Risk-Sharing ** 50 25 50 25 Section 542(c ) Risk-Sharing ** 50 25 50 25 AFFORDABLE: INCLUSIONARY VOUCHERS 35 35 207 New Constr/Sub Rehab w Inclusionary Zoning, or 10 percent-90 percent LIHTC, or 10 percent-90 percent Section 8 45-70 35 45-70 35 207 Manufactured Home Parks w Inclusionary Zoning, or 10 percent-90 percent LIHTC, or 10 percent-90 percent Section 8 45-70 35 45-70 35 221(d)(4) New Constr/Sub Rehab w Inclusionary Zoning, or 10 percent-90 percent LIHTC, or 10 percent-90 percent Section 8 45-65 35 45-65 35 220 Urban Renewal Housing w Inclusionary Zoning, or 10 percent-90 percent LIHTC, or 10 percent-90 percent Section 8 45-70 35 45-70 35 207/223(f) Refi or Purchase w Inclusionary Zoning, or 10 percent-90 percent LIHTC, or 10 percent-90 percent Section 8 100 35 45-60 35 223(a)(7) Refinance of Apts. w Inclusionary Zoning, or 10 percent-90 percent LIHTC, or 10 percent-90 percent Section 8 50 35 45-50 35 231 Elderly Housing w Inclusionary Zoning, or 10 percent-90 percent LIHTC, or 10 percent-90 percent Section 8 45-70 35 45-70 35 241(a) Supplementals for Apts./coop w Inclusion Zoning, or 10 percent-90 percent LIHTC, or 10 percent-90 percent Section 8 45-95 35 45-95 35 GREEN/ENERGY EFFICIENT HOUSING 25 25 207 Multifamily New Construction/Sub Rehab w Green 45-70 25 45-70 25 207 Manufactured Home Parks with Green 45-70 25 45-70 25 221(d)(4) New Constr/Sub Rehab w Green 45-65 25 45-65 25 220 Urban Renewal Housing w Green 45-70 25 45-70 25 207/223(f) Refi or Purchase for Apts. w Green 100 25 45-60 25 223(a)(7) Refi of Apts. w Green 50 25 45-50 25 231 Elderly Housing w Green 45-70 25 45-70 25 241(a) Supplemental Loans for Apts./coop w Green 45-95 25 45-95 25 * Upfront premiums for multifamily refinancing programs are capitalized and based on the first year's annual MIP for the applicable rate category (except market rate 223(f), where the upfront rate remains at 100 basis points). Upfront premiums for multifamily new construction and substantial rehabilitation programs insuring advances are capitalized and based on the annual MIP for the applicable rate category for the entire construction period, rounded up to the nearest whole year. ** Under the Sections 542(b) and 542(c) Risk-Sharing programs, the MIP collected by HUD is currently, and will continue to be, proportionate to the percentage of risk assumed by FHA, as follows:
    Program FHA percent
  • of risk share
  • April 1, 2016,
  • upfront capitalized MIP basis points
  • (bps)
  • April 1, 2016,
  • annual MIP basis points
  • (bps)
  • 542(b) 50 percent 12.5 (25 bps × 50 percent) 12.5 (25 bps × 50 percent). 542(c) 50 percent 12.5 (25 bps × 50 percent) 12.5 (25 bps × 50 percent). 75 percent 18.75 (25 bps × 75 percent) 18.75 (25 bps × 75 percent). 90 percent 22.5 (25 bps × 90 percent) 22.5 (25 bps × 90 percent).
    V. Regulatory Waiver for the 542(c) Risk-Sharing Program

    Section 106 of the Department of Housing and Urban Development Reform Act of 1989 (the HUD Reform Act) (42 U.S.C. 3535(q)) requires HUD to publish waivers in the Federal Register. To allow for the FY 2016 MIP changes covered in this notice to apply to the 542(c) Risk-Sharing program, authorized under the Housing and Community Development Act of 1992, HUD must waive §§  266.600, 266.602, and 266.604, which currently prescribe percentages for calculating the MIP under the 542(c) Risk-Sharing program. HUD believes these set percentages are no longer appropriate for the 542(c) Risk-Sharing program and issued a proposed rule on March 8, 2016, entitled “Section 542(c) Housing Finance Agencies Risk-Sharing Program: Revisions to Regulations” (81 FR 12051), which would permit MIP changes for the Risk-Sharing program to be published through Federal Register notice. All loans originated under the Risk-Sharing programs are for affordable housing purposes with recorded affordability restrictions, and therefore qualify as Broadly Affordable housing. HUD believes that the 542(c) Risk-Sharing program, like the other identified Multifamily Housing programs, should be eligible for the MIP changes in this notice. Therefore, HUD is issuing this regulatory waiver of §§  266.600, 266.602, and 266.604 for FY 2016 and FY 2017. Commitments issued or reissued for 542(c) Risk-Sharing program beginning April 1, 2016, through FY 2017 will be eligible for these MIP changes.

    VI. Environmental Impact

    This notice involves the establishment of rate or cost determinations and related external administrative requirements that do not constitute a development decision affecting the physical condition of specific project areas or building sites. Accordingly, under 24 CFR 50.19(c)(6), this notice is categorically excluded from environmental review under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321).

    Dated: March 28, 2016. Edward L. Golding, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Housing. Dated: March 28, 2016. Nani A. Coloretti, Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-07405 Filed 3-30-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4210-67-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Financial Crimes Enforcement Network 31 CFR Part 1010 RIN 1506-AB27 Imposition of Special Measure Against FBME Bank Ltd., Formerly Known as the Federal Bank of the Middle East Ltd., as a Financial Institution of Primary Money Laundering Concern AGENCY:

    Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN), Treasury.

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    In a Notice of Finding (NOF) published in the Federal Register on July 22, 2014, FinCEN found that reasonable grounds exist for concluding that FBME Bank Ltd. (FBME), formerly known as the Federal Bank of the Middle East Ltd., is a financial institution of primary money laundering concern pursuant to Section 311 of the USA PATRIOT Act (Section 311). On the same date, FinCEN also published in the Federal Register a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) to propose the imposition of a special measure authorized by Section 311 against FBME and opened a comment period that closed on September 22, 2014. On July 29, 2015, FinCEN published in the Federal Register a final rule imposing the fifth special measure, which the United States District Court for the District of Columbia subsequently enjoined before the rule's effective date of August 28, 2015. FinCEN is issuing this final rule imposing a prohibition on U.S. financial institutions from opening or maintaining a correspondent account for, or on behalf of, FBME in place of the rule published on July 29, 2015.

    DATES:

    This final rule is effective July 29, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    The FinCEN Resource Center at (800) 767-2825 or [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Background A. Statutory Provisions

    On October 26, 2001, the President signed into law the Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001, Public Law 107-56 (the USA PATRIOT Act). Title III of the USA PATRIOT Act amends the anti-money laundering (AML) provisions of the Bank Secrecy Act (BSA), codified at 12 U.S.C. 1829b, 12 U.S.C. 1951-1959, and 31 U.S.C. 5311-5314, 5316-5332, to promote the prevention, detection, and prosecution of international money laundering and the financing of terrorism. Regulations implementing the BSA appear at 31 CFR Chapter X. The authority of the Secretary of the Treasury (the Secretary) to administer the BSA and its implementing regulations has been delegated to FinCEN.

    Section 311 of the USA PATRIOT Act (Section 311) grants FinCEN the authority, upon finding that reasonable grounds exist for concluding that a foreign jurisdiction, foreign financial institution, class of transactions, or type of account is of “primary money laundering concern,” to require domestic financial institutions and financial agencies to take certain “special measures” to address the primary money laundering concern. The special measures enumerated under Section 311 are prophylactic safeguards that defend the U.S. financial system from money laundering and terrorist financing. FinCEN may impose one or more of these special measures in order to protect the U.S. financial system from these threats. Special measures one through four, codified at 31 U.S.C. 5318A(b)(1)-(b)(4), impose additional recordkeeping, information collection, and reporting requirements on covered U.S. financial institutions. The fifth special measure, codified at 31 U.S.C. 5318A(b)(5), allows FinCEN to prohibit or impose conditions on the opening or maintaining of correspondent or payable-through accounts for the identified institution by U.S. financial institutions.

    B. FBME Bank Ltd.

    FBME Bank Ltd. (FBME) was established in 1982 in Cyprus as the Federal Bank of the Middle East Ltd., a subsidiary of the private Lebanese bank, the Federal Bank of Lebanon. Both FBME and the Federal Bank of Lebanon are owned by Ayoub-Farid M. Saab and Fadi M. Saab. In 1986, FBME changed its country of incorporation to the Cayman Islands, and its banking presence in Cyprus was re-registered as a branch of the Cayman Islands entity. In 2003, FBME left the Cayman Islands and incorporated and established its headquarters in Tanzania. At the same time, FBME's Cypriot operations became a branch of FBME Tanzania Ltd. In 2005, FBME changed its name from the Federal Bank of the Middle East Ltd. to FBME Bank Ltd.

    As of July 22, 2014, the date that FinCEN issued its Notice of Finding, FBME's headquarters in Tanzania was widely regarded as the largest bank in Tanzania based on its $2 billion asset size, despite having only four Tanzania-based branches. While FBME is presently headquartered in Tanzania, as of July 2014, FBME transacted over 90 percent of its global banking business and held over 90 percent of its assets in its Cyprus branch. FBME has long maintained a significant presence in Cyprus.

    II. FinCEN's Section 311 Rulemaking Regarding FBME A. The 2014 Notice of Finding and Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

    In a Notice of Finding (NOF) published in the Federal Register on July 22, 2014, FinCEN explained its finding that reasonable grounds exist for concluding that FBME is a financial institution of primary money laundering concern pursuant to 31 U.S.C. 5318A.1 FinCEN's NOF identified two main areas of concern: (1) FBME's facilitation of money laundering, terrorist financing, transnational organized crime, fraud schemes, sanctions evasion, weapons proliferation, corruption by politically-exposed persons, and other financial crime, and (2) FBME's weak AML controls, which allowed its customers to perform a significant volume of obscured transactions and activities through the U.S. financial system. In particular, FinCEN found that FBME had been used to facilitate this illicit activity internationally and through the U.S. financial system, and attracted high-risk shell companies (i.e., entities that typically have no physical presence other than a mailing address, and generate little to no independent economic value). As described in the NOF, FBME performed a significant volume of transactions and activities that had little or no transparency with regard to customer information and often no apparent legitimate business purpose. Such lack of transparency makes it difficult for U.S. and other financial institutions, as well as law enforcement, to detect illicit activity.

    1See 79 FR 42639 (July 22, 2014).

    As detailed in the NOF, illicit activities involving FBME included: (1) An FBME customer's receipt of a deposit of hundreds of thousands of dollars from a financier for Lebanese Hezbollah; (2) providing financial services to a financial advisor for a major transnational organized crime figure; (3) FBME's facilitation of funds transfers to an FBME account involved in fraud against a U.S. person, with the FBME customer operating the alleged fraud scheme later being indicted in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio; and (4) FBME's facilitation of U.S. sanctions evasion through its extensive customer base of shell companies, including at least one FBME customer that was a front company for a U.S.-sanctioned Syrian entity, the Scientific Studies and Research Center (SSRC), which used its FBME account to process transactions through the U.S. financial system.

    On the same day it published the NOF, FinCEN also published in the Federal Register a related Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) proposing the imposition of a prohibition on U.S. financial institutions from opening or maintaining a correspondent account for, or on behalf of, FBME.2 On July 29, 2015, after considering comments and other information available to FinCEN, including both public and non-public information, FinCEN finalized the rule, to take effect on August 28, 2015.3

    2 79 FR 42486 (July 22, 2014) (RIN 1506-AB27).

    3 80 FR 45057 (July 29, 2015) (RIN 1506-AB27).

    B. Re-Opening of the Comment Period

    Following the publication of the rule in the Federal Register, on August 7, 2015, FBME filed suit in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, seeking a preliminary injunction against the final rule. On August 27, 2015, the court granted FBME's motion for preliminary injunction and enjoined the rule from taking effect.4 In its order, the court held that FBME was likely to succeed on the merits of two of its claims: (1) That FinCEN had provided insufficient notice of unclassified, non-protected information on which it relied during the rulemaking proceedings, and (2) that FinCEN had failed to adequately consider at least one potentially significant, viable, and obvious alternative to the special measure it had imposed.5

    4FBME Bank Ltd. v. Lew, No. 1:15-cv-01270 (CRC), 2015 WL 5081209 (D.D.C. Aug. 27, 2015).

    5Id. at *5.

    On November 6, 2015, the court granted FinCEN's motion for voluntary remand so that FinCEN could engage in further rulemaking to address the procedural issues identified by the court. On November 27, 2015, FinCEN published in the Federal Register a Notice to re-open the final rule for 60 days to solicit additional comments in connection with the rulemaking, particularly with respect to the unclassified, non-protected documents that supported the rulemaking, and whether any alternatives to the prohibition on the opening or maintaining of correspondent accounts for FBME would effectively mitigate the money laundering and terrorist financing risks associated with FBME. FinCEN also made available for comment on www.regulations.gov the unclassified, non-protected material that FinCEN considered and intended to rely upon during the rulemaking proceeding. The re-opened comment period closed on January 26, 2016.

    III. FBME Developments

    This section outlines steps taken by FBME's relevant banking regulators in FBME's jurisdictions of operation following FinCEN's announcement of its NOF and NPRM.

    On July 21, 2014, the Central Bank of Cyprus (CBC), under authority of the Cyprus Resolution Act, issued a decree announcing that it would formally place FBME's Cyprus branch “under resolution” and appoint a Special Administrator to protect the bank's depositors. On December 21, 2015, the CBC announced that it is considering the withdrawal of FBME's license to operate the branch in Cyprus; however, there is litigation pending between FBME and the CBC.

    On July 24, 2014, the Bank of Tanzania (BoT) appointed a statutory manager over FBME's headquarters in Tanzania to ensure sound operations of the bank in order to restore and maintain confidence of depositors and the general public; to ensure the safety of bank assets; and to execute duties in accordance with the prevailing laws and regulations, guidelines, and directives issued by the BoT.

    IV. Summary of FinCEN's Ongoing Concerns Regarding FBME

    After considering comments from FBME and the public as well as other information available to the agency, including both public and non-public information, FinCEN is issuing this rule imposing a prohibition on U.S. financial institutions from opening or maintaining a correspondent account for, or on behalf of, FBME. The information available to FinCEN 6 provides reason to conclude that FBME's AML compliance efforts remain inadequate to address the risks posed by FBME, and that FBME continues to facilitate illicit financial activity. Because of the ongoing money laundering and terrorist financing concerns that FinCEN has regarding FBME, FinCEN finds that FBME continues to be a financial institution of primary money laundering concern.

    6 As contemplated by Section 311, FinCEN's determinations that FBME is of primary money laundering concern and the appropriate special measure to address that concern are based on unclassified information provided to the public as well as classified or otherwise-protected materials. This final rule necessarily describes only the record information made available to the public or authorized to be publicly released.

    As described in Part V, audits of FBME's Cyprus branch performed by third parties in 2013 and 2014 that FBME provided to FinCEN to demonstrate the effectiveness of its AML compliance program instead identified significant, recurring weaknesses in FBME's compliance program. Indeed, one of the third party auditors identified several deficiencies as being of high or medium significance. These deficiencies, which FinCEN has reason to conclude have continued since the issuance of the NOF, facilitate the illicit financial activities of FBME's customers.

    Furthermore, FinCEN notes that these audits only address the bank's Cyprus branch. As defined in the NOF and NPRM, FinCEN's finding that FBME is of primary money laundering concern identified the entire bank, to include its headquarters in Tanzania and its other branches, offices, and subsidiaries.

    Also, as discussed below, the CBC's identification of “serious and systemic” AML deficiencies at FBME following an AML examination of the bank's Cyprus branch in 2014, as well as the CBC's findings since the issuance of the NOF and NPRM, reinforce and corroborate FinCEN's concerns regarding the money laundering and terrorist financing risks associated with FBME.

    FinCEN also concludes that FBME has sought to evade AML regulations and has ignored the CBC's AML directives. As noted in FinCEN's NOF, FBME was recognized by its high-risk customers for its ease of use. FBME even advertised the bank to its potential customer base as being willing to facilitate the evasion of AML regulations. FBME's Cyprus branch also ignored instructions from its AML regulator, the CBC, to remedy AML deficiencies specifically identified by the CBC. In addition, in late 2014, FBME employees took various measures to obscure information. FinCEN finds this behavior may have been part of an effort to reduce scrutiny over FBME's operations following the issuance of the NOF and increased regulatory scrutiny. Moreover, FinCEN is concerned that terrorist financing activity involving the bank has continued beyond publication of the NOF. As of early 2015, an alleged Hezbollah associate and the Tanzanian company he managed owned accounts at FBME. And this is not the first episode of the bank's involvement in financial activity possibly connected to Hezbollah. As discussed in the NOF, in 2008, an FBME customer received a deposit of hundreds of thousands of dollars from a financier for Hezbollah.

    The CBC's AML Examination of FBME's Cyprus Branch

    As described in the NOF, FinCEN had reasonable grounds to find FBME to be of primary money laundering concern because, among other things, the bank's AML controls encouraged use of the bank by high-risk customers, and the bank conducted a significant volume of transactions and activities with little or no transparency and often with no apparent legitimate business purpose. The CBC independently identified many of these same concerns during an on-site AML examination of FBME's Cyprus branch conducted from June to September 2014.7

    7 That examination sought to evaluate FBME's Cyprus branch for compliance with the provisions of Part VIII of the Prevention and Suppression of Money Laundering Activities Law of 2007, the Directive issued by the CBC for the Prevention of Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing in December 2013, and the provisions of Regulation 1781/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of November 15, 2006 regarding information related to funds transfer information.

    In a September 18, 2015 letter to the Special Administrator of FBME's Cyprus branch regarding that examination,8 the CBC found, among other things, that FBME (1) failed to apply enhanced due diligence to high-risk customers; (2) allowed customers to use FBME's physical address in wire transfers in lieu of the customers' true addresses, thus obscuring key transactional details that U.S. and other financial institutions need to conduct appropriate AML screening; (3) failed to adequately assess its own money laundering and terrorist financing risk, thus hindering the bank's ability to mitigate those risks; (4) accepted false beneficial ownership information for high-risk customers; and (5) maintained incomplete customer due diligence information and failed to update and review customer files.

    8 FBME provided this letter to FinCEN as Exhibit 41 to its January 26, 2016 comment. FBME also included, as Exhibit 41a to its comment, a letter from the bank to the CBC, dated September 28, 2015, in which it raised issues regarding the conclusions set forth in the CBC's September 18, 2015 letter.

    In sum, according to the September 18, 2015 letter, the CBC identified “serious and systemic” AML failures—failures to comply with applicable AML laws that resulted in an “inadequate and ineffective” AML system. The CBC fined FBME €1.2 million in December 2015 for these AML deficiencies. These deficiencies contributed to the CBC's conclusion that the lack of robust AML controls at FBME's Cyprus branch increases the risk that the branch's services can be used by criminals for the purpose of money laundering and/or terrorist financing. FinCEN shares this concern.

    Banks with weak AML controls, like FBME, can become a magnet for illicit actors seeking to hide their identity and the illicit nature of their activities. Indeed, the illicit activity at FBME, including holding an account for an alleged Hezbollah associate and the Tanzanian company he managed, illustrates this vulnerability. Protecting the United States from such illicit financial activity requires FinCEN to ensure that banks with severely deficient AML controls, like FBME, do not have access to the U.S. financial system.

    As part of its January 26, 2016 comment, FBME included responses to the CBC's conclusions, which FinCEN reviewed as part of its evaluation of whether FBME remains of primary money laundering concern. FBME's responses generally consisted of arguments that the CBC misinterpreted FBME's banking records or Cypriot regulations, that other Cypriot banks were as non-compliant with certain AML provisions as FBME, or expressed general disagreement with the CBC's conclusion. After a thorough point-by-point review of the deficiencies identified by the CBC and FBME's responses, FinCEN found FBME's responses to be neither persuasive nor sufficient to alleviate FinCEN's concerns surrounding FBME's AML deficiencies. For example, although FBME disputed the CBC's findings that the bank failed to maintain sufficiently comprehensive and up-to-date files on its customers, FinCEN notes that in some cases FBME conceded that the CBC's findings were correct. Further, FinCEN remains troubled by the fact that as of June 2014, FBME had completed its review of only three percent of its high-risk customer files. As another example, FBME accepted false identifying information regarding beneficial ownership of FBME customers who it should have known were high-risk. FBME contended that valid confidentiality concerns existed and that accepting the false information did not impede the application of enhanced due diligence measures. FinCEN, however, agrees with the CBC's assessment that excluding certain relevant information on customer forms prevented FBME from adequately identifying and mitigating money laundering risks.

    V. Consideration of Comments

    Following the issuance of the July 22, 2014, NOF and NPRM, FinCEN opened a comment period that closed on September 22, 2014. FinCEN re-opened the comment period on November 27, 2015, following the court's order granting the government's motion for a voluntary remand to allow for further rulemaking. That comment period closed on January 26, 2016. FinCEN first addresses the comments received from FBME and then addresses the other comments received.

    A. Comments Received From FBME 1. FBME's September 22, 2014 Comment and Additional Submissions Regarding the Notice of Finding and Proposed Rulemaking

    FBME, through its counsel, submitted a comment dated September 22, 2014. FBME made six additional submissions of information related to that comment. FinCEN reviewed and considered each of these submissions in drafting this final rule.

    FBME's September 22, 2014 comment consists of an introduction followed by two major sections. In its introduction, FBME makes six key points.

    • First, FBME states that its AML compliance program policies are in line with applicable requirements, including the requirements of the European Union's Third Money Laundering Directive and the CBC's Fourth Directive. FBME contends that this alignment has been the case since at least 2013, according to third party audits.

    • Second, FBME states that, in response to recommendations made as a result of audits conducted by Ernst & Young (EY) in 2011 and KPMG in 2013, FBME substantially strengthened its compliance program between 2012 and 2014.

    • Third, FBME states that FBME and its officers and directors do not condone the use of FBME for illicit purposes and strive to prevent such misuse.

    • Fourth, FBME contends that some of the statements made in the NOF are incorrect or are based on incomplete information, which FBME also describes in the second section of its comment.

    • Fifth, FBME states that, in some cases, FBME filed Suspicious Transaction Reports (STRs) with the Cypriot Financial Intelligence Unit (MOKAS) on activity described in the NOF and NPRM.

    • Sixth, FBME claims that the NOF and NPRM have had a significant adverse impact on FBME and its customers.

    The first section of FBME's September 22, 2014 comment then describes aspects of its AML compliance program, and the second section responds to statements made in the NOF that FBME asserts are inaccurate or based on incomplete information.9

    9 In this final rule, FinCEN focuses its response on the six points in the introduction, which summarize FBME's concerns with the NOF and NPRM. In responding to the first three points of FBME's introduction, FinCEN addresses the first section of FBME's comment because the first three points of FBME's introduction and the first section of FBME's comment all refer to FBME's AML compliance program, its policies, audits conducted by third parties, and FBME's management. In responding to the fourth point of FBME's introduction, FinCEN addresses the second section of FBME's comment because both the fourth point of the introduction and the second section of the comment refer to the same statements in the NOF that FBME asserts are inaccurate or based on incomplete information.

    FBME's AML Program

    With regard to FBME's first and second points, i.e., FBME's contention that its AML compliance program policies are in line with applicable requirements and that it has substantially strengthened its compliance program, the KPMG and EY audits that FBME provided to FinCEN show a pattern of recurring AML deficiencies at the bank. FBME has asserted that it continued to make improvements, but FBME has not provided meaningful information to support these assertions. These deficiencies included failures to maintain adequate customer identification files and other customer due diligence weaknesses, failure to ensure that third parties the bank relied on to establish new customer relationships employed appropriate AML controls with regard to such persons, and issues with sanctions-related screening.

    According to FBME's September 22, 2014 comment, EY conducted an audit in 2011 (the EY 2011 Audit). During that audit, according to FBME, EY found that FBME's due diligence procedures with respect to obtaining information from new clients met the requirements of the CBC Directive at the time, but also noted that some customer information requirements of the Directive had not been fully met by FBME in previous iterations of its AML procedures and policies. According to FBME's comment, EY conducted another audit in 2014 (the EY 2014 Audit), which found that, although FBME had an AML compliance program in place that incorporated the requirements of both the CBC Fourth Directive and the European Union Third Directive, FBME nevertheless had deficiencies in its customer due diligence, automated alerts system, and AML training areas.

    According to FBME's September 22, 2014 comment, KPMG also conducted an audit in 2013 (the KPMG 2013 Audit) which found that FBME “basically fulfills” the AML regulatory requirements of the CBC and the European Union, but also identified issues of “high or medium” significance with FBME's use of Approved Third Parties and FBME's sanction screening procedures. As FBME stated in its September 22, 2014 comment, FBME uses its relationships with Approved Third Parties (a person authorized by a bank to introduce new customers to the bank), some of which are in foreign jurisdictions, to develop potential new customer relationships. According to the KPMG 2013 Audit, FBME had never attempted to ensure the adequacy of its Approved Third Parties' AML measures. In addition, the KPMG 2013 Audit found that FBME only screened the related parties of its Approved Third Parties when the customers were initially onboarded.

    The KPMG 2013 Audit also found FBME's customer due diligence procedures to be deficient. As FBME disclosed in its September 22, 2014 comment, in its 2013 audit, KPMG recommended better presentation of ownership information to demonstrate links between group entities for older customers, in line with a new structure that had been introduced for new customers. KPMG also found that certain customer files reviewed did not have sufficient information to gain a complete understanding of the customers' activities or business rationale. In its 2013 audit, KPMG further found that FBME's use of hold-mail accounts (a service that allowed a number of customers to keep their mail within the branch and use the branch's address in payment messages for the transfer of funds) and post office boxes managed by Approved Third Parties should be reconsidered by FBME in order to avoid potential anonymization.

    The EY 2014 Audit identified numerous deficiencies in FBME's compliance program. Specifically, the EY 2014 Audit made the following recommendations: Consistently documenting the efforts taken to verify the sources of funds and business purpose of accounts from prospective customers; more thoroughly investigating relationships among FBME customers, especially when inordinate volumes of internal transfers are identified; modifying FBME's periodic customer due diligence process to align with industry practices (e.g., moving to a rolling 12 or 36-month review cycle, depending on the customer's risk); implementing an automated case management system to record the alerts generated, stage of investigation, and ultimate disposition of the alerts generated by FBME's screening software, as opposed to the current process of manually entering the alerts/outcome on several different spreadsheets; and more thoroughly documenting the AML/sanctions training given for new hires and providing general awareness training to all employees on an annual basis.

    The numerous AML compliance program deficiencies described in the KPMG 2013 Audit and the EY 2014 Audit in particular are similar to AML deficiencies FinCEN identified in the NOF. As FBME acknowledged in its September 22, 2014 comment, in 2010, the CBC fined FBME for customer identification, due diligence, and automated monitoring deficiencies. According to the KPMG 2013 Audit, FBME also undertook an extensive Know Your Customer (KYC) remediation project from 2009 through 2011 that was ordered by the CBC and resulted in the closure of thousands of FBME accounts. Despite this remediation project, the CBC identified deficiencies in the customer due diligence controls at the Cypriot branch during its 2014 AML audit. Also, the CBC fined FBME €1.2 million in December 2015 for AML deficiencies.

    Finally, FBME's argument that its AML compliance program is now adequate is weakened by the list of illicit actors identified in the NOF that continued to make use of FBME as recently as 2014, including narcotics traffickers, terrorist financiers, and organized crime figures. In addition, as of early 2015, an alleged Hezbollah associate and the Tanzanian company he managed owned accounts at FBME.

    FBME's Management

    With regard to FBME's third point, i.e., FBME's contention that FBME and its officers and directors do not condone the use of FBME for illicit purposes, FinCEN has no reason to believe that FBME's leadership has changed after issuance of the NOF. Given that FinCEN has reason to believe that illicit activity occurred at FBME after the NOF, FinCEN has no reason to believe that management has modified its practices and FBME has not provided information to support such a conclusion.

    Alleged Errors in the Notice of Finding

    With regard to FBME's fourth point, i.e., where FBME has argued that portions of the eight statements in the NOF were incorrect or based on incomplete information, FBME submitted on December 5, 2014 a report prepared by EY (2014 EY Transaction Review) that specifically examined the concerns that FinCEN identified in the NOF and NPRM. The 2014 EY Transaction Review in some cases partially identified the activity of concern, and as noted below, failed to identify the activity of concern, or identified additional illicit financial activity that FinCEN has not previously identified. After a careful consideration of the public and non-public information available to FinCEN, including the 2014 EY Transaction Review, FinCEN continues to believe that the concerns identified in the NOF remain valid and accurate.

    FinCEN amended the NOF based on these comments in the final rule issued on July 29, 2015 that was subsequently enjoined by the court. In the first case, FBME stated that it was not fined by the CBC in 2008, but that the CBC imposed an administrative fine on FBME in 2010. FinCEN agrees that the fine in question was imposed in 2010, not in 2008.

    In the second case, FBME argued that the report that FBME may have been subject to a fine of up to €240 million is from a November 2013 article in the Cypriot press that relied on anonymous sources at the CBC. FinCEN agrees that the source of this statement was an article that appeared in the Cypriot press that referenced statements by a CBC official speaking anonymously. Neither of these two cases, nor any of FBME's remaining claims of incompleteness and factual inaccuracy, present any new information that would undercut the accuracy of the other information presented in the NOF.

    FBME's Filing of STRs

    With regard to FBME's fifth point, i.e., FBME's assertion that it filed STRs with MOKAS on activity described in the NOF and NPRM, FinCEN notes that the filing of STRs on suspicious activities or transactions by a financial institution is not, taken in isolation, an adequate indicator of the robustness and comprehensiveness of a compliance program. Moreover, filing STRs does not excuse a financial institution's failure to adequately implement other areas of its AML program, such as, for example, customer due diligence procedures.

    Adverse Impact on FBME and Its Customers

    FBME claims in its sixth point that the NOF and NPRM have had a significant adverse impact on FBME and its customers. As part of FinCEN's consideration of the statutory factors supporting its imposition of a prohibition under the fifth special measure, FinCEN has considered “the extent to which the action or the timing of the action would have a significant adverse systemic impact on . . . legitimate business activities involving” FBME.10 This factor is discussed in the NOF and Part VI, Section A(3) below.

    10 31 U.S.C. 5318A(a)(4)(B)(iii).

    In addition to its public comment, FBME submitted supplemental information regarding FBME's policies and procedures, along with reports of the audits conducted by KPMG in 2013 and EY in 2014. Many of these submissions are addressed elsewhere in this final rule. FinCEN has considered these materials, which outline some of the steps that FBME may have taken to strengthen its compliance program. Although FBME claims that it took steps to address some of the obvious deficiencies in its AML controls, it failed to correct other deficiencies and it continues to pose a significant risk. After reviewing and considering these and other public and non-public materials, FinCEN concludes that, except as acknowledged in this final rule, the statements made in the NOF remain accurate.

    2. FBME's January 26, 2016 Comment on the Re-Opened Rulemaking

    FBME submitted a comment on January 26, 2016, during the re-opened comment period. Set forth below are the key points raised in this comment and FinCEN's responses.11

    11 FBME also submitted an additional exhibit to its January 26, 2016 comment on January 29, 2016. FinCEN reviewed and considered this exhibit in drafting this final rule.

    First, FBME argues that the procedures FinCEN followed in connection with the proposed rule are unconstitutional and unlawful. Specifically, FBME asserts that (1) FinCEN failed to provide FBME with meaningful notice and opportunity to confront evidence against it; (2) FBME is entitled to a neutral arbiter; and (3) FBME has a right to a hearing.

    The procedures used by FinCEN are constitutional and lawful. FinCEN provided FBME with meaningful notice and opportunity to confront the evidence against it. Although FBME argues that FinCEN should not be able to rely on “secret” evidence, as previously noted, FinCEN disclosed all of the unclassified, non-protected information that it relied upon or otherwise considered during the rulemaking. FinCEN did not disclose information that is classified or otherwise protected from disclosure, and the law does not require that it do so. As for the due process argument, the process that FinCEN has undertaken is consistent with the Constitution and the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). Section 311 expressly provides for the reliance on classified information in making findings of primary money laundering concern and provides that such information will be submitted to the court ex parte and in camera. The BSA expressly protects from disclosure information to include Suspicious Activity Reports (SARs) to protect reporting financial institutions and their employees, and to encourage honest and open reporting of suspicious activity. FinCEN's use of SARs is more fully discussed later in this rule.

    FinCEN engaged in a fully interactive process with FBME. It accepted and considered multiple submissions of information from FBME that sought to rebut or otherwise address the agency's findings, and participated in an active, long-running dialogue with the bank's counsel regarding the finding and the NPRM. Ultimately, after reviewing the bank's submissions, as well as additional information obtained from various non-public sources, FinCEN exercised its discretion in determining that reasonable grounds existed to find FBME of primary money laundering concern.

    In making the finding that FBME was of primary money laundering concern, FinCEN exercised the specific grant of authority given to FinCEN by Congress and the Secretary.12 FinCEN interpreted the relevant law and statutory provisions applicable to this exercise of authority. FinCEN exercised this authority consistent with the statute. Section 311 does not provide a right to a hearing, nor do applicable authorities allow for a neutral arbiter in making findings of primary money laundering concern. Section 311, as delegated by the Secretary, gives the authority to make such findings to FinCEN upon consultation with the Departments of State and Justice. The APA does not require otherwise for Section 311 rulemaking.

    12 31 U.S.C. 5318A.

    Second, FBME argues that FinCEN should not rely on information provided to it by the CBC, as the Cypriot government has consistently discriminated against FBME because it is owned by non-Cypriots and is financially stable. In support of this argument, FBME provides several examples of the CBC's alleged discrimination, including its denial of FBME's attempts to incorporate in Cyprus and other business opportunities, as well as the imposition of what FBME describes as unreasonable regulatory requirements and fines. FBME also argues that coordination between FinCEN and the CBC raises serious concerns, claiming that FinCEN and the CBC acted in concert against FBME.

    As part of this rulemaking, FinCEN has reviewed a significant amount of information, including information related to fines that the CBC imposed on FBME and CBC examinations of FBME's Cyprus branch. As with any information available to the agency, FinCEN makes an independent assessment of its credibility and relevance. FinCEN assesses that the CBC is a government authority with relevant information related to the finding that FBME is of primary money laundering concern. The CBC has received positive reviews that cite the CBC's adequate monitoring of the Cypriot financial system for money laundering and terrorist financing issues from the Committee of Experts on the Evaluation of Anti-Money Laundering and the Financing of Terrorism (MONEYVAL), an inter-governmental organization established to set standards and promote effective implementation of measures for combating money laundering and terrorist financing.13

    13 Committee of Experts on the Evaluation of Anti-Money Laundering and the Financing of Terrorism (MONEYVAL). “Report of the Fourth Assessment Visit—Executive Summary: Anti-Money Laundering and the Combating of the Financing of Terrorism: CYPRUS.” 27 Sep 2011. (last visited March 21, 2016). <https://www.coe.int/t/dghl/monitoring/moneyval/Countries/Cyprus_en.asp>.

    FinCEN's consideration of information and actions related to the CBC's supervisory role over FBME is not improper and does not reflect inappropriate coordination with the CBC. Contrary to FBME's assertion, FinCEN has exercised its authority independently under Section 311 to protect the U.S. financial system.

    Third, FBME argues that this administrative action is flawed for the following key reasons:

    • FBME asserts that it has rebutted each of the allegations identified in FinCEN's NOF and that FinCEN did not provide any additional information supporting its finding that FBME is of primary money laundering concern since the publication of the NOF. With respect to FBME's assertion that it rebutted each of the allegations in the NOF, FinCEN disagrees and notes that it considered and addressed FBME's September 22, 2014 comment, and its supplemental submissions, and FBME's January 26, 2016 comment, which contained FBME's rebuttals to the allegations identified in FinCEN's NOF, as set forth in Part V, Section A. Pursuant to the court's order granting FinCEN's request for a voluntary remand, the agency made publicly available all unclassified, non-protected information the agency relied upon as part of this rulemaking, including news articles regarding Italian government corruption and money laundering involving FBME, and information concerning alleged Hezbollah affiliated accounts at FBME.

    • FBME contends that FinCEN ignored its assertion that FBME has an extensive AML compliance program that meets or exceeds local and European requirements. FBME also asserts that it has continued to make improvements to its AML program, as recently as January 2016. Even if FBME adopted specific policies and procedures to comply with AML requirements, FinCEN is concerned that FBME would not implement those policies and procedures given FBME's history of ignoring instructions from the CBC to improve the bank's AML controls at it Cyprus bank and its past willingness to evade AML regulations. For example, in late 2014, FBME employees took various measures to obscure information. Separately, the CBC noted in assessing a €1.2 million fine in December 2015 that FBME failed to comply with Cypriot money laundering laws and directives and European Union regulations related to funds transfers.

    • FBME argues that FinCEN continues to ignore the positive conclusions reached by independent auditors and investigators concerning FBME's evolving AML practices. The EY 2014 Audit and other third party audits show a pattern of recurring AML deficiencies at FBME. This issue is addressed more fully above in Part V, Section A(1) above. As discussed, the deficiencies in FBME's AML compliance program described in the KPMG 2013 Audit and the EY 2014 Audit are similar to the AML deficiencies that FinCEN identified in the NOF, and support FinCEN's conclusion that there have been longstanding and comprehensive deficiencies in FBME's AML compliance program.

    • FBME asserts that FinCEN failed to consider that FBME has promptly and consistently adopted auditors' suggestions to establish an AML compliance program that exceeds applicable legal requirements. As more fully addressed in Part V, Section A(1) above, FBME's assertion is contradicted by the findings of its third party auditors and by the CBC. FBME states that Exhibit 28 to its January 26, 2016 comment demonstrates its commitment to effective AML policies by documenting FBME's responses to, and implementation of, KPMG's recommendations in its 2013 audit to improve FBME's AML program, as of January 26, 2016. FBME also notes that Exhibit 33 to its January 26, 2016 comment details how FBME purportedly implemented the recommendations identified in the EY 2014 Audit. However, FBME does not provide any meaningful information that allows FinCEN to fully evaluate whether FBME has implemented those recommendations in the manner that FBME asserts it has. For example, according to FBME, it has purchased and implemented an onboarding platform to maintain key information regarding ultimate beneficial owners and address information for FBME customers. However, FBME did not provide meaningful information or documentation to demonstrate whether that onboarding platform satisfies EY's recommendation.

    • FBME states that the allegations in FinCEN's NOF are misleading and inaccurate.

    ○ FBME argues that the 2014 EY Transaction Review refutes the allegations in the NOF.14 However, FinCEN disagrees as discussed above in Part V, Section A(1).

    14 The 2014 EY Transaction Review was an evaluation of 11 statements from the NOF deemed specific enough for EY to attempt to identify and validate the relevant FBME customers, their activities, and related transactions.

    ○ FBME argues that supplemental information that FinCEN provided as part of the re-opened comment period only further undermines FinCEN's conclusions in the NOF. When FinCEN re-opened the comment period in November 2015, it provided supplemental information indicating that FBME had been used as part of a scheme involving Italian government corruption and money laundering. The money transferred to FBME in Tanzania was frozen and then sent back to Italy when the Tanzanian Financial Intelligence Unit and the BoT, which monitors foreign currency transactions, became suspicious of the activity at FBME. FBME argues that it detected the suspicious transaction, suspended the activity, returned the funds, closed the customer's accounts and all accounts related to it, and notified the Tanzanian authorities pursuant to FBME's AML policies and procedures. FinCEN notes that FBME did not provide documentation to substantiate its assertion. Regardless, the identification of a single transaction does not address FinCEN's broader concerns about FBME's systemic AML deficiencies.

    ○ FinCEN's NOF and NPRM found, as reflected in the administrative record, that FBME facilitated sanctions evasion on behalf of a sanctioned Syrian entity. FBME argues that FinCEN's reliance on the fact that a sanctioned individual was a customer of FBME as part of its finding that FBME was of primary money laundering concern was unjust, in part, because the customer's account had been closed or inactive since at least 2008, which FBME notes was years before the customer was sanctioned. In the 2014 EY Transaction Review, FBME identified an individual who was sanctioned by the Treasury Department's Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) in 2014 for providing material support and services to the Government of Syria as an FBME customer. However, the sanctioned entity referenced in FinCEN's NOF was not the individual identified by FBME. Instead, FBME identified an additional sanctioned entity related to Syria that was also a customer of FBME.

    ○ FBME argues that FinCEN's use of SARs is misconceived and these reports should be made available to FBME to satisfy due process requirements. FBME argues that FinCEN does not correctly analyze SARs, that its reliance on SARs is arbitrary and capricious, that FinCEN should not rely upon SARs filed by other financial institutions, and that FinCEN's refusal to provide SARs to FBME violates due process.

    FinCEN disagrees and notes that SARs, which are filed by financial institutions regarding transactions revealing a possible violation of law, are an invaluable source of information and an important tool for financial investigations. In this case, FinCEN believes that the SARs related to FBME are relevant to the finding that FBME is of primary money laundering concern when viewed in the context of all the other information considered. Multiple SARs indicate that FBME facilitated transactions on behalf of shell companies which, as stated earlier, can be an indicator of money laundering and other suspicious activity.

    Regarding disclosure of SARs to FBME, the improper disclosure of SARs may cause significant risk to the filing institution and its employees. To encourage honest and open reporting of suspicious activity and to protect reporting financial institutions and their employees, the BSA and its implementing regulations impose severe restrictions on improper disclosures of SARs, and violations of these restrictions may result in civil or criminal sanctions.15

    15See 31 U.S.C. 5318(g)(2) (prohibiting disclosure of SAR information to anyone involved in the reported transaction); 31 CFR 1020.320(e) (implementing regulation for depository institution SARs); 31 U.S.C. 5321, 5322 criminal and civil sanctions for BSA violations, including improper SAR disclosures); and 31 CFR 1010.820, 1010.840 (implementing regulations for civil and criminal penalties for BSA violations).

    • FBME argues that the mere fact that FBME transacted with shell or holding companies is not a basis to conclude that FBME is of primary money laundering concern. FinCEN's finding that FBME is of primary money laundering concern is not based solely on the fact that FBME transacts with shell companies, but rather is based on all of the information FinCEN considered when issuing the NOF. The formation and operation of shell companies can allow the owners of these companies to disguise their identity and purpose. With respect to FBME, FinCEN considered all of the relevant information and is particularly concerned with: (1) The large number of FBME customers that are either shell companies or that conduct transactions with shell companies; (2) the lack of transparency with respect to beneficial ownership or legitimate business purposes of many of FBME's shell company customers; (3) the location of many of its shell company customers in other high-risk money laundering jurisdictions outside of Cyprus; (4) the high volume of U.S. dollar transactions conducted by these shell companies with no apparent business purpose; and (5) FBME's longtime facilitation of its shell company customers' anonymity by allowing thousands of customers to use the bank's physical address in lieu of their own.

    • FBME argues that FinCEN failed to explain why it finds FBME to be of primary money laundering concern. The NOF and this rule provide an explanation as to the basis for FinCEN's conclusion that there are reasonable grounds to find that FBME is of primary money laundering concern and to impose a special measure to address that concern.

    Fourth, FBME argues that there are several alternatives to a prohibition of correspondent accounts under the fifth special measure. This issue is addressed below in Part VI.

    FinCEN notes that FBME's January 26, 2016 comment includes 67 separate exhibits consisting of over 1,100 pages of documents, many of which are declarations, emails, letters, comments or information previously considered and evaluated in this record. FinCEN reviewed the exhibits as part of its consideration of FBME's comments and, if appropriate, addressed the exhibits elsewhere in this document.

    B. Other Comments Received From the Public During Both Comment Periods

    FinCEN received three comments in addition to the comment received from FBME during the initial comment period that opened on July 22, 2014 and closed on September 22, 2014.

    FinCEN considered a comment received from the American Bankers' Association (ABA), dated September 22, 2014; a joint comment received from the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association (SIFMA) and The Clearing House (TCH), dated September 22, 2014; and a separate comment received from SIFMA, dated September 22, 2014. FinCEN notes that these comments are procedural in nature and do not address the underlying conclusion surrounding the risk of money laundering and terrorist financing through FBME. FinCEN addresses the comments from the ABA, SIFMA, and TCH in the section-by-section analysis in Part VII below.

    During the re-opened comment period that opened on November 27, 2015 and closed on January 26, 2016, in addition to FBME's comment, FinCEN received twelve comments 16 that generally raise the following issues: (1) FinCEN's purported use of unreliable, misleading, or inaccurate information to support its NOF and NPRM, (2) APA or Constitutional due process requirements, (3) concerns about the CBC's impartiality with respect to FBME, and (4) concerns that FinCEN is unfairly focusing on FBME as opposed to U.S. persons or other financial institutions. These comments are addressed below.

    16 Thirteen comments were submitted during the re-opened comment period that opened on November 27, 2015 and closed on January 26, 2016. In advance of publicly posting one of those comments received on January 18, 2016, the agency provided it to legal counsel for FBME to request redactions as appropriate. Legal counsel for FBME claimed that the comment contained privileged and confidential information and objected to the agency's consideration of that comment and to any public posting. While the agency does not concede that the comment is privileged, it has not publicly posted the comment and has not considered the comment as part of this rulemaking.

    1. FinCEN's Purported Use of Unreliable, Misleading, or Inaccurate Information To Support Its NOF and NPRM

    Multiple comments raise concerns regarding FinCEN's purported use of unreliable, misleading, or inaccurate information to support its NOF and NPRM. Multiple comments state that FinCEN's reliance on articles available on the Internet is concerning because they consider the articles unreliable sources of information.

    FinCEN relies on a variety of information sources to support its rulemaking, including government-published material and press articles that may be found on the Internet. FinCEN assesses the credibility and weight to be given to Internet sources on a case-by-case basis, as it does with respect to all of its sources of information. FinCEN has continued to vet articles in the administrative record and when inaccuracies are identified, they are corrected. As discussed previously in Part V Section A(1), FinCEN corrected two inaccuracies, which FinCEN is publishing in this rule. FinCEN reviewed the remaining articles identified in these comments and finds that they provide valuable context and information about the background and history of FBME and its role in the Cypriot financial system.

    2. APA and Constitutional Due Process Requirements

    Multiple commenters state that FinCEN's actions violates the APA and are unconstitutional for reasons similar to those FBME asserted in its comments. FinCEN has reviewed the comments and believes the processes followed in this action were lawful and an appropriate exercise of FinCEN's authority. FinCEN notes that this issue is addressed above in Part V Section A(2) above.

    3. Concerns About the CBC's Impartiality With Respect to FBME

    Several commenters raise concerns with the CBC. Specifically, the commenters state that the CBC has provided FinCEN with misleading information, that CBC is incompetent, inefficient, and corrupt, and that FBME is in litigation with the CBC at the International Chamber of Commerce in Paris.

    As part of this rulemaking, FinCEN has reviewed a significant amount of information, including information related to fines that the CBC imposed on FBME and CBC examinations of FBME's Cyprus branch. As with any information available to the agency, FinCEN makes an independent assessment of its credibility and relevance. FinCEN assesses that the CBC is a government authority with relevant information related to the finding that FBME is of primary money laundering concern. The CBC has received positive reviews that cite the CBC's adequate monitoring of the Cypriot financial system for money laundering and terrorist financing issues from MONEYVAL, an inter-governmental organization established to set standards and promote effective implementation of measures for combating money laundering and terrorist financing.17

    17See Committee of Experts on the Evaluation of Anti-Money Laundering and the Financing of Terrorism (MONEYVAL) supra note 13.

    As part of this rulemaking, FinCEN reviewed a significant amount of information, to include information related to fines and audits conducted by the CBC. FinCEN's consideration of information and actions related to the CBC's supervisory role over FBME is not improper, but rather reflects FinCEN's consideration of the totality of information relevant to FBME as part of the agency's own rulemaking. FinCEN notes that this issue is also addressed above in Part V Section A(2).

    4. Concerns That FinCEN Is Unfairly Focusing on FBME as Opposed to U.S. Persons or Other Financial Institutions

    Three comments asserted that FinCEN treated FBME differently than other foreign financial institutions or U.S. persons and financial institutions. Specifically, the commenters identify other foreign banks involved in money laundering that were not the subject of a Section 311 rulemaking. In addition, a commenter notes that the involvement of U.S. persons and financial institutions in criminal activity was identified and questions what FinCEN has done about the criminal activity in the United States.

    FinCEN may find only financial institutions operating outside of the United States to be of primary money laundering concern under Section 311. FinCEN continues to monitor for other instances of money laundering by foreign financial institutions and executes its authorities as appropriate.

    VI. Imposition of Special Measure Against FBME as a Financial Institution of Primary Money Laundering Concern

    As described in the NOF, NPRM, and as described in this document, FinCEN continues to find that reasonable grounds exist for concluding that FBME is a financial institution of primary money laundering concern. Based upon that finding, FinCEN is authorized to impose one or more special measures. Following the required consultations and the consideration of all relevant factors discussed in the NOF, FinCEN proposed the imposition of a prohibition under the fifth special measure in an NPRM published on July 22, 2014. The fifth special measure authorizes a prohibition against the opening or maintaining of correspondent accounts by any domestic financial institution or agency for, or on behalf of, a financial institution found to be of primary money laundering concern.

    After re-opening the comment period, FinCEN considered all of the special measures, as well as measures short of a prohibition, and concluded that a prohibition under the fifth special measure is still the appropriate choice. Consistent with the finding that FBME is a financial institution of primary money laundering concern and in consideration of additional relevant factors, this final rule imposes a prohibition on the opening or maintaining of correspondent accounts by covered financial institutions for, or on behalf of, FBME under the fifth special measure. The prohibition on the opening or maintenance of correspondent accounts imposed by the fifth special measure will help guard against the money laundering and terrorist financing risks that FBME presents to the U.S. financial system as identified in the NOF, NPRM, and this final rule.

    A. Discussion of Section 311 Factors 1. Whether Similar Actions Have Been or Will Be Taken by Other Nations or Multilateral Groups Against FBME

    Given the interconnectedness of the global financial system, the potential for FBME to access the U.S. financial system indirectly, including through the use of nested correspondent accounts, exposes the U.S. financial system to FBME's risks. Accordingly, FinCEN concludes that it is necessary to restrict both direct and indirect access to the U.S. financial system by FBME, particularly since FinCEN does not have information suggesting that any other country has prohibited FBME from accessing its financial system in the same manner as this rule, based on the information available to FinCEN.

    Moreover, despite measures that the CBC and the BoT have taken to protect the bank's depositors, FinCEN has reason to believe that those measures do not fully address the money laundering and terrorist financing risks associated with FBME. The continuation of illicit activity at the bank's Tanzanian headquarters even after the BoT appointed a statutory manager on July 24, 2014, bolsters FinCEN's concern. Specifically, in early 2015, an alleged Hezbollah associate and the Tanzanian company he managed owned accounts at FBME.

    2. Whether the Imposition of the Fifth Special Measure Would Create a Significant Competitive Disadvantage, Including Any Undue Cost or Burden Associated With Compliance, for Financial Institutions Organized or Licensed in the United States

    The fifth special measure imposed by this rulemaking prohibits covered financial institutions from opening or maintaining a correspondent account for, or on behalf of, FBME. As a corollary to this measure, covered financial institutions are also required to take reasonable steps to apply special due diligence, as set forth below, to all of their correspondent accounts to help ensure that no such account is being used indirectly to provide services to FBME. FinCEN does not expect the burden associated with these requirements to be significant. There is only a minimal burden involved in transmitting a onetime notice to correspondent account holders concerning the prohibition on indirectly providing services to FBME. U.S. financial institutions generally apply some level of transaction and account screening, often through the use of commercially available software. Financial institutions should, if necessary, be able to easily adapt their current screening procedures to support compliance with this final rule. Thus, the prohibition on the opening or maintenance of correspondent accounts required by this rulemaking is not expected to impose a significant additional burden upon U.S. financial institutions.

    3. The Extent to Which the Action or Timing of the Action Will Have a Significant Adverse Systemic Impact on the International Payment, Clearance, and Settlement System, or on Legitimate Business Activities Involving FBME

    FBME is not a major participant in the international payment system and is not relied upon by the international banking community for clearance or settlement services. Thus, the imposition of a prohibition under the fifth special measure against FBME will not have a significant adverse systemic impact on the international payment, clearance, and settlement system.

    While this action could affect FBME's legitimate business activities in the jurisdictions in which it operates, FinCEN believes that the need to protect U.S. financial institutions from the money laundering and terrorist financing risks presented by FBME outweighs any of those potential effects. Also, FinCEN believes that a not insignificant amount of FBME's business activities are illegitimate. For example, as explained in the NOF, wire transfers related to suspected shell company activity accounted for hundreds of millions of dollars of FBME's financial activity between 2006 and 2014. In just the year from April 2013 through April 2014, FBME conducted at least $387 million in wire transfers through the U.S. financial system that had indicators of high-risk money laundering typologies, including shell company activity. FinCEN recognizes that shell companies are sometimes used for legitimate business activity, but notes that they are also commonly used on behalf of high-risk customers as vehicles to obscure transactions and launder money.

    4. The Effect of the Action on United States National Security and Foreign Policy

    Imposing a prohibition under the fifth special measure complements the U.S. Government's foreign policy efforts to expose and disrupt international money laundering and to encourage other nations to do the same. The United States has been a leader in combating money laundering and terrorist financing not only through action with regard to specific institutions, but also through participation in international operational and standard-setting bodies such as the Egmont Group and the Financial Action Task Force.

    Excluding FBME and other banks that serve as conduits for money laundering, terrorist financing, and other financial crimes from the U.S. financial system will enhance U.S. national security by making it more difficult for terrorists, sanctions evaders, and money launderers to access the substantial resources of the U.S. financial system. As discussed in the NOF, NPRM, as well as herein, FBME facilitates money laundering, terrorist financing, transnational organized crime, fraud schemes, sanctions evasion, weapons proliferation, corruption by politically exposed persons, and other financial crimes. FinCEN is concerned that this activity, which has occurred at FBME for many years, persists. As of early 2015, an alleged Hezbollah associate and the Tanzanian company he managed owned accounts at FBME. This is not the first episode of the bank's involvement in financial activity possibly connected to Hezbollah, an organization designated by the U.S. government as a Foreign Terrorist Organization. As discussed in the NOF, in 2008, an FBME customer received a deposit of hundreds of thousands of dollars from a financier for Hezbollah.

    B. Consideration of Alternatives to a Prohibition Under the Fifth Special Measure

    FinCEN concludes that a prohibition under the fifth special measure is the only viable measure to protect the U.S. financial system against the money laundering and terrorist financing threats posed by FBME. In making this determination, FinCEN considered alternatives to a prohibition under the fifth special measure, including the first four special measures, imposing conditions on the opening or maintaining of correspondent accounts for, or on behalf of, FBME, and the alternatives suggested by FBME. For the reasons explained below, FinCEN concludes that none of these alternatives would sufficiently safeguard the U.S. financial system from the risks posed by FBME.

    1. Special Measures One Through Four and Conditions Under the Fifth Special Measure

    The first four special measures are focused on gathering additional information, and include (1) requiring additional recordkeeping and reporting of certain transactions, (2) requiring information related to beneficial ownership information, (3) requiring information related to certain payable-through accounts, and (4) requiring correspondent account customer information.18 Also, under the fifth special measure, FinCEN can impose conditions—rather than a prohibition—on the opening or maintaining of correspondent accounts for FBME.19

    18 31 U.S.C. 5318A(b)(1)-(4)

    19 31 U.S.C. 5318A(b)(5)

    There could be any number of conditions imposed under the fifth special measure, including those suggested by FBME in its January 26, 2016 comment. The parties responsible for assuring compliance with these conditions could include FinCEN and/or U.S. financial institutions. However, any condition, and any of the first four special measures, inherently rely on FBME to provide accurate, credible, and reliable information to the party responsible for assuring compliance. Given FBME's extensive history of AML deficiencies, including ignoring its own AML regulator's directives, and its active efforts to evade AML regulations, including advertising the bank to potential customers as being willing to facilitate the evasion of AML regulations, FinCEN has a reasonable basis to doubt the accuracy, credibility, or reliability of any information that FBME would provide in connection with compliance with any condition on the maintenance of correspondent accounts or the other four special measures available under Section 311.

    Specifically, the CBC concluded that FBME's Cyprus branch failed to remedy AML weaknesses identified in previous CBC exams, despite the CBC's instructions to do so. FinCEN is also particularly concerned that FBME continued to take measures to evade regulatory oversight even after FinCEN highlighted its concerns in the NOF. In late 2014, FBME employees took various measures to obscure information. FinCEN finds this behavior may have been part of an effort to reduce scrutiny by its regulators over FBME's operations. In light of all of these factors, FinCEN is not assured that FBME will implement appropriate and necessary safeguards to ensure that it provides accurate, credible, and reliable information to the entities tasked with ensuring compliance with any alternative special measure or any condition under the fifth special measure.

    Moreover, the “serious and systemic” AML deficiencies identified by the CBC during its 2014 AML examination of the bank's Cyprus branch inform FinCEN's concern that FBME would provide incomplete or erroneous information to FinCEN and/or U.S. financial institutions. As described above, the CBC found, in part, that FBME failed to apply enhanced due diligence to high-risk customers, allowed customers to obfuscate key identifying information and transactional details, and failed to maintain complete customer due diligence information. Accordingly, FinCEN assesses that any customer or transactional information provided by FBME would likely reflect these deficiencies.

    2. Alternative Remedies Suggested by FBME

    In its January 26, 2016 comment, FBME suggested multiple alternatives that it argued would be less damaging and still ensure that FBME poses no danger to the U.S. financial system. As noted above, FBME asserts that these alternatives could be conditions to FBME's eligibility to maintain correspondent accounts. To the extent that the alternatives depend on additional reporting or recordkeeping, FinCEN maintains that they would not protect the U.S. financial system from the risks posed by FBME because they would depend on FBME to provide accurate, credible, and reliable information, which FinCEN does not believe FBME will provide. As described above and as reflected in the record, FBME previously disregarded the instructions of its AML regulator; engaged in opaque and suspicious money transfers; maintains deficient AML controls; and its employees took various measures to obscure information. Given this past behavior, FinCEN cannot reasonably rely on a proposed resolution that depends on FBME's candid provision of complete, credible, and accurate information.

    FBME has also suggested as alternatives to a prohibition under the fifth special measure the imposition of an independent monitor to oversee and report on FBME's operations, making periodic reports to FinCEN regarding FBME's operations, placing appropriate conditions on the use of correspondent accounts, and consulting with FinCEN, or an expert chosen by FinCEN, to adopt specific and detailed policies to supplement FBME's existing compliance program. Like the first four special measures, the effectiveness of these alternatives to safeguard the U.S. financial system from the risks posed by FBME inherently depends on FBME to provide accurate, reliable, and credible information. In order for a monitor to work effectively, that monitor would have to have access to reliable, credible, and accurate customer and transactional information. But as noted above, FinCEN has a reasonable basis to doubt the accuracy, credibility or reliability of any such information provided by FBME, given FBME's history of ignoring its own AML regulator's directives and its active efforts to evade AML regulations. And with respect to FBME's suggestion to consult with FinCEN, or an expert chosen by FinCEN, to adopt specific policies and procedures, FinCEN remains concerned that FBME would not effectively implement any such policies given FBME's history of ignoring recommendations from its regulator to improve its AML controls.

    FBME suggests two other alternatives that would not mitigate FinCEN's concerns regarding the bank's AML program for different reasons. FBME suggests that FinCEN should consider requiring FBME to pay a monetary fine for any historical shortcoming in FBME's AML compliance. By way of example, FBME cites to the civil money penalties that FinCEN imposed on a domestic bank and a domestic casino for violating certain U.S. AML laws. But the payment of a fine does not achieve the very purpose of the special measures available under Section 311, namely, to protect the U.S. financial system against risks posed by foreign financial institutions found to be of primary money laundering concern. Payment of a fine would not ameliorate the concerns that FinCEN has regarding FBME's deficient AML controls, which present risks to the U.S. financial system.

    FBME also suggests that FinCEN require FBME to refrain from transactions that FinCEN deems most “worrisome.” Given the lack of transparency surrounding many of FBME's transactions, FinCEN is not confident that it would be able to identify all of the potentially “worrisome” transactions in which FBME might engage. And even assuming the ability to enforce such a provision, and the ability to identify these transactions, refraining from these transactions alone would not address all of the broader concerns regarding the bank's deficient AML controls.

    Finally, just as none of FBME's suggested alternatives would sufficiently address FinCEN's concerns, no combination of these alternatives would do so either. Because such alternatives ultimately depend on FBME to provide accurate, reliable, and credible information, FinCEN concludes that no combination of these alternatives could overcome that fundamental deficiency.

    In its January 26, 2016 comment, FBME also compares this matter to FinCEN's Section 311 action regarding Multibanka, a Latvia-based bank. In that matter, FinCEN withdrew a finding and an NPRM proposing the fifth special measure prohibiting the opening or maintaining of correspondent accounts for, or on behalf of, Multibanka after the bank took certain remedial measures to address FinCEN's concerns.20 FBME argues that FinCEN should similarly withdraw the NPRM here.

    20 71 FR 39,606.

    FinCEN determines the appropriate outcome of a Section 311 action on a case-by-case basis. The matter of Multibanka is not analogous to the one here. At the time FinCEN withdrew the finding and NPRM regarding Multibanka, the bank had significantly revised its AML policies and procedures, and importantly, FinCEN found that Multibanka was working to ensure that its improved AML procedures were “translated effectively into practice.” 21 In contrast, FBME has not demonstrated any AML improvements with respect to its headquarters in Tanzania. And with respect to FBME's Cyprus branch, FinCEN remains concerned that FBME would not effectively implement new AML policies and procedures given FBME's history of ignoring instructions from its AML regulator and its past willingness to actively evade AML regulations. Indeed, because of the serious concerns that FinCEN has about FBME, as described in this document, FinCEN finds that FBME continues to be a financial institution of primary money laundering concern.

    21Id.

    As in other cases, FinCEN will continue to assess developments with respect to FBME, its regulators, and the jurisdictions in which it operates in determining whether it remains of primary money laundering concern.

    VII. Section-by-Section Analysis for Imposition of a Prohibition Under the Fifth Special Measure A. 1010.658(a)—Definitions 1. FBME

    Section 1010.658(a)(1) of the rule defines FBME to include all branches, offices, and subsidiaries of FBME operating in any jurisdiction, including Tanzania and Cyprus. Financial institutions should take commercially reasonable measures to determine whether a customer is a branch, office, or subsidiary of FBME. Currently, FBME's bank branches are located in Tanzania and Cyprus, with a representative office in Moscow, Russian Federation.

    SIFMA, TCH, and the ABA noted that it would be useful for FinCEN to provide a list of FBME's subsidiaries; however, because subsidiary relationships can change frequently, covered financial institutions should use commercially-reasonable tools to determine the current subsidiaries of FBME.

    2. Correspondent Account

    Section 1010.658(a)(2) of the rule defines the term “correspondent account” by reference to the definition contained in 31 CFR 1010.605(c)(1)(ii). Section 1010.605(c)(1)(ii) defines a correspondent account to mean an account established to receive deposits from, or make payments or other disbursements on behalf of, a foreign bank, or to handle other financial transactions related to the foreign bank. Under this definition, “payable through accounts” are a type of correspondent account.

    In the case of a U.S. depository institution, this broad definition includes most types of banking relationships between a U.S. depository institution and a foreign bank that are established to provide regular services, dealings, and other financial transactions, including a demand deposit, savings deposit, or other transaction or asset account, and a credit account or other extension of credit. FinCEN is using the same definition of “account” for purposes of this rule as was established for depository institutions in the final rule implementing the provisions of Section 312 of the USA PATRIOT Act requiring enhanced due diligence for correspondent accounts maintained for certain foreign banks.22

    22See 31 CFR 1010.605(c)(2)(i).

    In the case of securities broker-dealers, futures commission merchants, introducing brokers-commodities, and investment companies that are open-end companies (mutual funds), FinCEN is also using the same definition of “account” for purposes of this rule as was established for these entities in the final rule implementing the provisions of Section 312 of the USA PATRIOT Act requiring enhanced due diligence for correspondent accounts maintained for certain foreign banks.23

    23See 31 CFR 1010.605(c)(2)(ii)-(iv).

    3. Covered Financial Institution

    Section 1010.658(a)(3) of the rule defines “covered financial institution” with the same definition used in the final rule implementing Section 312 of the USA PATRIOT Act,24 which, in general, includes the following:

    24See 31 CFR 1010.605(e)(1).

    • An insured bank (as defined in section 3(h) of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act (12 U.S.C. 1813(h));

    • A commercial bank;

    • An agency or branch of a foreign bank in the United States;

    • A Federally insured credit union;

    • A savings association;

    • a corporation acting under section 25A of the Federal Reserve Act (12 U.S.C. 611);

    • A trust bank or trust company;

    • A broker or dealer in securities;

    • A futures commission merchant or an introducing broker-commodities; and

    • A mutual fund.

    4. Subsidiary

    Section 1010.658(a)(4) of the rule defines “subsidiary” as a company of which more than 50 percent of the voting stock or analogous equity interest is owned by another company.

    B. 1010.658(b)—Requirements for Covered Financial Institutions With Regard to the Fifth Special Measure

    For purposes of complying with the final rule's prohibition on the opening or maintaining in the United States of correspondent accounts for, or on behalf of, FBME, covered financial institutions should take such steps as a reasonable and prudent financial institution would take to protect itself from loan or other fraud or loss based on misidentification of a person's status.

    C. Prohibition on Opening or Maintaining Correspondent Accounts

    Section 1010.658(b)(1) of the rule imposing the fifth special measure prohibits all covered financial institutions from opening or maintaining a correspondent account in the United States for, or on behalf of, FBME.

    The prohibition requires all covered financial institutions to review their account records to ensure that they maintain no accounts directly for, or on behalf of, FBME.

    D. Special Due Diligence of Correspondent Accounts To Prohibit Indirect Use

    As a corollary to the prohibition on opening or maintaining correspondent accounts directly for FBME, section 1010.658(b)(2) of the rule imposing a prohibition under the fifth special measure requires a covered financial institution to apply special due diligence to its correspondent accounts that is reasonably designed to guard against processing transactions involving FBME. As part of that special due diligence, covered financial institutions must notify those foreign correspondent account holders that covered financial institutions know or have reason to know provide services to FBME that such correspondents may not provide FBME with access to the correspondent account maintained at the covered financial institution. Covered financial institutions should implement appropriate risk-based procedures to identify transactions involving FBME.

    A covered financial institution may satisfy the notification requirement by transmitting the following notice to its foreign correspondent account holders that it knows or has reason to know provide services to FBME:

    Notice: Pursuant to U.S. regulations issued under Section 311 of the USA PATRIOT Act, see 31 CFR 1010.658, we are prohibited from opening or maintaining a correspondent account for, or on behalf of, FBME Bank, Ltd., or any of its branches, offices or subsidiaries. The regulations also require us to notify you that you may not provide FBME Bank, Ltd., or any of its branches, offices or subsidiaries with access to the correspondent account you hold at our financial institution. If we become aware that the correspondent account you hold at our financial institution has processed any transactions involving FBME Bank, Ltd., or any of its branches, offices or subsidiaries, we will be required to take appropriate steps to prevent such access, including terminating your account.

    A covered financial institution may, for example, have knowledge through transaction screening software that a correspondent account processes transactions for FBME. The purpose of the notice requirement is to aid cooperation with correspondent account holders in preventing transactions involving FBME from accessing the U.S. financial system. However, FinCEN would not require or expect a covered financial institution to obtain a certification from any of its correspondent account holders that access will not be provided to comply with this notice requirement. Instead, methods of compliance with the notice requirement could include, for example, transmitting a one-time notice by mail, fax, or email to appropriate correspondent account holders of the covered financial institution, informing them that they may not provide FBME with access to the covered financial institution's correspondent account, or including such information in the next regularly occurring transmittal from the covered financial institution to those correspondent account holders.

    In its comment to the NPRM, SIFMA requested reconsideration of the notice provision, specifically regarding the meaning of “one-time notice,” and further objected to the requirement to send such a notice as overly burdensome and possibly duplicative. SIFMA also requested further clarification with regard to the timing of the required notice. FinCEN emphasizes that the scope of the notice requirement is targeted toward those correspondent account holders that the covered financial institution knows or has reason to know provide services to FBME, not to all correspondent account holders. The term “one-time notice” means that a financial institution should provide notice to all existing correspondent account holders who the covered financial institution knows or has reason to know provide services to FBME, within a reasonably short time after this final rule is published, and to new correspondent account holders during the account opening process who the covered financial institution knows or has reason to know provide services to FBME. It is not necessary for the notice to be provided in any particular form. It may be provided electronically, orally (with documentation), or as part of the standard paperwork involved in opening or maintaining a correspondent account. Given the limited nature of FBME's correspondent relationships, FinCEN does not expect this requirement to be burdensome.

    A covered financial institution is also required to take reasonable steps to identify any indirect use of its correspondent accounts by FBME, to the extent that such indirect use can be determined from transactional records maintained by the covered financial institution in the normal course of business. Covered financial institutions are expected to apply an appropriate screening mechanism to be able to identify a funds transfer order that on its face lists FBME as the financial institution of the originator or beneficiary, or otherwise references FBME. An appropriate screening mechanism could be the mechanism used by a covered financial institution to comply with various legal requirements, such as the commercially available software programs used to comply with the economic sanctions programs administered by the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC).

    Notifying certain correspondent account holders and taking reasonable steps to identify any indirect use of its correspondent accounts by FBME in the manner discussed above are the minimum due diligence requirements under the rule imposing a prohibition under the fifth special measure. Beyond these minimum steps, a covered financial institution must adopt a risk-based approach for determining what, if any, additional due diligence measures are appropriate to guard against the risk of indirect use of its correspondent accounts by FBME, based on risk factors such as the type of services it offers and the geographic locations of its correspondent account holders.

    Under this rule imposing a prohibition under the fifth special measure, a covered financial institution that obtains knowledge that a correspondent account is being used by a foreign bank to provide indirect access to FBME must take all appropriate steps to prevent such indirect access, including the notification of its correspondent account holder per section 1010.658(b)(2)(i)(A) and, where necessary, terminating the correspondent account. A covered financial institution may afford the foreign bank a reasonable opportunity to take corrective action prior to terminating the correspondent account. Should the foreign bank refuse to comply, or if the covered financial institution cannot obtain adequate assurances that the account will no longer be available to FBME, the covered financial institution must terminate the account within a commercially reasonable time. This means that the covered financial institution may not permit the foreign bank to establish any new positions or execute any transactions through the account, other than those necessary to close the account. A covered financial institution may reestablish an account closed under the rule if it determines that the account will not be used to provide banking services indirectly to FBME.

    E. Reporting Not Required

    Section 1010.658(b)(3) of the rule imposing a prohibition under the fifth special measure clarifies that the rule does not impose any reporting requirement upon any covered financial institution that is not otherwise required by applicable law or regulation. A covered financial institution must, however, document its compliance with the requirement that it notify those correspondent account holders that the covered financial institution knows or has reason to know provide services to FBME, that such correspondents may not process any transaction involving FBME through the correspondent account maintained at the covered financial institution.

    VIII. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    When an agency issues a final rule, the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) requires the agency to “prepare and make available for public comment an initial regulatory flexibility analysis” that will “describe the impact of the final rule on small entities.” (5 U.S.C. 603(a)). Section 605 of the RFA allows an agency to certify a rule, in lieu of preparing an analysis, if the final rule is not expected to have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

    A. Proposal to Prohibit Covered Financial Institutions From Opening or Maintaining Correspondent Accounts With Certain Foreign Banks Under the Fifth Special Measure 1. Estimate of the Number of Small Entities to Whom the Proposed Fifth Special Measure Will Apply

    For purposes of the RFA, both banks and credit unions are considered small entities if they have less than $550,000,000 in assets.25 Of the estimated 6,192 banks, 80 percent have less than $550,000,000 in assets and are considered small entities.26 Of the estimated 6,021 credit unions, 92.5 percent have less than $550,000,000 in assets.27

    25Table of Small Business Size Standards Matched to North American Industry Classification System Codes, Small Business Administration Size Standards (SBA Feb. 26, 2016) [hereinafter “SBA Size Standards”].

    26 Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, Find an Institution, http://www2.fdic.gov/idasp/main.asp; select Size or Performance: Total Assets, type Equal or less than $: “550000” and select Find.

    27 National Credit Union Administration, Credit Union Data, http://webapps.ncua.gov/customquery/; select Search Fields: Total Assets, select Operator: Less than or equal to, type Field Values: “550000000” and select Go.

    Broker-dealers are defined in 31 CFR 1010.100(h) as those broker-dealers required to register with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). Because FinCEN and the SEC regulate substantially the same population, for the purposes of the RFA, FinCEN relies on the SEC's definition of small business as previously submitted to the Small Business Administration (SBA). The SEC has defined the term small entity to mean a broker or dealer that: (1) Had total capital (net worth plus subordinated liabilities) of less than $500,000 on the date in the prior fiscal year as of which its audited financial statements, were prepared pursuant to Rule 17a-5(d) or, if not required to file such statements, a broker or dealer that had total capital (net worth plus subordinated debt) of less than $500,000 on the last business day of the preceding fiscal year (or in the time that it has been in business if shorter); and (2) is not affiliated with any person (other than a natural person) that is not a small business or small organization as defined in this release.28 Based on SEC estimates, 17 percent of broker-dealers are classified as small entities for purposes of the RFA.29

    28 17 CFR 240.0-10(c).

    29 76 FR 37572, 37602 (June 27, 2011) (the SEC estimates 871 small broker-dealers of the 5,063 total registered broker-dealers).

    Futures commission merchants (FCMs) are defined in 31 CFR 1010.100(x) as those FCMs that are registered or required to be registered as a FCM with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) under the Commodity Exchange Act (CEA), except persons who register pursuant to section 4f(a)(2) of the CEA, 7 U.S.C. 6f(a)(2). Because FinCEN and the CFTC regulate substantially the same population, for the purposes of the RFA, FinCEN relies on the CFTC's definition of small business as previously submitted to the SBA. In the CFTC's “Policy Statement and Establishment of Definitions of `Small Entities' for Purposes of the Regulatory Flexibility Act,” the CFTC concluded that registered FCMs should not be considered to be small entities for purposes of the RFA.30 The CFTC's determination in this regard was based, in part, upon the obligation of registered FCMs to meet the capital requirements established by the CFTC.

    30 47 FR 18618, 18619 (Apr. 30, 1982).

    For purposes of the RFA, an introducing broker-commodities dealer is considered small if it has less than $35,500,000 in gross receipts annually.31 Based on information provided by the National Futures Association (NFA), 95 percent of introducing brokers-commodities dealers have less than $35.5 million in adjusted net capital and are considered to be small entities.

    31 SBA Size Standards at 28.

    Mutual funds are defined in 31 CFR 1010.100(gg) as those investment companies that are open-end investment companies that are registered or are required to register with the SEC. Because FinCEN and the SEC regulate substantially the same population, for the purposes of the RFA, FinCEN relies on the SEC's definition of small business as previously submitted to the SBA. The SEC has defined the term “small entity” under the Investment Company Act to mean “an investment company that, together with other investment companies in the same group of related investment companies, has net assets of $50 million or less as of the end of its most recent fiscal year.” 32 Based on SEC estimates, seven percent of mutual funds are classified as “small entities” for purposes of the RFA under this definition.33

    32 17 CFR 270.0-10.

    33 78 FR 23637, 23658 (April 19, 2013).

    As noted above, 80 percent of banks, 92.5 percent of credit unions, 17 percent of broker-dealers, 95 percent of introducing brokers-commodities, no FCMs, and seven percent of mutual funds are small entities. The limited number of foreign banking institutions with which FBME maintains or will maintain accounts will likely limit the number of affected covered financial institutions to the largest U.S. banks, which actively engage in international transactions. Thus, the prohibition on maintaining correspondent accounts for foreign banking institutions that engage in transactions involving FBME under the fifth special measure would not impact a substantial number of small entities.

    2. Description of the Projected Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements of the Prohibition Under the Fifth Special Measure

    The prohibition under the fifth special measure would require covered financial institutions to provide a notification intended to aid cooperation from foreign correspondent account holders in preventing transactions involving FBME from accessing the U.S. financial system. FinCEN estimates that the time it takes institutions to provide this notice is one hour. Covered financial institutions would also be required to take reasonable measures to detect use of their correspondent accounts to process transactions involving FBME. All U.S. persons, including U.S. financial institutions, currently must exercise some degree of due diligence to comply with OFAC sanctions and suspicious activity reporting requirements. The tools used for such purposes, including commercially available software used to comply with the economic sanctions programs administered by OFAC, can easily be modified to identify correspondent accounts with foreign banks that involve FBME. Thus, the special due diligence that would be required by the imposition of the fifth special measure—i.e., the one-time transmittal of notice to certain correspondent account holders, the screening of transactions to identify any use of correspondent accounts, and the implementation of risk-based measures to detect use of correspondent accounts—would not impose a significant additional economic burden upon small U.S. financial institutions.

    B. Certification

    For these reasons, FinCEN certifies that this final rulemaking would not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small businesses.

    IX. Paperwork Reduction Act

    The collection of information contained in the final rule has been approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507(d)), and has been assigned OMB Control Number 1506- AB19. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a valid control number assigned by OMB.

    Description of Affected Financial Institutions: Banks, broker-dealers in securities, futures commission merchants and introducing brokers-commodities, and mutual funds.

    Estimated Number of Affected Financial Institutions: 5,000.

    Estimated Average Annual Burden in Hours per Affected Financial Institution: The estimated average burden associated with the collection of information in this rule is one hour per affected financial institution.

    Estimated Total Annual Burden: 5,000 hours.

    X. Executive Order 12866

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public health and safety effects, distributive impacts, and equity). Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting flexibility. It has been determined that the final rule is not a “significant regulatory action” for purposes of Executive Order 12866.

    List of Subjects in 31 CFR Part 1010

    Administrative practice and procedure, Banks and banking, Brokers, Counter-money laundering, Counter-terrorism, Foreign banking.

    Authority and Issuance

    For the reasons set forth in the preamble, chapter X of title 31 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:

    PART 1010—GENERAL PROVISIONS 1. The authority citation for part 1010 is revised to read as follows: Authority:

    12 U.S.C. 1829b and 1951-1959; 31 U.S.C. 5311-5314, 5316-5332; title III, sec. 314 Pub. L. 107-56, 115 Stat. 307.

    2. Revise § 1010.658 to read as follows:
    § 1010.658 Special measures against FBME Bank, Ltd.

    (a) Definitions. For purposes of this section:

    (1) FBME Bank, Ltd. means all branches, offices, and subsidiaries of FBME Bank, Ltd. operating in any jurisdiction.

    (2) Correspondent account has the same meaning as provided in § 1010.605(c)(1)(ii).

    (3) Covered financial institution has the same meaning as provided in § 1010.605(e)(1).

    (4) Subsidiary means a company of which more than 50 percent of the voting stock or analogous equity interest is owned by another company.

    (b) Prohibition on accounts and due diligence requirements for covered financial institutions—(1) Prohibition on use of correspondent accounts. A covered financial institution shall not open or maintain a correspondent account in the United States for, or on behalf of, FBME Bank, Ltd.

    (2) Special due diligence of correspondent accounts to prohibit use—(i) A covered financial institution shall apply special due diligence to its foreign correspondent accounts that is reasonably designed to guard against their use to process transactions involving FBME Bank, Ltd. At a minimum, that special due diligence must include:

    (A) Notifying those correspondent account holders that the covered financial institution knows or has reason to know provide services to FBME Bank, Ltd., that such correspondents may not provide FBME Bank, Ltd. with access to the correspondent account maintained at the covered financial institution; and

    (B) Taking reasonable steps to identify any use of its foreign correspondent accounts by FBME Bank, Ltd., to the extent that such use can be determined from transactional records maintained in the covered financial institution's normal course of business.

    (ii) A covered financial institution shall take a risk-based approach when deciding what, if any, other due diligence measures it reasonably must adopt to guard against the use of its foreign correspondent accounts to process transactions involving FBME Bank, Ltd.

    (iii) A covered financial institution that obtains knowledge that a foreign correspondent account may be being used to process transactions involving FBME Bank, Ltd. shall take all appropriate steps to further investigate and prevent such access, including the notification of its correspondent account holder under paragraph (b)(2)(i)(A) of this section and, where necessary, termination of the correspondent account.

    (iv) A covered financial institution required to terminate a correspondent account pursuant to paragraph (b)(2)(iii) of this section:

    (A) Should do so within a commercially reasonable time, and should not permit the foreign bank to establish any new positions or execute any transaction through such correspondent account, other than those necessary to close the correspondent account; and

    (B) May reestablish a correspondent account closed pursuant to this paragraph if it determines that the correspondent account will not be used to provide banking services indirectly to FBME Bank Ltd.

    (3) Recordkeeping and reporting. (i) A covered financial institution is required to document its compliance with the notice requirement set forth in paragraph (b)(2)(i)(A) of this section.

    (ii) Nothing in this paragraph (b) shall require a covered financial institution to report any information not otherwise required to be reported by law or regulation.

    Dated: March 25, 2016. Jamal El-Hindi, Deputy Director, Financial Crimes Enforcement Network.
    [FR Doc. 2016-07210 Filed 3-30-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4810-02-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 110 [Docket Number USCG-2015-0038] RIN 1625-AA01 Anchorage Regulations; Port of New York AGENCY:

    Coast Guard, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Coast Guard is disestablishing thirteen anchorage grounds and one special anchorage area that are now obsolete in Newark Bay, the East River, Western Long Island Sound, Raritan Bay, and Lower New York Bay, and reducing the size of three anchorage grounds in Raritan, Sandy Hook, and Lower New York Bays.

    DATES:

    This rule is effective May 2, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-2015-0038 in the “SEARCH” box and click “SEARCH.” Click on Open Docket Folder on the line associated with this rule.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    If you have questions on this rule, call or email Mr. Craig Lapiejko, Waterways Management Branch at Coast Guard First District, telephone 617-223-8351, email [email protected] or Mr. Jeff Yunker, Coast Guard Sector New York Waterways Management Division, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone 718-354-4195, email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Table of Abbreviations CFR Code of Federal Regulations DHS Department of Homeland Security FR Federal Register NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking §  Section USACE United States Army Corps of Engineers USCP United States Coast Pilot U.S.C. United States Code WAMS Waterways Analysis and Management System II. Background Information and Regulatory History

    In 2012, the Coast Guard conducted a WAMS survey of these anchorage regulations within Newark Bay. In 2013, the Coast Guard conducted a WAMS survey of these anchorage regulations within New Rochelle Harbor, Manhasset, and Little Neck Bays. In 2014, the Coast Guard conducted a WAMS survey of these anchorage regulations within Raritan Bay. In response, on November 25, 2015, the Coast Guard published an NPRM titled Anchorage Regulations; Port of New York (80 FR 73692). There we stated why we issued the NPRM, and invited comments on our proposed regulatory action related to these anchorage regulations. During the comment period that ended January 25, 2016, we received one comment.

    III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 33 U.S.C. 1231. The First Coast Guard District Commander has determined that potential hazards associated with vessels anchoring in the shallow water of these charted anchorage grounds will be a safety concern for vessels constrained by their draft. The purpose of this rule is to reduce the risk of vessels grounding in shallow water and accurately reflect the anchorages currently in use.

    IV. Discussion of Comments, Changes, and the Rule

    This rule disestablishes thirteen anchorage grounds and one special anchorage area that are now obsolete in Newark Bay, the East River, Western Long Island Sound, Raritan Bay, and Lower New York Bay, and reduces the size of three anchorage grounds in Raritan, Sandy Hook, and Lower New York Bays.

    As noted above, we received one comment on our NPRM published November 25, 2015. There are no changes in the regulatory text of this rule from the proposed rule in the NPRM.

    The Office of Coast Survey, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) strongly recommended that the coordinates for the disestablished anchorage grounds be published within the final rule. These coordinates follow:

    Coordinates for Disestablished Special Anchorage Area:

    33 CFR 110.60(d)(2) New York Harbor:

    Newark Bay, Southwest: All waters bound by the following points: 40°38′52.1″ N., 074°09′41.1″ W.; thence to 40°38′51.6″ N., 074°10′18.2″ W.; thence to 40°38′51.0″ N., 074°10′36.5″ W.; thence to 40°39′16.8″ N., 074°09′56.3″ W.; thence to 40°39′16.2″ N., 074°09′36.9″ W.; thence to the point of origiN., excluding therefrom the “Pipe Line Area”.

    Coordinates for Disestablished Anchorage Grounds:

    33 CFR 110.155 Port of New York:

    (a)(2) Anchorage Ground No. 1-A: All waters southwest of a line from 40°54′27.36″ N., 073°46′04.16″ W to 40°54′01.65″ N., 073°45′23.02″ W. All waters northwest of a line from 40°54′01.65″ N., 073°45′23.02″ W, thence to 40°53′30.65″ N., 073°46′05.30″ W. All waters north of a line from 40°53′30.65″ N., 073°46′05.30″ W thence to 40°53′21.35″ N., 073°46′38.52″ W.

    (a)(3) Anchorage Ground No. 1-B: All waters west and north of the following lines: from 40°54′58.06″ N., 073°44′51.82″ W; thence to 40°54′10.69″ N., 073°45′10.48″ W.; thence to 40°54′26.89″ N., 073°46′04.84″ W.

    (a)(4) Anchorage Ground No. 2: All waters west of a line from 40°48′56.58″ N., 073°47′52.98″ W.; thence to 40°48′27.38″ N., 073°47′29.20″ W.

    (a)(5) Anchorage Ground No. 3: All waters northeast of a line from 40°50′54.57″ N., 073°44′16.64″ W.; thence to 40°51′28.94″ N., 073°44′49.11″ W. All waters southeast of a line from 40°51′28.94″ N., 073°44′49.11″ W.; thence to 40°52′07.26″ N., 073°44′15.41″ W. All waters southwest of a line from 40°52′07.26″ N., 073°44′15.41″ W.; thence to 40°51′57.80″ N., 073°43′47.86″ W.

    (a)(6) Anchorage Ground No. 4: All waters northeast of a line from 40°49′00.62″ N., 073°45′41.92″ W.; thence to 40°49′28.17″ N., 073°46′29.31″ W. All waters southeast of a line from 40°49′28.17″ N., 073°46′29.31″ W.; thence to 40°51′28.94″ N., 073°44′49.11″ W. All waters southwest of a line from 40°51′28.94″ N., 073°44′49.11″ W.; thence to 40°50′54.57″ N., 073°44′16.64″ W.

    (a)(7) Anchorage Ground No. 5: All waters east of a line from 40°47′40.53″ N., 073°46′28.93″ W.; thence to 40°49′18.69″ N., 073°46′12.69″ W. All waters south of a line from 40°49′18.69″ N., 073°46′12.69″ W.; thence to 40°49′00.62″ N., 073°45′41.92″ W.

    (b)(2) Anchorage Ground No. 7: All waters south of a line from 40°48′03.24″ N., 073°49′11.46″ W.; thence to 40°47′41.80″ N., 073°46′58.77″ W.

    (h)(1) Anchorage Ground No. 34: All waters bound by the following points: 40°38′51.5″ N, 074°10′35.6″ W.; thence to 40°39′20.2″ N, 074°09′50.8″ W.; thence to 40°39′41.4″ N, 074°09′30.2″ W.; thence to 40°39′29.6″ N, 074°08′58.0″ W.; thence to 40°39′21.7″ N, 074°08′50.8″ W.; thence to 40°39′08.0″ N, 074°08′58.9″ W.; thence to 40°38′49.9″ N, 074°09′20.0″ W.; thence to 40°38′53.5″ N, 074°09′37.1″ W.; thence to 40°38′52.0″ N, 074°09′41.6″ W.; thence to the point of origin (NAD 83).

    (h)(3) Anchorage Ground No. 36: All waters bound by the following points: 40°41′13.1″ N, 074°08′06.1″ W.; thence to 40°41′12.7″ N, 074°08′09.9″ W.; thence to 40°40′51.0″ N, 074°08′29.7″ W.; thence to 40°40′44.7″ N, 074°08′29.8″ W.; thence to 40°40′34.0″ N, 074°08′12.0″ W.; thence to 40°40′36.6″ N, 074°08′04.8″ W.; thence to 40°40′54.5″ N, 074°07′56.5″ W.; thence to 40°41′03.3″ N, 074°07′56.5″ W.; thence to the point of origin (NAD 83).

    (h)(4) Anchorage Ground No. 37: All waters bound by the following points: 40°41′40.66″ N, 074°06′38.63″ W.; thence to 40°41′51.85″ N, 074°07′01.88″ W.; thence to 40°39′16.54″ N, 074°08′33.79″ W.; thence to 40°39′16.68″ N, 074°08′25.82″ W, thence along the shoreline to point of origin (NAD 83).

    (h)(5) Anchorage Ground No. 38: All waters bound by the following points: 40°43′05.57″ N, 074°06′08.36″ W.; thence to 40°42′40.39″ N, 074°06′48.46″ W.; thence to 40°42′35.47″ N, 074°06′53.93″ W.; thence to 40°42′24.34″ N, 074°06′59.31″ W.; thence to 40°42′20.79″ N, 074°06′59.76″ W.; thence to 40°42′11.44″ N, 074°06′55.73″ W.; thence to 40°42′03.86″ N, 074°07′00.66″ W.; thence to 40°41′52.53″ N, 074°07′01.56″ W.; thence to 40°41′41.33″ N, 074°06′38.05″ W, thence along the shoreline to point of origin (NAD 83).

    (h)(6) Anchorage Ground No. 39: All waters bound by the following points: 40°43′20.60″ N, 074°07′11.06″ W.; thence to 40°42′51.41″ N, 074°07′16.10″ W.; thence to 40°42′27.93″ N, 074°07′08.10″ W.; thence to 40°42′43.70″ N, 074°06′56.08″ W.; thence to 40°43′08.81″ N, 074°06′24.24″ W.; thence along the shoreline to point of origin (NAD 83).

    (j)(4) Anchorage Ground No. 46: 40°29′52.19″ N, 074°15′01.76″ W.; thence to 40°29′48.88″ N, 074°15′10.76″ W. 40°30′34.63″ N, 074°11′25.01″ W.; thence to 40°30′02.74″ N, 074°09′03.10″ W.; thence to 40°31′44.04″ N, 074°09′19.73″ W.

    V. Regulatory Analyses

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

    A. Regulatory Planning and Review

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

    This regulatory action determination is based on the administrative nature of the rulemaking as it would not alter current navigational practices on the affected waterways.

    B. Impact on Small Entities

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

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

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

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

    C. Collection of Information

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

    D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

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

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

    E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

    F. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have determined that this action is one of a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This rule involves the disestablishment of thirteen obsolete anchorage grounds and one obsolete SAA, and reduces the size of two anchorage grounds and combines them into one smaller anchorage ground. It is categorically excluded from further review under paragraph 34(f) of Figure 2-1 of the Commandant Instruction. We seek any comments or information that may lead to the discovery of a significant environmental impact from this rule.

    List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 110

    Anchorage grounds.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 CFR part 110 as follows:

    PART 110—ANCHORAGE REGULATIONS 1. The authority citation for part 110 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    33 U.S.C. 471; 1221 through 1236, 2071; 33 CFR 1.05-1; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.

    § 110.60 [Amended]
    2. In § 110.60— a. Remove paragraph (d)(2) and redesignate paragraphs (d)(3) through (10) as paragraphs (d)(2) through (9), respectively. b. Amend the note to newly redesignated paragraph (d)(2) by removing “paragraph (d)(3)” and adding “paragraph (d)(2)” in its place.
    3. In § 110.155— a. Remove and reserve paragraph (a)(2), and remove paragraphs (a)(3) through (7), b. Remove and reserve paragraph (b)(2); c. Revise paragraph (f); d. Remove and reserve paragraph (h); e. Revise paragraph (j)(2), and f. Remove paragraphs (j)(3) through (5).

    The revisions read as follows:

    § 110.155 Port of New York.

    (f) Lower Bay, Raritan Bay, Sandy Hook Bay, and Atlantic Ocean. (1) Anchorage No. 26. In Raritan and Sandy Hook Bays all waters bound by the following points: 40°30′06.74″ N., 074°10′04.96″ W.; thence to 40°28′59.44″ N., 074°05′00.00″ W.; thence to 40°28′44.94″ N., 074°05′00.00″ W.; thence to 40°29′05.02″ N., 074°07′30.56″ W.; thence to 40°29′17.49″ N., 074°10′16.50″ W.; thence to the point of origin (NAD 83).

    (2) Anchorage No. 27. In the Atlantic Ocean all waters bound by the following points: 40°28′49.27″ N., 074°00′12.13″ W.; thence to 40°28′52.12″ N., 074°00′00.56″ W.; thence to 40°28′40.88″ N., 073°58′51.95″ W.; thence to 40°25′57.91″ N., 073°54′55.56″ W.; thence to 40°23′45.55″ N., 073°54′54.89″ W.; thence to 40°23′45.38″ N., 073°58′32.10″ W.; thence along the shoreline to the point of origin (NAD 83).

    (3) Anchorage No. 28. In Lower Bay all waters bound by the following points: 40°30′02.30″ N., 074°08′52.69″ W.; thence to 40°29′10.10″ N., 074°04′59.65″ W.; thence to 40°29′09.99″ N., 074°02′57.75″ W.; thence to 40°31′52.89″ N., 074°02′39.89″ W.; thence to 40°31′59.72″ N., 074°03′25.13″ W.; thence to 40°31′28.57″ N., 074°03′40.70″ W.; thence to 40°30′26.24″ N., 074°05′11.46″ W.; thence to 40°30′19.01″ N., 074°06′21.37″ W.; thence to 40°30′21.53″ N., 074°08′46.19″ W.; thence to the point of origin (NAD 83).

    (j) * * *

    (2) Anchorage No. 45. West of the Raritan Bay Channel leading into Arthur Kill; north of the Raritan River Channel leading into Raritan River; and east of the Cutoff Channel between Raritan River and Arthur Kill, except that part of the said area occupied by Anchorage No. 44.

    (i) Vessels must not anchor in the channel to Keyport Harbor west of lines ranging from Keyport Channel Buoy 1 to Keyport Channel Buoy 9, thence through Keyport Channel Buoys 11 and 13 to the northeast corner of the easterly steamboat wharf; and east of a line extending from a point 400 yards west of Keyport Channel Buoy 1 tangent to the west shore at the mouth of Matawan Creek.

    (ii) [Reserved]

    Dated: March 22, 2016. L.L. Fagan, Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, First Coast Guard District.
    [FR Doc. 2016-07307 Filed 3-30-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R10-OAR-2015-0448; FRL-9943-19-Region 10] Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Washington; Update to Materials Incorporated by Reference AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Final rule; administrative change.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is updating the materials that are incorporated by reference (IBR) into the Washington State Implementation Plan (SIP). The regulations affected by this update have been previously submitted by the Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology) and approved by the EPA. In this action, the EPA is also notifying the public of corrections to typographical errors, minor formatting changes to the IBR tables, and correcting errors regarding the location of certain items in the tables. This update affects the SIP materials that are available for public inspection at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) and the EPA Regional Office.

    DATES:

    This action is effective March 31, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    SIP materials which are incorporated by reference into 40 CFR part 52 are available for inspection at the following locations: Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10, Office of Air, Waste, and Toxics (AWT-150), 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle, WA 98101, or the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call (202) 741-6030, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

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

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background

    The SIP is a living document which a state revises as necessary to address its unique air pollution problems. Therefore, the EPA from time to time, must take action on SIP revisions containing new and/or revised regulations as being part of the SIP. On May 22, 1997, the EPA revised the procedures for incorporating by reference Federally-approved SIPs, as a result of consultations between the EPA and the Office of the Federal Register (OFR) (62 FR 27968). The description of the revised SIP document, IBR procedures and “Identification of plan” format are discussed in further detail in the May 22, 1997 Federal Register document. On March 20, 2013, the EPA published a Federal Register beginning the new IBR procedure for Washington (78 FR 17108). On December 8, 2014, the EPA published an update to the IBR material for Washington (79 FR 72548).

    Since the publication of the last IBR update, the EPA approved into the Washington SIP the changes listed below.

    A. Added Regulations Table 2—Additional Regulations Approved for Washington Department of Ecology (Ecology) Direct Jurisdiction

    • Washington Administrative Code, Chapter 173-400—General Regulations for Air Pollution Sources, sections 173-400-131 (Issuance of Emission Reduction Credits), 173-400-136 (Use of Emission Reduction Credits (ERC)), 173-400-800 (Major Stationary Source and Major Modification in a Nonattainment Area), 173-400-810 (Major Stationary Source and Major Modification Definitions), 173-400-820 (Determining if a New Stationary Source or Modification to a Stationary Source is Subject to these Requirements), 173-400-830 (Permitting Requirements), 173-400-840 (Emission Offset Requirements), 173-400-850 (Actual Emissions Plantwide Applicability Limitation (PAL)), and 173-400-860 (Public Involvement Procedures). For more information see 79 FR 66291 (November 7, 2014).

    • Washington Administrative Code, Chapter 173-400—General Regulations for Air Pollution Sources, sections 173-400-116 (Increment Protection), 173-400-117 (Special Protection Requirements for Federal Class I Areas), 173-400-700 (Review of Major Stationary Sources of Air Pollution), 173-400-710 (Definitions), 173-400-720 (Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD)), 173-400-730 (Prevention of Significant Deterioration Application Processing Procedures), 173-400-740 (PSD Permitting Public Involvement Requirements), and 173-400-750 (Revisions to PSD Permits). For more information see 80 FR 23721 (April 29, 2015).

    Table 4—Additional Regulations Approved for the Benton Clean Air Agency (BCAA) Jurisdiction

    • Benton Clean Air Agency, Regulation I, sections 1.01 (Name of Agency), 1.02 (Policy and Purpose), 1.03 (Applicability), 4.01A (Definitions—Fugitive Dust), 4.01 paragraph B (Definitions—Fugitive Emissions), 4.02 paragraph B (Particulate Matter Emissions—Fugitive Emissions), 4.02 paragraph C.1 (Particulate Matter Emissions—Fugitive Dust), and 4.02 paragraph C.3 (Particulate Matter Emissions—Fugitive Dust). For more information see 80 FR 71695 (November 17, 2015).

    • Washington Administrative Code, Chapter 173-400—General Regulations for Air Pollution Sources, sections 173-400-036 (Relocation of Portable Sources), 173-400-111 (Processing Notice of Construction Applications for Sources, Stationary Sources and Portable Sources), 173-400-117 (Special Protection Requirements for Federal Class I Areas), 173-400-118 (Designation of Class I, II, and III Areas), 173-400-131 (Issuance of Emission Reduction Credits), 173-400-136 (Use of Emission Reduction Credits (ERC)), 173-400-175 (Public Information), 173-400-560 (General Order of Approval), 173-400-800 (Major Stationary Source and Major Modification in a Nonattainment Area), 173-400-810 (Major Stationary Source and Major Modification Definitions), 173-400-820 (Determining if a New Stationary Source or Modification to a Stationary Source is Subject to these Requirements), 173-400-830 (Permitting Requirements), 173-400-840 (Emission Offset Requirements), 173-400-850 (Actual Emissions Plantwide Applicability Limitation (PAL)), and 173-400-860 (Public Involvement Procedures). For more information see 80 FR 71695 (November 17, 2015).

    B. Revised Regulations Table 1—Regulations Approved Statewide

    • Washington Administrative Code, Chapter 173-422—Motor Vehicle Emission Inspection, sections 173-422-020 (Definitions), 173-422-030 (Vehicle Emission Inspection Requirement), 173-422-031 (Vehicle Emission Inspection Schedules), 173-422-060 (Gasoline Vehicle Emission Standards), 173-422-065 (Diesel Vehicle Exhaust Emission Standards), 173-422-070 (Gasoline Vehicle Exhaust Emission Testing Procedures), 173-422-075 (Diesel Vehicle Inspection Procedure), 173-422-160 (Fleet and Diesel Owner Vehicle Testing Requirements), 173-422-190 (Emission Specialist Authorization), and 173-422-195 (Listing of Authorized Emission Specialists). For more information see 80 FR 48033 (August 11, 2015).

    Table 2—Additional Regulations Approved for Washington Department of Ecology (Ecology) Direct Jurisdiction

    • Washington Administrative Code, Chapter 173-400—General Regulations for Air Pollution Sources, sections 173-400-036 (Relocation of Portable Sources), 173-400-111 (Processing Notice of Construction Applications for Sources, Stationary Sources and Portable Sources), 173-400-112 (Processing Notice of Construction Applications for Sources, Stationary Sources and Portable Sources), 173-400-113 (New Sources in Attainment or Unclassifiable Areas—Review for Compliance with Regulations), 173-400-171 (Public Notice and Opportunity for Public Comment), and 173-400-560 (General Order of Approval). For more information see 80 FR 23721 (April 29, 2015).

    • Washington Administrative Code, Chapter 173-400—General Regulations for Air Pollution Sources, section 173-400-111 (Processing Notice of Construction Applications for Sources, Stationary Sources and Portable Sources). For more information see 80 FR 27102 (May 12, 2015).

    Table 4—Additional Regulations Approved for the Benton Clean Air Agency (BCAA) Jurisdiction

    • Washington Administrative Code, Chapter 173-400—General Regulations for Air Pollution Sources, sections 173-400-030 (Definitions), 173-400-040 (General Standards for Maximum Emissions), 173-400-050 (Emission Standards for Combustion and Incineration Units), 173-400-060 (Emission Standards for General Process Units), 173-400-070 (Emission Standards for Certain Source Categories), 173-400-081 (Startup and Shutdown), 173-400-091 (Voluntary Limits on Emissions), 173-400-105 (Records, Monitoring and Reporting), 173-400-110 (New Source Review (NSR) for Sources and Portable Sources), 173-400-112 (Requirements for New Sources in Nonattainment Areas—Review for Compliance with Regulations), 173-400-113 (New Sources in Attainment or Unclassifiable Areas—Review for Compliance with Regulations), 173-400-151 (Retrofit Requirements for Visibility Protection), 173-400-171 (Public Notice and Opportunity for Public Comment), and 173-400-200 (Creditable Stack Height & Dispersion Techniques). For more information see 80 FR 71695 (November 17, 2015).

    Table 9—Additional Regulations Approved for the Spokane Regional Clean Air Agency (SRCAA) Jurisdiction

    • Spokane Regional Clean Air Agency, Regulation I, Article VIII—Solid Fuel Burning Device Standards, sections 8.01 (Purpose), 8.02 (Applicability), 8.03 (Definitions), 8.04 (Emission Performance Standards), 8.05 (Opacity Standards), 8.06 (Prohibited Fuel Types), 8.07 (Curtailment (Burn Ban)), 8.08 (Exemptions), 8.09 (Procedure to Geographically Limit Solid Fuel Burning Devices) and 8.10 (Restrictions on Installation and Sales of Solid Fuel Burning Devices). For more information see 80 FR 58216 (September 28, 2015).

    C. Removed Regulations Table 1—Regulations Approved Statewide

    • Washington Administrative Code, Chapter 173-422—Motor Vehicle Emission Inspection, section 173-422-130 (Inspection Fees). For more information see 80 FR 48033 (August 11, 2015). For more information see 80 FR 71695 (November 17, 2015).

    Table 4—Additional Regulations Approved for the Benton Clean Air Agency (BCAA) Jurisdiction

    • Washington Administrative Code, Chapter 173-400—General Regulations for Air Pollution Sources, sections 173-400-010 (Policy and Purpose), 173-400-020 (Applicability), and 173-400-100 (Registration).

    Table 9—Additional Regulations Approved for the Spokane Regional Clean Air Agency (SRCAA) Jurisdiction

    • Spokane Regional Clean Air Agency, Regulation I, Article VIII—Solid Fuel Burning Device Standards, section 8.11 (Regulatory Actions and Penalties). For more information see 80 FR 58216 (September 28, 2015).

    D. Revised Source-Specific Requirements

    • BP Cherry Point Refinery, Administrative Order No. 7836, Revision 2. For more information see 81 FR 7710 (February 16, 2016).

    II. EPA Action

    In this action, the EPA is announcing the update to the IBR material as of February 19, 2016. The EPA is correcting minor typographical errors, including subsection 52.2470(c), table 2, entry 173-400-091, which incorrectly listed the state effective date as “9/20/93” rather than the correct date of “4/1/11”. The EPA is also rearranging tables 5 through 10 in subsection 52.2470(c) to list the local clean air agency regulations at the top of the tables consistent with the EPA's recent final approval of the Benton Clean Air Agency general air quality regulations (80 FR 71698, November 17, 2015). The EPA is also rearranging and republishing the contents of subsection 52.2470(e) to organize the actions by pollutant and type for clarity. Finally, the EPA is moving the location of regulations relating to Washington's enforcement authority, appeals, and conflicts of interest, specifically, WAC 173-400-220 (Requirements for Board Members), WAC 173-400-230 (Regulatory Actions), WAC 173-400-240 (Criminal Penalties), WAC 173-400-250 (Appeals), and WAC 173-400-260 (Conflict of Interest). These regulations were inadvertently placed in subsection 52.2470 (c), Tables 2, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10, the regulations incorporated by reference. The EPA is moving these regulations to subsection 52.2470(e), the provisions that are approved but not incorporated by reference. For more information see 80 FR 71698 (November 17, 2015).

    The EPA has determined that today's rule falls under the “good cause” exemption in section 553(b)(3)(B) of the Administrative Procedures Act (APA) which, upon finding “good cause,” authorizes agencies to dispense with public participation and section 553(d)(3) which allows an agency to make a rule effective immediately (thereby avoiding the 30-day delayed effective date otherwise provided for in the APA). Today's rule simply codifies provisions which are already in effect as a matter of law in Federal and approved State programs. Under section 553 of the APA, an agency may find good cause where procedures are “impractical, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.” Public comment is “unnecessary” and “contrary to the public interest” since the codification only reflects existing law. Immediate notice in the CFR benefits the public by removing outdated citations and incorrect table entries.

    III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews A. General Requirements

    Under the Clean Air Act (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, the EPA's role is to approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that reason, this action:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    • is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because this action does not involve technical standards; 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.

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

    B. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General

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

    C. Petitions for Judicial Review

    The EPA has also determined that the provisions of section 307(b)(1) of the CAA pertaining to petitions for judicial review are not applicable to this action. Prior EPA rulemaking actions for each individual component of the Washington SIP compilations had previously afforded interested parties the opportunity to file a petition for judicial review in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit within 60 days of such rulemaking action. Thus, the EPA sees no need in this action to reopen the 60-day period for filing such petitions for judicial review for this “Identification of plan” update action for Washington.

    List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

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

    Dated: February 22, 2016. Dennis J. McLerran, Regional Administrator, Region 10.

    40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

    PART 52—APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS 1. The authority for citation for part 52 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    Subpart WW—Washington 2. Section 52.2470 is amended by: a. Revising paragraph (b); b. Revising paragraph (c); c. Revising paragraph (d); d. Revising paragraph (e).

    The revisions read as follows:

    § 52.2470 Identification of plan.

    (b) Incorporation by reference. (1) Material listed as incorporated by reference in paragraphs (c) and (d) of this section with an EPA approved date of February 19, 2016 was approved for incorporation by reference by the Director of the Federal Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. The material incorporated is as it exists on the date of the approval, and notice of any change in the material will be published in the Federal Register. Entries in paragraphs (c) and (d) of this section with EPA approval dates on or after February 19, 2016 will be incorporated by reference in the next update to the SIP compilation.

    (2)(i) EPA Region 10 certifies that the rules and regulations provided by the EPA at the addresses in paragraph (b)(3) of this section are an exact duplicate of the officially promulgated State rules and regulations which have been approved as part of the State Implementation Plan as of February 19, 2016.

    (ii) EPA Region 10 certifies that the following source-specific requirements provided by the EPA at the addresses in paragraph (b)(3) of this section are an exact duplicate of the officially promulgated State source-specific requirements which have been approved as part of the State Implementation Plan as of February 19, 2016.

    (3) Copies of the materials incorporated by reference may be inspected at the EPA Region 10 Office of Air, Waste and Toxics (AWT-150), 1200 Sixth Ave, Seattle, WA 98101; or at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html.

    (c) EPA approved regulations.

    Table 1—Regulations Approved Statewide [Not applicable in Indian reservations (excluding non-trust land within the exterior boundaries of the Puyallup Indian Reservation) and any other area where the EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction] State citation Title/subject State effective date EPA approval date Explanations Washington Administrative Code, Chapter 173-405—Kraft Pulping Mills 173-405-012 Statement of Purpose 3/22/91 1/15/93, 58 FR 4578 173-405-021 Definitions 3/22/91 1/15/93, 58 FR 4578 173-405-040 Emissions Standards 3/22/91 1/15/93, 58 FR 4578 Except sections (1)(b), (1)(c), (3)(b), (3)(c), (4), (7), (8) & (9). 173-405-045 Creditable Stack Height & Dispersion Techniques 3/22/91 1/15/93, 58 FR 4578 173-405-061 More Restrictive Emission Standards 3/22/91 1/15/93, 58 FR 4578 173-405-072 Monitoring Requirements 3/22/91 1/15/93, 58 FR 4578 Except section (2). 173-405-077 Report of Startup, Shutdown, Breakdown or Upset Conditions 3/22/91 1/15/93, 58 FR 4578 173-405-078 Emission Inventory 3/22/91 1/15/93, 58 FR 4578 173-405-086 New Source Review (NSR) 3/22/91 1/15/93, 58 FR 4578 173-405-087 Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) 3/22/91 1/15/93, 58 FR 4578 173-405-091 Special Studies 3/22/91 1/15/93, 58 FR 4578 Washington Administrative Code, Chapter 173-410—Sulfite Pulping Mills 173-410-012 Statement of Purpose 3/22/91 1/15/93, 58 FR 4578 173-410-021 Definitions 3/22/91 1/15/93, 58 FR 4578 173-410-040 Emissions Standards 3/22/91 1/15/93, 58 FR 4578 Except the exception provision in (3) & section (5). 173-410-045 Creditable Stack Height & Dispersion Techniques 3/22/91 1/15/93, 58 FR 4578 173-410-062 Monitoring Requirements 3/22/91 1/15/93, 58 FR 4578 173-410-067 Report of Startup, Shutdown, Breakdown or Upset Conditions 3/22/91 1/15/93, 58 FR 4578 173-410-071 Emission Inventory 3/22/91 1/15/93, 58 FR 4578 173-410-086 New Source Review (NSR) 3/22/91 1/15/93, 58 FR 4578 173-410-087 Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) 3/22/91 1/15/93, 58 FR 4578 173-410-100 Special Studies 3/22/91 1/15/93, 58 FR 4578 Washington Administrative Code, Chapter 173-415—Primary Aluminum Plants 173-415-010 Statement of Purpose 3/22/91 1/15/93, 58 FR 4578 173-415-020 Definitions 3/22/91 1/15/93, 58 FR 4578 Except sections (1) & (2). 173-415-030 Emissions Standards 3/22/91 1/15/93, 58 FR 4578 Except sections (1) & (3)(b). 173-415-045 Creditable Stack Height & Dispersion Techniques 3/22/91 1/15/93, 58 FR 4578 173-415-050 New Source Review (NSR) 3/22/91 1/15/93, 58 FR 4578 173-415-051 Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) 3/22/91 1/15/93, 58 FR 4578 173-415-060 Monitoring and Reporting 3/22/91 1/15/93, 58 FR 4578 Except sections (1)(a), (b), & (d). 173-415-070 Report of Startup, Shutdown, Breakdown or Upset Conditions 3/22/91 1/15/93, 58 FR 4578 173-415-080 Emission Inventory 3/22/91 1/15/93, 58 FR 4578 Washington Administrative Code, Chapter 173-422—Motor Vehicle Emission Inspection 173-422-010 Purpose 6/3/93 9/25/96, 61 FR 50235 173-422-020 Definitions 7/4/02 8/11/15, 80 FR 48033 173-422-030 Vehicle Emission Inspection Requirement 7/4/02 8/11/15, 80 FR 48033 173-422-031 Vehicle Emission Inspection Schedules 7/4/02 8/11/15, 80 FR 48033 173-422-035 Registration Requirements 3/31/95 9/25/96, 61 FR 50235 173-422-040 Noncompliance Areas 6/3/93 9/25/96, 61 FR 50235 173-422-050 Emission Contributing Areas 11/9/96 5/19/97, 62 FR 27204 173-422-060 Gasoline Vehicle Emission Standards 7/4/02 8/11/15, 80 FR 48033 173-422-065 Diesel Vehicle Exhaust Emission Standards 7/4/02 8/11/15, 80 FR 48033 173-422-070 Gasoline Vehicle Exhaust Emission Testing Procedures 7/4/02 8/11/15, 80 FR 48033 173-422-075 Diesel Vehicle Inspection Procedure 7/4/02 8/11/15, 80 FR 48033 173-422-090 Exhaust Gas Analyzer Specifications 3/31/95 9/25/96, 61 FR 50235 173-422-095 Exhaust Opacity Testing Equipment 3/11/94 9/25/96, 61 FR 50235 173-422-100 Testing Equipment Maintenance and Calibration 3/31/95 9/25/96, 61 FR 50235 173-422-120 Quality Assurance 3/31/95 9/25/96, 61 FR 50235 173-422-145 Fraudulent Certificates of Compliance/Acceptance 4/6/90 9/25/96, 61 FR 50235 173-422-160 Fleet and Diesel Owner Vehicle Testing Requirements 7/4/02 8/11/15, 80 FR 48033 Except: The part of 173-422-160(3) that says “of twelve or less dollars”. 173-422-170 Exemptions 12/2/00 5/12/05, 70 FR 24491 173-422-175 Fraudulent Exemptions 1/2/84 9/25/96, 61 FR 50235 173-422-190 Emission Specialist Authorization 7/4/02 8/11/15, 80 FR 48033 173-422-195 Listing of Authorized Emission Specialists 7/4/02 8/11/15, 80 FR 48033 Washington Administrative Code, Chapter 173-425—Open Burning 173-425-010 Purpose 10/18/90 1/15/93, 58 FR 4578 173-425-020 Applicability 10/18/90 1/15/93, 58 FR 4578 173-425-030 Definitions 10/18/90 1/15/93, 58 FR 4578 173-425-036 Curtailment During Episodes or Impaired Air Quality 10/18/90 1/15/93, 58 FR 4578 173-425-045 Prohibited Materials 1/3/89 1/15/93, 58 FR 4578 173-425-055 Exceptions 10/18/90 1/15/93, 58 FR 4578 173-425-065 Residential Open Burning 10/18/90 1/15/93, 58 FR 4578 173-425-075 Commercial Open Burning 10/18/90 1/15/93, 58 FR 4578 173-425-085 Agricultural Open Burning 10/18/90 1/15/93, 58 FR 4578 173-425-095 No Burn Area Designation 10/18/90 1/15/93, 58 FR 4578 173-425-100 Delegation of Agricultural Open Burning Program 10/18/90 1/15/93, 58 FR 4578 173-425-115 Land Clearing Projects 10/18/90 1/15/93, 58 FR 4578 173-425-120 Department of Natural Resources Smoke Management Plan 10/18/90 1/15/93, 58 FR 4578 173-425-130 Notice of Violation 10/18/90 1/15/93, 58 FR 4578 173-425-140 Remedies 10/18/90 1/15/93, 58 FR 4578 Washington Administrative Code, Chapter 173-430—Burning of Field and Forage and Turf Grasses Grown for Seed Open Burning 173-430-010 Purpose 10/18/90 1/15/93, 58 FR 4578 173-430-020 Definitions 10/18/90 1/15/93, 58 FR 4578 173-430-030 Permits, Conditions, and Restrictions 10/18/90 1/15/93, 58 FR 4578 173-430-040 Mobile Field Burners 10/18/90 1/15/93, 58 FR 4578 173-430-050 Other Approvals 10/18/90 1/15/93, 58 FR 4578 173-430-060 Study of Alternatives 10/18/90 1/15/93, 58 FR 4578 173-430-070 Fees 10/18/90 1/15/93, 58 FR 4578 173-430-080 Certification of Alternatives 10/18/90 1/15/93, 58 FR 4578 Washington Administrative Code, Chapter 173-433—Solid Fuel Burning Device Standards 173-433-010 Purpose 2/23/14 5/9/14, 79 FR 26628 173-433-020 Applicability 12/16/87 1/15/93, 58 FR 4578 173-433-030 Definitions 2/23/14 5/9/14, 79 FR 26628 173-433-100 Emission Performance Standards 2/23/14 5/9/14, 79 FR 26628 173-433-110 Opacity Standards 2/23/14 5/9/14, 79 FR 26628 173-433-120 Prohibited Fuel Types 2/23/14 5/9/14, 79 FR 26628 173-433-130 General Emission Standards 10/18/90 1/15/93, 58 FR 4578 173-433-140 Criteria for Impaired Air Quality Burn Bans 2/23/14 5/9/14, 79 FR 26628 173-433-150 Restrictions on Operation of Solid Fuel Burning Devices 2/23/14 5/9/14, 79 FR 26628 173-433-155 Criteria for Prohibiting Solid Fuel Burning Devices That Are Not Certified 2/23/14 5/9/14, 79 FR 26628 Washington Administrative Code, Chapter 173-434—Solid Waste Incinerator Facilities 173-434-010 Purpose 10/18/90 1/15/93, 58 FR 4578 173-434-020 Applicability and Compliance 1/22/04 8/4/05, 70 FR 44855 173-434-030 Definitions 1/22/04 8/4/05, 70 FR 44855 173-434-090 Operation and Maintenance Plan 10/18/90 1/15/93, 58 FR 4578 173-434-110 Standards of Performance 1/22/04 8/4/05, 70 FR 44855 Except section (1)(a). 173-434-130 Emission Standards 1/22/04 8/4/05, 70 FR 44855 Except section (2). 173-434-160 Design and Operation 1/22/04 8/4/05, 70 FR 44855 173-434-170 Monitoring and Reporting 1/22/04 8/4/05, 70 FR 44855 173-434-190 Changes in Operation 1/22/04 8/4/05, 70 FR 44855 173-434-200 Emission Inventory 1/22/04 8/4/05, 70 FR 44855 173-434-210 Special Studies 10/18/90 1/15/93, 58 FR 4578 Washington Administrative Code, Chapter 173-435—Emergency Episode Plan 173-435-010 Purpose 1/3/89 1/15/93, 58 FR 4578 173-435-015 Significant Harm Levels 1/3/89 1/15/93, 58 FR 4578 173-435-020 Definitions 1/3/89 1/15/93, 58 FR 4578 173-435-030 Episode Stage Criteria 1/3/89 1/15/93, 58 FR 4578 173-435-040 Source Emission Reduction Plans 1/3/89 1/15/93, 58 FR 4578 173-435-050 Action Procedures 1/3/89 1/15/93, 58 FR 4578 173-435-060 Enforcement 1/3/89 1/15/93, 58 FR 4578 173-435-070 Sampling Sites, Equipment and Methods 1/3/89 1/15/93, 58 FR 4578 Except section (1). Washington Administrative Code, Chapter 173-476—Ambient Air Quality Standards 173-476-010 Purpose 12/22/13 3/4/14, 79 FR 12077 173-476-020 Applicability 12/22/13 3/4/14, 79 FR 12077 173-476-030 Definitions 12/22/13 3/4/14, 79 FR 12077 173-476-100 Ambient Air Quality Standard for PM-10 12/22/13 3/4/14, 79 FR 12077 173-476-110 Ambient Air Quality Standards for PM-2.5 12/22/13 3/4/14, 79 FR 12077 173-476-120 Ambient Air Quality Standard for Lead (Pb) 12/22/13 3/4/14, 79 FR 12077 173-476-130 Ambient Air Quality Standards for Sulfur Oxides (Sulfur Dioxide) 12/22/13 3/4/14, 79 FR 12077 173-476-140 Ambient Air Quality Standards for Nitrogen Oxides (Nitrogen Dioxide) 12/22/13 3/4/14, 79 FR 12077 173-476-150 Ambient Air Quality Standard for Ozone 12/22/13 3/4/14, 79 FR 12077 173-476-160 Ambient Air Quality Standards for Carbon Monoxide 12/22/13 3/4/14, 79 FR 12077 173-476-170 Monitor Siting Criteria 12/22/13 3/4/14, 79 FR 12077 173-476-180 Reference Conditions 12/22/13 3/4/14, 79 FR 12077 173-476-900 Table of Standards 12/22/13 3/4/14, 79 FR 12077 Washington Administrative Code, Chapter 173-490—Emission Standards and Controls for Sources Emitting Volatile Organic Compounds 173-490-010 Policy and Purpose 3/22/91 7/12/93, 58 FR 37426 173-490-020 Definitions 3/22/91 7/12/93, 58 FR 37426 173-490-025 General Applicability 3/22/91 7/12/93, 58 FR 37426 173-490-030 Registration and Reporting 3/22/91 7/12/93, 58 FR 37426 173-490-040 Requirements 3/22/91 7/12/93, 58 FR 37426 173-490-080 Exceptions and Alternative Methods 3/22/91 7/12/93, 58 FR 37426 173-490-090 New Source Review (NSR) 3/22/91 7/12/93, 58 FR 37426 173-490-200 Petroleum Refinery Equipment Leaks 3/22/91 7/12/93, 58 FR 37426 173-490-201 Petroleum Liquid Storage in External Floating Roof Tanks 3/22/91 7/12/93, 58 FR 37426 173-490-202 Leaks from Gasoline Transport Tanks and Vapor Collection System 3/22/91 7/12/93, 58 FR 37426 173-490-203 Perchloroethylene Dry Cleaning Systems 3/22/91 7/12/93, 58 FR 37426 173-490-204 Graphic Arts System 3/22/91 7/12/93, 58 FR 37426 173-490-205 Surface Coating of Miscellaneous Metal Parts and Products 3/22/91 7/12/93, 58 FR 37426 173-490-207 Surface Coating of Flatwood Paneling 3/22/91 7/12/93, 58 FR 37426 173-490-208 Aerospace Assembly and Component Coating Operations 3/22/91 7/12/93, 58 FR 37426 Washington Administrative Code, Chapter 173-492—Motor Fuel Specifications for Oxygenated Gasoline 173-492-010 Policy and Purpose 10/19/96 4/30/97, 62 FR 23363 173-492-020 Applicability 12/1/92 4/30/97, 62 FR 23363 173-492-030 Definitions 12/1/92 4/30/97, 62 FR 23363 173-492-040 Compliance Requirements 12/1/92 4/30/97, 62 FR 23363 173-492-050 Registration Requirements 10/19/96 4/30/97, 62 FR 23363 173-492-060 Labeling Requirements 12/1/92 4/30/97, 62 FR 23363 173-492-070 Control Areas and Control Periods 10/19/96 4/30/97, 62 FR 23363 173-492-080 Enforcement and Compliance 12/1/92 4/30/97, 62 FR 23363 173-492-090 Unplanned Conditions 12/1/92 4/30/97, 62 FR 23363 173-492-100 Severability 12/1/92 4/30/97, 62 FR 23363 Table 2—Additional Regulations Approved for Washington Department of Ecology (Ecology) Direct Jurisdiction [Applicable in Adams, Asotin, Chelan, Columbia, Douglas, Ferry, Franklin, Garfield, Grant, Kittitas, Klickitat, Lincoln, Okanogan, Pend Oreille, San Juan, Stevens, Walla Walla, and Whitman counties, excluding facilities subject to Energy Facilities Site Evaluation Council (EFSEC) jurisdiction, Indian reservations (excluding non-trust land within the exterior boundaries of the Puyallup Indian Reservation), and any other area where the EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. These regulations also apply statewide for facilities subject to the applicability sections of WAC 173-400-700, 173-405-012, 173-410-012, and 173-415-012] State citation Title/subject State effective date EPA approval date Explanations Washington Administrative Code, Chapter 173-400—General Regulations for Air Pollution Sources 173-400-010 Policy and Purpose 3/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-020 Applicability 12/29/12 10/3/14, 79 FR 59653 173-400-030 Definitions 12/29/12 10/3/14, 79 FR 59653 Except: 173-400-030(91). 173-400-036 Relocation of Portable Sources 12/29/12 4/29/15, 80 FR 23721 173-400-040 General Standards for Maximum Emissions 4/1/11 10/3/14, 79 FR 59653 Except: 173-400-040(2)(c); 173-400-040(2)(d); 173-400-040(3); 173-400-040(5); 173-400-040(7), second paragraph. 173-400-050 Emission Standards for Combustion and Incineration Units 12/29/12 10/3/14, 79 FR 59653 Except: 173-400-050(2); 173-400-050(4); 173-400-050(5). 173-400-060 Emission Standards for General Process Units 2/10/05 10/3/14, 79 FR 59653 173-400-070 Emission Standards for Certain Source Categories 12/29/12 10/3/14, 79 FR 59653 Except: 173-400-070(7); 173-400-070(8). 173-400-081 Startup and Shutdown 4/1/11 10/3/14, 79 FR 59653 173-400-091 Voluntary Limits on Emissions 4/1/11 10/3/14, 79 FR 59653 9/20/93 version continues to be approved under the authority of CAA Section 112(l) with respect to Section 112 hazardous air pollutants. See 60 FR 28726 (June 2, 1995). 173-400-105 Records, Monitoring, and Reporting 12/29/12 10/3/14, 79 FR 59653 173-400-107 Excess Emissions 9/20/93 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-110 New Source Review (NSR) for Sources and Portable Sources 12/29/12 4/29/15, 80 FR 23721 Except: 173-400-110(1)(c)(ii)(C); 173-400-110(1)(e); 173-400-110(2)(d);
  • The part of WAC 173-400-110(4)(b)(vi) that says,
  • • “not for use with materials containing toxic air pollutants, as listed in chapter 173-460 WAC,”;
  • The part of 400-110 (4)(e)(iii) that says,
  • • “where toxic air pollutants as defined in chapter 173-460 WAC are not emitted”;
  • The part of 400-110(4)(e)(f)(i) that says,
  • • “that are not toxic air pollutants listed in chapter 173-460 WAC”;
  • The part of 400-110(4)(h)(xviii) that says,
  • • “, to the extent that toxic air pollutant gases as defined in chapter 173-460 WAC are not emitted”;
  • The part of 400-110 (4)(h)(xxxiii) that says,
  • • “where no toxic air pollutants as listed under chapter 173-460 WAC are emitted”;
  • The part of 400-110(4)(h)(xxxiv) that says,
  • • “, or ≤1% (by weight) toxic air pollutants as listed in chapter 173-460 WAC”;
  • The part of 400-110(4)(h)(xxxv) that says,
  • • “or ≤1% (by weight) toxic air pollutants”;
  • The part of 400-110(4)(h)(xxxvi) that says,
  • • “or ≤1% (by weight) toxic air pollutants as listed in chapter 173-460 WAC”; 400-110(4)(h)(xl) , second sentence;
  • The last row of the table in 173-400-110(5)(b) regarding exemption levels for Toxic Air Pollutants.
  • 173-400-111 Processing Notice of Construction Applications for Sources, Stationary Sources and Portable Sources 12/29/12 5/12/15, 80 FR 27102 Except: 173-400-111(3)(h);
  • The part of 173-400-111(8)(a)(v) that says,
  • • “and 173-460-040,”; 173-400-111(9).
  • 173-400-112 Requirements for New Sources in Nonattainment Areas—Review for Compliance with Regulations 12/29/12 4/29/15, 80 FR 23721 Except: 173-400-112(8). 173-400-113 New Sources in Attainment or Unclassifiable Areas—Review for Compliance with Regulations 12/29/12 4/29/15, 80 FR 23721 Except: 173-400-113(3), second sentence. 173-400-116 Increment Protection 9/10/11 4/29/15, 80 FR 23721 173-400-117 Special Protection Requirements for Federal Class I Areas 12/29/12 4/29/15, 80 FR 23721 173-400-118 Designation of Class I, II, and III Areas 12/29/12 10/3/14, 79 FR 59653 173-400-131 Issuance of Emission Reduction Credits 4/1/11 11/7/14, 79 FR 66291 173-400-136 Use of Emission Reduction Credits (ERC) 4/1/11 11/7/14, 79 FR 66291 173-400-151 Retrofit Requirements for Visibility Protection 2/10/05 10/3/14, 79 FR 59653 173-400-161 Compliance Schedules 3/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-171 Public Notice and Opportunity for Public Comment 12/29/12 4/29/15, 80 FR 23721 Except: The part of 173-400-171(3)(b) that says, • “or any increase in emissions of a toxic air pollutant above the acceptable source impact level for that toxic air pollutant as regulated under chapter 173-460 WAC”; 173-400-171(12). 173-400-175 Public Information 2/10/05 10/3/14, 79 FR 59653 173-400-190 Requirements for Nonattainment Areas 3/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-200 Creditable Stack Height and Dispersion Techniques 2/10/05 10/3/14, 79 FR 59653 173-400-205 Adjustment for Atmospheric Conditions 3/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-210 Emission Requirements of Prior Jurisdictions 3/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-560 General Order of Approval 12/29/12 4/29/15, 80 FR 23721 Except: The part of 173-400-560(1)(f) that says, “173-460 WAC”. 173-400-700 Review of Major Stationary Sources of Air Pollution 4/1/11 4/29/15, 80 FR 23721 173-400-710 Definitions 12/29/12 4/29/15, 80 FR 23721 173-400-720 Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) 12/29/12 4/29/15, 80 FR 23721 Except: 173-400-720(4)(a)(i through iv); 173-400-720(4)(b)(iii)(C); and 173-400-720(4)(a)(vi) with respect to the incorporation by reference of the text in 40 CFR 52.21(b)(49)(v), 52.21(i)(5)(i), and 52.21(k)(2). 173-400-730 Prevention of Significant Deterioration Application Processing Procedures 12/29/12 4/29/15, 80 FR 23721 173-400-740 PSD Permitting Public Involvement Requirements 12/29/12 4/29/15, 80 FR 23721 173-400-750 Revisions to PSD Permits 12/29/12 4/29/15, 80 FR 23721 Except: 173-400-750(2) second sentence. 173-400-800 Major Stationary Source and Major Modification in a Nonattainment Area 4/1/11 11/7/14, 79 FR 66291 173-400-810 Major Stationary Source and Major Modification Definitions 12/29/12 11/7/14, 79 FR 66291 173-400-820 Determining if a New Stationary Source or Modification to a Stationary Source is Subject to these Requirements 12/29/12 11/7/14, 79 FR 66291 173-400-830 Permitting Requirements 12/29/12 11/7/14, 79 FR 66291 173-400-840 Emission Offset Requirements 12/29/12 11/7/14, 79 FR 66291 173-400-850 Actual Emissions Plantwide Applicability Limitation (PAL) 12/29/12 11/7/14, 79 FR 66291 173-400-860 Public Involvement Procedures 4/1/11 11/7/14, 79 FR 66291
    Table 3—Additional Regulations Approved for the Energy Facilities Site Evaluation Council (EFSEC) Jurisdiction [See the SIP-approved provisions of WAC 463-39-020 for jurisdictional applicability] State citation Title/subject State
  • effective date
  • EPA approval date Explanations
    Washington Administrative Code, Chapter 463-39—General Regulations for Air Pollution Sources 463-39-005 Adoption by Reference 9/21/95 5/23/96, 61 FR 25791 Except sections (2), (3) & (4). 463-39-010 Purpose 5/3/92 5/23/96, 61 FR 25791 463-39-020 Applicability 9/21/95 5/23/96, 61 FR 25791 463-39-030 Additional Definitions 9/21/95 5/23/96, 61 FR 25791 463-39-095 Permit Issuance 9/21/95 5/23/96, 61 FR 25791 463-39-100 Registration 12/11/93 5/23/96, 61 FR 25791 463-39-120 Monitoring and Special Report 9/21/95 5/23/96, 61 FR 25791 463-39-135 Criminal Penalties 8/6/79 5/23/96, 61 FR 25791 463-39-170 Conflict of Interest 8/6/79 5/23/96, 61 FR 25791 463-39-230 Regulatory Actions 8/26/94 5/23/96, 61 FR 25791
    Table 4—Additional Regulations Approved for the Benton Clean Air Agency (BCAA) Jurisdiction [Applicable in Benton County, excluding facilities subject to Energy Facilities Site Evaluation Council (EFSEC) jurisdiction, Indian reservations and any other area where the EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction, and facilities subject to the applicability sections of WAC 173-400-700, 173-405-012, 173-410-012, and 173-415-012] State/local
  • citation
  • Title/subject State/local
  • effective
  • date
  • EPA approval date Explanations
    Benton Clean Air Agency (BCAA) Regulations Regulation 1 1.01 Name of Agency 12/11/14 11/17/15, 80 FR 71695 1.02 Policy and Purpose 12/11/14 11/17/15, 80 FR 71695 Replaces WAC 173-400-010. 1.03 Applicability 12/11/14 11/17/15, 80 FR 71695 Replaces WAC 173-400-020. 4.01(A) Definitions—Fugitive Dust 12/11/14 11/17/15, 80 FR 71695 Replaces WAC 173-400-030(38). 4.01(B) Definitions—Fugitive Emissions 12/11/14 11/17/15, 80 FR 71695 Replaces WAC 173-400-030(39). 4.02(B) Particulate Matter Emissions—Fugitive Emissions 12/11/14 11/17/15, 80 FR 71695 Replaces WAC 173-400-040(4). 4.02(C)(1) Particulate Matter Emissions—Fugitive Dust 12/11/14 11/17/15, 80 FR 71695 Replaces WAC 173-400-040(9)(a). 4.02(C)(3) Particulate Matter Emissions—Fugitive Dust 12/11/14 11/17/15, 80 FR 71695 Replaces WAC 173-400-040(9)(b). Washington Department of Ecology Regulations Washington Administrative Code, Chapter 173-400—General Regulations for Air Pollution Sources 173-400-030 Definitions 12/29/12 11/17/15, 80 FR 71695 Except: 173-400-030(38); 173-400-030(39); 173-400-030(91). 173-400-036 Relocation of Portable Sources 12/29/12 11/17/15, 80 FR 71695 173-400-040 General Standards for Maximum Emissions 4/1/11 11/17/15, 80 FR 71695 Except: 173-400-040(2)(c); 173-400-040(2)(d); 173-400-040(3); 173-400-040(4); 173-400-040(5); 173-400-040(7), second paragraph; 173-400-040(9)(a); 173-400-040(9)(b). 173-400-050 Emission Standards for Combustion and Incineration Units 12/29/12 11/17/15, 80 FR 71695 Except: 173-400-050(2); 173-400-050(4); 173-400-050(5). 173-400-060 Emission Standards for General Process Units 2/10/05 11/17/15, 80 FR 71695 173-400-070 Emission Standards for Certain Source Categories 12/29/12 11/17/15, 80 FR 71695 Except: 173-400-070(7); 173-400-070(8). 173-400-081 Startup and Shutdown 4/1/11 11/17/15, 80 FR 71695 173-400-091 Voluntary Limits on Emissions 4/1/11 11/17/15, 80 FR 71695 173-400-105 Records, Monitoring and Reporting 12/29/12 11/17/15, 80 FR 71695 173-400-107 Excess Emissions 9/20/93 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-110 New Source Review (NSR) for Sources and Portable Sources 12/29/12 11/17/15, 80 FR 71695 Except: 173-400-110(1)(c)(ii)(C); 173-400-110(1)(e); 173-400-110(2)(d);
  • —The part of WAC 173-400-110(4)(b)(vi) that says, “not for use with materials containing toxic air pollutants, as listed in chapter 173-460 WAC,”;
  • —The part of 400-110(4)(e)(iii) that says, “where toxic air pollutants as defined in chapter 173-460 WAC are not emitted”; The part of 400-110(4)(e)(f)(i) that says, “that are not toxic air pollutants listed in chapter 173-460 WAC”;
  • —The part of 400-110(4)(h)(xviii) that says, “, to the extent that toxic air pollutant gases as defined in chapter 173-460 WAC are not emitted”;
  • —The part of 400-110(4)(h)(xxxiii) that says, “where no toxic air pollutants as listed under chapter 173-460 WAC are emitted”;
  • —The part of 400-110(4)(h)(xxxiv) that says, “, or ≤1% (by weight) toxic air pollutants as listed in chapter 173-460 WAC”; The part of 400-110(4)(h)(xxxv) that says, “or ≤1% (by weight) toxic air pollutants”;
  • —The part of 400-110(4)(h)(xxxvi) that says, “or ≤1% (by weight) toxic air pollutants as listed in chapter 173-460 WAC”; 400-110(4)(h)(xl), second sentence;
  • —The last row of the table in 173-400-110(5)(b) regarding exemption levels for Toxic Air Pollutants.
  • 173-400-111 Processing Notice of Construction Applications for Sources, Stationary Sources and Portable Sources 12/29/12 11/17/15, 80 FR 71695 Except: 173-400-111(3)(h);
  • —The part of 173-400-111(8)(a)(v) that says, “and 173-460-040,”; 173-400-111(9).
  • 173-400-112 Requirements for New Sources in Nonattainment Areas—Review for Compliance with Regulations 12/29/12 11/17/15, 80 FR 71695 Except: 173-400-112(8). 173-400-113 New Sources in Attainment or Unclassifiable Areas—Review for Compliance with Regulations 12/29/12 11/17/15, 80 FR 71695 Except: 173-400-113(3), second sentence. 173-400-117 Special Protection Requirements for Federal Class I Areas 12/29/12 11/17/15, 80 FR 71695 Except facilities subject to the applicability provisions of WAC 173-400-700. 173-400-118 Designation of Class I, II, and III Areas 12/29/12 11/17/15, 80 FR 71695 173-400-131 Issuance of Emission Reduction Credits 4/1/11 11/17/15, 80 FR 71695 173-400-136 Use of Emission Reduction Credits (ERC) 12/29/12 11/17/15, 80 FR 71695 173-400-151 Retrofit Requirements for Visibility Protection 2/10/05 11/17/15, 80 FR 71695 173-400-161 Compliance Schedules 3/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-171 Public Notice and Opportunity for Public Comment 12/29/12 11/17/15, 80 FR 71695 Except:
  • —The part of 173-400-171(3)(b) that says, “or any increase in emissions of a toxic air pollutant above the acceptable source impact level for that toxic air pollutant as regulated under chapter 173-460 WAC”; 173-400-171(12).
  • 173-400-175 Public Information 2/10/05 11/17/15, 80 FR 71695 173-400-190 Requirements for Nonattainment Areas 3/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-200 Creditable Stack Height & Dispersion Techniques 2/10/05 11/17/15, 80 FR 71695 173-400-205 Adjustment for Atmospheric Conditions 3/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-210 Emission Requirements of Prior Jurisdictions 3/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-560 General Order of Approval 12/29/12 11/17/15, 80 FR 71695 Except:
  • —The part of 173-400-560(1)(f) that says, “173-460 WAC”.
  • 173-400-800 Major Stationary Source and Major Modification in a Nonattainment Area 4/1/11 11/17/15, 80 FR 71695 173-400-810 Major Stationary Source and Major Modification Definitions 12/29/12 11/17/15, 80 FR 71695 173-400-820 Determining if a New Stationary Source or Modification to a Stationary Source is Subject to these Requirements 12/29/12 11/17/15, 80 FR 71695 173-400-830 Permitting Requirements 12/29/12 11/17/15, 80 FR 71695 173-400-840 Emission Offset Requirements 12/29/12 11/17/15, 80 FR 71695 173-400-850 Actual Emissions Plantwide Applicability Limitation (PAL) 12/29/12 11/17/15, 80 FR 71695 173-400-860 Public Involvement Procedures 4/1/11 11/17/15, 80 FR 71695
    Table 5—Additional Regulations Approved for the Northwest Clean Air Agency (NWCAA) Jurisdiction [Applicable in Island, Skagit and Whatcom counties, excluding facilities subject to Energy Facilities Site Evaluation Council (EFSEC) jurisdiction, Indian reservations and any other area where the EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction, and facilities subject to the applicability sections of WAC 173-400-700, 173-405-012, 173-410-012, and 173-415-012] State/local
  • citation
  • Title/subject State/local
  • effective
  • date
  • EPA approval date Explanations
    Northwest Clean Air Agency Regulations General Provisions 100 Name of Authority 9/8/93 2/22/95, 60 FR 9778 101 Short Title 9/8/93 2/22/95, 60 FR 9778 102 Policy 9/8/93 2/22/95, 60 FR 9778 103 Duties & Powers 9/8/93 2/22/95, 60 FR 9778 104 Adoption of State/Federal Laws and Rules 11/13/94 10/24/95, 60 FR 54439 Except section 104.2. 105 Separability 9/8/93 2/22/95, 60 FR 9778 106 Public Records 9/8/93 2/22/95, 60 FR 9778 110 Investigation and Studies 9/8/93 2/22/95, 60 FR 9778 111 Interference or Obstruction 9/8/93 2/22/95, 60 FR 9778 112 False and Misleading Oral Statements 9/8/93 2/22/95, 60 FR 9778 113 Service of Notice 9/8/93 2/22/95, 60 FR 9778 114 Confidential Information 9/8/93 2/22/95, 60 FR 9778 120 Hearings 9/8/93 2/22/95, 60 FR 9778 121 Orders 9/8/93 2/22/95, 60 FR 9778 122 Appeals from Orders or Violations 9/8/93 2/22/95, 60 FR 9778 123 Status of Orders on Appeal 9/8/93 2/22/95, 60 FR 9778 124 Display of Orders 9/8/93 2/22/95, 60 FR 9778 130 Citations—Notices 9/8/93 2/22/95, 60 FR 9778 131 Violations—Notices 9/8/93 2/22/95, 60 FR 9778 132 Criminal Penalty 11/13/94 10/24/95, 60 FR 54439 133 Civil Penalty 11/13/94 10/24/95, 60 FR 54439 134 Restraining Orders—Injunction 9/8/93 2/22/95, 60 FR 9778 135 Additional Enforcement—Compliance Schedules 9/8/93 2/22/95, 60 FR 9778 140 Reporting by Government Agencies 9/8/93 2/22/95, 60 FR 9778 145 Motor Vehicle Owner Responsibility 9/8/93 2/22/95, 60 FR 9778 150 Pollutant Disclosure—Reporting by Air Containment Sources 9/8/93 2/22/95, 60 FR 9778 180 Sampling and Analytical Methods/References 9/8/93 2/22/95, 60 FR 9778 Definitions 200 Definitions 11/13/94 10/24/95, 60 FR 54439 Control Procedures 300 Notice of Construction When Required 11/13/94 10/24/95, 60 FR 54439 301 Information Required for Notice of Construction & Application for Approval, Public Notice, Public Hearing 11/13/94 10/24/95, 60 FR 54439 302 Issuance of Approval or Order 11/13/94 10/24/95, 60 FR 54439 303 Notice of Completion—Notice of Violation 9/8/93 2/22/95, 60 FR 9778 310 Approval to Operate Required 9/8/93 2/22/95, 60 FR 9778 320 Registration Required 9/8/93 2/22/95, 60 FR 9778 321 General Requirements for Registration 9/8/93 2/22/95, 60 FR 9778 322 Exemptions from Registration 11/13/94 10/24/95, 60 FR 54439 323 Classes of Registration 9/8/93 2/22/95, 60 FR 9778 324 Fees 11/13/94 10/24/95, 60 FR 54439 Except section 324.121. 325 Transfer 9/8/93 2/22/95, 60 FR 9778 340 Report of Breakdown and Upset 11/13/94 10/24/95, 60 FR 54439 341 Schedule Report of Shutdown or Start-Up 9/8/93 2/22/95, 60 FR 9778 342 Operation and Maintenance 9/8/93 2/22/95, 60 FR 9778 360 Testing and Sampling 9/8/93 2/22/95, 60 FR 9778 365 Monitoring 9/8/93 2/22/95, 60 FR 9778 366 Instrument Calibration 9/8/93 2/22/95, 60 FR 9778 Standards 400 Ambient Air Standards—Forward 9/8/93 2/22/95, 60 FR 9778 401 Suspended Particulate Standards (PM-10) 9/8/93 2/22/95, 60 FR 9778 410 Sulfur Oxide Standards 9/8/93 2/22/95, 60 FR 9778 420 Carbon Monoxide Standards 9/8/93 2/22/95, 60 FR 9778 422 Nitrogen Oxide Standards 9/8/93 2/22/95, 60 FR 9778 424 Ozone Standards 9/8/93 2/22/95, 60 FR 9778 450 Emission Standards—Forward 9/8/93 2/22/95, 60 FR 9778 451 Emission of Air Contaminant—Visual Standards 11/13/94 10/24/95, 60 FR 54439 452 Motor Vehicle Visual Standards 9/8/93 2/22/95, 60 FR 9778 Except section 452.5. 455 Emission of Particulate Matter 9/8/93 2/22/95, 60 FR 9778 458 Incinerators—Wood Waste Burners 9/8/93 2/22/95, 60 FR 9778 460 Weight/Heat Rate Standard—Emission of Sulfur Compounds 9/8/93 2/22/95, 60 FR 9778 462 Emission of Sulfur Compounds 11/13/94 10/24/95, 60 FR 54439 466 Portland Cement Plants 9/8/93 2/22/95, 60 FR 9778 Regulated Activities and Prohibitions 510 Incinerator Burning 9/8/93 2/22/95, 60 FR 9778 520 Sulfur Compounds in Fuel 9/8/93 2/22/95, 60 FR 9778 550 Particulate Matter from Becoming Airborne 9/8/93 2/22/95, 60 FR 9778 560 Storage of Organic Liquids 9/8/93 2/22/95, 60 FR 9778 580 Volatile Organic Compound Control (VOC) 11/13/94 10/24/95, 60 FR 54439 Washington Department of Ecology Regulations Washington Administrative Code, Chapter 173-400—General Regulations for Air Pollution Sources 173-400-010 Policy and Purpose 3/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-020 Applicability 3/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-030 Definitions 3/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-040 General Standards for Maximum Emissions 3/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 Except (1)(c), and (1)(d), (2), (4), and the 2nd paragraph of (6). 173-400-050 Emission Standards for Combustion and Incineration Units 3/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 Except the exception provision in (3). 173-400-060 Emission Standards for General Process Units 3/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-070 Emission Standards for Certain Source Categories 3/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 Except (7). 173-400-081 Startup and Shutdown 9/20/93 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-091 Voluntary Limits on Emissions 9/20/93 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 9/20/93 version continues to be approved under the authority of CAA Section 112(l) with respect to Section 112 hazardous air pollutants. See 60 FR 28726 (June 2, 1995). 173-400-100 Registration 9/20/93 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-105 Records, Monitoring and Reporting 9/20/93 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-107 Excess Emissions 9/20/93 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-110 New Source Review (NSR) 9/20/93 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-112 Requirements for New Sources in Nonattainment Areas 9/20/93 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 Except (8). 173-400-113 Requirements for New Sources in Attainment or Unclassifiable Areas 9/20/93 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 Except (5). 173-400-151 Retrofit Requirements for Visibility Protection 3/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-161 Compliance Schedules 3/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-171 Public Involvement 9/20/93 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-190 Requirements for Nonattainment Areas 3/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-200 Creditable Stack Height & Dispersion Techniques 3/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-205 Adjustment for Atmospheric Conditions 3/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-210 Emission Requirements of Prior Jurisdictions 3/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726
    Table 6—Additional Regulations Approved for the Olympic Region Clean Air Agency (ORCAA) Jurisdiction [Applicable in Clallam, Grays Harbor, Jefferson, Mason, Pacific, and Thurston counties, excluding facilities subject to Energy Facilities Site Evaluation Council (EFSEC) jurisdiction, Indian reservations and any other area where the EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction, and facilities subject to the applicability sections of WAC 173-400-700, 173-405-012, 173-410-012, and 173-415-012] State/local
  • citation
  • Title/subject State/local
  • effective date
  • EPA approval date Explanations
    Olympic Region Clean Air Agency Regulations Rule 6.2 Outdoor Burning 6.2.3 No Residential or Land Clearing Burning 2/4/12 10/3/13, 78 FR 61188 Only as it applies to the cities of Olympia, Lacey, and Tumwater. 6.2.6 Curtailment 3/18/11 10/3/13, 78 FR 61188 6.2.7 Recreational Burning 3/18/11 10/3/13, 78 FR 61188 Rule 8.1 Wood Heating 8.1.1 Definitions 5/22/10 10/3/13, 78 FR 61188 8.1.2(b) and (c) General Emission Standards 5/22/10 10/3/13, 78 FR 61188 8.1.3 Prohibited Fuel Types 5/22/10 10/3/13, 78 FR 61188 8.1.4 Curtailment 5/22/10 10/3/13, 78 FR 61188 8.1.5 Exceptions 5/22/10 10/3/13, 78 FR 61188 8.1.7 Sale and Installation of Uncertified Woodstoves 5/22/10 10/3/13, 78 FR 61188 8.1.8 Disposal of Uncertified Woodstoves 5/22/10 10/3/13, 78 FR 61188 Washington Department of Ecology Regulations Washington Administrative Code, Chapter 173-400—General Regulations for Air Pollution Sources 173-400-010 Policy and Purpose 3/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-020 Applicability 3/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-030 Definitions 3/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-040 General Standards for Maximum Emissions 3/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 Except (1)(c), and (1)(d), (2), (4), and the 2nd paragraph of (6). 173-400-050 Emission Standards for Combustion and Incineration Units 3/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 Except the exception provision in (3). 173-400-060 Emission Standards for General Process Units 3/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-070 Emission Standards for Certain Source Categories 3/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 Except (7). 173-400-081 Startup and Shutdown 9/20/93 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-091 Voluntary Limits on Emissions 9/20/93 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 9/20/93 version continues to be approved under the authority of CAA Section 112(l) with respect to Section 112 hazardous air pollutants. See 60 FR 28726 (June 2, 1995). 173-400-100 Registration 9/20/93 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-105 Records, Monitoring and Reporting 9/20/93 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-107 Excess Emissions 9/20/93 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-110 New Source Review (NSR) 9/20/93 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-112 Requirements for New Sources in Nonattainment Areas 9/20/93 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 Except (8). 173-400-113 Requirements for New Sources in Attainment or Unclassifiable Areas 9/20/93 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 Except (5). 173-400-151 Retrofit Requirements for Visibility Protection 3/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-161 Compliance Schedules 3/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-171 Public Involvement 9/20/93 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-190 Requirements for Nonattainment Areas 3/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-200 Creditable Stack Height & Dispersion Techniques 3/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-205 Adjustment for Atmospheric Conditions 3/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-210 Emission Requirements of Prior Jurisdictions 3/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726
    Table 7—Additional Regulations Approved for the Puget Sound Clean Air Agency (PSCAA) Jurisdiction [Applicable in King, Kitsap, Pierce and Snohomish counties, excluding facilities subject to Energy Facilities Site Evaluation Council (EFSEC) jurisdiction, Indian reservations (excluding non-trust land within the exterior boundaries of the Puyallup Indian Reservation), any other area where the EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction, and facilities subject to the applicability sections of WAC 173-400-700, 173-405-012, 173-410-012, and 173-415-012] State/local
  • citation
  • Title/subject State/local
  • effective date
  • EPA approval date Explanations
    Puget Sound Clean Air Agency Regulations Regulation I—Article 1: Policy, Short Title, and Definitions 1.01 Policy 11/1/99 8/31/04, 69 FR 53007 1.03 Name of Agency 11/1/99 8/31/04, 69 FR 53007 1.05 Short Title 11/1/99 8/31/04, 69 FR 53007 1.07 Definitions 5/19/94 6/29/95, 60 FR 33734 Regulation I—Article 3: General Provisions 3.04 Reasonably Available Control Technology 4/17/99 8/31/04, 69 FR 53007 Except (e). 3.06 Credible Evidence 11/14/98 8/31/04, 69 FR 53007 Regulation I—Article 5: Registration 5.02 Applicability and Purpose of the Registration Program 11/1/96 8/6/97, 62 FR 42216 5.03 Registration Required 8/13/99 8/31/04, 69 FR 53007 Except (a)(5). 5.05 General Reporting Requirements for Registration 11/1/98 8/31/04, 69 FR 53007 Regulation I—Article 6: New Source Review 6.03 Notice of Construction 11/1/96 8/6/97, 62 FR 42216 6.04 Notice of Construction Review Fees 11/1/97 4/21/98, 63 FR 19658 6.06 Public Notice 5/19/94 6/29/95, 60 FR 33734 6.07 Order of Approval—Order to Prevent Construction 5/19/94 6/29/95, 60 FR 33734 6.08 Emission Reduction Credit Banking 1/1/93 8/29/94, 59 FR 44324 6.09 Notice of Completion 5/19/94 6/29/95, 60 FR 33734 6.10 Work Done without an Approval 11/1/97 4/21/98, 63 FR 19658 Regulation I—Article 7: Operating Permits 7.09 General Reporting Requirements for Operating Permits 11/1/98 8/31/04, 69 FR 53007 Regulation I—Article 8: Outdoor Burning 8.04 General Conditions for Outdoor Burning 1/1/01 8/31/04, 69 FR 53007 8.05 Agricultural Burning 1/1/01 8/31/04, 69 FR 53007 8.06 Outdoor Burning Ozone Contingency Measure 1/23/03 8/5/04, 69 FR 47364 8.09 Description of King County No-Burn Area 1/1/01 8/31/04, 69 FR 53007 8.10 Description of Pierce County No-Burn Area 1/1/01 8/31/04, 69 FR 53007 8.11 Description of Snohomish County No-Burn Area 1/1/01 8/31/04, 69 FR 53007 8.12 Description of Kitsap County No-Burn Area 11/30/02 8/31/04, 69 FR 53007 Regulation I—Article 9: Emission Standards 9.03 Emission of Air Contaminant: Visual Standard 4/17/99 8/31/04, 69 FR 53007 Except (e). 9.04 Opacity Standards for Equipment with Continuous Opacity Monitoring Systems 6/1/98 8/31/04, 69 FR 53007 Except (d)(2) & (f). 9.05 Refuse Burning 1/13/94 6/29/95, 60 FR 33734 9.07 Sulfur Dioxide Emission Standard 5/19/94 6/29/95, 60 FR 33734 9.08 Fuel Oil Standards 5/19/94 6/29/95, 60 FR 33734 9.09 Particulate Matter Emission Standards 6/1/98 8/31/04, 69 FR 53007 9.15 Fugitive Dust Control Measures 4/17/99 8/31/04, 69 FR 53007 9.16 Spray-Coating Operations 9/1/01 8/31/04, 69 FR 53007 9.20 Maintenance of Equipment 6/9/88 8/29/94, 59 FR 44324 Regulation I—Article 12: Standards of Performance for Continuous Emission Monitoring Systems 12.01 Applicability 6/1/98 8/31/04, 69 FR 53007 12.03 Continuous Emission Monitoring Systems 11/1/04 9/17/13, 78 FR 57073 Regulation I—Article 13: Solid Fuel Burning Device Standards 13.01 Policy and Purpose 12/01/12 5/29/13, 78 FR 32131 13.02 Definitions 12/01/12 5/29/13, 78 FR 32131 13.03 Opacity Standards 12/01/12 5/29/13, 78 FR 32131 13.04 Prohibited Fuel Types 12/01/12 5/29/13, 78 FR 32131 13.05 Curtailment 12/01/12 5/29/13, 78 FR 32131 13.06 Emission Performance Standards 12/01/12 5/29/13, 78 FR 32131 13.07 Contingency Plan 12/01/12 5/29/13, 78 FR 32131 Regulation II—Article 1: Purpose, Policy, Short Title, and Definitions 1.01 Purpose 11/1/99 8/31/04, 69 FR 53007 1.02 Policy 11/1/99 8/31/04, 69 FR 53007 1.03 Short Title 11/1/99 8/31/04, 69 FR 53007 1.04 General Definitions 12/11/80 2/28/83, 48 FR 8273 1.05 Special Definitions 9/1/03 9/17/13, 78 FR 57073 Regulation II—Article 2: Gasoline Marketing Emission Standards 2.01 Definitions 8/13/99 8/31/04, 69 FR 53007 2.03 Petroleum Refineries 7/15/91 8/29/94, 59 FR 44324 2.05 Gasoline Loading Terminals 1/13/94 6/29/95, 60 FR 33734 2.06 Bulk Gasoline Plants 7/15/91 8/29/94, 59 FR 44324 2.07 Gasoline Stations 1/10/00 8/31/04, 69 FR 53007 2.08 Gasoline Transport Tanks 8/13/99 8/31/04, 69 FR 53007 2.09 Oxygenated Gasoline Carbon Monoxide Contingency Measure and Fee Schedule 1/23/03 8/5/04, 69 FR 47365 2.10 Gasoline Station Ozone Contingency Measure 1/23/03 8/5/04, 69 FR 47365 Regulation II—Article 3: Miscellaneous Volatile Organic Compound Emission Standards 3.01 Cutback Asphalt Paving 7/15/91 8/29/94, 59 FR 44324 3.02 Volatile Organic Compound Storage Tanks 8/13/99 8/31/04, 69 FR 53007 3.03 Can and Paper Coating Operations 3/17/94 6/29/95, 60 FR 33734 3.04 Motor Vehicle and Mobile Equipment Coating Operations 9/1/03 9/17/13, 78 FR 57073 3.05 Graphic Arts Systems 1/13/94 6/29/95, 60 FR 33734 3.08 Polyester, Vinylester, Gelcoat, and Resin Operations 1/13/94 6/29/95, 60 FR 33734 3.09 Aerospace Component Coating Operations 1/13/94 6/29/95, 60 FR 33734 Washington Department of Ecology Regulations Washington Administrative Code, Chapter 173-400—General Regulations for Air Pollution Sources 173-400-010 Policy and Purpose 3/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-020 Applicability 3/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-030 Definitions 3/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-040 General Standards for Maximum Emissions 3/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 Except (1)(c), and (1)(d), (2), (4), and the 2nd paragraph of (6). 173-400-050 Emission Standards for Combustion and Incineration Units 3/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 Except the exception provision in (3). 173-400-060 Emission Standards for General Process Units 3/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-070 Emission Standards for Certain Source Categories 3/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 Except (7). 173-400-081 Startup and Shutdown 9/20/93 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-091 Voluntary Limits on Emissions 9/20/93 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 9/20/93 version continues to be approved under the authority of CAA Section 112(l) with respect to Section 112 hazardous air pollutants. See 60 FR 28726 (June 2, 1995). issued pursuant to this section. 173-400-100 Registration 9/20/93 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-105 Records, Monitoring and Reporting 9/20/93 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-107 Excess Emissions 9/20/93 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-110 New Source Review (NSR) 9/20/93 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-112 Requirements for New Sources in Nonattainment Areas 9/20/93 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 Except (8). 173-400-113 Requirements for New Sources in Attainment or Unclassifiable Areas 9/20/93 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 Except (5). 173-400-151 Retrofit Requirements for Visibility Protection 3/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-161 Compliance Schedules 3/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-171 Public Involvement 9/20/93 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-190 Requirements for Nonattainment Areas 3/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-200 Creditable Stack Height & Dispersion Techniques 3/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-205 Adjustment for Atmospheric Conditions 3/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-210 Emission Requirements of Prior Jurisdictions 3/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726
    Table 8—Additional Regulations Approved for the Southwest Clean Air Agency (SWCAA) Jurisdiction [Applicable in Clark, Cowlitz, Lewis, Skamania and Wahkiakum counties, excluding facilities subject to Energy Facilities Site Evaluation Council (EFSEC) jurisdiction, Indian reservations and any other area where the EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction, and facilities subject to the applicability sections of WAC 173-400-700, 173-405-012, 173-410-012, and 173-415-012] State/local
  • citation
  • Title/subject State/local
  • effective date
  • EPA approval date Explanations
    Southwest Clean Air Agency Regulations General Regulations for Air Pollution Sources 400-010 Policy and Purpose 9/21/95 2/26/97, 62 FR 8624 400-020 Applicability 9/21/95 2/26/97, 62 FR 8624 400-030 Definitions 11/21/96 5/19/97, 62 FR 27204 Except 2nd sentence in two subsections (14) & (49), subsection (84). 400-040 General Standards for Maximum Emissions 9/21/95 2/26/97, 62 FR 8624 Except (1)(c), and (1)(d), (2), (4), and the exception provision of (6)(a). 400-050 Emission Standards for Combustion and Incineration Units 9/21/95 2/26/97, 62 FR 8624 Except the exception provision in (3). 400-052 Stack Sampling of Major Combustion Sources 9/21/95 2/26/97, 62 FR 8624 400-060 Emission Standards for General Process Units 9/21/95 2/26/97, 62 FR 8624 400-070 Emission Standards for Certain Source Categories 9/21/95 2/26/97, 62 FR 8624 Except (5). 400-074 Gasoline Transport Tankers 9/21/95 2/26/97, 62 FR 8624 400-081 Startup and Shutdown 9/21/95 2/26/97, 62 FR 8624 400-090 Voluntary Limits on Emissions 11/8/93 5/3/95, 60 FR 21703 400-091 Voluntary Limits on Emissions 9/21/95 2/26/97, 62 FR 8624 400-100 Registration and Operating Permits 9/21/95 2/26/97, 62 FR 8624 Except the first sentence of (3)(a)(iv) & (4). 400-101 Sources Exempt from Registration Requirements 11/21/96 5/19/97, 62 FR 27204 400-105 Records, Monitoring and Reporting 9/21/95 2/26/97, 62 FR 8624 400-107 Excess Emissions 9/21/95 2/26/97, 62 FR 8624 400-109 Notice of Construction Application 11/21/96 5/19/97, 62 FR 27204 Except subsections (3)(b), (3)(c), (3)(g), (3)(h), (3)(i). 400-110 New Source Review 11/21/96 5/19/97, 62 FR 27204 400-111 Requirements for Sources in a Maintenance Plan Area 11/21/96 5/19/97, 62 FR 27204 400-112 Requirements for New Sources in Nonattainment Areas 11/21/96 5/19/97, 62 FR 27204 400-113 Requirements for New Sources in Attainment or Nonclassifiable Areas 11/21/96 5/19/97, 62 FR 27204 400-114 Requirements for Replacement or Substantial Alteration for Emission Control Technology at an Existing Stationary Source 11/21/96 5/19/97, 62 FR 27204 400-116 Maintenance of Equipment 11/21/96 5/19/97, 62 FR 27204 400-151 Retrofit Requirements for Visibility Protection 9/21/95 2/26/97, 62 FR 8624 400-161 Compliance Schedules 9/21/95 2/26/97, 62 FR 8624 400-171 Public Involvement 9/21/95 2/26/97, 62 FR 8624 400-190 Requirements for Nonattainment Areas 11/21/96 5/19/97, 62 FR 27204 400-200 Creditable Stack Height & Dispersion Techniques 9/21/95 2/26/97, 62 FR 8624 400-205 Adjustment for Atmospheric Conditions 9/21/95 2/26/97, 62 FR 8624 400-210 Emission Requirements of Prior Jurisdictions 9/21/95 2/26/97, 62 FR 8624 400-220 Requirements for Board Members 9/21/95 2/26/97, 62 FR 8624 400-230 Regulatory Actions & Civil Penalties 9/21/95 2/26/97, 62 FR 8624 400-240 Criminal Penalties 9/21/95 2/26/97, 62 FR 8624 400-250 Appeals 9/21/95 2/26/97, 62 FR 8624 400-260 Conflict of Interest 9/21/95 2/26/97, 62 FR 8624 400-270 Confidentiality of Records & Information 9/21/95 2/26/97, 62 FR 8624 400-280 Powers of Authority 9/21/95 2/26/97, 62 FR 8624 Emission Standards and Controls for Sources Emitting Volatile Organic Compounds 490-010 Policy and Purpose 11/21/96 5/19/97, 62 FR 27204 490-020 Definitions 11/21/96 5/19/97, 62 FR 27204 490-025 General Applicability 11/21/96 5/19/97, 62 FR 27204 490-030 Registration and Reporting 11/21/96 5/19/97, 62 FR 27204 490-040 Requirements 11/21/96 5/19/97, 62 FR 27204 490-080 Exceptions & Alternative Methods 11/21/96 5/19/97, 62 FR 27204 490-090 New Source Review 11/21/96 5/19/97, 62 FR 27204 490-200 Petroleum Refinery Equipment Leaks 11/21/96 5/19/97, 62 FR 27204 490-201 Petroleum Liquid Storage in External Floating Roof Tanks 11/21/96 5/19/97, 62 FR 27204 490-202 Leaks from Gasoline Transport Tanks and Vapor Collection Systems 11/21/96 5/19/97, 62 FR 27204 490-203 Perchloroethylene Dry Cleaning Systems 11/21/96 5/19/97, 62 FR 27204 490-204 Graphic Arts Systems 11/21/96 5/19/97, 62 FR 27204 490-205 Surface Coating of Miscellaneous Metal Parts and Products 11/21/96 5/19/97, 62 FR 27204 490-207 Surface Coating of Flatwood Paneling 11/21/96 5/19/97, 62 FR 27204 490-208 Aerospace Assembly & Component Coating Operations 11/21/96 5/19/97, 62 FR 27204 Emissions Standards and Controls for Sources Emitting Gasoline Vapors 491-010 Policy and Purpose 11/21/96 5/19/97, 62 FR 27204 491-015 Applicability 11/21/96 5/19/97, 62 FR 27204 491-020 Definitions 11/21/96 5/19/97, 62 FR 27204 491-030 Registration 11/21/96 5/19/97, 62 FR 27204 491-040 Gasoline Vapor Control Requirements 11/21/96 5/19/97, 62 FR 27204 491-050 Failures, Certification, Testing & Recordkeeping 11/21/96 5/19/97, 62 FR 27204 491-060 Severability 11/21/96 5/19/97, 62 FR 27204 Oxygenated Fuels 492-010 Policy and Purpose 11/21/96 4/30/97, 62 FR 23363 492-020 Applicability 11/21/96 4/30/97, 62 FR 23363 492-030 Definitions 11/21/96 4/30/97, 62 FR 23363 492-040 Compliance Requirements 11/21/96 4/30/97, 62 FR 23363 492-050 Registration Requirements 11/21/96 4/30/97, 62 FR 23363 492-060 Labeling Requirements 11/21/96 4/30/97, 62 FR 23363 492-070 Control Area and Control Period 11/21/96 4/30/97, 62 FR 23363 492-080 Enforcement and Compliance 11/21/96 4/30/97, 62 FR 23363 492-090 Unplanned Conditions 11/21/96 4/30/97, 62 FR 23363 492-100 Severability 11/21/96 4/30/97, 62 FR 23363 VOC Area Source Rules 493-100 Consumer Products (Reserved) 05/26/96 5/19/97, 62 FR 27204 493-200-010 Applicability 05/26/96 5/19/97, 62 FR 27204 493-200-020 Definitions 05/26/96 5/19/97, 62 FR 27204 493-200-030 Spray Paint Standards & Exemptions 05/26/96 5/19/97, 62 FR 27204 493-200-040 Requirements for Manufacture, Sale and Use of Spray Paint 05/26/96 5/19/97, 62 FR 27204 493-200-050 Recordkeeping & Reporting Requirements 05/26/96 5/19/97, 62 FR 27204 493-200-060 Inspection and Testing Requirements 05/26/96 5/19/97, 62 FR 27204 493-300-010 Applicability 05/26/96 5/19/97, 62 FR 27204 493-300-020 Definitions 05/26/96 5/19/97, 62 FR 27204 493-300-030 Standards 05/26/96 5/19/97, 62 FR 27204 493-300-040 Requirements for Manufacture, Sale and Use of Architectural Coatings 05/26/96 5/19/97, 62 FR 27204 493-300-050 Recordkeeping & Reporting Requirements 05/26/96 5/19/97, 62 FR 27204 493-300-060 Inspection and Testing Requirements 05/26/96 5/19/97, 62 FR 27204 493-400-010 Applicability 05/26/96 5/19/97, 62 FR 27204 493-400-020 Definitions 05/26/96 5/19/97, 62 FR 27204 493-400-030 Coating Standards & Exemptions 05/26/96 5/19/97, 62 FR 27204 493-400-040 Requirements for Manufacture & Sale of Coating 05/26/96 5/19/97, 62 FR 27204 493-400-050 Requirements for Motor Vehicle Refinishing in Vancouver AQMA 05/26/96 5/19/97, 62 FR 27204 493-400-060 Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements 05/26/96 5/19/97, 62 FR 27204 493-400-070 Inspection & Testing Requirements 05/26/96 5/19/97, 62 FR 27204 493-500-010 Applicability 05/26/96 5/19/97, 62 FR 27204 493-500-020 Compliance Extensions 05/26/96 5/19/97, 62 FR 27204 493-500-030 Exemption from Disclosure to the Public 05/26/96 5/19/97, 62 FR 27204 493-500-040 Future Review 05/26/96 5/19/97, 62 FR 27204 Washington Department of Ecology Regulations Washington Administrative Code, Chapter 173-400—General Regulations for Air Pollution Sources 173-400-010 Policy and Purpose 03/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-020 Applicability 03/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-030 Definitions 03/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-040 General Standards for Maximum Emissions 03/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 Except (1)(c), and (1)(d), (2), (4), and the 2nd paragraph of (6). 173-400-050 Emission Standards for Combustion and Incineration Units 03/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 Except the exception provision in (3). 173-400-060 Emission Standards for General Process Units 03/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-070 Emission Standards for Certain Source Categories 03/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 Except (7). 173-400-081 Startup and Shutdown 09/20/93 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-091 Voluntary Limits on Emissions 09/20/93 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 9/20/93 version continues to be approved under the authority of CAA Section 112(l) with respect to Section 112 hazardous air pollutants. See 60 FR 28726 (June 2, 1995). 173-400-100 Registration 09/20/93 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-105 Records, Monitoring and Reporting 09/20/93 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-107 Excess Emissions 09/20/93 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-110 New Source Review (NSR) 09/20/93 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-112 Requirements for New Sources in Nonattainment Areas 09/20/93 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 Except (8). 173-400-113 Requirements for New Sources in Attainment or Unclassifiable Areas 09/20/93 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 Except (5). 173-400-151 Retrofit Requirements for Visibility Protection 03/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-161 Compliance Schedules 03/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-171 Public Involvement 09/20/93 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-190 Requirements for Nonattainment Areas 03/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-200 Creditable Stack Height & Dispersion Techniques 03/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-205 Adjustment for Atmospheric Conditions 03/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-210 Emission Requirements of Prior Jurisdictions 03/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726
    Table 9—Additional Regulations Approved for the Spokane Regional Clean Air Agency (SRCAA) Jurisdiction [Applicable in Spokane County, excluding facilities subject to Energy Facilities Site Evaluation Council (EFSEC) jurisdiction, Indian reservations and any other area where the EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction, and facilities subject to the applicability sections of WAC 173-400-700, 173-405-012, 173-410-012, and 173-415-012] State/local
  • citation
  • Title/subject State/local
  • effective date
  • EPA approval date Explanations
    Spokane Regional Clean Air Agency Regulations Regulation I—Article VI—Emissions Prohibited 6.05 Particulate Matter & Preventing Particulate Matter from becoming Airborne 11/12/93 1/27/97, 62 FR 3800 6.14 Standards for Control of Particulate Matter on Paved Surfaces 2/13/99 4/12/99, 64 FR 17545 6.15 Standards for Control of Particulate Matter on Unpaved Roads 2/13/99 4/12/99, 64 FR 17545 6.16 Motor Fuel Specifications for Oxygenated Gasoline 7/6/95 9/22/97, 62 FR 49442 * * correction: 12/31/97, 62 FR 68187. Regulation I—Article VIII—Solid Fuel Burning Device Standards 8.01 Purpose 9/02/14 9/28/15, 80 FR 58216 8.02 Applicability 9/02/14 9/28/15, 80 FR 58216 8.03 Definitions 9/02/14 9/28/15, 80 FR 58216 8.04 Emission Performance Standards 9/02/14 9/28/15, 80 FR 58216 Except the incorporation by reference of WAC 173-433-130, 173-433-170, and 173-433-200. 8.05 Opacity Standards 9/02/14 9/28/15, 80 FR 58216 8.06 Prohibited Fuel Types 9/02/14 9/28/15, 80 FR 58216 8.07 Curtailment 9/02/14 9/28/15, 80 FR 58216 8.08 Exemptions 9/02/14 9/28/15, 80 FR 58216 8.09 Procedure to Geographically Limit Solid Fuel Burning Devices 9/02/14 9/28/15, 80 FR 58216 8.10 Restrictions on Installation of Solid Fuel Burning Devices 9/02/14 9/28/15, 80 FR 58216 Regulation II—Article IV—Emissions Prohibited 4.01 Particulate Emissions—Grain Loading Restrictions 4/26/79 6/5/80, 45 FR 37821 Washington Department of Ecology Regulations Washington Administrative Code, Chapter 173-400—General Regulations for Air Pollution Sources 173-400-010 Policy and Purpose 3/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-020 Applicability 3/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-030 Definitions 3/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-040 General Standards for Maximum Emissions 3/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 Except (1)(c), and (1)(d), (2), (4), and the 2nd paragraph of (6). 173-400-050 Emission Standards for Combustion and Incineration Units 3/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 Except the exception provision in (3). 173-400-060 Emission Standards for General Process Units 3/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-070 Emission Standards for Certain Source Categories 3/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 Except (7) 173-400-081 Startup and Shutdown 9/20/93 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-091 Voluntary Limits on Emissions 9/20/93 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 9/20/93 version continues to be approved under the authority of CAA Section 112(l) with respect to Section 112 hazardous air pollutants See 60 FR 28726 (June 2, 1995). 173-400-100 Registration 9/20/93 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-105 Records, Monitoring and Reporting 9/20/93 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-107 Excess Emissions 9/20/93 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-110 New Source Review (NSR) 9/20/93 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-112 Requirements for New Sources in Nonattainment Areas 9/20/93 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 Except (8). 173-400-113 Requirements for New Sources in Attainment or Unclassifiable Areas 9/20/93 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 Except (5). 173-400-151 Retrofit Requirements for Visibility Protection 3/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-161 Compliance Schedules 3/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-171 Public Involvement 9/20/93 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-190 Requirements for Nonattainment Areas 3/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-200 Creditable Stack Height & Dispersion Techniques 3/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-205 Adjustment for Atmospheric Conditions 3/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-210 Emission Requirements of Prior Jurisdictions 3/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726
    Table 10—Additional Regulations Approved for the Yakima Regional Clean Air Agency (YRCAA) Jurisdiction [Applicable in Yakima County, excluding facilities subject to Energy Facilities Site Evaluation Council (EFSEC) jurisdiction, Indian reservations and any other area where the EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction, and facilities subject to the applicability sections of WAC 173-400-700, 173-405-012, 173-410-012, and 173-415-012] State/local
  • citation
  • Title/subject State/local
  • effective date
  • EPA approval date Explanations
    Yakima Regional Clean Air Agency Regulations Article I—Policy, Short Title and Definitions 1.01 Policy 12/15/95 2/2/98, 63 FR 5269 1.02 Short Title 11/18/93 2/2/98, 63 FR 5269 1.03 Definitions 12/15/95 2/2/98, 63 FR 5269 Article II—General Provisions 2.02 Control Officer—Powers & Duties 11/18/93 2/2/98, 63 FR 5269 2.03 Miscellaneous Provisions 11/18/93 2/2/98, 63 FR 5269 2.04 Confidentiality 11/18/93 2/2/98, 63 FR 5269 2.05 Advisory Council 11/18/93 2/2/98, 63 FR 5269 Article III—Violations—Orders and Hearings 3.01 Notice of Violation—Corrective Action Hearings 11/18/93 2/2/98, 63 FR 5269 3.02 Finality of Order 11/18/93 2/2/98, 63 FR 5269 3.03 Stay of Order Pending Appeal 11/18/93 2/2/98, 63 FR 5269 3.04 Voluntary Compliance 11/18/93 2/2/98, 63 FR 5269 Article IV—Registration and Notice of Construction 4.01 Registration 12/15/95 2/2/98, 63 FR 5269 4.02 Notice of Construction 12/15/95 2/2/98, 63 FR 5269 4.03 Exceptions to Article 4 11/18/93 2/2/98, 63 FR 5269 Article V—Emissions Standards and Preventative Measures 5.01 Outdoor Burning 12/15/95 2/2/98, 63 FR 5269 5.02 Regulations Applicable to all Outdoor Burning 12/15/95 2/2/98, 63 FR 5269 5.03 Regulations Applicable to all Outdoor Burning within Jurisdiction of the Yakima County Clean Air Authority, Local Cities, Towns, Fire Protection Districts and Conservation Districts 12/15/95 2/2/98, 63 FR 5269 5.04 Regulations Applicable to Permits Issued by the Yakima County Clean Air Authority for all Other Outdoor Burning 12/15/95 2/2/98, 63 FR 5269 5.05 Additional Restrictions on Outdoor Burning 12/15/95 2/2/98, 63 FR 5269 5.06 General Standards for Maximum Permissible Emissions 12/15/95 2/2/98, 63 FR 5269 5.07 Minimum Emission Standards for Combustion and Incineration Sources 12/15/95 2/2/98, 63 FR 5269 5.08 Minimum Emissions Standards for General Process Sources 12/15/95 2/2/98, 63 FR 5269 5.10 Sensitive Area Designation 6/20/94 2/2/98, 63 FR 5269 5.11 Monitoring and Special Reporting 12/15/95 2/2/98, 63 FR 5269 5.12 Preventive Measures 11/18/93 2/2/98, 63 FR 5269 Article VIII—Penalty and Severability 8.01 Penalty for Violation 11/18/93 2/2/98, 63 FR 5269 8.02 Additional/Alternative Penalties 12/15/95 2/2/98, 63 FR 5269 8.03 Assurance of Discontinuance 11/18/93 2/2/98, 63 FR 5269 8.04 Restraining Order—Injunctions 11/18/93 2/2/98, 63 FR 5269 8.05 Severability 12/15/95 2/2/98, 63 FR 5269 Article IX—Woodstoves and Fireplaces 9.01 Policy 11/18/93 2/2/98, 63 FR 5269 9.02 Opacity 11/18/93 2/2/98, 63 FR 5269 9.03 Prohibitive Fuel Types 11/18/93 2/2/98, 63 FR 5269 9.04 Limitations of Sales of Solid Fuel Burning Devices 11/18/93 2/2/98, 63 FR 5269 9.05 Prohibition of Visible Emissions During Air Pollution Episodes 12/15/95 2/2/98, 63 FR 5269 Article XII—Adoption of State and Federal Regulations 12.01 State Regulations 12/15/95 2/2/98, 63 FR 5269 Article XIII—Fee Schedules and Other Charges 13.01 Registration and Fee Schedule 1/13/94 2/2/98, 63 FR 5269 13.02 Notice of Construction Fee Schedule 6/20/94 2/2/98, 63 FR 5269 13.03 Outdoor Burning Permit Fees 6/20/94 2/2/98, 63 FR 5269 Washington Department of Ecology Regulations Washington Administrative Code, Chapter 173-400—General Regulations for Air Pollution Sources 173-400-010 Policy and Purpose 3/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-020 Applicability 3/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-030 Definitions 3/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-040 General Standards for Maximum Emissions 3/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 Except (1)(c), and (1)(d), (2), (4), and the 2nd paragraph of (6). 173-400-050 Emission Standards for Combustion and Incineration Units 3/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 Except the exception provision in (3). 173-400-060 Emission Standards for General Process Units 3/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-070 Emission Standards for Certain Source Categories 3/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 Except (7). 173-400-081 Startup and Shutdown 9/20/93 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-091 Voluntary Limits on Emissions 9/20/93 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 9/20/93 version continues to be approved under the authority of CAA Section 112(l) with respect to Section 112 hazardous air pollutants. See 60 FR 28726 (June 2, 1995). 173-400-100 Registration 9/20/93 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-105 Records, Monitoring and Reporting 9/20/93 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-107 Excess Emissions 9/20/93 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-110 New Source Review (NSR) 9/20/93 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-112 Requirements for New Sources in Nonattainment Areas 9/20/93 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 Except (8). 173-400-113 Requirements for New Sources in Attainment or Unclassifiable Areas 9/20/93 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 Except (5). 173-400-151 Retrofit Requirements for Visibility Protection 3/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-161 Compliance Schedules 3/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-171 Public Involvement 9/20/93 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-190 Requirements for Nonattainment Areas 3/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-200 Creditable Stack Height & Dispersion Techniques 3/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-205 Adjustment for Atmospheric Conditions 3/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-210 Emission Requirements of Prior Jurisdictions 3/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726

    (d) EPA-Approved State Source-Specific Requirements.

    EPA-Approved State of Washington Source-Specific Requirements 1 Name of source Order/permit No. State effective date EPA approval date Explanations IBP (now known as Tyson Foods, Inc.) 02AQER-5074 12/6/02 5/2/05, 70 FR 22597 Except finding number 4 (T-BACT) & 3.3 of approval condition #3 (Emission Limits & Test Methods). Boise White Paper LLC Permit 000369-7 12/1/04 5/2/05, 70 FR 22597 Following condition only: 1.Q.1 of item Q. Boise Cascade, Wallula Mill 1614-AQ04 9/15/04 5/2/05, 70 FR 22597 Following conditions only: No. 1 (Approval Conditions) & Appendix A. Fugitive Dust Control Plan for Simplot Feeders Limited Partnership 12/1/03 5/2/05, 70 FR 22597 Emission Limits for Significant Stack Sources various orders various dates 10/26/95, 60 FR 54812 Honam, Inc., Ideal Division (now known as LaFarge North America, Inc.) #5183 2/9/94 8/31/04, 69 FR 53007 Saint Gobain Containers LLC #8244 9/9/99 8/31/04, 69 FR 53007 Kaiser Order—Alternate Opacity Limit 91-01 12/12/91 1/27/97, 62 FR 3800 Kaiser Order—Limiting Potential-to-Emit 96-03 10/4/00 7/1/05, 70 FR 38029 Kaiser Order—Limiting Potential-to-Emit 96-04 4/24/96 1/27/97, 62 FR 3800 Kaiser Order—Limiting Potential-to-Emit 96-05 10/4/00 7/1/05, 70 FR 38029 Kaiser Order—Limiting Potential-to-Emit 96-06 10/19/00 7/1/05, 70 FR 38029 Kaiser Order DE 01 AQIS-3285 10/24/01 5/12/05, 70 FR 24991 Kaiser Order Amendment #1 DE 01 AQIS-3285 4/9/03 5/12/05, 70 FR 24991 RACT Limits for Centralia Power Plant #97-2057R1 2/26/98 6/11/03, 68 FR 34821 TransAlta Centralia BART #6426 12/13/11 12/6/12, 77 FR 72742 Except the undesignated introductory text, the section titled “Findings,” and the undesignated text following condition 13. BP Cherry Point Refinery Administrative Order No. 7836, Revision 2 5/13/15 2/16/16, 81 FR 7710 The following conditions: 1.1, 1.1.1, 1.2, 1.2.1, 1.2.2, 2.1, 2.1.1, 2.1.2, 2.1.3, 2.1.4, 2.1.5, 2.2, 2.2.1, 2.2.2, 2.3, 2.3.1, 2.3.2, 2.4, 2.4.1, 2.4.2, 2.4.2.1, 2.5, 2.5.1, 2.5.1.1, 2.5.1.2, 2.5.2, 2.5.3, 2.5.4, 2.6, 2.6.1, 2.6.2, 2.6.3, 2.7, 2.7.1, 2.7.2, 2.7.3, 2.7.4, 2.8, 2.8.1, 2.8.2, 2.8.3, 2.8.4, 2.8.5, 2.8.6, 3, 3.1, 3.1.1, 3.1.2, 3.2, 3.2.1, 3.2.2, 3.2.3, 3.2.4, 4, 4.1, 4.1.1, 4.1.1.1, 4.1.1.2, 4.1.1.3, 4.1.1.4, 5, 5.1, 5.2, 6, 6.1, 6.2, 6.3, 7, 9. Alcoa Intalco Works Administrative Order No. 7837, Revision 1 11/15/10 6/11/14, 79 FR 33438 The following conditions: 1, 2, 2.1, 3, 4, 4.1, Attachment A conditions: A1, A2, A3, A4, A5, A6, A7, A8, A9, A10, A11, A12, A13, A14. Tesoro Refining and Marketing Company Administrative Order 7838 7/7/10 6/11/14, 79 FR 33438 The following conditions: 1, 1.1, 1.1.1, 1.1.2, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, 1.5.1, 1.5.1.1, 1.5.1.2, 1.5.1.3, 1.5.2, 1.5.3, 1.5.4, 1.5.5, 1.5.6, 2, 2.1, 2.1.1, 2.1.1.1, 2.1.2, 2.1.3, 2.2, 2.2.1, 3, 3.1, 3.1.1, 3.1.2, 3.1.2.1, 3.1.2.2, 3.1.2.3, 3.2, 3.2.1, 3.2.1.1, 3.2.1.2, 3.2.1.3, 3.2.1.4, 3.2.1.4.1, 3.2.1.4.2, 3.2.1.4.3, 3.2.1.4.4, 3.2.1.4.5, 3.3, 3.3.1, 3.4, 3.4.1, 3.4.2, 4, 4.1, 5, 5.1, 6, 6.1, 6.1.1, 6.1.2, 6.1.3, 6.1.4, 7, 7.1, 7.1.1, 7.1.2, 7.1.3, 7.1.4, 7.1.5, 7.2, 7.2.1, 7.2.2, 7.2.3, 7.2.4, 8, 8.1, 8.1.1, 8.1.2, 8.2, 8.2.1, 8.2.2, 8.2.3, 8.3, 8.3.1, 8.3.2, 9, 9.1, 9.1.1, 9.1.2, 9.2, 9.2.1, 9.3, 9.3.1, 9.3.2, 9.3.3, 9.4, 9.4.1, 9.4.2, 9.4.3, 9.4.5, 9.4.6, 9.5, 10, 11, 12, 13, 13.1, 13.2, 13.3, 13.4, 13.5, 13.6. Port Townsend Paper Corporation Administrative Order No. 7839, Revision 1 10/20/10 6/11/14, 79 FR 33438 The following Conditions: 1, 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 2, 2.1, 3, 3.1, 4. Lafarge North America, Inc. Seattle, Wa Administrative Revised Order No. 7841 7/28/10 6/11/14, 79 FR 33438 The following Conditions: 1, 1.1, 1.2, 2, 2.1, 2.1.1, 2.1.2, 2.2, 2.3, 3, 3.1, 3.1.1, 3.1.2, 3.1.3, 3.2, 3.3, 4, 4.1, 5, 5.1, 5.1.1, 5.1.2, 5.2, 5.3, 6, 6.1, 7, 7.1, 7.2, 7.3, 7.4, 7.5, 8, 8.1, 8.2, 8.3, 8.4, 8.5, 9, 10, 11, 12. Weyerhaeuser Corporation, Longview, Wa Administrative Order No. 7840 7/7/10 6/11/14, 79 FR 33438 The following Conditions: 1, 1.1, 1.1.1, 1.1.2, 1.1.3, 1.2, 1.2.1, 1.2.2, 1.2.3, 1.3, 1.3.1, 1.4, 2, 2.1, 3, 3.1, 4, 4.1. 1 The EPA does not have the authority to remove these source-specific requirements in the absence of a demonstration that their removal would not interfere with attainment or maintenance of the NAAQS, violate any prevention of significant deterioration increment or result in visibility impairment. Washington Department of Ecology may request removal by submitting such a demonstration to the EPA as a SIP revision.

    (e) EPA Approved Nonregulatory Provisions and Quasi-Regulatory Measures.

    Table 1—Approved But Not Incorporated by Reference Regulations State/local
  • citation
  • Title/subject State/local
  • effective date
  • EPA approval date Explanations
    Washington Department of Ecology Regulations 173-400-220 Requirements for Board Members 3/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-230 Regulatory Actions 3/20/93 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-240 Criminal Penalties 3/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-250 Appeals 9/20/93 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-400-260 Conflict of Interest 3/22/91 6/2/95, 60 FR 28726 173-433-200 Regulatory Actions and Penalties 10/18/90 1/15/93, 58 FR 4578 Benton Clean Air Agency Regulations 2.01 Powers and Duties of the Benton Clean Air Agency (BCAA) 12/11/14 11/17/15, 80 FR 71695 2.02 Requirements for Board of Directors Members 12/11/14 11/17/15, 80 FR 71695 Replaces WAC 173-400-220. 2.03 Powers and Duties of the Board of Directors 12/11/14 11/17/15, 80 FR 71695 2.04 Powers and Duties of the Control Officer 12/11/14 11/17/15, 80 FR 71695 2.05 Severability 12/11/14 11/17/15, 80 FR 71695 2.06 Confidentiality of Records and Information 12/11/14 11/17/15, 80 FR 71695 Olympic Region Clean Air Agency Regulations 8.1.6 Penalties 5/22/10 10/3/13, 78 FR 61188 Spokane Regional Clean Air Agency Regulations 8.11 Regulatory Actions and Penalties 09/02/14 09/28/15, 80 FR 58216
    Table 2—Attainment, Maintenance, and Other Plans Name of SIP provision Applicable
  • geographic or nonattainment area
  • State submittal date EPA approval date Explanations
    Attainment and Maintenance Planning—Carbon Monoxide Carbon Monoxide Attainment Plan Yakima 4/27/79 6/5/80, 45 FR 37821 Carbon Monoxide Attainment Plan Puget Sound 1/22/93 1/20/94, 59 FR 2994 Carbon Monoxide Attainment Plan Spokane 1/22/93 1/20/94, 59 FR 2994 Carbon Monoxide Attainment Plan Vancouver 1/22/93 1/20/94, 59 FR 2994 Carbon Monoxide Attainment Plan—Contingency Measure Vancouver 11/10/93 10/31/94, 59 FR 54419 Carbon Monoxide Attainment Plan—VMT Supplement Puget Sound 1/22/93 8/23/95, 60 FR 43710 Carbon Monoxide Maintenance Plan Puget Sound 2/29/96 10/11/96, 61 FR 53323 Carbon Monoxide Maintenance Plan Vancouver 3/19/96 10/21/96, 61 FR 54560 Carbon Monoxide Attainment Plan—Revisions Spokane 9/14/93
  • and 4/30/96
  • 9/22/97, 62 FR 49442
    Carbon Monoxide Attainment Plan—Correction Spokane 12/31/97, 62 FR 68187 Carbon Monoxide Maintenance Plan Yakima 9/26/01 11/01/02, 67 FR 66555 Carbon Monoxide Maintenance Plan 10-Year Update Puget Sound 12/17/03 8/5/04, 69 FR 47365 Carbon Monoxide Attainment Plan—Including Kaiser Orders Spokane 9/20/01
  • and 11/22/04
  • 5/12/05, 70 FR 24991
    Carbon Monoxide Maintenance Plan Spokane 11/29/04 6/29/05, 70 FR 37269 Carbon Monoxide Maintenance Plan 10-Year Update Vancouver 4/25/07 6/27/08, 73 FR 36439 Attainment and Maintenance Planning—Lead (Pb) Lead Attainment Plan Seattle 9/27/84 1/29/85, 50 FR 3907 Attainment and Maintenance Planning—Ozone Ozone Attainment Plan Vancouver 7/16/82 12/17/82, 47 FR 56497 Ozone Attainment Plan Seattle-Tacoma 7/16/82 2/28/83, 48 FR 8273 Ozone Attainment Plan—VOC RACT Seattle-Tacoma 5/14/91 7/12/93, 58 FR 37426 Ozone Attainment Plan—VOC RACT Vancouver 5/14/91 7/12/93, 58 FR 37426 Ozone Attainment Plan—Emission Statement Program Seattle-Tacoma 1/28/93 9/12/94, 59 FR 46764 Ozone Attainment Plan—Emission Statement Program Vancouver 1/28/93 9/12/94, 59 FR 46764 Ozone Maintenance Plan Seattle-Tacoma 3/4/96 9/26/96, 21 FR 50438 Ozone Maintenance Plan Vancouver 6/13/96 5/19/97, 62 FR 27204 Ozone Maintenance Plan 10-Year Update Seattle-Tacoma 12/17/03 8/5/04, 69 FR 47365 8-Hour Ozone 110(a)(1) Maintenance Plan Seattle-Tacoma 2/5/08 5/2/14, 79 FR 25010 8-Hour Ozone 110(a)(1) Maintenance Plan Vancouver 1/17/2007 8/11/15, 80 FR 48033 Attainment and Maintenance Planning—Particulate Matter (PM 10 ) Particulate Matter (PM10) Attainment Plan Kent 11/15/91 7/27/93, 58 FR 40059 Particulate Matter (PM10) Attainment Plan Thurston County 2/17/89
  • and 11/15/91
  • 7/27/93, 58 FR 40056
    Particulate Matter (PM10) Attainment Plan Tacoma 5/2/95 10/25/95, 60 FR 54559 Particulate Matter (PM10) Attainment Plan Seattle 2/21/95 10/26/95, 60 FR 54812 Particulate Matter (PM10) Attainment Plan Spokane 12/9/94 1/27/97, 62 FR 3800 Particulate Matter (PM10) Attainment Plan Wallula 11/13/91 1/27/97, 62 FR 3800 Particulate Matter (PM10) Attainment Plan Yakima 3/24/89 2/2/98, 63 FR 5269 Particulate Matter (PM10) Maintenance Plan Thurston County 8/16/99 10/4/00, 65 FR 59128 Particulate Matter (PM10) Maintenance Plan Kent 8/23/99 3/13/01, 66 FR 14492 Particulate Matter (PM10) Maintenance Plan Seattle 8/23/99 3/13/01, 66 FR 14492 Particulate Matter (PM10) Maintenance Plan Tacoma 8/23/99 3/13/01, 66 FR 14492 Particulate Matter (PM10) Maintenance Plan Yakima 7/8/04 2/8/05, 70 FR 6591 Particulate Matter (PM10) Attainment Plan—Revision Wallula 11/30/04 5/2/05, 70 FR 22597 Particulate Matter (PM10) Maintenance Plan Spokane 11/30/04 7/1/05, 70 FR 38029 Particulate Matter (PM10) Maintenance Plan Wallula 3/29/05 8/26/05, 70 FR 50212 Particulate Matter (PM10) 2nd 10-year Limited Maintenance Plan Thurston County 7/1/13 10/3/13, 78 FR 61188 Particulate Matter (PM10) 2nd 10-Year Limited Maintenance Plan Kent, Seattle, and Tacoma 11/29/13 8/20/14, 79 FR 49244 Attainment and Maintenance Planning—Particulate Matter (PM 2.5 ) Particulate Matter (PM2.5) Clean Data Determination Tacoma, Pierce County 05/22/12 09/04/12, 77 FR 53772 Particulate Matter (PM2.5) 2008 Baseline Emissions Inventory and SIP Strengthening Rules Tacoma, Pierce County 11/28/12 5/29/13, 78 FR 32131 Approval of Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets and Determination of Attainment for the 2006 24-Hour Fine Particulate Standard (PM2.5) Tacoma, Pierce County 11/28/12 9/19/13, 78 FR 57503 Particulate Matter (PM2.5) Maintenance Plan Tacoma, Pierce County 11/03/14 2/10/15, 80 FR 7347 Visibility and Regional Haze Plans Visibility New Source Review (NSR) for non-attainment areas for Washington Statewide 6/26/86, 51 FR 23228 Washington State Visibility Protection Program Statewide 11/5/99 6/11/03, 68 FR 34821 Regional Haze State Implementation Plan—TransAlta BART Statewide 12/29/11 12/6/12, 77 FR 72742 Regional Haze SIP Statewide 12/22/10 6/11/14, 79 FR 33438 The Regional Haze SIP including those provisions relating to BART incorporated by reference in § 52.2470 `Identification of plan' with the exception of the BART provisions that are replaced with a BART FIP in § 52.2498 Visibility protection., § 52.2500 Best available retrofit technology requirements for the Intalco Aluminum Corporation (Intalco Works) primary aluminum plant—Better than BART Alternative., § 52.2501 Best available retrofit technology (BART) requirement for the Tesoro Refining and Marketing Company oil refinery—Better than BART Alternative., § 52.2502 Best available retrofit technology requirements for the Alcoa Inc.—Wenatchee Works primary aluminum smelter. Regional Haze SIP—Technical Correction Statewide 12/22/10 11/24/14, 79 FR 69767 Regional Haze State Implementation Plan—BP Cherry Point Refinery BART Revision. Statewide 5/14/15 2/16/16, 81 FR 7710 110(a)(2) Infrastructure and Interstate Transport Interstate Transport for the 1997 8-Hour Ozone and PM2.5 NAAQS Statewide 1/17/07 1/13/09, 74 FR 1591 110(a)(2) Infrastructure Requirements—1997 Ozone Standard Statewide 1/24/12 5/24/12, 77 FR 30902 110(a)(2) Infrastructure Requirements—2008 Lead Standard Statewide 4/14/14 7/23/14, 79 FR 42685 This action addresses the following CAA elements: 110(a)(2)(A), (B), (C), (D)(i)(II), (D)(ii), (E), (F), (G), (H), (J), (K), (L), and (M). 110(a)(2) Infrastructure Requirements—2008 Ozone and 2010 Nitrogen Dioxide Standards Statewide 9/22/14 1/14/15, 80 FR 1849 This action addresses the following CAA elements: 110(a)(2)(A), (B), (C), (D)(i)(II), (D)(ii), (E), (F), (G), (H), (J), (K), (L), and (M). 110(a)(2) Infrastructure Requirements—1997, 2006, and 2012 Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5) Standards Statewide 9/22/14 5/12/15, 80 FR 27102 This action addresses the following CAA elements: 110(a)(2)(A), (B), (C), (D)(i)(II), (D)(ii), (E), (F), (G), (H), (J), (K), (L), and (M). Interstate Transport for the 2008 Pb and 2010 NO2 NAAQS Statewide 5/11/15 7/16/15, 80 FR 42042 This action addresses CAA 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I). Interstate Transport for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS Statewide 5/11/15 7/30/15, 80 FR 45429 This action addresses CAA 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I). Interstate Transport for the 2008 Ozone NAAQS Statewide 5/11/15 12/15/15, 80 FR 77580 This action addresses CAA 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I). Other Federally Mandated Plans Oxygenated Gasoline Program 1/22/93 1/20/94, 59 FR 2994 Business Assistance Program 11/16/92 3/8/95, 60 FR 12685 Motor Vehicle Inspection & Maintenance Program 8/21/95 9/25/96, 61 FR 50235 Supplementary Documents Air Quality Monitoring, Data Reporting and Surveillance Provisions 4/15/81 Energy Facilities Site Evaluation Council (EFSEC) Memorandum of Agreement 2/23/82 Recently Approved Plans
    [FR Doc. 2016-07175 Filed 3-30-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 180 [EPA-HQ-OPP-2014-0397; FRL-9943-79] Pendimethalin; Tolerance Exemptions; Technical Correction AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Final rule; technical correction.

    SUMMARY:

    EPA issued a final rule in the Federal Register of December 21, 2015, concerning the addition of certain commodities to 40 CFR 180.361. Nut, tree group 14-12 was inadvertently omitted. This document corrects that omission.

    DATES:

    This final rule correction is effective March 31, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    The docket for this action, identified by docket identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2014-0397, is available at http://www.regulations.gov or at the Office of Pesticide Programs Regulatory Public Docket (OPP Docket) in the Environmental Protection Agency Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the OPP Docket is (703) 305-5805. Please review the visitor instructions and additional information about the docket available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Susan Lewis, Registration Division (7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number: (703) 305-7090; email address: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Does this action apply to me?

    The Agency included in the December 21, 2015 final rule a list of those who may be potentially affected by this action.

    II. What does this technical correction do?

    EPA issued a final rule in the Federal Register of December 21, 2015 (80 FR 79267) (FRL-9937-18) that was adding commodities including Nut, tree group 14-12 to 40 CFR 180.361(a)(1). EPA inadvertently omitted the language in the codified text, which would have added Nut, tree group.

    III. Why is this correction issued as a final rule?

    Section 553 of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B)) provides that, when an agency for good cause finds that notice and public procedure are impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest, the agency may issue a final rule without providing notice and an opportunity for public comment. EPA has determined that there is good cause for making this technical correction final without prior proposal and opportunity for comment, because this is correcting a typographical error. EPA finds that this constitutes good cause under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B).

    IV. Do any of the statutory and executive order reviews apply to this action?

    No. For a detailed discussion concerning the statutory and executive order review, refer to Unit VI of the December 21, 2015 final rule.

    V. Congressional Review Act

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

    List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180

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

    Dated: March 24, 2016. Daniel J. Rosenblatt, Acting Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.

    Therefore, 40 CFR part 180 is corrected as follows:

    PART 180—[AMENDED] 1. The authority citation for part 180 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.

    2. In §  180.361(a)(1), add alphabetically the entry Nut, tree, group 14-12 to read as follows:
    §  180.361 Pendimethalin; tolerances for residues.

    (a) * * *

    (1) * * *

    Commodity Parts per
  • million
  • *    *    *    *    * Nut, tree, group 14-12 0.10 *    *    *    *    *
    [FR Doc. 2016-07310 Filed 3-30-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration 49 CFR Parts 171 and 173 [Docket No. PHMSA-2011-0143 (HM-253)] RIN 2137-AE81 Hazardous Materials: Reverse Logistics (RRR) AGENCY:

    Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    In this final rule, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) is adopting regulatory amendments applicable to the reverse logistics shipments of certain hazardous materials by highway transportation. This final rule revises the Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR) to include a definition of “reverse logistics” and provides appropriate provisions for hazardous materials within the scope of this definition. This final rule also expands a previously existing exception for return shipments of used automobile batteries transported between a retail facility and a recycling center. The PHMSA incorporated recommendations from petitions for rulemaking and public comment into this rulemaking.

    DATES:

    Effective: March 31, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Steven Andrews, (202) 366-8553, Standards and Rulemaking Division, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Table of Contents of Supplementary Information I. Executive Summary II. Background A. Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking B. Notice of Proposed Rulemaking III. Review of Amendments and Response to Comments A. Definition of “Reverse Logistics” and Applicability and Hazard Classes B. Packaging C. Hazard Communication D. Training E. Segregation F. Incident Reporting G. Battery Recycling IV. Regulatory Review and Notices A. Statutory Authority B. Executive Order 12866, Executive Order 13563, Executive Order 13610, and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures C. Executive Order 13132 D. Executive Order 13175 E. Regulatory Flexibility Act, Executive Order 13272, and DOT Procedures and Policies F. Paperwork Reduction Act G. Regulatory Identifier Number (RIN) H. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 I. Environmental Assessment J. Privacy Act K. Executive Order 13609 and International Trade Analysis L. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act List of Subjects I. Executive Summary

    This final rule creates a new section (§ 173.157) in the Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR parts 171-180) with provisions specific to reverse logistics (e.g., returning shipments from retail stores to a product's manufacturer, supplier, or distribution facility) by highway transportation. The PHMSA believes that the requirements adopted in this final rule will benefit retail operators by establishing a regulatory framework targeted to a distinct and limited segment of the supply chain that is associated with retail stores. In this rule, the PHMSA codifies a definition for the “reverse logistics” of hazardous materials as “the process of offering for transport or transporting by motor vehicle goods from a retail store for return to its manufacturer, supplier, or distribution facility for the purpose of capturing value (e.g., to receive manufacturer's credit), recall, replacement, recycling, or similar reason.” The PHMSA is also addressing the reverse logistics transportation of used automobile batteries to recycling centers. This change to the HMR will address the concerns of stakeholders pertaining to the consolidation of shipments of lead-acid batteries for recycling.

    II. Background

    As noted in its petition (P-1528), the Council on Safe Transportation of Hazardous Articles, Inc. (COSTHA) and the PHMSA entered into a partnership agreement in November 2006 for the purpose of enhancing hazardous materials transportation safety involving the return of consumer products to a manufacturer or distributor (referred to in the petition as “reverse logistics”). In an effort to reduce undeclared hazardous materials shipments and raise awareness of applicable regulations, COSTHA worked with the PHMSA to develop and disseminate outreach materials, training programs, and other resources.

    Consequently, COSTHA engaged stakeholders in meetings, forums, and other communications to address the challenges posed by reverse logistics shipments. A product of this engagement was the development of COSTHA's 2008 petition for rulemaking. In its petition, COSTHA notes that its organization “identified an unquantifiable exposure to risk presented through undeclared hazmat, specifically from retail operations that unknowingly return articles containing hazmat to the product manufacturer or a distributor.” 1

    1 P-1528, Page 2. http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=PHMSA-2008-0249.

    This petition also notes that many reverse logistics shipments of hazardous materials were eligible (at the time the petition was drafted) to be classified as Other Regulated Material (ORM-D) and could be shipped under the “Consumer Commodity” proper shipping name.2 COSTHA also notes that equipment powered by internal combustion engines may be returned to retail outlets after being used and may contain residual fuel, therefore posing a risk in transportation. As a result, such articles transported in forward logistics may not be initially regulated as hazardous materials, but once used, the same article transported in reverse logistics may be regulated as a hazardous material.

    2Consumer commodity means a material that is packaged and distributed in a form intended or suitable for sale through retail sales agencies or instrumentalities for consumption by individuals for purposes of personal care or household use. This term also includes drugs and medicines. 49 CFR 171.8.

    COSTHA's petition requested that the PHMSA include a definition in § 171.8 for “reverse logistics” and add a new § 173.157 to outline the general requirements and exceptions for hazardous materials shipped in reverse logistics. In addition, the petitioner also requested regulatory relief from certain training, packaging, segregation, hazard communication, and other baseline provisions in the HMR.

    After the acceptance of this petition, the PHMSA published a final rule: Hazardous Materials: Harmonization With the United Nations Recommendations, the International Maritime Dangerous Goods Code, and the International Civil Aviation Organization Technical Instructions for the Safe Transport of Dangerous Goods by Air; PHMSA-2009-0126 (HM-215K) [76 FR 3308].3 HM-215K implemented a system for the shipment of limited quantities of hazardous materials consistent with the requirements in the United Nations Model Regulations.4 By harmonizing the HMR with international standards, a common, internationally recognized mark was adopted.5 In making this change, HM-215K (as appealed) phased out the ORM-D classification and the use of packagings marked “Consumer commodity, ORM-D” in surface transportation after December 31, 2020. The majority of shipments in reverse logistics are within the scope and quantity limits of the HMR's limited quantity provisions.

    3 76 FR 3308.

    4Limited quantity, when specified as such in a section applicable to a particular material, means the maximum amount of a hazardous material for which there is a specific labeling or packaging exception. 49 CFR 171.8.

    5 See 49 CFR 172.315(a)(1).

    The PHMSA also received a petition for rulemaking (P-1561) from the Battery Council International (BCI) addressing return shipments of used lead-acid batteries. In its petition, the BCI requested that the PHMSA authorize the shipment of used batteries from multiple shippers on a single transport vehicle under the exception provided in § 173.159(e). The BCI noted in its petition that it is unclear whether the current exception in § 173.159(e) authorizes the shipment of used batteries from multiple shippers for the purposes of recycling.

    This rule advances government-wide efforts to clarify, streamline, and allow for flexibility in regulations when possible. Accordingly, this final rule is part of the DOT's Retrospective Regulatory Review (RRR) designed to identify ways to improve the HMR. There are three (3) Executive Orders that make up the RRR review process: Executive Order 13563 (“Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review”), Executive Order 12866 (“Regulatory Planning and Review”), and Executive Order 13610 (“Identifying and Reducing Regulatory Burden”). Executive Order 13563 specifically requires agencies to: (1) Involve the public in the regulatory process; (2) promote simplification and harmonization through interagency coordination; (3) identify and consider regulatory approaches that reduce burden and maintain flexibility; (4) ensure the objectivity of any scientific or technological information used to support regulatory action; and (5) consider how to best promote retrospective analysis to modify, streamline, expand, or repeal existing rules that are outmoded, ineffective, insufficient, or excessively burdensome. Executive Order 13563 supplements and reaffirms the principles, structures, and definitions governing regulatory review that were established in Executive Order 12866 issued on September 30, 1993. Furthermore, Executive Order 13610 urges agencies to conduct retrospective analyses of existing rules to examine whether they remain justified or whether they should be modified or streamlined in light of changed circumstances, including the rise of new technologies. The PHMSA's review of the reverse logistics process determined that current regulations could better account for what is a distinct and limited segment of the supply chain associated with the return shipment of consumer items containing hazardous materials from retail store for return to its manufacturer, supplier, or distribution facility. Therefore, consistent with the DOT's RRR efforts, this final rule is intended to clarify, streamline, and allow for flexibility in the regulatory requirements with regards to reverse logistics.

    As a result of investigative activities conducted by its field operations staff, the PHMSA identified a need to consider regulatory amendments to specifically address the unique issues encountered by this distinct and limited segment of the supply chain. Some of the unique problems that can occur during the reverse logistics of hazmat are:

    • The lack of knowledge regarding the risks of transporting certain products;

    • The lack of hazmat training by employees at a retail store;

    • The difficulty in applying hazmat regulations to reverse logistics shipments;

    • The different packaging(s) other than the original packaging being used to ship the material;

    • The potential for hazmat to be subject to Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) waste manifest rules;

    • The inclusion of items once classified as consumer commodities that no longer meet the “consumer commodity” definition.

    In order to reduce undeclared, misdeclared, or improperly packaged hazmat from being offered and transported in commerce, we are amending the HMR to better address the reverse logistics supply chain. Specifically, we are seeking to ensure retail employers properly identify hazardous materials in the reverse logistics chain and ensure that their employees have clear instructions to safely offer such shipments. Even when intended for ground transportation, the complex transportation network in the U.S. means that these shipments could inadvertently enter into air transportation—a mode of transportation where clear hazard communications is essential. Clear and correct hazard communication allows air carriers to manage the risk in their system by either rejecting, or properly accepting, handling, and segregating hazardous materials.

    The PHMSA believes that the reverse logistics of hazmat will continue to rise with the increased consumption of goods in a growing economy. By adopting, in part, petitions P-1528 and P-1561, the PHMSA is seeking to account for the distinct challenges associated with this issue.

    A. Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

    On July 5, 2012 [77 FR 39662], the PHMSA published an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM) to request comments on reverse logistics. Specifically, we requested comments on regulatory changes intended to address retail operations that ship consumer products containing hazmat in the reverse logistics supply chain. We presented targeted questions in the ANPRM in order to evaluate reverse logistics shipments by highway, rail, and vessel, as these types of shipments are not intended for transportation by air. The PHMSA used the data collected by the ANPRM in its development of the NPRM.

    B. Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

    On August 11, 2014 [79 FR 46748], the PHMSA published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) to request comments on a proposed new section of the regulations for reverse logistics shipments. In response to the NPRM, the PHMSA received comments from the following entities:

    Advanced Auto Parts http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=PHMSA-2011-0143-0056. Airline Pilots Association (APA) http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=PHMSA-2011-0143-0049. Alaska Airlines http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=PHMSA-2011-0143-0043. American Coatings Association (ACA) http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=PHMSA-2011-0143-0060. American Pyrotechnics Association http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=PHMSA-2011-0143-0070. American Trucking Association (ATA) http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=PHMSA-2011-0143-0055. Anonymous http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=PHMSA-2011-0143-0050. Anonymous http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=PHMSA-2011-0143-0039. Association of HAZMAT Shippers (AHS) http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=PHMSA-2011-0143-0061. Battery Council International (BCI) http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=PHMSA-2011-0143-0065. Billy Puk http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=PHMSA-2011-0143-0052. C&S Wholesale Grocers http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=PHMSA-2011-0143-0068. Council on the Safe Transportation of Hazardous Articles (COSTHA) http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=PHMSA-2011-0143-0064. Crazy Cracker http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=PHMSA-2011-0143-0042. Dangerous Goods Advisory Council (DGAC) http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=PHMSA-2011-0143-0063. Federal Express (FedEx) http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=PHMSA-2011-0143-0053. g2 Revolution http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=PHMSA-2011-0143-0044. Giant Cement Holding, Inc http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=PHMSA-2011-0143-0073. Graylin Presbury http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=PHMSA-2011-0143-0051. Heritage Environmental Services http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=PHMSA-2011-0143-0059. Inmar Inc http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=PHMSA-2011-0143-0045. Kellner's Fireworks Inc http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=PHMSA-2011-0143-0046. National Association of Manufactures http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=PHMSA-2011-0143-0071. National Fireworks Association http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=PHMSA-2011-0143-0047. Orion Safety Products http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=PHMSA-2011-0143-0062. Rechargeable Battery Association (PRBA) http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=PHMSA-2011-0143-0074. Retail Industry Leaders Association (RILA) http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=PHMSA-2011-0143-0058. RSR Corporation http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=PHMSA-2011-0143-0066. Siemens Healthcare http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=PHMSA-2011-0143-0072. Sporting Arms and Ammunition Manufacturers' Institute (SAAMI) http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=PHMSA-2011-0143-0069. Stephen Charles http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=PHMSA-2011-0143-0040. United Parcel Service (UPS) http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=PHMSA-2011-0143-0057. Wal-Mart http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=PHMSA-2011-0143-0048. III. Review of Amendments and Response to Comments

    With regard to providing clarity and concise hazmat transport regulations for reverse logistics shipments, the PHMSA considered petitions for rulemaking submitted by the regulated community, input from the PHMSA's enforcement division, and comments submitted to both the July 5, 2012 ANPRM and the August 11, 2014 NPRM. The PHMSA received 34 comments to the ANPRM and 33 comments to the NPRM. As a result, in this final rule, the PHMSA is amending the HMR to:

    • Define the term “reverse logistics”;

    • Establish a new section in the HMR specifically for the reverse logistics shipment of hazmat;

    • Ensure employees have knowledge and familiarity in preparing hazardous materials shipments subject to the reverse logistics shipments;

    • Define the authorized packaging for reverse logistics shipments;

    • Allow more flexibility in the transportation of lead-acid batteries;

    • Authorize certain materials to be offered in accordance with the new reverse logistics requirements when transported by private carrier.

    A. Definition of “Reverse Logistics” and Applicability and Hazard Classes Definition of “Reverse Logistics”

    In the NPRM, we proposed to define “reverse logistics” as “the process of moving goods from their final destination for the purpose of capturing value, recall, replacement, proper disposal, or similar reason.” We received several comments pertaining to this definition from the regulated community.

    The American Coatings Association (ACA) supports a definition for “reverse logistics” provided the definition is broad enough to capture recycling, business-to-business transactions, and return scenarios that exist in the marketplace. While the PHMSA appreciates ACA's comments, this rule is more focused on the specific relationship between retail stores and distribution facilities, and not business-to-business operations. However, the PHMSA agrees with ACA's comment pertaining to recycling and is adding the term “recycling” to the definition for “reverse logistics” in § 171.8 of the HMR. In addition, the Retail Industry Leaders Association (RILA) suggests adding “such as a retail store” to the definition of “reverse logistics” to provide an example of a final destination. The PHMSA agrees with the intent of this comment and, in the final rule, has amended the definition of “reverse logistics” by removing the term “final destination” to clarify that, for the purposes of this rulemaking, reverse logistics applies solely to shipments of hazardous materials returned to their manufacturer, supplier, or distribution facility.

    The American Trucking Association (ATA) and COSTHA are concerned that the proposed definition for “reverse logistics” did not include carriers. COSTHA asserts that the term “moving” is not appropriate and instead suggests adding the language “offering for transport or transporting” to include carriers in the reverse logistics definition. The PHMSA agrees and is addressing COSTHA's comment by modifying the definition of “reverse logistics” to include both the process of offering hazmat for transport and the transport of hazmat.

    The Dangerous Goods Advisory Council (DGAC) suggests limiting the carrier scenarios proposed in § 173.157(b)(1)(ii) and (iii) of the NPRM to only private or dedicated carriers. The DGAC is aware that contract and common carriers have significant concerns with aspects of this rulemaking, whereas private or dedicated carriers are supportive. It is DGAC's view that while exceptions are necessary, the shipper, as appropriate, should retain responsibility for the transportation of hazmat shipments and the responsibility without control should not be placed on contract or common carriers. The PHMSA agrees and is adopting revisions in this final rule so that reverse logistics shipments by non-private carriers are consistent with the HMR's marking requirements for limited quantity shipments. It should be noted that training requirements are an exception to this alignment. This issue is discussed later in this final rule (see heading “Training.”) We also note that certain types of hazmat proposed in the NPRM, such as retail fireworks, would not be appropriate for shipment as reverse logistics by non-private carriers. Therefore, we are limiting those hazard classes to private carriers only. For the purposes of this final rule, a non-private carrier is anyone who does not own or operate its own fleet of vehicles.

    The ACA asked for clarification of “capturing value” in the definition for “reverse logistics.” The PHMSA intended “capturing value” to be a way for retailers to return consumer products containing hazmat to their manufacturer, supplier, or distribution facility to receive manufacturer's credit, be resold, or be donated, etc. This final rule seeks to clarify this term within the definition.

    Several commenters, including Mr. Billy Puk and the ACA, raise concerns about the use of the term “proper disposal” in the definition of “reverse logistics.” These commenters express concern about potential overlaps with EPA rules for the Federal regulation of hazardous waste. In order to avoid confusion, the PHMSA is removing the term “proper disposal” and adding language to the general section in § 173.157 that specifically excludes hazardous waste as defined in § 171.8 as a material eligible for shipment under the reverse logistics section. By eliminating the term “proper disposal” from the definition, the PHMSA is avoiding any potential inconsistencies with EPA hazardous waste regulations. Furthermore, the PHMSA notes there is nothing in this final rule that supersedes EPA's Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) regulations related to when a material is considered a solid or hazardous waste. The PHMSA is therefore clarifying in §§ 171.8 and 173.157 that hazardous waste is outside the scope of this rulemaking.

    As previously stated, the PHMSA is also clarifying that the definition of “reverse logistics” applies only to the return of hazardous materials from a retail store to the product's manufacturer, supplier, or distribution facility. Therefore, in this final rule, the definition for “reverse logistics” has been revised to read, “Means the process of offering for transport or transporting by motor vehicle goods from a retail store for return to its manufacturer, supplier, or distribution facility for the purpose of capturing value (e.g. to receive manufacturer's credit), recall, replacement, recycling, or similar reason.” In addition, the PHMSA notes that individual consumers are not considered hazmat employees under § 171.8 of the HMR and, therefore, would not be directly affected by the new requirements in this rulemaking.

    Applicability and Hazard Classes

    In the NPRM, we proposed hazard classes and quantities of hazmat authorized for reverse logistics shipments. We also proposed to limit shipments under the reverse logistics to highway transportation only. Several commenters request that the PHMSA extend the applicability to rail and vessel transportation. These commenters believe the rule should authorize the use of domestic vessel and rail shipments where such modes of transportation are used as part of the reverse logistics process. Commenters express that without an extension of the proposed rule to cover domestic vessel and rail shipments utilized during reverse logistics, some retailers may have to create two reverse logistics processes, which will add complexity, confusion, and ultimately, difficulty in execution. Since additional modes were not proposed in the NPRM, these comments are beyond the scope of this rulemaking, and the PHMSA is not adding these modes to the applicability section of this final rule.

    Heritage Environmental Services notes that the PHMSA already provides limited quantity provisions in Part 173 of the HMR for retail products that would typically be shipped under the reverse logistics section. The PHMSA agrees and notes that the hazmat classes and quantities addressed in this final rule are consistent with existing limited quantity provisions when using non-private carriers. One exception is that the final rule authorizes the transportation by private carrier of certain Division 2.1 and 2.2 cylinders without the cylinders being tested for pressure. This exception would authorize retail stores to offer certain returned cylinders as a hazardous material when they may no longer meet the definition of a Division 2.1 or Division 2.2 hazardous material. Other deviations from the limited quantities approach, which would allow for the shipment of 1.4G (fireworks and flares), Division 2.1 and 2.2 cylinders (that do not qualify as limited quantity shipments) sold as retail products, and the return of equipment powered by flammable liquids or flammable gases, are permitted under this section only when offered and transported by private carrier. As discussed later in this final rule, the PHMSA also revised employee training requirements for the shipments under the reverse logistics section.

    Comments submitted by FedEx seek clarification on the methodology used to develop the authorized hazard classes for this rulemaking. The list of hazardous classes eligible for the reverse logistics section in the NPRM was developed based on information provided in petitions, comments to the ANPRM, and the initial regulatory analysis. However, in response to comments to the NPRM, the PHMSA has revised this final rule to be consistent (with exception of the deviations noted in the previous paragraph) with the hazard classes and quantity limitations found in the applicable corresponding limited quantities sections of the HMR.

    In the NPRM, we proposed to limit applicable Division 1.4 hazmat to consumer fireworks and ammunition. The PHMSA received comments from the American Pyrotechnics Association, Kellner's Fireworks, the National Fireworks Association, and Greyland Presbury supporting the inclusion of 1.4S and 1.4G fireworks in the final rule. COSTHA commented that the PHMSA should implement a quantity-per-package limit for Division 1.4 hazmat and does not believe that the PHMSA demonstrated an adequate safety analysis to justify including flares and fireworks. The DGAC commented that Division 1.4 materials should not be limited to fireworks and flares and proposed a tiered approach to regulating Division 1.4 hazmat. United Parcel Service (UPS) indicates that Division 1.4 hazmat should not be included as part of this rulemaking since there are already applicable limited quantity provisions.

    We agree. Therefore, in response to the comments, the PHMSA has revised the proposed language to include Division 1.4 materials in the final rule with certain limitations. For the purposes of fireworks and flares, the reverse logistics transportation of these materials will be limited to consumer grade fireworks sold at retail facilities. In addition, the PHMSA is requiring consumer grade fireworks to be packaged as required by the approval assigned to those fireworks. This will help to ensure that fireworks packages are shipped in an equivalent manner to when they were originally shipped in the forward logistics chain. In response to comments discussed later, the PHMSA has also added language that limits all reverse logistics shipment of Division 1.4 materials to 30 kg (66 pounds) per package. This is consistent with what is required for limited quantities shipments in the forward logistics chain. Also, in response to UPS and other commenters, the PHMSA is limiting the shipment of 1.4S and 1.4G fireworks and flares to transportation by private carrier when shipped as reverse logistics. By authorizing the shipment of these materials as limited quantities by private carrier, the PHMSA is providing an exception from existing limited quantity provisions to authorize for transportation the shipment of consumer fireworks and flares as reverse logistics. However, we believe that the proposed controls coupled with limitation to private carrier-only appropriately balances any safety concerns.

    With the exception pertaining to 1.4S and 1.4G fireworks and flares as noted above, explosive materials authorized under § 173.157 for non-private carrier will be consistent with the types of 1.4S (ammunition-related) materials authorized to be shipped as limited quantities. Specifically, the PHMSA is authorizing 1.4S hazardous materials that are allowed for shipment as a limited quantity under § 173.63(b) to be allowed for both private and non-private carrier transport of reverse logistics shipments. By ensuring consistent hazard communications for non-private carrier shipments under reverse logistics, air carrier employees will be better able to recognize and reject shipments not authorized for air transportation.

    The PHMSA received several comments regarding other hazard classes proposed in the applicability section of the NPRM. Several commenters present concerns with including hazard Divisions of 5.2 (organic peroxides), 6.1 (toxic materials), and 6.2 (infectious substances). Specifically, ATA and COSTHA question the inclusion of Division 6.1 hazmat that is also toxic-by-inhalation (TIH). In addition to noting that these materials are inherently dangerous in transport and are not permitted to be shipped as limited quantities, COSTHA asserts its belief that it would be prudent to also prohibit these materials from being offered as reverse logistics shipments. Further, ATA notes its concern with the inclusion of Division 6.2 materials and adds that a shipper with limited training could ship Ebola, for example, under the proposed exception. FedEx and UPS also comment that Division 6.1 and 6.2 materials should not be included in the final rule. Specifically, FedEx contends that even when transported in limited quantities, Division 6.2 hazardous materials may pose a risk to health, safety, and property when transported under the scope of “reverse logistics.” Further, UPS notes that including Division 6.2 materials could conflict with various state regulations involving the transportation of medical waste. UPS adds that under the limited quantities section, Division 6.1 hazmat is limited to Packaging Groups (PG) II and III.

    We agree. Therefore, based on these comments, the PHMSA has determined that Division 5.2 and 6.2 materials would not be appropriate for reverse logistics shipments. Therefore, we are removing the applicability of this rule to Division 5.2 and 6.2 hazardous materials. In addition, the PHMSA is also excluding Division 4.1 materials that are also self-reactive as these materials present a similar risk as Division 5.2 materials. With regards to Division 6.1 materials, the PHMSA notes that there are consumer products found in retail outlets (such as rat poison), that would meet the definition of Division 6.1 and be appropriate for reverse logistics shipments. Additionally, the PHMSA agrees with UPS that these materials should be limited to PG II and III in order to remain consistent with the limited quantities provisions of the HMR. The PHMSA also agrees that TIH materials should not be included and is clarifying in this final rule that Division 6.1 materials which also meet the definition of a TIH material cannot be transported as a reverse logistics shipment. Therefore, in this final rule we are limiting Division 6.1 materials (excluding TIH materials) to PG II and III only.

    The DGAC suggested that the PHMSA should not include any materials found in Table 1 of the § 172.504 general placarding requirements as part of this rulemaking. Hazardous materials found in Table 1 of § 172.504 must display appropriate placards when any quantity of a material is being transported. We agree. Therefore, we are not including any materials found in Table 1 of the § 172.504 general placarding requirements as part of this rulemaking. In addition, we are also limiting this rulemaking to only a portion of materials found in Table 2 of § 172.504.

    Wal-Mart requests that the PHMSA extend the applicability to Class 7 (radioactive) materials, which would include retail products such as smoke detectors. Since the PHMSA did not propose to include Class 7 materials as part of the NPRM, the comment is beyond the scope of this rulemaking, and we are not able to accommodate the change it as part of this rulemaking.

    The ATA expresses concern about the inclusion of Division 4.3 (dangerous when wet) materials and notes that these substances can flare when exposed to water, thus causing issues for emergency responders. COSTHA adds that the PHMSA should consider limits on Division 4.3 materials. We agree. Therefore, based on comments received the PHMSA is no longer considering Division 4.3 materials for this rulemaking and is removing it from the applicability section. Similarly, the PHMSA believes that Class 8 and Class 5, PG I materials are not typically sold as retail products and are otherwise inappropriate due to their risk profile. Therefore, the PHMSA is limiting Class 8 and Class 5 materials to PG II and III, which will also be consistent with the hazard classes authorized under the limited quantity provisions.

    The PHMSA is not authorizing the shipment of lithium batteries as reverse logistics as the current exceptions for the shipment of lithium batteries in § 173.185 already provide a means for the return of these products. Specifically, § 173.185(d) authorizes the shipment of lithium cells and batteries (including lithium cells and batteries contained in equipment) for disposal and recycling. Section 173.185(f) authorizes the shipment of lithium cells and batteries that are damaged, defective, or recalled. Particularly with the international supply chain associated with these products, establishing a new, alternative, and domestic-only hazard communication requirement for these shipments would be duplicative and would not be in the interests of safety.

    In summary, after careful review and consideration of the comments to the NPRM, the PHMSA is including certain consumer products in Classes 3, 8 (PG II and III), and 9 (except lithium batteries); certain Division 1.4S materials; and Divisions 2.1, 2.2, 4.1 (excluding self-reactive materials), 5.1 (PG II and III), and 6.1 (excluding TIH and PG I), within the scope of reverse logistics under this final rule.

    The PHMSA believes, based on comments and petitions, that these hazard classes and divisions cover much of the hazmat in the reverse logistics process, and the risk presented by the quantities of such hazmat used in consumer products can be managed within the reverse logistics provisions established under this rule. In order to codify these hazmat and quantities, the PHMSA is providing an exception for reverse logistics shipments in each of the applicable sections for each hazard class or division that is included as a part of this rulemaking: For example, § 173.150 provides exceptions for flammable liquids. The PHMSA is adding new paragraph (h) to § 173.150 to authorize reverse logistics shipments that meet the limited quantity provision of § 173.150(b), the requirements in the new reverse logistics definition in § 171.8, and the new reverse logistics section in § 173.157. Similar language is being codified to the exceptions section for each hazard class or division included as a part of this rulemaking. However, we note that not all hazmat authorized under the limited quantity provisions is authorized under the reverse logistics section.

    B. Packaging General Packaging

    In the NPRM, the PHMSA proposed a set of packaging standards under the reverse logistics exception to ensure consistent and safe packaging requirements for low hazard items. The proposed standard included requiring the use of the original packaging or a packaging of equivalent strength or integrity. The NPRM also proposed to require that inner packagings be leak-proof for liquids and sift-proof for solids. Further, for liquids that require an outer packaging, enough absorbent material to contain a spill from the inner packagings must be present. The proposed exception also required shippers to secure products in cages, carts, or bins to prevent shifting during transport.

    In response to this proposal, ATA suggests that the PHMSA redraft the packaging requirement to read “each material must be packaged in the manufacturer's original packaging, if available, and in substantially similar condition to when it left the manufacturer, or a packaging of strength and integrity commensurate to the manufacturer's original packaging.” The ACA states its belief that use of original packaging or one of equivalent strength containing absorbent material is problematic; the Airline Pilots Association supports the packaging standards proposed in the NPRM; and Siemens Healthcare suggests the packaging standards should only apply when original packaging is unavailable. FedEx adds that the PHMSA should require original packaging, and if one is not available, the PHMSA should require salvage drums for consolidation, asserting that it is unreasonable to expect minimally-trained employees to put damaged materials in packaging of equal strength. G2 Revolution expresses its concern that this section will interfere with the “salvage drums” requirements under § 173.3(c) of the HMR. UPS expresses concern pertaining to the reliance on fiberboard packages that could result in structural failures of the packagings. Giant Cement Holding, Inc. (Giant Cement) asks the PHMSA to clarify what constitutes a “packaging of equal or greater strength and integrity.” Wal-Mart seeks clarification on what items require an outer packaging and whether “receptacles” are the same as an “inner packaging.”

    After consideration of the aforementioned comments, the PHMSA is modifying the packaging requirements as proposed in the NPRM. The PHMSA disagrees with FedEx that salvage drums are necessary for the shipment of consumer-type products that are placed in a package of equal or greater strength and integrity. However, the PHMSA notes that packages that are leaking or damaged would not be in compliance with limited quantity provisions. The PHMSA believes that the consumer products that are authorized under this rulemaking are consistent with what is authorized under the limited quantities sections. As written, consumer-type products shipped under this final rule should not be in such a damaged state that a salvage drum would always be required. The PHMSA agrees with the language suggested by ATA and is adding this language to the packaging section for clarification that packages should be in the original packaging or a package of similar strength and integrity. Especially for transport by non-private carrier, it is the PHMSA's intent is to ensure that hazmat shipped under the reverse logistics section will be transported in packages that are the same as what would be required under the limited quantities sections of the HMR.

    The ACA suggests amending proposed § 173.157(a)(2)(ii) to incorporate Special Provision 149 in § 172.102 to authorizes inner packagings not exceeding 5 L (1.3 gallons) for PG III materials, further adding that there should be some consideration of increasing the capacity threshold for Class 3, PG III materials to authorize the return of 5-gallon pails of paint.

    As the PHMSA did not propose to expand the quantities for PG III materials, the ACA's comment is beyond the scope of this rulemaking, and therefore, we are not adopting such a revision in this final rule. However, if the ACA believes that revision of the threshold quantities for certain materials authorized under “reverse logistics” is justified, the PHMSA suggests they submit a petition for rulemaking providing justification.

    Several commenters from the regulated community express concern that there is no size limitation on the packages used in the reverse logistics process. COSTHA suggests implementing a 30 kg (66 pounds) limit on reverse logistics shipments. Conversely, Giant Cement suggests Large Gaylord boxes (large corrugated boxes) should be allowed as a strong outside package. The PHMSA agrees with the majority of commenters that there should be a limit on the size per package of shipments made under the reverses logistics section. As there is a size limit of 30 kg (66 pounds) per package for hazmat shipped as limited quantities under Part 173 of the HMR, the types of packages shipped under the reverse logistics will be consistent with those products shipped as limited quantities. Otherwise, packages shipped under the reverse logistics section would be shipped in sizes larger than what is authorized by the limited quantities sections. Therefore, in this final rule, the PHMSA is setting a 30 kg (66 pound) limit for each package shipped under the reverse logistics section.

    Giant Cement expresses concern that shippers will add absorbent material even when there is no damage to the products shipped under the reverse logistics section. Inmar Inc. suggests mandating absorbent materials is unnecessary and suggests that leak-proof cardboard boxes should be adequate for reverse logistics shipments. Inmar Inc. adds that the term “compromised receptacle” is unnecessarily vague and not needed in the provisions, therefore suggesting that the PHMSA clarify what types of receptacles would be considered compromised. In this final rule, the PHMSA is removing the language proposed in § 173.157(b)(2) and (b)(3) related to leaking products containing hazmat, as well as aligning the reverse logistics section with the limited quantities section of the HMR. Therefore, only packages that would be suitable for shipment under the limited quantities section would be eligible for shipment under this section.

    Inmar Inc. also notes that the section in the NPRM discussing equipment with batteries needs clarification as to what type of products this section addresses. For clarification, the PHMSA is specifying that only equipment containing non-lithium batteries may be shipped as reverse logistics. Lithium cells or batteries, as well as products containing lithium cells or batteries, must be offered in accordance with the requirements in § 173.185 and are not within the scope of this final rule.

    The RILA asks the PHMSA to clarify if there is a difference between “leak-proof” and “leak-tight,” with UPS and Wal-Mart stating that the PHMSA should clarify what is considered “leak-proof” or “sift-proof.” In addition, RILA suggests the PHMSA include a definition for “leak-proof,” while Wal-Mart expresses concern that there is neither a definition of “leak-proof” nor “leak-tight.”

    For the purposes of packagings shipped under the reverse logistics requirements, the PHMSA is only requiring that the reverse logistics packages are closed in a manner that leakage will not occur under normal conditions of transportation. This means transporting retail items in their original packaging or a packaging of equal or greater strength if the original packaging is unavailable. The PHMSA does not believe it is necessary to define “leak-proof” or “leak-tight” for the purposes of this rulemaking.

    Cylinders and Aerosols

    The ATA notes that the proposed rule extends to cylinders shipped as single packages. In addition, ATA comments that carriers' hazmat training programs teach drivers to demand shipping papers, placards, etc. when receiving cylinder shipments and asserts that allowing cylinders to be shipped as reverse logistics hazmat without these documents undermines carriers' overall hazmat training programs for their drivers. UPS also expresses concern that allowing the transport of Division 2.1 and 2.2 materials without a shipping paper could cause confusion concerning standard procedures that carriers use for the shipment of cylinders.

    The PHMSA disagrees that shipments of cylinders returned from retail facilities to distribution centers in accordance with this rule would compromise safety. The cylinders shipped under this section are retail consumer products representing a low hazard and are limited to the return of products from the retail facility to the manufacturer, supplier, or distribution facility. Cylinders offered to non-private carriers must be in full compliance with existing limited quantity provisions—including existing hazard communications requirements. Cylinder or aerosols containing hazardous materials that are not limited quantities that weigh less than 66 pounds, and that are intended for retail sale are restricted to transportation by private carriers.

    In the NPRM, the PHMSA proposed that aerosols shipped under this section must have caps and closures. Several commenters raise questions pertaining to the preparation of aerosols (see § 171.8 of the HMR for the definition of “aerosol”) for reverse logistics shipments. Giant Cement requests clarification that aerosols are not liquids for shipping purposes and, therefore, are not required to be shipped with absorbent material. The Association of Hazmat Shippers (AHS) and Inmar Inc. suggest that the stem of an aerosol should be allowed to be removed, while C&S Wholesale Grocers and Wal-Mart suggest that the PHMSA allow caps other than the original cap for the aerosol can. Inmar Inc. asks if receptacles include aerosols, and if so, it suggests the PHMSA consider size limitation on the entire package.

    The HMR currently authorizes the shipment of aerosol cans as consumer commodities in § 173.306. The PHMSA believes the provisions in § 173.306 are adequate to address the transportation of aerosol cans as reverse logistics shipments. Therefore, based on our intent to align the reverse logistics section with the limited quantity provisions, shipments of aerosol cans transported as reverse logistics shipments should be packaged in accordance with the limited quantity provisions specified in § 173.306.

    Internal Combustion Powered Equipment

    In the NPRM, the PHMSA proposed to authorize the transport of equipment powered by an internal combustion engine containing a flammable liquid under the reverse logistics section provided the flammable liquid source was drained and all shut-off devices were in the closed position. These products are unique in that they did not contain hazardous materials at the time of purchase but could become regulated by the HMR as return shipments. In its comments, DGAC seeks clarification from the PHMSA about whether equipment powered by an internal combustion engine (with either flammable liquid or gas fuel) and equipment powered by electric storage batteries are excepted from the packaging requirement in § 173.157(b)(2) as proposed. Inmar Inc. notes that the proposed § 173.157(c) requirements for internal combustion powered equipment (i.e., lawn mowers, weed trimmers) seem more stringent than § 173.220, which authorizes gasoline to remain in equipment. Inmar Inc. believes these requirements should match what is currently required in § 173.220. Wal-Mart supports the proposal to allow reverse logistics shipment of items with a fuel tank provided they are drained with closures securely in place.

    The PHMSA agrees with Inmar Inc. that the requirements for reverse logistics shipments of internal combustion powered equipment should align with what is currently allowed by highway in § 173.220(b)(4). Therefore, the PHMSA is allowing the return of internal combustion powered equipment by motor vehicle provided the fuel tank remains securely closed. The PHMSA is also restricting the allowances proposed in the NPRM for flammable liquid-powered equipment, flammable gas-powered equipment, and other equipment powered by flammable gas to transportation by private carrier.

    Other Comments

    The Rechargeable Battery Association (PRBA) suggests revising § 172.102 Special Provision 130 to allow for batteries utilizing different chemistries. Except for lead-acid batteries and lithium batteries, the PHMSA did not propose in the NPRM to authorize batteries utilizing different chemistries for reverse logistics shipments. Expanding these provisions in this final rule would be beyond the scope of this rulemaking. Therefore, we are unable to accommodate PRBA's comments in this final rule.

    C. Hazard Communication

    In the NPRM, the PHMSA proposed that packages shipped under reverse logistics be marked with the common names or proper shipping names of the hazmat contained within the package. The PHMSA received several comments expressing safety concerns with this proposed requirement. For example, ATA notes that a common name could be as uninformative as “lawn care product” or “expired cosmetics,” further adding that a common name might also be a brand name, such as “Dutch Boy” to represent a flammable paint. Therefore, ATA suggests the PHMSA require the use of a “REVERSE LOGISTICS—HIGHWAY TRANSPORT ONLY” marking similar to other marking requirements in the HMR. C&S Wholesale Grocers suggests the PHMSA require a sticker advising that the box may contain limited amounts of hazmat. The DGAC adds that shipments made under reverse logistics should require a marking, contending that a marking would alert drivers and carriers to the presence of hazmat being transported under the reverse logistics section. The DGAC further suggests that the marking read, “This package conforms to 49 CFR 173.4 for domestic highway or rail transport only,” or, more preferably, that there be a pictogram to indicate a reverse logistics shipment.

    FedEx and other commenters express concern that only requiring a common name on a package and not a hazmat marking could lead to reverse logistics shipments on aircraft. COSTHA comments that requiring the common name or shipping name of items in the package would not provide much value. Instead, COSTHA suggests requiring the marking, “This package conforms to the requirements of § 173.157 for domestic surface transport only.” Alaska Airlines comments that packages need more information on the outside regarding the contents and supports a marking similar to what ATA and COSTHA suggest. UPS states a lack of communication on packages will result in difficulty when reporting spills of hazmat, such as is required by some states. Conversely, both Wal-Mart and Advanced Auto Parts suggested not requiring an additional marking when an outer packaging is already required.

    After consideration of all the comments, the PHMSA agrees with the majority of the commenters that a more informative and recognizable marking is needed and that it is necessary to modify the marking requirement for packages shipped under the reverse logistics. Therefore, the PHMSA is replacing the proposed common name or proper shipping name marking requirement with the marking “REVERSE LOGISTICS—HIGHWAY TRANSPORT ONLY—UNDER 49 CFR 173.157.” Moreover, this marking would only be permissible for shipments offered to and transported by private carriers. Conversely, as shipments made by non-private carriers meet all limited quantity conditions except for training, the limited quantity marking found in § 172.315(a)(1) will be required. We note that the limited quantity marking is well-recognized in both ground and air modes. This familiarity will help to ensure that air carriers are better able to identify shipments offered for non-private carrier transportation under the reverse logistics section of the HMR, thus safeguarding that hazmat shipments are even more readily recognized and, therefore, more easily rejected from inadvertent air transportation. This revision is intended to address the concerns of air carriers and other commenters that these shipments could enter into transportation modes other than highway.

    Advance Auto Parts states its belief that the requirement to notify the driver of the presence of hazmat needs clarification or should be removed; FedEx and Inmar Inc. are not sure how the PHMSA expects the requirement to notify the driver of the presence of hazmat to be satisfied; and DGAC notes that a marking on the package would alert drivers and carriers to the presence of hazmat under the reverse logistics section.

    We agree. Therefore, in this final rule, the PHMSA is removing the proposed requirement to notify drivers of the presence of hazmat with a reverse logistics shipment. The PHMSA believes that the revised reverse logistics marking on packages is sufficient to indicate the presence of a reverse logistics shipment is present and negates the need for driver notification.

    D. Training

    In the NPRM, the PHMSA proposed that retail employees who prepare hazmat shipments for return from retail facilities to the distribution centers be excepted from comprehensive training requirements. A central element of this training is the employee's knowledge of the types of materials that are being returned to manufacturers, suppliers, or distribution facilities. As proposed, for reverse logistics shipments, employees must be able to recognize hazmat and prepare the shipments in accordance with the requirements specified in the reverse logistics section—including adherence to the clear instructions provided by manufacturers, suppliers, or distribution facilities. This approach was considered acceptable in light of the wide array of hazmat common to many retail stores and the limited public exposure such shipments will have in the overall transport system. Moreover, consumer products in the retail industry are generally lower risk and easier to package than industrial-type hazardous materials.

    The PHMSA received a range of comments pertaining to the reduced training requirements. The Airline Pilots Association and FedEx express their disagreement with the reduced training requirement: The Airline Pilots Association notes that currently there are occurrences of undeclared hazmat in the air mode, and it is concerned that a reduction in training will increase the opportunity for these shipments to be loaded onto an aircraft. FedEx also expresses concern about whether relaxed training requirements as proposed will provide an adequate level of safety. COSTHA adds that the PHMSA should better define who requires training and should eliminate the recordkeeping requirement for training under the reverse logistics section. C&S Wholesale Grocery, DGAC, ACA, and Kellner's Fireworks expressed support of the reduced training requirements. Giant Cement notes it should be made clear that management and supervisors should not be excepted from the full training requirements. G2 Revolution believes that the PHMSA is underestimating the savings with the reduced training requirement but did not quantify by how much.

    The PHMSA considered and agreed in principle with commenters pertaining to training requirements and is simplifying these requirements in this final rule. Specifically, the PHMSA is clarifying that retail employees shipping hazardous materials as reverse logistics shipments must be familiar with the reverse logistics requirements adopted in this final rule. Retail employees must also document that returned shipments of hazardous materials authorized in this final rule are done so in a manner that is consistent with instructions provided by the manufacturer, supplier, or distribution facility. For example, instructions could be emailed, retrieved from a Web site, or retained in hard copy with instructions on how to return certain hazardous materials as instructed by the manufacturer, supplier, or distribution facility. The PHMSA believes that these requirements, in conjunction with the requirement that retail employees have knowledge of the types of materials that are being returned, would be sufficient to properly prepare hazmat for reverse logistics shipments.

    We recognize that hazmat employees of manufacturers, suppliers, or original distributors who have already been trained in accordance with the training requirements in § 172.704 of the HMR will assist in ensuring that a majority of shipments are being shipped in appropriate packaging. In this final rule, the PHMSA is clarifying that when performing hazmat functions for the purpose of transporting reverse logistics shipments, employees are subject only to those training requirements specified in this final rule for reverse logistics.

    E. Segregation

    In the NPRM, the PHMSA proposed to authorize the mixing of various hazard classes and divisions provided the contents of the packages are not leaking. The ATA suggests that parties offering shipments comprised of both traditional and “reverse logistics” hazmat be required to manifest all hazmat on the load's shipping papers, including hazmat moving under the reverse logistics exception. COSTHA adds that reverse logistics shipments transported with traditional hazardous materials should comply with all segregation, shipping paper, placarding, etc. requirements, unless some portion of the hazmat qualifies for a demonstrably safe exemption from these requirements, such as the limited quantity regulations. FedEx suggests that the segregation requirement should be re-worded to say, “Hazardous materials that may react dangerously with one another may not be offered for transportation in the same outer package.” Inmar Inc. comments that the PHMSA should provide a table to make it easier for industry to know what types of materials would react dangerously and also suggests that the requirement for hazmat to be “adequately separated” is vague and needs clarification. COSTHA supports the proposed segregation language for outer packages but notes that it is impractical for carriers to know if various outer packages meet the segregation requirement. Further, for simplicity, COSTHA suggests that the PHMSA include the reverse logistics segregation requirements in the reverse logistics exception section.

    The PHMSA is aligning the reverse logistics section for transportation on non-private carriers with the requirements specified in the limited quantities section of the HMR. Therefore, for non-private carriers, no additional or specific language on segregation requirements is required under this rule. The PHMSA notes, however, that segregation requirements will apply for reverse logistics shipments of 1.4S and 1.4G fireworks and flares, which this final rule authorize for transport by private carrier only.

    F. Incident Reporting

    In the NPRM, the PHMSA proposed to limit incident reporting to those outlined in § 171.15 for shipments made under the reverse logistics requirements. In response to this proposal, the ACA suggests that incident reporting should not be required for reverse logistics shipments since incident reports are not required for materials of trade (MOTs) transport or limited quantities shipments. COSTHA suggests that the written report requirements of § 171.16 should not apply to the reverse logistics section and that this requirement poses difficulties for carriers, as much of the information required to be reported on a DOT-5800.1 will not be available. The ATA recommends either treating reverse logistics hazmat releases as if the carrier discovered undeclared hazmat under § 171.16(a)(4) or treating these releases as being exempt from incident reporting requirements under § 171.16(d). The ATA adds that filling out an incident form for a reverse logistics shipment will be impossible without shipping papers and other hazard communication (e.g., proper shipping name marking). FedEx asks how the PHMSA expects carriers to comply with incident reporting when there is little to no hazard communication required.

    As noted in the hazard communication discussion above, the PHMSA believes that requiring a marking that indicates a shipment contains hazmat under the reverse logistics section provides the necessary information for carriers to report a hazmat release in accordance with the reporting requirements in § 171.15. For non-private carriers, the PHMSA has aligned with limited quantity provisions, thus subjecting these shipments to the current incident reporting requirements and exceptions.

    G. Battery Recycling

    In the NPRM, the PHMSA proposed to revise § 173.159(e) to authorize the pick-up of used automobile batteries (i.e., electric storage batteries) from multiple shipper locations. The PHMSA received comments from DGAC, BCI, and the National Association of Manufactures in support of modifying the battery exception in § 173.159(e) to authorize the pick-up of used automobile batteries from multiple shipper locations. However, RSR Corporation opposes the change and urges the PHMSA to keep the single shipper provision intact, further specifying that the removal of the provision would lead to an increase in incidents involving the transportation of used lead-acid batteries. The BCI and DGAC seek clarification on what the PHMSA meant by the language in this section that reads “pallets should be built.”

    The PHMSA does not believe that allowing a battery recycler to pick up batteries from multiple shipping locations will lead to an increase in incidents involving the transportation of used automobile batteries. Rather, it is the PHMSA's position that because § 173.159(e) requires batteries to be loaded or braced to prevent damage and short circuits in transit, the likelihood of an incident is minimal Allowing the collection of lead-acid batteries from multiple locations, as the BCI notes, will result in fewer miles traveled to accomplish battery collection activities. Therefore, this will reduce the number of highway miles traveled, the risk of highway accidents, and the impact on the environment. For these reasons, the PHMSA is revising § 173.159(e)(4) to authorize the pick-up of used automotive batteries from multiple retail locations for the purposes of recycling, provided those batteries are consolidated on pallets and loaded so as to not cause damage to the batteries during transportation.

    When the PHMSA used the term “should be built” in the proposed revision to § 173.159(e)(4), we were referring to how the batteries were stacked on the pallet, not the construction of the pallet itself. In this final rule, the PHMSA is revising this language to clarify our intention. In addition, the PHMSA is requiring incident reporting for a spill that occurs while transporting under the revised battery exception. It should be noted that EPA export requirements (i.e., 40 CFR part 266, subpart G and 40 CFR part 273), such as notice and consent and annual reporting, apply even if spent lead-acid batteries (SLABs) are recycled.

    IV. Regulatory Review and Notices A. Statutory Authority

    Federal Hazardous Materials Transportation Law (49 U.S.C. 5101-5128) authorizes the Secretary of Transportation (Secretary) to “prescribe regulations for the safe transportation, including security, of hazardous material in intrastate, interstate, and foreign commerce.” The Secretary delegated this authority to the PHMSA in 49 CFR 1.97(b). The PHMSA is responsible for overseeing a hazardous materials safety program that minimizes the risks to life and property inherent in the transportation of hazardous materials in commerce. Annually, the HMR provides safety and security requirements for transport of more than 2.5 billion tons of hazardous materials (hazmat), valued at about $2.3 trillion, accounting for 307 billion miles traveled on the nation's interconnected transportation network. In addition, the HMR includes operational requirements applicable to each mode of transportation.

    This final rule is published under the authority of the Federal Hazardous Materials Transportation Law, 49 U.S.C. 5101 et seq. Section 5103(b) authorizes the Secretary to prescribe regulations for the safe transportation, including security, of hazardous material in intrastate, interstate, and foreign commerce. This final rule provides regulations for the transport of hazardous consumer products in the reverse logistics process.

    B. Executive Order 12866, Executive Order 13563, Executive Order 13610, and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures

    This final rule is not considered a significant regulatory action within the meaning of Executive Order 12866 (“Regulatory Planning and Review”) and the Regulatory Policies and Procedures of the Department of Transportation (44 FR 11034).

    Executive Order 13563 (“Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review”) is supplemental to and reaffirms the principles, structures, and definitions governing regulatory review that were established in Executive Order 12866 of September 30, 1993. Executive Order 13563, issued January 18, 2011, notes that our nation's current regulatory system must not only protect public health, welfare, safety, and our environment but also promote economic growth, innovation, competitiveness, and job creation.6 Further, this Executive Order urges government agencies to consider regulatory approaches that reduce burdens and maintain flexibility and freedom of choice for the public. In addition, Federal agencies were directed to periodically review existing significant regulations, retrospectively analyze rules that may be outmoded, ineffective, insufficient, or excessively burdensome, and modify, streamline, expand, or repeal regulatory requirements in accordance with what has been learned.

    6 See http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/01/18/improving-regulation-and-regulatory-review-executive-order.

    Executive Order 13610 (“Identifying and Reducing Regulatory Burdens”), issued May 10, 2012, urges agencies to conduct retrospective analyses of existing rules to examine whether they remain justified or whether they should be modified or streamlined in light of changed circumstances, including the rise of new technologies.7

    7 See http://www.thefederalregister.org/fdsys/pkg/FR-2012-05-14/pdf/2012-11798.pdf.

    These three Executive Orders act together to require agencies to regulate in the “most cost-effective manner,” to make a “reasoned determination that the benefits of the intended regulation justify its costs,” and to develop regulations that “impose the least burden on society.”

    Additionally, Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and 13610 require agencies to provide a meaningful opportunity for public participation. Accordingly, the PHMSA invited public comment twice (ANRPM published on July 5, 2012 [77 FR 39662]; NPRM published on August 11, 2014 [79 FR 46748]) on these considerations, including any cost or benefit figures or factors, alternative approaches, and relevant scientific, technical and economic data. These comments aided the PHMSA in the evaluation of the proposed requirements. The PHMSA has since revised our evaluation and analysis to address the public comments received.

    The PHMSA has evaluated the HMR with respect to reverse logistics and identified areas that could be modified to increase flexibility for the regulated community. In this final rule, the amendments are an optional means to comply with the HMR and will not impose increased compliance costs on the regulated industry. By proposing to add a new § 173.157 to the HMR for items shipped in the reverse logistics supply chain, the PHMSA will increase flexibility to industry. The PHMSA believes that the implementation of a regulatory approach addressing a distinct segment of the supply that transports consumer-type goods, coupled with outreach, will create a framework that will allow for the safe transportation of dangerous goods.

    In addition to providing a new reverse logistics section for transporting specifically authorized hazmat, this rulemaking expands an existing exception for exclusive shipments of used automobile batteries. This exception is typically used for shipment of these batteries from a retail facility to a recycling center. This change to the HMR will allow the regulated community to consolidate shipments of automotive batteries (i.e., lead-acid batteries) for recycling.

    A summary of the Regulatory Evaluation used to support the requirements presented in this final rule are discussed below, and a complete copy of the Regulatory Evaluation for this rulemaking is available at http://www.regulations.gov under Docket No. PHMSA-2011-0143.

    Regulatory Evaluation

    The PHMSA assumes that this rulemaking would reduce shipping paper preparation costs for shipments involving certain quantities of commodities. The packages will, however, require a marking indicating that the materials are being shipped in accordance with § 173.157 or the existing limited quantity marking. Transport vehicles carrying packages affected by the rule will no longer require placarding. Additionally, the training requirements are amended to reflect a distinct segment of the supply chain which transports consumer-type hazardous materials as return shipments from retail stores. Finally, the PHMSA is relaxing the requirements for exclusive use shipment of wet batteries (i.e., lead-acid batteries). This change will reduce the transportation costs associated with shipment for the recycling of lead-acid batteries. A table identifying the benefits associated with this final rule is provided below:

    Benefits of the Final Rule (Reduced Compliance Costs) Relevant HMR citation Category Amount of annual savings § 173.157 Training $4-8 million. § 173.157 Shipment Preparation $0-1 million. § 173.159 Transportation Costs—Battery Recycling $1-2 million.

    Note that the numbers above represent an upper bound on the expected savings from this final rule. In this final rule, the PHMSA did remove some hazard classes from the applicability and reduced the size limit on packages to 30 kg (66 pounds). The hazard classes in this final rule represent a vast majority of the consumer-type products containing hazardous materials. In addition, the 30 kg (66 pound) package limit is consistent with limited quantity shipments used for these products in the forward logistics chain. Therefore, the PHMSA believes the above numbers are a general representation of the savings expected form this final rule. The PHMSA does not expect any additional cost to the regulated community because of these changes.

    C. Executive Order 13132

    This final rule has been analyzed in accordance with the principles and criteria contained in Executive Order 13132 (“Federalism”) and the President's memorandum on (“Preemption”) published in the Federal Register on May 22, 2009 (74 FR 24693). This final rule will preempt State, local, and tribal government requirements but does not propose any regulation that has substantial direct effects on the states, the relationship between the Federal government and the states, or the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. Therefore, the consultation and funding requirements of Executive Order 13132 do not apply.

    The Federal Hazardous Materials Transportation Law, 49 U.S.C. 5101-5128, contains an express preemption provision, 49 U.S.C. 5125 (b), that preempts State, local, and tribal government requirements on the following subjects:

    (1) The designation, description, and classification of hazardous materials;

    (2) The packing, repacking, handling, labeling, marking, and placarding of hazardous materials;

    (3) The preparation, execution, and use of shipping documents related to hazardous materials and requirements related to the number, contents, and placement of those documents;

    (4) The written notification, recording, and reporting of the unintentional release in transportation of hazardous material;

    (5) The design, manufacture, fabrication, marking, maintenance, recondition, repair, or testing of a packaging or container represented, marked, certified, or sold as qualified for use in transporting hazardous material.

    This final rule addresses all the covered subject areas above. This final rule will preempt any State, local, or tribal requirements concerning these subjects unless the non-Federal requirements are “substantively the same” as the Federal requirements. Furthermore, this final rule is necessary to update, clarify, and provide relief from regulatory requirements.

    Federal Hazardous Materials Transportation Law provides at § 5125(b)(2) that, if the DOT issues a regulation concerning any of the covered subjects, the DOT must determine and publish in the Federal Register the effective date of Federal preemption. The effective date may not be earlier than the 90th day following the date of issuance of the final rule and not later than two years after the date of issuance. The PHMSA has determined that the effective date of Federal preemption for these requirements will be one year from the date of publication of the final rule in the Federal Register.

    D. Executive Order 13175

    This final rule has been analyzed in accordance with the principles and criteria contained in Executive Order 13175 (“Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments”). The PHMSA did not receive any comments from or requests for consultation and coordination with tribal governments related to this rulemaking action. Because this final rule does not significantly or uniquely affect the communities of tribal governments and does not impose substantial direct compliance costs, the funding and consultation requirements of Executive Order 13175 do not apply.

    E. Regulatory Flexibility Act, Executive Order 13272, and DOT Procedures and Policies

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) requires an agency to review regulations to assess their impact on small entities unless the agency determines that a rule is not expected to have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. The primary costs to small entities include ensuring that reverse logistics shipments are shipped properly under § 173.157 and ensuring that its employees have access to the minimal training requirements as required under this new section.

    The PHMSA expects this rule to have little or no impact on small entities since these entities are already subject to hazmat shipping requirements and this rule will provide an optional alternative to current regulations. The estimated benefits and costs figures discussed below should be viewed as upper bounds, both of which will be reduced by the extent of current practice.

    Retail, trucking, and other industries potentially affected by this final rule all have substantial numbers of small entities. The impacts of the final rule are expected to be favorable because of the new flexibility for the preparation and transport of certain hazmat within the scope of reverse logistics. However, the PHMSA does not expect that the impacts will be significant. A typical small entity would save roughly $60 per affected new employee in training costs and $0.17-$2 per affected package in shipment preparation costs.

    This rule applies to all shippers and carriers of hazardous materials, to the extent that they (1) are involved in reverse logistics movements and (2) choose to avail of the proposed new regulations rather than the existing HMR. Key affected industries are specialized freight trucking (NAICS 484200), general freight trucking (NAICS 484100), electronics and home furnishing retail (NAICS 442000), and health and personal care stores (NAICS 446000). The PHMSA does not have detailed data on the number of potentially affected entities by industry or their distribution by entity size; however, based on hazmat registration data, roughly 10,785 registered shippers are small entities (75 percent of the total) and 11,131 registered carriers are small businesses (85 percent of the total). Not all of these offer or transport materials in reverse logistics.

    Based upon the above estimates and assumptions, the PHMSA certifies that the amendments in this final rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Further information on the estimates and assumptions used to evaluate the potential impacts to small entities is available in the Regulatory Evaluation, which is available in the public docket for this rulemaking. This rule has been developed in accordance with Executive Order 13272 (“Proper Consideration of Small Entities in Agency Rulemaking”) and the DOT's procedures and policies to promote compliance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act to ensure that potential impacts of rules on small entities are properly considered. More information can be found in the Initial Regulatory Flexibility Act (IFRA) that is included in the Regulatory Evaluation document.

    F. Paperwork Reduction Act

    The PHMSA currently has an approved information collection under OMB Control Number 2137-0034, entitled “Hazardous Materials Shipping Papers & Emergency Response Information,” with an expiration date of May 30, 2016. This final rule will result in a decrease in the annual burden and cost to OMB Control Number 2137-0034 due to the decrease in the number of shipments subject to the shipping paper requirements.

    Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, no person is required to respond to an information collection unless it has been approved by OMB and displays a valid OMB control number. Section 1320.8(d), title 5, Code of Federal Regulations requires that the PHMSA provide interested members of the public and affected agencies an opportunity to comment on information and recordkeeping requests.

    The PHMSA received no comments on the information collection portion of this rulemaking. This final rule identifies revised information collection requests that the PHMSA will submit to OMB for approval based on the requirements in this final rule. The PHMSA has developed burden estimates to reflect changes in this final rule and approximates that the information collection and recordkeeping burdens will be revised as follows:

    OMB Control No. 2137-0034:

    Decrease in Annual Number of Respondents: 12,600.

    Decrease in Annual Responses: 630,000.

    Decrease in Annual Burden Hours: 210,000.

    Decrease in Annual Burden Costs: $5,250,000.

    Requests for a copy of this information collection should be directed to Steven Andrews or T. Glenn Foster, (202) 366-8553, Office of Hazardous Materials Safety, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001.

    G. Regulation Identifier Number (RIN)

    A regulation identifier number (RIN) is assigned to each regulatory action listed in the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulations. The Regulatory Information Service Center publishes the Unified Agenda in April and October of each year. The RIN contained in the heading of this document can be used to cross-reference this action with the Unified Agenda.

    H. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

    This final rule does not impose unfunded mandates under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995. It does not result in costs of $141.3 million or more to either State, local, or tribal governments, in the aggregate, or to the private sector, and it is the least burdensome alternative that achieves the objective of the rule.

    I. Environmental Assessment

    The National Environmental Policy Act, 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq., (NEPA) requires that Federal agencies consider the environmental effects of final rule in their decision making process. In accordance with the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulations (40 CFR parts 1500-1508), which implement NEPA, an agency may prepare an Environmental Assessment (EA) when it does not anticipate that the final action will have significant environmental effects. An EA must provide sufficient evidence and analysis for determining whether to prepare an environmental impact statement or a finding of no significant impact and include: (1) The need for the action; (2) alternatives to the action; (3) environmental impacts of the action and alternatives; and (4) a list of the agencies and persons consulted during the consideration process [See 40 CFR 1508.9(b)].

    1. Purpose and Need

    The purpose of this rulemaking is to provide an exception in the HMR for the shipment of low hazard items in the reverse logistics supply chain. The PHMSA is revising the HMR to provide requirements that are more tailored to a consumer or retail environment. Further, the PHMSA is providing more flexibility for exclusive use shipments of wet batteries (i.e., lead-acid batteries) in order to promote recycling and to allow carriers to consolidate shipments of batteries from multiple shippers on a single transport vehicle.

    2. Alternatives

    The alternatives considered in this Environmental Assessment include the following:

    Alternative 1: A final rule providing regulatory flexibility to allow low hazard consumer products to be returned to points of origination under a new section of the HMR. This action, Alternative 1, provides a mechanism for the regulated community to safely transport low hazard items back to distribution centers, for example, in the reverse logistics supply chain. The PHMSA believes that the incorporation of this section will address the unique aspects of reverse logistics in the retail sector.

    Alternative 2: The “no action” alternative, meaning that the regulatory scheme will stay the same and the final rule would not be promulgated. This action, Alternative 2, results in no change to the HMR, which requires full regulation for low hazard items shipped to distribution facilities via the reverse logistics supply chain. While this alternative would not impose any new cost or change any environmental impacts, neither would it account for the compliance obstacles and regulatory concerns raised by retailers and shared by the PHMSA.

    3. Environmental Impacts of Selected Action

    When developing potential regulatory requirements, the PHMSA evaluates those requirements to consider the environmental impact of each amendment. Specifically, the PHMSA evaluates the following: The risk of release of hazmat and resulting environmental impact; the risk to human safety, including any risk to first responders; the longevity of the packaging; and the circumstances in which the regulations would be carried out (i.e., the defined geographic area, the resources, any sensitive areas) and how they could thus be impacted.

    Of the regulatory changes in Alternative 1, none has negative environmental impacts. The revision of the exclusive use shipment of automobile batteries in § 173.159 promote and simplify the recycling of used automobile batteries. This revision will result in more consolidated shipments of such batteries from multiple shippers and, in turn, will reduce the number of highway shippers on the road. Currently, the HMR limits transport of these batteries to one shipper, but by reducing the number of shipments by highway, this will result in lower emissions and fuel consumption. This change will also likely increase the lead-acid battery-recycling rate, thus reducing the number of these batteries that end up in landfills. This reduction in shipments will reduce the likelihood that hazmat is spilled into the environment. Overall, all of these impacts will have a net positive impact on the environment. The PHMSA does not believe that these environmental impacts will be significant.

    Alternative 2, the “no-action alternative,” would not lead to any environmental costs or benefits.

    4. Discussion of Environmental Impacts in Response to Comments

    The PHMSA did not receive any comments on the environmental impact of this rulemaking. However, the PHMSA did receive comments from the EPA that were unrelated to the potential impact to the environment. These comments were related to inclusion of the word “disposal” in the definition of “reverse logistics.”

    5. Federal Agencies Consulted and Public Participation

    In an effort to ensure all appropriate Federal stakeholders are provided a chance to provide input on potential rulemaking actions, the PHMSA, as part of its rulemaking development, consults other Federal agencies that this rule could affect. In developing this rulemaking action, the PHMSA consulted the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), and the Consumer Products Safety Commission (CPSC).

    6. Conclusion

    The provisions of this rule build on current regulatory requirements and are modeled after existing regulatory exceptions for low hazard materials. The PHMSA has calculated that this rulemaking will not increase the current risk of release of hazardous materials into the environment. Therefore, the PHMSA finds that there are no significant environmental impacts associated with this final rule.

    J. Privacy Act

    In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), the DOT solicits comments from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. The DOT posts these comments, without edit, including any personal information the commenter provides, to www.regulations.gov, as described in the system of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at www.dot.gov/privacy.

    K. Executive Order 13609 and International Trade Analysis

    Under Executive Order 13609 (“Promoting International Regulatory Cooperation”), agencies must consider whether the impacts associated with significant variations between domestic and international regulatory approaches are unnecessary or if they may impair the ability of American business to export and compete internationally. In meeting shared challenges involving health, safety, labor, security, environmental, and other issues, international regulatory cooperation can identify approaches that are at least as protective as those that are or will be adopted in the absence of such cooperation. International regulatory cooperation can also reduce, eliminate, or prevent unnecessary differences in regulatory requirements.

    Similarly, the Trade Agreements Act of 1979 (Pub. L. 96-39), as amended by the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (Pub. L. 103-465), prohibits Federal agencies from establishing any standards or engaging in related activities that create unnecessary obstacles to the foreign commerce of the United States. For purposes of these requirements, Federal agencies may participate in the establishment of international standards, so long as the standards have a legitimate domestic objective, such as providing for safety, and do not operate to exclude imports that meet this objective. The statute also requires consideration of international standards and, where appropriate, that they be the basis for U.S. standards.

    The PHMSA participates in the establishment of international standards in order to protect the safety of the American public. We have assessed the effects of the final rule and have found that this domestic exception for the return of hazardous consumer products through the reverse logistics supply chain will not cause unnecessary obstacles to foreign trade. Accordingly, this rulemaking is consistent with Executive Order 13609 and the PHMSA's obligations under the Trade Agreement Act, as amended.

    L. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs Federal agencies to use voluntary consensus standards in their regulatory activities unless doing so would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical standards (e.g., specification of materials, test methods, or performance requirements) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standard bodies. This final rule does not involve voluntary consensus standards.

    List of Subjects 49 CFR Part 171

    Administrative practice and procedure, Hazardous materials transportation, Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    49 CFR Part 173

    Hazardous materials transportation, Packaging and containers, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    In consideration of the foregoing, 49 CFR Chapter I is amended as follows:

    PART 171—HAZARDOUS MATERIALS PROGRAM PROCEDURES 1. The authority citation for part 171 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    49 U.S.C. 5101-5128, 44701; Pub. L. 101-410, section 4 (28 U.S.C. 2461 note); Pub. L. 104-121, sections 212-213; Pub. L. 104-134, section 31001; 49 CFR 1.81 and 1.97.

    2. In § 171.8, a definition for “Reverse logistics” is added in alphabetical order to read as follows:
    § 171.8 Definitions and abbreviations.

    Reverse logistics means the process of offering for transport or transporting by motor vehicle goods from a retail store for return to its manufacturer, supplier, or distribution facility for the purpose of capturing value (e.g., to receive manufacturer's credit), recall, replacement, recycling, or similar reason. This definition does not include materials that meet the definition of a hazardous waste as defined in this section.

    PART 173—SHIPPERS—GENERAL REQUIREMENTS FOR SHIPMENTS AND PACKAGINGS 3. The authority citation for part 173 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    49 U.S.C. 5101-5128, 44701; 49 CFR 1.81, 1.96 and 1.97.

    4. In § 173.63, add paragraph (d) to read as follows:
    § 173.63 Packaging exceptions.

    (d) Reverse logistics. Hazardous materials meeting the definition of “reverse logistics” under § 171.8 of this subchapter and in compliance with paragraph (b) of this section may be offered for transport and transported in highway transportation in accordance with § 173.157.

    5. In § 173.150, add paragraph (i) to read as follows:
    § 173.150 Exceptions for Class 3 (flammable and combustible liquids).

    (i) Reverse logistics. Hazardous materials meeting the definition of “reverse logistics” under § 171.8 of this subchapter and in compliance with paragraph (b) of this section may be offered for transport and transported in highway transportation in accordance with § 173.157.

    6. In § 173.151, add paragraph (f) to read as follows:
    § 173.151 Exceptions for Class 4.

    (f) Reverse logistics. Except for Division 4.2 hazardous materials and self-reactive materials, hazardous materials meeting the definition of “reverse logistics” under § 171.8 of this subchapter and in compliance with paragraph (b) of this section may be offered for transport and transported in highway transportation in accordance with § 173.157.

    7. In § 173.152, add paragraph (d) to read as follows:
    § 173.152 Exceptions for Division 5.1 (oxidizers) and Division 5.2 (organic peroxides).

    (d) Reverse logistics. Except for Division 5.2 hazardous materials, hazardous materials meeting the definition of “reverse logistics” under § 171.8 of this subchapter and in compliance with paragraph (b) of this section may be offered for transport and transported in highway transportation in accordance with § 173.157.

    8. In § 173.153, add paragraph (d) to read as follows:
    § 173.153 Exceptions for Division 6.1 (poisonous materials).

    (d) Reverse logistics. Hazardous materials meeting the definition of “reverse logistics” under § 171.8 of this subchapter and in compliance with paragraph (b) of this section may be offered for transport and transported in highway transportation in accordance with § 173.157.

    9. In § 173.154, add paragraph (e) to read as follows:
    § 173.154 Exceptions for Class 8 (corrosive materials).

    (e) Reverse logistics. Hazardous materials meeting the definition of “reverse logistics” under § 171.8 of this subchapter and in compliance with paragraph (b) of this section may be offered for transport and transported in highway transportation in accordance with § 173.157.

    10. In § 173.155, add paragraph (d) to read as follows:
    § 173.155 Exceptions for Class 9 (miscellaneous hazardous materials).

    (d) Reverse logistics. Except for Lithium batteries, hazardous materials meeting the definition of “reverse logistics” under § 171.8 of this subchapter and in compliance with paragraph (b) of this section may be offered for transport and transported in highway transportation in accordance with § 173.157.

    11. Add § 173.157 to subpart D to read as follows:
    § 173.157 Reverse logistics—General requirements and exceptions for reverse logistics.

    (a) Authorized hazardous materials. Hazardous materials may be offered for transport and transported in highway transportation under this section when they meet the definition of reverse logistics as defined under § 171.8 of this subchapter. However, hazardous materials that meet the definition of a hazardous waste as defined in § 171.8 of this subchapter are not permitted to be offered for transport or transported under this section. Hazardous materials authorized for transport according to a special permit as defined in § 171.8 of this subchapter must be offered for transportation and transported as authorized by the special permit.

    (b) When offered for transport or transported by non-private carrier. Hazardous materials must be both authorized for limited quantity provisions as well as explicitly authorized for reverse logistics transportation under their applicable limited quantities section. Except for alternative training provisions authorized under paragraph (e) of this section, all hazardous materials must otherwise meet the requirements for a limited quantity shipment.

    (c) When offered for transport or transported by private carrier. Hazardous materials are authorized under paragraph (b) of this section or are subject to the following limitations:

    (1) Division 1.4G materials offered for transport and transported in accordance with § 173.65 of this subchapter.

    (2) When sold in retail facilities; Division 1.4G or 1.4S fireworks, Division 1.4G ammunition, or Division 1.4G or 1.4S flares. Shipments offered for transport or transported under this subparagraph are limited to 30 kg (66 pounds) per package. All explosive materials subject to an approval must meet the terms of the approval, including packaging required by the approval.

    (3) Equipment powered by flammable liquids or flammable gases.

    (i) Flammable liquid-powered equipment. The fuel tank and fuel lines of equipment powered by an internal combustion engine must be in the closed position, and all fuel tank caps or closures must be securely in place.

    (ii) Flammable gas-powered equipment. A combustion engine using flammable gas fuel or other devices using flammable gas fuel (such as camping equipment, lighting devices, and torch kits) must have the flammable gas source disconnected and all shut-off devices in the closed position.

    (4) Division 2.1 or 2.2 compressed gases weighing less than 66 pounds and sold as retail products. For the purposes of this section a cylinder or aerosol container may be assumed to meet the definition of a Division 2.1 or 2.2 materials, respectively, even if the exact pressure is unknown.

    (5) Materials shipped under this paragraph (c) must also comply with the segregation requirements as required in § 177.848.

    (6) Shipments made under this section are subject to the incident reporting requirements in § 171.15.

    (d) Hazard communication. Hazardous materials offered for transportation and transported by private carrier in accordance with paragraph (c) of this section may use the marking “REVERSE LOGISTICS—HIGHWAY TRANSPORT ONLY—UNDER 49 CFR 173.157” as an alternative to the surface limited quantity marking found under § 172.315(a). Size marking requirements found in § 172.301(a)(1) apply.

    (e) Training (1) Any person preparing a shipment under this section must have clear instructions on preparing the reverse logistics shipment to the supplier, manufacturer, or distributor from the retail store. This includes information to properly classify, package, mark, offer, and transport. These instructions must be provided by the supplier, manufacturer, or distributor to ensure the shipment is correctly prepared for transportation or through training requirements prescribed under part 172 Subpart H of this subchapter.

    (2) Employers who do not provide training under part 172 Subpart H of this subchapter must:

    (i) Identify hazardous materials subject to the provisions of this section, verify compliance with the appropriate conditions and limitations, as well as ensure clear instructions from the manufacturer, supplier, or distributor associated with product's origination or destination;

    (ii) Ensure clear instructions provided are known and accessible to the employee at the time they are preparing the shipment; and

    (iii) Document that employees are familiar with the requirements of this section as well as the specific return instructions for the products offered under this section. Documentation must be retained while the employee is employed and 60-days thereafter. Alternatively, recordkeeping requirements under part 172 Subpart H may be used.

    12. In § 173.159, revise paragraphs (e)(3) and (4) and add paragraph (e)(5) to read as follows:
    § 173.159 Batteries, wet.

    (e) * * *

    (3) Any other material loaded in the same vehicle must be blocked, braced, or otherwise secured to prevent contact with or damage to the batteries. In addition, batteries on pallets, must be stacked to not cause damage to another pallet in transportation;

    (4) A carrier may accept shipments of batteries from multiple locations for the purpose of consolidating shipments of batteries for recycling; and

    (5) Shipments made under this paragraph are subject to the incident reporting requirements in § 171.15.

    13. In § 173.306, add paragraph (m) to read as follows:
    § 173.306 Limited quantities of compressed gases.

    (m) Reverse logistics. Hazardous materials meeting the definition of “reverse logistics” under § 171.8 of this subchapter and in compliance with this section may be offered for transport and transported in highway transportation in accordance with § 173.157. For the purposes of this paragraph a cylinder or aerosol container may be assumed to meet the definition of a Division 2.1 or 2.2 material, respectively, even if the exact pressure is unknown.

    Issued in Washington, DC on, March 25, 2016, under the authority delegated in 49 CFR 1.97. Marie Therese Dominguez, Administrator, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration.
    [FR Doc. 2016-07199 Filed 3-30-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-60-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 50 CFR Part 622 [Docket No. 130403320-4891-02] RIN 0648-XE542 Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico, and South Atlantic; Snapper-Grouper Resources of the South Atlantic; 2016-2017 Recreational Fishing Season for Black Sea Bass AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Temporary rule; recreational season length.

    SUMMARY:

    NMFS announces that the length of the recreational season for black sea bass in the exclusive economic zone (EEZ) of the South Atlantic will extend throughout the 2016-2017 fishing year. Announcing the length of recreational season for black sea bass is one of the accountability measures (AMs) for the recreational sector. This announcement allows recreational fishermen to maximize their opportunity to harvest the recreational annual catch limit (ACL) for black sea bass during the fishing season while managing harvest to protect the black sea bass resource.

    DATES:

    This rule is effective from 12:01 a.m., local time, April 1, 2016, until 12:01 a.m., local time, April 1, 2017, unless changed by subsequent notification in the Federal Register.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Nikhil Mehta, NMFS Southeast Regional Office, telephone: 727-824-5305, email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

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

    The final rule implementing Regulatory Amendment 14 to the FMP changed the recreational fishing season for black sea bass from June 1 through May 31 to April 1 through March 31 (79 FR 66316, November 7, 2014). The final rule also revised the recreational AMs for black sea bass. Prior to the start of each recreational fishing year on April 1, NMFS will project the length of the recreational fishing season based on when NMFS projects the recreational ACL to be met and will announce the recreational season end date in the Federal Register (50 CFR 622.193(e)(2)). The purpose of this revised AM is to implement a more predictable recreational season length while still constraining harvest at or below the recreational ACL to protect the stock from experiencing adverse biological consequences.

    The recreational ACL for the 2016-2017 fishing year is 848,455 lb (384,853 kg), gutted weight, 1,001,177 lb (454,126 kg), round weight, and was established through the final rule for Regulatory Amendment 19 to the FMP on September 23, 2013 (78 FR 58249). In the 2015-2016 fishing year, harvest levels of black sea bass were not close to reaching the recreational ACL of 876,254 lb (397,462 kg), gutted weight, 1,033,980 lb (469,005 kg) round weight, and based on landings from the 2013-2014 through 2015-2016 fishing years, NMFS therefore estimates that the recreational ACL will not be met in the 2016-2017 fishing year. Accordingly, the recreational sector for black sea bass is not expected to close as a result of reaching its ACL, and the season end date for recreational fishing for black sea bass in the South Atlantic EEZ is the end of the current fishing year, March 31, 2017.

    Classification

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

    This action is taken under 50 CFR 622.193(e)(2) and is exempt from review under Executive Order 12866.

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

    This action responds to the best scientific information available. The Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, NOAA (AA), finds that the need to immediately implement the recreational season length constitutes good cause to waive the requirements to provide prior notice and opportunity for public comment pursuant to the authority set forth in 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), because prior notice and opportunity for public comment on this temporary rule is unnecessary. Such procedures are unnecessary, because the rule establishing the AM has already been subject to notice and comment, and all that remains is to notify the public of the recreational season length.

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

    Authority:

    16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

    Dated: March 28, 2016. Emily H. Menashes, Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2016-07292 Filed 3-28-16; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 50 CFR Part 635 [Docket No. 150413357-5999-02] RIN 0648-XE531 Atlantic Highly Migratory Species; Commercial Aggregated Large Coastal Shark and Hammerhead Shark Management Group Retention Limit Adjustment AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Temporary rule; inseason retention limit adjustment.

    SUMMARY:

    NMFS is adjusting the commercial aggregated large coastal shark (LCS) and hammerhead shark management group retention limit for directed shark limited access permit holders in the Atlantic region from 36 LCS other than sandbar sharks per vessel per trip to 3 LCS other than sandbar sharks per vessel per trip. This action is based on consideration of the regulatory determination criteria regarding inseason adjustments. The retention limit will remain at 3 LCS other than sandbar sharks per vessel per trip in the Atlantic region through the rest of the 2016 fishing season or until NMFS announces via a notice in the Federal Register another adjustment to the retention limit or a fishery closure is warranted. This retention limit adjustment will affect anyone with a directed shark limited access permit fishing for LCS in the Atlantic region.

    DATES:

    This retention limit adjustment is effective at 11:30 p.m. local time April 2, 2016, through the end of the 2016 fishing season on December 31, 2016, or until NMFS announces via a notice in the Federal Register another adjustment to the retention limit or a fishery closure, if warranted.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Guý DuBeck or Karyl Brewster-Geisz, 301-427-8503; fax 301-713-1917.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Atlantic shark fisheries are managed under the 2006 Consolidated Highly Migratory Species (HMS) Fishery Management Plan (FMP), its amendments, and implementing regulations (50 CFR part 635) issued under authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.).

    Under § 635.24(a)(8), NMFS may adjust the commercial retention limit in the shark fisheries during the fishing season. Before making any adjustment, NMFS must consider specified regulatory criteria and other relevant factors (see § 635.24(a)(8)(i)-(vi)). After considering these criteria as discussed below, we have concluded that reducing the retention limit of the Atlantic aggregated LCS and hammerhead management groups for directed shark limited access permit holders will slow the fishery catch rates to allow the fishery throughout the Atlantic region to remain open for the rest of the year. Since landings have exceeded 20 percent of the quota and are projected to reach 80 percent before the end of the 2016 fishing season, we are reducing the commercial Atlantic aggregated LCS and hammerhead shark retention limit from 36 to 3 LCS other than sandbar per vessel per trip.

    We considered the inseason retention limit adjustment criteria listed in § 635.24(a)(8), which includes:

    (i) The amount of remaining shark quota in the relevant area, region, or sub-region, to date, based on dealer reports.

    Based on dealer reports, 6.6 mt dw or 24 percent of the 27.1 mt dw shark quota for the hammerhead management group has already been harvested in the Atlantic region. This means that approximately 76 percent of the quota remains. These levels so early in the season indicate that the quota is being harvested too quickly and unless action is taken to slow harvest, fishermen in the Atlantic region may not have an opportunity to fish in the region for the remainder of the year.

    (ii) The catch rates of the relevant shark species/complexes in the region or sub-region, to date, based on dealer reports;

    Based on the average catch rate of landings data from dealer reports, the amount of hammerhead sharks harvested on a daily basis is high. While fishermen are landing sharks within their per-trip limit of 36 fish per trip on a given day, they are making multiple trips a day that overall result in high numbers of hammerheads being caught rapidly throughout the fishery. This daily average catch rate means that hammerhead sharks are being harvested too quickly to ensure fair fishing opportunities throughout the season. If the per trip limit is left unchanged, hammerhead sharks would likely be harvested at such a high rate that there would not be enough hammerhead shark quota remaining to keep the fishery open year-round, precluding equitable fishing opportunities for the entire Atlantic region.

    (iii) Estimated date of fishery closure based on when the landings are projected to reach 80 percent of the quota given the realized catch rates;

    Once the landings reach 80 percent of the quota, we would have to close the hammerhead management group as well as any other management group with “linked quotas” such as the Atlantic aggregated LCS management group. Current catch rates would likely result in hitting this limit by mid-May. A closure so early in the year would preclude fishing opportunities in the Atlantic region for the remainder of the year.

    (iv) Effects of the adjustment on accomplishing the objectives of the 2006 Consolidated HMS FMP and its amendments;

    Reducing the retention limit for the aggregated LCS and hammerhead management group from 36 to 3 LCS per trip would allow for fishing opportunities later in the year consistent with the FMP's objectives to ensure equitable fishing opportunities throughout the fishing season and to limit bycatch and discards.

    (v) Variations in seasonal distribution, abundance, or migratory patterns of the relevant shark species based on scientific and fishery-based knowledge;

    The directed shark fisheries in the Atlantic region exhibit a mixed species composition, with a high abundance of aggregated LCS caught in conjunction with hammerhead sharks. As a result, by slowing the harvest and reducing landings on a per-trip basis, both fisheries could remain open for the remainder of the year.

    (vi) Effects of catch rates in one part of a region or sub-region precluding vessels in another part of that region or sub-region from having a reasonable opportunity to harvest a portion of the relevant quota.

    Based on dealer reports, and given NMFS' notice to the regulated community (80 FR 74999) that a goal of this year's fishery was to ensure fishing opportunities throughout the fishing season, we have concluded that the hammerhead shark quota is being harvested too quickly to meet conservation and management goals for the fishery. If the harvest of these species is not slowed down, we estimate that the fishery would close in mid-May. Closing the fishery so early would prevent fishermen from other parts of the Atlantic region from having the same opportunities to harvest the hammerhead shark quota later in the year.

    On December 1, 2015 (80 FR 74999), we announced that the aggregated LCS and hammerhead shark fisheries management groups for the Atlantic region would open on January 1 with a quota of 168.9 metric tons (mt) dressed weight (dw) (372,552 lb dw) and 27.1 mt dw (59,736 lb dw), respectively. In that final rule, NMFS also announced that if it appeared that the quota is being harvested too quickly, precluding fishing opportunities throughout the entire region (e.g., if approximately 20 percent of the quota is caught at the beginning of the year), we would reduce the commercial retention limit to 3 LCS other than sandbar sharks. Dealer reports through March 18, 2016, indicate that 6.6 mt dw or 24 percent of the available quota for the hammerhead shark fishery has been harvested. If the average catch rate indicated by these reports continues, the landings could reach 80 percent of the quota by mid-May. Once the landings reach 80 percent of the quota, consistent with § 635.28(b)(3) (“linked quotas”), NMFS would close any species and/or management group of a linked group.

    Accordingly, as of 11:30 p.m. local time April 4, 2016, NMFS is reducing the retention limit for the commercial aggregated LCS and hammerhead shark management groups in the Atlantic region for directed shark limited access permit holders from 36 LCS other than sandbar sharks per vessel per trip to 3 LCS other than sandbar sharks per vessel per trip. If the vessel is properly permitted to operate as a charter vessel or headboat for HMS and is engaged in a for-hire trip, in which case the recreational retention limits for sharks and “no sale” provisions apply (§ 635.22(a) and (c)), or if the vessel possesses a valid shark research permit under § 635.32 and a NMFS-approved observer is onboard, then they are exempted from the retention limit adjustment.

    All other retention limits and shark fisheries in the Atlantic region remain unchanged. This retention limit will remain at 3 LCS other than sandbar sharks per vessel per trip for the rest of the 2016 fishing season, or until NMFS announces via a notice in the Federal Register another adjustment to the retention limit or a fishery closure, is warranted.

    The boundary between the Gulf of Mexico region and the Atlantic region is defined at § 635.27(b)(1) as a line beginning on the East Coast of Florida at the mainland at 25°20.4′ N. lat, proceeding due east. Any water and land to the north and east of that boundary is considered, for the purposes of quota monitoring and setting of quotas, to be within the Atlantic region.

    Classification

    Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, NOAA (AA), finds there is good cause to waive prior notice and an opportunity for public comment on this action, as notice and comment would be impracticable and contrary to the public interest. Providing prior notice and an opportunity for comment is impracticable because the catch and landings that need to be reduced are ongoing and must be reduced immediately to meet conservation and management objectives for the fishery. Continued fishing at those levels during the time that notice and comment takes place would result in the much of the quota being landed and could result in a very early closure of the fishery, contrary to the objectives of the existing conservation and management measures in place for those species. These objectives include ensuring that fishing opportunities are equitable and that bycatch and discards are minimized. Allowing fishing to continue at the existing rates even for a limited time is contrary to these objectives and would thus be impracticable. It would also be contrary to the public interest because, if the quota continues to be caught at the current levels the quota will not last throughout the remainder of the fishing season and a larger number of fishermen will essentially be denied the opportunity to land sharks from the quota. Furthermore, continued catch at the current rates, even for a limited period, could result in eventual quota overharvests, since it is still so early in the fishing year. The AA also finds good cause to waive the 30-day delay in effective date pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3) for the same reasons. This action is required under § 635.28(b)(2) and is exempt from review under Executive Order 12866. We have concluded that reducing the retention limit of the Atlantic aggregated LCS and hammerhead management groups for directed shark limited access permit holders will slow the fishery catch rates to allow the fishery throughout the Atlantic region to remain open for the rest of the year

    Authority:

    16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

    Dated: March 28, 2016. Emily H. Menashes, Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2016-07294 Filed 3-28-16; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    81 62 Thursday, March 31, 2016 Proposed Rules DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Internal Revenue Service 26 CFR Parts 41, 48, and 145 [REG-103380-05] RIN 1545-BE31 Excise Tax; Tractors, Trailers, Trucks, and Tires; Definition of Highway Vehicle AGENCY:

    Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury.

    ACTION:

    Notice of proposed rulemaking.

    SUMMARY:

    This document contains proposed regulations relating to the excise taxes imposed on the sale of highway tractors, trailers, trucks, and tires; the use of heavy vehicles on the highway; and the definition of highway vehicle related to these and other taxes. These proposed regulations reflect legislative changes and court decisions regarding these topics. These proposed regulations affect manufacturers, producers, importers, dealers, retailers, and users of certain highway tractors, trailers, trucks, and tires.

    DATES:

    Written and electronic comments and requests for a public hearing must be received by June 29, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Send submissions to: CC:PA:LPD:PR (REG-103380-05), Room 5203, Internal Revenue Service, P.O. Box 7604, Ben Franklin Station, Washington, DC 20044. Submissions may be hand-delivered to: CC:PA:LPD:PR Monday through Friday between the hours of 8 a.m. and 4 p.m. to: CC:PA:LPD:PR (REG-103380-05), Courier's Desk, Internal Revenue Service, 1111 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC, or sent electronically via the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov (IRS REG-1103380-05).

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Concerning the proposed regulations, Celia Gabrysh, at (202) 317-6855; concerning submissions of comments or a request for a hearing Regina Johnson at (202) 317-6901 (not toll-free numbers).

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Paperwork Reduction Act

    The collection of information contained in this notice of proposed rulemaking has been submitted to the Office of Management and Budget for review in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507(d)). Comments on the collection of information should be sent to the Office of Management and Budget, Attn: Desk Officer for the Department of the Treasury, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Washington, DC 20503, with copies to the Internal Revenue Service, Attn: IRS Reports Clearance Officer, SE:W:CAR:MP:T:T:SP, Washington, DC 20224. Comments on the collection of information should be received by May 31, 2016. Comments are specifically requested concerning:

    Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Internal Revenue Service, including whether the information will have practical utility;

    The accuracy of the estimated burden associated with the proposed collection of information;

    How the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected may be enhanced;

    How the burden of complying with the proposed collection of information may be minimized, including through the application of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and

    Estimates of capital or start-up costs and costs of operation, maintenance, and purchase of services to provide information.

    The collections of information in these proposed regulations are in § 48.4051-1(e)(8), describing the certificate the seller of an incomplete chassis cab must have to substantiate a tax-free sale; § 48.4051-1(f)(3)(ii), describing the record of gross vehicle weight (GVW) a seller of a truck, trailer, or tractor must maintain to substantiate taxable and nontaxable sales; § 48.4051-1(f)(4)(ii), describing the record of gross combination weight (GCW) a seller of a tractor must maintain to substantiate taxable and nontaxable sales; § 48.4052-1(c), describing the certificate a seller of a truck, trailer, or tractor for resale or long term leasing must have to substantiate a tax-free sale; § 48.4052-2(b), describing the certificate a seller of a trailer must have to avoid the four percent price markup for resale within six months; § 48.4073-1(c), describing the certificate a taxable tire manufacturer must have to make a tax-free sale to the Department of Defense or the Coast Guard; § 48.4221-7(c), describing the certificate a manufacturer must have to make a tax-free sale of a taxable tire when sold for use or in connection with the sale of another article manufactured by the purchaser and sold by the purchaser in a sale that meets the requirements of section 4221(e)(2); and § 48.4221-8(c), describing the certificate a taxable tire manufacturer must have to make a tax-free sale of taxable tires for intercity, local and school buses. This information is required to obtain a tax benefit and meet a taxpayer's recordkeeping obligations under section 6001. This information will be used by the IRS to substantiate claims for tax benefits. The likely recordkeepers are businesses.

    Estimated total annual reporting and/or recordkeeping burden: 750 hours.

    Estimated average annual burden hours per respondent and/or recordkeeper varies from .10 hour to .40 hours, depending on individual circumstances, with an estimated average of .25 hours.

    Estimated number respondents and/or recordkeepers: 3,000.

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

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

    Background

    This document contains proposed amendments to the Highway Use Tax Regulations (26 CFR part 41), the Manufacturers and Retailers Excise Tax Regulations (26 CFR part 48), and the Temporary Excise Tax Regulations Under The Highway Revenue Act of 1982 (Pub. L. 97-424) (26 CFR part 145).

    Tractors, Trailers, and Trucks

    Before April 1, 1983, section 4061 imposed a tax on the manufacturer's sale of certain highway-type tractors, chassis, and bodies for highway-type trailers and trucks, and related parts and accessories for these articles. The Highway Revenue Act of 1982, Public Law 97-424 (96 Stat. 2097) (the 1982 Act), changed this tax to a 12 percent tax under section 4051(a)(1) on the first retail sale of certain highway-type tractors and chassis and bodies for highway-type trailers and trucks. In addition, the 1982 Act replaced the tax on the manufacturer's sale of related parts and accessories with a tax on the installation of parts and accessories on a vehicle containing a taxable article within six months after the vehicle was first placed in service (unless the aggregate price of the parts and the cost of installation was less than $200). Section 4051(a)(5) provides that the sale of a truck, truck trailer, or semitrailer is to be considered as the sale of a chassis and of a body.

    Under the 1982 Act, a chassis or body suitable for use with (1) a truck with a GVW of 33,000 pounds or less or (2) a trailer with a GVW of 26,000 pounds or less is generally exempt from tax. All tractors of the kind chiefly used for highway transportation in connection with trailers and semitrailers were taxable under the 1982 Act regardless of their GVW.

    On April 4, 1983, temporary regulations were published in the Federal Register (48 FR 14361; TD 7882) to implement this new retail tax. Subsequent amendments to these regulations were published in the Federal Register on September 13, 1985 (50 FR 37350; TD 8050); May 12, 1988 (53 FR 16867; TD 8200); and July 1, 1998 (63 FR 35799; TD 8774). Collectively, these regulations are referred to in this preamble as “the temporary regulations.”

    One provision in the temporary regulations provided that tax was not imposed on tractors, chassis, and bodies when they were sold for resale or long-term lease if the buyer was registered by the IRS. Section 1434(b)(2) of the Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997, Public Law 105-34 (111 Stat. 788) (the 1997 Act), provided that IRS registration could not be a prerequisite for these tax-free sales. Subsequently, the temporary regulations were amended to reflect this statutory provision on March 31, 2000 (65 FR 17149; TD 8879). The 1997 Act also increased from $200 to $1,000 the aggregate dollar value of parts and accessories that may be installed on section 4051 articles without incurring a tax liability.

    Section 11112 of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA), Public Law 109-59 (119 Stat. 1144), added new section 4051(a)(4), that provides an exemption for small tractors from the tax on tractors.

    Tires

    Before January 1, 1984, section 4071 imposed a tax on the manufacturer's sale of highway and nonhighway tires, tubes, and tread rubber. Effective that date, the 1982 Act repealed most of these taxes but retained a tax on certain heavy highway-type tires based on the weight of the tires.

    Section 869 of the American Jobs Creation Act of 2004, Public Law 108-357 (118 Stat. 1418) (2004 Act), changed section 4071 from a tax based on the weight of a tire to a tax based on the maximum rated load capacity of a tire in excess of 3,500 pounds. A special rate of tax was provided for super single tires. A super single tire was defined as a single tire greater than 13 inches in cross-section width designed to replace two tires in a dual fitment.

    Section 1364(a) of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, Public Law 109-58 (119 Stat. 594), amended the definition of a super single tire to exclude any tire designed for steering.

    Definition of Highway Vehicle

    Generally, section 4051 imposes a tax only on components of highway vehicles. Similarly, the tax imposed by section 4481 on the use of certain heavy vehicles applies only to highway vehicles. Sections 6421 and 6427 allow a credit or payment related to the tax imposed on fuel (including gasoline or diesel fuel) in many cases if the fuel is used other than as a fuel in a highway vehicle.

    Existing regulations define highway vehicle with exceptions provided for (1) certain specially-designed mobile machinery for nontransportation functions, (2) certain vehicles specially designed for off-highway transportation, and (3) certain trailers and semitrailers specially designed to perform nontransportation functions off the public highway. Section 851 of the 2004 Act generally codified the regulatory exception for item (1) and codified, with substantial changes, the regulatory definitions of items (2) and (3).

    Reason for These Regulations

    Many of the existing regulations relating to tractors, trailers, trucks, and tires do not reflect current law. These proposed regulations reflect changes to the Internal Revenue Code since 1982, address several court decisions, remove numerous obsolete regulations, and also afford the public the opportunity to comment on those provisions of the temporary regulations that are restated and unchanged.

    Explanation of Provisions Definition of Highway Vehicle

    Proposed § 48.0-5 defines a highway vehicle as any self-propelled vehicle, or any truck trailer or semitrailer, designed to perform a function of transporting a load over public highways. This proposed section also provides exceptions for specified mobile machinery, off-highway vehicles, and non-transportation trailers and semitrailers for purposes of the tax on the sale of heavy vehicles (section 4051), the highway use tax (section 4481), and the credits and payments allowed for certain nontaxable uses (sections 6421 and 6427). The exception for mobile machinery restates section 4053(8) (as added by the 2004 Act) and the exceptions for off-highway vehicles and non-transportation trailers and semitrailers restate section 7701(a)(48)(A) and (B) (as added by the 2004 Act). Also, Notice 2005-4, 2005-1 C.B. 289, announced that existing regulations regarding certain vehicles specially designed for off-highway transportation would be revised so that they will not apply to calendar quarters beginning after October 22, 2004. These proposed regulations make that change.

    The proposed regulations provide two examples that illustrate the definition of highway vehicle. The first example concerns the off-highway vehicle exception and characterizes an asphalt semitrailer similar to the trailers and semitrailers described in Flow Boy, Inc. v. United States, 83-1 U.S.T.C. ¶16,395, aff'd, 54 A.F.T.R.2d 84-6545, 84-1 U.S.T.C. ¶16,418 (10th Cir. 1984), and Gateway Equip. Corp. v. United States, 247 F. Supp. 2d 299 (W.D.N.Y. 2003), as a highway vehicle. Relying on the then-existing regulations, the Flow Boy and Gateway courts held that the asphalt trailers and semitrailers in question were not highway vehicles. In 2004, Congress added section 7701(a)(48) to the Code, which provides a statutory definition of the term “off-highway vehicles.” Under section 7701(a)(48)(A), a vehicle is not treated as a highway vehicle if such vehicle is specially designed for the primary function of transporting a particular type of load over the public highway and because of this special design, such vehicle's capability to transport a load over the public highway is substantially limited or impaired. The enactment of section 7701(a)(48) effectively disqualified an asphalt semitrailer similar to the ones described in Flow Boy and Gateway from the off-highway exception because its special design does not substantially limit or impair its capability to transport a load over a public highway. The example in the proposed regulations illustrates the analysis of whether a vehicle is a highway vehicle under section 7701(a)(48).

    The second example concerns the mobile machinery exception and reflects the decision in Florida Power & Light Co. v. United States, 375 F.3d 1119 (Fed. Cir. 2004), which holds that a vehicle that can perform more than one transportation function is not specially designed to serve “only” as a mobile carriage and mount. See also Schlumberger Technology Corp. and Subsidiaries v. United States, 55 Fed. Cl. 203 (2003).

    Retail Tax on Tractors, Trailers, and Trucks

    The proposed regulations reorganize and partially restate the temporary regulations that address the retail tax on tractors, trailers, and trucks. Proposed § 48.4051-1(e) revises the definitions of tractor and truck and provides a model certificate for a seller to establish the tax status of an incomplete chassis cab. If the buyer of an incomplete chassis cab certifies to the seller that the buyer will not complete the incomplete chassis cab as a taxable tractor, the seller may treat the sale of the incomplete chassis cab as the sale of a truck or small tractor. Consequently, no tax is imposed on the sale of an incomplete chassis cab when accompanied by a qualifying certificate. In the absence of this certificate, the seller must treat the sale of an incomplete chassis cab as the sale of a taxable tractor. This rule generally restates § 145.4051-1(e)(1) and is consistent with the interpretation of the existing rule in Freightliner of Grand Rapids, Inc. v. United States, 351 F. Supp. 2d 718, 723 (2004).

    Consistent with the temporary regulations, the proposed regulations define the terms tractor and truck by reference to the primary design of a vehicle. For purposes of determining whether a vehicle is “primarily designed” as a tractor or a truck, proposed § 48.4051-1(g) also includes an example and reflects Rev. Rul. 2004-80 (2004-2 CB 164), which applied the primarily designed test to determine whether a vehicle was a tractor or a truck.

    The definition of truck trailer in proposed § 48.4051-1(e)(4)(ii) would include any manufactured home on a frame that has axles and wheels. This definition classifies a manufactured home of the type at issue in Horton Homes, Inc. v. United States, 357 F.3d 1209 (11th Cir. 2004), as a truck trailer because all of its load and weight is carried on its own chassis and it is designed to be towed. A consequence of this characterization is that the vehicle that tows this manufactured home is a tractor as defined in section 4051(a)(1)(E). Thus, under the proposed regulations, toters, as the vehicles that tow these manufactured homes are known in the industry, would be taxable as tractors. While this result is different from the decision in Horton Homes, which held that toters are not taxable tractors, that decision expressly noted that “Congress did not define `trailers or semitrailers,' [in the statute] nor has the Treasury promulgated regulations defining those terms” and thus applied a dictionary definition of the term “trailer” to determine whether toters are taxable. Id. at 1212 n.6. These proposed regulations fill in the regulatory gap faced by the Eleventh Circuit by providing a definition of “trailer” that will clarify the determination of whether a vehicle is a taxable tractor.

    Proposed § 48.4051-1(f) provides exclusions from the tax imposed by section 4051 for certain trucks and trailers that are below a certain GVW and tractors that are below a certain GVW and a certain GCW. Proposed § 48.4051-1(f) defines GVW and GCW and also provides the related recordkeeping requirements to support these exclusions.

    Proposed § 48.4051-2 modifies the temporary regulations to reflect the statutory increase in the aggregate dollar value of parts and accessories that may be installed on a taxable article without incurring a tax liability.

    Proposed § 48.4052-1 supplements the existing definition of taxable sale to include the resale of an unused article that had been previously sold tax-free.

    Chassis Characterization

    The proposed regulations provide that if a chassis is a component part of a highway vehicle, the taxability of the chassis is determined independent of, and without regard to, the body that is installed on the chassis. Likewise, if a body is a component part of a highway vehicle, the taxability of the body is determined independent of, and without regard to, the chassis on which the body is installed. This proposed rule is contrary to the result in Rev. Rul. 69-205 (1969-1 CB 277), which holds that an otherwise taxable chassis is not taxable if a motorhome body is installed on the chassis. This revenue ruling predates and is inconsistent with the language in section 4051(a)(1), which lists a chassis and a body as separate taxable articles. This revenue ruling will be obsoleted after publication of the final regulations.

    Taxable Tires

    Effective January 1, 2005, section 4071 imposes a tax on taxable tires for each ten pounds of the maximum rated load capacity that exceeds 3,500 pounds. The proposed regulations reflect this change and remove references in existing regulations to tread rubber, inner tubes, and the determination of a tire's weight. The proposed regulations also define rated load capacity and super single tire, and address multiple load ratings and the consequences of tampering with a tire's maximum load rating. The proposed regulations also provide rules under section 4073 for making tax-free sales of tires for the exclusive use of the Department of Defense and the Coast Guard. In addition, the proposed regulations provide model certificates to support these sales, as well as sales of tires by manufacturers for use on or in connection with the sale of another article manufactured by the purchaser and sold by the purchaser in a sale that meets the requirements of section 4221(e)(2) and sales of taxable tires to be used on intercity, local, and school buses (section 4221(e)(3)).

    Proposed Applicability Date

    The regulations generally are proposed to apply on and after the date of publication of a Treasury decision adopting these rules as final regulations in the Federal Register.

    Availability of IRS Documents

    The IRS revenue rulings and the notice cited in this preamble are published in the Internal Revenue Cumulative Bulletin and are available at www.irs.gov.

    Special Analyses

    Certain IRS regulations, including this one, are exempt from the requirements of Executive Order 12866, as supplemented and reaffirmed by Executive Order 13563. Therefore, a regulatory flexibility assessment is not required. It also has been determined that section 553(b) of the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. chapter 5) does not apply to these regulations. It is hereby certified that the collection of information in these regulations will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This certification is based on the fact that the time required to secure and maintain the required information is minimal (estimated at an average of 15 minutes) and taxpayers would ordinarily already collect and retain much of this information for other business purposes such as accounting, insurance, and marketing. Also, truck manufacturers presently provide the GVW and gross combined weight to truck dealers for purposes unrelated to federal excise tax. Therefore, a Regulatory Flexibility Analysis under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. chapter 6) is not required. Pursuant to section 7805(f) of the Internal Revenue Code, this notice of proposed rulemaking has been submitted to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration for comment on its impact on small business.

    Comments and Requests for a Public Hearing

    Before these proposed regulations are adopted as final regulations, consideration will be given to any comments that are submitted timely to the IRS as prescribed in this preamble under the ADDRESSES heading. The Treasury Department and the IRS request comments on all aspects of the proposed regulations. All comments will be available at www.regulations.gov or upon request. A public hearing may be scheduled if requested in writing by any person that timely submits written comments. If a public hearing is scheduled, notice of the date, time, and place for the hearing will be published in the Federal Register.

    Drafting Information

    The principal author of these regulations is Celia Gabrysh, Office of Associate Chief Counsel (Passthroughs and Special Industries). However, other personnel from the IRS and the Treasury Department participated in their development.

    List of Subjects 26 CFR Part 41

    Excise taxes, Motor vehicles, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    26 CFR Parts 48 and 145

    Excise taxes, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Proposed Amendments to the Regulations

    Accordingly, 26 CFR parts 41, 48, and 145 are proposed to be amended as follows:

    PART 41—EXCISE TAX ON USE OF CERTAIN HIGHWAY MOTOR VEHICLES Paragraph 1. The authority citation for part 41 continues to read in part as follows: Authority:

    26 U.S.C. 7805 * * *

    § 41.4482(a)-1 [Amended]
    Par. 2. Section 41.4482(a)-1(a)(2) is amended by removing the language “§ 48.4061(a)-1(d)” and adding “§ 48.0-5” in its place. PART 48—MANUFACTURERS AND RETAILERS EXCISE TAXES Par. 3. The authority citation for part 48 is amended by adding entries in numerical order to read in part as follows: Authority:

    26 U.S.C. 7805 * * *

    Section 48.4051-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 4051(a).

    Section 48.4051-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 4051(b).

    Section 48.4052-2 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 4052(b).

    Section 48.4071-3 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 4071(b).

    § 48.0-1 [Amended]
    Par. 4. Section 48.0-1, fourth sentence, is amended by removing the language “highway-type tires” and adding “taxable tires” in its place.
    § 48.0-2 [Amended]
    Par. 5. In § 48.0-2, paragraph (b)(5), first sentence, is amended by removing the language “In the case of a lease,” and adding “Except as provided in § 48.4052-1(e), in the case of a lease,” in its place. Par. 6. Section 48.0-4 is added to subpart A to read as follows:
    § 48.0-4 Highway vehicle and mobile machinery.

    (a) Overview. (1) The definitions of highway vehicle and mobile machinery in this section apply for purposes of this part and part 41 of this chapter. See § 41.4482(a)-1(a)(2) of this chapter.

    (2) The taxes imposed by sections 4051 and 4481 do not apply to mobile machinery (as defined in paragraph (b)(3)(iii) of this section), and the tax imposed by section 4071 does not apply to tires of a type used exclusively on such mobile machinery. In addition, for purposes of determining whether use of a vehicle qualifies as off-highway business use under section 6421(e)(2)(C) (relating to uses in mobile machinery), mobile machinery (as defined in this section) satisfies the design-based test of section 6421(e)(2)(C)(iii). To qualify as off-highway business use, however, the use of the vehicle must also satisfy the use-based test of section 6421(e)(2)(C)(iv).

    (b) Highway vehicle—(1) In general. Except as otherwise provided in paragraph (b)(3) of this section, highway vehicle means any self-propelled vehicle, or any truck trailer or semitrailer, designed to perform a function of transporting a load over public highways.

    (2) Explanation. (i) A vehicle consists of a chassis, or a chassis and a body if the vehicle has a body, but does not include the vehicle's load.

    (ii) Except as otherwise provided in paragraph (b)(3) of this section, in determining whether a vehicle is a highway vehicle, it is immaterial whether—

    (A) The vehicle can perform functions other than transporting a load over the public highways;

    (B) The vehicle is designed to perform a highway transportation function for only a particular kind of load, such as passengers, furnishings and personal effects (as in a house, office, or utility trailer), a special type of cargo, goods, supplies, or materials, or machinery or equipment specially designed to perform some off-highway task unrelated to highway transportation; and

    (C) In the case of a vehicle specially designed to transport machinery or equipment, such machinery or equipment is permanently mounted on the vehicle.

    (iii) Examples of vehicles that are designed to perform a function of transporting a load over the public highways are passenger automobiles, motorcycles, buses, motor homes, and highway-type trucks, truck tractors, trailers, and semitrailers.

    (iv) Examples of vehicles that are not designed to perform a function of transporting a load over the public highways are farm tractors, bulldozers, road graders, and forklifts.

    (v) The term public highway includes any road (whether a federal highway, state highway, city street, or otherwise) in the United States that is not a private roadway.

    (vi) The term transport includes tow.

    (3) Exceptions—(i) Certain vehicles specially designed for off-highway transportation—(A) In general. The term highway vehicle does not include a vehicle if the vehicle is specially designed for the primary function of transporting a particular type of load other than over a public highway and because of this special design such vehicle's capability to transport a load over a public highway is substantially limited or impaired.

    (B) Determination of vehicle's design. For purposes of paragraph (c)(3)(i)(A) of this section, a vehicle's design is determined solely on the basis of its physical characteristics.

    (C) Determination of substantial limitation or impairment. For purposes of paragraph (c)(3)(i)(A) of this section, in determining whether substantial limitation or impairment exists, account may be taken of factors such as the size of the vehicle, whether the vehicle is subject to the licensing, safety, and other requirements applicable to highway vehicles, and whether the vehicle can transport a load at a sustained speed of at least 25 miles per hour. It is immaterial that a vehicle can transport a greater load off the public highway than the vehicle is permitted to transport over the public highway.

    (ii) Nontransportation truck trailers and semitrailers. The term highway vehicle does not include a truck trailer or semitrailer if it is specially designed to function only as an enclosed stationary shelter for the carrying on of an off-highway function at an off-highway site.

    (iii) Mobile machinery. The term highway vehicle does not include any vehicle that consists of a chassis—

    (A) To which there has been permanently mounted (by welding, bolting, riveting, or other means) machinery or equipment to perform a construction, manufacturing, processing, farming, mining, drilling, timbering, or similar operation if the operation of the machinery or equipment is unrelated to transportation on or off the public highways;

    (B) That has been specially designed to serve only as a mobile carriage and mount (and a power source, where applicable) for the particular machinery or equipment involved, whether or not such machinery or equipment is in operation; and

    (C) That, by reason of such special design, could not, without substantial structural modification, be used as a component of a vehicle designed to perform a function of transporting any load other than that particular machinery or equipment or similar machinery or equipment requiring such a specially designed chassis.

    (c) Examples. The following examples illustrate the rules of this section:

    Example 1; Off-highway transportation.

    (1) Facts. (i) A tri-axle semitrailer that is used in highway construction, maintenance, and repair work also hauls highway construction and repair materials to job sites. The semitrailer's floor is equipped with a continuous rubber belt attached to a steel slatted roller chain that carries payload to the rear tailgate at a controllable discharge rate. The semitrailer has insulated double sidewalls and a baffled hopper. This equipment enables the semitrailer to transport and unload hot-mix asphalt, asphalt-related materials, and low-slump concrete for highway construction and repair. When used as an asphalt transporter, the semitrailer unloads the asphalt at the job site through the rear tailgate into a trailing asphalt paving machine. The semitrailer is designed to perform a function of transporting a load over public highways.

    (ii) A highway tractor tows the semitrailer at normal highway speeds. The semitrailer complies with all federal and state regulations governing highway use, may be legally operated on the public highways when loaded within legal weight limits (80,000 pounds), and does not exceed state maximum highway length, width, or height limitations. Loaded to its capacity with asphalt, the combined weight of the semitrailer, the asphalt, and the tractor exceeds 100,000 pounds. Special state permits may be purchased to operate the tractor/semitrailer combination above the legal weight limit on public highways.

    (2) Analysis. For purposes of the exception provided by paragraph (b)(3)(i) of this section for vehicles specially designed for off-highway transportation, paragraph (b)(3)(i)(B) of this section provides that a vehicle's design is determined solely on the basis of its physical characteristics. The physical characteristics of this semitrailer include insulated double sidewalls, a baffled hopper, and an unloading mechanism on the floor of the trailer that moves hot road building materials to the back of the trailer and delivers these materials into a paving machine at controlled rates. Examples of the type of machinery or equipment that contribute to the highway transportation function are unloading equipment and machinery that contribute to the preservation of the cargo. The semitrailer's conveyor discharge system and insulated walls are designed to contribute to the highway transportation functions of unloading (discharge conveyor system) and preserving (insulated sidewalls) the load. This equipment is not designed for the job-site function of applying asphalt or low-slump concrete.

    (3) Conclusion. The semitrailer is not a vehicle described in paragraph (b)(3)(i)(A) of this section. The semitrailer's physical characteristics, such as sidewalls, a hopper, and the unloading mechanism, demonstrate that this semitrailer is capable of transporting asphalt or low-slump concrete over a public highway without substantial limitation or impairment.

    Example 2; Mobile machinery.

    (1) Facts. A chassis manufacturer built a truck chassis with a reinforced chassis frame, a heavy-duty engine, and a structure to accommodate the manufacturer's mounting of drilling equipment on the chassis and the use of that drilling equipment off the highways. The manufacturer also bolted a pintle-type trailer hitch to a beam that is welded to, and operates as a rear cross member of, the chassis frame rails. The truck is designed to perform a function of transporting a load over public highways.

    (2) Analysis. This chassis can perform two functions. First, the chassis serves as a mobile carriage and mount for the drilling equipment installed on its bed. Second, the chassis can tow a trailer because it has a pintle-type trailer hitch. These dual capabilities demonstrate that the chassis was not specially designed to serve only as a mobile carriage and mount for its machinery.

    (3) Conclusion. The chassis fails to meet the test in paragraph (c)(3)(iii) of this section for treatment as mobile machinery because the chassis is not specially designed to serve only as a mobile carriage and mount for the drilling equipment. A similar conclusion would apply if the manufacturer reinforced the chassis to make the chassis capable of towing a trailer, but the manufacturer did not install the pintle hook.

    (d) Effective/applicability date. This section applies on and after the date of publication of these regulations in the Federal Register as final regulations.

    Par. 7. Section 48.4041-8 is amended as follows: 1. Paragraph (b)(2)(ii), first sentence, is amended by removing the language “A self-propelled” and adding “Before January 1, 2005, a self-propelled” in its place. 2. Paragraph (b)(2)(iv) is added.

    The addition reads as follows:

    § 48.4041-8 Definitions.

    (b) * * *

    (2) * * *

    (iv) Off-highway transportation vehicles after December 31, 2004. For a description of certain vehicles that are not treated as highway vehicles after December 31, 2004, see § 48.0-5(b)(3).

    Par. 8. The heading for subpart H is revised to read as follows: Subpart H—Motor Vehicles, Tires, and Taxable Fuel Par. 9. New §§ 48.4051-0, 48.4051-1, and 48.4051-2 are added to subpart H to read as follows:
    § 48.4051-0 Overview; Heavy trucks, tractors, and trailers sold at retail.

    Sections 48.4051-1, 48.4051-2, and 48.4052-1 provide guidance under sections 4051 and 4052 relating to the tax on the first retail sale of certain truck and trailer chassis and bodies and certain tractors. This guidance includes rules relating to the imposition of tax, liability for tax, exclusions, and definitions. For rules under sections 4051 and 4052 on the treatment of leases, uses treated as sales, and the determination of price for which an article is sold, see § 145.4052-1 of this chapter.

    § 48.4051-1 Imposition of tax; Heavy trucks, tractors, and trailers sold at retail.

    (a) Imposition of tax. Section 4051 imposes a tax on the first retail sale of the following articles (including in each case parts or accessories sold on or in connection with the article or with the sale of the article):

    (1) Automobile truck chassis and bodies.

    (2) Truck trailer and semitrailer chassis and bodies.

    (3) Tractors of the kind chiefly used for highway transportation in combination with a truck trailer or semitrailer.

    (b) Tax base and rate of tax. The tax is the applicable percentage of the price for which the article is sold. The applicable percentage is prescribed in section 4051(a)(1). For rules for the determination of price, see paragraph (d)(4) of this section and § 145.4052-1(d) of this chapter.

    (c) Liability for tax—(1) In general. Except as provided in paragraph (c)(2) of this section, the person that makes the first retail sale (as defined in § 48.4052-1(a)) of a taxable article listed in paragraph (a) of this section is liable for the tax imposed by section 4051. This person is referred to as the retailer in this section and § 48.4051-2.

    (2) Exceptions; cross references. For cases in which a person other than the retailer is liable for the tax imposed under paragraph (a) of this section, see §§ 48.4051-1(d)(2)(ii) and (iii) (relating to chassis and bodies sold for use as a component part of a highway vehicle) and § 48.4051-1(e)(6)(ii) (relating to certain chassis completed as tractors).

    (d) Special rules—(1) Separate taxation of chassis and body. If a chassis is a component part of a highway vehicle, the taxability of the chassis is determined independently of, and without regard to, the body that is installed on the chassis. If a body is a component part of a highway vehicle, the taxability of the body is determined independently of, and without regard to, the chassis on which the body is installed.

    (2) Chassis and bodies sold for use as a component part of a highway vehicle—(i) In general. A chassis or body listed in paragraph (a) of this section is taxable under section 4051 only if such chassis or body is sold for use as a component part of a highway vehicle that is an automobile truck, truck trailer or semitrailer, or a tractor of the kind chiefly used for highway transportation in combination with a trailer or semitrailer. A chassis or body that is not listed in paragraph (a) of this section (for example, a chassis or body of a passenger automobile) is not taxable under section 4051 even though such chassis or body is used as a component part of a highway vehicle.

    (ii) Retailer; conditions for avoidance of liability. The retailer is not liable for tax on a chassis or body if, at the time of the first retail sale, the retailer—

    (A) Has obtained from the buyer a certificate described in paragraph (d)(2)(iv) of this section stating, among other things, that the buyer will use the chassis or body as a component part of a vehicle that is not a highway vehicle;

    (B) Has no reason to believe that any information in the certificate is false; and

    (C) Has not received a notification from the IRS under paragraph (d)(2)(iv) of this section with respect to the buyer or the type of chassis or body.

    (iii) Liability of buyer. If a buyer that provides a certificate described in paragraph (d)(2)(iv) of this section uses the chassis or body to which the certificate relates as a component part of a highway vehicle, the buyer is liable for the tax imposed on the first retail sale of such chassis or body.

    (iv) Form of certificate. The certificate described in this paragraph (d)(2)(iv) consists of a statement that is signed under penalties of perjury by a person with authority to bind the buyer, is in substantially the same form as the model certificate in paragraph (d)(2)(v) of this section, and includes all the information necessary to complete the model certificate. The IRS may withdraw the right of a buyer to provide a certificate under this section if the buyer uses the chassis or body to which a certificate relates other than as stated in the certificate. The IRS may notify any retailer that the buyer's right to provide a certificate has been withdrawn. The IRS may also notify a retailer that sales of a specified type or types of chassis or bodies may not be made tax-free under this paragraph (d)(2) until further notification. The certificate may be included as part of any business records used to document a sale.

    (v) Model Certificate.

    Certificate (To support the tax-free sale of a chassis or body that is to be used as a component part of a non-highway vehicle)

    The undersigned buyer of a chassis or body listed in section 4051 (“Buyer”) hereby certifies the following under penalties of perjury:

    1. Seller's name, address, and employer identification number 2. Buyer's name, address, and employer identification number 3.

     Date and location of sale to Buyer

    4. The article(s) listed below will not be used as a component part of a highway vehicle. If the article is a chassis, Buyer has listed the chassis Vehicle Identification Number. If the article is a body, Buyer has listed the body's identification number. 5. Buyer understands that it must be prepared to establish, by evidence satisfactory to an examining agent, how Buyer used the article. 6. Buyer has not been notified by the Internal Revenue Service that its right to provide a certificate has been withdrawn. 7. Buyer understands that if it uses a chassis or body listed in this certificate as a component part of a highway vehicle, Buyer is liable for the tax imposed by section 4051 of the Internal Revenue Code. 8. Buyer understands that Buyer may be liable for the section 6701 penalty (relating to aiding and abetting an understatement of tax liability) if this is an erroneous certification. 9. Buyer understands that the fraudulent use of this certificate may subject Buyer and all parties making any fraudulent use of this statement to a fine or imprisonment, or both, together with the costs of prosecution. Printed or typed name of person signing this certificate Title of person signing Signature and date signed

    (3) Sale of a completed unit. A sale of an automobile truck, truck trailer, or semitrailer is considered a sale of a chassis and of a body listed in paragraph (a) of this section.

    (4) Equipment installed on chassis or bodies. For purposes of section 4051, the sale price of a chassis or body includes any amount paid for equipment or machinery that is installed on and is an integral part of the chassis or body. Equipment or machinery is an integral part of a chassis or body if the equipment or machinery contributes to the highway transportation function of the chassis or body. Examples of machinery or equipment that contributes to the highway transportation function of a chassis or body are loading and unloading equipment; towing winches; and all other machinery or equipment that contributes to the maintenance or safety of the vehicle, the preservation of cargo (other than refrigeration units), or the comfort or convenience of the driver or passengers.

    (5) Vehicle use. In determining whether a tractor, a truck body or chassis, or a truck trailer or semitrailer chassis or body is subject to the tax imposed by section 4051, the use (whether commercial, personal, recreational, or otherwise) of an article is immaterial.

    (e) Explanation of terms and exclusions; tractors, trucks, trailers—(1) Tractor. The term tractor means a highway vehicle primarily designed to tow a vehicle, such as a truck trailer or semitrailer. A vehicle equipped with air brakes and/or a towing package will be presumed to be a tractor unless it is established, based on all the vehicle's characteristics, that the vehicle is not primarily designed to tow a vehicle. However, a vehicle that is not equipped with air brakes and/or a towing package is a tractor if the vehicle is primarily designed to tow a vehicle.

    (2) Truck. The term truck means a highway vehicle primarily designed to transport its load on the same chassis as the engine even if it is also equipped to tow a vehicle, such as a trailer or semitrailer.

    (3) Primarily designed. The term primarily means principally or of first importance. Primarily does not mean exclusively. The function for which a vehicle is primarily designed is evidenced by physical characteristics such as the vehicle's capacity to tow a vehicle, carry cargo, and operate (including brake) safely when towing or carrying cargo. Towing capacity depends on the vehicle's gross vehicle weight (GVW) rating and gross combination weight (GCW) rating and whether the vehicle is configured to tow a trailer or semitrailer. Cargo carrying capacity depends on the vehicle's GVW rating and the configuration of the vehicle's bed or platform. If a vehicle is capable of more than one function, such as towing a vehicle and carrying cargo on the same chassis as the engine, the physical characteristics of the vehicle determine the purpose for which the vehicle is primarily designed. A vehicle that can both carry cargo on its chassis and tow a trailer is either a truck or tractor depending on which function is of greater importance.

    (4) Trailer—(i) In general. The term trailer means a non-self-propelled vehicle hauled, towed, or drawn by a separate truck or tractor. A trailer consists of a chassis and a body. A chassis is the frame that supports the trailer's suspension, axles, wheels, tires, and brakes. A body is the structure usually installed on the trailer chassis to accommodate the intended load of the trailer. In some instances, the body may itself constitute all or part of the intended load.

    (ii) Truck trailer. The term truck trailer means a trailer that carries all of its weight and the weight of its load on its own chassis.

    (iii) Semitrailer. The term semitrailer means a trailer, the front end of which is designed to be attached to, and rest upon, the vehicle that tows it. A portion of the semitrailer's weight and load also rests upon the towing vehicle.

    (5) Incomplete chassis cab; classification as a truck. An incomplete chassis cab is classified as a truck at the time of its sale if, at such time—

    (i) The incomplete chassis cab is not equipped with any of the features listed in paragraph (e)(7) of this section; and

    (ii) The seller—

    (A) Has obtained from the buyer a certificate described in paragraph (e)(8) of this section stating, among other things, that the buyer will equip the incomplete chassis cab as a truck;

    (B) Has no reason to believe that any information in the certificate is false; and

    (C) Has not received a notification under paragraph (e)(8) of this section with respect to the buyer.

    (6) Incomplete chassis cab; classification as a tractor—(i) In general. An incomplete chassis cab is classified as a tractor at the time of its sale if, at such time—

    (A) The incomplete chassis cab is equipped with any of the features listed in paragraph (e)(7) of this section; or

    (B) The seller fails to satisfy one or more of the conditions set forth in paragraph (e)(5)(ii) of this section.

    (ii) Completion as a tractor. If no tax is imposed under section 4051(a)(1) on the sale of an incomplete chassis cab classified as a truck under paragraph (e)(5) of this section and the purchaser completes the incomplete chassis cab as a taxable tractor, the purchaser is liable for tax under section 4051(a)(1) on the purchaser's sale or use of the taxable tractor.

    (7) Incomplete chassis cab; features. The features referred to in paragraphs (e)(5)(i) and (e)(6)(i)(A) of this section are the following:

    (i) A device for supplying air or hydraulic pressure or electric or other power from the incomplete chassis cab to the brake system of a towed vehicle.

    (ii) A mechanism for protecting the incomplete chassis cab brake system from the effects of a loss of pressure in the brake system of a towed vehicle.

    (iii) A control linking the brake system of the incomplete chassis cab to the brake system of a towed vehicle.

    (iv) A control in the incomplete chassis cab for operating a towed vehicle's brakes independently of the incomplete chassis cab's brakes.

    (v) Any other equipment designed to establish or enhance the incomplete chassis cab's use as a tractor.

    (8) Incomplete chassis cab; certificate—(i) In general. The certificate described in this paragraph (e)(8) consists of a statement that is signed under penalties of perjury by a person with authority to bind the buyer, is in substantially the same form as the model certificate in paragraph (e)(8(ii) of this section, and includes all the information necessary to complete the model certificate. The IRS may withdraw the right of a buyer of vehicles to provide a certificate under this section if the buyer uses the vehicles to which a certificate relates other than as stated in the certificate. The IRS may notify any seller that the buyer's right to provide a certificate has been withdrawn. The certificate may be included as part of any business records normally used to document a sale.

    (ii) Model Certificate.

    Certificate (To support the completion of an incomplete chassis cab as a truck)

    The undersigned buyer of articles listed in section 4051 (“Buyer”) hereby certifies the following under penalties of perjury:

    1. Seller's name, address, and employer identification number 2. Buyer's name, address, and employer identification number 3.

      Date and location of sale to Buyer

    4. Buyer certifies that Buyer will complete these incomplete chassis cabs listed below as trucks: VIN: VIN: VIN: VIN: VIN: VIN: VIN: VIN: 5. Buyer has not been notified by the Internal Revenue Service that its right to provide a certificate has been withdrawn. 6. Buyer understands that if Buyer completes an incomplete chassis cab listed in this certificate as a taxable tractor described in section 4051(a)(1)(E) and then uses it or sells it, Buyer may be liable for the tax imposed by section 4051 on this sale or use. See 26 CFR 48.4051-1(e)(6)(ii) and 145.4052-1(c). 7. Buyer understands that Buyer may be liable for the section 6701 penalty (relating to aiding and abetting an understatement of tax liability) if this is an erroneous certification. 8. Buyer understands that the fraudulent use of this certificate may subject Buyer and all parties making any fraudulent use of this statement to a fine or imprisonment, or both, together with the costs of prosecution. Printed or typed name of person signing this certificate Title of person signing Signature and date signed

    (f) Exclusions—(1) In general. Tax is not imposed by section 4051 on the first retail sale of the following articles:

    (i) Automobile truck chassis or bodies that have practical and commercial fitness for use with a vehicle that has a GVW of 33,000 pounds or less.

    (ii) Truck trailer and semitrailer chassis or bodies that have practical and commercial fitness for use with a truck trailer or semitrailer that has a GVW of 26,000 pounds or less.

    (iii) Tractors that have—

    (A) A GVW of 19,500 pounds or less; and

    (B) A GCW of 33,000 pounds or less.

    (2) Practical and commercial fitness. A chassis or body possesses practical fitness for use with a vehicle if it performs its intended function up to a generally acceptable standard of efficiency with the vehicle, and a chassis or body possesses commercial fitness for use with a vehicle if it is generally available for use with the vehicle at a price that is reasonably competitive with other articles that may be used for the same purpose. A truck chassis that has practical and commercial fitness for use with a vehicle having a GVW of 33,000 pounds or less is not subject to the tax imposed by section 4051 regardless of the body actually mounted on the chassis. A truck trailer or semitrailer chassis that has practical and commercial fitness for use with a vehicle having a GVW of 26,000 pounds or less is not subject to tax regardless of the body actually mounted on the chassis. A taxable chassis or body, as the case may be, remains subject to tax—

    (i) Even if an exempt body is mounted on a taxable chassis or a taxable body is mounted on an exempt chassis; and

    (ii) The resulting vehicle is a highway vehicle.

    (3) Gross vehicle weight. (i) The term gross vehicle weight means the maximum total weight of a loaded vehicle. Except as otherwise provided in this paragraph (f)(3), the maximum total weight is the GVW rating of the article as specified by the manufacturer on the Manufacturer's Statement of Origin (or comparable document) or by the retailer of the completed article on a comparable document. In determining the GVW, the following rules apply:

    (A) The GVW rating must take into account, among other things, the strength of the chassis frame, the axle capacity and placement, and, if an article is specially equipped to the buyer's specifications, those specifications.

    (B) The manufacturer or retailer of an article listed in paragraph (a) of this section must specify the article's GVW rating at the time the article requires no additional manufacture other than—

    (1) The addition of readily attachable articles, such as tire or rim assemblies or minor accessories;

    (2) The performance of minor finishing operations, such as painting; or

    (3) In the case of a chassis, the addition of a body.

    (C) If the IRS finds that a GVW rating by the manufacturer or a later seller is unreasonable in light of the facts and circumstances in a particular case, that GVW rating will not be used for purposes of section 4051.

    (D) The IRS may exclude from a GVW rating any readily attachable parts to the extent the IRS finds that the use of such parts in computing the GVW rating results in an inaccurate GVW rating.

    (E) If the following or similar ratings are inconsistent, the highest of these ratings is the GVW rating:

    (1) The rating indicated in a label or identifying device affixed to an article.

    (2) The rating set forth in sales invoice or warranty agreement.

    (3) The advertised rating for that article (or identical articles).

    (ii) The retailer must keep a record of the GVW rating for each chassis, body, or vehicle it sells. For this purpose, a record of the serial number of each such article is treated as a record of the GVW rating of the article if such rating is indicated by the serial number. The GVW rating must be retained as part of the retailer's records for each of its chassis, bodies, or vehicles.

    (4) Gross combination weight. (i) The term gross combination weight means the GVW of the tractor plus the GVW of any trailer or semitrailer that the tractor may safely tow. Unless a particular rating is unreasonable in light of the facts and circumstances in a particular case, the IRS will consider the GCW of a tractor to be the highest GCW rating specified on any of the following documents:

    (A) The Manufacturer's Statement of Origin (or comparable document) or a comparable document of a seller of the completed tractor.

    (B) A label or identifying device affixed to the completed tractor by the manufacturer or the seller.

    (C) A sales invoice or warranty agreement.

    (D) An advertisement for the tractor (or identical tractors).

    (ii) The retailer must keep a record of the GCW rating for each tractor it sells. The GCW rating must be retained as part of the retailer's records for each of its tractors.

    (g) Example. The following example illustrates the application of paragraphs (e)(1), (2), (3), and (4) of this section:

    Example.

    (1) Facts. (i) A vehicle has the capacity to tow truck trailers and semitrailers (trailers) that have a GVW of 20,000 pounds. The vehicle has a standard chassis cab (4-door with crew cab), accommodating five passengers, and is outfitted with certain luxury features. The cab has an electric trailer brake control that connects to the brakes of a towed trailer and to a hook up for trailer lights. The vehicle has two storage boxes behind the cab that can accommodate incidental items such as small tools and vehicle repair equipment.

    (ii) The vehicle has a GVW rating of 23,000 pounds and a GCW rating of 43,000 pounds. The vehicle is equipped with hydraulic disc brakes with a four wheel automatic braking system, a 300 horsepower engine, and a six-speed automatic transmission. The front axle of the vehicle has an 8,000 pound rating and the rear axle has a 15,000 pound rating.

    (iii) The vehicle has three types of hitching devices: A removable ball gooseneck hitch, a fifth wheel hitch, and a heavy duty trailer receiver hitch. The vehicle's platform, which is approximately 139 inches long, is designed with a rectangular well to accommodate the gooseneck and fifth wheel hitches (bed hitches). This platform slopes at the rear of the rectangular well and has tie down hooks. Optional removable steel stake rails can be placed around the platform.

    (2) Analysis. (i) Some characteristics of the vehicle such as its chassis cab with a GVW rating of 23,000 pounds, a 300 horsepower engine, a front axle with an 8,000 pound rating, and a rear axle with a 15,000 pound rating are consistent with either a cargo carrying or a towing function. In this case, however, the vehicle also has a GCW rating of 43,000 pounds and its engine, brakes, transmission, axle ratings, electric trailer brake control, trailer hook up lights, and hitches enable it to tow a trailer that has a GVW rating of 20,000 pounds.

    (ii) When the vehicle's bed hitches are used to tow, the cargo carrying capacity of the vehicle is limited to the storage boxes behind the cab and is minimal in comparison to the GVW rating of the towed truck trailer or semitrailer. Neither the steel stake bed rails nor the tie down hooks significantly increase cargo carrying capacity when either of the bed hitches is used. Even if neither of the vehicle's two bed hitches is used, the design of the vehicle significantly reduces its cargo carrying capacity when compared to the cargo carrying capacity of a pickup truck body or a flatbed truck body installed on a comparable chassis. The significant reduction in cargo carrying capacity resulting from the vehicle's platform with its rectangular well and sloping platform at the rear of the rectangular well is evidence that the vehicle is not primarily designed to carry cargo. By accommodating the bed hitches, however, this platform configuration increases the vehicle's towing capacity and, in conjunction with the other features described above, makes it possible to safely tow a trailer with a GVW rating of 20,000 pounds.

    (3) Conclusion. The vehicle's physical characteristics, which maximize towing capacity at the expense of carrying capacity, establish that the vehicle is primarily designed to tow a vehicle, such as a truck trailer or semitrailer, rather than to carry cargo on its chassis. Thus, the vehicle is a tractor.

    (h) Effective/applicability date. This section applies on and after the date of publication of these regulations in the Federal Register as final regulations.

    § 48.4051-2 Imposition of tax; parts and accessories.

    (a) Parts or accessories sold on or in connection with the sale of chassis, bodies, and tractors—(1) In general. (i) The tax imposed by section 4051 applies to parts or accessories sold on or in connection with, or with the sale of, any article specified in § 48.4051-1(a). The tax applies whether or not the parts or accessories are separately billed by the retailer.

    (ii) If a taxable chassis or body is sold by the retailer without parts or accessories that are considered equipment essential for the operation or appearance of the taxable article, the sale of these parts or accessories by the retailer to the buyer of the taxable article will be considered, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, to have been made in connection with the sale of the taxable article even though they are shipped separately, whether at the same time or on a different date.

    (iii) Parts and accessories that are spares or replacements are not subject to the tax described in paragraph (a)(1)(i) of this section.

    (2) Example. The following example illustrates the application of this paragraph (a):

    Example.

    X buys from Retailer a chassis in a sale subject to the tax imposed by section 4051. At the time of the sale, bumpers were not attached to the chassis; rather, they had been ordered from Retailer and delivered to X at a later date. For purposes of the tax imposed by section 4051, the price of the chassis includes the price of the bumpers, regardless of when the Retailer delivered the bumpers or billed X for the bumpers.

    (b) Parts or accessories not sold on or in connection with the sale of chassis, bodies, and tractors—(1) In general. Section 4051(b)(1) imposes a tax on the installation of a part or accessory on a taxable article specified in § 48.4051-1(a) within six months after the article was first placed in service. However, the tax imposed by section 4051(b)(1) does not apply if—

    (i) The part or accessory is a replacement part or accessory; or

    (ii) The aggregate price of non-replacement parts and accessories (and their installation) for any vehicle does not exceed $1,000.

    (2) Application and rate of tax. The tax is the applicable percentage of the price of the part or accessory and its installation. The applicable percentage is prescribed in section 4051(b)(1).

    (3) Liability for tax. The owner, lessee, or operator of the vehicle on which the parts or accessories are installed is liable for this tax. The owner(s) of the trade or business that installs the parts or accessories is secondarily liable for this tax.

    (4) Definitions—(i) First placed in service. For purposes of this section, a vehicle is first placed in service on the date on which the owner of the vehicle took actual possession of the vehicle. This date can be established by the delivery ticket signed by the owner or other comparable document indicating delivery to, and acceptance by, the owner.

    (ii) Replacement part. The term replacement part means an item that is substantially similar to and intended to take the place of a vehicle part that has worn out or broken down, regardless of when it is ordered.

    (5) Example. The following example illustrates the application of this paragraph (b). Assume that during the periods described, the rate of tax is 12 percent of the price of the part or accessory and its installation.

    Example.

    X bought a vehicle in a sale that was subject to the tax imposed by section 4051 and first placed it in service on September 1, 2013. On October 1, 2013, X purchases and has installed non-replacement parts at a cost of $750. On November 1, 2013, X purchases and has installed additional non-replacement parts at a cost of $450. On December 1, 2013, X purchases and has installed additional non-replacement parts and accessories at a cost of $900. Although the price of each separate purchase and installation is less than $1,000, the aggregate price exceeds the $1,000 limit on November 1, 2013. Accordingly, on November 1, 2013, X is liable for tax of $144 (12 percent × ($750 + $450)) on account of the installations on October 1, and November 1, 2013. On December 1, 2013, X is liable for a tax of $108 (12 percent × $900) on account of the installation on that date. To report its liability X must file Form 720, Quarterly Federal Excise Tax Return, for the fourth calendar quarter of 2013 by January 31, 2014.

    (c) Effective/applicability date. This section applies on and after the date of publication of these regulations in the Federal Register as final regulations.

    Par. 10. Section 48.4052-1 is revised to read as follows:
    § 48.4052-1 Definition; first retail sale.

    (a) In general. For purposes of the tax imposed by section 4051, first retail sale means a taxable sale defined in paragraph (b) of this section.

    (b) Taxable sale; in general. A sale of an article described in § 48.4051-1(a) is a taxable sale except in the following cases:

    (1) The sale is an exempt sale. A sale is an exempt sale if—

    (i) The sale is a tax-free sale under section 4221;

    (ii) The sale is of a used article that had previously been sold tax-free under section 4221; or

    (iii) The article is sold for resale or leasing in a long-term lease and, at the time of sale, the seller—

    (A) Has obtained from the buyer a certificate described in paragraph (d) of this section stating, among other things, that the buyer will either resell the vehicle or lease it in a long-term lease;

    (B) Has no reason to believe that any information in the certificate is false; and

    (C) Has not received a notification from the IRS under paragraph (d)(1) of this section with respect to the buyer.

    (2) There has been a prior sale of the article that is not an exempt sale. The previous sentence does not apply if the prior sale is described in paragraph (c)(1) of this section.

    (c) Special rule for trailers and semitrailers—(1) In general. A sale is described in this paragraph (c)(1) if the sale—

    (i) Is a sale of a chassis or body of a truck trailer or semitrailer (“trailer or semitrailer”);

    (ii) Is not an exempt sale; and

    (iii) Occurs less than six months after the first sale of the trailer or semitrailer that is not an exempt sale.

    (2) Credit. In the case of a sale described in paragraph (c)(1) of this section, any tax paid by the prior seller on account of its sale (and not at any time refunded to or credited against any other liability of the prior seller) is treated as a payment on behalf of the person (the subsequent seller) liable for the tax on the sale described in paragraph (c)(1) of this section. The subsequent seller may claim such payment as a credit against its liability for tax on the sale described in paragraph (c)(1) of this section if the following conditions are met:

    (i) The claim is made on Form 720, “Quarterly Federal Excise Tax Return” (or such other form as the IRS may designate) in accordance with the instructions for that form.

    (ii) The subsequent seller has not been repaid any portion of the tax by the prior seller and has not provided the prior seller with a written consent to the allowance of a credit or refund.

    (iii) The subsequent seller has records substantiating the amount of tax paid by the prior seller on its sale of the truck trailer or semitrailer.

    (d) Certificate—(1) In general. The certificate referred to in paragraph (b)(1)(iii) of this section is a statement that is signed under penalties of perjury by a person with authority to bind the buyer, is in substantially the same form as the model certificate provided in paragraph (d)(3) of this section, and contains all information necessary to complete the model certificate. The IRS may withdraw the right of a buyer of vehicles to provide a certificate under this section if the buyer uses the vehicles to which a certificate relates other than as stated in the certificate. The IRS may notify any seller that the buyer's right to provide a certificate has been withdrawn. The certificate may be included as part of any business records normally used to document a sale.

    (2) Effect of use other than as stated in certificate. If a buyer that provides a certificate described in paragraph (b)(1)(iii)(A) of this section uses or leases (in a short term lease) an article listed in the certificate, the sale of such article to the buyer is treated as the first retail sale of the article and the buyer is liable for the tax imposed on such sale. If the conditions of paragraph (b)(1)(iii)(A), (B), and (C) of this section are satisfied, the seller will not be liable for the tax imposed on such sale.

    (3) Model certificate.

    Certificate (To support nontaxable sale of articles listed in section 4051 for resale or long term lease under section 4052 of the Internal Revenue Code)

    The undersigned buyer of articles listed in section 4051 (“Buyer”) hereby certifies the following under penalties of perjury:

    1. Seller's name, address, and employer identification number 2. Buyer's name, address, and employer identification number 3.

     Date and location of sale to Buyer

    4. The articles listed below will be either resold by Buyer or leased on a long term basis by Buyer. If the article is a chassis, Buyer has listed the chassis Vehicle Identification Number. If the article is a body, Buyer has listed the body's identification number. 5. Buyer understands that it must be prepared to establish, by evidence satisfactory to an examining agent, how each article bought under this certificate was used. 6. Buyer has not been notified by the Internal Revenue Service that its right to provide a certificate has been withdrawn. 7. Buyer understands that if it uses or leases (in a short term lease) an article listed in this certificate, Buyer will be liable for the tax imposed by section 4051(a)(1) on the article. See 26 CFR 48.4051-1 and 145.4052-1(c). 8. Buyer understands that Buyer may be liable for the section 6701 penalty (relating to aiding and abetting an understatement of tax liability) if this is an erroneous certification. 9. Buyer understands that the fraudulent use of this certificate may subject Buyer and all parties making any fraudulent use of this statement to a fine or imprisonment, or both, together with the costs of prosecution. Printed or typed name of person signing this certificate Title of person signing Signature and date signed

    (e) No installment payment of tax. If a lease is a taxable sale under § 145.4052-1(b) of this chapter or an installment sale (or another form of sale under which the sales price is paid in installments), then the liability for the entire tax arises at the time of the lease or installment sale. No portion of the tax is deferred by reason of the fact that the sales price is paid in installments.

    (f) Effective/applicability date. This section applies on and after the date of publication of these regulations in the Federal Register as final regulations.

    Par. 11. Section 48.4061(a)-1 is amended as follows: 1. Paragraph (d)(2)(ii), first sentence, is amended by removing the language “A self-propelled” and adding “Before January 1, 2005, a self-propelled” in its place. 2. Paragraph (d)(2)(iv) is added.

    The addition reads as follows:

    § 48.4061(a)-1 Imposition of tax; exclusion for light-duty trucks, etc.

    (d) * * *

    (2) * * *

    (iv) Off-highway transportation vehicles after October 21, 2004. For a description of certain vehicles that are not treated as highway vehicles after October 21, 2004, see § 48.0-5(b)(3).

    Subpart H [Amended] Par. 12. Subpart H is amended by revising the undesignated center heading reading “Tires, Tubes, and Tread Rubber” to read “Tires”. Par. 13. Section 48.4071-1 is revised to read as follows:
    § 48.4071-1 Tires; imposition of tax.

    (a) In general. (1) Tax is imposed by section 4071 on the sale by the manufacturer of a taxable tire with a maximum rated load capacity greater than 3,500 pounds.

    (2) See § 48.4072-1(b) for the definition of the term taxable tire.

    (b) Tax base and computation of tax. The tax base is equal to the number of 10-pound increments, rounded down to the nearest ten pounds, by which the maximum rated load capacity exceeds 3,500 pounds. The tax is determined by multiplying this tax base by the rate of tax specified in section 4071(a). Thus, for example, a taxable tire with a maximum rated load capacity of 4,005 pounds is treated as having a maximum rated load capacity of 4,000 pounds and a tax base of 50 ((4000 − 3,500) ÷ 10). The tax imposed on the tire is the rate of tax under section 4071(a) times 50.

    (c) Liability for tax. The manufacturer of a taxable tire is liable for the tax imposed by section 4071.

    (d) Effective/applicability date. This section applies on and after the date of publication of these regulations in the Federal Register as final regulations.

    Par. 14. Section 48.4071-2 is revised to read as follows:
    § 48.4071-2 Determination of maximum rated load capacity.

    (a) In general. For purposes of the tax imposed by section 4071, the maximum rated load capacity is the maximum rated load rating inscribed on a taxable tire's sidewall provided the inscription meets the standards prescribed by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration in its regulations. If a taxable tire has multiple maximum load ratings, the taxable tire's highest maximum load rating is the taxable tire's maximum rated load capacity for purposes of the tax.

    (b) Tampering. In the event of any tampering with, or the appearance of tampering with, the inscription of a taxable tire's maximum rated load capacity as described in paragraph (a) of this section, the tire's maximum rated load capacity is the maximum rated load capacity of a comparable tire.

    (c) Effective/applicability date. This section applies on and after the date of publication of these regulations in the Federal Register as final regulations.

    Par. 15. Section 48.4071-3 is amended by: 1. Revising the section heading and paragraph (a). 2. Revising paragraph (c)(1). 3. Adding paragraph (e). 4. Removing the undesignated authority citation at the end of the section.

    The revisions and addition read as follows:

    § 48.4071-3 Imposition of tax on tires delivered to manufacturer's retail outlet.

    (a) General rule. If a tire manufacturer delivers a taxable tire it manufactured to one of its retail outlets, the manufacturer is liable for the tax imposed by section 4071 on this tire in the same manner as if the tire had been sold upon delivery to the retail outlet. The amount of tax is computed under § 48.4071-1.

    (c) * * *

    (1) Delivery—(i) Delivery options. A manufacturer of taxable tires may, at its option, treat either of the following events as constituting delivery to a retail outlet:

    (A) Delivery of taxable tires to a common carrier (or, where the taxable tires are transported by the manufacturer, the placing of the taxable tires into the manufacturer's highway vehicle) for shipment from the plant in which the taxable tires are manufactured, or from a regional distribution center of taxable tires, to a retail outlet or to a location in the immediate vicinity of a retail outlet primarily for future delivery to the retail outlet.

    (B) Arrival of the taxable tires at the retail outlet, or, where shipment is to a location in the immediate vicinity of a retail outlet primarily for future delivery to the retail outlet, the arrival of the taxable tires at such location.

    (ii) Delivery election. A manufacturer that has elected to treat one of the events listed in paragraph (c)(1)(i)(A) or (B) of this section as constituting delivery to a retail outlet may not use a different criterion for a later return period unless the manufacturer obtains permission from the IRS in advance.

    (e) Effective/applicability date. This section applies on and after the date of publication of these regulations in the Federal Register as final regulations.

    § 48.4071-4 [Removed]
    Par. 16. Section 48.4071-4 is removed. Par. 17. Section 48.4072-1 is amended by: 1. Revising paragraphs (b), (c), and (d). 2. Amending paragraph (e) by removing the second, third, and fourth sentences. 3. Revising paragraphs (f), (g), and (h). 4. Removing the undesignated authority citation at the end of the section.

    The revisions and addition read as follows:

    § 48.4072-1 Definitions.

    (b) Taxable tire—(1) In general. The term taxable tire means a tire—

    (i) Of the type used on highway vehicles;

    (ii) That is wholly or in part made of rubber; and

    (iii) That is marked pursuant to federal regulations for for highway use.

    (2) Recapped and retreaded tires. The term taxable tire includes a used tire that is recapped or retreaded (whether from shoulder-to-shoulder or bead-to-bead) only if—

    (i) The used tire had not previously been sold in the United States;

    (ii) The used tire is recapped or retreaded outside the United States; and

    (iii) When imported into the United States, the recapped or retreaded tire meets the requirements of section (b)(1) of this section.

    (c) Tires of the type used on highway vehicles. The term tires of the type used on highway vehicles means tires (other than tires of a type used exclusively on mobile machinery (within the meaning of § 48.0-5(c))) of the type used on—

    (1) Highway vehicles; or

    (2) Vehicles of the type used in connection with highway vehicles.

    (d) Rated load capacity. The term rated load capacity means the maximum load a tire is rated to carry at a specified inflation pressure.

    (f) Super single tire. The term super single tire means a single tire greater than 13 inches in cross section width designed to replace two tires in a dual fitment. The term does not include any tire designed for steering or an all position tire.

    (g) Examples. The following examples illustrate the application of this section.

    Example 1.

    (1) Facts. (i) A foreign tire manufacturer manufactures a tire that meets the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard for truck tires prescribed by the DOT. The tire is not of a type used exclusively on mobile machinery (within the meaning of § 48.0-5(c)). This tire is partially made of rubber. The foreign manufacturer marks this tire for highway use pursuant to DOT regulations. The foreign manufacturer sells the tire for use in the foreign country.

    (ii) After use in the foreign country, a tire importer buys the tire and imports it into the United States. At the time of importation, the tread on this tire's casing meets the criteria for minimal tread on trucks used in interstate commerce as prescribed by the DOT.

    (2) Analysis. The imported tire is a taxable tire because the tire is of the type used on a highway vehicle and is not of a type used exclusively on mobile machinery, the tire is wholly or in part made of rubber, and the tire is marked pursuant to federal regulations for highway use.

    Example 2.

    (1) Facts. A tire manufacturer pays the tax imposed by section 4071(a) when it sells a tire that is (1) of the type used on highway vehicles; (2) wholly or in part made of rubber; and (3) marked pursuant to federal regulations for highway use. The tire does not have any design features to indicate that it is a tire of a type used exclusively on mobile machinery (within the meaning of § 48.0-5(b)(3)(iii)). The purchaser of this tire puts the tire on mobile machinery described in § 48.0-5(b)(3)(iii).

    (2) Analysis. A tire that is “of the type used on highway vehicles” and “not of a type used exclusively on mobile machinery” retains those characteristics regardless of how the tire is actually used. Therefore, the characterization of a tire as a taxable tire is not changed because the tire is actually used on a vehicle that is mobile machinery.

    (h) Effective/applicability date. This section applies on and after the date of publication of these regulations in the Federal Register as final regulations.

    § 48.4073 [Removed]
    Par. 18. Reserved § 48.4073 is removed. Par. 19. Section 48.4073-1 is revised to read as follows:
    § 48.4073-1 Exemption for tires sold for the exclusive use of the Department of Defense or the Coast Guard.

    (a) In general. Tax is not imposed by section 4071 on the sale of a taxable tire if—

    (1) The manufacturer of the taxable tire meets the registration requirements of section 4222; and

    (2) The sale of the taxable tire is to the Department of Defense or the Coast Guard for the exclusive use of the Department of Defense or the Coast Guard,

    (b) Sales for resale. A manufacturer may sell a taxable tire tax-free under section 4073 and this section only if the sale is directly made to either the Department of Defense or the Coast Guard for such agency's exclusive use. Accordingly, a sale may not be made taxfree to a dealer for resale to the Department of Defense or the Coast Guard for its exclusive use, even though it is known at the time of sale by the manufacturer that the article will be so resold.

    (c) Certificate—(1) Effect of certificate. A manufacturer will not be liable for tax on the sale of a taxable tire if, at the time of the sale, the manufacturer has obtained from the buyer an unexpired certificate described in paragraph (c)(2) of this section and has no reason to believe any information in the certificate is false. A buyer that provides an erroneous certificate described in paragraph (c)(2) of this section is liable for any tax imposed on the sale to which the certificate relates.

    (2) Form of certificate. The certificate described in this paragraph (c)(2) is a statement by the Department of Defense or the Coast Guard that is signed under penalties of perjury by a person with authority to bind the Department of Defense or the Coast Guard, is in substantially the same form as the model certificate provided in paragraph (c)(3) of this section, and contains all information necessary to complete the model certificate. A new certificate or notice that the current certificate is invalid must be given if any information in the current certificate changes. The certificate may be included as part of any business records normally used to document a sale.

    (3) Model Certificate.

    Certificate (To support the tax-free sales of tires to the Department of Defense or the Coast Guard under section 4073 of the Internal Revenue Code)

    The undersigned buyer of taxable tires (“Buyer”) hereby certifies the following under penalties of perjury:

    1. Manufacturer's name, address, and employer identification number 2. Buyer's name, address, and employer identification number 3.

     Date and location of sale to Buyer

    4. The tire(s) to which this certificate applies will be for the exclusive use of Buyer (that is, the Department of Defense or the Coast Guard). 5. This certificate applies to Buyer's purchases from Manufacturer as follows (complete as applicable): a. A single purchase on invoice or delivery ticket number __. b. All purchases between __ (effective date) and __ (expiration date), a period not exceeding 12 calendar quarters after the effective date, under account or order number(s) __. If this certificate applies only to Buyer's purchases for certain locations, check here __ and list the locations. 6. Buyer will provide a new certificate to the Manufacturer if any information in this certificate changes. 7. Buyer understands that Buyer may be liable for the section 6701 penalty (relating to aiding and abetting an understatement of tax liability) if this is an erroneous certification. 8. Buyer understands that the fraudulent use of this certificate may subject Buyer and all parties making any fraudulent use of this statement to a fine or imprisonment, or both, together with the costs of prosecution. Printed or typed name of person signing this certificate Title of person signing Signature and date signed

    (d) Effective/applicability date. This section applies on and after the date of publication of these regulations in the Federal Register as final regulations.

    Par. 20. Section 48.4073-2 is revised to read as follows:
    § 48.4073-2 American National Red Cross.

    (a) For the exemption allowed to the American National Red Cross from the tax imposed by section 4071, see the Secretary's Authorization, 1979-1 C.B. 478 (See § 601.601(d)(2)(ii)(b) of this chapter.)

    (b) Effective/applicability date. This section applies on and after the date of publication of these regulations in the Federal Register as final regulations.

    §§ 48.4073-3 and 48.4073-4 [Removed]
    Par. 21. Sections 48.4073-3 and 48.4073-4 are removed.
    § 48.4081-1 [Amended]
    Par. 22. Section 48.4081-1(b) is amended by removing the language “§ 48.4061(a)-1(d)” in the definition of Diesel-powered highway vehicle and adding “§ 48.0-5” in its place. Par. 23. Section 48.4221-7 is amended by: 1. Revising the section heading and paragraph (a). 2. Removing paragraph (b) and redesignating paragraph (c) as paragraph (b). 3. Revising redesignated paragraph (b)(2). 4. Adding new paragraph (c).

    The revisions and addition read as follows:

    § 48.4221-7 Tax-free sale of tires for use on other articles.

    (a) In general. Under section 4221(e)(2), tax is not imposed by section 4071 on the sale of a taxable tire if—

    (1) The taxable tire is sold for use by the purchaser for sale on or in connection with the sale of another article manufactured or produced by the purchaser;

    (2) The other article is to be sold by the purchaser—

    (i) In a tax-free sale for export, for use as supplies for vessels or aircraft, to a state or local government for its exclusive use, or to a nonprofit educational organization for its exclusive use; or

    (ii) For any of such purposes in a sale that would be tax-free but for the fact that the other article is not subject to tax under section 4051 or 4064;

    (3) The registration requirements of section 4222 and the regulations thereunder are met; and

    (4) The proof, described in paragraph (b) of this section, of the disposition of the other article, is timely received by the manufacturer.

    (b) * * *

    (2) Required information—(i) In general. The information referred to in paragraph (b)(1) of this section is a statement that is signed under penalties of perjury by a person with authority to bind the purchaser, is in substantially the same form as the model certificate provided in paragraph (b)(2)(ii) of this section, and contains all information necessary to complete the model certificate. For purchasers that are not required to be registered under section 4222, the IRS may withdraw the right of a purchaser of a taxable tire to provide a certificate under this section if the purchaser uses the tire to which a certificate relates other than as stated in the certificate. The IRS may notify any manufacturer to whom such purchaser has provided a certificate that the purchaser's right to provide a certificate has been withdrawn. The certificate may be included as part of any business records normally used to document a sale.

    (ii) Model certificate.

    Certificate (To support the nontaxable sale of taxable tires by the manufacturer when sold for use on or in connection with the sale of another article manufactured or produced by the buyer and sold by the buyer in a sale that meets the requirements of section 4221(e)(2))

    The undersigned buyer of taxable tires (“Buyer”) hereby certifies the following under penalties of perjury:

    1. Manufacturer's name, address, employer identification number, and registration number 2. Buyer's name, address, employer identification number, and registration number (if required) 3.

     Date and location of sale to Buyer

    4. The taxable tire(s) listed below, by its (their) United States Department of Transportation identification number(s), are covered by this certificate 5. The taxable tire(s) listed in this certificate that were purchased or shipped on the date specified in entry 3 have been used on or in connection with the sale of __ (describe product sold by Buyer) by Buyer and such sale was— (complete line (i), (ii), (iii), or (iv), whichever is applicable) (i) for export by __ (Name of carrier) to __ (Name of foreign country or possession) and was so exported on __ (Date). (A copy of the bill of lading or other proof of exportation is attached.) (ii) for use as supplies on __ (Name of vessel or aircraft) that is registered in __ (Name of country in which vessel or aircraft is registered). (iii) to __ (Name of state or local government). (iv) to __ (Name and address of the nonprofit educational organization). 6. Buyer understands that it must be prepared to establish, by evidence satisfactory to an examining agent, how each tire bought under this certificate was used. 7. Check here __ if Buyer is not required to be registered with the Internal Revenue Service because Buyer is a state or local government, a foreign person buying for export, or the United States. 8. Buyer understands that Buyer may be liable for the section 6701 penalty (relating to aiding and abetting an understatement of tax liability) if this is an erroneous certification. 9. Buyer understands that the fraudulent use of this certificate may subject Buyer and all parties making any fraudulent use of this statement to a fine or imprisonment, or both, together with the costs of prosecution. Printed or typed name of person signing this certificate Title of person signing Signature and date signed

    (c) Effective/applicability date. This section applies on and after the date of publication of these regulations in the Federal Register as final regulations.

    Par. 24. Section 48.4221-8 is amended by: 1. Revising the section heading and paragraph (a). 2. Removing the second paragraph (b), Registration requirements for tires, tubes, and tread rubber; vendees purchasing tax-free. 3. Revising paragraphs (c) and (d). 4. Removing paragraphs (e) and (f).

    The revisions read as follows:

    § 48.4221-8 Tax-free sales of tires used on intercity, local, and school buses.

    (a) In general. Under section 4221(e)(3), tax is not imposed by section 4071 on the sale of a taxable tire for use by the buyer on or in connection with a qualified bus, as defined in paragraph (b) of this section, if—

    (1) The registration requirements of section 4222 and the regulations thereunder are met;

    (2) At the time of sale, the manufacturer of the taxable tire—

    (i) Possesses a certificate (in the form described in paragraph (c)(2) of this section) from the buyer of a taxable tire, in which, among other things, the buyer certifies that the buyer will use the taxable tire on or in connection with a qualified bus;

    (ii) Has no reason to believe that any information in the certificate described in paragraph (c) of this section is false; and

    (iii) Has not received a notification from the IRS under paragraph (c)(2) of this section with respect to the buyer.

    (c) Certificate—(1) Effect of certificate. A manufacturer will not be liable for tax on the sale of a taxable tire if the conditions of paragraph (a)(2) of this section are satisfied. In such a case, a buyer that provides an erroneous certificate described in paragraph (c)(2) of this section is liable for any tax imposed on the sale to which the certificate relates.

    (2) In general. The certificate referred to in paragraph (a)(2) of this section is a statement that is signed under penalties of perjury by a person with authority to bind the buyer, is in substantially the same form as the model certificate provided in paragraph (c)(3) of this section, and contains all information necessary to complete the model certificate. For purchasers that are not required to be registered under section 4222, the IRS may withdraw the right of a buyer of a taxable tire to provide a certificate under this section if the buyer uses the tires to which a certificate relates other than as stated in the certificate. The IRS may notify any manufacturer to whom the buyer has provided a certificate that the buyer's right to provide a certificate has been withdrawn. The certificate may be included as part of any business records normally used to document a sale.

    (3) Model certificate.

    Certificate (To support the nontaxable sale of taxable tires used on intercity, local, and school buses)

    The undersigned buyer of taxable tires (“Buyer”) hereby certifies the following under penalties of perjury:

    1. Manufacturer's name, address, employer identification number, and registration number 2. Buyer's name, address, employer identification number, and registration number 3.

     Date and location of sale to Buyer

    4. The taxable tire(s) listed below, by its (their) United States Department of Transportation identification number(s), will be used on intercity, local, and school buses. 5. Buyer understands that it must be prepared to establish, by evidence satisfactory to an examining agent, how each tire bought under this certificate was used. 6. Check here ___ if Buyer is not required to be registered with the Internal Revenue Service because Purchaser is a state or local government or the United States. 7. Buyer understands that Buyer may be liable for the section 6701 penalty (relating to aiding and abetting an understatement of tax liability) if this is an erroneous certification. 8. Buyer understands that the fraudulent use of this certificate may subject Buyer and all parties making any fraudulent use of this statement to a fine or imprisonment, or both, together with the costs of prosecution. Printed or typed name of person signing this certificate Title of person signing Signature and date signed

    (d) Effective/applicability date. This section applies on and after the date of publication of these regulations in the Federal Register as final regulations.

    § 48.6416(c)-1 [Removed]
    Par. 25. Section 48.6416(c)-1 is removed. Par. 26. For each section listed in the tables, remove the language in the “Remove” column from wherever it appears in the paragraph and add in its place the language in the “Add” column as set forth below: Section Remove Add § 48.4071-3(b) Second sentence tires or tubes taxable tires. Fourth sentence tires or inner tubes taxable tires. Fifth sentence tires taxable tires. Sixth sentence taxable tires. and inner tubes taxable tires. § 48.4071-3(c)(1) Introductory text tires or inner tubes taxable tires. § 48.4071-3(c)(1)(i) tires or inner tubes taxable tires. tires or tubes taxable tires. tires and inner tubes taxable tires. § 48.4071-3(c)(2)(i) Second sentence tires and inner tubes taxable tires. Third sentence tires or inner tubes taxable tires. Fourth sentence Tires and inner tubes
  • tires and tubes
  • Taxable tires.
  • taxable tires.
  • Seventh sentence tires and inner tubes
  • tires and tubes
  • tires or tubes
  • taxable tires.
  • taxable tires
  • Eighth sentence tires and inner tubes
  • tire or inner tube
  • taxable tires.
    § 48.4071-3(c)(2)(ii) First sentence (Example) tires and tubes taxable tires. Third sentence (Example) tires and inner tubes taxable tires. Fourth sentence (Example) tires or inner tubes
  • tires and tubes
  • taxable tires.
    § 48.4071-3(c)(3)(i) tire or inner tube taxable tire. § 48.4071-3(c)(3)(ii) tire or inner tube taxable tire. § 48.4071-3(d)(1) First sentence tires and inner tubes taxable tires. Second sentence tires or inner tubes taxable tires. § 48.4071-3(d)(2) tires and inner tubes taxable tires. § 48.4071-3(d)(3)(i) First sentence tire or inner tube taxable tire. Second sentence tire or inner tube taxable tire. § 48.4071-3(d)(3)(ii) Third sentence (Example) tires and tubes (each of the two times it appears) taxable tires. Fourth sentence (Example) tires or inner tubes taxable tires. § 48.4081-1(b) 48.4061(a)-1(d) 48.0-5 of this chapter Redesignated § 48.4221-7(b)(1) tire or inner tube taxable tire. Second sentence tire or inner tube taxable tire. Third sentence tire or inner tube taxable tire. § 48.6421-4(c) 48.4061(a)-1(d) 48.0-5
    PART 145—TEMPORARY EXCISE TAX REGULATIONS UNDER THE HIGHWAY REVENUE ACT OF 1982 (PUB. L. 97-424) Par. 27. The authority citation for part 145 is amended by adding the following entry in numerical order to read in part as follows: Authority:

    26 U.S.C. 7805.* * *

    Section 145.4052-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 4052.

    Par. 28. Section 145.4051-1 is revised to read as follows:
    § 145.4051-1 Imposition of tax on heavy trucks, tractors, and trailers sold at retail.

    (a) For rules relating to the imposition of the tax imposed by section 4051 and related rules on the tax base, liability for tax, explanation of terms, and exclusions, see § 48.4051-1 through § 48.4052-2 of this chapter.

    (b) This section applies on and after the date on which these regulations are published as final regulations in the Federal Register.

    Par. 29. Section 145.4052-1 is amended by: 1. Revising paragraph (a). 2. Adding two sentences after the first sentence in paragraph (d)(1). 3. Removing the last sentence in paragraph (d)(8)(iii). 4. Revising paragraph (g).

    The revisions read as follows:

    § 145.4052-1 Special rules and definitions.

    (a) First retail sale. For the definition of first retail sale, see § 48.4052-1 of this chapter.

    (d) * * * (1) * * *. Total consideration paid for a chassis or body includes charges for equipment installed on the chassis or body. See § 48.4051-1(d)(4). * * *

    (g) Effective/applicability date. This section applies on and after the date of publication of these regulations in the Federal Register as final regulations.

    § 145.4061-1 [Removed]
    Par. 30. Section 145.4061-1 is removed. Par. 31. For each section listed in the tables, remove the language in the “Remove” column and add in its place the language in the “Add” column as set forth below: § 145.4052-1(b)(1) First sentence § 145.4051-1 § 48.4051-1 of this chapter. Second sentence paragraph (a)(2) of this section § 48.4052-1(b) of this chapter. § 145.4052-1(b)(2) § 145.4051-1 § 48.4051-1 of this chapter. paragraph (a)(2) of this section § 48.4052-1(b) of this chapter. § 145.4052-1(c)(1) § 145.4051-1 § 48.4051-1 of this chapter. § 145.4052-1(c)(5)(ii) 4216(a), 4216(f) 4052(b)(1)(A) and (B), 4216(a). § 145.4052-1(d)(1) Fourth sentence Installation installation. John Dalrymple, Deputy Commissioner for Services and Enforcement.
    [FR Doc. 2016-06881 Filed 3-30-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 50 CFR Parts 300 and 600 [Docket No. 150507434-5999-01] RIN 0648-BF09 Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act; Seafood Import Monitoring Program AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Proposed rule; extension of the comment period.

    SUMMARY:

    The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) is announcing an extension to the comment period for the proposed rule on a seafood import monitoring program published in the Federal Register on February 5, 2016. The comment period is being extended from April 5, 2016 to April 12, 2016. Pursuant to the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSA), this proposed rule would establish filing and recordkeeping procedures relating to the importation of certain fish and fish products, in order to implement the MSA's prohibition on the import and trade, in interstate or foreign commerce, of fish taken, possessed, transported or sold in violation of any foreign law or regulation. The information to be filed is proposed to be collected at the time of entry, and makes use of an electronic single window consistent with the Safety and Accountability for Every (SAFE) Port Act of 2006 and other applicable statutes. Specifically, NMFS proposes to integrate collection of catch and landing documentation for certain fish and fish products within the government-wide International Trade Data System (ITDS) and require electronic information collection through the Automated Commercial Environment (ACE) maintained by the Department of Homeland Security, Customs and Border Protection (CBP). Under these procedures, NMFS would require an annually renewable International Fisheries Trade Permit (IFTP) and specific data for certain fish and fish products to be filed and retained as a condition of import to enable the United States to exclude the entry into commerce of products of illegal fishing activities. The information to be collected and retained will help authorities verify that the fish or fish products were lawfully acquired by providing information that traces each import shipment from point of harvest to entry-into commerce. The rule will also decrease the incidence of seafood fraud by collecting information at import and requiring retention of documentation so that the information reported (e.g., regarding species and harvest location) can be verified. This proposed rule stipulates the catch and landing data for imports of certain fish and fish products which would be required to be submitted electronically to NMFS through ACE and the requirements for recordkeeping concerning such imports.

    DATES:

    Written comments on the proposed rule published February 5, 2016 (81 FR 6210) must be received on or before April 12, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Written comments on this action, identified by NOAA-NMFS-2015-0122, may be submitted by either of the following methods:

    Electronic Submissions: Submit all electronic public comments via the Federal eRulemaking Portal. Go to http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=NOAA-NMFS-2015-0122, click the “Comment Now!” icon, complete the required fields, and enter or attach your comments.

    Mail: Mark Wildman, International Fisheries Division, Office for International Affairs and Seafood Inspection, NOAA Fisheries, 1315 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910.

    All comments received are a part of the public record and will generally be posted to http://www.regulations.gov without change. All personal identifying information (for example, name and address) voluntarily submitted by the commenter may be publicly accessible. Do not submit confidential business information or otherwise sensitive or protected information.

    NMFS will accept anonymous comments. Enter N/A in the required fields if you wish to remain anonymous. Attachments to electronic comments will be accepted in Microsoft Word, Excel, WordPerfect, or Adobe portable document file (PDF) formats only.

    Written comments regarding the burden-hour estimates or other aspects of the collection-of-information requirements contained in this proposed rule may be submitted to the NOAA Fisheries Office for International Affairs and Seafood Inspection and by email to OIRA [email protected] or fax to (202) 395-7285.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Mark Wildman, Office for International Affairs and Seafood Inspection, NOAA Fisheries (phone 301-427-8350, or email [email protected]).

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Extension of Comment Period

    This document extends the public comment period established in the Federal Register for 7 days. There are a number of international stakeholders who are potential commenters who need some additional time to comment. NMFS is hereby extending the comment period, which was set to end on April 5, 2016, to April 12, 2016.

    Dated: March 25, 2016. Eileen Sobeck, Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2016-07258 Filed 3-30-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 50 CFR Part 648 [Docket No. 151130999-6225-01] RIN 0648-XE336 Fishery of the Northeastern United States; Bluefish Fishery; 2016-2018 Bluefish Specifications AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Proposed specifications; request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    We propose specifications for the 2016-2018 bluefish fishery. This action is necessary to comply with the implementing regulations for the Bluefish Fishery Management Plan that require us to publish specifications and provide an opportunity for public comment. The proposed specifications are necessary to constrain harvest for this species within scientifically sound recommendations to prevent overfishing.

    DATES:

    Comments must be received on or before April 15, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    A draft environmental assessment (EA) was prepared for these specifications and describes the proposed action and other considered alternatives, and provides an analysis of their impacts. Copies of the draft Specifications Document, including the draft EA and the Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA), are available on request from Dr. Christopher M. Moore, Executive Director, Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council, Suite 201, 800 North State Street, Dover, DE 19901. These documents are also accessible via the Internet at www.mafmc.org and www.regulations.gov.

    You may submit comments on this document, identified by NOAA-NMFS-2015-1060, by either of the following methods:

    Electronic Submission: Submit all electronic public comments via the Federal e-Rulemaking Portal.

    1. Go to www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=NOAA-NMFS-2015-1060

    2. Click the “Comment Now!” icon, complete the required fields

    3. Enter or attach your comments.

    —OR—

    Mail: Submit written comments to John Bullard, Regional Administrator, National Marine Fishery Service, 55 Great Republic Drive, Gloucester, MA 01950. Mark the outside of the envelope, “Comments on the Proposed Rule for Bluefish Specifications.”

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

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Elizabeth Scheimer, Fishery Management Specialist, (978) 281-9236.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: General Specification Background

    The Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council (Council) and the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission (Commission) cooperatively manage the Atlantic bluefish (Pomatus saltatrix) fishery. Specifications in this fishery include various catch and landing subdivisions, such as annual catch limits (ACLs), commercial and recreational sector annual catch targets (ACTs), sector-specific landing limits (i.e., the commercial fishery quota and recreational harvest limit), and measures used to manage the recreational fishery (e.g., minimum fish size, bag limits) for the upcoming fishing year.

    The Bluefish Fishery Management Plan (FMP) and its implementing regulations establish the Council's process for establishing specifications. Regulations implementing the FMP appear at 50 CFR part 648, subparts A and J. The regulations requiring annual specifications are found at § 648.162. The management unit specified in the FMP is U.S. waters of the western Atlantic Ocean, from Florida northward to the U.S./Canada border. The FMP also stipulates how to divide the specification catch limits into commercial and recreational fishery allocations, when and how to adjust commercial and recreational limits by quota transfer between the two sectors, and how to allocate state-by-state quotas.

    The annual specifications process requires that the Council's Scientific and Statistical Committee (SSC) and the Bluefish Monitoring Committee review the best available scientific information and make recommendations to the Council. The SSC met July 21, 2015, to review a new 2015 benchmark stock assessment and recommend acceptable biological catches (ABCs) for 2016-2018 for this fishery. More details on the SSC's discussions are provided in the proposed Specifications section below. The Council's Bluefish Monitoring Committee met on July 27, 2015, to review the SSC's ABC recommendations and to propose complementary management measures. The Council and the Commission's Bluefish Management Board met jointly on August 10, 2015, to consider the recommendations of the SSC and the Bluefish Monitoring Committee, receive public comments, and formalize catch limit specifications and commercial and recreational management measures. More complete details on the SSC, Bluefish Monitoring Committee, and Council meeting deliberations can be found on the Council's Web site (www.mafmc.org).

    While the Board action was finalized at the August meeting, the Council's recommendations must be reviewed by NMFS to ensure that they comply with the FMP and all applicable law. NMFS must also conduct notice-and-comment rulemaking to propose and implement the final specifications.

    The Bluefish FMP defines ACL as equal to ABC. The Bluefish Monitoring Committee identifies the relevant sources of management uncertainty, which may be used to reduce the ACL before establishing the recreational and commercial ACTs. Because the bluefish fishery has not fully utilized available ACTs in recent years and management precision is timely, the Bluefish Monitoring Committee did not recommend applying a management uncertainty reduction before establishing sector-specific ACTs. The Bluefish Monitoring Committee recommended allocating 17 percent of the ACL to the commercial fishery and 83 of the ACL percent to the recreational fishery. Estimated discards are then subtracted from each sector ACT to calculate sector Total Allowable Landings (TALs). Using this method ensures that each sector is accountable for its respective discards, rather than simply apportioning the ABC by the allocation percentages to derive the sector TALs. Commercial discards are assumed to be negligible and recreational discards are projected using a 3-year moving average from Marine Recreational Information Program (MRIP) data. The Council may also specify a research set-aside (RSA) quota of up to 3 percent of the TAL, but the Council did not recommend RSA for 2016-2018. Additionally, the FMP specifies that if the recreational fishery is not projected to land its available harvest limit, then quota may be transferred from the recreational to the commercial sector, up to a commercial quota of 10.5 million lb (4,762 mt). The adjusted commercial quota is then allocated to the coastal states from Maine through Florida in specified shares as outlined in the FMP.

    A 2015 benchmark stock assessment used as the scientific basis for these specifications may be found on the Northeast Fisheries Science Center's Web site (www.nefsc.noaa.gov). The assessment indicates that bluefish are not overfished, and that overfishing is not occurring. The assessment updated the bluefish stock biological reference points. The previous assessment used Maximum Sustainable Yield (MSY) reference points for fishing mortality and total biomass. The stock recruitment relationship is poorly defined for bluefish, so the 2015 benchmark assessment used Spawning Stock Biomass (SSB) per recruit based reference points as proxies for MSY reference points. This lowered the SSB target level from 324 million lb (147,052 mt) to 245 million pounds (111,228 mt) and lowered the current SSB estimate (191 million pounds in 2014; or 86,534 mt) used to develop the ABCs.

    The SSC modified the overfishing limit (OFL) probability distribution derived from the stock assessment, and determined that a lower coefficient of variation, or CV, to estimate scientific uncertainty was acceptable instead of the previously used 100-percent CV. The SSC stated this was acceptable because the new stock assessment improved treatment of uncertainty. The SSC's ABC recommendations are based on a 60-percent CV from the OFL and are, therefore, higher than they would have been under the previously used 100-percent CV.

    Proposed Specifications

    This rule proposes the Council's ABC recommendation and the commercial and recreational catch limits associated with that ABC for fishing years 2016-2018 as outlined in table 1.

    Table 1—Proposed 2016-2018 Bluefish Specifications and Calculations Current 2015 million lb mt Proposed 2016 million lb mt 2017 million lb mt 2018 million lb mt OFL 34.22 15,521 25.76 11,686 26.44 11,995 27.97 12,688 ABC 21.54 9,772 19.45 8,825 20.64 9,363 21.81 9,895 ACL 21.54 9,772 19.45 8,825 20.64 9,363 21.81 9,895 Management Uncertainty 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Commercial ACT 3.66 1,661 3.30 1,500 3.50 1,592 3.70 1,682 Recreational ACT 17.88 8,110 16.14 7,325 17.13 7,770 18.10 8,213 Commercial Discards 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Recreational Discards 3.35 1,520 2.98 1,356 2.98 1,356 2.98 1,356 Commercial TAL 3.66 1,661 3.30 1,500 3.50 1,592 3.70 1,682 Recreational TAL 14.53 6,591 13.15 5,969 14.14 6,414 15.11 6,857 Combined TAL 18.19 8,252 16.46 7,469 17.65 8,006 18.82 8,539 Projected Recreational Landings 12.95 5,875 10.98 4,980 10.98 4,980 10.98 4,90 Transfer 1.58 716 2.17 984 3.16 1,433 4.13 1,873 Commercial Quota 5.24 2,377 5.48 2,485 6.67 3,025 7.84 3,556 Recreational Harvest Limit (RHL) 12.95 5,875 10.98 4,980 10.98 4,980 10.98 4,980 Note: Recreational projections, transfer, and resulting commercial quota and RHL may be adjusted as more up-to-date recreational data become available.

    The Council recommended the ABC values proposed by the SSC for 2016-2018. The Bluefish Monitoring Committee recommended using a 3-year average to project future recreational landings as was done in the previous specifications. The Council did not endorse this recommendation, requesting that the most recent available complete year's landing data be used to project recreational landings.

    Under certain conditions, the FMP allows a TAL transfer from the recreational to the commercial fishery, if projections indicate the full recreational landing limit will not be fully harvested. Council analysis using preliminary 2015 landings data to project future landings indicates the recreational fishery is not expected to land its harvest limit in 2016, so quota can be transferred to the commercial fishery. The amount of transfer was calculated so that the RHL equals expected recreational landings and the final commercial quota does not exceed 10.5 million lb, consistent with the FMP requirement outlining the transfer process. This option represents the preferred alternative recommended by the Council; however, the Council recognized that future updates to the recreational harvest projections may result in a different transfer amount from the recreational sector to the commercial sector. We will use updated 2015 MRIP recreational harvest data as they become available and adjust the 2016 recreational transfer limit, as needed, in the final rule. The Council recommended we re-evaluate the transfer each year, consistent with the FMP requirements, as additional recreational fishery data become available. Each year in 2017 and 2018, an updated projection for recreational landings will be based on realized recreational landings from the preceding year, and that projection will be used to estimate potential transfers from the recreational fishery to the commercial fishery. Any adjustments to the transfer amount will be published each year in a rule.

    We propose the Council-recommended status quo daily recreational possession limit of up to 15 fish per person. Fishing under these catch limits for 2016 through 2018 is not expected to compromise the bluefish stock, nor will fishing at this level present an unacceptably high likelihood of overfishing. The calculation process described above produced the management measures shown in Table 1. Table 2 presents the proposed state allocations for 2016-2018 using the state commercial quota allocations in the FMP. There were no states that exceeded their quota in 2015; therefore, no accountability measures are necessary for the 2016 fishing year. In 2017 and 2018, any commercial quota adjustments necessary to account for overages will be published in the Federal Register prior to the start of the respective fishing year.

    Table 2—2016-2018 Proposed Initial Bluefish State Commercial Quotas State FMP Percent share 2016 Initial quota kg lb 2017 Initial quota kg lb 2018 Initial quota kg lb ME 0.6685 16,635 36,673 20,231 44,602 23,788 52,443 NH 0.4145 10,314 22,739 12,544 27,655 14,749 32,517 MA 6.7167 167,135 368,469 203,270 448,135 239,003 526,912 RI 6.8081 169,409 373,483 206,037 454,233 242,256 534,082 CT 1.2663 31,510 69,467 38,323 84,487 45,059 99,339 NY 10.3851 258,417 569,712 314,289 692,888 369,538 814,691 NJ 14.8162 368,678 812,796 448,389 988,529 527,211 1,162,302 DE 1.8782 46,736 103,035 56,841 125,312 66,833 147,341 MD 3.0018 74,695 164,675 90,845 200,278 106,814 235,485 VA 11.8795 295,603 651,693 359,515 792,594 422,713 931,924 NC 32.0608 797,783 1,758,810 970,270 2,139,079 1,140,833 2,515,107 SC 0.0352 876 1,931 1,065 2,349 1,253 2,761 GA 0.0095 236 521 288 634 338 745 FL 10.0597 250,320 551,861 304,441 671,178 357,959 789,164 Total 100.0001 2,488,344 5,485,859 3,026,344 6,671,946 3,558,344 7,844,805 Classification

    Pursuant to section 304(b)(1)(A) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, the NMFS Assistant Administrator has determined that this proposed rule is consistent with the Bluefish FMP, other provisions of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, and other applicable law, subject to further consideration after public comment.

    These proposed specifications are exempt from review under Executive Order 12866.

    An IRFA was prepared by the Council, as required by section 603 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), to examine the impacts of these proposed specifications on small business entities, if adopted. A copy of the detailed RFA analysis, including the IRFA, is available from NMFS or the Council (see ADDRESSES). The Council's analysis made use of quantitative approaches when possible. Where quantitative data on revenues or other business-related metrics that would provide insight to potential impacts were not available to inform the analyses, qualitative analyses were conducted. A summary of the 2016-2018 specifications IRFA analysis follows.

    Description of the Reasons Why Action by the Agency Is Being Considered and a Statement of the Objectives of, and Legal Basis for, This Proposed Rule

    This action proposes management measures, including annual catch limits, for the bluefish fishery in order to prevent overfishing and achieve optimum yield in the fishery. A complete description of the action, why it is being considered, and the legal basis for this action are contained in the draft Specifications Document, and elsewhere in the preamble to this proposed rule, and are not repeated here.

    Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities to Which the Proposed Rule Would Apply

    The Small Business Administration defines a small business as one that is independently owned and operated; not dominant in its field of operation; has annual receipts that do not exceed $20.5 million in the case of commercial finfish harvesting entities, $5.5 million in the case of commercial shellfish harvesting entities, $7.5 million in the case of for-hire fishing entities; or has fewer than 750 employees in the case of fish processors or 100 employees in the case of fish dealers.

    This proposed rule affects commercial and recreational fish harvesting entities engaged in the bluefish fishery. Individually-permitted vessels may hold permits for several fisheries, harvesting species of fish that are regulated by several different FMPs, beyond those impacted by the proposed action. Furthermore, multiple-permitted vessels and/or permits may be owned by entities affiliated by stock ownership, common management, identity of interest, contractual relationships, or economic dependency. For the purposes of the IRFA analysis, the ownership entities, not the individual vessels, are considered to be the regulated entities.

    Ownership entities are defined as those entities with common ownership personnel as listed on the permit application. Only permits with identical ownership personnel are categorized as an ownership entity. For example, if five permits have the same seven persons listed as co-owners on their permit applications, those seven persons would form one ownership entity that holds those five permits. If two of those seven owners also co-own additional vessels, that ownership arrangement would be considered a separate ownership entity for the purpose of this analysis.

    In preparation for this action, ownership entities are identified based on a list of all permits for the most recent complete calendar year. The current ownership data set used for this analysis is based on calendar year 2014 and contains average gross sales associated with those permits for calendar years 2012 through 2014. In addition to classifying a business (ownership entity) as small or large, a business can also be classified by its primary source of revenue. A business is defined as being primarily engaged in fishing for finfish if it obtains greater than 50 percent of its gross sales from sales of finfish. A description of the specific permits that are likely to be impacted by this action is provided below, along with a discussion of the impacted businesses, which can include multiple vessels and/or permit types.

    The ownership database shows that for the 2012-2014 period, 724 affiliate firms held a bluefish commercial permit only, 144 affiliate firms held a bluefish party/charter permit only, and 144 firms held both commercial and party/charter permits. However, not all of those affiliate firms are active participants in the fishery. According to the ownership database, 950 affiliate firms landed bluefish during the 2012-2014 period, with 942 of those business affiliates categorized as small business and 8 categorized as large business.

    Description of the Projected Reporting, Record-Keeping, and Other Compliance Requirements of This Proposed Rule

    There is no new reporting or recordkeeping requirements contained in any of the alternatives considered for this action.

    Federal Rules Which May Duplicate, Overlap, or Conflict With This Proposed Rule

    NMFS is not aware of any relevant Federal rules that may duplicate, overlap, or conflict with this proposed rule.

    Description of Significant Alternatives to the Proposed Action Which Accomplish the Stated Objectives of Applicable Statutes and Which Minimize Any Significant Economic Impact on Small Entities

    The Council analyzed four sets of combined catch limit alternatives for each of the fishing years 2016-2018 for the bluefish fishery. The alternatives were as follows:

    • Alternative 1 is the Council's preferred alternative that we are proposing as outlined in this rule's preamble;

    • Alternative 2 is the status quo and would maintain the current measures in effect;

    • Alternative 3 is an alternative provided for analytical purposes as the “most restrictive” set of commercial quotas, based on no transfer between the recreational and commercial sectors; and

    • Alternative 4 is the counter-point to Alternative 3, a maximum quota transfer of up to 10.5 million lb (4,762 mt) commercial quota.

    The preferred alternative represents an increase in commercial quota and a decrease in RHL for all three years 2016-2018 relative to the 2015 implemented limits. The discussion below is based on the conclusions of the IRFA analyses in the draft Specifications Document provided by the Council. Table 3 outlines the available commercial quota and recreational harvest limits for the four alternatives used in the IRFA.

    Table 3—Summary of Landings Limits by Alternative Year Alternative Commercial quota million lb mt Recreational
  • harvest limit
  • million lb mt
    2016 1 5.48 2,485 10.98 4,980 2 5.24 2,376 12.95 5,874 3 3.31 1,501 13.15 5,964 4 10.5 4,760 5.96 2,703 2017 1 6.67 3,025 10.98 4,980 2 5.24 2,376 12.95 5,874 3 3.51 1,592 14.14 6,413 4 10.5 4,760 7.15 3,243 2018 1 7.84 3,556 10.98 4,980 2 5.24 2,376 12.95 5,874 3 3.71 1,682 15.11 6,853 4 10.5 4,762 8.32 3,773
    Commercial Fishery Impacts

    To assess the impact of the alternatives on commercial fisheries, the Council conducted a threshold analysis and an analysis of potential changes in ex-vessel gross revenue that would result from each alternative, using Northeast dealer reports and South Atlantic Trip Ticket reports.

    Alternative 1 (the preferred alternative) and Alternative 4 represent increases in commercial quotas relative to 2015. It is expected that Alternatives 1 and 4 would have neutral socio-economic impacts. In recent years, bluefish commercial landings have been substantially lower than the quotas due to market conditions. Unless market conditions change substantially, we expect that commercial landings will be close to 2014 landings despite an increase in fishing opportunity. There is no indication that the market environment for commercially caught bluefish will change considerably in 2016-2018.

    Under the Alternative 2 (status quo) measures, the 2016-2018 specifications would have no change in allowable commercial landings relative to the 2015 limits. As such, it is expected that no change in revenues or fishing opportunities would occur. Alternative 2 would likely result in quota constraints for vessels in New York, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and North Carolina; however, these quota constraints may not have an economic impact due to the ability to transfer quota from state to state.

    Under Alternative 3, the most commercially restrictive alternative considered, 72 out of 942 small firms in the Northeast region are projected to incur revenue losses of 5 percent or more in 2016 when compared to 2015. Of those firms, 43 percent had gross sales of $10,000 or less, likely indicating that their dependence on fishing is small. In 2017, 68 small firms likely would be faced with revenue reductions of 5 percent or more (60 percent with gross sales of $10,000 or less), and in 2018, 61 small firms likely would be faced with revenue reductions of 5 percent or more (61 percent with gross sales less than $10,000). For large firms that landed bluefish in the Northeast during 2012-2014, the potential overall revenue reduction is 0.01 percent for each year in 2016-2018. Assuming no change in prices, the average decrease in revenue distributed among all firms that landed bluefish in the Northeast would be $780 per firm in 2016, $649 in 2017, and $518 in 2018.

    The South Atlantic Trip Ticket Report data indicate that 757 vessels landed commercial bluefish quota in North Carolina from 2012-2014. On average, these vessels generated 8.9 percent of their total ex-vessel revenue from bluefish landings. Landings are projected to decrease in North Carolina by 43 percent as a consequence of Alternative 3 quota in 2016 relative to 2014; however, this analysis may overestimate the negative impact to small businesses because quota may be transferred between states. Alternative 3 represents a 40-percent reduction in 2017 and 36-percent reduction in 2018 for North Carolina relative to 2014 landings. If commercial quota is transferred from a state or states that do not land their entire bluefish quotas, as was done frequently in previous years, the number of affected entities could change. Under this alternative, the amount of potential surplus quota available to be transferred is low for all years 2016-2018, but transfers could lessen the adverse economic impact on vessels landing in the state(s) receiving quota transfers. Such transfers cannot be predicted or projected, as each occurs on a case-by-case basis by agreement between states.

    Recreational Fishery Impacts

    It is very difficult to calculate the economic value of recreational fisheries. No changes to the recreational fishing season, minimum fish size, or per-angler possession limit are being proposed. Because these measures are not changing, it is not expected that there will be any associated economic impact on the recreational fishery. The only potential variable that may have an economic on impact recreational fisheries and regulated small business entities that participate in them are the various landing limits under consideration. Using the preliminary 2015 recreational landings data, Alternative 1 (preferred) proposes an RHL (10.98 million lb, 4,980 mt) that is approximately 15 percent lower than the 2015 limit; however, the proposed RHL is the same as 2015 landings. As such, the proposed RHL is not expected to be constraining, and, therefore, is not expected to impact recreational fisheries. Under the Alternative 2 (status quo), the RHL (12.95 million lb, 5,874 mt) is approximately 15 percent above the recreational landings for 2015 (10.98 million lb, 4,980 mt). The RHLs for Alternative 3 (13.15 million lb, 5,964 mt) and Alternative 4 (5.96 million lb, 2,703 mt) in 2016 are approximately 20 percent above and 46 percent below the recreational landings for 2015, respectively. Alternative 4, which we are not recommending, is the only alternative that could potentially have negative impacts on the recreational fishery by risking a closure. None of the analyses indicate that the proposed measures will have a negative impact on recreational fishing. The proposed RHLs each year are not anticipated to limit recreational catch or negatively impact recreational fishing revenue, because the RHLs will be based on realized landings from the preceding year.

    Summary

    The Council selected Alternative 1 (preferred) over Alternative 2 (status quo), Alternative 3 (no transfer), and Alternative 4 (maximum transfer), stating that the Alternative 1 measures were consistent with the advice provided to the Council by its SSC and Bluefish Monitoring Committees. The Council analysis indicates the proposed measures would have less negative economic impacts than the most restrictive Alternative 3, while also benefitting from the potential for increased efficiency of flexible sector quota transfer. Alternative 2, the status quo alternative, is not feasible because it could result in combined landings that are higher than the ABC, which is inconsistent with the Council's risk policy on overfishing and is in violation of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act. Alternative 4 is not preferred because it represents significant decreases in recreation limits below historical catch and it is not expected that the commercial sector would fully utilize the resulting quota. The proposed measures in Alternative 1 contain the second largest overall increase in commercial quota and the second lowest overall reduction in RHL of all the analyzed alternatives when compared to 2015 measures. As such, NMFS is proposing to implement the Council's preferred ABCs, ACLs, ACTs, commercial quotas, and recreational harvest limits, as presented in Table 1 of this proposed rule preamble.

    Authority:

    16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

    Dated: March 24, 2016. Eileen Sobeck, Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2016-07263 Filed 3-30-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    81 62 Thursday, March 31, 2016 Notices DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service [Docket No. APHIS-2016-0015] Notice of Request for Revision to and Extension of Approval of an Information Collection; APHIS Pest Reporting and Asian Longhorn Beetle Program AGENCY:

    Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA.

    ACTION:

    Revision to and extension of approval of an information collection; comment request.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this notice announces the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service's intention to request a revision to and extension of approval of an information collection that allows the public to report sightings of plant pests and diseases.

    DATES:

    We will consider all comments that we receive on or before May 31, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments by either of the following methods:

    Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2016-0015.

    Postal Mail/Commercial Delivery: Send your comment to Docket No. APHIS-2016-0015, Regulatory Analysis and Development, PPD, APHIS, Station 3A-03.8, 4700 River Road Unit 118, Riverdale, MD 20737-1238.

    Supporting documents and any comments we receive on this docket may be viewed at http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2016-0015 or in our reading room, which is located in room 1141 of the USDA South Building, 14th Street and Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC. Normal reading room hours are 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, except holidays. To be sure someone is there to help you, please call (202) 799-7039 before coming.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For information on reporting sightings of plant pests and diseases, contact Dr. Robyn Rose, National Policy Manager, PHP, PPQ, APHIS, 4700 River Road Unit 137, Riverdale, MD 20737-1231; (301) 851-2283. For copies of more detailed information on the information collection, contact Ms. Kimberly Hardy, APHIS' Information Collection Coordinator, at (301) 851-2727.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Title: APHIS Pest Reporting and Asian Longhorn Beetle Program.

    OMB Control Number: 0579-0311.

    Type of Request: Revision to and extension of approval of an information collection.

    Abstract: As authorized by the Plant Protection Act (U.S.C. 7701 et seq.) (PPA), the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS), either independently or in cooperation with States, may carry out operations or measures to detect, eradicate, suppress, control, prevent, or retard the spread of plant pests and diseases that are new to or not widely distributed within the United States. This authority allows APHIS to establish control programs for a number of pests and diseases of concern, including Asian longhorned beetle (ALB), emerald ash borer beetle, and citrus greening, to name a few.

    APHIS relies on various entities, such as individuals, households, businesses, and State departments of agriculture to report sightings of pests of concern or suspicious signs of pest or disease damage they may see in their local areas. This reporting and the detection and verification methods involved include information collection activities, such as the online pest reporting form (Plant Protection and Quarantine (PPQ) Form 10), inspection and ALB unified survey form (PPQ Form 375), cooperative agreement for inspection, State compliance training workshop records, contract for inspection, homeowner permission or refusal to inspect, tree removal agreement, litigation and warrants and associated letters, removal and monitoring, removal and disposal, disposal/Marshalling Yard, tree warrant, treatment agreement, contract for treatment, and certificate/permit cancellation.

    PPQ Form 10 was previously approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under control number 0579-0311. However, in addition to this form, we are adding the information collection activities listed above to further assist APHIS with its efforts for the detection, treatment, and eradication of various plant pests. As a result, we have revised the name of this information collection from APHIS Pest Reporting Form to APHIS Pest Reporting and Asian Longhorn Beetle Program.

    We are asking OMB to approve our use of these information collection activities, as described, for an additional 3 years.

    The purpose of this notice is to solicit comments from the public (as well as affected agencies) concerning our information collection. These comments will help us:

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

    (2) Evaluate the accuracy of our estimate of the burden of the 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 information collection on those who are to respond, through use, as appropriate, of automated, electronic, mechanical, and other collection technologies; e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.

    Estimate of burden: The public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 0.63706 hours per response.

    Respondents: Individuals and households, businesses, and State departments of agriculture.

    Estimated annual number of respondents: 7,055.

    Estimated annual number of responses per respondent: 97.62.

    Estimated annual number of responses: 688,746.

    Estimated total annual burden on respondents: 438,779 hours. (Due to averaging, the total annual burden hours may not equal the product of the annual number of responses multiplied by the reporting burden per response.)

    All responses to this notice will be summarized and included in the request for OMB approval. All comments will also become a matter of public record.

    Done in Washington, DC, this 25th day of March 2016. Michael C. Gregoire, Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.
    [FR Doc. 2016-07291 Filed 3-30-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-34-P
    DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Forest Service Pike-San Isabel Resource Advisory Committee AGENCY:

    Forest Service, USDA.

    ACTION:

    Notice of meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    The Pike-San Isabel Resource Advisory Committee (RAC) will meet in Salida, Colorado. 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. RAC information can be found at the following Web site: http://www.fs.usda.gov/goto/psicc/RAC.

    DATES:

    The meeting will be held at 9:00 a.m. (MST) on May 12, 2016.

    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 Pike & San Isabel National Forests, Cimarron & Comanche National Grasslands (PSICC) Salida Ranger District Office, 5575 Cleora Road, Salida, Colorado. The public may access the meeting by attending a Video Teleconference (VTC) at the following U.S. Forest Service facilities in Colorado: Leadville, Salida, Fairplay, Pueblo and Ft. Collins.

    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 PSICC. Please call ahead to facilitate entry into the building.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Barbara Timock, RAC Coordinator, by phone at 719-553-1415 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 to:

    1. Review project proposals;

    2. Vote and recommend projects; and

    3. Public comment.

    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 May 4, 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 to make oral comments must be sent to Barbara Timock, RAC Coordinator, 2840 Kachina Drive, Pueblo, Colorado; by email to [email protected], or via facsimile to 719-553-1416.

    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, please contact the person listed in the section titled FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. All reasonable accommodation requests are managed on a case by case basis.

    Dated: March 21, 2016. Erin Connelly, Forest and Grassland Supervisor.
    [FR Doc. 2016-07270 Filed 3-30-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3411-15-P
    DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Forest Service Siskiyou County Resource Advisory Committee AGENCY:

    Forest Service, USDA.

    ACTION:

    Notice of meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    The Siskiyou County Resource Advisory Committee (RAC) will meet in Yreka, California. 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. RAC information can be found at the following Web site: http://cloudapps-usda-gov.force.com/FSSRS/RAC_Meeting_Page?id=a2zt00000004CyPAAU.

    DATES:

    The meeting will be held April 18, 2016, at 5:00 p.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 Klamath National Forest (NF) Supervisor's Office, Conference Room, 1711 South Main Street, Yreka, California.

    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 Klamath NF Supervisor's Office. Please call ahead to facilitate entry into the building.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Natalie Stovall, RAC Coordinator, by phone at 530-841-4411 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 to:

    1. Approve prior meeting notes;

    2. Update on ongoing projects;

    3. Public comment period;

    4. Review meeting schedule;

    5. Proposal reviews;

    6. Vote on proposals from February meeting; and

    7. Schedule meeting for May.

    The meeting is open to the public. The agenda will include time for people to make oral statements of three minutes or less. 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 may be sent to Natalie Stovall, RAC Coordinator, 1711 S. Main Street, Yreka, California 96097; by email to [email protected] or via facsimile to 530-841-4571.

    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, please contact the person listed in the section titled FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. All reasonable accommodation requests are managed on a case by case basis.

    Dated: March 24, 2016. Patricia A Grantham, Forest Supervisor.
    [FR Doc. 2016-07271 Filed 3-30-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3411-15-P
    DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Forest Service Hood and Willamette Resource Advisory Committee AGENCY:

    Forest Service, USDA.

    ACTION:

    Notice of meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    The Hood and Willamette Resource Advisory Committee (RAC) will meet in Salem, Oregon. 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. RAC information can be found at the following Web site: http://www.fs.usda.gov/detail/willamette/workingtogether/advisorycommittees/?cid=STELPRDB5048434.

    DATES:

    The meeting will be held on May 4, 2016, beginning at 10:00 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 Willamette Heritage Center, Dye House, 1313 Mill Street Southeast, Salem, Oregon.

    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 Willamette National Forest Supervisor's Office. Please call ahead to facilitate entry into the building.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Jennifer Lippert, RAC Coordinator, by phone at 541-225-6440 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 to:

    1. Familarize RAC members with each other;

    2. Review Secure Rural School rules and regulations pertaining to the Title II process; and

    3. Make decisions on proposals submitted for FY2016 Title II funds.

    The meeting is open to the public. The agenda will include time for people to make oral statements of three minutes or less. Individuals wishing to make an oral statement should request in writing by April 22, 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 Jennifer Lippert, RAC Coordinator, Willamette National Forest Supervisor's Office, 3106 Pierce Parkway, Suite D, Springfield, Oregon 97477; by email to [email protected], or via facsimile to 541-225-6224.

    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, please contact the person listed in the section titled FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. All reasonable accommodation requests are managed on a case by case basis.

    Dated: March 15, 2016. Tracy Beck, Forest Supervisor, Willamette National Forest.
    [FR Doc. 2016-07188 Filed 3-30-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3411-15-P
    DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Rural Utilities Service Announcement of Grant and Loan Application Deadlines AGENCY:

    Rural Utilities Service, USDA.

    ACTION:

    Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA), Revolving Fund Program.

    SUMMARY:

    The Rural Utilities Service (RUS) announces its Revolving Fund Program (RFP) application window for Fiscal Year (FY) 2016. The RFP is authorized under section 306(a)(2)(B) of the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act (Con Act), 7 U.S.C. 1926(a)(2)(B). Under the RFP, qualified private, non-profit organizations may receive RFP grant funds to establish a lending program for eligible entities. Eligible entities for the revolving loan fund will be the same entities eligible, under paragraph 1 or 2 of Section 306(a) of the Con Act, 7 U.S.C. 1926(a)(1) or (b)(2), to obtain a loan, loan guarantee, or grant from the RUS Water, Waste Disposal, and Wastewater loan and grant programs.

    This year administrative discretion points may be awarded for work plans that:

    1. Direct loans to the smallest communities with the lowest incomes emphasizing areas where according to the American Community Survey data by census tracts show that at least 20 percent of the population is living in poverty. This emphasis will support Rural Development's goal of providing 20 percent of its funding by 2016 to these areas of need.

    2. Direct loans to areas that lack running water, flush toilets, and modern sewage disposal systems, and areas which have open sewers and high rates of disease caused by poor sanitation, in particular, colonias or Substantially Underserved Trust Areas.

    3. Direct loans that emphasize energy and water efficient components to reduce costs and increase sustainability of rural systems.

    DATES:

    You may submit completed applications for grants on paper or electronically according to the following deadlines:

    • Paper copies must be postmarked and mailed, shipped, or sent overnight no later than May 31, 2016 to be eligible for FY 2016 grant funding. Late or incomplete applications will not be eligible for FY 2016 grant funding.

    • Electronic copies must be received by May 31, 2016 to be eligible for FY 2016 grant funding. Late or incomplete applications will not be eligible for FY 2016 grant funding.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may obtain application guides and materials for the RFP program at the Water and Environmental Programs (WEP) Web site: http://www.rd.usda.gov/programs-services/water-waste-disposal-revolving-loan-funds. You may also request application guides and materials by contacting Lisa Chesnel at (202) 720-0499.

    Submit electronic grant applications at http://www.grants.gov/ and follow the instructions on the Web site.

    Submit completed paper applications for RFP grants to, Rural Utilities Service, Rural Development, U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1400 Independence Avenue SW., Room 2234, STOP 1570, Washington, DC 20250-1570. Applications should be marked Attention: Lisa Chesnel, Water and Environmental Programs.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Lisa Chesnel, Community Programs Specialist, Water and Environmental Programs, Rural Utilities Service, Rural Development, U.S. Department of Agriculture STOP 1570, Room 2234-S, 1400 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20250-1570; Telephone: (202) 720-0499: Fax: (202) 690-0649.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Overview

    Federal Agency: Rural Utilities Service (RUS), USDA.

    Funding Opportunity Title: Grant Program to Establish a Fund for Financing Water and Wastewater Projects (Revolving Fund Program (RFP)).

    Announcement Type: Notice of Funding Availability.

    Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number: 10.864.

    Due Date for Applications: Applications must be mailed, shipped or submitted electronically through Grants.gov no later than May 31, 2016 to be eligible for FY 2016 grant funding.

    Items in Supplementary Information

    A. Program Description: Brief introduction to the RFP.

    B. Federal Award Information: $1,000,000.00.

    C. Eligibility Information: Who is eligible, what kinds of projects are eligible, what criteria determine basic eligibility.

    D. Application and Submission Information: Where to get application materials, what constitutes a completed application, how and where to submit applications, deadlines, items that are eligible.

    E. Application Review Information: Considerations and preferences, scoring criteria, review standards, selection information.

    F. Federal Award Administration Information: Award notice information, award recipient reporting requirements.

    G. Federal Awarding Agency Contacts: Web site, phone, fax, email, contact name.

    H. Other Information: Non-discrimination Statement.

    A. Program Description

    Drinking water systems are basic and vital to both health and economic development. With dependable water facilities, rural communities can attract families and businesses that will invest in the community and improve the quality of life for all residents. Without dependable water facilities, the communities cannot sustain economic development.

    RUS provides financial and technical assistance to help communities bring safe drinking water and sanitary, environmentally sound waste disposal facilities to rural Americans. It supports the sound development of rural communities and the growth of our economy without endangering the environment.

    The Revolving Fund Program (RFP) was established under 7 U.S.C. part 1783 to assist communities with water or wastewater systems. Qualified private, non-profit organizations, who are selected for funding, will receive RFP grant funds to establish a lending program for eligible entities. Eligible entities for the revolving loan fund will be those entities eligible under 7 U.S.C. 1926(a)(1) and (2) to obtain a loan, loan guarantee, or grant from the Water and Waste Disposal loan and grant programs administered by RUS. As grant recipients, the non-profit organizations will set up a revolving loan fund to provide loans to finance predevelopment costs of water or wastewater projects, or short-term small capital projects not part of the regular operation and maintenance of current water and wastewater systems. The amount of financing to an eligible entity shall not exceed $100,000.00 and shall be repaid in a term not to exceed 10 years. The rate shall be determined in the approved grant work plan.

    B. Federal Award Information

    Available funds: $1,000,000.

    C. Eligibility Information 1. Eligible Applicants

    An applicant is eligible to apply for the RFP grant if it:

    a. Is a private, non-profit organization;

    b. Is legally established and located within one of the following:

    i. A state within the United States;

    ii. The District of Columbia;

    iii. The Commonwealth of Puerto Rico; or

    iv. A United States territory;

    c. Has the legal capacity and authority to carry out the grant purpose;

    d. Has a proven record of successfully operating a revolving loan fund to rural areas;

    e. Has capitalization acceptable to the Agency, and is composed of at least 51 percent of the outstanding interest or membership being citizens of the United States or individuals who reside in the United States after being legally admitted for permanent residence;

    f. Has no delinquent debt to the Federal government or no outstanding judgments to repay a Federal debt;

    g. Demonstrates that it possesses the financial, technical, and managerial capability to comply with Federal and state laws and requirements; and

    h. Is not a corporation that has been convicted of a felony (or had an officer or agent acting on behalf of the corporation convicted of a felony) within the past 24 months. Any Corporation that has any unpaid Federal tax liability that has been assessed, for which all judicial and administrative remedies have been exhausted or have lapsed, and that is not being paid in a timely manner pursuant to an agreement with the authority responsible for collecting the tax liability is not eligible.

    2. Cost Sharing or Matching

    Applicants must contribute at least 20 percent of funds from sources other than the proceeds of an RFP grant to pay part of the cost of a loan recipient's project. In-kind contribution will not be considered.

    3. Other: What are the basic eligibility requirements for a project?

    a. The following activities are authorized under the RFP statute:

    i. Grant funds must be used to capitalize a revolving fund program for the purpose of providing direct loan financing to eligible entities for pre-development costs associated with proposed or with existing water and wastewater systems, or,

    ii. Short-term costs incurred for equipment replacement, small-scale extension of services, or other small capital projects that are not part of the regular operations and maintenance activities of existing water and wastewater systems.

    b. Grant funds may not be used to pay any of the following:

    i. Payment of the Grant Recipient's administrative costs or expenses, or,

    ii. Delinquent debt owed to the Federal Government.

    D. Application and Submission Information 1. Address To Request Application Package

    a. The Internet: http://www.rd.usda.gov/programs-services/water-waste-disposal-revolving-loan-funds or Grants.gov Web site: http://www.grants.gov/.

    b. For paper copies of these materials, you may call (202) 720-9583.

    2. Content and Form of Application Submission

    a. You may file an application in either paper or electronic format. To be considered for support, you must be an eligible entity and must submit a complete application by the deadline date. You should consult the cost principles and general administrative requirements for grants pertaining to their organizational type in order to prepare the budget and complete other parts of the application. You also must demonstrate compliance (or intent to comply), through certification or other means, with a number of public policy requirements. Applications should be prepared in conformance with 7 CFR part 1783, and departmental and other applicable regulations including 2 CFR parts 180, 182, 200, 400 and 421, or any successor regulations.

    Whether you file a paper or an electronic application, you will need a DUNS number and must be registered in the System for Award Management (SAM). Detailed information on obtaining a DUNS number and registering for SAM may be found in section D(3).

    b. Applicants must complete and submit the following forms to apply for a RFP grant:

    i. Standard Form 424, “Application for Federal Assistance”.

    ii. Standard Form 424A, “Budget Information—Non-Construction Programs”.

    iii. Standard Form 424B, “Assurances—Non-Construction Programs”.

    iv. Standard Form LLL, “Disclosure of Lobbying Activity”.

    v. Form RD 400-1, “Equal Opportunity Agreement”.

    vi. Form RD 400-4, “Assurance Agreement (Under Title VI, Civil Rights Act of 1964).

    c. The project proposal should outline the project in sufficient detail to provide a reader with a complete understanding of how the loan program will work. Explain what you will accomplish by lending funds to eligible entities. Demonstrate the feasibility of the proposed loan program in meeting the objectives of this grant program. The proposal should cover the following elements:

    i. Present a brief project overview. Explain the purpose of the project, how it relates to RUS's purposes, how you will carry out the project, what the project will produce, and who will direct it.

    ii. Describe why the project is necessary. Demonstrate that eligible entities need loan funds. Quantify the number of prospective borrowers or provide statistical or narrative evidence that a sufficient number of borrowers will exist to justify the grant award. Describe the service area. Address community needs.

    iii. Clearly state your project goals. Your objectives should clearly describe the goals and be concrete and specific enough to be quantitative or observable. They should also be feasible and relate to the purpose of the loan program.

    iv. The narrative should cover in more detail the items briefly described in the Project Summary. It should establish the basis for any claims that you have substantial expertise in promoting the safe and productive use of revolving funds. In describing what the project will achieve, you should tell the reader if it also will have broader influence. The narrative should address the following points:

    (1) Document your ability to administer and service a revolving fund in accordance with the provisions of 7 CFR part 1783.

    (2) Document your ability to commit financial resources to establish the RFP with funds your organization controls. This documentation should describe the sources of funds other than the RFP grant that will be used to pay your operational costs and provide financial assistance for projects.

    (3) Demonstrate that you have secured commitments of significant financial support from other funding sources, if appropriate.

    (4) List the fees and charges that borrowers will be assessed.

    v. The work plan must describe the tasks and activities that will be accomplished with available resources during the grant period. It must show the work you plan to do to achieve the anticipated outcomes, goals, and objectives set out for the RFP. The plan must:

    (1) Describe the work to be performed by each person.

    (2) Give a schedule or timetable of work to be done.

    (3) Show evidence of previous experience with the techniques to be used or their successful use by others.

    (4) Outline the loan program to include the following: Specific loan purposes, a loan application process, priorities, borrower eligibility criteria, limitations, fees, interest rates, terms, and collateral requirements.

    (5) Provide a marketing plan.

    (6) Explain the mechanics of how you will transfer loan funds to the borrowers.

    (7) Describe follow-up or continuing activities that should occur after project completion such as monitoring and reporting borrowers' accomplishments.

    (8) Describe how the results will be evaluated. The evaluation criteria should be in line with the project objectives.

    (9) List all personnel responsible for administering this program along with a statement of their qualifications and experience.

    vi. The written justification for projected costs should explain how budget figures were determined for each category. It should indicate which costs are to be covered by grant funds and which costs will be met by your organization or other organizations. The justification should account for all expenditures discussed in the narrative. It should reflect appropriate cost-sharing contributions. The budget justification should explain the budget and accounting system proposed or in place. The administrative costs for operating the budget should be expressed as a percentage of the overall budget. The budget justification should provide specific budget figures, rounding off figures to the nearest dollar. Applicants should consult 2 CFR 200, Subpart E, “Cost Principals,” for information about appropriate costs for each budget category.

    vii. In addition to completing the standard application forms, you must submit:

    (1) Supplementary material that demonstrate that your organization is legally recognized under state or Tribal and Federal law. Satisfactory documentation includes, but is not limited to, certificates from the Secretary of State, or copies of state statutes or laws establishing your organization. Letters from the IRS awarding tax-exempt status are not considered adequate evidence.

    (2) A certified list of directors and officers with their respective terms.

    (3) Evidence of tax exempt status from the IRS.

    (4) The most recent audit of your organization.

    (5) The following financial statements:

    (a) A pro forma balance sheet at start-up and for at least three additional years; Balance sheets, income statements, and cash flow statements for the last three years.

    (b) If your organization has been formed less than three years, the financial statements should be submitted for the periods from inception to the present. Projected income and cash flow statements for at least three years supported by a list of assumptions showing the basis for the projections. The projected income statement and balance sheet must include one set of projections that shows the revolving loan fund only and a separate set of projections that shows your organization's total operations.

    (6) Additional information to support and describe your plan for achieving the grant objectives. The information may be regarded as essential for understanding and evaluating the project and may be found in letters of support, as resolutions, policies, and other relevant documents. The supplements may be presented in appendices to the proposal.

    d. Compliance with other federal statutes:

    The applicant must provide evidence of compliance with other federal statutes, including but not limited to the following:

    i. Debarment and suspension information is required in accordance with 2 CFR part 417 (Nonprocurement Debarment and Suspension) supplemented by 2 CFR part 180, if it applies. The section heading is “What information must I provide before entering into a covered transaction with the Federal Government?” located at 2 CFR 180.335. It is part of OMB's Guidance for Grants and Agreements concerning Government-wide Debarment and Suspension.

    ii. All of your organization's known workplaces by including the actual address of buildings (or parts of buildings) or other sites where work under the award takes place. Workplace identification is required under the drug-free workplace requirements in Subpart B of 2 CFR part 421, which adopts the Government-wide implementation (2 CFR part 182) of the Drug-Free Workplace Act.

    iii. 2 CFR parts 200 and 400 (Uniform Assistance Requirements, Cost Principles and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards).

    iv. 2 CFR part 182 (Governmentwide Requirements for Drug-Free Workplace (Financial Assistance)) and 2 CFR part 421 (Requirements for Drug Free Workplace (Financial Assistance)).

    v. Executive Order 13166, “Improving Access to Services for Persons with Limited English Proficiency.” For information on limited English proficiency and agency-specific guidance, go to http://www.LEP.gov.

    e. Requirements for numbers of copies of submitted applications:

    i. Send or deliver paper applications by the U.S. Postal Service (USPS) or courier delivery services to: Water and Environmental Programs, Rural Utilities Service, 1400 Independence Avenue SW., Attention: Lisa Chesnel, Mail STOP 1570, Room 2233-S, Washington, DC, 20250-1570.

    ii. For paper applications mail or ensure delivery of an original paper application (no stamped, photocopied, or initialed signatures) and two copies by the deadline date. The application and any materials sent with it become Federal records by law and cannot be returned to you.

    iii. Electronically submitted applications:

    (1). Applications will not be accepted by fax or electronic mail.

    (2). Electronic applications for grants will be accepted if submitted through Grants.gov.

    (3). Applicants must preregister successfully with Grants.gov to use the electronic applications option. Application information may be downloaded from Grants.gov without preregistration.

    (4). Applicants who apply through Grants.gov should submit their electronic applications before the deadline.

    (5). Grants.gov contains full instructions on all required passwords, credentialing, and software. Follow the instructions at Grants.gov for registering and submitting an electronic application.

    (6). Grants.gov has two preregistration requirements: A DUNS number and an active registration in the SAM. See section D(3) below for instructions on obtaining a DUNS number and registering in the SAM.

    3. Unique Entity Identifier and System for Award Management (SAM)

    The applicant for a grant must supply a Dun and Bradstreet Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number as part of an application. The Standard Form 424 (SF-424) contains a field for the DUNS number. The applicant can obtain the DUNS number free of charge by calling Dun and Bradstreet. Please see http://fedgov.dnb.com/webform for more information on how to obtain a DUNS number or how to verify your organization's number.

    In accordance with 2 CFR part 25, whether applying electronically or by paper, the applicant must register in the System for Award Management (SAM) prior to submitting an application. Applicants may register for the SAM at https://www.sam.gov/portal/SAM/#1. The SAM registration must remain active with current information at all times while RUS is considering an application or while a Federal Grant award or loan is active. To remain registered in the SAM database the applicant must review and update the information in the SAM database annually from date of initial registration or from the date of the last update. The applicant must ensure that the information in the database is current, accurate, and complete.

    4. Submission Dates and Times

    You may submit completed applications for grants on paper or electronically according to the following deadlines:

    a. Paper copies must be postmarked and mailed, shipped, or sent overnight no later than May 31, 2016 to be eligible for FY 2016 grant funding. Late or incomplete applications will not be eligible for FY 2016 grant funding.

    b. Electronic copies must be received by May 31, 2016 to be eligible for FY 2016 grant funding. Late or incomplete applications will not be eligible for FY 2016 grant funding.

    5. Funding Restrictions

    Grant proceeds may be used solely to establish the revolving loan fund to provide loans to eligible entities for: Pre-development costs associated with proposed or existing water and wastewater projects, and short-term costs incurred for replacement equipment or other small capital projects not part of regular operations and maintenance of existing water and wastewater systems. Grant recipients may not use grant funds in any manner inconsistent with the purposes described in 7 CFR 1783.12 or in the terms of the grant agreement. Administrative expenses may, however, be paid or reimbursed from revolving loan fund assets that are not RFP grant funds, including revolved funds and case originally contributed by the grant recipient.

    E. Application Review Information

    Within 30 days of receiving your application, RUS will send you a letter of acknowledgment. Your application will be reviewed for completeness to determine if you included all of the items required. If your application is incomplete or ineligible, RUS will return it to you with an explanation. A review team, composed of at least two RUS staff members, will evaluate all applications and proposals. They will make overall recommendations based on factors such as eligibility, application completeness, and conformity to application requirements. They will score the applications based on criteria in the following section.

    1. Criteria

    All applications that are complete and eligible will be ranked competitively based on the following scoring criteria:

    a. Degree of expertise and successful experience in making and servicing commercial loans, with a successful record, for the following number of full years:

    i. At least 1 but less than 3 years—5 points.

    ii. At least 3 but less than 5 years—10 points.

    iii. At least 5 but less than 10 years—20 points.

    iv. 10 or more years—30 points.

    b. Extent to which the work plan demonstrates a well thought out, comprehensive approach to accomplishing the objectives of this part, clearly defines who will be served by the project, clearly articulates the problem/issues to be addressed, identifies the service area to be covered by the RFP loans and appears likely to be sustainable; Up to 40 points.

    c. Percentage of applicant contributions. Points allowed under this paragraph will be based on written evidence of the availability of funds from sources other than the proceeds of an RFP grant to pay part of the cost of a loan recipient's project. In-kind contributions will not be considered. Funds from other sources as a percentage of the RFP grant and points corresponding to such percentages are as follows:

    i. Less than 20 percent—ineligible.

    ii. At least 20 percent but less than 50 percent—10 points.

    iii. 50 percent or more—20 points.

    d. Extent to which the goals and objectives are clearly defined, tied to the work plan, and are measurable; Up to 15 points.

    e. Lowest ratio of projected administrative expenses to loans advanced; Up to 10 points.

    f. The evaluation methods for considering loan applications and making RFP loans are specific to the program, clearly defined, measurable, and are consistent with program outcomes; Up to 20 points.

    g. Administrator's discretion points up to 10 points may be awarded.

    To the maximum extent possible, there should be an emphasis on high poverty areas in rural communities and rural areas with the lowest incomes, particularly those areas where at least 45 percent of children qualify for the National School Lunch Program. This emphasis will support Rural Development's goal of providing 20 percent of its funding by 2016 to these areas of need.

    Factors include:

    i. Directs loans to the smallest communities with the lowest incomes emphasizing areas where according to the American Community Survey data by census tracts show that at least 20 percent of the population is living in poverty.

    ii. Directs loans to areas which lack running water, flush toilets, and modern sewage disposal systems, and areas which have open sewers and high rates of disease caused by poor sanitation, in particular, colonias or Substantially Underserved Trust Areas.

    iii. Directs loans that emphasize energy and water efficient components to reduce costs and increase sustainability of rural systems.

    2. Review and Selection Process

    RUS will rank all qualifying applications by their final score. Applications will be selected for funding, based on the highest scores and the availability of funding for RFP grants. Each applicant will be notified in writing of the score its application receives.

    a. In making its decision about your application, RUS may determine that your application is:

    i. Eligible and selected for funding,

    ii. Eligible but offered fewer funds than requested,

    iii. Eligible but not selected for funding, or

    iv. Ineligible for the grant.

    b. In accordance with 7 CFR part 1900, subpart B, you generally have the right to appeal adverse decisions. Some adverse decisions cannot be appealed. For example, if you are denied RUS funding due to a lack of funds available for the grant program, this decision cannot be appealed. However, you may make a request to the National Appeals Division (NAD) to review the accuracy of our finding that the decision cannot be appealed. The appeal must be in writing and filed at the appropriate regional office, which can be found at www.nad.usda.gov or by calling (703) 305-1166.

    F. Federal Award Administration Information 1. Federal Award Notices

    RUS generally notifies by mail applicants whose projects are selected for awards. However, the receipt of an award letter does not serve to authorize the applicant to commence performance under the award. RUS follows the award letter with an agreement containing terms and conditions for the grant. Applicants selected for funding will complete and return grant agreement, which outlines the terms and conditions of the grant award.

    2. Administrative and National Policy Requirements

    The items listed in Section D of this notice, the RFP program regulation and departmental and other regulations including 2 CFR parts 180, 182, 200, 400, 421 and any successor regulations implement the appropriate administrative and national policy requirements, which include but are not limited to:

    a. SF-270, “Request for Advance or Reimbursement,” will be completed by the Non-Federal Entity and submitted to either the state or national office no more frequently than monthly.

    b. Upon receipt of a properly completed SF-270, the funds will be requested through the field office terminal system. Ordinarily, payment will be made within 30 days after receipt of a proper request for reimbursement.

    c. Non-Federal Entities may use women- and minority-owned banks (a bank which is owned at least 50 percent by women or minority group members) for the deposit and disbursement of funds.

    3. Reporting

    a. Any change in the scope of the project, budget adjustments of more than 10 percent of the total budget, or any other significant change in the project must be reported to and approved by the approval official by written amendment to the grant agreement. Any change not approved may be cause for termination of the grant.

    b. Non-Federal Entities shall constantly monitor performance to ensure that time schedules are being met, projected work by time periods is being accomplished, and other performance objectives are being achieved. The Non-Federal Entity will provide project reports as follows:

    i. SF-425, “Financial Status Report (short form),” and a project performance activity report will be required of all Non-Federal Entities on a quarterly basis, due 30 days after the end of each quarter.

    ii. A final project performance report will be required with the last SF-425 due 90 days after the end of the last quarter in which the project is completed. The final report may serve as the last quarterly report.

    iii. All multi-State Non-Federal Entities are to submit an original of each report to the National Office. Non-Federal Entities serving only one State are to submit an original of each report to the State Office. The project performance reports should detail, preferably in a narrative format, activities that have transpired for the specific time period.

    c. Financial reporting. The Non-Federal Entity will provide an audit report or financial statements as follows:

    i. Non-Federal Entities expending $750,000 or more Federal funds per fiscal year will submit an audit conducted in accordance with 2 CFR part 200 The audit will be submitted within nine months after the Non-Federal Entity's fiscal year. Additional audits may be required if the project period covers more than one fiscal year.

    ii. Non-Federal Entities expending less than $750,000 will provide annual financial statements covering the grant period, consisting of the organization's statement of income and expense and balance sheet signed by an appropriate official of the organization. Financial statements will be submitted within 90 days after the Non-Federal Entity's fiscal year.

    iii. Recipient and Subrecipient Reporting. The applicant must have the necessary processes and systems in place to comply with the reporting requirements for first-tier sub-awards and executive compensation under the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 in the event the applicant receives funding unless such applicant is exempt from such reporting requirements pursuant to 2 CFR part 170, § 170.110(b). The reporting requirements under the Transparency Act pursuant to 2 CFR part 170 are as follows:

    (1) First Tier Sub-Awards of $25,000 or more in non-Recovery Act funds (unless they are exempt under 2 CFR part 170) must be reported by the Recipient to http://www.fsrs.gov no later than the end of the month following the month the obligation was made.

    (2) The Total Compensation of the Recipient's Executives (five most highly compensated executives) must be reported by the Recipient (if the Recipient meets the criteria under 2 CFR part 170) to https://www.sam.gov/portal/SAM/#1 by the end of the month following the month in which the award was made.

    (3) The Total Compensation of the Subrecipient's Executives (five most highly compensated executives) must be reported by the Subrecipient (if the Subrecipient meets the criteria under 2 CFR part 170) to the Recipient by the end of the month following the month in which the subaward was made.

    G. Federal Awarding Agency Contacts

    1. Web site: http://www.rd.usda.gov/programs-services/water-waste-disposal-revolving-loan-funds. The RUS Web site maintains up-to-date resources and contact information for the RFP.

    2. Phone: (202) 720-9640.

    3. Fax: (202) 690-0649.

    4. Email: [email protected]

    5. Main point of contact: Lisa Chesnel, Community Programs Specialist, Water and Environmental Programs, Rural Utilities Service, Rural Development, U.S. Department of Agriculture.

    H. Other Information 1. USDA Non-Discrimination Statement

    In accordance with Federal civil rights law and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) civil rights regulations and policies, the USDA, its Agencies, offices, and employees, and institutions participating in or administering USDA programs are prohibited from discriminating based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, gender identity (including gender expression), sexual orientation, disability, age, marital status, family/parental status, income derived from a public assistance program, political beliefs, or reprisal or retaliation for prior civil rights activity, in any program or activity conducted or funded by USDA (not all bases apply to all programs). Remedies and complaint filing deadlines vary by program or incident.

    Persons with disabilities who require alternative means of communication for program information (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, American Sign Language, etc.) should contact the responsible Agency or USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TTY) or contact USDA through the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339. Additionally, program information may be made available in languages other than English.

    To file a program discrimination complaint, complete the USDA Program Discrimination Complaint Form, AD-3027, found online at http://www.ascr.usda.gov/complaint_filing_cust.html and at any USDA office or write a letter addressed to USDA and provide in the letter all of the information requested in the form. To request a copy of the complaint form, call (866) 632-9992. Submit your completed form or letter to USDA by:

    (1) Mail: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20250-9410;

    (2) Fax: (202) 690-7442; or

    (3) Email: [email protected]

    USDA is an equal opportunity provider, employer, and lender.

    Dated: February 29, 2016. Brandon McBride, Administrator, Rural Utilities Service.
    [FR Doc. 2016-07309 Filed 3-30-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

    The Department of Commerce will submit to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for clearance the following proposal for collection of information under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. chapter 35).

    Agency: U.S. Census Bureau.

    Title: 2017 New York City Housing and Vacancy Survey.

    OMB Control Number: 0607-0757.

    Form Number(s): H-100, H-100(SP), H-100A, H-100A(SP), H-108, H-100(L), H-100L(A).

    Type of Request: Reinstatement, with change, of a previously Approved collection for which approval has expired.

    Number of Respondents: 19,000.

    Average Hours per Response: 0.5 hours.

    Burden Hours: 9,396.

    Needs and Uses: The Census Bureau will conduct the survey for the City of New York in order to determine the vacancy rate of rental housing stock, which the city uses to enact specific policies. New York City will also use the data to help measure the quality of its housing, and learn specific demographic characteristics about the city's residents.

    Affected Public: Primarily households and some rental offices/realtors (for vacants).

    Frequency: Every three years.

    Respondent's Obligation: Voluntary.

    Legal Authority: Title 13 U.S.C.—Section 8b and Local Emergency Housing Rent Control Act, Laws of New York (Chapters 8603 and 657).

    This information collection request may be viewed at www.reginfo.gov. Follow the instructions to view Department of Commerce collections currently under review by OMB.

    Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collection should be sent within 30 days of publication of this notice to [email protected] or faxed to (202) 395-5806.

    Dated: March 28, 2016. Glenna Mickelson, Management Analyst, Office of the Chief Information Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2016-07298 Filed 3-30-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-07-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Foreign-Trade Zones Board [B-15-2016] Foreign-Trade Zone (FTZ) 87—Lake Charles, Louisiana; Notification of Proposed Production Activity; Sasol Chemicals (USA), LLC, Subzone 87E, (Assembly of Ethylene Distillation/Rectification Plant and Ethane Cracker/Reaction Unit; Production of Polyethylene) Westlake and Sulphur, Louisiana

    Sasol Chemicals (USA), LLC (Sasol) submitted a notification of proposed production activity to the FTZ Board for its sites within Subzone 87E in Westlake and Sulphur, Louisiana. The notification conforming to the requirements of the regulations of the FTZ Board (15 CFR 400.22) was received on March 17, 2016.

    Sasol is requesting FTZ authority for the assembly and installation of an ethylene distillation/rectification plant and ethane cracker/reaction unit(s). Sasol is also requesting to produce polyethylene from foreign-sourced ethane once the construction is completed. Pursuant to 15 CFR 400.14(b), FTZ activity would be limited to the specific foreign-status materials/components and specific finished products described in the submitted notification (as described below) and subsequently authorized by the FTZ Board.

    Production under FTZ procedures could allow Sasol to choose the duty rates during customs entry procedures that apply to the ethylene distillation/rectification plant and ethane cracker/reaction unit(s) (free and 4.2%) and the finished polyethylene (6.5%) for the foreign-status inputs noted below.

    The components and materials from abroad for the assembly and installation of the ethylene distillation/rectification plant and ethane cracker/reaction unit include: Ethane; paint; cellular polyurethane foam insulation; plastic stacking corner fixtures for stacking pallets; plastic cable guides; Teflon back-up rings; fiber reinforced plastic washers; plastic gaskets; plastic washers; Teflon encapsulated gaskets; vulcanized rubber hoses; vulcanized, cellular rubber rings; neoprene seals; neoprene rubber gaskets; rubber feed-filtrate hoses reinforced or otherwise combined with textile materials without fittings/measurement hoses with fittings/diaphragms/vibration control bushings/seals/containers, with or without their closures, of a kind used for the packing and transporting of merchandise/sealing frame diaphragms; textile filter bags; ceramic insulation; refractory materials for cracking furnaces; center precast walls; fiber glass filters non-woven fabric; fiber glass filters fabric woven; carbon steel flatbar for toeplates; seamless iron or steel pipes; seamless stainless steel pipe (boiler tubes); seamless alloy steel pipe (exchanger, boiler tubes); submerged arc welded line pipe; longitudinally welded line pipe; welded stainless steel pipe; welded alloy steel pipe; welded carbon steel pipe; welded stainless steel pipe; pipe fittings: carbon steel threaded plugs/carbon steel unions (ductile fittings, non-threaded)/stainless steel flanges/stainless steel threaded elbows and bends/stainless steel concentric reducers/stainless steel elbows/butt welding fittings/stainless steel sleeves (couplings)/stainless steel weldolets/stainless steel nipples/iron or steel flanges/iron or steel threaded elbow and bends/iron or steel threaded sleeves (couplings)/iron or nonalloy steel butt welding fittings with an inside diameter of less than 360 millimeters/alloy steel butt welding fittings with an inside diameter of less than 360 millimeters/butt welding fittings of all metallurgies other than stainless steel with and inside diameter of 360 millimeters or more/butt welding fittings of all metallurgies other than stainless steel—nipples; pumps (venturi tubes); steel beams, columns, posts, platforms and ladders and steel assemblies for use in steel structures; pipe rack modules (steel structures with piping); steel tanks for liquid; steel fume collectors for holding gas; stainless steel belts (superbelts); galvanized carbon steel wire mesh screen; iron or steel machine screws; iron or steel studs; iron or steel nuts; stainless steel threaded rods; steel washers; cotter pins (split pins); coil spring pins; steel hairsprings; steel assemblies for mine air heaters; steel wires; electrical grounding rods; spring hangers for supporting pipe in steel structures; aluminum connecting fishplates (splice bar for connecting aluminum beams or tracks); aluminum ladders; steel wrenches, non-adjustable; steel wrenches, adjustable; socket wrenches; carbon steel threaded studs; stainless steel grating discs (with assembly hardware); fabricated steel brackets; non-iron or steel attachment brackets; boilers with steam production exceeding 45 tons per hour; boilers with steam production not exceeding 45 tons per hour; condensate and boiler feedwater system parts; steam boiler heat exchangers; parts for steam boilers; steam turbines (compressor driver); spare rotors for steam turbine in steel container; high pressure deck pumps; pitch pumps; rotary positive displacement pumps; centrifugal water pumps; feed pumps, cloth wash pumps; eductors (acts as a pump with no moving parts); pump parts; vacuum station pumps; exhaust fans; induced draft fans; propylene refrigeration compressors; ethylene refrigeration compressors; screw compressors; pellet transfer air compressors; nitrogen compressors; cracked gas compressors; decoke air compressors; spare compressor rotor assemblies in steel container; parts for fans and blowers; parts for compressors; parts for pumps; flare systems; dry flare superheater condenser pots; furnace parts; cracked gas driers; depropanizer column (distillation process to remove propane); debutanizer column (distillation process to remove butane); de-ethanizer column (distillation process to remove ethane); quench water towers; coolers (shell and tube heat exchangers); heaters (shell and tube heat exchangers); air cooled (fin-fan) heat exchangers; brazed aluminum plate-fin heat exchangers; reactors; ethane feed systems; parts for quench water towers (fabricated center support beams with hardware and carbon steel lateral pipe distributors with hardware); heat exchanger parts; reactor parts; sludge paddles; carbon steel large drums, suspect condensate flash drums; strainers; filters; carbon steel drums for hydro carbon vapor & liquid separation; filter elements; parts for filtering machinery; liquid propane ethane stripper feed chiller parts; truck weighing scales; down flow booths with temperature control cooling coils and integrated safety shower units; lifting devices; aggregate feeder conveyors; mixer feed screw conveyors; truck and railcar loading arms; rock breaker boom systems; lime silo bin vent assemblies; special tools for rock breakers; self-feeder lid assemblies; pulverizer mills to grind sample material; millmate assemblies; jaw crushers; colloidal mixing systems; overflow chutes; mounting brackets; flotation tank cell components, disassembled for shipping; washer plates; nut plates; extruders; static mixers; air electromechanical self-contained electric motors; gas motor driven machines; ammonia storage package; accumulators; parts for lime mixers; pressure reducing valves; hand-operated relief valves; non-iron or steel hand operated valves; hand-operated copper valves; hand-operated steel valves; hydraulic and pneumatic actuated valves; copper valve parts; steel valve parts; iron or steel slide plates; spiral wound gaskets, mixture of metallic material; collector seals; electric actuator of an output exceeding 37.5 watts but not exceeding 74.6 watts; gear motors; electric motors of an output exceeding 74.6 watts but not exceeding 735 watts; motors of an output exceeding 750 watts but not exceeding 75 kilo watts; motors exceeding 750 watts but not exceeding 14.92 kilo watts; motors exceeding 75 kilo watts but under 149.2 kilo watts; motors not exceeding 373 kilo watts; motors of 149.2 kilo watts or more but not exceeding 150 kilo watts; rock breaker hydraulic power units with a power output not exceeding 50 watts; speed drive controllers for electric motors; bolt heaters; electric mercury retorts; visual sensors; automatic fuses; solenoid operated valve open/close switch boxes; safety relays; on/off electrical switches; limit switches; electrical terminals; electrical splices and couplings; junction boxes including support switch boxes; auxiliary panels; I-line distribution panels; local control panels; variable bleed solenoid valve box sets; parts of machines, thermocouples; printed circuit assemblies; cables for emergency switches; sea containers; pyrometers; flow meters (instruments for measuring liquid flow); liquid level sensors; level housing assemblies; pressure transmitters; pressure gauges; level transmitters, parts & accessories; sensors; gas chromatographs; electrical turbidity transmitters and sensors; turbidity transmitters and sensors with exposure meters; integrated turbines compressor control system designed for use in 6, 12 or 24 volt systems; local gauge board with bolts, nuts & washers (duty rates range from free to 9%).

    The request indicates that alloy steel pipes (diameter exceeding 114.3 mm but not exceeding 406.4 mm), HTSUS 7304.19.5050; butt welding fittings, HTSUS 7307.23.0000; iron or non-alloy steel pipes (external diameter exceeding 609.6 mm), HTSUS 7305.11.1060; iron or non-alloy steel pipes (external diameter exceeding 406.4 mm but not exceeding 609.6 mm), HTSUS 7305.11.1030; welded iron or non-alloy steel tubes, HTSUS 7305.31.4000; iron or non-alloy line pipes (outside diameter exceeding 114.3 mm), HTSUS 7306.19.1050; welded iron or non-alloy steel pipes (external diameter exceeding 406.4 mm but not exceeding 609.6 mm), HTSUS 7305.12.1030; line pipes (external diameter exceeding 609.6 mm), HTSUS 7305.19.1060; and, welded stainless steel line pipes (outside diameter not exceeding 114.3 mm), HTSUS 7306.19.1010, are subject to antidumping/countervailing duty (AD/CVD) orders. The FTZ Board's regulations (15 CFR 400.14(e)) require that merchandise subject to AD/CVD orders be admitted to the zone in privileged foreign status (19 CFR 146.41).

    Additionally, production of polyethylene under FTZ procedures could exempt Sasol from customs duty payments on the foreign-status ethane (duty free) used in export production. On its domestic sales, Sasol would be able to choose the duty rate during customs entry procedures that applies to polyethylene (duty rate 6.5%) for the foreign-status ethane.

    Public comment is invited from interested parties. Submissions shall be addressed to the FTZ Board's Executive Secretary at the address below. The closing period for their receipt is May 10, 2016.

    A copy of the notification will be available for public inspection at the Office of the Executive Secretary, Foreign-Trade Zones Board, Room 21013, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230-0002, and in the “Reading Room” section of the FTZ Board's Web site, which is accessible via www.trade.gov/ftz.

    For further information, contact Diane Finver at [email protected] or (202) 482-1367.

    Dated: March 25, 2016. Andrew McGilvray, Executive Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-07315 Filed 3-30-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Foreign-Trade Zones Board [S-4-2016] Approval of Subzone Status, FTZ Networks, Inc., Olive Branch, MS

    On January 19, 2016, the Executive Secretary of the Foreign-Trade Zones (FTZ) Board docketed an application submitted by Tunica County, Mississippi, grantee of FTZ 287, requesting subzone status subject to the existing activation limit of FTZ 287 on behalf of FTZ Networks, Inc., in Olive Branch, Mississippi.

    The application was processed in accordance with the FTZ Act and Regulations, including notice in the Federal Register inviting public comment (81 FR 4249-4250, January 26, 2016). The FTZ staff examiner reviewed the application and determined that it meets the criteria for approval.

    Pursuant to the authority delegated to the FTZ Board's Executive Secretary (15 CFR 400.36(f)), the application to establish Subzone 287A is approved, subject to the FTZ Act and the Board's regulations, including Section 400.13, and further subject to FTZ 287's 2,000-acre activation limit.

    Dated: March 25, 2016. Andrew McGilvray, Executive Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-07317 Filed 3-30-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [C-570-041] Truck and Bus Tires From the People's Republic of China: Postponement of Preliminary Determination in the Countervailing Duty Investigation AGENCY:

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

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Jennifer Shore or Mark Kennedy, AD/CVD Operations, Office I, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-2778 or (202) 482-7883, respectively.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background

    On February 18, 2016, the Department of Commerce (the Department) initiated a countervailing duty investigation on Truck and Bus Tires From the People's Republic of China (China).1 Currently, the preliminary determination is due no later than April 25, 2016.2

    1See Truck and Bus Tires From the People's Republic of China: Initiation of Countervailing Duty Investigation, 81 FR 9428 (February 25, 2016).

    2 The actual deadline is April 23, 2016, which is a Saturday. Department practice dictates that where a deadline falls on a weekend or federal holiday, the appropriate deadline is the next business day. See Notice of Clarification: Application of “Next Business Day” Rule for Administrative Determination Deadlines Pursuant to the Tariff Act of 1930, As Amended, 70 FR 24533 (May 10, 2005).

    Postponement of the Preliminary Determination

    Section 703(b)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), requires the Department to issue the preliminary determination in a countervailing duty investigation within 65 days after the date on which the Department initiated the investigation. However, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.205(e), if the petitioner makes a timely request for an extension, section 703(c)(1)(A) of the Act allows the Department to postpone the preliminary determination until no later than 130 days after the date on which the Department initiated the investigation. Under 19 CFR 351.205(e), a petitioner must submit a request for postponement 25 days or more before the scheduled date of the preliminary determination and must state the reason for the request. The Department will grant the request unless it finds compelling reasons to deny the request.3

    3See 19 CFR 351.205(e).

    On March 14, 2016, the petitioner 4 in this investigation submitted a timely request pursuant to section 703(c)(1)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.205(e) to postpone the preliminary determination due to the number and nature of subsidy programs under investigation.5

    4 The United Steel, Paper and Forestry, Rubber, Manufacturing, Energy, Allied Industrial and Service Workers International Union, AFL-CIO-CLC (collectively, the petitioner).

    5See Letter from the petitioner, entitled “Truck and Bus Tires From People's Republic of China: Petitioner's Request To Extend the Deadline for the Preliminary Determination,” dated March 14, 2016.

    The record does not present any compelling reasons to deny the petitioner's request. Therefore, in accordance with section 703(c)(1)(A) of the Act, we are fully postponing the due date for the preliminary determination to not later than 130 days after the day on which the investigation was initiated. As a result, the deadline for completion of the preliminary determination is now June 27, 2016. In accordance with section 705(a)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.210(b)(1), the deadline for the final determinations of this investigation will continue to be 75 days after the date of the preliminary determination, unless postponed at a later date.

    This notice is issued and published pursuant to section 703(c)(2) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.205(f)(1).

    Dated: March 24, 2016. Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
    [FR Doc. 2016-07314 Filed 3-30-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XE443 Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to Boost-Backs and Landings of Rockets at Vandenberg Air Force Base AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Notice; proposed incidental harassment authorization; request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    NMFS has received a request from Space Explorations Technology Corporation (SpaceX), for authorization to take marine mammals incidental to boost-backs and landings of Falcon 9 rockets at Vandenberg Air Force Base in California, and at a contingency landing location approximately 30 miles offshore. Pursuant to the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA), NMFS is requesting comments on its proposal to issue an incidental harassment authorization (IHA) to SpaceX to incidentally take marine mammals, by Level B Harassment only, during the specified activity.

    DATES:

    Comments and information must be received no later than May 2, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Comments on the application should be addressed to Jolie Harrison, Chief, Permits and Conservation Division, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service. Physical comments should be sent to 1315 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910 and electronic comments should be sent to [email protected]

    Instructions: Comments sent by any other method, to any other address or individual, or received after the end of the comment period, may not be considered by NMFS. Comments received electronically, including all attachments, must not exceed a 25-megabyte file size. Attachments to electronic comments will be accepted in Microsoft Word or Excel or Adobe PDF file formats only. All comments received are a part of the public record and will generally be posted for public viewing on the Internet at www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental/ without change. All personal identifying information (e.g., name, address), confidential business information, or otherwise sensitive information submitted voluntarily by the sender will be publicly accessible.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Jordan Carduner, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, (301) 427-8401.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Availability

    An electronic copy of SpaceX's IHA application and supporting documents, as well as a list of the references cited in this document, may be obtained by visiting the Internet at www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental/. In case of problems accessing these documents, please call the contact listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

    Background

    Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.) direct the Secretary of Commerce to allow, upon request by U.S. citizens who engage in a specified activity (other than commercial fishing) within a specified area, the incidental, but not intentional, taking of small numbers of marine mammals, providing that certain findings are made and the necessary prescriptions are established.

    The incidental taking of small numbers of marine mammals may be allowed only if NMFS (through authority delegated by the Secretary) finds that the total taking by the specified activity during the specified time period will (i) have a negligible impact on the species or stock(s) and (ii) not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of the species or stock(s) for subsistence uses (where relevant). Further, the permissible methods of taking and requirements pertaining to the mitigation, monitoring and reporting of such taking must be set forth.

    The allowance of such incidental taking under section 101(a)(5)(A), by harassment, serious injury, death, or a combination thereof, requires that regulations be established. Subsequently, a Letter of Authorization may be issued pursuant to the prescriptions established in such regulations, providing that the level of taking will be consistent with the findings made for the total taking allowable under the specific regulations. Under section 101(a)(5)(D), NMFS may authorize such incidental taking by harassment only, for periods of not more than one year, pursuant to requirements and conditions contained within an IHA. The establishment of these prescriptions requires notice and opportunity for public comment.

    NMFS has defined “negligible impact” in 50 CFR 216.103 as “. . . an impact resulting from the specified activity that cannot be reasonably expected to, and is not reasonably likely to, adversely affect the species or stock through effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival.” Except with respect to certain activities not pertinent here, section 3(18) of the MMPA defines “harassment” as: “. . . any act of pursuit, torment, or annoyance which (i) has the potential to injure a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild [Level A harassment]; or (ii) has the potential to disturb a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild by causing disruption of behavioral patterns, including, but not limited to, migration, breathing, nursing, breeding, feeding, or sheltering [Level B harassment].”

    Summary of Request

    On July 28, 2015, we received a request from SpaceX for authorization to take marine mammals incidental to Falcon 9 First Stage recovery activities, including in-air boost-back maneuvers and landings of the First Stage of the Falcon 9 rocket at Vandenberg Air Force Base (VAFB) in California, and at a contingency landing location approximately 50 km (31 mi) offshore of VAFB. SpaceX submitted a revised version of the request on November 5, 2015. This revised version of the application was deemed adequate and complete. Acoustic stimuli, including sonic booms (overpressure of high-energy impulsive sound), landing noise, and possible explosions, resulting from boost-back maneuvers and landings of the Falcon 9 First Stage have the potential to result in take, in the form of Level B harassment, of six species of pinnipeds. NMFS is proposing to authorize the Level B harassment of the following marine mammal species/stocks, incidental to SpaceX's proposed activities: Pacific harbor seal (Phoca vitulina richardii), California sea lion (Zalophus californianus), Steller sea lion (eastern Distinct Population Segment, or DPS) (Eumetopias jubatus), northern elephant seal (Mirounga angustirostris), northern fur seal (Callorhinus ursinus), and Guadalupe fur seal (Arctocephalus townsendi).

    Description of the Specified Activity Overview

    The Falcon 9 is a two-stage rocket designed and manufactured by SpaceX for transport of satellites and SpaceX's Dragon spacecraft into orbit. SpaceX currently operates the Falcon Launch Vehicle Program at Space Launch Complex 4E (SLC-4E) at VAFB. SpaceX proposes regular employment of First Stage recovery by returning the Falcon 9 First Stage to SLC-4 West (SLC-4W) at VAFB for potential reuse up to six times per year. The reuse of the Falcon 9 First Stage will enable SpaceX to efficiently conduct lower cost launch missions from VAFB in support of commercial and government clients. First Stage recovery includes an in-air boost-back maneuver and the landing of the First Stage of the Falcon 9 rocket.

    Although SLC-4W is the preferred landing location, SpaceX has identified the need for a contingency landing action that would only be exercised if there were critical assets on South VAFB that would not permit an over-flight of the First Stage, or if other reasons such as fuel constraints did not permit landing at SLC-4W. The contingency action is to land the First Stage on a barge in the Pacific Ocean at a landing location 50 km (31 miles) offshore of VAFB.

    Dates and Duration

    SpaceX plans to conduct their proposed activities during the period from June 30, 2016 to June 29, 2017. Up to six Falcon 9 First Stage recovery activities would occur per year. Precise dates of Falcon 9 First Stage recovery activities are not known. Falcon 9 First Stage recovery activities may take place at any time of year and at any time of day.

    Specific Geographic Region

    Falcon 9 First Stage recovery activities will originate at VAFB. Areas affected include VAFB and areas on the coastline surrounding VAFB; the Pacific Ocean offshore VAFB; and the Northern Channel Islands (NCI). VAFB operates as a missile test base and aerospace center, supporting west coast space launch activities for the U.S. Air Force (USAF), Department of Defense, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and commercial contractors. VAFB is the main west coast launch facility for placing commercial, government, and military satellites into polar orbit on expendable (unmanned) launch vehicles, and for testing and evaluating intercontinental ballistic missiles and sub-orbital target and interceptor missiles.

    VAFB occupies approximately 99,100 acres of central Santa Barbara County, California (see Figure 1-1 in SpaceX's IHA application), approximately halfway between San Diego and San Francisco. The Santa Ynez River and State Highway 246 divide VAFB into two distinct parts: North Base and South Base. SLC-4W is located on South Base, approximately 0.5 miles (0.8 km) inland from the Pacific Ocean (see Figure 1-2 in SpaceX's IHA application). SLC-4E, the launch facility for SpaceX's Falcon 9 program, is located approximately 427 m to the east of SLC-4W, the proposed landing site for the Falcon 9 First Stage (see Figure 1-2, inset, in SpaceX's IHA application).

    Although SLC-4W is the preferred landing location, SpaceX has identified the need for a contingency landing action that would be exercised if there were critical assets on South VAFB that would not permit an over-flight of the First Stage or if other reasons (e.g. fuel constraints) prevented a landing at SLC-4W. The contingency action is to land the First Stage on a barge in the Pacific Ocean at a landing location 31 miles (50 km) offshore of VAFB (see Figure 1-5 in SpaceX's IHA application for the proposed location of the contingency landing location). Thus the waters of the Pacific Ocean between VAFB and the area approximately 50 km offshore shown in Figure 1-5 in SpaceX's IHA application are also considered part of the project area for the purposes of this proposed authorization.

    The NCI are four islands (San Miguel, Santa Rosa, Santa Cruz, and Anacapa) located approximately 50 km (31 mi) south of Point Conception, which is located on the mainland approximately 6.5 km south of the southern border of VAFB (see Figure 2-1 and 2-2 in the IHA application). All four islands are inhabited by pinnipeds, with San Miguel Island being the most actively used among the four islands for pinniped rookeries. All four islands in the NCI are part of the Channel Islands National Park, while the Channel Islands National Marine Sanctuary encompasses the waters 11 km off the islands. The closest part of the NCI (Harris Point on San Miguel Island) is located more than 55 km south-southeast of SLC-4E, the launch facility for the Falcon 9 rocket. Pinnipeds hauled out on beaches of the NCI may be affected by sonic booms associated with the proposed action, as described later in this document.

    Detailed Description of Activities

    The Falcon 9 is a two-stage rocket designed and manufactured by SpaceX for transport of satellites and SpaceX's Dragon spacecraft into orbit. The First Stage of the Falcon 9 is designed to be reusable, while the second stage is not reusable. The proposed action includes up to six Falcon 9 First Stage recoveries, including in-air boost-back maneuvers and landings of the First Stage, at VAFB and/or at a contingency landing location 50 km offshore over the course of one year.

    Boost-back and Landing Maneuvers

    After launch of the Falcon 9, the boost-back and landing sequence begins when the rocket's First Stage separates from the second stage and the Merlin engines of the First Stage cut off. After First Stage engine cutoff, rather than dropping the First Stage in the Pacific Ocean, exoatmospheric cold gas thrusters would be triggered to flip the First Stage into position for retrograde burn. The First Stage would then descend back toward earth. During descent, a sonic boom would be generated when the First Stage reaches a rate of travel that exceeds the speed of sound. Sound from the sonic boom would have the potential to result in harassment of marine mammals, as described below. The sonic boom's overpressure would be directed at either the coastal area south of SLC-4 or at the ocean surface no less than 50 km off the coast of VAFB, depending on the targeted landing location. Three of the nine First Stage Merlin engines would be restarted to conduct the retrograde burn in order to reduce the velocity of the First Stage in the correct angle to land. Once the First Stage is in position and approaching its landing target, the three engines would be cut off to end the boost-back burn. The First Stage would then perform a controlled descent using atmospheric resistance to slow the stage down and guide it to the landing site. The landing legs on the First Stage would then deploy in preparation for a final single engine burn that would slow the First Stage to a velocity of zero before landing. Please see Figure 1-3 in the IHA application for a graphical depiction of the boost-back and landing sequence, and see Figure 1-4 in the IHA application for an example of the boost-back trajectory of the First Stage and the second stage trajectory.

    Contingency Landing Procedure

    As a contingency action to landing the Falcon 9 First Stage on the SLC-4W landing pad at VAFB, SpaceX proposes to return the Falcon 9 First Stage booster to a barge. The barge is specifically designed to be used as a First Stage landing platform and will be located at least 50 km off VAFB's shore (See Figure 1-5 in the IHA application). The contingency landing location would be used if conditions prevented a landing at SLC-4W, as described above. The maneuvering and landing process described above for a pad landing would be the same for a barge landing. Three vessels would be required to support a barge landing, if it were required: A barge/landing platform (300 ft long and 150 ft wide); a support vessel (165 ft long research vessel); and an ocean tug (120 ft long open water commercial tug). In the event of an unsuccessful barge landing, the First Stage would explode upon impact with the barge; the explosion would not be expected to result in take of marine mammals, as described below. The explosive equivalence with maximum fuel and oxidizer is 503 pounds of trinitrotoluene (TNT) which is capable of a maximum projectile range of 384 m (1,250 ft) from the point of impact. Approximately 25 pieces of debris are expected to remain floating in the water and expected to impact less than 0.46 km2 (114 acres), and the majority of debris would be recovered. All other debris is expected to sink. These 25 pieces of debris are primarily made of Carbon Over Pressure Vessels (COPVs), the LOX fill line, and carbon fiber constructed legs. During previous landing attempts in other locations, SpaceX has performed successful debris recovery. All of the recovered debris would be transported back to Long Beach Harbor for proper disposal. Most of the fuel (estimated 50-150 gallons) is expected to be released onto the barge deck at the location of impact.

    In the event that a contingency landing action is required, SpaceX has considered the likelihood of the First Stage missing the barge and landing instead in the Pacific Ocean, and has determined that the likelihood of such an event is so unlikely as to be considered discountable. This is supported by three previous attempts by SpaceX at Falcon 9 First Stage barge landings, none of which have missed the barge. Therefore, NMFS does not propose to authorize take of marine mammals incidental to landings of the Falcon 9 First Stage in the Pacific Ocean, and the potential effects of landings of the Falcon 9 First Stage in the Pacific Ocean on marine mammals are not considered further in this proposed authorization.

    NMFS has previously issued regulations and Letters of Authorization (LOA) that authorize the take of marine mammals, by Level B harassment, incidental to launches of up to 50 rockets per year (including the Falcon 9) from VAFB (79 FR 10016). The regulations, titled “Taking of Marine Mammals Incidental to U.S. Air Force Launches, Aircraft and Helicopter Operations, and Harbor Activities Related to Vehicles from Vandenberg Air Force Base, California,” published February 24, 2014, are effective from March 2014 to March 2019. The activities proposed by SpaceX are limited to Falcon 9 First Stage recovery events (Falcon 9 boost-back maneuvers and landings); launches of the Falcon 9 rocket are not part of the proposed activities, and incidental take (Level B harassment) resulting from Falcon 9 rocket launches from VAFB is already authorized in the above referenced LOA. As such, NMFS does not propose to authorize take of marine mammals incidental to launches of the Falcon 9 rocket; incidental take resulting from Falcon 9 rocket launches is therefore not analyzed further in this document. The LOA application (USAF 2013a), and links to the Federal Register notice of the final rule (79 FR 10016) and the Federal Register notice of issuance of the LOA (79 FR 18528), can be found on the NMFS Web site at: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental.

    Description of Marine Mammals in the Area of the Specified Activity

    There are six marine mammal species with expected occurrence in the project area (including at VAFB, on the NCI, and in the waters surrounding VAFB, the NCI and the contingency landing location) that are expected to be affected by the specified activities. These include the Steller sea lion (Eumetopias jubatus), northern fur seal (Callorhinus ursinus), northern elephant seal (Mirounga angustirostris), Guadalupe fur seal (Arctocephalus townsendi), California sea lion (Zalophus californianus), and Pacific harbor seal (Phoca vitulina richardsi). There are an additional 28 species of cetaceans with expected or possible occurrence in the project area. However, despite the fact that the ranges of these cetacean species overlap spatially with SpaceX's proposed activities, we have determined that none of the potential stressors associated with the proposed activities (including exposure to debris strike, rocket fuel, and visual and acoustic stimuli, as described further in “Potential Effects of the Specified Activity on Marine Mammals”) are likely to result in take of cetaceans. As we have concluded that the likelihood of a cetacean being taken incidentally as a result of SpaceX's proposed activities is so low as to be discountable, cetaceans are not considered further in this proposed authorization. Please see Table 3-1 in the IHA application for a complete list of species with expected or potential occurrence in the project area.

    We have reviewed SpaceX's detailed species descriptions, including abundance, status, distribution and life history information, for accuracy and completeness; this information is summarized below and may be viewed in detail in the IHA application, available on the NMFS Web site at http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental. Additional information on these species is available in the NMFS stock assessment reports (SARs), which can be viewed online at http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/sars/. Generalized species accounts are also available on NMFS' Web site at www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/species/mammals.

    Table 1 lists the marine mammal species with expected potential for occurrence in the vicinity of the project during the project timeframe that are likely to be affected by the specified activities, and summarizes key information regarding stock status and abundance. Please see NMFS' Stock Assessment Reports (SAR), available at www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/sars, for more detailed accounts of these stocks' status and abundance.

    Table 1—Marine Mammals Expected To be Present in the Vicinity of the Project Location That are Likely To be Affected by the Specified Activities Species Stock ESA Status/MMPA Status; strategic
  • (Y/N)1
  • Stock
  • abundance 2
  • Occurrence in
  • project area
  • Order Carnivora—Superfamily Pinnipedia Family Otariidae (eared seals and sea lions) Steller sea lion Eastern U.S. DPS -/D; Y 60,131 Rare. California sea lion U.S. stock -/-; N 296,750 Common. Family Phocidae (earless seals) Harbor seal California stock -/-; N 30,968 Common. Northern elephant seal California breeding stock -/-; N 179,000 Common. Northern fur seal California stock -/-; N 12,844 Common. Guadalupe fur seal n/a T/D; Y 3 7,408 Rare. 1 ESA status: Endangered (E), Threatened (T)/MMPA status: Depleted (D). A dash (-) indicates that the species is not listed under the ESA or designated as depleted under the MMPA. Under the MMPA, a strategic stock is one for which the level of direct human-caused mortality exceeds PBR or is determined to be declining and likely to be listed under the ESA within the foreseeable future. Any species or stock listed under the ESA is automatically designated under the MMPA as depleted and as a strategic stock. 2 For certain stocks of pinnipeds, abundance estimates are based upon observations of animals (often pups) ashore multiplied by some correction factor derived from knowledge of the species (or similar species) life history to arrive at a best abundance estimate. 3 Abundance estimate for this stock is greater than ten years old and is therefore not considered current. We nevertheless present the most recent abundance estimate, as this represents the best available information for use in this document.

    In the species accounts provided here, we offer a brief introduction to the species and relevant stock as well as available information regarding population trends and threats, and describe any information regarding local occurrence.

    Pacific Harbor Seal

    Pacific harbor seals are the most common marine mammal inhabiting VAFB, congregating on multiple rocky haulout sites along the VAFB coastline. Harbor seals are local to the area, rarely traveling more than 50 km from haul-out sites. There are 12 harbor seal haul-out sites on south VAFB; of these, 10 sites represent an almost continuous haul-out area which is used by the same animals. Virtually all of the haul-out sites at VAFB are used during low tides and are wave-washed or submerged during high tides. Additionally, the Pacific harbor seal is the only species that regularly hauls out near the VAFB harbor. The main harbor seal haul-outs on VAFB are near Purisima Point and at Lion's Head (approximately 0.6 km south of Point Sal) on north VAFB and between the VAFB harbor north to South Rocky Point Beach on south VAFB (ManTech 2009). This south VAFB haul-out area is composed of several sand and cobblestone coves, rocky ledges, and offshore rocks. The Rocky Point area, located approximately 1.6 km north of the VAFB harbor, is used as breeding habitat (ManTech 2009).

    Pups are generally present in the region from March through July. Within the affected area on VAFB, a total of up to 332 adults and 34 pups have been recorded, at all haulouts combined, in monthly counts from 2013 to 2015 (ManTech 2015). During aerial pinniped surveys of haulouts located in the Point Conception area by NOAA Fisheries in May 2002 and May and June of 2004, between 488 to 516 harbor seals were recorded (M. Lowry, NOAA Fisheries, unpubl. data). Harbor seals also haul out, breed, and pup in isolated beaches and coves throughout the coasts of San Miguel, Santa Rosa, and Santa Cruz Islands (Lowry 2002). During aerial surveys conducted by NOAA Fisheries in May 2002 and May and June of 2004, between 521 and 1,004 harbors seals were recorded at San Miguel Island, between 605 and 972 at Santa Rosa Island, and between 599 and 1,102 Santa Cruz Island (M. Lowry, NOAA Fisheries, unpubl. data).

    The harbor seal population at VAFB has undergone an apparent decline in recent years (USAF 2013). This decline has been attributed to a series of natural landslides at south VAFB, resulting in the abandonment of many haulout sites. These slides have also resulted in extensive down-current sediment deposition, making these sites accessible to coyotes, which are now regularly seen in the area. Some of the displaced seals have moved to other sites at south VAFB, while others likely have moved to Point Conception, about 6.5 km south of the southern boundary of VAFB.

    Pacific harbor seals frequently use haul-out sites on the NCI, including San Miguel, Santa Rosa, Santa Cruz; and Anacapa. On San Miguel Island, they occur along the north coast at Tyler Bight and from Crook Point to Cardwell Point. Additionally, they regularly breed on San Miguel Island. On Santa Cruz Island, they inhabit small coves and rocky ledges along much of the coast. Harbor seals are scattered throughout Santa Rosa Island and also are observed in small numbers on Anacapa Island.

    California Sea Lions

    California sea lions are not listed as threatened or endangered under the Endangered Species Act, nor are they categorized as depleted under the Marine Mammal Protection Act. The estimated population of the U.S. stock is approximately 296,750 (Carretta et al. 2015). California sea lion breeding areas are on islands located in southern California, in western Baja California (Mexico), and the Gulf of California. During the breeding season, most California sea lions inhabit southern California and Mexico. Rookery sites in southern California are limited to the San Miguel Islands and the southerly Channel Islands of San Nicolas, Santa Barbara, and San Clemente (Carretta et al., 2015). Males establish breeding territories during May through July on both land and in the water. Females come ashore in mid-May and June where they give birth to a single pup approximately four to five days after arrival and will nurse pups for about a week before going on their first feeding trip. Adult and juvenile males will migrate as far north as British Columbia, Canada while females and pups remain in southern California waters in the non-breeding season. In warm water (El Niño) years, some females are found as far north as Washington and Oregon, presumably following prey. Elevated strandings of California sea lion pups have occurred in Southern California since January 2013. This event has been declared an Unusual Mortality Event (UME), and is confined to pup and yearling California sea lions.

    California sea lions are common offshore of VAFB and haul out on rocks and beaches along the coastline of VAFB. At south VAFB, California sea lions haul out on north Rocky Point, with numbers often peaking in spring. They have been reported at Point Arguello and Point Pedernales (both on south VAFB) in the past, although none have been noted there over the past several years. Individual sea lions have been noted hauled out throughout the VAFB coast; these were transient or stranded specimens. California sea lions occasionally haul out on Point Conception itself, south of VAFB. They regularly haul out on Lion Rock, north of VAFB and immediately south of Point Sal. In 2014, counts of California sea lions at haulouts on VAFB increased substantially, ranging from 47 to 416 during monthly counts. Despite their prevalence at haulout sites at VAFB, California sea lions rarely pup on the VAFB coastline (ManTech 2015); no pups were observed in 2013 or 2014 (ManTech 2015) and 1 pup was observed in 2015 (VAFB, unpubl. data).

    Pupping occurs in large numbers on San Miguel Island at the rookeries found at Point Bennett on the west end of the island and at Cardwell Point on the east end of the island (Lowry 2002). Sea lions haul out at the west end of Santa Rosa Island at Ford Point and Carrington Point. A few California sea lions have been born on Santa Rosa Island, but no rookery has been established. On Santa Cruz Island, California sea lions haul out from Painted Cave almost to Fraser Point, on the west end. Fair numbers haul out at Gull Island, off the south shore near Punta Arena. Pupping appears to be increasing there. Sea lions also haul out near Potato Harbor, on the northeast end of Santa Cruz. California sea lions haul out by the hundreds on the south side of East Anacapa Island.

    During aerial surveys conducted by NOAA Fisheries in February 2010 of the Northern Channel Islands, 21,192 total California sea lions (14,802 pups) were observed at haulouts on San Miguel Island and 8,237 total (5,712 pups) at Santa Rosa Island (M. Lowry, NOAA Fisheries, unpubl. data). During aerial surveys in July 2012, 65,660 total California sea lions (28,289 pups) were recorded at haulouts on San Miguel Island, 1,584 total (3 pups) at Santa Rosa Island, and 1,571 total (zero pups) at Santa Cruz Island (M. Lowry, NOAA Fisheries, unpubl. data).

    Northern Elephant Seal

    Northern elephant seals are not listed as threatened or endangered under the Endangered Species Act, nor are they categorized as depleted under the Marine Mammal Protection Act. The estimated population of the California breeding stock is approximately 179,000 animals (Carretta et al. 2015). Northern elephant seals range in the eastern and central North Pacific Ocean, from as far north as Alaska and as far south as Mexico. They spend much of the year, generally about nine months, in the ocean. They spend much of their lives underwater, diving to depths of about 1,000 to 2,500 ft (330-800 m) for 20- to 30-minute intervals with only short breaks at the surface, and are rarely seen at sea for this reason. While on land, they prefer sandy beaches.

    Northern elephant seals breed and give birth in California and Baja California (Mexico), primarily on offshore islands, from December to March (Stewart et al. 1994). Adults return to land between March and August to molt, with males returning later than females. Adults return to their feeding areas again between their spring/summer molting and their winter breeding seasons.

    Northern elephant seals haul out sporadically on rocks and beaches along the coastline of VAFB; monthly counts in 2013 and 2014 recorded between 0 and 191 elephant seals within the affected area (ManTech 2015). However, northern elephant seals do not currently pup on the VAFB coastline. Observations of young of the year seals from May through November at VAFB have represented individuals dispersing later in the year from other parts of the California coastline where breeding and birthing occur. The nearest regularly used haul-out site on the mainland coast is at Point Conception. Eleven northern elephant seals were observed during aerial surveys of the Point Conception area by NOAA Fisheries in February of 2010 (M. Lowry, NOAA Fisheries, unpubl. data). In December 2012, an immature male elephant seal was observed hauled out on the sandy beach west of the breakwater at the VAFB harbor (representing the first documented instance of an elephant seal hauled out at the VAFB harbor). There has been no verified breeding of northern elephant seals on VAFB.

    Point Bennett on the west end of San Miguel Island is the primary northern elephant seal rookery in the NCI, with another rookery at Cardwell Point on the east end of San Miguel Island (Lowry 2002). They also pup and breed on Santa Rosa Island, mostly on the west end. Northern elephant seals are rarely seen on Santa Cruz and Anacapa Islands. During aerial surveys of the NCI conducted by NMFS in February 2010, 21,192 total northern elephant seals (14,802 pups) were recorded at haulouts on San Miguel Island and 8,237 total (5,712 pups) were observed at Santa Rosa Island (M. Lowry, NOAA Fisheries, unpubl. data). None were observed at Santa Cruz Island (M. Lowry, NOAA Fisheries, unpubl. data).

    Steller Sea Lion

    The eastern DPS of Steller sea lion is not listed as endangered or threatened under the ESA, nor is it categorized as depleted under the MMPA. The species as a whole was ESA-listed as threatened in 1990 (55 FR 49204). In 1997, the species was divided into western and eastern DPSs, with the western DPS reclassified as endangered under the ESA and the eastern DPS retaining its threatened listing (62 FR 24345). On October 23, 2013, NMFS found that the eastern DPS has recovered; as a result of the finding, NMFS removed the eastern DPS from ESA listing. Only the eastern DPS is considered in this proposed authorization due to its distribution and the geographic scope of the action. Steller sea lions are distributed mainly around the coasts to the outer continental shelf along the North Pacific rim from northern Hokkaido, Japan through the Kuril Islands and Okhotsk Sea, Aleutian Islands and central Bering Sea, southern coast of Alaska and south to California (Loughlin et al., 1984).

    Prior to 2012, there were no records of Steller sea lions observed at VAFB. In April and May 2012, Steller sea lions were observed hauled out at North Rocky Point on VAFB, representing the first time the species had been observed on VAFB during launch monitoring and monthly surveys conducted over the past two decades (Marine Mammal Consulting Group and Science Applications International Corporation 2013). Since 2012, Steller sea lions have been observed frequently in routine monthly surveys, with as many as 16 individuals recorded. In 2014, up to five Steller sea lions were observed in the affected area during monthly marine mammal counts (ManTech 2015) and a maximum of 12 individuals were observed during monthly counts in 2015 (VAFB, unpublished data). However, up to 16 individuals were observed in 2012 (SAIC 2012). Steller sea lions once had two small rookeries on San Miguel Island, but these were abandoned after the 1982-1983 El Niño event (DeLong and Melin 2000; Lowry 2002); these rookeries were once the southernmost colonies of the eastern stock of this species. In recent years, between two to four juvenile and adult males have been observed on a somewhat regular basis on San Miguel Island (pers. comm. Sharon Melin, NMFS Alaska Fisheries Science Center, to J. Carduner, NMFS, Feb 11, 2016). Steller sea lions are not observed on the other NCI.

    Northern Fur Seal

    Northern fur seals are not ESA listed and are not categorized as depleted under the MMPA. Northern fur seals occur from southern California north to the Bering Sea and west to the Okhotsk Sea and Honshu Island, Japan. Two stocks of northern fur seals are recognized in U.S. waters: An eastern Pacific stock and a California stock (formerly referred to as the San Miguel Island stock). Only the California stock is considered in this proposed authorization due to its geographic distribution.

    Due to differing requirements during the annual reproductive season, adult males and females typically occur ashore at different, though overlapping, times. Adult males occur ashore and defend reproductive territories during a 3-month period from June through August, though some may be present until November (well after giving up their territories). Adult females are found ashore for as long as 6 months (June-November). After their respective times ashore, fur seals of both sexes spend the next 7 to 8 months at sea (Roppel 1984). Peak pupping is in early July and pups are weaned at three to four months. Some juveniles are present year-round, but most juveniles and adults head for the open ocean and a pelagic existence until the next year. Northern fur seals exhibit high site fidelity to their natal rookeries.

    Northern fur seals have rookeries on San Miguel Island at Point Bennett and on Castle Rock. Comprehensive count data for northern fur seals on San Miguel Island are not available. San Miguel Island is the only island in the NCI on which Northern fur seals have been observed. Although the population at San Miguel Island was established by individuals from Alaska and Russian Islands during the late 1960s, most individuals currently found on San Miguel nowadays are considered resident to the island. No haul-out or rookery sites exist for northern fur seals on the mainland coast. The only individuals that do appear on mainland beaches are stranded animals.

    Guadalupe Fur Seal

    Guadalupe fur seals are listed as threatened under the ESA and are categorized as depleted under the MMPA. The population is estimated at 7,408 animals; however, this estimate is over 20 years old (Carretta et al. 2015). The population is considered to be a single stock. Guadalupe Fur Seals were abundant prior to seal exploitation, when they were likely the most abundant pinniped species on the Channel Islands. They are found along the west coast of the United States, but are considered uncommon in Southern California. They are typically found on shores with abundant large rocks, often at the base of large cliffs (Belcher and Lee 2002). Increased strandings of Guadalupe fur seals started occurring along the entire coast of California in early 2015. Strandings were eight times higher than the historical average, peaking from April through June 2015, and have since lessened. This event has been declared a marine mammal UME.

    Comprehensive survey data on Guadalupe fur seals in the NCI is not readily available. On San Miguel Island, one to several male Guadalupe fur seals had been observed annually between 1969 and 2000 (DeLong and Melin 2000) and juvenile animals of both sexes have been seen occasionally over the years (Stewart et al. 1987). The first adult female at San Miguel Island was seen in 1997. In June 1997, she gave birth to a pup in rocky habitat along the south side of the island and, over the next year, reared the pup to weaning age. This was apparently the first pup born in the California Channel Islands in at least 150 years. Since 2008, individual adult females, subadult males, and between one and three pups have been observed annually on San Miguel Island. There are estimated to be approximately 20-25 individuals that have fidelity to San Miguel, mostly inhabiting the southwest and northwest ends of the island. A total of 14 pups have been born on the island since 2009, with no more than 3 born in any single season (pers. comm., S. Melin, NMFS National Marine Mammal Laboratory, to J. Carduner, NMFS, Aug. 28, 2015). Thirteen individuals and two pups were observed in 2015 (NMFS 2016). No haul-out or rookery sites exist for Guadalupe fur seals on the mainland coast, including VAFB. The only individuals that do appear on mainland beaches are stranded animals.

    Potential Effects of the Specified Activity on Marine Mammals

    This section includes a summary and discussion of the ways that components of the specified activity may impact marine mammals. The “Estimated Take by Incidental Harassment” section later in this document will include a quantitative analysis of the number of individuals that are expected to be taken by this activity. The “Negligible Impact Analysis” section will include the analysis of how this specific activity will impact marine mammals and will consider the content of this section, the “Estimated Take by Incidental Harassment” section, the “Proposed Mitigation” section, and the “Anticipated Effects on Marine Mammal Habitat” section to draw conclusions regarding the likely impacts of this activity on the reproductive success or survivorship of individuals and from that on the affected marine mammal populations or stocks.

    Debris Strike

    Under the contingency barge landing action, in the event of an unsuccessful barge landing, the First Stage booster is expected to explode upon impact with the barge. The maximum estimated remaining fuel and oxidizer onboard the booster when it explodes would be the equivalent a net explosive weight of 503 lbs. of TNT. The resulting explosion of the estimated onboard remaining fuel would be capable of scattering debris a maximum estimated range of approximately 384 m from the landing point and thus spread over a radial area of 0.46 km2 as an impact area (ManTech 2015). Based on engineering analysis collected during a flight anomaly that occurred during a Falcon 9 test at SpaceX's Texas Rocket Development Facility, debris could impact 0.000706 km2 of the total 0.46 km2 impact area. Debris impacting an individual marine mammal, though highly unlikely as discussed below, would have the potential to cause injury and potential mortality.

    Using a statistical probability analysis for estimating direct air strike impact developed by the U.S. Navy (Navy 2014), the probability of impact of debris with a marine mammal (P) can be estimated for individual marine mammals of each species that may occur in the impact footprint area (I) (0.000706 km2). For this analysis, SpaceX assumed a dynamic scenario with broadside collision, in which the width of the impact footprint is enhanced by a factor of five (5) to reflect forward momentum created by an explosion (Navy 2014). Forward momentum typically accounts for five object lengths, thus the applied factor of five (5) area (Navy 2014).

    The probability of impact with a single animal (P) is calculated as the likelihood that an animal footprint area (A, defined as the adult length [L a] and width [W a] for each species) intersects the impact footprint area (I) within the overall “testing area” (R). Note that to calculate (P) it is assumed that the animal is in the testing area and is at or near the ocean surface, thus the model is overly conservative since cetaceans spend the majority of time submerged. For the purposes of this model, R was estimated as the maximum range of debris spread as a result of the First Stage explosion at the landing location (0.46 km2). The probability impact with a single animal (P) depends on the degree of overlap of A and I. To calculate this area of overlap (A tot), a buffer distance is added around A that is equal to one-half of the impact area (0.5*I). This buffer accounts for an impact with the center of the object anywhere within the combined area of overlap (A tot) would result in an impact with the animal. A tot is then calculated as (L a + 2*W i)*(W a + (1 + 5)*L i), where W i and L i are the length and width of the impact area (I). We assumed that W a = W i = square root of I. The single animal impact probability (P) for each species is then calculated as the ratio of total area (A tot) to testing area (R): P = A tot / R. This single animal impact probability (P) is then multiplied by the number of animals expected in the testing area (N = density * R) to estimate the probability of impacting an individual for each species per event (T).

    SpaceX proposes to conduct up to six contingency offshore landings per year, which may result in between zero and six explosions of the First Stage annually (as recovery actions continue, SpaceX expects to assess each incident, refine methodology and ultimately reduce the risk or explosion for the purpose of First Stage recovery and re-use). In the model presented in the IHA application, SpaceX assumed that the maximum of six events per year would result in an explosion. This is a conservative estimate, since the actual number of contingency landing events resulting in the First Stage explosion may be less than six. In addition, the model conservatively utilized the highest estimated at-sea individual densities for each species within the geographic area of potential impact. Please see Table 6-1 of the IHA application for results of the debris strike analysis.

    Even with the intentionally conservative estimates of parameters and assumptions in the model as described above, the results indicate that it is highly unlikely that debris would strike any individual of any marine mammal species, including cetaceans and pinnipeds. For all 34 marine mammal species that occur in the project area, including pinnipeds and cetaceans, the maximum probability of debris strike, for a single debris impact event, was 0.0222 for California sea lion (see Table 6-1 in the IHA application). The modeled probabilities are sufficiently low as to be considered discountable. Therefore, we have concluded that the likelihood of take of marine mammals from debris strike following the explosion of the Falcon 9 First Stage is negligible. As such, debris strike is not analyzed further in this proposed authorization as a potential stressor to marine mammals.

    Floating Debris

    As described above, in the event of an unsuccessful landing attempt at the contingency landing location, the Falcon 9 First Stage would explode upon impact with the barge. SpaceX has experience performing recovery operations after water and unsuccessful barge landings for previous Falcon 9 First Stage landing attempts. This experience, in addition to the debris catalog that identifies all floating debris, has revealed that approximately 25 pieces of debris remain floating after an unsuccessful barge landing. The surface area potentially impacted with debris would be less than 0.46 km2, and the vast majority of debris would be recovered. All other debris is expected to sink to the bottom of the ocean.

    The approximately 25 pieces of debris expected to be floating after an unsuccessful barge landing are primarily made up of Carbon Over Pressure Vessels (COPVs), the LOX fill line, and carbon fiber constructed landing legs. SpaceX has performed successful recovery of all of these floating items during previous landing attempts. An unsuccessful barge landing would result in a very small debris field, making recovery of debris relatively straightforward and efficient. All debris recovered offshore would be transported back to Long Beach Harbor.

    Since the area impacted by debris is very small, the likelihood of adverse effects to marine mammals is very low. Denser debris that would not float on the surface is anticipated to sink relatively quickly and is composed of inert materials which would not affect water quality or bottom substrate potentially used by marine mammals. The rate of deposition would vary with the type of debris; however, none of the debris is so dense or large that benthic habitat would be degraded. Also, the area that would be impacted per event by sinking debris is only a maximum of 0.17 acres (0.000706 km2), a relatively small portion of the total 0.46 km2 potential impact area, based on a maximum range of 384 m that a piece of debris would travel following an explosion.

    We have determined that the likelihood of debris from an unsuccessful barge landing that enters the ocean environment approximately 50 km offshore of VAFB resulting in the incidental take of a marine mammal to be so small as to be discountable. Therefore the potential effects of floating debris on marine mammals as a result of the proposed activities are not considered further in this proposed authorization.

    Spilled Rocket Propellant

    As described above, in the event of an unsuccessful landing attempt at the contingency landing location, the Falcon 9 First Stage would explode upon impact with the barge. At most, the First Stage would contain 400 gallons of rocket propellant (RP-1 or “fuel”) on board. In the event of an unsuccessful barge landing, most of this fuel would be consumed during the subsequent explosion. Residual fuel after the explosion (estimated to be between 50 and 150 gallons) would be released into the ocean. Final volumes of fuel remaining in the First Stage upon impact may vary, but are anticipated to be below this high range estimate. The fuel used by the First Stage, RP-1, is a Type 1 “Very Light Oil”, which is characterized as having low viscosity, low specific gravity, and is highly volatile. Clean-up following a spill of very light oil is usually not possible, particularly with such a small quantity of oil that would enter the ocean in the event of an unsuccessful barge landing (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1998). Therefore, SpaceX would not attempt to boom or recover RP-1 fuel from the ocean.

    In relatively high concentrations, exposure to very light oils can have a range of effects to marine mammals including skin and eye irritation, increased susceptibility to infection, respiratory irritation, gastrointestinal inflammation, ulcers, bleeding, diarrhea, damage to organs, immune suppression, reproductive failure, and death. The effects of exposure primarily depend on the route (internal versus external) and amount (volume and time) of exposure. Although the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has established exposure levels for kerosene and jet fuel (RP-1 is a type of kerosene) for toxicity in mammals and the environment (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 2011), in reality it is difficult to predict exposure levels, even with a known amount of fuel released. This is because exposure level is dependent not only on the amount of fuel in the spill area, but also on unpredictable factors, including the behavior of the animal and the amount of fuel it contacts, ingests, or inhales.

    However, precluding these factors is the overall risk of a marine mammal being within the fuel spill area before the RP-1 dissipates. This risk depends primarily on how quickly RP-1 dissipates in the environment and the area affected by the spill. Since RP-1 is lighter than water and almost completely immiscible (i.e. very little will dissolve into the water column), RP-1 would stay on top of the water's surface. Due to its low viscosity, it would rapidly spread into a very thin layer (several hundred nanometers) on the surface of water and would continue to spread as a function of sea surface, wind, current, and wave conditions. This spreading rapidly reduces the concentration of RP-1 on the water surface at any one location and exposes more surface area of the fuel to the atmosphere, thus increasing the amount of RP-1 that is able to evaporate.

    RP-1 is highly volatile and evaporates rapidly when exposed to the air (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1998). The evaporation rate for jet fuel (a kerosene similar to RP-1) on water, can be determined by the following equation from Fingas (2013): %EV = (0.59 + 0.13T)/ t, where %EV is the percent of mass evaporated within a given time in minutes (t) at a given temperature in °C (T). Using an assumed air temperature of 50 °F (10 °C), the percent of mass evaporated versus time can be determined (see Figure 14 in the IHA application). Although it would require one to two days for the RP-1 to completely dissipate, over 90 percent of its mass would evaporate within the first seven minutes and 99 percent of its mass would evaporate within the first hour (see Figure 14 in the IHA application). In the event of adverse ocean conditions (e.g., large swells, large waves) and weather conditions (e.g., fog, rain, high winds) RP‐1 would be volatilized more rapidly due to increased agitation and thus dissipate even more quickly and further reduce the likelihood of exposure.

    Since RP-1 would remain on the surface of the water, in order for a marine mammal to be directly exposed to RP-1, it would have to surface within the spill area very soon after the spill occurred (on the order of minutes). Given the relatively small volume of RP-1 that would be spilled (50 to 150 gallons), the exposure area would be relatively small and thus it would be unlikely that a marine mammal would be within the exposure area. Based on the thinness of the layer of RP-1 on the water surface, spreading on the surface (thus rapidly reducing concentration), and rapid evaporation (further reducing concentration), a marine mammal would need to be at the surface within the layer of RP-1 and be exposed to a toxic level within a very short period of time (minutes) after the spill to be affected. Similarly, since RP-1 would be a very thin, rapidly evaporating layer on the water's surface, we do not expect that fish or other prey species would be negatively impacted to any significant degree.

    We therefore have determined that the likelihood that spilled RP-1, as a result of an unsuccessful barge landing that enters the ocean environment approximately 50 km from shore, would have an effect on marine ma