Federal Register Vol. 81, No.93,

Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 93 (May 13, 2016)

Page Range29761-30155
FR Document

81_FR_93
Current View
Page and SubjectPDF

Issue

81 93 Friday, May 13, 2016 Contents Agricultural Marketing Agricultural Marketing Service NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 29833-29834 2016-11318 Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Generic Fruit Crops, 29832-29833 2016-11319 Agriculture Agriculture Department See

Agricultural Marketing Service

See

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

Alcohol Tobacco Tax Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 29950-29953 2016-11334 Animal Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service NOTICES Evaluation of the Classical Swine Fever, Swine Vesicular Disease, African Swine Fever, Foot-and-Mouth Disease, and Rinderpest Status of Malta, 29834-29836 2016-11316 Requests for Nominations: General Conference Committee of the National Poultry Improvement Plan; Corrections, 29834 2016-11314 Army Army Department NOTICES Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc.: Training Mission and Mission Support Activities at Fort Campbell, KY, 29849-29850 2016-11285 Centers Medicare Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services NOTICES Meetings: Medicare Program; New and Reconsidered Clinical Diagnostic Laboratory Test Codes for the Clinical Laboratory Fee Schedule for Calendar Year 2017, 29863-29865 2016-11269 Children Children and Families Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 29865-29866 2016-11325 Civil Rights Civil Rights Commission NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 29836 2016-11451 Coast Guard Coast Guard RULES Drawbridge Operations: Grassy Sound Channel, Middle Township, NJ, 29770 2016-11349 Safety Zones: National Grid—Beck Lockport 104 and Beck Harper 106 Removal Project; Niagara River, Lewiston, NY, 29774-29776 2016-11363 Navy UNDET, Apra Outer Harbor and Piti, GU, 29772-29774 2016-11361 Security Zones: Tall-Ship CUAUHTEMOC; Thames River, New London Harbor, New London, CT, 29770-29772 2016-11253 Special Local Regulations: Lake of the Ozarks, Lakeside, MO, 29768-29770 2016-11339 PROPOSED RULES Safety Zones: Allegheny River Mile 12.0 to 12.5, Oakmont, PA, 29819-29821 2016-11365 Commerce Commerce Department See

First Responder Network Authority

See

Foreign-Trade Zones Board

See

International Trade Administration

See

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

See

National Telecommunications and Information Administration

NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 29836-29837 2016-11241
Committee for Purchase Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled NOTICES Procurement List; Additions and Deletions, 29848-29849 2016-11330 2016-11331 Commodity Futures Commodity Futures Trading Commission NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 29849 2016-11548 Defense Acquisition Defense Acquisition Regulations System NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement; Quality Assurance, 29850-29851 2016-11373 Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement; Radio Frequency Identification Advance Shipment Notices, 29851 2016-11374 Defense Department Defense Department See

Army Department

See

Defense Acquisition Regulations System

NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 29851-29852 2016-11290 Charter Renewals: Department of Defense Federal Advisory Committees, 29852-29853 2016-11308 Meetings: Defense Health Board, 29853-29854 2016-11342
Education Department Education Department NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 29854 2016-11303 Employment and Training Employment and Training Administration NOTICES Meetings: Advisory Committee on Apprenticeship, 29921-29922 2016-11315 Environmental Protection Environmental Protection Agency RULES Acquisition Regulations: Small Business Programs, Solicitation Provisions and Contract Clauses, 29793-29798 2016-11378 PROPOSED RULES National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Site Remediation, 29821-29828 2016-10988 NOTICES Access to Confidential Business Information: Abt Associates, Inc., 29855 2016-11379 Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals Title I of the Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act, 29856 2016-11275 Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Brownfields Program—Accomplishment Reporting, 29857 2016-11277 Solid Waste Disposal Facility Criteria, 29858 2016-11276 Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc.; Weekly Receipts, 29855-29856 2016-11347 Executive Office Executive Office for Immigration Review NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Application for Cancellation of Removal (42A) for Certain Permanent Residents; and Application for Cancellation of Removal and Adjustment of Status (42B) for Certain Nonpermanent Residents, 29919-29920 2016-11321 Export Import Export-Import Bank NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 29858-29859 2016-11340 Federal Aviation Federal Aviation Administration PROPOSED RULES Airworthiness Directives: Fokker Services B.V. Airplanes, 29800-29802 2016-11172 Saab AB, Saab Aeronautics (Type Certificate Previously Held by Saab AB, Saab Aerosystems) Airplanes, 29807-29809 2016-11171 Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation Helicopters, 29817-29819 2016-11196 The Boeing Company Airplanes, 29802-29807, 29809-29817 2016-11169 2016-11170 2016-11173 Federal Communications Federal Communications Commission PROPOSED RULES Emergency Alert System and Wireless Emergency Alerts, 29828-29829 2016-11232 Increase Resilience and Enhance Information Sharing During Disasters, 29829-29830 2016-11233 NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 29859 2016-11335 Federal Deposit Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation NOTICES Terminations of Receivership: 10261, Turnberry Bank, Aventura, FL, 29860 2016-11324 Miami Valley Bank Lakeview, OH, 29859-29860 2016-11355 The Peoples Bank, Winder, GA, 29860 2016-11356 Updates to Notice of Financial Institutions for Which the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation has been Appointed Either Receiver, Liquidator, or Manager, 29860 2016-11357 Federal Election Federal Election Commission NOTICES Policy Statements: Program for Requesting Consideration of Legal Questions by the Commission, 29861-29862 2016-11145 Federal Mine Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 29862-29863 2016-11453 2016-11454 Federal Reserve Federal Reserve System NOTICES Changes in Bank Control: Acquisitions of Shares of a Bank or Bank Holding Company, 29863 2016-11242 FIRSTNET First Responder Network Authority NOTICES Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc.: East Region of the Nationwide Public Safety Broadband Network and Notice of Public Meetings; Correction, 29837-29838 2016-11370 Fish Fish and Wildlife Service NOTICES Endangered Species; Marine Mammals: Receipt of Applications for Permit, 29889-29890 2016-11307 Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc.: Final Pima County Multi-Species Habitat Conservation Plan, Pima County, AZ, 29907-29909 2016-10948 Incidental Take Permit Applications: Participation in the Amended Oil and Gas Industry Conservation Plan for the American Burying Beetle in Oklahoma, 29909-29910 2016-11333 Marine Mammals; Incidental Take During Specified Activities: Proposed Incidental Harassment Authorization for Northern Sea Otters from the Southcentral Stock in Cook Inlet, AK, 29890-29907 2016-11426 Food and Drug Food and Drug Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Food Labeling; Notification Procedures for Statements on Dietary Supplements, 29867-29868 2016-11272 Charter Renewals: Pulmonary-Allergy Drugs Advisory Committee, 29868-29869 2016-11323 Draft Guidance for Industry and Staff: Infectious Disease Next Generation Sequencing Based Diagnostic Devices: Microbial Identification and Detection of Antimicrobial Resistance and Virulence Markers, 29869-29870 2016-11237 Guidance: Frequently Asked Questions about Medical Foods; Second Edition, 29866-29867 2016-11268 Foreign Trade Foreign-Trade Zones Board NOTICES Applications for Reorganization under Alternative Site Framework: Foreign-Trade Zone 20—Norfolk, VA, 29838 2016-11391 Health and Human Health and Human Services Department See

Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services

See

Children and Families Administration

See

Food and Drug Administration

See

Health Resources and Services Administration

See

National Institutes of Health

See

Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration

NOTICES Findings of Research Misconduct, 29871 2016-11317
Health Resources Health Resources and Services Administration NOTICES Health Center Program, 29870-29871 2016-11413 Homeland Homeland Security Department See

Coast Guard

See

U.S. Customs and Border Protection

PROPOSED RULES Updates to Protected Critical Infrastructure Information Program, 29799-29800 2016-11338 NOTICES Meetings: Homeland Security Advisory Council, 29881-29882 2016-11345
Housing Housing and Urban Development Department NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Continuum of Care Homeless Assistance—Technical Submission, 29882-29883 2016-11354 Consolidated Redelegation of Authority for the Government National Mortgage Association (Ginnie Mae), 29883-29885 2016-11358 Federal Property Suitable as Facilities to Assist the Homeless, 29885-29888 2016-11046 Order of Succession for Government National Mortgage Association (Ginnie Mae), 29888-29889 2016-11359 Indian Affairs Indian Affairs Bureau NOTICES Indian Land Consolidation Lien Removal and Acquisition Fund Disposition, 29910 2016-11286 Proposed Finding Against Acknowledgment of the Georgia Tribe of Eastern Cherokee, Inc., 29910-29912 2016-11301 Interior Interior Department See

Fish and Wildlife Service

See

Indian Affairs Bureau

See

Land Management Bureau

See

National Park Service

RULES Land Exchange Procedures and Procedures to Amend the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act, 29776-29793 2016-11146
Internal Revenue Internal Revenue Service NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 29953-29958 2016-11327 2016-11328 2016-11332 2016-11362 2016-11364 2016-11366 2016-11369 Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Dividend Equivalents from Sources within the United States, 29954 2016-11367 International Trade Adm International Trade Administration NOTICES Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Investigations, Orders, or Reviews: Certain Steel Threaded Rod from the People's Republic of China, 29843-29846 2016-11389 Circular Welded Non-Alloy Steel Pipe from the Republic of Korea, 29840-29842 2016-11390 Solid Fertilizer Grade Ammonium Nitrate from the Russian Federation, 29839-29840 2016-11388 Meetings: President's Export Council, 29842-29843 2016-11485 International Trade Com International Trade Commission NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 29919 2016-11447 Justice Department Justice Department See

Executive Office for Immigration Review

NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Electronic Applications for the Attorney General's Honors Program and the Summer Law Intern Program, 29920-29921 2016-11322 Request for Registration under the Gambling Devices Act of 1962, 29920 2016-11320
Labor Department Labor Department See

Employment and Training Administration

Land Land Management Bureau NOTICES Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc.: Energy Gateway South Transmission Project and Proposed Land-use Plan Amendments, 29912-29915 2016-11371 Proposed Coeur Rochester Mine Plan of Operations Amendment 10 and Closure Plan, Pershing County, NV, 29915-29916 2016-11287 Legal Legal Services Corporation NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 29922 2016-11477 National Credit National Credit Union Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 29922-29923 2016-11343 National Highway National Highway Traffic Safety Administration NOTICES Petitions for Decisions of Inconsequential Noncompliance; Denials: Van Hool N.V., 29941-29942 2016-11271 National Institute National Institutes of Health NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: NIDDK Office of Minority Health Research Coordination Research Training and Mentor Programs Applications, 29877-29878 2016-11416 Study to Estimate Radiation Doses and Cancer Risks from Radioactive Fallout from the Trinity Nuclear Test—National Cancer Institute, 29875-29876 2016-11254 Meetings: Center for Scientific Review, 29876 2016-11255 National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, 29878 2016-11256 National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research, 29874 2016-11259 National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, 29872-29874 2016-11261 2016-11260 National Institute of General Medical Sciences, 29873 2016-11262 National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, 29876-29877 2016-11263 National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, 29872 2016-11257 Requests for Information: Developing the National Cancer Moonshot Initiative, 29871-29872 2016-11283 National Oceanic National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NOTICES Applications: Marine Mammals; File No. 19638, 29846-29847 2016-11311 Marine Mammals; File No. 19116, 29847-29848 2016-11309 Permits: Marine Mammals; File No. 20324, 29846 2016-11348 National Park National Park Service NOTICES Committee Renewals: Gateway National Recreation Area Fort Hancock 21st Century Advisory Committee, 29918 2016-11383 Meetings: Wekiva River System Advisory Management Committee; Cancellation, 29916 2016-11377 Requests for Nominations: Cape Cod National Seashore Advisory Commission, 29917-29918 2016-11372 Cedar Creek and Belle Grove National Historical Park Advisory Commission, 29918-29919 2016-11368 Paterson Great Falls National Historical Park Advisory Commission, 29917 2016-11375 National Telecommunications National Telecommunications and Information Administration NOTICES Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc.: East Region of the Nationwide Public Safety Broadband Network and Notice of Public Meetings; Correction, 29837-29838 2016-11370 Nuclear Regulatory Nuclear Regulatory Commission RULES Fuel-Cladding Issues in Postulated Spent Fuel Pool Accidents, 29761-29765 2016-11212 NOTICES Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc.: Geologic Repository for the Disposal of Spent Nuclear Fuel and High-Level Radioactive Waste, Yucca Mountain, NV, 29923-29924 2016-11075 Pension Benefit Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation RULES Adjustment of Civil Penalties, 29765-29767 2016-11296 Benefits Payable in Terminated Single-Employer Plans; Interest Assumptions for Paying Benefits, 29767-29768 2016-11297 Personnel Personnel Management Office NOTICES Meetings: Hispanic Council on Federal Employment, 29924 2016-11288 Pipeline Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration PROPOSED RULES Pipeline Safety: Safety of Gas Transmission and Gathering Pipelines, 29830-29831 2016-11240 NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 29943-29950 2016-11304 Presidential Documents Presidential Documents ADMINISTRATIVE ORDERS Yemen; Continuation of National Emergency (Notice of May 12, 2016), 30153-30155 2016-11587 Securities Securities and Exchange Commission RULES Business Conduct Standards for Security-Based Swap Dealers and Major Security-Based Swap Participants, 29960-30151 2016-10918 NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 29925 2016-11533 Public Company Accounting Oversight Board; Order Granting Approval of Proposed Rules to Require Disclosure of Certain Audit Participants, etc., 29925-29928 2016-11292 Self-Regulatory Organizations; Proposed Rule Changes: Bats BZX Exchange, Inc., 29932-29936 2016-11293 Chicago Stock Exchange, Inc., 29936-29939 2016-11294 Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc., 29929-29932 2016-11295 Trading Suspension Orders: GroveWare Technologies Ltd., Luve Sports, Inc., and Northcore Technologies, Inc., 29928-29929 2016-11459 Li-ion Motors Corp. (a/k/a Terra Inventions Corp.), PetroHunter Energy Corp., and Shrink Nanotechnologies, Inc., 29924-29925 2016-11460 Small Business Small Business Administration NOTICES Disaster Declarations: Arkansas, 29939-29940 2016-11386 Louisiana, 29939 2016-11384 Louisiana; Amendment 7, 29940 2016-11387 State Department State Department NOTICES Culturally Significant Objects Imported for Exhibition: Real/Ideal: Photography in France, 1847-1860, 29941 2016-11353 Unruly Nature: The Landscapes of Theodore Rousseau, 29940-29941 2016-11360 Meetings: Binational Bridges and Border Crossings Group in Mexico City, Mexico, 29940 2016-11351 Substance Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration NOTICES Meetings: Center for Mental Health Services, 29878 2016-11247 2016-11248 Transportation Department Transportation Department See

Federal Aviation Administration

See

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

See

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration

Treasury Treasury Department See

Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau

See

Internal Revenue Service

Customs U.S. Customs and Border Protection NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Application to Establish a Centralized Examination Station, 29880-29881 2016-11278 Quarterly IRS Interest Rates Used in Calculating Interest on Overdue Accounts and Refunds on Customs Duties, 29879-29880 2016-11376 Separate Parts In This Issue Part II Securities and Exchange Commission, 29960-30151 2016-10918 Part III Presidential Documents, 30153-30155 2016-11587 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 93 Friday, May 13, 2016 Rules and Regulations NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 10 CFR Part 50 [Docket Nos. PRM-50-108; NRC-2014-0171] Fuel-Cladding Issues in Postulated Spent Fuel Pool Accidents AGENCY:

Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

ACTION:

Petition for rulemaking; denial.

SUMMARY:

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is denying a petition for rulemaking (PRM or the petition), PRM-50-108, submitted by Mr. Mark Edward Leyse (the petitioner). The petitioner requested that the NRC require power reactor licensees to perform evaluations to determine the potential consequences of various postulated spent fuel pool (SFP) accident scenarios. The evaluations would be required to be submitted to the NRC for informational purposes. The NRC is denying the petition because the NRC does not believe the information is needed for effective NRC regulatory decisionmaking with respect to SFPs or for public safety, environmental protection, or common defense and security.

DATES:

The docket for the petition, PRM-50-108, is closed on May 13, 2016.

ADDRESSES:

Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2014-0171 when contacting the NRC about the availability of information for this petition. You may obtain publicly-available information related to this petition by any of the following methods:

Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2014-0171. Address questions about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher; telephone: 301-415-3463; email: [email protected] For technical questions, contact the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document.

The NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS): You may obtain publicly-available documents online in the ADAMS Public Document collection at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. To begin the search, select “ADAMS Public Documents” and then select “Begin Web-Based ADAMS Search.” For problems with ADAMS, please contact the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR) reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by email to [email protected] The ADAMS accession number for each document referenced (if it is available in ADAMS) is provided the first time that it is mentioned in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section. For the convenience of the reader, instructions about obtaining materials referenced in this document are provided in Section IV, “Availability of Documents,” of this document.

The NRC's PDR: You may examine and purchase copies of public documents at the NRC's PDR, O1-F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Daniel Doyle, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation; U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-3748; email: [email protected]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents I. The Petition II. Reasons for Denial III. Conclusion IV. Availability of Documents I. The Petition

Section 2.802 of title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), “Petition for rulemaking—requirements for filing,” provides an opportunity for any interested person to petition the Commission to issue, amend, or rescind any regulation. The NRC received a petition dated June 19, 2014, from Mr. Mark Edward Leyse and assigned it Docket No. PRM-50-108 (ADAMS Accession No. ML14195A388). The NRC published a notice of docketing in the Federal Register (FR) on October 7, 2014 (79 FR 60383). The NRC did not request public comment on the petition because sufficient information was available for the NRC staff to form a technical opinion regarding the merits of the petition.

The petitioner requested that the NRC develop new regulations requiring that: (1) SFP accident evaluation models use data from multi-rod bundle (assembly) severe accident experiments for calculating the rates of energy release, hydrogen generation, and fuel cladding oxidation from the zirconium-steam reaction; (2) SFP accident evaluation models use data from multi-rod bundle (assembly) severe accident experiments conducted with pre-oxidized fuel cladding for calculating the rates of energy release (from both fuel cladding oxidation and fuel cladding nitriding), fuel cladding oxidation, and fuel cladding nitriding from the zirconium-air reaction; (3) SFP accident evaluation models be required to conservatively model nitrogen-induced breakaway oxidation behavior; and (4) licensees be required to use conservative SFP accident evaluation models to perform annual SFP safety evaluations of: postulated complete loss-of-coolant accident (LOCA) scenarios, postulated partial LOCA scenarios, and postulated boil-off accident scenarios.

The petitioner referenced recent NRC post-Fukushima MELCOR simulations of boiling-water reactor Mark I SFP accident/fire scenarios. The petitioner stated that the conclusions from the NRC's MELCOR simulations are non-conservative and misleading because their conclusions underestimate the probabilities of large radiological releases from SFP accidents.

The petitioner asserted that in actual SFP fires, there would be quicker fuel-cladding temperature escalations, releasing more heat, and quicker axial and radial propagation of zirconium (Zr) fires than MELCOR simulations predict. The petitioner stated that the NRC's philosophy of defense-in-depth requires the application of conservative models, and, therefore, it is necessary to improve the performance of MELCOR and any other computer safety models that are intended to accurately simulate SFP accident/fire scenarios.

The petitioner stated that the new regulations would help improve public and plant-worker safety. The petitioner asserted that the first three requested regulations, regarding zirconium fuel cladding oxidation and nitriding, as well as nitrogen-induced breakaway oxidation behavior, are intended to improve the performance of computer safety models that simulate postulated SFP accident/fire scenarios. The petitioner stated that the fourth requested regulation would require that licensees use conservative SFP accident evaluation models to perform annual SFP safety evaluations of postulated complete LOCA scenarios, postulated partial LOCA scenarios, and postulated boil-off accident scenarios. The petitioner stated that the purpose of these evaluations would be to keep the NRC informed of the potential consequences of postulated SFP accident/fire scenarios as fuel assembles were added, removed, or reconfigured in licensees' SFPs. The petitioner stated that the requested regulations are needed because the probability of the type of events that could lead to SFP accidents is relatively high.

The NRC staff reviewed the petition and, based on its understanding of the overall argument in the petition, identified and evaluated the following three issues:

• Issue 1: The requested regulations pertaining to SFP accident evaluation models are needed because the probability of the type of events that could lead to SFP accidents is relatively high.

• Issue 2: Annual licensee SFP safety evaluations and submission of results to the NRC is necessary so that the NRC is aware of potential consequences of postulated SFP accident/fire scenarios as fuel assemblies are added, removed, or reconfigured in licensees' SFPs.

• Issue 3: MELCOR is not currently sufficient to provide a conservative evaluation of postulated SFP accident/fire scenarios for use in the PRM-proposed annual SFP evaluations.

Detailed NRC responses to the three issues are provided in Section II, “Reasons for Denial,” of this document.

II. Reasons for Denial

The NRC is denying the petition because the petitioner failed to present any significant information or arguments that would warrant the requested regulations. The first three requested regulations would establish requirements for how the detailed annual evaluations that would be required by the fourth requested regulation would be performed. It is not necessary to require detailed annual evaluations of the progression of SFP severe accidents because the risk of an SFP severe accident is low. The NRC defines risk as the product of the probability and the consequences of an accident. The requested annual evaluations are not needed for regulatory decisionmaking, and the evaluations would not prevent or mitigate an SFP accident. The petitioner described multiple ways that an extended loss of offsite electrical power could occur and how this could lead to an SFP fire. In order for an SFP fire to occur, all SFP systems, backup systems, and operator actions that are intended to prevent the spent fuel in the pool from being uncovered would have to fail. The NRC does not agree that more detailed accident evaluation models need to be developed for this purpose, as requested by the petitioner, because the requested annual evaluations are not needed for regulatory decisionmaking. The NRC recognizes that the consequences of an SFP fire could be large and that is why there are numerous requirements in place to prevent a situation where the spent fuel is uncovered.

This section provides detailed NRC responses to the three issues identified in the petition.

Issue 1: The Requested Regulations Pertaining to SFP Accident Evaluation Models Are Needed Because the Probability of the Type of Events That Could Lead to SFP Accidents Is Relatively High

The petitioner stated that the requested regulations pertaining to SFP accident evaluation models are needed because the probability of the type of events that could lead to SFP accidents is relatively high. The petitioner stated that an SFP accident could happen as a result of a leak (rapid drain down) or boil-off scenario. Furthermore, the petitioner notes that in the event of a long-term station blackout, emergency diesel generators could run out of fuel and SFP cooling would be lost, resulting in a boil-off of SFP water inventory and a subsequent release of radioactive materials from the spent fuel. The petitioner also provided several examples of events that could lead to a long-term station blackout and, ultimately, an SFP accident, such as a strong geomagnetic disturbance, a nuclear device detonated in the earth's atmosphere, a pandemic, or a cyber or physical attack.

NRC Response

Spent nuclear fuel offloaded from a reactor is initially stored in an SFP. The SFPs at all nuclear plants in the United States are robust structures constructed with thick, reinforced, concrete walls and welded stainless-steel liners. They are designed to safely contain the spent fuel discharged from a nuclear reactor under a variety of normal, off-normal, and hypothetical accident conditions (e.g., loss of electrical power, loss of cooling, fuel or cask drop incidents, floods, earthquakes, or extreme weather events). Racks fitted in the SFPs store the fuel assemblies in a controlled configuration so that the fuel is maintained in a sub-critical and coolable geometry. Redundant monitoring, cooling, and water makeup systems are provided. The spent fuel assemblies are typically covered by at least 25-feet of water, which provides passive cooling as well as radiation shielding. Penetrations to pools are limited to prevent inadvertent drainage, and the penetrations are generally located well above spent fuel storage elevations to prevent uncovering of fuel from drainage.

Studies conducted over the last four decades have consistently shown the risk of an accident causing a zirconium fire in an SFP to be low. The risk of an SFP accident was examined in the 1980s as Generic Issue 82, “Beyond Design Basis Accidents in Spent Fuel Pools,” in light of increased use of high-density storage racks and laboratory studies that indicated the possibility of zirconium fire propagation between assemblies in an air-cooled environment (Section 3 of NUREG-0933, “Resolution of Generic Safety Issues,” http://nureg.nrc.gov/sr0933/). The risk assessment and cost-benefit analyses developed through this effort, Section 6.2 of NUREG-1353, “Regulatory Analysis for the Resolution of Generic Issue 82, Beyond Design Basis Accidents in Spent Fuel Pools” (ADAMS Accession No. ML082330232), concluded that the risk of a severe accident in the SFP was low and appeared to meet the objectives of the Commission's Safety Goal Policy Statement public health objectives (51 FR 30028; August 21, 1986) and that no new regulatory requirements were warranted.

The risk of an SFP accident was re-assessed in the late 1990s to support a risk-informed rulemaking for permanently shutdown, or decommissioned, nuclear power plants in the United States. The study, NUREG-1738, “Technical Study of Spent Fuel Pool Accident Risk at Decommissioning Nuclear Power Plants” (ADAMS Accession No. ML010430066), conservatively assumed that if the water level in the SFP dropped below the top of the spent fuel, an SFP zirconium fire involving all of the spent fuel would occur, and thereby bounded those conditions associated with air cooling of the fuel (including partial-drain down scenarios) and fire propagation. Even with this conservative assumption, the study found the risk of an SFP fire to be low and well within the Commission's Safety Goals.

Additional mechanisms to mitigate the potential loss of SFP water inventory were implemented following the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, which have enhanced spent fuel coolability and the potential to recover SFP water level and cooling prior to a potential SFP zirconium fire (73 FR 76204; August 8, 2008). Based on the implementation of these additional strategies, the probability and, accordingly, the risk of an SFP zirconium fire initiation has decreased and is expected to be less than previously analyzed in NUREG-1738 and previous studies.

Following the 2011 accident at Fukushima Dai-ichi, the NRC took extensive actions to ensure that portable equipment is available to mitigate a loss of cooling water in the SFP. On March 12, 2012, the NRC issued Order EA-12-049, “Order Modifying Licenses with Regard to Requirements for Mitigation Strategies for Beyond-Design-Basis External Events” (ADAMS Accession No. ML12054A735). This order required licensees to develop, implement, and maintain guidance and strategies to maintain or restore core cooling, containment, and SFP cooling capabilities following a beyond-design-basis external event. The NRC endorsed the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) guidance to meet the requirements of this order.1 That guidance establishes additional mechanisms for mitigating a loss of SFP cooling water beyond the requirements in 10 CFR 50.54(hh)(2), such as installing a remote connection for SFP makeup water that can be accessed away from the SFP refueling floor.

1 See NEI 12-06, “Diverse and Flexible Coping Strategies (FLEX) Implementation Guide,” dated August 2012 (ADAMS Accession No. ML12242A378), and JLD-ISG-2012-01, “Compliance with Order EA-12-049, Order Modifying Licenses with Regard to Requirements for Mitigation Strategies for Beyond-Design-Basis External Events,” dated August 2012 (ADAMS Accession No. ML12229A174).

Also, in 2014, the NRC documented a regulatory analysis in COMSECY-13-0030, “Staff Evaluation and Recommendation for Japan Lessons Learned Tier 3 Issue on Expedited Transfer of Spent Fuel” (ADAMS Accession No. ML13329A918), which considered a broad history of the NRC's oversight of spent fuel storage, SFP operating experience (domestic and international), as well as information compiled in NUREG-2161, “Consequence Study of a Beyond-Design-Basis Earthquake Affecting the Spent Fuel Pool for a U.S. Mark I Boiling Water Reactor” (ADAMS Accession No. ML14255A365). In COMSECY-13-0030, the NRC staff concluded that SFPs are robust structures with large safety margins and recommended to the Commission that assessments of possible regulatory actions to require the expedited transfer of spent fuel from SFPs to dry cask storage were not warranted. The Commission subsequently approved the staff's recommendation in the Staff Requirements Memorandum to COMSECY-13-0030 (ADAMS Accession No. ML14143A360).

As supported by numerous evaluations referenced in this document, the NRC has determined that the risk of an SFP severe accident is low. While the risk of a severe accident in an SFP is not negligible, the NRC believes that the risk is low because of the conservative design of SFPs; operational criteria to control spent fuel movement, monitor pertinent parameters, and maintain cooling capability; mitigation measures in place if there is loss of cooling capability or water; and emergency preparedness measures to protect the public. The information proposed to be provided to the NRC is not needed for the effectiveness of NRC's approach for ensuring SFP safety. The NRC notes that the issue of long-term cooling of SFPs is the subject of PRM-50-96, which was accepted for consideration in the rulemaking process (77 FR 74788; December 18, 2012) and is being addressed by the NRC's rulemaking regarding mitigation of beyond design-basis events (RIN 3150-AJ49; NRC-2014-0240).

Issue 2: Annual Licensee SFP Safety Evaluations and Submission of Results to the NRC Is Necessary So That the NRC Is Aware of Potential Consequences of Postulated SFP Accident/Fire Scenarios as Fuel Assemblies Are Added, Removed, or Reconfigured in Licensees' SFPs

The petitioner stated that the purpose of the proposed requirement is to keep the NRC informed of the potential consequences of postulated SFP accident/fire scenarios as fuel assemblies are added, removed, or reconfigured in licensees' SFPs.

NRC Response

The NRC does not agree that this is necessary because the NRC already evaluates SFP systems and structures during initial licensing and license amendment reviews. In addition, baseline NRC inspections provide ongoing oversight to ensure adequate protection. There are not sufficient benefits that would justify the new requirement proposed in the petition for SFP accident evaluations. The proposed new requirement for licensees to perform SFP evaluations would not prevent or mitigate an SFP accident or provide information that is necessary for regulatory decisionmaking. The annual licensee SFP safety evaluations and their results proposed to be provided to the NRC are not needed for the effectiveness of the NRC's approach to ensuring SFP safety.

The NRC issues licenses after reviewing and approving the design and licensing bases contained in the plant's safety analysis report. Licensees are required to operate the plant, including performing operations and surveillances related to spent fuel, in accordance with technical specifications and established practices and procedures for that plant. Any licensee changes to design, operational or surveillance practices, or approved spent fuel inventory limits or configuration changes must be evaluated using the criteria in 10 CFR 50.59, documented and retained for the duration of the operating license, and, if warranted, submitted to the NRC for prior approval.

The general design criteria (GDC) in appendix A to 10 CFR part 50 establish general expectations that licensees must meet through compliance with their plant-specific licensing basis. Several GDC apply to SFPs:

• Protecting against natural phenomena and equipment failures (GDC 2 and GDC 4);

• Preventing a substantial loss-of-coolant inventory under accident conditions (e.g., equipment failure or loss of decay and residual heat removal) (GDC 61);

• Preventing criticality of the spent fuel (GDC 62); and

• Adequately monitoring the SFP conditions for loss of decay heat removal and radiation (GDC 63).

Additionally, emergency procedures and mitigating strategies are in place to address unexpected challenges to spent fuel safety. Multiple requirements in 10 CFR part 50, as well as recent NRC orders following the Fukushima Dai-ichi accident, require redundant equipment and strategies to address loss of cooling to SFPs and protective actions for plant personnel and the public to limit exposure to radioactive materials.

The NRC provides oversight of the licensee's overall plant operations and the SFP in several ways. The NRC inspectors ensure that spent fuel is stored safely by regularly inspecting reactor and equipment vendors; inspecting the design, construction, and use of equipment; and observing “dry runs” of procedures. At least two NRC resident inspectors are assigned to each site to provide monitoring and inspection of routine and special activities. They are aware of, and routinely observe, SFP activities involving fuel manipulation. The NRC inspectors use inspection procedures to guide periodic inspection activities, and the results are published in publicly-available inspection reports. Special inspections may be conducted, as necessary, to evaluate root causes and licensee corrective actions if site-specific events occur. Special inspections may also evaluate generic actions taken by some or all licensees as a result of an NRC order or a change in regulations.

In accordance with 10 CFR part 21, the NRC is informed of defects and noncompliances associated with basic components, which include SFPs and associated drain pipes and safety-related systems, structures, and components for makeup water. This information allows the NRC to take additional regulatory action as necessary with respect to defects and noncompliances. The NRC is also informed of events and conditions at nuclear power plants, as set forth in §§ 50.72 and 50.73. Depending upon the nature of the event or condition, a nuclear power plant licensee must inform the NRC within a specified period of time of the licensee's corrective action taken or planned to be taken. These reports also facilitate effective and timely NRC regulatory oversight. Finally, information identified by a nuclear power plant applicant or licensee as having a significant implication for public health and safety or common defense and security must be reported to the NRC within 2 days of the applicant's or licensee's identification of the information.

The annual evaluations requested in the petition would not provide information that is necessary for regulatory decisionmaking. The evaluations requested in the petition would postulate scenarios in which the normal cooling systems, the backup cooling methods, and the mitigation strategies have all failed to cool the stored fuel and would require the calculation of the time it would take for the stored fuel to ignite and how much of it would ignite. Due to the robustness of this equipment, the NRC views this sequence of events as extremely unlikely to occur. Since the current regulations require that the pool be designed to prevent the loss-of-coolant and subsequent uncovering of the fuel, the information that would be obtained from the proposed requirement in the petition would not impact the current design basis. Moreover, as discussed previously, the NRC's current regulatory infrastructure relevant to SFPs at nuclear power plants in the United States already contains information collection and reporting requirements that support effective NRC regulatory oversight of SFPs.

The NRC does not agree that it is necessary to impose a new requirement for licensees to perform annual evaluations of their SFPs because existing requirements and oversight are sufficient to ensure adequate protection of public health and safety.

Issue 3: MELCOR Is Not Currently Sufficient To Provide a Conservative Evaluation of Postulated SFP Accident/Fire Scenarios

The petitioner requested that the NRC establish requirements for SFP accident evaluation computer models to be used in the annual SFP evaluations requested in Issue 2. The petitioner stated that there are serious flaws with MELCOR, which has been used by the NRC to model severe accident progression in SFPs, and, therefore, MELCOR is not sufficient.

NRC Response

The NRC does not agree that it is necessary to establish requirements for SFP accident evaluation computer models because the annual SFP evaluations requested in Issue 2 are not necessary for regulatory decisionmaking. Therefore, it is not necessary for the NRC to establish requirements for how such an evaluation should be conducted. Furthermore, the NRC disagrees with the petitioner's statements that MELCOR is flawed.

There are inherent uncertainties in the progression of severe accidents. There are many interrelated phenomena that need to be properly understood; otherwise, conservatism in one area may lead to overall non-conservative results. Conservatism can be meaningfully introduced into the relevant analysis after the best estimate analysis is done and uncertainties are properly taken into account.

The important question for a severe accident analysis is whether the uncertainties are appropriately considered in the analysis results. For example, Section 9 of the SFP study (NUREG-2161) is devoted to discussing the major uncertainties that can affect the radiological releases (e.g., hydrogen combustion, core concrete interaction, multi-unit or concurrent accident, or fuel loading). In addition, the regulatory analysis in COMSECY-13-0030 only relied on SFP study insights for the boiling-water reactors with Mark I and II containments, and, even then, the results were conservatively biased towards higher radiological releases. For other designs, the release fractions were based on previous studies (i.e., NUREG-1738) that used bounding or conservative estimates.

The MELCOR computer code is the NRC's best estimate tool for severe accident analysis. It has been validated against experimental data, and it represents the current state of the art in severe accident analysis. In NUREG-2161, the NRC stated that “MELCOR has been developed through the NRC and international research performed since the accident at Three Mile Island in 1979. MELCOR is a fully integrated, engineering-level computer code and includes a broad spectrum of severe accident phenomena with capabilities to model core heatup and degradation, fission product release and transport within the primary system and containment, core relocation to the vessel lower head, and ex-vessel core concrete interaction.” Furthermore, MELCOR has been benchmarked against many experiments, including separate and integral effects tests for a wide range of phenomena. Therefore, the NRC has determined that MELCOR is acceptable for its intended use.

Additional information about the capabilities of the MELCOR code to model SFP accidents can be found in the NRC response to stakeholder comments in Appendix E to NUREG-2161. The NRC also addressed questions regarding MELCOR in Appendix D to NUREG-2157, Volume 2, “Generic Environmental Impact Statement for Continued Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel” (ADAMS Accession No. ML14196A107).

III. Conclusion

For the reasons described in Section II, “Reasons for Denial,” of this document, the NRC is denying the petition under 10 CFR 2.803. The petitioner failed to present any information or arguments that would warrant the requested amendments. The NRC does not believe that the information that would be reported to the NRC as requested by the petitioner is necessary for effective NRC regulatory decisionmaking with respect to SFPs. The NRC continues to conclude that the current design and licensing requirements for SFPs provide adequate protection of public health and safety.

IV. Availability of Documents

The documents identified in the following table are available to interested persons as indicated. For more information on accessing ADAMS, see the ADDRESSES section of this document.

Date Document ADAMS accession number/Federal Register citation August 21, 1986 Safety Goals for the Operations of Nuclear Power Plants; Policy Statement; Republication 51 FR 30028. April 1989 NUREG-1353, “Regulatory Analysis for the Resolution of Generic Issue 82, Beyond Design Basis Accidents in Spent Fuel Pools” ML082330232. February 2001 NUREG-1738, “Technical Study of Spent Fuel Pool Accident Risk at Decommissioning Nuclear Power Plants” ML010430066. March 12, 2012 EA-12-049, “Order Modifying Licenses with Regard to Requirements for Mitigation Strategies for Beyond-Design-Basis External Events” ML12054A735. August 2012 NEI 12-06, “Diverse and Flexible Coping Strategies (FLEX) Implementation Guide” ML12242A378. August 2012 JLD-ISG-2012-01, “Compliance with Order EA-12-049, Order Modifying Licenses with Regard to Requirements for Mitigation Strategies for Beyond-Design-Basis External Events” ML12229A174. December 18, 2012 Long-Term Cooling and Unattended Water Makeup of Spent Fuel Pools 77 FR 74788. November 12, 2013 COMSECY-13-0030, “Staff Evaluation and Recommendation for Japan Lessons Learned Tier 3 Issue on Expedited Transfer of Spent Fuel” ML13329A918. May 23, 2014 SRM-COMSECY-13-0030, “Staff Requirements—COMSECY-13-0030—Staff Evaluation and Recommendation for Japan Lessons-Learned Tier 3 Issue on Expedited Transfer of Spent Fuel” ML14143A360. June 19, 2014 Incoming Petition (PRM-50-108) from Mr. Mark Edward Leyse ML14195A388. September 2014 NUREG-2157, “Generic Environmental Impact Statement for Continued Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel,” Volume 2 ML14196A107. September 2014 NUREG-2161, “Consequence Study of a Beyond-Design-Basis Earthquake Affecting the Spent Fuel Pool for a U.S. Mark I Boiling-Water Reactor” ML14255A365. October 7, 2014 Notice of Docketing for PRM-50-108 79 FR 60383. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 5th day of May, 2016.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Annette L. Vietti-Cook, Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2016-11212 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
PENSION BENEFIT GUARANTY CORPORATION 29 CFR Parts 4010, 4041, 4071, and 4302 RIN 1212-AB33 Adjustment of Civil Penalties AGENCY:

Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation.

ACTION:

Interim final rule.

SUMMARY:

The Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation is amending its regulations to adjust the penalties provided for in sections 4071 and 4302 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974. This action is being taken in accordance with the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act Improvements Act of 2015 and Office of Management and Budget memorandum M-16-06. The regulations being amended are those on Penalties for Failure to Provide Certain Notices or Other Material Information (29 CFR part 4071) and Penalties for Failure to Provide Certain Multiemployer Plan Notices (29 CFR part 4302). Conforming amendments are also being made to the regulations on Annual Financial and Actuarial Information Reporting (29 CFR part 4010) and Termination of Single-Employer Plans (29 CFR part 4041).

DATES:

The amendments are effective August 1, 2016. Also see Applicability, below.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Deborah C. Murphy, Deputy Assistant General Counsel for Regulatory Affairs ([email protected]), Office of the General Counsel, Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation, 1200 K Street NW., Washington, DC 20005-4026; 202-326-4400 extension 3451. (TTY and TDD users may call the Federal relay service toll-free at 800-877-8339 and ask to be connected to 202-326-4400 extension 3451.)

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Executive Summary Purpose of the Regulatory Action

This rule is needed to carry out the requirements of the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act Improvements Act of 2015. The rule adjusts the maximum civil penalties that PBGC may assess for failure to provide certain notices or other material information.

PBGC's legal authority for this action comes from the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 1990 as amended by the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act Improvements Act of 2015 and from sections 4002(b)(3), 4071, and 4302 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974.

Major Provisions of the Regulatory Action

This rule adjusts the maximum civil penalties that PBGC may assess under sections 4071 and 4302 of ERISA. The new maximum amounts are $2,063 for section 4071 penalties and $275 for section 4302 penalties.

Background

The Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (PBGC) administers title IV of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA). Title IV has two provisions that authorize PBGC to assess civil monetary penalties.1 Section 4302, added to ERISA by the Multiemployer Pension Plan Amendments Act of 1980, authorizes PBGC to assess a civil penalty of up to $100 a day for failure to provide a notice under subtitle E of title IV of ERISA (dealing with multiemployer plans). Section 4071, added to ERISA by the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1987, authorizes PBGC to assess a civil penalty of up to $1,000 a day for failure to provide a notice or other material information under subtitles A, B, and C of title IV and sections 303(k)(4) and 306(g)(4) of title I of ERISA.

1 Under the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 1990, a penalty is a civil monetary penalty if (among other things) it is for a specific monetary amount or has a maximum amount specified by Federal law. Title IV also provides (in section 4007) for penalties for late payment of premiums, but those penalties are neither in a specified amount nor subject to a specified maximum amount.

The Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 1990 called for reports by the President to Congress about the effect of inflation on civil penalties and the adjustment of civil penalties for inflation. The Debt Collection Improvement Act of 1996 amended the 1990 act to require agencies to make inflation adjustments of civil monetary penalties by regulation in accordance with principles in the 1990 act. On July 10, 1997 (at 62 FR 36993), PBGC published a final rule to implement the 1996 act. That final rule added to PBGC's regulations parts 4071 and 4302, which provided that the maximum penalty amounts under sections 4071 and 4302 were $1,100 a day for section 4071 and $110 a day for section 4302.

Several of PBGC's regulations note that section 4071 penalties may be assessed for failure to provide notices or other material information required under those regulations, but only two mention the adjusted maximum amount. The two regulations that do so are those on Annual Financial and Actuarial Information Reporting (29 CFR part 4010) and Termination of Single-Employer Plans (29 CFR part 4041).

Adjustment of Civil Penalties

On November 2, 2015, the President signed into law the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act Improvements Act of 2015,2 which further amended the 1990 act. The 2015 act requires agencies to adjust civil monetary penalties for inflation and to publish the adjustments in the Federal Register. An initial adjustment must be made by interim final rule published by July 1, 2016, and effective by August 1, 2016. Subsequent adjustments must be promulgated by January 15 of each year after 2016. Adjustments must be based on changes in the Consumer Price Index, and the initial adjustment is to be made from the penalty level most recently established, other than by an adjustment under the 1990 act. The initial adjustment cannot increase a penalty more than 150 percent over its level on November 2, 2015. Adjusted penalties are to be rounded to the nearest dollar.

2 Sec. 701, Public Law 114-74, 129 Stat. 599-601 (Bipartisan Budget Act of 2015).

On February 24, 2016, the Office of Management and Budget issued memorandum M-16-06 on implementation of the 2015 act.3 The memorandum provides guidance to agencies about how to comply with the act. In particular, the memorandum includes a table of multipliers to use for the initial adjustment. The multiplier for 1980 (when section 4302 was added to ERISA) is 2.80469. The multiplier for 1987 (when section 4071 was added to ERISA) is 2.06278. Applying these multipliers to the enacted maximum amounts of the two penalties yields new maximum penalty levels (rounded to the nearest dollar) of $280 for section 4302 and $2,063 for section 4071. But applying the 150-percent-maximum-increase rule, the maximum penalty under section 4302 may not exceed $275. Accordingly, PBGC is adjusting the maximum penalty under section 4071 to $2,063 and adjusting the maximum penalty under section 4302 to $275.

3https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/memoranda/2016/m-16-06.pdf.

Given the prospect of annual adjustments of the maximum section 4071 penalty, PBGC is simply removing the references in its other regulations to the maximum amount of section 4071 penalties. Removal of these references has no substantive effect, since the operative provision for the maximum amount is in part 4071; and removal avoids the need for annual amendments to these other regulations to track adjustments in the maximum penalty level.

Applicability

The increases in the civil monetary penalties under sections 4071 and 4302 provided for in this rule apply on and after August 1, 2016.

Compliance With Regulatory Requirements

PBGC has determined, in consultation with the Office of Management and Budget, that this rule is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866.

PBGC has determined that notice and public comment on this interim final rule are unnecessary because the adjustment of civil penalties implemented in the rule is required by law. See 5 U.S.C. 553(b).

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

List of Subjects 29 CFR Part 4010

Penalties, Pension insurance, Pensions, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

29 CFR Part 4041

Penalties, Pension insurance, Pensions, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

29 CFR Part 4071

Penalties.

29 CFR Part 4302

Penalties.

In consideration of the foregoing, PBGC amends 29 CFR parts 4010, 4043, 4071, and 4302 as follows:

PART 4010—ANNUAL FINANCIAL AND ACTUARIAL INFORMATION REPORTING 1. The authority citation for part 4010 continues to read as follows: Authority:

29 U.S.C. 1302(b)(3), 1310.

§ 4010.14 [Amended]
2. In § 4010.14, the words “of up to $1,100 a day for each day that the failure continues” are removed. PART 4041—TERMINATION OF SINGLE-EMPLOYER PLANS 3. The authority citation for part 4041 continues to read as follows: Authority:

29 U.S.C. 1302(b)(3), 1341, 1344, 1350.

§ 4041.6 [Amended]
4. In § 4041.6, the words “of up to $1,100 a day for each day that the failure continues” are removed. PART 4071—PENALTIES FOR FAILURE TO PROVIDE CERTAIN NOTICES OR OTHER MATERIAL INFORMATION 5. The authority citation for part 4071 is revised to read as follows: Authority:

28 U.S.C. 2461 note, as amended by sec. 701, Pub. L. 114-74, 129 Stat. 599-601; 29 U.S.C. 1302(b)(3), 1371.

§ 4071.3 [Amended]
6. In § 4071.3, the figures “$1,100” are removed and the figures “$2,063” are added in their place. PART 4302—PENALTIES FOR FAILURE TO PROVIDE CERTAIN MULTIEMPLOYER PLAN NOTICES 7. The authority citation for part 4302 is revised to read as follows: Authority:

28 U.S.C. 2461 note, as amended by sec. 701, Pub. L. 114-74, 129 Stat. 599-601; 29 U.S.C. 1302(b)(3), 1452.

§ 4302.3 [Amended]
8. In § 4302.3, the figures “$110” are removed and the figures $275” are added in their place. Issued in Washington, DC, this 5 day of May, 2016. W. Thomas Reeder, Director, Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation.
[FR Doc. 2016-11296 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7709-02-P
PENSION BENEFIT GUARANTY CORPORATION 29 CFR Part 4022 Benefits Payable in Terminated Single-Employer Plans; Interest Assumptions for Paying Benefits AGENCY:

Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation.

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

This final rule amends the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation's regulation on Benefits Payable in Terminated Single-Employer Plans to prescribe interest assumptions under the regulation for valuation dates in June 2016. The interest assumptions are used for paying benefits under terminating single-employer plans covered by the pension insurance system administered by PBGC.

DATES:

Effective June 1, 2016.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Deborah C. Murphy ([email protected]), Deputy Assistant General Counsel for Regulatory Affairs, Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation, 1200 K Street NW., Washington, DC 20005, 202-326-4024. (TTY/TDD users may call the Federal relay service toll-free at 1-800-877-8339 and ask to be connected to 202-326-4024.)

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

PBGC's regulation on Benefits Payable in Terminated Single-Employer Plans (29 CFR part 4022) prescribes actuarial assumptions—including interest assumptions—for paying plan benefits under terminating single-employer plans covered by title IV of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974. The interest assumptions in the regulation are also published on PBGC's Web site (http://www.pbgc.gov).

PBGC uses the interest assumptions in Appendix B to Part 4022 to determine whether a benefit is payable as a lump sum and to determine the amount to pay. Appendix C to Part 4022 contains interest assumptions for private-sector pension practitioners to refer to if they wish to use lump-sum interest rates determined using PBGC's historical methodology. Currently, the rates in Appendices B and C of the benefit payment regulation are the same.

The interest assumptions are intended to reflect current conditions in the financial and annuity markets. Assumptions under the benefit payments regulation are updated monthly. This final rule updates the benefit payments interest assumptions for June 2016.1

1 Appendix B to PBGC's regulation on Allocation of Assets in Single-Employer Plans (29 CFR part 4044) prescribes interest assumptions for valuing benefits under terminating covered single-employer plans for purposes of allocation of assets under ERISA section 4044. Those assumptions are updated quarterly.

The June 2016 interest assumptions under the benefit payments regulation will be 0.75 percent for the period during which a benefit is in pay status and 4.00 percent during any years preceding the benefit's placement in pay status. In comparison with the interest assumptions in effect for May 2016, these interest assumptions represent a decrease of 0.25 percent in the immediate annuity rate and are otherwise unchanged.

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

Because of the need to provide immediate guidance for the payment of benefits under plans with valuation dates during June 2016, PBGC finds that good cause exists for making the assumptions set forth in this amendment effective less than 30 days after publication.

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

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

List of Subjects in 29 CFR Part 4022

Employee benefit plans, Pension insurance, Pensions, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

In consideration of the foregoing, 29 CFR part 4022 is amended as follows:

PART 4022—BENEFITS PAYABLE IN TERMINATED SINGLE-EMPLOYER PLANS 1. The authority citation for part 4022 continues to read as follows: Authority:

29 U.S.C. 1302, 1322, 1322b, 1341(c)(3)(D), and 1344.

2. In appendix B to part 4022, Rate Set 272, as set forth below, is added to the table. Appendix B to Part 4022—Lump Sum Interest Rates for PBGC Payments Rate set For plans with a valuation date On or after Before Immediate
  • annuity rate
  • (percent)
  • Deferred annuities
  • (percent)
  • i 1 i 2 i 3 n 1 n 2
    *         *         *         *         *         *         * 272 6-1-16 7-1-16 0.75 4.00 4.00 4.00 7 8
    3. In appendix C to part 4022, Rate Set 272, as set forth below, is added to the table. Appendix C to Part 4022—Lump Sum Interest Rates for Private-Sector Payments

    Rate set For plans with a valuation date On or after Before Immediate
  • annuity rate
  • (percent)
  • Deferred annuities
  • (percent)
  • i 1 i 2 i 3 n 1 n 2
    *         *         *         *         *         *         * 272 6-1-16 7-1-16 0.75 4.00 4.00 4.00 7 8
    Issued in Washington, DC, on this 5th day of May 2016. Judith Starr, General Counsel, Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation.
    [FR Doc. 2016-11297 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7709-02-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 100 [Docket Number USCG-2016-0276] RIN 1625-AA08 Special Local Regulation; Lake of the Ozarks, Lakeside, MO AGENCY:

    Coast Guard, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Temporary final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Coast Guard is establishing a special local regulation for certain waters of the Lake of the Ozarks. This action is necessary to provide for the safety of life on these navigable waters near Lakeside, MO, during a powerboat race on June 4, 2016. This regulation designates prohibited areas for the race course and associated safety buffer, spectator areas, and location for vessels to transit during the race at no wake speeds. Deviation from the established special local regulation must be authorized by the Captain of the Port Upper Mississippi River or a designated representative.

    DATES:

    This rule is effective from 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. on June 4, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-2016-0276 in the “SEARCH” box and click “SEARCH.” Click on Open Docket Folder on the line associated with this rule.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    If you have questions on this rule, call or email LCDR Sean Peterson, Chief of Prevention, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone 314-269-2332, email [email protected].

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

    On March 16, 2016, the Lake Race Steering Committee notified the Coast Guard that it will be hosting a powerboat race from 9 a.m. until 6 p.m. on June 4, 2016. In response, on April 20, 2016, the Coast Guard published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) titled Special Local Regulation; Lake of the Ozarks, Lakeside, MO (81 FR 23223). There we stated why we issued the NPRM, and invited comments on our proposed regulatory action related to this powerboat race. During the comment period that ended May 5, 2016, we received no comments.

    We are issuing this rule, and under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for making it effective less than 30 days after publication in the Federal Register. On March 16, 2016, the Coast Guard was notified of the event being held and an NPRM with a 15 day comment period was published on April 20, 2016. Though we are not providing a full 30 day notice period, the Coast Guard did provide notice and opportunity to comment through the NPRM process and is now providing less than 30 days notice before the final rule goes into effect on June 4, 2016. It is impracticable to provide a full 30-days notice because this rule must be effective June 4, 2016.

    III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 33 U.S.C. 1233. The Captain of the Port (COTP) Upper Mississippi River has determined that potential hazards associated with the powerboat race are a safety concern. The purpose of this rule is to ensure safety of vessels and the navigable waters in the special local regulation before, during, and after the scheduled event.

    IV. Discussion of Comments, Changes, and the Rule

    As noted above, we received no comments on our NPRM published April 20, 2016. There are no changes in the regulatory text of this rule from the proposed rule in the NPRM. This rule establishes a special local regulation from 9 a.m. until 6 p.m. on June 4, 2016, designating the race course and location of spectator areas. Vessels transiting near the course will be restricted to transiting at the slowest safe speed. This special local regulation covers navigable waters on the Lake of the Ozarks Osage Branch between miles 0 and 4. The Coast Guard has also posted a map depicting the location and restricted areas for this special local regulation in the docket. Six anchorage areas for spectators are designated and are also shown on the map and labeled as A through F. This map may be viewed as indicated under the ADDRESSES section. The duration of the regulation is intended to ensure the safety of vessels and these navigable waters before, during, and after the power boat race, scheduled from 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. No vessel or person will be permitted to deviate from the special local regulation without obtaining permission from the COTP or a designated representative.

    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 size, location, and duration of the special local regulation. Vessel traffic will be able to safely transit around the race course and spectators will have designated locations to view the race. Moreover, the Coast Guard is including event information in the Local Notice to Mariners, and the rule allows vessels to seek permission to deviate from the regulation.

    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 the safety zone may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section V.A. above, this rule will not have a significant economic impact on any vessel owner or operator.

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

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

    C. Collection of Information

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

    D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

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

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

    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 a special local regulation designating the race course, location of spectator areas, and location for vessels to transit during the race at slowest safe speed. It is categorically excluded from further review under paragraph 34(h) of Figure 2-1 of the Commandant Instruction. An environmental analysis checklist supporting this determination and a Categorical Exclusion Determination are available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES. We seek any comments or information that may lead to the discovery of a significant environmental impact from this rule.

    G. Protest Activities

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

    List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 100

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

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 CFR part 100 as follows:

    PART 100—REGATTAS AND MARINE PARADES 1. The authority citation for part 100 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    33 U.S.C. 1233.

    2. Add § 100.T08-0276 to read as follows:
    § 100.T08-0276 Special Local Regulation; Lake of the Ozarks; Lakeside, MO.

    (a) Location. The following areas are regulated areas:

    (1) Lake of the Ozarks Osage Branch between miles 0 and 4; the Bagnell Dam and Birdsong Hollow Cove, covering the entire width of the branch. Access to the race course and associated safety buffer area will be prohibited to authorized vessels only. The safety buffer area for the course will be marked with blue buoy markers. Vessels transiting outside of the safety buffer area shall proceed at no wake speed. See attached map for additional information on location.

    (2) Six designated areas will be available for spectators for the duration of the races. The designated anchorage areas will be marked with blue and yellow buoy marker. They are labeled A-F on the attached map. The anchorage areas are located a minimum of 100 feet outside the race course safety buffer area marked with blue buoy markers. The six anchorages are located in the following areas: Branch Rd Point; Emerald Ln Point; Lotell Hollow Cove; McCoy Branch Cove; west of Duck Head Point; and Jennings Branch Cove. In addition to the listed designated anchorages, vessels may also anchor inside the protective coves.

    (b) Definitions. As used in this section, designated representative means a Coast Guard Patrol Commander, including a Coast Guard coxswain, petty officer, or other officer operating a Coast Guard vessel and a Federal, State, and local officer designated by or assisting the Captain of the Port Upper Mississippi River in the enforcement of the regulation.

    (c) Regulations. (1) Under the general regulations in § 100.35, deviation from the regulations described in paragraph (a) of this section is prohibited unless authorized by the COTP Upper Mississippi River or designated representative.

    (2) To seek permission to deviate from the regulation, contact the COTP or the COTP's designated representative via VHF-FM ch 16 or by calling Sector Upper Mississippi River at 314-269-2332.

    (d) Enforcement period. This section will be enforced from 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. on June 4, 2016.

    Dated: May 6, 2016. M.L. Malloy, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Sector Upper Mississippi River.
    [FR Doc. 2016-11339 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 117 [Docket No. USCG-2016-0384] Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Grassy Sound Channel, Middle Township, NJ AGENCY:

    Coast Guard, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice of deviation from drawbridge regulation.

    SUMMARY:

    The Coast Guard has issued a temporary deviation from the operating schedule that governs the Grassy Sound Channel Bridge (West Ocean Drive/CR619) across the Grassy Sound Channel, mile 1.0, at Middle Township, NJ. This deviation is necessary to provide for the safety of runners during “The Wild Half” annual half marathon. This deviation allows the bridge to remain in the closed-to-navigation position.

    DATES:

    This deviation is effective from 7:30 a.m. to 11 a.m. on May 15, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    The docket for this deviation, [USCG-2016-0384] is available at http://www.regulations.gov. Type the docket number in the “SEARCH” box and click “SEARCH”. Click on Open Docket Folder on the line associated with this deviation.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    If you have questions on this temporary deviation, call or email Mr. Hal R. Pitts, Bridge Administration Branch Fifth District, Coast Guard, telephone 757-398-6222, email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Cape May County, Department of Public Works, that owns and operates the Grassy Sound Channel Bridge, has requested a temporary deviation from the current operating regulations to provide for the safety of runners during “The Wild Half” annual half marathon event. The bridge is a bascule draw bridge and has a vertical clearance in the closed position of 15 feet above mean high water.

    The current operating schedule is set out in 33 CFR 117.721. Under this temporary deviation, the bridge will remain in the closed-to-navigation position from 7:30 a.m. to 11 a.m. on May 15, 2016. The Coast Guard has carefully considered the nature and volume of vessel traffic on the waterway in publishing this temporary deviation.

    Vessels able to safely pass through the bridge in the closed position may do so at any time. The bridge will be able to open for emergencies and the New Jersey Intracoastal Waterway is an alternate route for vessels transiting the area. The Coast Guard will also inform the users of the waterways through our Local and Broadcast Notices to Mariners of the change in operating schedule for the bridge so that vessel operators can arrange their transit to minimize any impact caused by the temporary deviation.

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

    Dated: May 10, 2016. Hal R. Pitts, Bridge Program Manager, Fifth Coast Guard District.
    [FR Doc. 2016-11349 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 165 [Docket No. USCG-2016-0250] RIN 1625-AA87 Security Zone; Tall-Ship CUAUHTEMOC; Thames River, New London Harbor, New London, CT AGENCY:

    Coast Guard, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Temporary final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary security zone around the Tall-Ship CUAUHTEMOC during its transit through the Long Island Sound Captain of the Port (COTP) Zone, and for the duration of its mooring on the Thames River in New London Harbor, New London, CT. This temporary final rule creates a 250-yard radius security zone encompassing all navigable waters around the Tall-Ship CUAUHTEMOC while in transit through Sector Long Island Sound's Captain of the Port (COTP) Zone, and a 100-yard radius temporary security zone while the vessel is anchored or moored in the Thames River in New London Harbor, New London, CT. This zone is needed to protect the Tall-Ship CUAUHTEMOC and its crew from destruction, loss, or injury from sabotage, subversive acts, or other malicious acts of a similar nature. Persons or vessels may not enter the security zone without permission of the COTP or a COTP designated representative.

    DATES:

    This rule is effective without actual notice from May 13, 2016 until May 14, 2016. For the purposes of enforcement, actual notice will be used from May 1, 2016 until May 13, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-2016-0250 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 Petty Officer Jay TerVeen, Prevention Department, Coast Guard Sector Long Island Sound; telephone (203) 468-4446, email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Table of Abbreviations COTP Captain of the Port DHS Department of Homeland Security FR Federal Register NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking II. Background Information and Regulatory History

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary final rule without prior notice and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section 4(a) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those procedures are “impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.” Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) with respect to this rule because an NPRM would be impracticable and contrary to the public interest. Consequently, the Coast Guard did not have enough time to draft, publish, and receive public comment on this rulemaking via an NPRM and still publish a final rule before the event was scheduled to take place. Delaying this rulemaking by waiting for a comment period to run would also reduce the Coast Guard's ability to fulfill its statutory missions to protect and secure the ports and waterways of the United States.

    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), and for the same reasons as stated above, the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after publication in the Federal Register. Delaying the effective date of this rule would be contrary to public interest because immediate action is needed to respond to the potential security threats associated with having the Tall-Ship CUAUHTEMOC in U.S. Waters.

    III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under the authority in 33 U.S.C. 1231. The Captain of the Port Long of Island Sound (COTP) has determined that vessels, within a 250-yard radius of the Tall-Ship CUAUHTEMOC while it is transiting and a 100-yard radius while it is moored, pose a potential security risk.

    IV. Discussion of the Rule

    This rule establishes a security zone from May 1, 2016 through May 14, 2016 for the Tall-Ship CUAUHTEMOC. This zone is needed to protect the Tall-Ship CUAUHTEMOC and its crew from destruction, loss, or injury from sabotage, subversive acts, or other malicious acts of a similar nature.

    This rule prevents vessels from entering, transiting, mooring, or anchoring within the security zone unless authorized by the COTP or designated representative. The Coast Guard has determined that this security zone will not have a significant impact on vessel traffic due to its temporary nature, limited size, and the fact that vessels are allowed to transit the navigable waters outside of the security zone.

    The Coast Guard will notify the public and local mariners of this safety zone through appropriate means, which may include, but are not limited to, publication in the Federal Register, the Local Notice to Mariners, and Broadcast Notice to Mariners.

    V. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and Executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses based on these statutes and Executive Order 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 Orders 12866. Accordingly, it has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget.

    The Coast Guard determined that this rulemaking is not a significant regulatory action for the following reasons: (1) The enforcement of this security zone will be relatively short in duration; (2) persons or vessels desiring to enter the security zone may do so with permission from the COTP Sector LIS or a designated representative; (3) this security zone is designed in a way to limit impacts on vessel traffic, permitting vessels to navigate in other portions of the waterway not designated as a security zone; and (4) the Coast Guard will notify the public of the enforcement of this rule via appropriate means, such as via Local Notice to Mariners and Broadcast Notice to Mariners to increase public awareness of this security zone.

    B. Impact on Small Entities

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

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

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

    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 proposed rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard.

    C. Collection of Information

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

    D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

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

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

    E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538) requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or more in any one year. Though this rule will not result in such 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 (DHS) Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction Manual (CIM) M16475.lD, which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have concluded 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 establishment of a temporary security zone and is categorically excluded from further review under, paragraph 34(g) of figure 2-1 of the Commandant Instruction. An environmental analysis checklist and a categorical exclusion determination will be available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES.

    G. Protest Activities

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

    List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

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

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

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

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

    2. Add § 165.T01-0250 to read as follows:
    § 165.T01-0250 Security Zone; Tall-Ship CUAUHTEMOC; Thames River, New London Harbor, New London, CT.

    (a) Location. The following areas are designated as security zones:

    (1) All navigable waters within the Sector Long Island Sound Captain of the Port (COTP) Zone, extending from the surface to the bottom, within a 250-yard radius of the Tall-Ship CUAUHTEMOC.

    (2) All navigable waters within the Thames River in New London Harbor, New London, CT, extending from the surface to the riverbed within a 100-yard radius of the Tall-Ship CUAUHTEMOC while it moored or anchored in the Thames River in New London Harbor, New London, CT.

    (b) Enforcement Period. This section will be enforced from May 1, 2016 through May 14, 2016, unless terminated sooner by the COTP.

    (c) Regulations. (1) The general regulations contained in 33 CFR 165.33 apply. During the enforcement period, entry into, transit through, remaining within, mooring or anchoring within this temporary security zone is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port (COTP) or the designated representative.

    (2) Vessel operators given permission to enter or operate in the temporary security zone must comply with all directions given to them by the COTP or the designated representatives. Those vessels may be required to be at anchor or moored to a waterfront facility.

    (3) The “designated representative” is any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant, or petty officer who has been designated by the COTP to act on his behalf. The on-scene representative may be on a Coast Guard vessel, or onboard a federal, state, or local agency vessel that is authorized to act in support of the Coast Guard.

    (4) Vessel operators desiring to enter or operate within the temporary security zone shall telephone the COTP at (203) 468-4401, or his designated representative via VHF channel 16 to obtain permission to do so.

    Dated: April 19, 2016. E.J. Cubanski, III, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Sector Long Island Sound.
    [FR Doc. 2016-11253 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 165 [Docket Number USCG-2016-0274] RIN 1625-AA00 Safety Zone; Navy UNDET, Apra Outer Harbor and Piti, GU AGENCY:

    Coast Guard, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Temporary final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone for underwater detonation operations in the waters of Apra Outer Harbor and Piti, Guam. The Coast Guard believes this safety zone regulation is necessary to protect all persons and vessels that would otherwise transit or be within the affected areas from possible safety hazards associated with underwater detonation operations. Entry of vessels or persons into these zones is prohibited unless specifically authorized by the Captain of the Port Guam.

    DATES:

    This rule is effective without actual notice from May 13, 2016 until May 16, 2016. For the purposes of enforcement, actual notice will be used from May 10, 2016, until May 13, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-2016-0274 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 Chief Kristina Gauthier, Sector Guam, U.S. Coast Guard; (671) 355-4866, [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Table of Abbreviations CFR Code of Federal Regulations DHS Department of Homeland Security E.O. Executive order FR Federal Register NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking Pub. L. Public Law §  Section UNDET Underwater detonation U.S.C. United States Code II. Background Information and Regulatory History

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary rule without prior notice and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section 4(a) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those procedures are “impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.” Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) with respect to this rule because doing so would be impracticable and contrary to public interest. The Coast Guard received notice of this operation on March 10, 2015, only 62 days before the operation is scheduled. As a result, the Coast Guard did not have time to issue a notice of proposed rulemaking. Thus, delaying the effective date of this rule to wait for a comment period to run would be impracticable because it would inhibit the Coast Guard's ability to protect vessels and waterway users from the hazards associated with this operation.

    We are issuing this rule, and under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for making it effective less than 30 days after publication in the Federal Register. Due to the late notice and inherent danger in underwater exercises, delaying the effective period of this safety zone would be contrary to the public interest.

    III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 33 U.S.C. 1231. The Captain of the Port Guam (COTP) has determined that potential hazards associated with the U.S. Navy training exercise, which include detonation of underwater explosives on May 10th through 13th and 16th, 2016, will be a safety concern for anyone within a 700-yard radius on the surface and 1400-yard radius underwater of the operation. This rule is needed to protect personnel, vessels, and the marine environment in the navigable waters within the safety zone during the exercise. Mariners and divers approaching too close to such exercises could potentially expose the mariner to flying debris or other hazardous conditions.

    IV. Discussion of the Rule

    This rule establishes safety zones from 8 a.m. through 4 p.m. on May 10th through 13th and 16th, 2016. The safety zones will cover all navigable waters within 700 yards on the surface and 1400 yards underwater of vessels and machinery being used by Navy. The duration of the zone is intended to protect personnel, vessels, and the marine environment in these navigable waters during the underwater detonation exercise. No vessel or person will be permitted to enter the safety zones without obtaining permission from the COTP or a designated representative.

    V. Regulatory Analyses

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

    A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    E.O.s 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. E.O. 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 E.O. 12866. Accordingly, it has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget.

    This regulatory action determination is based on the size, location, and duration of the safety zone. Vessel traffic will be able to safely transit around this safety zone which will impact a small designated area of in waters off of Piti Guam, for 8 hours for 3 days and in Apra Outer Harbor for 8 hours for 3 days. Moreover, the Coast Guard will issue Broadcast Notice to Mariners via VHF-FM marine channel 16 about the zone and the rule allows vessels to seek permission to enter the zone.

    B. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term “small entities” comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the safety zone may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section 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 E.O. 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 E.O. 13132.

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

    E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538) requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or more in any one year. Though this rule will not result in such 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 a safety zone lasting 8 hours a day for 5 days that will prohibit entry within 700 yards on the surface and 1400 underwater of vessels and machinery being used by Navy personnel. It is categorically excluded from further review under paragraph 34(g) of Figure 2-1 of the Commandant Instruction. An environmental analysis checklist supporting this determination and a Categorical Exclusion Determination are available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES. We seek any comments or information that may lead to the discovery of a significant environmental impact from this rule.

    G. Protest Activities

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

    List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

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

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

    PART 165—SAFETY ZONE; NAVY UNDET, APRA OUTER HARBOR AND PITI, GU. 1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1(g), 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.

    2. Add § 165.T14-0274 to read as follows:
    165. T14-0274 Safety Zone; Navy UNDET, Apra Outer Harbor and Piti, GU.

    (a) Location. The following areas, within the Guam Captain of the Port (COTP) Zone (See 33 CFR 3.70-15), from the surface of the water to the ocean floor, are safety zones:

    (1) Piti Guam May 10th through 12th. All surface waters bounded by a circle with a 700-yard radius and all underwater areas bounded by a circle with a 1400 yard radius centered at 13 degrees 29 minutes 03 seconds North Latitude and 144 degrees 40 minutes 03 seconds East Longitude, (NAD 1983).

    (2) Apra Outer Harbor, Guam May 12th through 13th and 16th. All surface waters bounded by a circle with a 700-yard radius and all underwater areas bounded by a circle with a 1400 yard radius centered at 13 degrees 27 minutes 42 seconds North Latitude and 144 degrees 38 minutes 30 seconds East Longitude, (NAD 1983).

    (b) Enforcement period. This section will be enforced from 8 a.m. through 4 p.m. on May 10th through 13th and 16th, 2016.

    (c) Regulations. The general regulations governing safety zones contained in § 165.23 apply. No vessels may enter or transit safety zones (a)(1) and no persons in the water may enter or transit safety zone (a)(2) unless authorized by the COTP or a designated representative thereof.

    (d) Enforcement. Any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant, or petty officer, and any other COTP representative permitted by law, may enforce these temporary safety zones.

    (e) Waiver. The COTP may waive any of the requirements of this section for any person, vessel, or class of vessel upon finding that application of the safety zone is unnecessary or impractical for the purpose of maritime security.

    (f) Penalties. Vessels or persons violating this rule are subject to the penalties set forth in 33 U.S.C. 1232 and 50 U.S.C. 192.

    Dated: April 28, 2016. James C. Campbell, Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Acting Captain of the Port, Guam.
    [FR Doc. 2016-11361 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 165 [Docket Number USCG-2016-0265] RIN 1625-AA00 Safety Zone; National Grid—Beck Lockport 104 & Beck Harper 106 Removal Project; Niagara River, Lewiston, NY AGENCY:

    Coast Guard, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Temporary final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone on the Niagara River, Buffalo, NY. This safety zone is intended to restrict vessels from a portion of the Niagara River during the removal of international power lines spanning the Niagara River. This temporary safety zone is necessary to protect mariners and vessels from the navigational hazards associated with the removal of overhead power lines.

    DATES:

    This rule is effective from 7:45 a.m. on May 16, 2016, through 6:15 p.m. on May 18, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-2016-0265 in the “SEARCH” box and click “SEARCH.” Click on Open Docket Folder on the line associated with this rule. You may also visit the Docket Management Facility in Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the Department of Transportation West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    If you have questions on this rule, call or email LTJG Amanda Garcia, Chief of Waterways Management, Sector Buffalo, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone 716-843-9343, email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Table of Abbreviations CFR Code of Federal Regulations DHS Department of Homeland Security E.O. Executive order NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking Pub. L. Public Law §  Section U.S.C. United States Code II. Background Information and Regulatory History

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary rule without prior notice and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section 4(a) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those procedures are “impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.” Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) with respect to this rule because doing so would be impracticable. The final details of this event were not known to the Coast Guard until there was insufficient time remaining before the event to publish an NPRM. Thus, delaying the effective date of this rule to wait for a comment period to run would be impracticable because it would inhibit the Coast Guard's ability to protect mariners and vessels from the hazards associated with the removal of international power lines. Therefore, under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for making this temporary rule effective less than 30 days after publication in the Federal Register.

    III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 33 U.S.C. 1231. The Captain of the Port Buffalo (COTP) has determined that potential hazards associated with the removal of international power lines spanning the Niagara River starting May 16, 2016 will be a safety concern for anyone within the zone of the overhead power lines. This rule is needed to protect personnel, vessels, and the marine environment in the navigable waters within the safety zone while overhead power lines are removed.

    IV. Discussion of the Rule

    This rule establishes a safety zone from 7:45 a.m. on May 16, 2016, through 6:15 p.m. on May 18, 2016, to be enforced only when power line removal operations are taking place. The safety zone will encompass all waters of the Niagara River; Lewiston, NY starting at position 43° 8′44.8692″ N., and 079° 2′32.8842″ W. then extending approximately 3,300 feet north along the international maritime border ending at position 43° 9′9.9648″ N., and 079° 2′39.681″ W. inward to the shoreline (NAD 83).

    Entry into, transiting, or anchoring within the safety zone is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Buffalo or his designated on-scene representative. The Captain of the Port or his designated on-scene representative may be contacted via VHF Channel 16.

    V. Regulatory Analyses

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

    A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    E.O.s 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. E.O. 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 E.O. 12866. Accordingly, it has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget.

    We conclude that this rule is not a significant regulatory action because we anticipate that it will have minimal impact on the economy, will not interfere with other agencies, will not adversely alter the budget of any grant or loan recipients, and will not raise any novel legal or policy issues. The safety zone created by this rule will be relatively small and enforced for a relatively short time only during the lowering and crossing of international power lines. Also, the safety zone is designed to minimize its impact on navigable waters. Furthermore, the safety zone has been designed to allow vessels to transit around it. Thus, restrictions on vessel movement within that particular area are expected to be minimal. Under certain conditions, moreover, vessels may still transit through the safety zone when permitted by the Captain of the Port.

    B. Impact on Small Entities

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

    This safety zone will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities for the following reasons: This safety zone would be effective, and thus subject to enforcement only during operations involving the lowering and passing of international power lines across the Niagara River. Traffic may be allowed to pass through the zone with the permission of the Captain of the Port. The Captain of the Port can be reached via VHF channel 16. Before the enforcement of the zone, we would issue local Broadcast Notice to Mariners.

    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 E.O. 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 E.O. 13132.

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

    E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538) requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or more in any one year. Though this rule will not result in such 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 establishment of a safety zone and, therefore it is categorically excluded from further review under paragraph 34(g) of Figure 2-1 of the Commandant Instruction. An environmental analysis checklist supporting this determination and a Categorical Exclusion Determination are available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES. We seek any comments or information that may lead to the discovery of a significant environmental impact from this rule.

    G. Protest Activities

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

    List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

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

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

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

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

    2. § 165.T09-0265 Safety Zone; National Grid—Beck Lockport 104 & Beck Harper 106 Removal Project; Niagara River, Lewiston, NY.

    (a) Location. This zone will encompass all waters of the Niagara River; Lewiston, NY starting at position 43° 8′44.8692″ N., and 079° 2′32.8842″ W. then extending approximately 3,300 feet north along the international maritime border ending at position 43° 9′9.9648″ N., and 079° 2′39.681″ W., then south to the shoreline (NAD 83).

    (b) Enforcement period. This regulation will be enforced intermittently while power line removal operations are taking place from 7:45 a.m. on May 16, 2016 through 6:15 p.m. on May 18, 2016.

    (c) Regulations. (1) In accordance with the general regulations in § 165.23 of this part, entry into, transiting, or anchoring within this safety zone is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Buffalo or his designated on-scene representative.

    (2) This safety zone is closed to all vessel traffic, except as may be permitted by the Captain of the Port Buffalo or his designated on-scene representative.

    (3) The “on-scene representative” of the Captain of the Port Buffalo is any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant or petty officer who has been designated by the Captain of the Port Buffalo to act on his behalf.

    (4) Vessel operators desiring to enter or operate within the safety zone must contact the Captain of the Port Buffalo or his on-scene representative to obtain permission to do so. The Captain of the Port Buffalo or his on-scene representative may be contacted via VHF Channel 16. Vessel operators given permission to enter or operate in the safety zone must comply with all directions given to them by the Captain of the Port Buffalo, or his on-scene representative.

    Dated: April 22, 2016. B.W. Roche, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Buffalo.
    [FR Doc. 2016-11363 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Office of the Secretary 43 CFR Parts 47 and 48 [167D0102DM; DLSN00000.000000; DS61400000; DX61401] RIN 1090-AA98 Land Exchange Procedures and Procedures to Amend the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act, 1920 AGENCY:

    Office of the Secretary, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    This rule provides clarity in how the Department of the Interior administers certain provisions of the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act and the Hawaiian Home Lands Recovery Act. It facilitates the goal of the rehabilitation of the Native Hawaiian community, including the return of native Hawaiians to the land, consistent with the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act, the State of Hawai'i Admission Act, and the Hawaiian Home Lands Recovery Act. The rule clarifies the land exchange process for Hawaiian home lands, the documents required for land exchanges, and the respective responsibilities of the Department of the Interior, the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands, the Hawaiian Homes Commission, and other entities engaged in land exchanges of Hawaiian home lands. It also identifies the documentation requirements and the responsibilities of the Secretary of the Interior in the approval process for State of Hawai'i proposed amendments to the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act, 1920.

    DATES:

    This rule is effective July 12, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    The final rule is available on the internet at: http://www.regulations.gov.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ka`i`ini Kimo Kaloi, Director, Office of Native Hawaiian Relations, telephone (202) 208-7462.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background

    In 1921, Congress enacted the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act, 1920 (HHCA), 42 Stat. 108, to provide a homesteading program for native Hawaiians by placing approximately 200,000 acres of land (known as Hawaiian home lands) into the Hawaiian Home Lands Trust. The day-to-day administration of Hawaiian Home Lands Trust is by the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands (DHHL), an agency of the State of Hawai'i, headed by an executive board known as the Hawaiian Homes Commission (HHC). The HHCA provides the Chairman of the HHC the authority to propose to the Secretary of the Interior (Secretary) the exchange of Hawaiian home lands for land privately or publicly owned in furtherance of the purposes of the HHCA.

    The HHCA also created a series of funds (the Hawaiian Home Lands Trust Funds, or “trust funds”) See, HHCA section 213 as amended. The purpose of one of these trust funds is the “rehabilitation of native Hawaiians, native Hawaiian families, and Hawaiian homestead communities,” which shall include “the educational, economic, political, social, and cultural processes by which the general welfare and conditions of native Hawaiians are thereby improved and perpetuated.” Id. Another in this series of trust funds seeks, for instance, to enhance construction of replacement homes, repairs or additions, and enhance development of farms, ranches or aquaculture, and to provide farm loans, including for soil and water conservation. Still another trust fund provides money for construction, reconstruction operations and maintenance of revenue-producing improvements intended to benefit occupants of Hawaiian home lands; for investments in water and other utilities, supplies, equipment, and goods; and for professional services needed to plan, implement, develop or operate such projects that will improve the value of Hawaiian home lands for their current and future occupants. Other money is provided to establish and maintain an account to serve as a reserve for loans issued or backed by the Federal Government, to further the purpose of the HHCA. The purposes and goals of these funds reflect congressionally identified purposes and goals of the HHCA.

    In 1959, Congress enacted the Hawai'i Admission Act, 73 Stat. 4 (Admission Act), to admit the Territory of Hawai'i (Hawai'i or State) into the United States as a state. In compliance with the Admission Act, and as a compact between the State and the United States relating to the management and disposition of the Hawaiian home lands, the State adopted the HHCA, as amended, as a law of the State through Article XII of its Constitution.

    In section 223 of the HHCA, Congress reserved to itself the right to alter, amend, or repeal the HHCA. Consistent with this provision, section 4 of the Admission Act provides limitations on the State's administration of the Hawaiian Home Lands Trust and the Hawaiian Home Lands Trust Funds (hereafter referred to together as the Trust) and also provides that the HHCA is subject to amendment or repeal by the State only with the consent of the United States. Recognizing, however, that it was vesting the State with day-to-day administrative authority, Congress in section 4 of the Admission Act also provided exceptions within which the State could amend certain administrative provisions of the HHCA without the consent of the United States. The HHCA is a cooperative federalism statute, a compound of interdependent Federal and State law that establishes a Federal law framework but also provides for implementation through State law.

    Consistent with the provisions of the HHCA and the Admission Act, Congress enacted the Hawaiian Home Lands Recovery Act in 1995 (HHLRA), 109 Stat. 357, which provides that the Secretary shall determine whether a State-proposed amendment to the HHCA requires the consent of the United States under section 4 of the Admission Act. It is appropriately the function of the United States to ensure conformance with the limitations in the Admissions Act and protect the integrity of this statutory framework.

    The HHLRA also clarified the Secretary's role in the oversight of the Hawaiian Home Lands Trust. Section 204(a)(3) of the HHCA, in conjunction with Section 205 of the HHLRA, requires the approval or disapproval of the Secretary for the exchange of Hawaiian home lands. The HHLRA details the Secretary's responsibilities to ensure that Hawaiian home lands are administered in a manner that advances the interests of the beneficiaries.

    While the Secretary has broad responsibilities under the HHCA and the Admissions Act, the HHLRA clarifies the scope of the continuing responsibilities of the Federal Government with regard to the HHCA. Two of these responsibilities are addressed in the final rule. First, it clarifies the role of the Secretary in land exchanges and, second, clarifies the process for the Secretary's review of State-proposed amendments to the HHCA. As to HHC Chairman-proposed land exchanges, the HHLRA provides that the HHC Chairman submit a report to the Secretary, including identification of the benefits to the parties of the proposed exchange. The Secretary shall approve or disapprove the proposed exchange depending on whether it advances the interests of the beneficiaries. As to State-proposed amendments to the HHCA, the HHLRA requires the State to notify the Secretary of any amendment it proposes to the HHCA and then requires the Secretary to determine whether it impacts Federal responsibilities under the HHCA or infringes on Federal interests or those of the HHCA beneficiaries. If the Secretary determines the State's proposed amendment of the HHCA impacts the Federal responsibilities or infringes on either the Federal or beneficiaries' interests, the Secretary must submit the amendment to Congress for approval.

    Since Hawai'i's admission to the Union, both Secretarial reviews occurred on an ad hoc basis using procedures accepted by the State and the Department. See, letter dated August 21, 1987 to Chairman Morris Udall of the House Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs. This rule establishes a clear process for Secretarial review and approval of land exchanges proposed by the HHC Chairman under the HHCA and HHLRA (Part 47), and of State-proposed amendments to the HHCA (Part 48).

    II. Responses to Comments on the May 12, 2015 Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

    On May 12, 2015, the Secretary issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM), entitled “Land Exchange Procedures and Procedures to Amend the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act.” 80 FR 27134-27141 (May 12, 2015). The NPRM sought input from leaders and members of the Native Hawaiian community, HHCA beneficiaries, and the public about how the Secretary reviews land exchanges involving Hawaiian home lands proposed by the HHC Chairman and State-proposed amendments to the HHCA.

    The NPRM set an initial 60-day comment period that ended on July 13, 2015. In response to requests from commenters, including the HHC on behalf of itself and HHCA beneficiaries, the Secretary extended the comment deadline another 30 days, ending on August 12, 2015. 80 FR 39991 (July 13, 2015).

    The Secretary received over 500 written comments by the August 12, 2015 deadline. All comments received on the NPRM are available in the NPRM docket at http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=DOI-2015-0002-0001. Most of the comments revolved around a limited number of issues. The issues discussed below encompass the range of substantive issues presented in comments on the NPRM.

    After careful review and analysis of the comments on the NPRM, the Department concludes that it is appropriate to publish a final rule that would set forth the administrative procedures for the review of land exchanges involving Hawaiian home lands proposed by the HHC Chairman and amendments to the HHCA proposed by the State.

    Overview of Comments

    The Department received comments from the Native Hawaiian community, the State, HHCA beneficiaries, and others. One fundamental question raised in the comments was whether the rule expands the Secretary's authority beyond the HHCA, Admission Act, and HHLRA. We conclude that the rule is within the Secretary's authority and consistent with long-standing practice under the HHCA, Admission Act, and HHLRA.

    State-proposed amendments. On August 21, 1987, the Secretary forwarded to the House Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, a proposed procedure, agreed upon by the State and Secretary, for obtaining the consent of the United States to State-proposed amendments to the HHCA. That procedure provided for the HHC Chairman forwarding the proposed amendment to the Secretary with an opinion from an appropriate legal officer of the State, followed by the Secretary examining the material transmitted and then submitting to Congress a proposed report and bill. The parties anticipated that most State-proposed amendments would be free of controversy and national implications and would be submitted to Congress once every one to two years. The Department endeavored to follow these procedures subsequently embodied in the HHLRA and in this rule.

    Land exchanges. In the late 1970's, the State and the DHHL were resolving claims between themselves over lands that the State had allegedly withdrawn illegally from the Hawaiian Home Lands Trust, while also addressing claims against the United States for lands allegedly withdrawn illegally from the Hawaiian Home Lands Trust or used by the United States during the territorial period. Congress considered addressing these claims and implementing some recommendations of the Federal-State Task Force Report from 1983, such as the existing informal process of Secretarial review of land exchanges proposed by the HHC Chairman. Accordingly, Congress passed the HHLRA which provides procedures for settlement of federal claims (section 203); approval of amendments to the HHCA (section 204); and approval of exchanges involving Hawaiian home lands (section 205). The HHLRA also designated a federal official within the Department “to administer the responsibilities of the United States” under the HHCA and the HHLRA, and to protect and advance HHCA beneficiaries' rights and interests, including promoting homesteading opportunities, economic self-sufficiency, and social well-being (section 206). See, Hawaiian Home Lands Recovery Act: Hearing before the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources on S. 2174, 103d Cong., 9-10, 19 (1994). See, response to questions 3 and 40.

    HHCA beneficiaries. The HHLRA defines “beneficiary” in the same terms as “native Hawaiian” is defined in the HHCA, which was adopted as a provision of the constitution of the State as a compact with the United States. In 1959, when section 4 of the Admission Act referred to amendments that “increase the benefits to lessees of Hawaiian home lands,” all lessees met the definition of “native Hawaiian” and had a blood quantum of at least 50 percent. Beginning in 1986, however, certain persons with a lesser blood quantum could obtain lessees through succession or transfer. See, 100 Stat. 3143 (1986). The HHLRA, nevertheless, defined beneficiary in terms of the HHCA definition, not in terms of lessees. Therefore, the rule evaluates and advances the interests of the beneficiaries as distinguished from all lessees.

    Responses to Specific Issues Raised in the NPRM Comments 1. How do claims concerning the United States occupation of the Hawaiian Islands impact the rule?

    Issue: Multiple commenters who objected to Federal rulemaking based their objections on the assertion that the United States violated and continues to violate international law by illegally occupying the Hawaiian Islands and thus is without jurisdiction on the Islands.

    Response: The Department is an agency of the United States. The Secretary's authority to issue this rule derives from the United States Constitution and from Acts of Congress, and the Secretary's authority is confined within that structure. The Secretary is bound by Congressional enactments concerning the status of Hawai'i. Under those enactments and under the United States Constitution, Hawai'i is a State of the United States of America.

    In 1893, a United States officer, acting without authorization of the U.S. government, conspired with residents of Hawai'i to overthrow the Kingdom of Hawaii. In the years following the 1893 overthrow, Congress annexed the Territory of Hawai'i and established a government for the Territory of Hawai'i. See, Joint Resolution to Provide for Annexing the Hawaiian Islands to the United States, 30 Stat. 750 (1898); Act of Apr. 30, 1900, 31 Stat. 141. In 1959, Congress admitted Hawai'i to the Union as the 50th State. In 1993, Congress, through a joint resolution, apologized to Native Hawaiians for the overthrow and the deprivation of the rights of Native Hawaiians to self-determination, and expressed its support for reconciliation efforts with Native Hawaiians. Joint Resolution of November 23, 1993, 107 Stat. 1510, 1513 (commonly known as the “Apology Resolution”).

    The Apology Resolution, however, did not effectuate any changes to existing law. See, Hawai'i v. Office of Hawaiian Affairs, 556 U.S. 163, 175 (2009). Thus, the Admission Act established the current status of the State of Hawai'i. The Admission Act proclaimed in section 1 that “the State of Hawai'i is hereby declared to be a State of the United States of America, [and] is declared admitted into the Union on an equal footing with the other States in all respects whatever.” The Admission Act was consented to by the people of Hawai'i through an election held on June 27, 1959. The comments in response to the NPRM that call into question the legitimacy of the State of Hawai'i are inconsistent with the express determination of Congress, which is binding on the Department.

    2. Is the definition of a beneficiary of the HHCA consistent with the requirements of Federal law?

    Issue: Commenters questioned the Secretary's constitutional authority to promulgate rules for the Hawaiian Home Lands Trust, arguing that Congress's definition of a Native Hawaiian beneficiary is race-based because its use of a “blood quantum” violates the Constitution's guarantee of equal protection.

    Response: The Federal Government has broad authority to regulate with respect to Native American communities. See, U.S. Const. art. I, sec. 8, cl. 3 (Commerce Clause); U.S. Const. art. II, sec. 2, cl. 2 (Treaty Clause); Morton v. Mancari, 417 U.S. at 551-52 (“The plenary power of Congress to deal with the special problems of Indians is drawn both explicitly and implicitly from the Constitution itself.”). In the case of the Hawaiian Home Lands Trust, Congress specifically chose to use a 50 percent blood quantum requirement for all beneficiaries of the HHCA rather than a 1/32 blood quantum in order to make the bill more distinctly a Hawaiian rehabilitation scheme. Proposed Amendments to the Organic Act of the Territory of Hawai'i: Hearings on H.R. 7257 Before the House Comm. On the Territories, 66th Cong. 15 (1921). Acknowledging that the United States implemented similar rehabilitation programs for Indians because the government took away their lands without payment and violated treaties, Congressman Charles Curry, Chairman of the Committee on the Territories, said that it should be constitutional to do the same for the Hawaiians whose land had been taken away from them and noted that the Committee received opinions supporting the constitutionality of the proposed legislation from the Attorney General of Hawai'i and the Solicitor of the Department of the Interior. Id. at 141-142. Blood quantum reflects ties to the Native Hawaiian political community, as individuals marry within it. Id. at 140. And, as Congress explained, Congress “does not extend services to Native Hawaiians because of their race, but because of their unique status as the indigenous peoples of a once sovereign nation as to whom the United States has established a trust relationship.” 114 Stat. 2968 (2000) (Hawaiian Homelands Homeownership Act).

    3. Is the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act still Federal Law?

    Issue: Commenters questioned whether the HHCA remains a Federal law, presuming that the passage of the Admission Act repealed it.

    Response: Yes, the HHCA remains a Federal law. As explained in more detail above under “Background,”, in compliance with the Admission Act, and as a compact between the State and the United States relating to the management and disposition of the Hawaiian home lands, the State adopted the HHCA, as amended, as a law of the State through Article XII of its Constitution as a condition of its admission in 1959. The HHCA is a cooperative federalism statute, a compound of interdependent Federal and State law that establishes a Federal law framework but also provides for implementation through State law.

    Furthermore, consistent with the provisions of the HHCA and the Admission Act, the HHLRA provides that the Secretary shall determine whether a proposed amendment to the HHCA requires the consent of the United States under section 4 of the Admission Act. It is appropriately the function of the United States to ensure conformance with the limitations in the Admission Act and protect the integrity of this statutory framework.

    The HHLRA also clarified the role of the Secretary in the oversight of the Hawaiian Home Lands Trust. Section 204(a)(3) of the HHCA, in conjunction with section 205 of the HHLRA, requires the approval or disapproval of the Secretary for the exchange of Hawaiian home lands. The HHLRA details the Secretary's responsibilities to ensure that the administration of Hawaiian Home Lands Trust advances the interests of the beneficiaries.

    The HHLRA thus confirms the continuing role of the Secretary in implementing the HHCA and defines the scope of the continuing responsibilities of the Federal Government related to approval of land exchanges of Hawaiian home lands and state-proposed amendments to the HHCA.

    4. Is the Secretary's interpretation of the term “rehabilitation” as including political, cultural and social reorganization correct?

    Response: The meaning of the term “rehabilitation” under the HHCA was provided for background purposes in the proposed rule, and resulted in a number of comments. We now clarify the Department's position.

    The Secretary's interpretation of the term “rehabilitation” to include political, cultural, and social reorganization is consistent with both the statutory text and legislative history of HHCA. The term “rehabilitation” was added to the HHCA through the 1978 amendments to the Hawaiian Constitution. Section 213(i) of the HHCA, as amended, creates a “rehabilitation fund” that can be used for “the rehabilitation of native Hawaiians” including “educational, economic, political, social, and cultural processes.” Congress consented to this language through a joint resolution approved October 27, 1986, thereby amending the HHCA. 100 Stat. 3143. The purposes and goals of the rehabilitation fund are congressionally identified as some of the purposes and goals of the HHCA.

    Furthermore, the legislative history of the HHCA indicates that the bill's purpose was to protect the welfare of the Native Hawaiian people. See, 67 Cong. Rec. 3263 (1921) (statement of Rep. Almon). Methods to achieve that purpose included revitalizing the “mode of living” of Native Hawaiians from prior generations. See, Rehabilitation and Colonization of Hawaiians and Other Proposed Amendments to the Organic Act of the Territory of Hawai'i: Before the House Comm. on the Territories, 66th Cong 4 (1920) (quoting Sen. John H. Wise's testimony before the Territorial Legislature that: “[t]he Hawaiian people are a farming people and fishermen, out-of-door people, and [being] frozen out of their lands. . . . is one of the reasons why the Hawaiian people are dying. Now, the only way to save them, I contend, is to take them back to the lands and give them the mode of living that their ancestors were accustomed to and in that way rehabilitate them.”).

    In 1982 the Secretary and the Governor of Hawai'i created a task force whose purpose was to consider how to better effectuate the purposes of the HHCA. Federal-State Task Force on the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act Report to the Secretary of the Interior and the Governor of the State of Hawai'i, Honolulu, Hawai'i, August 1983, pp. 4, 8. That task force found that the term “rehabilitation” “implies that traditional and cultural practices of native beneficiaries, to the extent not precluded by law, should be respected and acknowledged by the DHHL in order to enable native beneficiaries to return to their lands and to provide for their self-sufficiency and initiative and for the preservation of their culture.” Id. at 55. Thus, the term “rehabilitation” has been consistently interpreted in ways that support the development of the Hawaiian community itself. The Secretary's interpretation of the term “rehabilitation” to include political, cultural, and social reorganization is consistent with the statutory language, congressional intent, and longstanding interpretation of the HHCA.

    The funds Congress provided for in the HHCA represent factors that Congress identified as some of the purposes and goals of the HHCA. These purposes and goals guide the Secretary's review in determining whether a proposal advances the interests of the beneficiaries. Section 48.25 has been modified in response to these comments.

    5. Should leaseholds to beneficiaries be converted to fee simple allocations of land?

    Issue: Commenters recommend a path that would convert HHCA leaseholders into the outright owners of their leasehold property.

    Response: Allowing for the conversion of leaseholds into fee simple ownership of Hawaiian home lands properties, which resembles the allotment process that was repudiated by Congress in 1934, is prohibited by current Federal law and is not within the scope of the rule.

    6. Does the State of Hawai'i have the ability to amend the HHCA?

    Issue: Commenters allege that the State has no ability to amend the HHCA through the process outlined in the Admission Act because it remains a Federal law.

    Response: The HHCA is a cooperative federalism statute, a compound of interdependent Federal and State law that establishes a Federal law framework but also provides for implementation through State law. The Admission Act provided that the State could amend certain provisions of the HHCA but expressly limited the State's authority. The HHLRA provides further clarification, providing that the Secretary shall determine whether a State-proposed amendment to the HHCA requires the consent or approval of Congress under section 4 of the Admission Act. If the State-proposed amendment is found not to require the approval of the United States, the rule provides that the effective date of the State-proposed amendment is the date of the Secretary's notification letter to the Congressional Committee Chairmen that Congressional approval was not required. It is appropriately the function of the United States to ensure conformity with the limitations in the Admission Act and protect the integrity of this Federal statutory framework.

    7. Do parts 47 and 48 create an administrative burden that would make it more difficult for the State to move forward with land exchanges or amendments to the HHCA that would benefit the Hawaiian home lands program?

    Issue: Commenters stated that while it may be lawful for the Secretary to engage in rulemaking, administrative requirements and criteria may constrain state officials and make it more difficult for them to proceed with land exchanges or amendments to the HHCA that they consider beneficial to the program.

    Response: The three main Hawaiian Home Lands Trust statutes (the HHCA, the Admission Act, and the HHLRA) establish a trust relationship and grant the Secretary authority to protect and advance the interests of the beneficiaries. Section 206 of the HHLRA charges the Secretary with advancing the interests of the beneficiaries in administering the HHCA. Parts 47 and 48 will assist the Secretary in carrying out this responsibility and make the Secretary's actions more transparent to the public. Similarly, the rule will assist the State in understanding what information the Secretary considers necessary in order to evaluate the proposed actions. As evidenced by the fact that the HHLRA requires the Secretary to approve or disapprove all land exchanges involving Hawaiian home lands and to review all proposed amendments to the HHCA proposed by the State, Congress not only recognized the benefit of an independent Federal determination that the proposal advances the interests of the beneficiaries, but also recognized that the interests of the Hawaiian Home Lands Trust and its beneficiaries may not always coincide with the interests of the State and their overall program. Congress prioritized the interests of the beneficiaries and in doing so circumscribed the day-to-day administration of the Trust by the State, notwithstanding benefits to other State goals.

    8. Should a federalism assessment be performed for this rule?

    Issue: One commenter suggests that the rule has sufficient federalism implications to warrant the preparation of a federalism assessment in accordance with Executive Order 13132.

    Response: No. While the HHCA, the Admission Act, and the HHLRA, limit what the State can do in administering the Trust, 43 CFR parts 47 and 48 merely provide a path for administering those Federal laws within the original limited delegation to the State in the Admission Act; thus, no federalism assessment needs to be performed. Recognizing the direct effect the three statutes have on the State and the benefits of working with the State to protect the beneficiaries and the Hawaiian Home Lands Trust, the Department held high level discussions with State officials as early as 2011 that resulted in this rulemaking to formalize the process for review of land exchanges and State proposed amendments to the HHCA.

    As discussed above, the statutory framework of the HHCA, the Admission Act, and the HHLRA result in a compound of interdependent Federal and State law. Those laws undoubtedly have federalism implications. This rule, however, does not. In accordance with E.O. 13132, rules or policies have federalism implications if they “have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.” Parts 47 and 48 have none of those effects. The rule merely formalizes the process the Secretary will use in reviewing and approving land exchanges and in reviewing proposed amendments to the HHCA under existing law, and clarifies the documentation that the HHC Chairman, an officer of the State of Hawai'i, must submit to implement existing law. The relationship between the State and the Secretary is unchanged by this rule. We expect the HHC Chairman will continue to submit proposed land exchanges and proposed amendments to the Secretary as it has since passage of the HHRLA. The distribution of power and responsibilities remains unchanged; the respective decision making authority of the Secretary and State are limited by section 4 of the Admission Act and sections 205 and 206 of the HHLRA. The only “direct effect” imposed on the State by this rule is the requirement to submit some additional documentation, which, given the level of documentation required and the frequency of submissions, does not rise to a “substantial direct effect.” We therefore conclude that no federalism analysis is necessary.

    9. Do parts 47 and 48 allow the Secretary to amend the HHCA?

    Issue: Commenters suggest that parts 47 and 48 amend or allow the Secretary to amend the HHCA.

    Response: The rule does not amend the HHCA. Parts 47 and 48 merely assist in the administration of the HHCA. One of the purposes of part 48 is, however, to provide clarity, consistent with Federal law, on what subjects under the HHCA the State may amend on its own and which subjects Congress must approve. Similarly, part 47 adds clarity to Federal review of land exchanges. This rulemaking process provided the public and all interested parties an opportunity to review and comment on the Department's existing process before it is replaced with a formalized one under this rule.

    10. Should the Secretary monitor State legislation that poses a threat to the HHCA?A13MY0.

    Issue: Commenters recommend that under part 48 the Secretary adequately monitor any legislation that would pose a threat to the HHCA.

    Response: Section 204 of the HHLRA requires that the Chairman of the HHC submit for review by the Secretary and if required, congressional approval, all State enactments proposing to amend the HHCA. Any proposed amendments to any terms or provisions of the HHCA by the State should also specify that the proposed amendment seeks to amend the HHCA, which puts all persons on notice that the amendment needs review by the Secretary. Consistent with the Admission Act and HHCA, if Federal review finds that any State enactment impacts any of the factors in § 48.20 of this rule, Congressional action is required before it has any effect on the provisions of the HHCA or administration of the Trust. It is the responsibility of the HHC Chairman to monitor the State's legislative activities and to obtain the required review by the Secretary if it is the State's intent to amend the HHCA.

    Once the Department determines that Congress must approve a proposed amendment to the HHCA and the Department transmits the proposed amendment to Congress, there is no requirement that the Administration monitor or advocate its passage. The Administration may oppose an amendment that does not advance the interests of the HHCA beneficiaries.

    11. Do State-proposed amendments to the HHCA require Congressional approval or consent?

    Issue: A commenter suggests that Congressional consent and not approval is required for certain proposed amendments to the HHCA.

    Response: Congress provided in section 4 of the Admission Act that certain amendments to the HHCA would require the consent of the United States. Congress also clarified in section 204 of the HHLRA that the consent of the United States is provided through the approval by Congress. Thus, approval is required.

    Section 204(c)(1) also requires the Secretary to submit to Congress a draft joint resolution approving the proposed amendment. Section 397, Joint Resolutions, of Jefferson's Manual of the House of Representatives of the United States Congress, provides, with the exception of joint resolutions proposing amendments to the Constitution, all resolutions are sent to the President for approval and have the full force of law.

    12. Does § 47.50(a)(8)(i) authorize the State of Hawai'i to evict tenants from property being considered for a land exchange?

    Issue: Multiple commenters expressed concern that § 47.50(a)(8)(i) authorizes the State to evict tenants from property being considered for a land exchange.

    Response: Section 47.50(a)(8)(i) does not authorize the State or any other entity to evict tenants from property being considered for a land exchange. This provision asks that if a party to the exchange will evict a tenant from land being exchanged under separate legal authority, the party should provide the Secretary details of arrangements for the relocation of the tenants. The provision in § 47.50(a)(8)(i) does not expand or grant such authority. The provision in § 47.50(a)(8)(i) is almost identical to section 43 CFR 2201.1(c)(11) which applies to other Federal land exchanges. The purpose of both 43 CFR 2201.1(c)(11) and final rule 43 CFR 47.50(a)(8)(i) is to assist the Secretary in identifying all costs, both economic and social, to all persons directly affected by an exchange.

    13. Should the definition of consultation in both parts 47 and 48 of this rule require face-to-face meetings with beneficiaries to be valid?

    Issue: Commenters question whether consultation with beneficiaries without face-to-face meetings will allow for a sufficient opportunity to engage in dialogue with the beneficiaries, consider their views, and, where feasible, seek agreement with them.

    Response: The definition of consultation in this rule provides a minimum requirement and is intended to give the Secretary, the HHC Chairman, as well as beneficiaries and interested parties, flexibility in the consultation process in order to efficiently and effectively engage beneficiaries and interested parties in informed consideration of proposed actions. Such actions may involve a wide spectrum of issues ranging from those that are singular, simple, and straight forward to those that are multi-faceted and complicated or complex. Such actions may also vary from those that are mandatory to others that allow greater discretion. Face-to-face meetings may be necessary under certain circumstances while other means of communications, including but not limited to letters delivered by the postal service, email, teleconferences, etc., may be just as effective in other circumstances.

    One commenter suggested requiring face-to-face consultations with beneficiaries and lessees who live within a 50-mile radius of the existing Hawaiian home lands to be exchanged or received into the Trust. While the rationale for not requiring face-to-face consultations presented in the previous paragraph still holds true, the Secretary encourages the State to engage in face-to-face consultations, at a minimum, within a 50-mile radius. The beneficiaries who live within a 50-mile radius of a proposed exchange will likely have a great deal of information important in making a decision about an exchange that would assist the Department in its review.

    The final rule modified the definition of consultation in response to these comments.

    14. Does § 47.45(a) impede the State's ability to engage in land exchanges involving Hawaiian home lands?

    Issue: Commenters raised the question whether § 47.45(a), which recommends the HHC Chairman and the other party seeking the exchange meet with the Department prior to finalizing an exchange, would hamper the progress of land exchanges involving Hawaiian home lands.

    Response: Section 47.45(a) is a suggested course of action and does not require pre-land exchange meetings. The Department finds, however, that getting all parties who are interested in a particular land exchange talking to one another can be extremely useful and time-saving. It is especially useful to have this type of pre-meeting to avoid the submission of a presumed final document that cannot be approved by the Department. The language of § 47.45(a) would leave it to the discretion of the HHC Chairman as to whether to engage in the pre-land exchange meeting. The meeting may be conducted via teleconferencing or web-conferencing rather than in-person.

    15. Should § 47.65(b) clarify the circumstances under which the Secretary will consult with the beneficiaries when making a determination if a land exchange advances the interests of the beneficiaries?

    Issue: Commenters suggest that it is unclear when and under what circumstances consultation might occur by the Secretary when reviewing a HHC Chairman-proposed land exchange.

    Response: When reviewing a land exchange proposal submitted by the HHC Chairman, it is essential to the Secretary's decision-making process to have input from the beneficiary community about the effect the land exchange may have on the beneficiaries and the Hawaiian Home Lands Trust. The reason for making consultation under § 47.65(b) permissive is that if the HHC Chairman has already consulted with the beneficiaries on the land exchange proposal that is before the Secretary, and records of this consultation provide the input that the Secretary seeks, then no further consultation by the Secretary may be necessary. If the HHC Chairman forgoes consultation on a land exchange or a proposed amendment to the HHCA, the Secretary may be required to consult directly with the beneficiaries in order to approve the exchange or to find that an amendment does not require Congressional approval.

    Upon consideration of the comments, language similar to that in § 47.65(b) was inserted into § 48.20.

    16. Should the term “consultation” be better defined?

    Issue: Commenters suggested that there be greater clarity and formalization as to when the Secretary would seek such consultation, what such consultation would entail, and how beneficiary input will be taken into account in any decision making process.

    Response: The Department agrees with this point and modified the definition of consultation in both parts 47 and 48 so that they are consistent with the definition used by Federal agencies when consulting with the Native Hawaiian community under section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act.

    17. Are the standards for the review of land exchanges sufficiently clear to protect the interests of the beneficiaries?

    Issue: Commenters suggest the standards for review of land exchanges is not sufficient to guarantee the Hawaiian Home Lands Trust will be preserved.

    Response: The definition of land exchanges in section 47.10 is based upon section 204 of the HHCA and the Secretary's experience with reviewing land exchanges involving Hawaiian home lands and other properties throughout the United States. Exchanges can be a valuable tool for the HHCA Chairman in managing the Hawaiian Home Lands Trust and advancing the interests of the beneficiaries. Part 47 seeks to clarify the section 205 of HHLRA to ensure it is carried out in compliance with section 206 of the HHLRA that requires the Secretary, in administering the HHCA, to advance the interests of the beneficiaries. The protections provided by the HHCA, Admission Act, and HHLRA, along with the details laid out in part 47, allow the HHC Chairman to engage in land exchanges involving Hawaiian home lands without endangering the Trust.

    18. Should the definition of “market value” be amended to take into consideration such things as utility and cultural significance of the properties?

    Issue: Commenters suggest that when there are multiple reasons for a land exchange to occur that the appraisals of the properties should take those reasons into account.

    Response: The Secretary is authorized to approve a land exchange under section 204 of the HHCA if the property to be added to the Hawaiian Home Lands Trust is of “equal value” to the property leaving the Hawaiian Home Lands Trust. The Secretary interprets this requirement to be referring to market value, similarly to the BLM land exchange regulations included in 43 CFR part 2200 that only consider the economic uses of the subject property. In order to approve the exchange, however, the Secretary must determine whether the proposed exchange advances the interests of the beneficiaries as required by section 206 of the HHLRA and as implemented in section 47.20 of this rule. At that point, the Secretary may take into account things such as the utility and cultural significance of the properties.

    19. Should the Secretary ensure that the appreciation rate of any new property being proposed for inclusion in the Hawaiian Home Lands Trust be at least equal to the rate of return for the property proposed to leave the Hawaiian Home Lands Trust?

    Issue: A commenter suggests that an appreciation rate of any new property being proposed for inclusion in the Hawaiian Home Lands Trust be at least equal to the rate of return for the trust property proposed to leave the Hawaiian Home Lands Trust. The example given by the commenter is that the return on the generation of electricity on a current trust property and the revenue it can potentially generate is more important than its present cash value of the property.

    Response: The definition of market value used in this rule requires that the estimate of value be made in terms of cash or its equivalent. The appreciation rate and rate of return reflect future income potential, of the properties being considered in an exchange and will be considered in the appraisal of a property if the highest and best use of the property is for generating income. Properties considered for exchange will be valued at their highest and best use as required by UASFLA for market value appraisals. The income capitalization approach, which is required to be completed on income producing properties under UASFLA, requires the appraiser to analyze a property's ability to generate future benefits and capitalizes the income into an indication of present cash value. The result is that the market value of the property as of the date of appraisal takes into account future income and any appreciation by converting future benefits into a present cash value. If the two exchange properties have similar highest and best uses, similar capitalization rates would likely be used ensuring equal treatment of the properties under appraisal.

    20. Should only Federal employees licensed in the State of Hawai'i be allowed to conduct appraisals of properties involved in an exchange involving Hawaiian home lands?

    Issue: A commenter suggests only Federal employees licensed in the State of Hawai'i be allowed to conduct appraisals of properties involved in an exchange of Hawaiian home lands.

    Response: The vast majority of Department's appraisals are completed by private contract appraisers under the direction of the Department. The review of those reports is done, however, exclusively by Federal employees. Requiring that appraisals be conducted by only Federal employees would place an unnecessary obstacle in the path of completing these land exchanges.

    21. Should the Secretary include in 43 CFR part 47 a process that addresses section 205(c) of the HHLRA which authorizes the Secretary to initiate a land exchange involving Hawaiian home lands?

    Issue: Commenters suggest 43 CFR part 47 include a process that addresses section 205(c) of the HHLRA which authorizes the Secretary to initiate a land exchange involving Hawaiian home lands.

    Response: In this rule, the Department did not include procedures governing land exchanges involving Hawaiian home lands initiated by the Secretary, but chose to address the primary way in which land exchanges are currently initiated. The Department is unaware of any land exchange involving Hawaiian home lands being initiated or proposed to be initiated by the Secretary. Thus, the need to address such an exchange through rulemaking is not necessary. Should the Secretary decide to engage in a land exchange involving Hawaiian home lands under the authority of section 205(c) and (d), we will consider then what process is required and if a rule is warranted.

    22. Should the factors listed in section 47.20 include “reduce the diversion of staff resources dedicated to deriving revenues from land dispositions to fund the DHHL's administrative and operating expenses”?

    Response: It is unnecessary to specifically insert the suggested language as it is encompassed within section 47.20(i).

    23. After approving or disapproving a proposed amendment to the HHCA, should the Secretary provide an email notice to the Native Hawaiian Organization List maintained by the Secretary and post on the Department of the Interior's Web site?

    Response: The Secretary does not approve or disapprove proposed amendments to the HHCA but merely reviews proposed amendments to determine if Congressional approval is required. Following the required review, the Secretary will post notice of the determination on the Department of the Interior Web site.

    24. Should the Secretary review and provide rulings to Congress and the HHC Chairman on State-proposed amendments to the HHCA that in accordance with their own provisions require Congressional approval to become effective?

    Issue: The State will sometimes pass legislation that proposes to amend the HHCA but is expressly contingent on approval by Congress.

    Response: When the State passes legislation that proposes to amend the HHCA but includes a provision that the effectiveness of the proposed amendment is contingent on approval by Congress, no proposal to amend the HHCA was made for purposes of section 206 of the HHLRA. In circumstances such as these, the State is merely taking on a general advisory role and providing advice to Congress on what Federal laws they should pass. Congress may consider the proposed amendment offered by the State of Hawai'i and this does not require a review under section 206 of HHLRA.

    25. Is it the responsibility of DHHL and the HHC to determine whether proposed land exchanges are appropriate for the Hawaiian people?

    Response: In accordance with section 205(b) of the HHLRA, “the Secretary shall approve or disapprove the proposed exchange” submitted by the HHC Chairman. While the Chairman may propose an exchange, the ultimate responsibility for determining the appropriateness of the proposed exchange remains with the Secretary.

    26. Are the factors the Secretary will consider in analyzing a land exchange listed in section 47.20 too restrictive to allow for the proper use of the land exchange tool by the HHC Chairman?

    Issue: A commenter suggests that the rule relies solely on the language listed in section 204(3) of the HHCA, which provides for an exchange of equal value “to consolidate its holdings or to better effectuate the purposes of the HHCA.”

    Response: Section 206 of the HHLRA requires that the Secretary “advance the interest of the beneficiaries” in administering the HHCA. Implementation of this provision is consistent with the purposes of section 204(a)(3) of the HHCA, which is to advance the interest of its beneficiaries when managing the Hawaiian Home Lands Trust. Section 47.20 articulates factors that are consistent with the purposes of the HHCA and with advancing the interest of the beneficiaries to provide transparency in the Secretary's decision making process. Section 47.20 of the rule implements both statutes in a consistent manner and utilizes the Secretary's expertise in reviewing land exchanges involving trust lands held for other U.S. indigenous communities.

    27. Should the factors the Secretary will consider in analyzing a land exchange listed in section 47.20 be expanded to include such things as the development of Hawaiian home lands for mercantile use and to protect ecological and cultural resources?

    Response: Section 47.20 specifies that the main purpose of engaging in a land exchange must be to advance the interests of the beneficiaries as provided in section 206 of the HHLRA. Accordingly, it lists the factors the Secretary will consider in analyzing a land exchange. These factors themselves are purposefully broad to allow flexibility in the analysis.

    Moreover, in order for the exchange to be approved, the purpose of the land exchange must be well documented and demonstrate how the land exchange advances the interests of the beneficiaries. For instance, it would be insufficient under the rule for the party proposing the exchange to make only a conclusory statement that the exchange advances the interests of the beneficiaries without further explanation. Sections 47.20 and 47.30 provide the necessary information for the Secretary to make a reasoned decision to approve or disapprove a proposed land exchange.

    28. Should there be a requirement that land exchanges not increase or decrease the acreage in the Trust in order to keep it whole?

    Response: While acreage is an important aspect of determining the market value of properties involved in a land exchange, it is not the exclusive determining factor. For example, 50 acres of heavily sloped rocky land will likely not be as valuable as a smaller number of acres of usable farm land or other more readily developable acres. Therefore, the HHCA requires that the exchange be of equal value, not that the acreage be the same. The Secretary needs to ensure the market value of the property coming into the Hawaiian Home Lands Trust is equal to or greater than the property leaving the trust as required by section 204(c) of the HHCA, rather than rely on identical acreages.

    29. Should the rule provide a more defined role for the Hawaiian Homes Commission in the review of land exchanges and amendments to the HHCA?

    Issue: Commenters suggest that the rule specifically recognize the role of the HHC because of its fiduciary duty to the beneficiaries of the HHCA.

    Response: Section 202 of the HHCA provides that the DHHL be headed by an executive board known as the HHC. The HHC and its Chairman are appointed by the Governor of the State of Hawai'i. The Chairman of the HHC is also the Director of DHHL and an Officer of the State of Hawaii. As officers of the State who are placed in their positions as Hawaiian Homes Commissioners to oversee the day-to-day management of the Hawaiian Home Lands Trust, the Secretary values their input. In response to comments, section 47.60(a)(1) now requires a statement of approval for a land exchange from the HHC, including the Commissioners' recorded vote on the exchange, and § 48.15(b)(2) requires that all testimony and correspondence from the HHC and its Commissioners related to proposed amendments be submitted to the Secretary in order to better inform the Secretary's review of proposed amendments to the HHCA. In addition, the rule now specifically references the Chairman of the HHC as submitting the State-proposed amendments to the HHCA and Chairman-proposed land exchanges to the Secretary to conform to the language in sections 204(a) and 205(a) of the HHLRA.

    30. In addition to requiring the submission of homestead association testimony and correspondence regarding proposed amendments to the HHCA, should § 48.15 also require the same documents from beneficiary associations whose membership is composed of persons who have submitted applications to the State for homesteads but are currently awaiting the assignment of a lot?

    Response: The Department appreciates the question. It is important for the Secretary to obtain the input of beneficiaries who are on the State's homestead waiting list as their priorities may diverge from the priorities of those beneficiaries who hold a homestead lease. Therefore, new definitions of HHCA Beneficiary Association and of Homestead Association are included in the rule and are referenced in § 48.15(b)(2), and beneficiaries are added to § 48.15(b)(2).

    31. Should the definition of “beneficiary” include those Native Hawaiians with a blood quantum of more than 25 percent but less than 50 percent who qualify to receive a homestead through transfer or succession?

    Response: Section 202 of the HHLRA states “the term `beneficiary' has the same meaning as given the term `native Hawaiian' under section 201(7) of the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act.” Section 201(7) of the HHCA states, “Native Hawaiian means any descendant of not less than one-half part of the blood of the races inhabiting the Hawaiian Islands previous to 1778.” Changing the definition of “beneficiary” to include those Native Hawaiians with a blood quantum of at least 25 percent but less than 50 percent who received a homestead through transfer or succession is not consistent with the HHLRA and HHCA and would require Congressional action.

    32. Will the rule assist in meeting the Congressional deadlines for the review of State- proposed amendments to the HHCA and HHC Chairman-proposed land exchanges involving Hawaiian home lands?

    Response: In order to provide a rational basis for decisions regarding land exchanges involving Hawaiian home lands and proposed amendments to the HHCA, the Secretary requires sufficient information on which to base those decisions. This rule details what information the Department requires to make an informed decision. The intention of the rule is to reduce the amount of time the Department takes to make an informed decision by providing clarity on the information necessary from the State about proposed land exchanges involving Hawaiian home lands or proposed amendments to the HHCA.

    33. Should the purpose of the rule regarding land exchange procedures be for the benefit of the beneficiaries of the HHCA?

    Response: While each part in the rule has a specific purpose, the overall purpose of the Secretary's oversight of the Hawaiian Home Lands Trust is to advance the interests of the beneficiaries of the HHCA in accordance with section 206(b) of the HHLRA. Advancement of these interests in both parts 47 and 48 must be specific to the interests of the beneficiaries, not others, and documented. For the purposes of an HHCA review, the interests of parties other than the beneficiaries are not relevant to the Secretary's decision making process; rather, the Secretary's approval is contingent upon a determination that the proposal does not decrease benefits to the beneficiaries. In response to comment, § 48.25 was modified to require that the Secretary consider the goals and purposes of the Trust when determining whether a proposed amendment to the HHCA decreases the benefits to the HHCA beneficiaries.

    It is important to note that there are other factors the Secretary must find to approve a proposed land exchange in addition to finding that the proposed exchange advances the interest of the beneficiaries. See, HHCA Section 204(a)(3) and final rule § 47.35 requiring the Department to ensure the market value of the property coming into the Trust is equal or greater than the property departing the Trust. Similarly, a finding that a proposed amendment to the HHCA advances the interests of the beneficiaries does not obviate the need for Congressional approval. See, Admission Act Section 4 (detailing circumstances in which Congress reserved its own authority over the Trust). Consideration of whether a land exchange advances the interests of the beneficiaries or a proposed amendment decreases the benefits to beneficiaries are separate steps in the Secretary's review processes in both parts 47 and 48.

    34. Should the rule require public input or a public vote when determining if a State-proposed amendment to the HHCA or HHC Chairman-proposed land exchange involving Hawaiian home lands is reviewed by the Secretary?

    Response: When reviewing land exchanges involving Hawaiian home lands proposed by the Chairman of the HHC or State-proposed amendments to the HHCA, the Secretary will consider all information provided by the State, including any public input it received. For purposes of land exchanges, it is the Chairman's decision as to whether to include public input, including any vote results from the public, in a land exchange proposal submitted to the Secretary. Section 47.60 sets forth the documentation that the Chairman must submit to the Secretary in a land exchange packet, which, in response to this comment, now includes the recorded vote of the Commissioners. The rule requires in § 48.15 that the final vote totals for votes taken by the HHC and the State of Hawai'i Legislature on a proposed HHCA amendment be forwarded to the Secretary when it is submitted for review. These vote totals help to provide the Secretary with a full picture of the State's position on a proposed amendment and whether that amendment decreases the benefits to the beneficiaries. This requirement is retained in the final rule.

    35. Should the rule require that the HHC Chairman engage in consultation with the beneficiaries before any land exchange involving Hawaiian home lands is approved or the Secretary makes a final determination regarding a proposed amendment to the HHCA?

    Response: The HHCA, Admission Act, and the HHLRA define the three parties involved in reviewing land exchanges involving Hawaiian home lands and proposed amendments to the HHCA. These parties are the State of Hawai'i (represented by the DHHL and HHC), the HHCA beneficiary community, and the Federal Government (represented by the Secretary of the Interior). The beneficiary community obtains much of this voice through consultation with either the State or the Department. Thus, while the HHC Chairman is not required to engage in consultation with the beneficiary community, without it the Department may not have sufficient information to evaluate whether a Chairman-proposed land exchange or a State-proposed amendment advances the interests of the HHCA beneficiaries.

    36. Should the rule provide a definition of a homestead association?

    Response: The Department agrees that the rule should provide a definition of a homestead association to provide clarity to the definition in the HHCA. The Secretary added a definition of homestead association in § 48.6 of this rule based on the language provided in sections 204(a)(2), 213, and 214(a) of the HHCA. This definition is also based on the definition of a Native Hawaiian organization listed in the National Historic Preservation Act and Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA). The Secretary will maintain a list of the homestead associations that meet this definition and file a statement, signed by the association's governing body, of governing procedures and a description of the territory it represents.

    37. Should the purpose of consultation be only to engage in good faith efforts to educate the beneficiaries, discuss and solicit their comments, and not to seek agreement?

    Response: As the National Historic Preservation Act provides Federal agencies with guidance on how to work with the Native Hawaiian community, the Department chose to use the Act's definition of consultation for working with the Native Hawaiian beneficiary community. The National Historic Preservation Act defines consultation as the process of seeking, discussing, and considering the views of other participants, and, where feasible, seeking agreement.

    38. Do the rules already in place that deal with the treatment of land exchanges involving indigenous lands held in trust for Federally recognized tribes with whom the United States has a formal government-to-government relationship provide sufficient guidance to the Secretary when reviewing land exchanges involving Hawaiian home lands?

    Response: No. The rules related to exchanges to lands held in trust are located in 25 CFR part 151 that do not apply to Hawaiian home lands. Congress enacted the HHCA and HHLRA to govern land exchanges involving Hawaiian home lands.

    39. Is the rule necessary to provide HHCA beneficiaries with options to hold the DHHL and the State accountable when proposing land exchanges involving Hawaiian home lands and amendments to the HHCA?

    Issue: A commenter questions the need for parts 47 and 48 and states “Beneficiaries have held DHHL as well as the State accountable through the judicial process, both federal and state; special legislative hearings; legislative audits; and media reports (including traditional print and TV media as well as social and internet based media resources). Statutorily, beneficiaries can pursue action for breaches of trust under Hawaii Revised Statutes Chapter 673 (Native Hawaiian Trusts Judicial Relief Act; aka Right to Sue).”

    Response: Parts 47 and 48 seek to provide clarity and transparency in the Federal administration of the Hawaiian Home Lands Trust statutes. By providing this clarity, the Secretary can better implement section 206(b) of the HHLRA that requires the Secretary to administer these statutes in a way that advances the interests of the beneficiaries. This rule also seeks to provide transparency about what information is necessary to make decisions regarding HHC Chairman-proposed land exchanges involving Hawaiian home lands and State-proposed amendments to the HHCA. Such transparency should increase confidence of the beneficiary community in the decisions of the Secretary and State, thus minimizing any risk and need for litigation.

    The rule incorporates consultation with the HHCA beneficiaries and consideration of the interests of the HHCA beneficiaries as provided by Congress in the HHLRA during the proposal and review processes. Such provisions address HHCA beneficiary concerns that they are often the last to be informed about proposed actions affecting their interests and are often informed after-the-fact when decisions have already been made. Such consultation should result in better-informed decision-making and lessen the need of beneficiaries to seek recourse after decisions have already been made.

    40. Does the rule expand the Secretary's authority beyond the HHLRA?

    Response: No. The rule simply provides uniform processes for implementing the authorities and responsibilities Congress granted the Secretary in the HHCA and HHLRA, consistent with the standards and requirements established by Congress in these and other applicable Federal laws, including those listed in § 47.15. It is important to note that Congress did not exempt the Secretary's actions under the HHLRA from other applicable Federal laws, such as Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act that directly apply to Hawaiian home lands.

    The information delineated in this rule provides clarity in the Department's decisions regarding land exchanges involving Hawaiian home lands and amendments to the HHCA proposed by the State. While the Secretary will give weight to the State in its findings and analysis, the rule seeks to make certain the information gathered is substantive and reasonably verifiable in order to ensure the Hawaiian Home Lands Trust statutes are administered in a way that advances the interests of the beneficiaries as required by section 206 of the HHLRA.

    41. Should the rule provide for recourse if the Secretary fails to follow the rule or act within specific timeframes?

    Response: No. Congress provides for uniform and consistent systems of recourse and judicial review through other statutes, such as the Administrative Procedure Act, and has not provided any other specific recourse with regard to the Secretary's responsibilities under the HHCA or HHLRA.

    42. Should the rule provide for automatic approval of a HHC Chairman-proposed land exchange or State-proposed amendments to the HHCA if the Secretary fails to follow the rule or act within specific timeframes?

    Response: Automatic approval of HHC Chairman proposed land exchanges or State-proposed amendments to the HHCA is inconsistent with sections 204 and 205 of the HHLRA, section 4 of the Admission Act, and potentially section 206 of the HHLRA, which requires that these Hawaiian Home Lands Trust statutes be administered to advance the interests of the beneficiaries. Moreover, such automatic approvals would deprive the beneficiary community of the reasoned analysis and considered judgment of the Department in its exercise of these statutory responsibilities.

    43. Should part 47 include a fast-track process for approval of land exchanges involving emergency situations, smaller acreages, less intense uses, or already developed land where the use will remain the same?

    By following the provisions of sections 47.50-47.60, the HHC Chairman and DHHL can dramatically reduce the amount of time necessary to complete a land exchange and increase the likelihood the exchange will be acted on by the Secretary without the delay necessitated by requests for additional information. In cases where a proposed land exchange is between the DHHL and another agency of the State or a Federal agency, where no change in land use is planned, a categorical exclusion under NEPA may be applicable as listed under Chapter 7.5 of the Department of the Interior Departmental Manual, which reduces the time required in preparation and review.

    If the HHC Chairman chooses not to seek the assistance of the Secretary in developing an exchange proposal, the HHC Chairman may merely submit the documentation listed in § 47.60. In accordance with section 205 of the HHLRA, the Secretary will approve or disapprove the proposed exchange not later than 120 days after receiving the information required in § 47.60.

    44. Does an assessment of beneficiary interests by the Secretary undermine the State's subject matter expertise and usurp the executive power of the HHC by re-evaluating the Commission's determination?

    Response: No. While the Hawaiian Home Lands Trust statutes provide the State and its subdivisions, including the HHC and its Chairman, certain responsibilities, nowhere do they relieve the Secretary of the requirement in section 206(b) of the HHLRA to administer the Hawaiian Home Lands Trust statutes in a way that advances the interests of the beneficiaries. For proper care of the Trust to take place, all three parties, the State, the Secretary, and the beneficiary community, must work together and fulfill their respective duties assigned by Congress. It is because the Federal government has an independent interest in implementing the Trust and because Congress understood that the State and its subdivisions might have interests that conflict with the interests of the beneficiaries, that Congress required Secretarial approval or disapproval of the HHC Chairman-proposed land exchange or State proposed amendment to the HHCA in section 205 of the HHLRA and section 204 of the HHCA. In addition, the Secretary has an interest in enforcing Federal law within her responsibility.

    45. Does the language “benefits to the parties of the proposed exchange” in section 205(a)(3) of the HHLRA require the Secretary to look at the benefits to the DHHL because the parties to an exchange will always be DHHL and another?

    Response: No. Such language requires the Secretary to look at the benefits to the beneficiaries of the Hawaiian Home Lands Trust. This provision must be read to be consistent with section 206, which requires the Secretary to advance the interests of the beneficiaries. Such a reading is also consistent with the purposes of the HHCA. The Hawaiian Home Lands Trust was established for the benefit of the HHCA beneficiaries. Section 206(b)(1) of the HHLRA specifically directs the Department to “(1) advance the interests of the beneficiaries.” To read the language in section 205(a)(1) as suggested by the commenter, gives no weight to this provision of section 206 and ignores the responsibilities of the State to the beneficiaries. In response to this comment, the language in § 47.30(a) was edited to remove the reference of “administration.”

    46. Does the rule limit the amount of consultation that the HHC Chairman or the Secretary may engage in with beneficiaries when reviewing Chairman-proposed land exchanges involving Hawaiian home lands or State-proposed amendments to the HHCA?

    Response: The definition of consultation provided in both parts 47 and 48 outline the minimum requirements for consultation. If the HHC Chairman chooses to engage in additional consultation efforts or decides to require a higher standard, such as holding face-to-face consultation with beneficiaries on all proposed land exchanges and amendments to the HHCA, the Department supports such efforts as beneficial to the beneficiaries, the Chairman, and the Secretary.

    47. If the factors from § 47.20 refer to the non-Hawaiian home lands that would be received, how are the benefits in retaining Hawaiian home lands determined in order to apply the balancing test in § 47.30(b)?

    Response: The factors listed in § 47.20 are utilized by the Secretary to review both the non-Hawaiian home lands proposed to be received into the Hawaiian Home Lands Trust and the Hawaiian home lands the HHC Chairman proposes to remove from the Hawaiian Home Lands Trust. Section 47.30(b) provides explicit instruction on how the § 47.20 factors are to be weighed.

    48. The Factors Listed in § 47.30(a) and (c) Are Ambiguous

    Response: The language in § 47.30(a) is not ambiguous. It requires the exercise of judgment when reviewing land exchanges covering a wide range of circumstances. Section 47.30(a) emphasizes the need for the Secretary to consider the long term effects a land exchange will have on the lands in the Hawaiian Home Lands Trust. These trust lands are being held in order to advance the interests of the HHCA beneficiaries. Section 47.30(b) is intended to ensure that beneficiaries benefit from every exchange. Section 47.30(c) emphasizes the need for the Secretary to consider whether a proposed exchange will significantly conflict with the beneficiaries' interests in adjacent Hawaiian home lands.

    49. Is the analysis presented in §§ 47.20 and 47.30 highly discretionary and provide for circumstances where the various factors may conflict?

    Response: Section 204(a)(3) of the HHCA and section 205(b) of the HHLRA make clear that a land exchange is not valid until it has been approved by the Secretary, but does not suggest that the Secretary is required to approve every proposed land exchange. Indeed, Congress provided expressly in section 205(b) of the HHLRA that “the Secretary shall approve or disapprove the proposed exchange.” The Secretary must also, at a minimum, be satisfied that the purposes of the Hawaiian Home Land Trust statutes are met. Each of these factors requires the exercise of judgment. Thus, the discharge of the responsibility placed on the Secretary is not ministerial. Nor is it “discretionary” as the factors to be considered are enumerated. There is, nonetheless, some subjectivity in the evaluation. Sections 47.20 and 47.30 provide factors to clarify the weighing process the Secretary must engage in when determining if a land exchange advances the interests of the beneficiaries. The factors in § 47.20, however, are not exhaustive.

    It is possible certain proposed exchanges will present situations where certain factors listed in § 47.20 may conflict with each other. In those circumstances the Department will be required to exercise expertise and judgment within these limits in weighing the factors in order to determine whether a proposed land exchange advances the interests of the beneficiaries. If the factors listed in § 47.20 conflict with § 47.30 (a) and (c), however, the Secretary will be required to disapprove the proposed land exchange.

    III. Summary of Impacts 1. Regulatory Planning and Review (Executive Orders 12866 and 13563)

    Executive Order 12866 provides that the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs will review all significant rules. The Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs determined that this rule is not significant.

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

    2. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Department of the Interior certifies that this final rule will not have a significant economic effect on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) as the final rule merely describes agency procedures and practices when reviewing HHC Chairman-proposed land exchanges involving Hawaiian home lands and State-proposed amendments to the HHCA. These procedures and practices are not agency activities that will have a significant economic effect on a substantial number of small entities. This rule neither imposes burdens on small entities nor requires actions by them. As such, the Regulatory Flexibility Act does not apply.

    3. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA)

    This is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 804(2), the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act. This final rule:

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

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

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

    4. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    This final rule does not impose an unfunded mandate on State, local, or tribal governments or the private sector of more than $100 million per year. The final rule does not have a significant or unique effect on State, local or tribal governments or the private sector. A statement containing the information required by the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) is not required.

    5. Takings (E.O. 12630)

    This rule does not affect a taking of private property or otherwise have taking implications under Executive Order 12630 as the taking of private property is not a subject covered or even contemplated under this rule. A takings implication assessment is not required.

    6. Federalism (E.O. 13132)

    In accordance with Executive Order 13132, the final rule does not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant the preparation of a federalism summary impact statement. Based on research and the deliberations outlined in the response to questions number 8, the final rule does not substantially and directly affect the relationship between the Federal and state governments. The Secretary of the Department of the Interior has oversight to ensure that land under the HHCA is administered in a manner that advances the interests of the beneficiaries. A federalism assessment is not required.

    7. Civil Justice Reform (E.O. 12988)

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

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

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

    8. Consultation With Indian Tribes (E.O. 13175)

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

    9. Paperwork Reduction Act

    This rule does not contain information collection requirements subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act and therefore a submission to the Office of Management and Budget under the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) is not required. We may not conduct or sponsor, and you are not required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

    10. National Environmental Policy Act

    This final rule does not constitute a major Federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment. A detailed statement under the National Environmental Policy Act, 1969 (NEPA) is not required. Under Departmental Manual 516 DM 2.3A(2), Section 1.10 of 516 DM 2, Appendix 1 excludes from documentation in an environmental assessment or impact statement “policies, directives, regulations and guidelines of an administrative, financial, legal, technical or procedural nature; or the environmental effects of which are too broad, speculative or conjectural to lend themselves to meaningful analysis and will be subject later to the NEPA process, either collectively or case-by-case.” We have also determined that the rule does not involve any of the extraordinary circumstances listed in 43 CFR 46.215 that would require further analysis under NEPA.

    11. Effects on the Energy Supply (E.O. 13211)

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

    12. Clarity of This Regulation

    The Secretary is required by Executive Orders 12866 (section 1(b)(12)), 12988 (section 3(b)(1)(B)), and 13563 (section 1(a)), and by the Presidential Memorandum of June 1, 1998, to write all rules in plain language. This rule meets the requirements that each rule the Secretary publishes must:

    (a) Be logically organized;

    (b) Use the active voice to address readers directly;

    (c) Use clear language rather than jargon;

    (d) Be divided into short sections and sentences; and

    (e) Use lists and tables wherever possible.

    List of Subjects in 43 CFR Parts 47 and 48

    Hawaii, Intergovernmental Programs, Land, State-Federal Relations.

    Kristen J. Sarri, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy, Management and Budget.

    For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Department of the Interior amends title 43 of the Code of Federal Regulations by adding new parts 47 and 48 as set forth below:

    PART 47—LAND EXCHANGE PROCEDURES Sec. 47.5 What is the purpose of this part? 47.10 What definitions apply to terms used in this part? 47.15 What laws apply to exchanges made under this part? Subpart A—The Exchange Process 47.20 What factors will the Secretary consider in analyzing a land exchange? 47.30 When does a land exchange advance the interests of the beneficiaries? 47.35 Must lands exchanged be of equal value? 47.40 How must properties be described? 47.45 How does the exchange process work? 47.50 What should the Chairman include in a land exchange proposal for the Secretary? 47.55 What are the minimum requirements for appraisals used in a land exchange? 47.60 What documentation must the Chairman submit to the Secretary in the land exchange packet? Subpart B—Approval and Finalization 47.65 When will the Secretary approve or disapprove the land exchange? 47.70 How does the Chairman complete the exchange? Authority:

    State of Hawai'i Admission Act, 73 Stat. 4, approved March 18, 1959; Hawaiian Homes Commission Act, 1920, as amended, Act of July 9, 1921, 42 Stat. 108; Hawaiian Home Lands Recovery Act, 1995, 109 Stat. 537, 5 U.S.C. 301; 25 U.S.C. 2 and 9; 43 U.S.C. 1457; 112 Departmental Manual 28.

    § 47.5 What is the purpose of this part?

    This part sets forth the procedures for conducting land exchanges of Hawaiian home lands authorized by the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act, 1920 (HHCA).

    § 47.10 What definitions apply to terms used in this part?

    As used in this part, the following terms have the meanings given in this section.

    Appraisal or Appraisal report means a written statement independently and impartially prepared by a qualified appraiser setting forth an opinion as to the market value of the lands or interests in lands to be exchanged as of a specific date(s), supported by the presentation and analysis of relevant market information.

    Beneficiary or beneficiaries means “native Hawaiian(s)” as that term is defined under section 201(a) of the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act.

    Chairman means the Chairman of the Hawaiian Homes Commission designated under section 202 of the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act.

    Commission means the Hawaiian Homes Commission established by section 202 of the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act, which serves as the executive board of the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands.

    Consultation or consult means representatives of the government engaging in an open discussion process that allows interested parties to address potential issues, changes, or actions. Consultation does not necessarily require formal face-to-face meetings. The complexity of the matter along with the potential effects that the matter may have on the Trust or beneficiaries will dictate the appropriate process for consultation. Consultation requires dialogue (oral, electronic, or printed) or a good faith, dialogue or documented effort to engage with the beneficiaries, consideration of their views, and, where feasible, seek agreement with the beneficiaries when engaged in the land exchange process.

    DHHL or Department of Hawaiian Home Lands means the department established by the State of Hawai'i under sections 26-4 and 26-17 of the Hawai'i Revised Statutes to exercise the authorities and responsibilities of the Hawaiian Homes Commission under the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act.

    Hawaiian Home Lands Trust means all trust lands given the status of Hawaiian home lands under section 204 of the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act, and those lands obtained through approval under this part, and as directed by Congress.

    Hawaiian Home Lands Trust Funds means the funds established in the HHCA section 213.

    Hazardous substances means those substances designated under Environmental Protection Agency regulations at 40 CFR part 302.

    HHCA or Hawaiian Homes Commission Act means the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act, 1920, 42 Stat. 108, as amended.

    HHCA Beneficiary Association means an organization controlled by beneficiaries who submitted applications to the DHHL for homesteads and are awaiting the assignment of a homestead; represents and serves the interests of those beneficiaries; has as a stated primary purpose the representation of, and provision of services to, those beneficiaries; and filed with the Secretary a statement, signed by the governing body, of governing procedures and a description of the beneficiaries it represents.

    HHLRA or Hawaiian Home Lands Recovery Act means the Hawaiian Home Lands Recovery Act, 1995, 109 Stat. 357.

    Homestead Association means a beneficiary controlled organization that represents and serves the interests of its homestead community; has as a stated primary purpose the representation of, and provision of services to, its homestead community; and filed with the Secretary a statement, signed by the governing body, of governing procedures and a description of the territory it represents.

    Land exchange is any transaction, other than a sale, that transfers Hawaiian home lands from the Hawaiian Home Lands Trust to another entity and in which the Hawaiian Home Lands Trust receives the entity's land as Hawaiian home lands. A land exchange can involve trading Hawaiian home lands for private land, but it can also involve trading land between the Hawaiian Home Lands Trust and State or Federal agencies.

    Market value means the most probable price in cash, or terms equivalent to cash, that lands or interests in lands should bring in a competitive and open market under all conditions requisite to a fair sale, where the buyer and seller each acts prudently and knowledgeably, and the price is not affected by undue influence.

    Native Hawaiian or native Hawaiian has the same meaning as that term defined under section 201(a) of the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act.

    Office of Valuation Services (OVS) means the Office with real estate appraisal functions within the Office of the Assistant Secretary—Policy, Management, and Budget of the Department of the Interior.

    Outstanding interests means rights or interests in property involved in a land exchange held by an entity other than a party to the exchange.

    Secretary means the Secretary of the Interior or the individual to whom the authority and responsibilities of the Secretary have been delegated.

    Trust means the Hawaiian Home Lands Trust and the Hawaiian Home Lands Trust Funds.

    § 47.15 What laws apply to exchanges made under this part?

    (a) The Chairman may only exchange land under the authority of the HHCA in conformity with the HHLRA.

    (b) When the Chairman makes any land exchange, the following laws and regulations constitute a partial list of applicable laws and regulations:

    Legislation or regulation Citation (1) The National Historic Preservation Act, 1966 16 U.S.C. 470 et seq. (2) Implementing regulations for the National Historic Preservation Act 36 CFR part 800. (3) Section 3 of the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) 25 U.S.C. 3002. (4) Implementing regulations for the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act 43 CFR part 10. (5) The National Environmental Policy Act, 1969 (NEPA) 42 U.S.C. 4371 et seq. (6) Implementing regulations for NEPA 40 CFR parts 1500-1508; 43 CFR part 46. (7) The State of Hawai'i Admission Act 73 Stat. 4. (8) Hawaiian Homes Commission Act, 1920, as amended 42 Stat. 108. (9) Hawaiian Home Lands Recovery Act, 1995 109 Stat. 537. (10) Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) 42 U.S.C. 9601 et seq. (11) Implementing regulations for CERCLA 40 CFR part 312. No new legal rights or obligations are created through listing applicable laws and regulatory provisions in this section.
    Subpart A—The Exchange Process
    § 47.20 What factors will the Secretary consider in analyzing a land exchange?

    The Secretary may approve an exchange only after making a determination that the exchange will advance the interests of the beneficiaries. In considering whether a land exchange will advance the interests of the beneficiaries, the Secretary will evaluate the extent to which it will:

    (a) Achieve better management of Hawaiian home lands;

    (b) Meet the needs of HHCA beneficiaries and their economic circumstances by promoting:

    (1) Homesteading opportunities,

    (2) economic self-sufficiency, and,

    (3) social well-being;

    (c) Promote development of Hawaiian home lands for residential, agricultural, and pastoral use;

    (d) Protect cultural resources and watersheds;

    (e) Consolidate lands or interests in lands, such as agricultural and timber interests, for more logical and efficient management and development;

    (f) Expand homestead communities;

    (g) Accommodate land use authorizations;

    (h) Address HHCA beneficiary needs; and

    (i) Advance other identifiable interests of the beneficiaries consistent with the HHCA.

    § 47.30 When does a land exchange advance the interests of the beneficiaries?

    A determination that an exchange advances the interests of the beneficiaries must find that:

    (a) The exchange supports perpetuation of the Hawaiian Home Lands Trust;

    (b) The interests of the beneficiaries in obtaining non-Hawaiian home lands exceeds the interests of the beneficiaries in retaining the Hawaiian home lands proposed for the exchange, based on an evaluation of the factors in § 47.20; and

    (c) The intended use of the conveyed Hawaiian home lands will not significantly conflict with the beneficiaries' interests in adjacent Hawaiian home lands.

    § 47.35 Must lands exchanged be of equal value?

    Hawaiian home lands to be exchanged must be of equal or lesser value than the lands to be received in the exchange, as determined by the appraisal. Once the market value is established by an approved appraisal, an administrative determination as to the equity of the exchange can be made based on the market value reflected in the approved appraisal.

    § 47.40 How must properties be described?

    The description of properties involved in a land exchange must be either:

    (a) Based upon a survey completed in accordance with the Public Land Survey System laws and standards of the United States; or

    (b) If Public Land Survey System laws and standards cannot be applied, based upon a survey that both:

    (1) Uses other means prescribed or allowed by applicable law; and

    (2) Clearly describes the property and allows it to be easily located.

    § 47.45 How does the exchange process work?

    (a) The Secretary recommends the parties prepare a land exchange proposal in accordance with § 47.50. The Secretary also recommends the Chairman and the non-Chairman party in the exchange meet with the Secretary before finalizing a land exchange proposal and signing an agreement to initiate the land exchange to informally discuss:

    (1) The review and processing procedures for Hawaiian home lands exchanges;

    (2) Potential issues involved that may require more consideration; or

    (3) Any other matter that may make the proposal more complete before submission.

    (b) Whether or not a land exchange proposal is completed, the Chairman initiates the exchange by preparing the documentation, conducting appropriate studies, and submitting them to the Secretary in accordance with § 47.60.

    (c) Upon completing the review of the final land exchange packet under § 47.60, the Secretary will issue a Notice of Decision announcing the approval or disapproval of the exchange.

    (d) If the Secretary approves an exchange, title will transfer in accordance with State law.

    § 47.50 What should the Chairman include in a land exchange proposal for the Secretary?

    (a) A land exchange proposal should include the following documentation:

    The proposal should include . . . that should contain . . . (1) Identifying information (i) The identity of the parties involved in the proposed exchange; and (ii) The status of their ownership of the properties in the exchange, or their ability to provide title to the properties. (2) Descriptive information A legal description of: (i) The land considered for the exchange; and (ii) The appurtenant rights proposed to be exchanged or reserved. (3) Authorized use information (i) Any authorized uses including grants, permits, easements, or leases; and (ii) Any known unauthorized uses, outstanding interests, exceptions, adverse claims, covenants, restrictions, title defects or encumbrances. (4) A time schedule for completing the exchange Expected dates of significant transactions or milestones. (5) Assignment of responsibilities Responsibilities for: (i) Performance of required actions; and (ii) Costs associated with the proposed exchange. (6) Hazardous substance information Notice of:
  • (i) Any known release, storage, or disposal of hazardous substances on non-Hawaiian Home Land Trust properties in the exchange;
  • (ii) Any commitments regarding responsibility for removal or remedial actions concerning hazardous substances on non-Hawaiian Home Land Trust properties; and (iii) All terms and conditions regarding hazardous substances on non-Hawaiian Home Land Trust properties. (7) Grants of permission by each party to the other Permission to enter the properties for the purpose of conducting physical examination and studies in preparation for the exchange. Written permission to appraise the properties should also be included. (8) Three statements Details of: (i) Arrangements for relocating tenants, if there are tenants, occupying the Hawaiian Home Land Trust and non-Hawaiian Home Land Trust properties involved in the exchange; (ii) How the land exchange proposal complies with the HHCA and HHLRA; and (iii) How the documents of conveyance will be exchanged once the Secretary has approved the exchange.

    (b) When the parties to the exchange agree to proceed with the land exchange proposal, they may sign an agreement that the Chairman will initiate the exchange.

    § 47.55 What are the minimum requirements for appraisals used in a land exchange?

    (a) The following table shows the steps in the appraisal process.

    Appraisal process step Requirements (1) The parties to the exchange must arrange for appraisals (i) The parties must arrange for appraisals within 90 days after executing the agreement to initiate the land exchange, unless the parties agree to another schedule. (ii) The parties must give the appraiser the land exchange proposal, if any, and the agreement to initiate the land exchange, and any attachments and amendments. (iii) The Chairman may request assistance from the Office of Valuation Services (OVS). OVS can provide valuation services to the Chairman, including appraisal, appraisal review, and appraisal advice on a reimbursable basis. OVS is also available for post-facto program review to ensure that appraisals conducted by the State are in conformance with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice and the Uniform Appraisal Standards for Federal Land Acquisitions as appropriate. (2) The qualified appraiser must provide an appraisal report The appraiser must:
  • (i) Meet the qualification requirements in paragraph (b) of this section;
  • (ii) Produce a report that meets the qualifications in paragraph (c) of this section; and (iii) Complete the appraisal under the timeframe and terms negotiated with the parties in the exchange. (3) The Secretary will review appraisal reports The Secretary will evaluate the reports using:
  • (i) The Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice; and
  • (ii) The Uniform Appraisal Standards for Federal Land Acquisitions.
  • (b) To be qualified to appraise land for exchange under paragraph (a)(2) of this section, an appraiser must:

    (1) Be competent, reputable, impartial, and experienced in appraising property similar to the properties involved in the appraisal assignment; and

    (2) Be approved by the OVS, if required by the Department of the Interior's Office of Native Hawaiian Relations.

    (3) Be licensed to perform appraisals in the State of Hawai'i unless a Federal employee whose position requires the performance of appraisal duties. Federal employees only need to be licensed in one State or territory to perform real estate appraisal duties as Federal employees in all States and territories.

    (c) Appraisal reports for the exchange must:

    (1) Be completed in accordance with the current edition of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP) and the Uniform Appraisal Standards for Federal Land Acquisition (UASFLA); and

    (2) Include the estimated market value of Hawaiian home lands and non-Hawaiian home lands properties involved in the exchange.

    § 47.60 What documentation must the Chairman submit to the Secretary in the land exchange packet?

    The documents in the exchange packet submitted to us for approval must include the following:

    The packet must contain . . . that must include . . . (a) Required statements (1) A statement of approval for the exchange from the Commission that includes the recorded vote of the Commission; (2) A statement of compliance with the National Historic Preservation Act and, as appropriate, a cultural and historic property review; (3) An explanation of how the exchange will advance the interests of the beneficiaries; (4) A summary of all consultations with beneficiaries, HHCA homestead associations, or HHCA beneficiary associations; and (5) A statement of compliance with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act. (b) Required analyses and reports (1) Environmental analyses and records sufficient to meet CERCLA, NEPA, and all other pertinent Federal environmental requirements; (2) Land appraisal reports and statements of qualification of the appraisers in accordance with § 47.55; and (3) If property conveyed is adjacent to Hawaiian home lands: (i) An analysis of intended use of the Hawaiian home lands conveyed; (ii) A finding that the intended use will not conflict with established management objectives on the adjacent Hawaiian home lands; and (4) A copy of the land exchange proposal, if any. (c) Relevant legal documents (1) Any land exchange agreements entered into regarding the subject properties between Chairman and the non-Chairman party; (2) Evidence of title; and (3) Deeds signed by the parties, with a signature block for the Secretary of the Interior or our authorized representative to approve the transaction.
    § 47.65 When will the Secretary approve or disapprove the land exchange?

    On receipt of the complete land exchange packet from the Commission, the Secretary will approve or disapprove the exchange within 120 calendar days.

    (a) Before approving or disapproving the exchange, the Secretary will review all environmental analyses, appraisals, and all other supporting studies and requirements to determine whether the proposed exchange complies with applicable law and advances the interests of the beneficiaries.

    (b) The Secretary may consult with the beneficiaries when making a determination if a land exchange advances the interests of the beneficiaries.

    (c) After approving or disapproving an exchange, the Secretary will notify DHHL, the Commission, and other officials as required by section 205(b)(2) of the HHLRA. The Secretary will post notice of the determination on the DOI Web site and give email notice of the posting to all those on the notification list maintained by the Office of Native Hawaiian Relations requesting notice of actions by the Secretary.

    § 47.70 How does the Chairman complete the exchange once approved?

    (a) The Chairman completes the exchange in accordance with the requirements of State law.

    (b) The Chairman shall provide a title report to the Secretary as evidence of the completed exchange.

    PART 48—AMENDMENTS TO THE HAWAIIAN HOMES COMMISSION ACT Sec. 48.5 What is the purpose of this part? 48.6 What definitions apply to terms used in this part? 48.10 What is the Secretary's role in reviewing proposed amendments to the HHCA? 48.15 What are the Chairman's responsibilities in submitting proposed amendments to the Secretary? 48.20 How does the Secretary determine if the State is seeking to amend Federal law? 48.25 How does the Secretary determine if the proposed amendment decreases the benefits to beneficiaries of Hawaiian home lands? 48.30 How does the Secretary determine if Congressional approval is unnecessary? 48.35 When must the Secretary determine if the proposed amendment requires Congressional approval? 48.40 What notification will the Secretary provide? 48.45 When is a proposed amendment deemed effective? 48.50 Can the State of Hawai'i amend the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act without Secretarial review? Authority:

    State of Hawai'i Admission Act, 73 Stat. 4, approved March 18, 1959; Hawaiian Homes Commission Act, 1920, 42 Stat. 108 et seq., Hawaiian Home Lands Recovery Act, 1995, 109 Stat. 537; 5 U.S.C. 301; 25 U.S.C. 2 and 9; 43 U.S.C. 1457; 112 Departmental Manual 28.

    § 48.5 What is the purpose of this part?

    (a) This part sets forth the policies and procedures for:

    (1) Review by the Secretary of amendments to the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act proposed by the State of Hawai'i; and

    (2) Determination by the Secretary whether the proposed amendment requires congressional approval.

    (b) This part implements requirements of the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act, the State of Hawai'i Admission Act, 1959, and the Hawaiian Home Lands Recovery Act, 1995.

    § 48.6 What definitions apply to terms used in this part?

    As used in this part, the following terms have the meanings given in this section.

    Beneficiary or beneficiaries means “native Hawaiian(s)” as that term is defined under section 201(a) of the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act.

    Chairman means the Chairman of the Hawaiian Homes Commission designated under section 202 of the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act.

    Commission means the Hawaiian Homes Commission, established by section 202 of the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act, which serves as the executive board of the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands.

    Consultation or consult means representatives of the government engaging in an open discussion process that allows interested parties to address potential issues, changes, or actions. Consultation does not necessarily require formal face-to-face meetings. The complexity of the matter along with the potential effects that the matter may have on the Trust or beneficiaries will dictate the appropriate process for consultation. Consultation requires dialogue (oral, electronic, or printed) or a good faith, dialogue or documented effort to engage with the beneficiaries, consideration of their views, and, where feasible, seek agreement with the beneficiaries when engaged in the land exchange process.

    DHHL or Department of Hawaiian Home Lands means the department established by the State of Hawai'i under sections 26-4 and 26-17 of the Hawai'i Revised Statutes to exercise the authorities and responsibilities of the Hawaiian Homes Commission under the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act.

    Hawaiian Home Lands Trust means all trust lands given the status of Hawaiian home lands under section 204 of the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act, and those lands obtained through approval under part 47, and as directed by Congress.

    Hawaiian Home Lands Trust Funds means the funds established in the HHCA section 213.

    HHCA or Hawaiian Homes Commission Act means the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act, 1920, 42 Stat. 108 et seq., as amended.

    HHCA Beneficiary Association means an organization controlled by beneficiaries who submitted applications to the DHHL for homesteads and are awaiting the assignment of a homestead; represents and serves the interests of those beneficiaries; has as a stated primary purpose the representation of, and provision of services to, those beneficiaries; and filed with the Secretary a statement, signed by the governing body, of governing procedures and a description of the beneficiaries it represents.

    HHLRA or Hawaiian Home Lands Recovery Act means the Hawaiian Home Lands Recovery Act, 1995, 109 Stat. 537.

    Lessee means either a:

    (1) Beneficiary who has been awarded a lease under section 207(a) of the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act;

    (2) Person to whom land has been transferred under section 208(5) of the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act; or

    (3) Successor lessee under section 209 of the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act.

    Homestead Association means a beneficiary controlled organization that represents and serves the interests of its homestead community; has as a stated primary purpose the representation of, and provision of services to, its homestead community; and filed with the Secretary a statement, signed by the governing body, of governing procedures and a description of the territory it represents.

    Secretary means the Secretary of the Interior or the individual to whom the authority and responsibilities of the Secretary have been delegated.

    Trust means the Hawaiian Home Lands Trust and the Hawaiian Home Lands Trust Funds.

    § 48.10 What is the Secretary's role in reviewing proposed amendments to the HHCA?

    (a) The Secretary must review proposed amendments to the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act (HHCA) by the State of Hawai'i to determine whether the proposed amendment requires approval of Congress.

    (b) The Secretary will notify the Chairman and Congress of this determination, and if approval is required, submit to Congress the documents required by § 48.35(b).

    § 48.15 What are the Chairman's responsibilities in submitting proposed amendments to the Secretary?

    (a) Not later than 120 days after the State approves a proposed amendment to the HHCA, the Chairman must submit to the Secretary a clear and complete:

    (1) Copy of the proposed amendment;

    (2) Description of the nature of the change proposed by the proposed amendment; and,

    (3) Opinion explaining whether the proposed amendment requires the approval of Congress.

    (b) The following information must also be submitted:

    (1) A description of the proposed amendment, including how the proposed amendment advances the interests of the beneficiaries;

    (2) All testimony and correspondence from the Director of the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands, Hawaiian Homes Commissioners, Homestead Associations, HHCA Beneficiary Associations, and beneficiaries providing views on the proposed amendment;

    (3) An analysis of the law and policy of the proposed amendment by the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands and the Hawaiian Homes Commission;

    (4) Documentation of the dates and number of hearings held on the measure, and a copy of all testimony provided or submitted at each hearing;

    (5) Copies of all committee reports and other legislative history, including prior versions of the proposed amendment;

    (6) Final vote totals by the Commission and the legislature on the proposed amendment;

    (7) Summaries of all consultations conducted with the beneficiaries regarding the proposed amendment; and

    (8) Other additional information that the State believes may assist in the review of the proposed amendment.

    § 48.20 How does the Secretary determine if the State is seeking to amend Federal law?

    (a) The Secretary will determine that Congressional approval is required if the proposed amendment, or any other legislative action that directly or indirectly has the effect of:

    (1) Decreasing the benefits to the beneficiaries of the Trust;

    (2) Reducing or impairing the Hawaiian Home Land Trust Funds;

    (3) Allowing for additional encumbrances to be placed on Hawaiian home lands by officers other than those charged with the administration of the HHCA;

    (4) Changing the qualifications of who may be a lessee;

    (5) Allowing the use of proceeds and income from the Hawaiian home lands for purposes other than carrying out the provisions of the HHCA; or

    (6) Amending a section other than sections 202, 213, 219, 220, 222, 224, or 225, or other provisions relating to administration, or paragraph (2) of section 204, section 206, or 212 or other provisions relating to the powers and duties of officers other than those charged with the administration of the HHCA.

    (b) The Secretary may consult with the beneficiaries when making a determination.

    § 48.25 How does the Secretary determine if the proposed amendment decreases the benefits to beneficiaries of Hawaiian home lands?

    (a) In determining benefits to the beneficiaries, the Secretary will consider the goals and purposes of the Trust, including, but not limited to, the following:

    (1) The provision of homesteads to beneficiaries;

    (2) The rehabilitation of beneficiaries and their families and Hawaiian homestead communities;

    (3) The educational, economic, political, social, and cultural processes by which the general welfare and conditions of beneficiaries are improved and perpetuated;

    (4) The construction of replacement homes, repairs or additions;

    (5) The development of farm, ranch or aquaculture, including soil and water conservation;

    (6) The enhanced construction, reconstruction, operation and maintenance of revenue-producing improvements intended to benefit occupants of Hawaiian home lands;

    (7) The making of investments in water and other utilities, supplies, equipment, and goods, as well as professional services needed to plan, implement, develop or operate such projects that will improve the value of Hawaiian home lands for their current and future occupants; and,

    (8) The establishment and maintenance of an account to serve as a reserve for loans issued or backed by the Federal Government.

    (b) The Secretary will determine if the proposed amendment or any other legislative action decreases the above-described or similar benefits to the beneficiaries, now or in the future, by weighing the answers to the following questions:

    (1) How would the proposed amendment impact the benefits to current lessees of Hawaiian home lands?

    (2) How would the proposed amendment impact the benefits to beneficiaries currently on a waiting list for a Hawaiian home lands lease?

    (3) How would the proposed amendment impact the benefits to beneficiaries who have not yet applied for a Hawaiian home lands lease?

    (4) If the interests of the beneficiaries who have not been awarded a Hawaiian home lands lease and the lessees differ, how does the proposed amendment weigh the interests of beneficiaries who have not been awarded a Hawaiian home lands lease with the interests of Hawaiian home lands lessees?

    (5) If the interests of the beneficiaries who have not been awarded a Hawaiian home lands lease and the lessees differ, do the benefits to the lessees outweigh any detriment to the beneficiaries who have not been awarded a Hawaiian home lands lease?

    (6) If the interests of the beneficiaries differ from the interests of the lessees, do the benefits to the beneficiaries outweigh any detriment to the lessees?

    § 48.30 How does the Secretary determine if Congressional approval is unnecessary?

    The Secretary will determine that Congressional approval is unnecessary if the proposed amendment meets none of the criteria in § 48.20.

    § 48.35 When must the Secretary determine if the proposed amendment requires Congressional approval?

    The Secretary will review the documents submitted by the Chairman, and if they meet the requirements of § 48.15, the Secretary will determine within 60 days after receiving them if the proposed amendment requires Congressional approval.

    § 48.40 What notification will the Secretary provide?

    (a) If the Secretary determines that Congressional approval of the proposed amendment is unnecessary, the Secretary will:

    (1) Notify the Chairmen of the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources and of the House Committee on Natural Resources, the Governor, Speaker of the House of Representatives and President of the Senate of the State of Hawai'i, and the Chairman of the Hawaiian Homes Commission; and

    (2) Include, if appropriate, an opinion on whether the proposed amendment advances the interests of the beneficiaries.

    (b) If the Secretary determines that Congressional approval of the proposed amendment is required, the Secretary will notify the Chairmen of the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources and of the House Committee on Natural Resources, the Governor, Speaker of the House of Representatives and President of the Senate of the State of Hawai'i, and the Chairman of the Hawaiian Homes Commission. The Secretary will also submit to the Committees the following:

    (1) A draft joint resolution approving the proposed amendment;

    (2) A description of the change made by the proposed amendment and an explanation of how the proposed amendment advances the interests of the beneficiaries;

    (3) A comparison of the existing law with the proposed amendment;

    (4) A recommendation on the advisability of approving the proposed amendment;

    (5) All documentation concerning the proposed amendment received from the Chairman; and

    (6) All documentation concerning the proposed amendment received from the beneficiaries.

    (c) The Secretary will post notice of the determination on the Department of the Interior's Web site.

    § 48.45 When is a proposed amendment deemed effective?

    (a) If the Secretary determines that a proposed amendment meets none of the criteria in § 48.20, the effective date of the proposed amendment is the date of the notification letter to the Congressional Committee Chairmen.

    (b) If the Secretary determines that the proposed amendment requires congressional approval then the effective date of the proposed amendment is the date that Congress's approval becomes law.

    § 48.50 Can the State of Hawai'i amend the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act without Secretarial review?

    The Secretary must review all proposed amendments to the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act. Any proposed amendments to any terms or provisions of the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act by the State must also specifically state that the proposed amendment proposes to amend the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act. Any state enactment that impacts any of the criteria in § 48.20 shall have no effect on the provisions of the HHCA or administration of the Trust, except pursuant to this part.

    [FR Doc. 2016-11146 Filed 5-11-16; 12:00 pm] BILLING CODE 4334-63-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 48 CFR Parts 1519 and 1552 [EPA-HQ-OARM-2015-0550; FRL 9945-69-OARM] Environmental Protection Agency Acquisition Regulation; Small Business Programs, Solicitation Provisions and Contract Clauses AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Direct final rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is issuing a final rule to remove outdated information and make administrative changes to the Environmental Protection Agency Acquisition Regulation (EPAAR). EPA does not anticipate any adverse comments.

    DATES:

    This rule is effective on July 12, 2016 without further action, unless EPA receives adverse comment by June 13, 2016. If EPA receives adverse comment, a timely withdrawal will be published in the Federal Register informing the public that the rule will not take effect.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OARM-2015-0550, at http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e. on the Web, cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Julianne Odend'hal, Policy, Training, and Oversight Division, Acquisition Policy and Training Service Center (3802R), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: (202) 564-5218; email address: odend'[email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Why is EPA using a direct final rule?

    EPA is publishing this rule without a prior proposed rule because EPA views this as a noncontroversial action and anticipates no adverse comments. EPAAR Parts 1519 and 1552 are being amended to remove outdated information and to make administrative changes. If EPA receives adverse comment, a timely withdrawal will be published in the Federal Register informing the public that the rule will not take effect. Any parties interested in commenting must do so at this time.

    II. Does this action apply to me?

    The EPAAR applies to contractors who have a contract with the EPA.

    III. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?

    A. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through http://www.regulations.gov or email. Clearly mark the part or all of the information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or CD-ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM as CBI, and then identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket. Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.

    B. Tips for Preparing Your Comments. When submitting comments, remember to:

    • Identify the rulemaking by docket number and other identifying information (subject heading, Federal Register date and page number).

    • Follow directions—The agency may ask you to respond to specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part or section number.

    • Explain why you agree or disagree, suggest alternatives, and substitute language for your requested changes.

    • Describe any assumptions and provide any technical informationand/or data that you used.

    • If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be reproduced.

    • Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and suggest alternatives.

    • Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of profanity or personal threats.

    • Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period deadline identified.

    IV. Background

    EPAAR Parts 1519 and 1552 are being amended to remove outdated information and to make administrative changes.

    V. Final Rule

    This direct final rule makes the following changes: (1) Updates outdated terms throughout EPAAR Parts 1519 and 1552 by removing “Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization (OSDBU)” and adding “Office of Small Business Programs (OSBP)” in its place, removing “Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization Specialists” and adding “Small Business Specialists” in its place, removing “Subcontracting with Small Business and Small Disadvantaged Business Concerns” and adding “Small Business Subcontracting Program” in its place; (2) amends section 1519.201 by removing the words “and the local” and adding the words “(CCO)s or Regional Acquisitions Managers (RAMs), the assigned” in its place; (3) amends section 1519.201-72, paragraph (a), by removing the words “for each contracting office”, and adding the words “The appointing authorities for regional SBS are the RAMs. The SBSs for EPA headquarters, Research Triangle Park (RTP), and Cincinnati shall be appointed by the OSBP Director.”, and removing the words “The appointing authorities are the Chiefs of the Contracting Offices.”; (4) Amends Section 1519.201-72, paragraph (c), by removing subparagraph (6) and re-numbering subparagraphs (7) through (10) to read (6) through (9), and amends re-numbered subparagraph (9) to read “Act as liaison with the appropriate SBA office or representative in connection with matters concerning the small business programs including set-asides.”; (5) amends section 1519.202-5, Data Collection and Reporting Requirements, by removing and reserving the section because this section is outdated; (6) amends section 1519.204, Small Disadvantaged Business Participation, by removing and reserving the section to conform to the FAR; (7) amends section 1552.219-70, paragraph (f), by removing the words “Standard Form 294, Subcontracts Report for Individual Contracts” and adding the words “Individual Subcontract Reports (ISR)” in its place; (8) amends section 1552.219-71, paragraph (e), by removing from subparagraph (4) the words “If recently required to submit a SF 295, provide copies of the two preceding year's reports;” (9) amends section 1552.219-71, paragraph (k) by removing the text and adding new text in its place; (10) amends section 1552.219-72, Small Disadvantaged Business Participation Program, section 1552.219-73, Small Disadvantaged Business Targets, section 1552.219-74, Small Disadvantaged Business Participation Evaluation Factor, by removing and reserving the sections to conform to the FAR.

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

    This action is not a significant regulatory action and was therefore not submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review.

    B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    This action does not impose an information collection burden under the PRA because it does not contain any information collection activities.

    C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), as Amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA), 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.

    I certify that this action will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA. In making this determination, the impact of concern is any significant adverse economic impact on small entities. An agency may certify that a rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities if the rule relieves regulatory burden, has no net burden or otherwise has a positive economic effect on the small entities subject to the rule. This action amends EPAAR parts 1519 and 1552 to remove outdated information and to make administrative changes. We have therefore concluded that this action will have no net regulatory burden for all directly regulated small entities.

    D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    This action does not contain an unfunded mandate of $100 million or more as described in UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not significantly or uniquely affect small governments. The action imposes no enforceable duty on any state, local or tribal governments or the private sector.

    E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

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

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

    This action does not have tribal implications, as specified in Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this action. In the spirit of Executive Order 13175, and consistent with EPA policy to promote communication between EPA and Tribal governments, EPA specifically solicits additional comment on this rule from Tribal officials.

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

    EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) as applying only to those regulatory actions that concern health or safety risks, such that the analysis required under section 5-501 of the Executive Order has the potential to influence the regulation. This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it does not establish an environmental standard intended to mitigate health or safety risks.

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

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355 (May 22, 2001)), because it is not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.

    I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995

    This rulemaking does not involve technical standards.

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

    Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629 (February 16, 1994)) establishes federal executive policy on environmental justice. Its main provision directs federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and permitted by law, to make environmental justice part of their mission by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs, policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income populations in the United States. EPA has determined that this final rule will not have disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects on minority or low-income populations because it does not affect the level of protection provided to human health or the environment.

    K. Congressional Review

    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. Section 804 exempts from section 801 the following types of rules (1) rules of particular applicability; (2) rules relating to agency management or personnel; and (3) rules of agency organization, procedure, or practice that do not substantially affect the rights or obligations of non-agency parties. 5 U.S.C. 804(3). EPA is not required to submit a rule report regarding this action under section 801 because this is a rule of agency organization, procedure, or practice that does not substantially affect the rights or obligations of non-agency parties.

    List of Subjects in 48 CFR Parts 1519 and 1552

    Government procurement.

    Dated: May 2, 2016. John R. Bashista, Director, Office of Acquisition Management.

    For the reasons stated in the preamble, 48 CFR parts 1519 and 1552 are amended as set forth below:

    1. Revise part 1519 to read as follows: PART 1519—SMALL BUSINESS PROGRAMS Subpart 1519.2—Policies Sec. 1519.201 Policy. 1519.201-71 Director of the Office of Small Business Programs. 1519.201-72 Small business specialists. 1519.202-5 [Reserved] 1519.203 Mentor-protégé. 1519.204 [Reserved] Subpart 1519.5—Set-Asides for Small Business 1519.501 Review of acquisitions. 1519.503 Class set-aside for construction. Subpart 1519.7—The Small Business Subcontracting Program 1519.705-2 Determining the need for a subcontract plan. 1519.705-4 Reviewing the subcontracting plan. 1519.705-70 Synopsis of contracts containing Pub. L. 95-507 subcontracting plans and goals. Authority:

    Sec. 205(c), 63 Stat. 390, as amended, 40 U.S.C. 486(c).

    Subpart 1519.2—Policies
    1519.201 Policy.

    Each program's Assistant or Associate Administrator shall be responsible for developing its socioeconomic goals on a fiscal year basis. The goals shall be developed in collaboration with the supporting Chiefs of Contracting Offices (CCOs) or Regional Acquisition Managers (RAMs), the assigned Small Business Specialist (SBS), and the Office of Small Business Programs (OSBP). The goals will be based on advance procurement plans and past performance. The goals shall be submitted to the Director of OSBP, at least thirty (30) days prior to the start of the fiscal year.

    1519.201-71 Director of the Office of Small Business Programs.

    The Director of the Office of Small Business Programs (OSBP) provides guidance and advice, as appropriate, to Agency program and contracts officials on small business programs. The OSBP Director is the central point of contact for inquiries concerning the small business programs from industry, the Small Business Administration (SBA), and the Congress; and shall advise the Administrator and staff of such inquiries as required. The OSBP Director shall represent the Agency in the negotiations with the other Government agencies on small business programs matters.

    1519.201-72 Small business specialists.

    (a) Small Business Specialists (SBSs) shall be appointed in writing. Regional SBSs will normally be appointed from members of staffs of the appointing authority. The appointing authorities for regional SBSs are the RAMs. The SBSs for EPA headquarters, Research Triangle Park (RTP), and Cincinnati shall be appointed by the OSBP Director. The SBS is administratively responsible directly to the appointing authority and, on matters relating to small business programs activities, receives technical guidance from the OSBP Director.

    (b) A copy of each appointment and termination of all SBSs shall be forwarded to the OSBP Director. In addition to performing the duties outlined in paragraph (c) of this section that are normally performed in the activity to which assigned, the SBS shall perform such additional functions as may be prescribed from time to time in furtherance of overall small business programs goals. The SBS may be appointed on either a full- or part-time basis; however, when appointed on a part-time basis, small business duties shall take precedence over collateral responsibilities.

    (c) The SBS appointed pursuant to paragraph (a) of this section shall perform the following duties as appropriate:

    (1) Maintain a program designed to locate capable small business sources for current and future acquisitions;

    (2) Coordinate inquiries and requests for advice from small business concerns on acquisition matters;

    (3) Review all proposed solicitations in excess of the simplified acquisition threshold, assure that small business concerns will be afforded an equitable opportunity to compete, and, as appropriate, initiate recommendations for small business set-asides, or offers of requirements to the Small Business Administration (SBA) for the 8(a) program, and complete EPA Form 1900-37, “Record of Procurement Request Review,” as appropriate;

    (4) Take action to assure the availability of adequate specifications and drawings, when necessary, to obtain small business participation in an acquisition. When small business concerns cannot be given an opportunity on a current acquisition, initiate action, in writing, with appropriate technical and contracting personnel to ensure that necessary specifications and/or drawings for future acquisitions are available;

    (5) Review proposed contracts for possible breakout of items or services suitable for acquisition from small business concerns;

    (6) Participate in the evaluation of a prime contractor's small business subcontracting programs;

    (7) Assure that adequate records are maintained, and accurate reports prepared, concerning small business participation in acquisition programs;

    (8) Make available to SBA copies of solicitations when so requested;

    (9) Act as liaison with the appropriate SBA office or representative in connection with matters concerning the small business programs including set-asides.

    1519.202-5 [Reserved]
    1519.203 Mentor-protégé.

    (a) The contracting officer shall insert the clause at 1552.219-70, Mentor-Protégé Program, in all contracts under which the contractor has been approved to participate in the EPA Mentor-Protégé Program.

    (b) The contracting officer shall insert the provision at 1552.219-71, Procedures for Participation in the EPA Mentor-Protégé Program, in all solicitations valued at $500,000 or more which will be cost-plus-award-fee or cost-plus fixed-fee contracts.

    1519.204 [Reserved]
    Subpart 1519.5—Set-Asides for Small Business
    1519.501 Review of acquisitions.

    (a) If no Small Business Administration (SBA) representative is available, the Small Business Specialist (SBS) shall initiate recommendations to the contracting officer for small business set-asides with respect to individual acquisitions or classes of acquisitions or portions thereof.

    (b) When the SBS has recommended that all, or a portion, of an individual acquisition or class of acquisitions be set aside for small business, the contracting officer shall:

    (1) Promptly concur in the recommendation; or

    (2) Promptly disapprove the recommendation, stating in writing the reasons for disapproval. If the contracting officer disapproves the recommendation of the SBS, the SBS may appeal to the appropriate appointing authority, whose decision shall be final.

    1519.503 Class set-aside for construction.

    (a) Each proposed acquisition for construction estimated to cost between $10,000 and $1,000,000 shall be set-aside for exclusive small business participation. Such set-asides shall be considered to be unilateral small business set-asides, and shall be withdrawn in accordance with the procedure of FAR 19.506 only if found not to serve the best interest of the Government.

    (b) Small business set-aside preferences for construction acquisitions in excess of $1,000,000 shall be considered on a case-by-case basis.

    Subpart 1519.7—The Small Business Subcontracting Program
    1519.705-2 Determining the need for a subcontract plan.

    One copy of the determination required by FAR 19.705-2(c) shall be placed in the contract file and one copy provided to the Director of the Office of Small Business Programs.

    1519.705-4 Reviewing the subcontracting plan.

    In determining the acceptability of a proposed subcontracting plan, the contracting officer shall obtain advice and recommendations from the Office of Small Business Programs, which shall in turn coordinate review by the Small Business Administration Procurement Center Representative (if any).

    1519.705-70 Synopsis of contracts containing Pub. L. 95-507 subcontracting plans and goals.

    The synopsis of contract award, where applicable, shall include a statement identifying the contract as one containing Public Law 95-507 subcontracting plans and goals.

    PART 1552—SOLICITATION PROVISIONS AND CONTRACT CLAUSES 2. The authority citation for part 1552 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    5 U.S.C 301; Sec. 205(c), 63 Stat. 390, as amended, 40 U.S.C. 486(c); and 41 U.S.C. 418b.

    3. Revise section 1552.219-70 to read as follows:
    1552.219-70 Mentor-Protégé Program.

    As prescribed in 1519.203(a), insert the following clause:

    Mentor-Protégé Program (JUL 2016)

    (a) The Contractor has been approved to participate in the EPA Mentor-Protégé Program. The purpose of the Program is to increase the participation of small disadvantaged businesses (SDBs) as subcontractors, suppliers, and ultimately as prime contractors; establish a mutually beneficial relationship with SDBs and EPA's large business prime contractors (although small businesses may participate as Mentors); develop the technical and corporate administrative expertise of SDBs which will ultimately lead to greater success in competition for contract opportunities; promote the economic stability of SDBs; and aid in the achievement of goals for the use of SDBs in subcontracting activities under EPA contracts.

    (b) The Contractor shall submit an executed Mentor-Protégé agreement to the Contracting Officer, with a copy to the Office of Small Business Programs (OSBP) or the Small Business Specialist, within thirty (30) calendar days after the effective date of the contract. The Contracting Officer will notify the Contractor within thirty (30) calendar days from its submission if the agreement is not accepted.

    (c) The Contractor as a Mentor under the Program agrees to fulfill the terms of its agreement(s) with the Protégé firm(s).

    (d) If the Contractor or Protégé firm is suspended or debarred while performing under an approved Mentor-Protégé agreement, the Contractor shall promptly give notice of the suspension or debarment to the OSBP and the Contracting Officer.

    (e) Costs incurred by the Contractor in fulfilling their agreement(s) with the Protégé firm(s) are not reimbursable on a direct basis under this contract.

    (f) In an attachment to Individual Subcontract Reports (ISR), the Contractor shall report on the progress made under their Mentor-Protégé agreement(s), providing:

    (1) The number of agreements in effect; and

    (2) The progress in achieving the developmental assistance objectives under each agreement, including whether the objectives of the agreement have been met, problem areas encountered, and any other appropriate information.

    (End of clause)
    4. Revise section 1552.219-71 to read as follows:
    1552.219-71 Procedures for Participation in the EPA Mentor-Protégé Program.

    As prescribed in 1519.203(b), insert the following provision:

    Procedures for Participation in the EPA Mentor-Protégé Program (JUL 2016)

    (a) This provision sets forth the procedures for participation in the EPA Mentor-Protégé Program (hereafter referred to as the Program). The purpose of the Program is to increase the participation of concerns owned and/or controlled by socially and economically disadvantaged individuals as subcontractors, suppliers, and ultimately as prime contractors; to establish a mutually beneficial relationship between these concerns and EPA's large business prime contractors (although small businesses may participate as Mentors); to develop the technical and corporate administrative expertise of these concerns, which will ultimately lead to greater success in competition for contract opportunities; to promote the economic stability of these concerns; and to aid in the achievement of goals for the use of these concerns in subcontracting activities under EPA contracts. If the successful offeror is accepted into the Program they shall serve as a Mentor to a Protégé firm(s), providing developmental assistance in accordance with an agreement with the Protégé firm(s).

    (b) To participate as a Mentor, the offeror must receive approval in accordance with paragraph (h) of this section.

    (c) A Protégé must be a concern owned and/or controlled by socially and economically disadvantaged individuals within the meaning of section 8(a)(5) and (6) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 637(a)(5) and (6)), including historically black colleges and universities. Further, in accordance with Public Law 102-389 (the 1993 Appropriation Act), for EPA's contracting purposes, economically and socially disadvantaged individuals shall be deemed to include women.

    (d) Where there may be a concern regarding the Protégé firm's eligibility to participate in the program, the protégé's eligibility will be determined by the contracting officer after the SBA has completed any formal determinations.

    (e) The offeror shall submit an application in accordance with paragraph (k) of this section as part of its proposal which shall include as a minimum the following information.

    (1) A statement and supporting documentation that the offeror is currently performing under at least one active Federal contract with an approved subcontracting plan and is eligible for the award of Federal contracts;

    (2) A summary of the offeror's historical and recent activities and accomplishments under any disadvantaged subcontracting programs. The offeror is encouraged to include any initiatives or outreach information believed pertinent to approval as a Mentor firm;

    (3) The total dollar amount (including the value of all option periods or quantities) of EPA contracts and subcontracts received by the offeror during its two preceding fiscal years. (Show prime contracts and subcontracts separately per year);

    (4) The total dollar amount and percentage of subcontract awards made to all concerns owned and/or controlled by disadvantaged individuals under EPA contracts during its two preceding fiscal years.

    (5) The number and total dollar amount of subcontract awards made to the identified Protégé firm(s) during the two preceding fiscal years (if any).

    (f) In addition to the information required by paragraph (e) of this section, the offeror shall submit as a part of the application the following information for each proposed Mentor-Protégé relationship:

    (1) Information on the offeror's ability to provide developmental assistance to the identified Protégé firm and how the assistance will potentially increase contracting and subcontracting opportunities for the Protégé firm.

    (2) A letter of intent indicating that both the Mentor firm and the Protégé firm intend to enter into a contractual relationship under which the Protégé will perform as a subcontractor under the contract resulting from this solicitation and that the firms will negotiate a Mentor-Protégé agreement. The letter of intent must be signed by both parties and contain the following information:

    (i) The name, address and phone number of both parties;

    (ii) The Protégé firm's business classification, based upon the NAICS code(s) which represents the contemplated supplies or services to be provided by the Protégé firm to the Mentor firm;

    (iii) A statement that the Protégé firm meets the eligibility criteria;

    (iv) A preliminary assessment of the developmental needs of the Protégé firm and the proposed developmental assistance the Mentor firm envisions providing the Protégé. The offeror shall address those needs and how their assistance will enhance the Protégé. The offeror shall develop a schedule to assess the needs of the Protégé and establish criteria to evaluate the success in the Program;

    (v) A statement that if the offeror or Protégé firm is suspended or debarred while performing under an approved Mentor-Protégé agreement the offeror shall promptly give notice of the suspension or debarment to the EPA Office of Small Business Programs (OSBP) and the Contracting Officer. The statement shall require the Protégé firm to notify the Contractor if it is suspended or debarred.

    (g) The application will be evaluated on the extent to which the offeror's proposal addresses the items listed in paragraphs (e) and (f) of this section. To the maximum extent possible, the application should be limited to not more than 10 single pages, double spaced. The offeror may identify more than one Protégé in its application.

    (h) If the offeror is determined to be in the competitive range, or is awarded a contract without discussions, the offeror will be advised by the Contracting Officer whether their application is approved or rejected. The Contracting Officer, if necessary, may request additional information in connection with the offeror's submission of its revised or best and final offer. If the successful offeror has submitted an approved application, they shall comply with the clause titled “Mentor-Protégé Program.”

    (i) Subcontracts of $1,000,000 or less awarded to firms approved as Protégés under the Program are exempt from the requirements for competition set forth in FAR 44.202-2(a)(5), and 52.244-5(b). However, price reasonableness must still be determined and the requirements in FAR 44.202-2(a)(8) for cost and price analysis continue to apply.

    (j) Costs incurred by the offeror in fulfilling their agreement(s) with a Protégé firm(s) are not reimbursable as a direct cost under the contract. Unless EPA is the responsible audit agency under FAR 42.703-1, offerors are encouraged to enter into an advance agreement with their responsible audit agency on the treatment of such costs when determining indirect cost rates. Where EPA is the responsible audit agency, these costs will be considered in determining indirect cost rates.

    (k) Submission of Application and Questions Concerning the Program. The application for the Program shall be submitted to the Contracting Officer, and to the EPA Office of Small Business Programs at the following address: Socioeconomic Business Program Officer, Office of Small Business Programs, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, William Jefferson Clinton Building (1230T), 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20460, Telephone: (202) 566-2075, Fax: (202) 565-2473.

    (End of provision)
    1552.219-72 through 1552.219-74 [Removed and Reserved]
    5. Remove and reserve sections 1552.219-72, 1552.219-73, and 1552.219-74.
    [FR Doc. 2016-11378 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    81 93 Friday, May 13, 2016 Proposed Rules DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Office of the Secretary 6 CFR Part 29 [DHS-2016-0032] RIN 1601-AA77 Updates to Protected Critical Infrastructure Information Program AGENCY:

    National Protection and Programs Directorate, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice of public meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) invites public comment on the Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM) to update its regulation “Procedures for Handling Critical Infrastructure Information”. These comments may be used for potential revisions to the current regulation to strengthen and align the language to support the evolving needs of the critical infrastructure community and the cyber landscape.

    DATES:

    A series of listening sessions will be held on:

    1. May 12, 2016 10:00 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. EST and 2:00 p.m. to 4:30 p.m. EST 2. May 17, 2016 10:00 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. EST and 2:00 p.m. to 4:30 p.m. EST 3. May 19, 2016 10:00 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. EST and 2:00 p.m. to 4:30 p.m. EST

    Written comments must be submitted on or before Wednesday, July 20, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    The listening sessions will be held at:

    • 1310 North Courthouse Road, 6th Floor, Arlington, VA 22201.

    You may submit comments, identified by docket number DHS-2016-0032. To avoid duplication, please use only one of the following methods:

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

    Mail: U.S. Department of Homeland Security, National Protection and Progra.m.s Directorate, Office of Infrastructure Protection, Infrastructure Information Collection Division, 245 Murray Lane SW., Mail Stop 0602, Washington, DC 20528-0602.

    In person: Verbal comments are acceptable in person at the public listening sessions.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Emily R. Hickey, Deputy Progra.m. Manager, by phone at (703) 235-9522 or by mail at Protected Critical Infrastructure Information Program, Office of Infrastructure Protection, Infrastructure Information Collection Division, 245 Murray Lane SW., Mail Stop 0602, Washington, DC 20528-0602.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Abbreviations and Terms Used in This Document ANPRM—Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking CFR—Code of Federal Regulations CII—Critical Infrastructure Information CII Act of 2002—Critical Infrastructure Information Act of 2002 DHS—Department of Homeland Security PCII—Protected Critical Infrastructure Information I. Background

    DHS receives sensitive information about the nation's critical infrastructure through its congressionally-mandated PCII Program. The PCII Program provides a secure environment for the private sector, government analysts, and other subject matter experts to share information that is vital to addressing concerns across all critical infrastructure sectors. The Critical Infrastructure Information Act of 2002 (Secs. 211-215, Title II, Subtitle B of the Homeland Security Act of 2002, Pub. L. 107-296) (CII Act of 2002) established the PCII Program, which assures owners and operators that the information they voluntarily submit is protected from public disclosure. In accordance with the CII Act of 2002, on September 1, 2006, DHS issued the PCII Program Final Rule (71 FR 52271, codified at 6 CFR part 29). This rule established procedures that govern the receipt, validation, handling, storage, marking, and use of critical infrastructure information voluntarily submitted to DHS. The procedures are applicable to all Federal, State, local, tribal, and territorial government agencies and contractors that have access to, handle, use, or store critical infrastructure information that enjoy protection under the CII Act of 2002. After 10 years of operation, changes are needed to transition the managing of submissions, access, use, dissemination and safeguarding of PCII to state of the art technology that operates within an electronic environment.

    II. Scope of Listening Sessions

    DHS is interested in obtaining recommendations for program modifications, particularly in subject matter areas that have developed significantly since the issuance of the initial rule; however, DHS has particular interest in hearing comments regarding: (1) Automated submissions and an expansion of categorical inclusions, (2) marking PCII, (3) sharing PCII with foreign governments, (4) regulatory access, (5) safeguarding, (6) oversight and compliance, (7) alignment with other information protection programs, and (8) the administration of PCII at the State, local, tribal, and territorial level.

    Additionally, DHS seeks comment on the economic impact of transitioning the PCII Program to a preferred electronic environment that: (1) Enhances the submission and validation process for critical infrastructure information, (2) uses state of the art technology for an automated interface for quicker access and dissemination of PCII, (3) modifies requirements for the express and certification statements; (4) expands the use of categorical inclusions; (5) requires portion marking of PCII; and (6) implements specific methods to capture and deliver metadata to the PCII Program.

    III. Written Comments A. In General

    DHS invites all interested persons, even those who are unable to attend the listening sessions, to submit written comments, data, or views on how the current PCII Program regulations, codified at 6 CFR part 29, “Procedures for Handling Critical Infrastructure Information,” might be improved. Comments that would be most helpful to DHS include the questions and answers identified in Part II of this document. Please explain the reason for any comments with available data, and include other information or authority that supports such comments. DHS encourages interested parties to provide specific data that documents the potential costs of modifying the existing rule requirements pursuant to the commenter's suggestions; the potential quantifiable benefits including security and societal benefits of modifying the existing regulatory requirements; and the potential impacts on small entities of modifying the existing regulatory requirements.

    Written comments may be submitted electronically or by mail, as explained previously in the ADDRESSES section of this ANPRM. To avoid duplication, please use only one of these methods to submit written comments.

    Except as provided below, all comments received, as well as pertinent background documents, will be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided.

    B. Handling of Proprietary or Business Sensitive Information

    Interested parties are encouraged to submit comments in a manner that avoids discussion of trade secrets, confidential commercial or financial information, CII or PCII, or any other category of sensitive information that should not be disclosed to the general public. If it is not possible to avoid such discussion, however, please specifically identify any confidential or sensitive information contained in the comments with appropriate warning language (e.g., any PCII must be marked and handled in accordance with the requirements of 6 CFR part 29 §§ 29.5-29.7) and submit them by mail to the PCII Program Manager listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

    DHS will not place any confidential or sensitive comments in the public docket; rather, DHS will handle them in accordance with applicable safeguards and restrictions on access. See, e.g., 6 CFR part 29 §§ 29.5-29.7. See also the DHS PCII Procedures Manual (“Protected Critical Infrastructure Information Program,” April 2009, located on the DHS Web site at www.dhs.gov/protected-critical-infrastructure-information-pcii-program). DHS will hold any such comments in a separate file to which the public does not have access, and place a note in the public docket that DHS has received such materials from the commenter. DHS will provide appropriate access to such comments upon request to individuals who meet the applicable legal requirements for access of such information.

    IV. Listening Sessions A. Purpose

    DHS will hold listening sessions on how the current PCII Program regulations, codified at 6 CFR part 29, “Procedures for Handling Critical Infrastructure Information,” might be improved.

    B. Procedures and Participation

    These meetings are open to the public. The listening sessions will be made available online via webinar and can be accessed through the following link, https://share.dhs.gov/pcii-training/, at the beginning of each listening session. Additionally, there will be a conference bridge made available so members of the public can dial into the listening sessions for audio. The conference bridge phone number for all the 10:00 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. EST listening sessions is 1-800-369-1912 followed by entering the participant passcode: 3922843. The conference bridge phone number for all the 2:00 p.m. to 4:30 p.m. EST listening sessions is 1-888-790-1952 followed by entering the participant passcode: 1933978. There are no fees to attend any of the listening sessions. DHS will do its best to accommodate all persons who wish to make a comment during the listening sessions. DHS encourages persons and groups having similar interests to consolidate their information for presentation through a single representative.

    The listening sessions are intended for technical experts, who have a cyber, security, regulatory or other background to discuss the proposed topics regarding updates to the PCII Program at an expert level. However, individuals who are not technical experts (or who do not meet the other criteria) may still attend and participate in the meeting. The listening sessions are intended to afford the public an opportunity to provide comments to DHS concerning the PCII Program and updating its current regulation. For the listening sessions, comments are requested not to exceed four minutes at a time to enable all interested attendees an opportunity to provide comment. Should time permit, commenters who need additional time may be invited to complete their comments. The listening sessions may adjourn early if all commenters present have had the opportunity to speak prior to the scheduled conclusion of the session. Participants who speak will be asked to provide their name, title, company and stakeholder segment. The listening sessions will be recorded to support the note-taking effort. Notes from the listening sessions, including the webinar materials, will be posted at http://www.regulations.gov. DHS will place a transcript of the listening sessions in the docket for this rulemaking.

    Tammy Barbour, Protected Critical Infrastructure Information, (PCII) Program Manager, Infrastructure, Information Collection Division.
    [FR Doc. 2016-11338 Filed 5-10-16; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE 9110-9P-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2016-6665; Directorate Identifier 2015-NM-070-AD] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Fokker Services B.V. Airplanes AGENCY:

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

    SUMMARY:

    We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all Fokker Services B.V. Model F28 Mark 0070 and 0100 airplanes. This proposed AD was prompted by an aileron-wing flutter analysis finding that when a hydraulic aileron actuator is not powered, while at least one aileron flutter damper is inoperative (latent failure), the maximum speed currently defined in the airplane flight manual (AFM) is insufficient to meet the required safety margin. This proposed AD would require revising the AFM to include procedures to follow in the event of a hydraulic system failure and abnormal flight control behavior. We are proposing this AD to ensure that the flightcrew has procedures to follow in the event of a hydraulic system failure and abnormal flight control behavior. If not corrected, this condition could lead to aileron flutter and possible reduced control of the airplane.

    DATES:

    We must receive comments on this proposed AD by June 27, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

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

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

    Fax: 202-493-2251.

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

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

    For service information identified in this NPRM, contact Fokker Services B.V., Technical Services Dept., P.O. Box 1357, 2130 EL Hoofddorp, the Netherlands; telephone +31 (0)88-6280-350; fax +31 (0)88-6280-111; email [email protected]; Internet http://www.myfokkerfleet.com. You may view this referenced service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 425-227-1221.

    Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-6665; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street address for the Docket Operations office (telephone 800-647-5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Tom Rodriguez, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; telephone 253-227-1137; fax 253-227-1149.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include “Docket No. FAA-2016-6665; Directorate Identifier 2015-NM-070-AD” at the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this proposed AD based on those comments.

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

    Discussion

    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA Airworthiness Directive 2015-0078, dated May 6, 2015 (referred to after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or “the MCAI”), to correct an unsafe condition for all Fokker Services B.V. Model F28 Mark 0070 and 0100 airplanes. The MCAI states:

    In the frame of a complementary aileron-wing flutter analysis performed by Fokker Services, it has been found that in case a hydraulic aileron actuator is not powered, while at least one aileron flutter damper is inoperative (latent failure), the maximum speed currently defined in the Airplane Flight Manual (AFM) is insufficient to meet the required safety margin.

    This condition, if not corrected, could lead to aileron flutter, possibly resulting in reduced control of the aeroplane.

    To address this potential unsafe condition, Fokker Services published an AFM change through Manual Change Notification—Operational (MCNO) F100-066 which introduces an additional step in the Abnormal Procedures for [a] hydraulic [system] failure and for abnormal flight control behaviour. This new step consists in a speed reduction to Vra (IAS 250kt/M 0.65) to restore a sufficient margin to the flutter speed.

    For the reasons described above, this [EASA] AD requires incorporation of the amended abnormal procedures into the applicable AFM.

    You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-6665.

    Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    Fokker Services B.V. has issued Fokker 70/100 Manual Change Notification—Operational Documentation MCNO F100-066, dated December 1, 2014. The service information contains amendments to applicable AFMs that introduce an additional step in the abnormal procedures for a hydraulic system failure and abnormal flight control behavior. This service information is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

    FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to our bilateral agreement with the State of Design Authority, we have been notified of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and service information referenced above. We are proposing this AD because we evaluated all pertinent information and determined an unsafe condition exists and is likely to exist or develop on other products of these same type designs.

    Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD affects 8 airplanes of U.S. registry.

    We also estimate that it would take about 1 work-hour per product to comply with the basic requirements of this proposed AD. The average labor rate is $85 per work-hour. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of this proposed AD on U.S. operators to be $680, or $85 per product.

    Authority for This Rulemaking

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

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

    Regulatory Findings

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

    For the reasons discussed above, I certify this proposed regulation:

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

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

    3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska; and

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

    List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

    The Proposed Amendment

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

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

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

    § 39.13 [Amended]
    2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): Fokker Services B.V.: Docket No. FAA-2016-6665; Directorate Identifier 2015-NM-070-AD. (a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by June 27, 2016.

    (b) Affected ADs

    None.

    (c) Applicability

    This AD applies to all Fokker Services B.V. Model F28 Mark 0070 and 0100 airplanes, certificated in any category, all serial numbers.

    (d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 27, Flight Controls.

    (e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by an aileron-wing flutter analysis finding that when a hydraulic aileron actuator is not powered, while at least one aileron flutter damper is inoperative (latent failure), the maximum speed currently defined in the airplane flight manual (AFM) is insufficient to meet the required safety margin. We are proposing this AD to ensure that the flightcrew has procedures to follow in the event of a hydraulic system failure and abnormal flight control behavior. If not corrected, this condition could lead to aileron flutter and possible reduced control of the airplane.

    (f) Compliance

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

    (g) AFM Revision

    Within 12 months after the effective date of this AD, revise the Abnormal Procedures and Limitations sections of the applicable AFM to include the information in Fokker 70/100 Manual Change Notification—Operational Documentation MCNO F100-066, dated December 1, 2014. This may be accomplished by inserting a copy of Fokker 70/100 Manual Change Notification—Operational Documentation MCNO F100-066, dated December 1, 2014, into the applicable AFM. Fokker 70/100 Manual Change Notification—Operational Documentation MCNO F100-066, dated December 1, 2014, introduces procedures for the flightcrew to follow in the event of a hydraulic system failure and abnormal flight control behavior. When the information in Fokker 70/100 Manual Change Notification—Operational Documentation MCNO F100-066, dated December 1, 2014, is included in the general revisions of the AFM, the general revisions may be inserted in the AFM, and Fokker Manual Change Notification—Operational Documentation MCNO F100-066, dated December 1, 2014, may be removed.

    (h) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:

    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information directly to the International Branch, send it to ATTN: Tom Rodriguez, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; telephone 425-227-1137; fax 425-227-1149. 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 Fokker B.V. Service's EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA). If approved by the DOA, the approval must include the DOA-authorized signature.

    (i) Related Information

    (1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information (MCAI) EASA Airworthiness Directive 2015-0078, dated May 6, 2015, for related information. This MCAI may be found in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-6665.

    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact Fokker Services B.V., Technical Services Dept., P.O. Box 1357, 2130 EL Hoofddorp, the Netherlands; telephone +31 (0)88-6280-350; fax +31 (0)88-6280-111; email [email protected]; Internet http://www.myfokkerfleet.com. You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 425-227-1221.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on May 4, 2016. Michael Kaszycki, Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
    [FR Doc. 2016-11172 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2016-6667; Directorate Identifier 2015-NM-125-AD] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes AGENCY:

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

    SUMMARY:

    We propose to supersede Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2009-21-01, which applies to certain Boeing Model 737-300 and 737-400 series airplanes. AD 2009-21-01 currently requires repetitive inspections to detect cracking of the aft fuselage skin, and related investigative and corrective actions if necessary. Since we issued AD 2009-21-01, an evaluation by the design approval holder (DAH) indicates that the aft fuselage skin is subject to widespread fatigue damage (WFD). This proposed AD would add new aft fuselage skin inspections for cracking, inspections to detect missing or loose fasteners and any disbonding or cracking of bonded doublers, permanent repairs of time-limited repairs, related investigative and corrective actions if necessary, and skin panel replacement. The proposed AD also removes Model 737-400 series airplanes from the applicability. We are proposing this AD to detect and correct cracking in the aft fuselage skin along the longitudinal edges of the bonded skin doubler, which could result in possible rapid decompression and reduced structural integrity of the airplane.

    DATES:

    We must receive comments on this proposed AD by June 27, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

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

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

    Fax: 202-493-2251.

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

    Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

    For service information identified in this NPRM, 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-2016-6667.

    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-2016-6667; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street address for the Docket Office (phone: 800-647-5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Wade Sullivan, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; phone: 425-917-6430; fax: 425-917-6590; email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include “Docket No. FAA-2016-6667; Directorate Identifier 2015-NM-125-AD” at the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this proposed AD because of those comments.

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

    Discussion

    Fatigue damage can occur locally, in small areas or structural design details, or globally, in widespread areas. Multiple-site damage is widespread damage that occurs in a large structural element such as a single rivet line of a lap splice joining two large skin panels. Widespread damage can also occur in multiple elements such as adjacent frames or stringers. Multiple-site damage and multiple-element damage cracks are typically too small initially to be reliably detected with normal inspection methods. Without intervention, these cracks will grow, and eventually compromise the structural integrity of the airplane. This condition is known as widespread fatigue damage. It is associated with general degradation of large areas of structure with similar structural details and stress levels. As an airplane ages, WFD will likely occur, and will certainly occur if the airplane is operated long enough without any intervention.

    The FAA's WFD final rule (75 FR 69746, November 15, 2010) became effective on January 14, 2011. The WFD rule requires certain actions to prevent structural failure due to WFD throughout the operational life of certain existing transport category airplanes and all of these airplanes that will be certificated in the future. For existing and future airplanes subject to the WFD rule, the rule requires that DAHs establish a limit of validity (LOV) of the engineering data that support the structural maintenance program. Operators affected by the WFD rule may not fly an airplane beyond its LOV, unless an extended LOV is approved.

    The WFD rule (75 FR 69746, November 15, 2010) does not require identifying and developing maintenance actions if the DAHs can show that such actions are not necessary to prevent WFD before the airplane reaches the LOV. Many LOVs, however, do depend on accomplishment of future maintenance actions. As stated in the WFD rule, any maintenance actions necessary to reach the LOV will be mandated by airworthiness directives through separate rulemaking actions.

    In the context of WFD, this action is necessary to enable DAHs to propose LOVs that allow operators the longest operational lives for their airplanes, and still ensure that WFD will not occur. This approach allows for an implementation strategy that provides flexibility to DAHs in determining the timing of service information development (with FAA approval), while providing operators with certainty regarding the LOV applicable to their airplanes.

    On September 25, 2009, we issued AD 2009-21-01, Amendment 39-16038 (74 FR 52395, October 13, 2009) (“AD 2009-21-01”), for certain Boeing Model 737-300 and 737-400 series airplanes. AD 2009-21-01 requires repetitive inspections to detect cracking of the aft fuselage skin, and related investigative and corrective actions if necessary. AD 2009-21-01 resulted from reports of cracks in the aft fuselage skin on both sides of the airplane. We issued AD 2009-21-01 to detect and correct cracking in the aft fuselage skin along the longitudinal edges of the bonded skin doubler, which could result in reduced structural integrity of the airplane.

    Actions Since AD 2009-21-01 Was Issued

    Since we issued AD 2009-21-01, additional cracks have been found on airplanes in the skin panels from station 727 to station 1016 and from stringer S-14 to stringer S-25 on the left and right sides of the airplanes. Cracks at fastener holes in the bonded doubler have also been reported on several airplanes in the area above stringer S-17 on the left and right side of the airplanes.

    An evaluation by the DAH indicates that the aft fuselage skin is subject to WFD. On the existing skin panel assemblies, the doubler is chemically milled to create pockets of various depths. At these skin panel locations on the airplane, the loads could cause a condition where cracks could form along the longitudinal edges of the doubler.

    AD 2009-21-01 applies to certain Boeing Model 737-300 and 737-400 series airplanes. This proposed AD is applicable to certain Model 737-300 series airplanes. We are considering issuing additional rulemaking that will apply to Model 737-400 series airplanes. We have determined that, in this case, a less burdensome approach is to issue separate ADs applicable only to each model type.

    Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    We reviewed Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1168, Revision 4, dated June 3, 2015. The service information describes procedures for doing inspections of the fuselage skin, repairs, and skin panel replacement. 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 proposing this AD because we evaluated all the relevant information and determined the unsafe condition described previously is likely to exist or develop in other products of the same type design.

    Proposed AD Requirements

    Although this proposed AD does not explicitly restate the requirements of AD 2009-21-01, this proposed AD would retain all of the requirements of AD 2009-21-01 for Model 737-300 series airplanes, except the skin panel replacement is terminating action only if the skin panel replacement is done with a production skin panel after 53,000 total flight cycles. Those requirements are referenced in the service information identified previously, which, in turn, is referenced in paragraphs (g) and (h) of this proposed AD. This proposed AD would require accomplishing the actions specified in the service information described previously, except as discussed under “Differences Between this Proposed AD and the Service Information.” 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-2016-6667.

    The phrase “related investigative actions” is used in this proposed AD. “Related investigative actions” are follow-on actions that (1) are related to the primary action, and (2) further investigate the nature of any condition found. Related investigative actions in an AD could include, for example, inspections.

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

    Differences Between This Proposed AD and the Service Information

    Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1168, Revision 4, dated June 3, 2015, specifies to contact the manufacturer for instructions on how to repair certain conditions and also to obtain certain work instructions, but this proposed AD would require repairing those conditions and also to obtain those work instructions in one of the following ways:

    • In accordance with a method that we approve; or

    • Using data that meet the certification basis of the airplane, and that have been approved by the Boeing Commercial Airplanes Organization Designation Authorization (ODA) whom we have authorized to make those findings.

    Table 6 of paragraph 1.E., “Compliance,” of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1168, Revision 4, dated June 3, 2015, specifies post-repair airworthiness limitation inspections in compliance with 14 CFR 25.571(a)(3) at the repaired locations, which support compliance with 14 CFR 121.1109(c)(2) or 129.109(b)(2). As airworthiness limitations, these inspections are required by maintenance and operational rules. It is therefore unnecessary to mandate them in this AD. Deviations from these inspections require FAA approval, but do not require an alternative method of compliance. This difference has been coordinated with Boeing.

    Explanation of Compliance Time

    The compliance time for the modification specified in this proposed AD for addressing WFD was established to ensure that discrepant structure is modified before WFD develops in airplanes. Standard inspection techniques cannot be relied on to detect WFD before it becomes a hazard to flight. We will not grant any extensions of the compliance time to complete any AD-mandated service bulletin related to WFD without extensive new data that would substantiate and clearly warrant such an extension.

    Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD affects 168 airplanes of U.S. registry.

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

    Estimated Costs Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per product Cost on U.S. operators Inspections Up to 1,791 work-hours × $85 per hour = $152,235 $0 Up to $152,235 Up to $25,575,480. Skin replacement 624 work-hours × $85 per hour = $53,040 $98,275 $151,315 $25,420,920.

    We estimate the following costs to do any necessary repairs that would be required based on the results of the proposed inspections. 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 Time limited repair 24 work-hours × $85 per hour = $2,040 per repair [1] $2,040 per repair. Permanent repair Up to 43 work-hours × $85 per hour = $3,655 per repair [1] Up to $3,655 per repair. [1] We have received no definitive data that would enable us to provide the part cost estimates for the on-condition actions specified in this proposed AD.

    We estimate the following costs to do any necessary post-repair inspections that would be required. We have no way of determining the number of aircraft that might need these inspections:

    Post-Repair Inspection Costs Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per product Post-repair inspection Up to 7 work-hours × $85 per hour = $595 $0 Up to $595. Authority for This Rulemaking

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

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

    Regulatory Findings

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

    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that the proposed regulation:

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

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

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

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

    List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

    The Proposed Amendment

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

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

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

    § 39.13 [Amended]
    2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by removing Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2009-21-01, Amendment 39-16038 (74 FR 52395, October 13, 2009), and adding the following new AD: The Boeing Company: Docket No. FAA-2016-6667; Directorate Identifier 2015-NM-125-AD. (a) Comments Due Date

    The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by June 27, 2016.

    (b) Affected ADs

    This AD replaces AD 2009-21-01, Amendment 39-16038 (74 FR 52395, October 13, 2009) (“AD 2009-21-01”).

    (c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Boeing Model 737-300 series airplanes, certificated in any category, as identified in Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1168, Revision 4, dated June 3, 2015.

    (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) indicates that the aft fuselage skin is subject to widespread fatigue damage (WFD). We are issuing this AD to detect and correct cracking in the aft fuselage skin along the longitudinal edges of the bonded skin doubler, which could result in possible rapid decompression and reduced structural integrity of the airplane.

    (f) Compliance

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

    (g) Inspections, Related Investigative and Corrective Actions

    At the applicable times specified in tables 1 and 2 of paragraph 1.E., “Compliance,” of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1168, Revision 4, dated June 3, 2015, except as required by paragraph (h)(1) and (h)(2) of this AD: Do the applicable inspections to detect cracks in the aft fuselage skin panels; and do all applicable related investigative and corrective actions; in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1168, Revision 4, dated June 3, 2015, except as required by paragraphs (h)(3) and (h)(4) of this AD. Do all applicable related investigative and corrective actions before further flight. Repeat the applicable inspections thereafter at the applicable intervals specified in tables 1 and 2 of paragraph 1.E., “Compliance,” of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1168, Revision 4, dated June 3, 2015. Accomplishment of a repair in accordance with “Part 4: Repair” of the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1168, Revision 4, dated June 3, 2015, except as required by paragraph (h)(3) of this AD, is terminating action for the repetitive inspections required by this paragraph at the repaired locations only.

    (h) Exceptions to Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1168, Revision 4, Dated June 3, 2015

    (1) Where Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1168, Revision 4, dated June 3, 2015, specifies compliance times “after the Revision 4 date of this service bulletin,” this AD requires compliance within the specified compliance times after the effective date of this AD.

    (2) The Condition column of Paragraph 1.E., “Compliance,” of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1168, Revision 4, dated June 3, 2015, refers to airplanes in certain configurations as of the “issue date of Revision 4 of this service bulletin.” However, this AD applies to airplanes in the specified configurations “as of the effective date of this AD.”

    (3) Where Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1168, Revision 4, dated June 3, 2015, specifies contacting Boeing for repair instructions or work instructions, before further flight, repair or perform the work instructions using a method approved in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (n) of this AD, except as required by paragraph (h)(4) of this AD.

    (4) For airplanes on which an operator has a record that a skin panel was replaced with a production skin panel before 53,000 total flight cycles: At the applicable time for the next inspection as specified in tables 1 and 2 of paragraph 1.E., “Compliance,” Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1168, Revision 4, dated June 3, 2015, except as provided by paragraph (h)(1) and (h)(2) of this AD: Perform inspections and applicable corrective actions using a method approved in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (n) of this AD.

    (i) Actions for Airplanes With a Time Limited Repair Installed

    (1) For airplanes with a time limited repair installed as specified in Boeing Service Bulletin 737-53-1168, Revision 3, dated November 28, 2006: At the applicable times specified in table 3 of paragraph 1.E., “Compliance,” of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1168, Revision 4, dated June 3, 2015, except as provided by paragraphs (h)(1) and (h)(2) of this AD: Do the actions specified in paragraphs (i)(1)(i) and (i)(1)(ii) of this AD.

    (i) Do the applicable inspections to detect missing or loose fasteners and any disbonding or cracking of bonded doublers; and do all applicable related investigative and corrective actions; in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1168, Revision 4, dated June 3, 2015, except as required by paragraph (h)(3) of this AD. Do all applicable related investigative and corrective actions before further flight. Repeat the applicable inspections thereafter at the applicable intervals specified Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1168, Revision 4, dated June 3, 2015.

    (ii) Make the time limited repair permanent; and do all applicable related investigative and corrective actions; in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1168, Revision 4, dated June 3, 2015, except as required by paragraph (h)(3) of this AD. Do all applicable related investigative and corrective actions before further flight. Accomplishing the permanent repair required by this paragraph terminates the inspections required by paragraph (i)(1)(i) of this AD for the permanently repaired area only.

    (2) For airplanes with a time limited repair installed as specified in Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1168, Revision 4, dated June 3, 2015: At the applicable times specified in table 4 of paragraph 1.E., “Compliance,” of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1168, Revision 4, dated June 3, 2015: Do the actions specified in paragraphs (i)(2)(i) and (i)(2)(ii) of this AD.

    (i) Do the applicable inspections to detect missing or loose fasteners and any disbonding or cracking of bonded doublers; and do all applicable related investigative and corrective actions; in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1168, Revision 4, dated June 3, 2015, except as required by paragraph (h)(3) of this AD. Do all applicable related investigative and corrective actions before further flight. Repeat the applicable inspections thereafter at the applicable intervals specified in table 4 of paragraph 1.E., “Compliance,” of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1168, Revision 4, dated June 3, 2015.

    (ii) Make the time limited repair permanent; and do all applicable related investigative and corrective actions; in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1168, Revision 4, dated June 3, 2015, except as required by paragraph (h)(3) of this AD. Do all applicable related investigative and corrective actions before further flight. Accomplishing the permanent repair required by this paragraph terminates the inspections required by paragraph (i)(2)(i) of this AD for the permanently repaired area only.

    (j) Modification of Certain Permanent Repairs

    For airplanes with an existing time limited repair that was made permanent as specified in Boeing Service Bulletin 737-53-1168, Revision 3, dated November 28, 2006: At the applicable times specified in table 5 of paragraph 1.E., “Compliance,” of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1168, Revision 4, dated June 3, 2015, except as provided by paragraphs (h)(1) of this AD: Modify the existing permanent repair; and do all applicable related investigative and corrective actions; in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1168, Revision 4, dated June 3, 2015, except as required by paragraph (h)(3) of this AD. Do all applicable related investigative and corrective actions before further flight.

    (k) Post-Repair Inspections

    Table 6 of paragraph 1.E., “Compliance,” of Boeing Service Bulletin Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1168, Revision 4, dated June 3, 2015, specifies post-repair airworthiness limitation inspections in compliance with 14 CFR 25.571(a)(3) at the repaired locations, which support compliance with 14 CFR 121.1109(c)(2) or 129.109(b)(2). As airworthiness limitations, these inspections are required by maintenance and operational rules. It is therefore unnecessary to mandate them in this AD. Deviations from these inspections require FAA approval, but do not require an alternative method of compliance.

    (l) Skin Panel Replacement

    At the later of the times specified in paragraphs (l)(1) and (1)(2) of this AD: Replace the applicable skin panels, and do all applicable related investigative and corrective actions, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1168, Revision 4, dated June 3, 2015. Do all applicable related investigative and corrective actions before further flight. Doing the skin panel replacement required by this paragraph terminates the inspection requirements of paragraphs (g), (i), and (j) of this AD for that skin panel only, provided the skin panel replacement was done with a production skin panel after 53,000 total flight cycles.

    (1) Before 60,000 total flight cycles, but not before 53,000 total flight cycles.

    (2) Within 6,000 flight cycles after the effective date of this AD, but not before 53,000 total flight cycles.

    (m) Credit for Previous Actions

    (1) This paragraph provides credit for the actions required by paragraph (g) of this AD, if those actions were performed before the effective date of this AD using Boeing Service Bulletin 737-53-1168, Revision 3, dated November 28, 2006, except as required by paragraph (h)(4) of this AD. Boeing Service Bulletin 737-53-1168, Revision 3, dated November 28, 2006, was incorporated by reference in AD 2009-21-01.

    (2) This paragraph provides credit for the actions required by paragraph (l) of this AD, if those actions were performed before the effective date of this AD using Boeing Service Bulletin 737-53-1168, Revision 3, dated November 28, 2006, except as required by paragraph (h)(4) of this AD; provided the skin panel replacement was done with a production skin panel after 53,000 total flight cycles. Boeing Service Bulletin 737-53-1168, Revision 3, dated November 28, 2006, was incorporated by reference in AD 2009-21-01.

    (3) This paragraph provides credit for the actions required by paragraph (l) of this AD, if those actions were performed before November 17, 2009 (the effective date of AD 2009-21-01), using any service information specified in paragraphs (m)(3)(i), (m)(3)(ii), and (m)(3)(iii) of this AD, except as required by paragraph (h)(4) of this AD; provided the skin panel replacement was done with a production skin panel after 53,000 total flight cycles. The service information specified in paragraphs (m)(3)(i), (m)(3)(ii), and (m)(3)(iii) of this AD are not incorporated by reference in this AD.

    (i) Part 3 of the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 737-53-1168, dated March 16, 1995.

    (ii) Part 3 of the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 737-53-1168, Revision 1, dated August 17, 1995.

    (iii) Part 3 of the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 737-53-1168, Revision 2, dated November 27, 1996.

    (n) 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 (o)(1) 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.

    (4) AMOCs approved previously for repairs for AD 2009-21-01 are approved as AMOCs for the corresponding provisions of paragraph (g) of this AD.

    (5) AMOCs approved for previous modifications done as optional terminating action for AD 2009-21-01 are approved as AMOCs for the modification required by paragraph (l) of this AD provided the previous modification was done after the airplane had accumulated 53,000 total flight cycles or more.

    (o) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Wade Sullivan, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle ACO, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; phone: 425-917-6430; fax: 425-917-6590; email: [email protected]

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

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on May 4, 2016. Michael Kaszycki, Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
    [FR Doc. 2016-11170 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2016-6668; Directorate Identifier 2014-NM-149-AD] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Saab AB, Saab Aeronautics (Type Certificate Previously Held by Saab AB, Saab Aerosystems) Airplanes AGENCY:

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

    SUMMARY:

    We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain Saab AB, Saab Aeronautics Model SAAB 2000 airplanes. This proposed AD was prompted by a report that on some airplanes, during the paint removal process for repainting the airplane, the basic corrosion protection (anodizing and primer) coating was sanded down to bare metal on the aluminum skin panels and the bare metal might not have been treated correctly for corrosion prevention. This proposed AD would require an inspection of structural components of the airplane for any damaged protective coating; inspections of those areas for pitting corrosion, if necessary; a thickness measurement to determine if there is reduced skin thickness, if necessary; and repair, if necessary. We are proposing this AD to detect and correct damaged protective coatings. This condition could result in pitting corrosion damage; and reduced metal thickness, which could result in reduced static and fatigue strength of the airplane's structural parts.

    DATES:

    We must receive comments on this proposed AD by June 27, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

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

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

    Fax: 202-493-2251.

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

    Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

    For service information identified in this NPRM, contact Saab AB, Saab Aeronautics, SE-581 88, Linköping, Sweden; telephone +46 13 18 5591; fax +46 13 18 4874; email [email protected]; Internet http://www.saabgroup.com. You may view this referenced service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 425-227-1221.

    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-2016-6668; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street address for the Docket Operations office (telephone 800-647-5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

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

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include “Docket No. FAA-2016-6668; Directorate Identifier 2014-NM-149-AD” at the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this proposed AD based on those comments.

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

    Discussion

    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA Airworthiness Directive 2014-0160, dated July 9, 2014 (Correction: July 9, 2014) (referred to after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or “the MCAI”), to correct an unsafe condition for certain Saab AB, Saab Aeronautics Model SAAB 2000 airplanes. The MCAI states:

    SAAB received evidence that on a number of SAAB 2000 aeroplanes, during paint removal before repainting, the basic corrosion protection anodizing and primer were removed. In these cases, the basic corrosion protection coating was sanded down to bare metal on the aluminium [aluminum] skin panel in spite of existing instruction(s) contained in the Structural Repair Manual (SRM) which prohibit(s) exposing the aluminium bare metal. Due to the fact that the skin panels are manufactured from aluminium without a protective covering (unclad), the anodizing and primer is the corner stone of the aeroplane corrosion protection system. If the anodizing and primer is removed and the aluminium surface is not correctly treated, pitting corrosion may occur. In addition, sanding to bare metal can inadvertently lead to metal removal and subsequently reduce the static and fatigue strength of the aeroplane structural parts.

    This condition, if not detected and corrected, could result in corrosion damage and/or reduced structural strength of the aeroplane structure.

    To address this potential unsafe condition, SAAB issued SB 2000-51-002 to provide inspection instructions.

    For the reasons described above, this [EASA] AD requires a one-time [detailed] inspection [for damage] * * * of required anticorrosion protective coating [e.g., bonding primer], [detailed] inspection for pitting corrosion (if necessary) [, a dye penetrant inspection for pitting corrosion (if necessary)] and measure the skin thickness (if necessary) [to determine if there is reduced skin thickness] and, depending on findings, corrective action(s) [e.g., repair].

    This [EASA] AD is re-issued to correct typographical error of the effective date.

    You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-6668.

    Relevant Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    Saab has issued Service Bulletin 2000-51-002, Revision 01, dated May 23, 2014. This service information describes procedures for an inspection of structural components of the airplane for any damaged protective coating; inspections of those areas for pitting corrosion; a thickness measurement to determine if there is reduced skin thickness; and repair. This service information is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

    FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to our bilateral agreement with the State of Design Authority, we have been notified of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and service information referenced above. We are proposing this AD because we evaluated all pertinent information and determined an unsafe condition exists and is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same type design.

    Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD affects 8 airplanes of U.S. registry.

    We also estimate that it would take about 20 work-hours per product to comply with the basic requirements of this proposed AD. The average labor rate is $85 per work-hour. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of this proposed AD on U.S. operators to be $13,600, or $1,700 per product.

    In addition, we estimate that any necessary follow-on actions would take about 45 work-hours, for a cost of $3,825 per product. We have no way of determining the number of aircraft that might need these actions. We have received no definitive data that would enable us to provide cost estimates for the parts cost of the follow-on actions specified in this proposed AD.

    Authority for This Rulemaking

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

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

    Regulatory Findings

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

    For the reasons discussed above, I certify this proposed regulation:

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

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

    3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska; and

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

    List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

    The Proposed Amendment

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

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

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

    § 39.13 [Amended]
    2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): Saab AB, Saab Aeronautics (Type Certificate previously held by Saab AB, Saab Aerosystems): Docket No. FAA-2016-6668; Directorate Identifier 2014-NM-149-AD. (a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by June 27, 2016.

    (b) Affected ADs

    None.

    (c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Saab AB, Saab Aeronautics (Type Certificate previously held by Saab AB, Saab Aerosystems) Model SAAB 2000 airplanes, certificated in any category, all manufacturer serial numbers, except as specified in paragraphs (c)(1) and (c)(2) of this AD.

    (1) Those airplanes identified in Table 1 of Saab Service Bulletin 2000-51-002, Revision 01, dated May 23, 2014, on which an applicable “Related Statement” identified in Table 1 was accomplished.

    (2) Those airplanes that either have retained the original paint or have been repainted by Saab AB, Saab Aeronautics.

    (d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 51, Standard Practices/Structures.

    (e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by a report that on some airplanes, during the paint removal process for repainting the airplane, the basic corrosion protection (anodizing and primer) coating was sanded down to bare metal on the aluminum skin panels and the bare metal might not have been treated correctly for corrosion prevention. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct damaged protective coatings. This condition could result in pitting corrosion damage; and reduced metal thickness, which could result in reduced static and fatigue strength of the airplane's structural parts.

    (f) Compliance

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

    (g) Inspection, Related Investigative Actions, and Corrective Action

    (1) Within 2,000 flight hours or 12 months, whichever occurs first after the effective date of this AD, do a detailed inspection of the airplane structural parts to detect damaged protective coating (e.g., bonding primer), in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Saab Service Bulletin 2000-51-002, Revision 01, dated May 23, 2014. If any damaged protective coating is found, before further flight, do a detailed inspection of the airplane structural parts to detect pitting corrosion and, if no pitting corrosion is found, do a dye penetrant inspection of the airplane structural parts to detect pitting corrosion and a thickness measurement to determine if there is reduced skin thickness, as applicable, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Saab Service Bulletin 2000-51-002, Revision 01, dated May 23, 2014.

    (2) If, during any inspection required by paragraph (g)(1) of this AD, any damage (such as pitting corrosion or damaged primer) or reduced skin thickness is detected, as defined in Saab Service Bulletin 2000-51-002, Revision 01, dated May 23, 2014, before further flight, contact the Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA; or the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA); or Saab AB, Saab Aeronautics' EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA) for a repair method, and do the repair within the compliance time indicated in those instructions.

    (h) Credit for Previous Actions

    This paragraph provides credit for actions required by paragraph (g) of this AD, if those actions were performed before the effective date of this AD using Saab Service Bulletin 2000-51-002, dated April 9, 2014, which is not incorporated by reference in 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: Shahram Daneshmandi, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; telephone 425-227-1112; fax 425-227-1149. Information may be emailed to: [email protected]. Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding district office. 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 Saab AB, Saab Aeronautics' EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA). If approved by the DOA, the approval must include the DOA-authorized signature.

    (j) Related Information

    (1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information (MCAI) EASA Airworthiness Directive 2014-0160, dated July 9, 2014 (Correction: July 9, 2014), for related information. This MCAI may be found in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-6668.

    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact Saab AB, Saab Aeronautics, SE-581 88, Linköping, Sweden; telephone +46 13 18 5591; fax +46 13 18 4874; email [email protected].com; Internet http://www.saabgroup.com. You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 425-227-1221.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on May 4, 2016. Michael Kaszycki, Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
    [FR Doc. 2016-11171 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2016-6666; Directorate Identifier 2015-NM-124-AD] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes AGENCY:

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

    SUMMARY:

    We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain Boeing Model 737-400 series airplanes. This proposed AD was prompted by an evaluation by the design approval holder (DAH) which indicates that the aft fuselage skin is subject to widespread fatigue damage (WFD) and reports of aft fuselage skin cracking. This proposed AD would require repetitive inspections to detect cracking of the aft fuselage skin, inspections to detect missing or loose fasteners and any disbonding or cracking of bonded doublers, permanent repairs of time-limited repairs, related investigative and corrective actions if necessary, and skin panel replacement. We are proposing this AD to detect and correct cracking in the aft fuselage skin along the longitudinal edges of the bonded skin doubler, which could result in possible rapid decompression and reduced structural integrity of the airplane.

    DATES:

    We must receive comments on this proposed AD by June 27, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

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

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

    Fax: 202-493-2251.

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

    Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

    For service information identified in this proposed 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. 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-2016-6666.

    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-2016-6666; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street address for the Docket Office (phone: 800-647-5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Wade Sullivan, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; phone: 425-917-6430; fax: 425-917-6590; email: wade.sul[email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include “Docket No. FAA-2016-6666; Directorate Identifier 2015-NM-124-AD” at the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this proposed AD because of those comments.

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

    Discussion

    Fatigue damage can occur locally, in small areas or structural design details, or globally, in widespread areas. Multiple-site damage is widespread damage that occurs in a large structural element such as a single rivet line of a lap splice joining two large skin panels. Widespread damage can also occur in multiple elements such as adjacent frames or stringers. Multiple-site damage and multiple-element damage cracks are typically too small initially to be reliably detected with normal inspection methods. Without intervention, these cracks will grow, and eventually compromise the structural integrity of the airplane. This condition is known as widespread fatigue damage. It is associated with general degradation of large areas of structure with similar structural details and stress levels. As an airplane ages, WFD will likely occur, and will certainly occur if the airplane is operated long enough without any intervention.

    The FAA's WFD final rule (75 FR 69746, November 15, 2010) became effective on January 14, 2011. The WFD rule requires certain actions to prevent structural failure due to WFD throughout the operational life of certain existing transport category airplanes and all of these airplanes that will be certificated in the future. For existing and future airplanes subject to the WFD rule, the rule requires that DAHs establish a limit of validity (LOV) of the engineering data that support the structural maintenance program. Operators affected by the WFD rule may not fly an airplane beyond its LOV, unless an extended LOV is approved.

    The WFD rule (75 FR 69746, November 15, 2010) does not require identifying and developing maintenance actions if the DAHs can show that such actions are not necessary to prevent WFD before the airplane reaches the LOV. Many LOVs, however, do depend on accomplishment of future maintenance actions. As stated in the WFD rule, any maintenance actions necessary to reach the LOV will be mandated by airworthiness directives through separate rulemaking actions.

    In the context of WFD, this action is necessary to enable DAHs to propose LOVs that allow operators the longest operational lives for their airplanes, and still ensure that WFD will not occur. This approach allows for an implementation strategy that provides flexibility to DAHs in determining the timing of service information development (with FAA approval), while providing operators with certainty regarding the LOV applicable to their airplanes.

    We have received reports of 29 airplanes with skin panel cracking. Cracks were found on airplanes with between 22,500 and 44,600 total airplane cycles. The cracks were found on both the left and the right hand sides of the airplanes between station 727 and station 947 in the skin panels between stringer S-20 and S-25. The cracks ranged in lengths from between 0.25 inches to 5.5 inches.

    During certain inspections, additional chem-mill step cracks have been discovered. On the existing skin panel assemblies, the doubler is chemically milled to create pockets of various depths. At these skin panel locations on the airplane, the loads could cause a condition where skin cracks form along the longitudinal edges of the doubler. If not corrected, skin cracks could extend to multiple bays and result in possible rapid decompression and loss of structural integrity of the airplane.

    Other Related Rulemaking

    On September 25, 2009, we issued AD 2009-21-01, Amendment 39-16038 (74 FR 52395, October 13, 2009) (“AD 2009-21-01”), for certain Boeing Model 737-300 and 737-400 series airplanes. AD 2009-21-01 requires repetitive inspections to detect cracking of the aft fuselage skin, and related investigative/corrective actions if necessary.

    We have determined that, in this case, a less burdensome approach is to issue separate ADs applicable only to each model type. Therefore, this proposed AD is applicable to certain Model 737-400 series airplanes. We are considering issuing additional rulemaking that will supersede AD 2009-21-01 and apply to Model 737-300 series airplanes.

    Although this proposed AD does not supersede AD 2009-21-01, this proposed AD would retain all of the requirements of AD 2009-21-01 for Model 737-400 series airplanes, except the skin panel replacement is terminating action only if the skin panel replacement is done with a production skin panel after 53,000 total flight cycles. Those requirements are referenced in Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1187, Revision 3, dated July 10, 2015, which, in turn, is referenced in paragraph (g) of this proposed AD.

    Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    We reviewed Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1187, Revision 3, dated July 10, 2015. The service information describes procedures for doing inspections of the fuselage skin, repairs, and skin panel replacement. 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 proposing this AD because we evaluated all the relevant information and determined the unsafe condition described previously is likely to exist or develop in other products of the same type design.

    Proposed AD Requirements

    This proposed AD would require accomplishing the actions specified in the service information described previously, except as discussed under “Differences Between this Proposed AD and the Service Information.” 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-2016-6666.

    The phrase “related investigative actions” is used in this proposed AD. “Related investigative actions” are follow-on actions that (1) are related to the primary action, and (2) further investigate the nature of any condition found. Related investigative actions in an AD could include, for example, inspections.

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

    Differences Between This Proposed AD and the Service Information

    Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1187, Revision 3, dated July 10, 2015, specifies to contact the manufacturer for instructions on how to repair certain conditions and also to obtain certain work instructions, but this proposed AD would require repairing those conditions and also to obtain those work instructions in one of the following ways:

    • In accordance with a method that we approve; or

    • Using data that meet the certification basis of the airplane, and that have been approved by the Boeing Commercial Airplanes Organization Designation Authorization (ODA) whom we have authorized to make those findings.

    Table 7 of paragraph 1.E., “Compliance,” of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1187, Revision 3, dated July 10, 2015, specifies post-repair airworthiness limitation inspections in compliance with 14 CFR 25.571(a)(3) at the repaired locations, which support compliance with 14 CFR 121.1109(c)(2) or 129.109(b)(2). As airworthiness limitations, these inspections are required by maintenance and operational rules. It is therefore unnecessary to mandate them in this AD. Deviations from these inspections require FAA approval, but do not require an alternative method of compliance. This difference has been coordinated with Boeing.

    Explanation of Compliance Time

    The compliance time for the modification specified in this proposed AD for addressing WFD was established to ensure that discrepant structure is modified before WFD develops in airplanes. Standard inspection techniques cannot be relied on to detect WFD before it becomes a hazard to flight. We will not grant any extensions of the compliance time to complete any AD-mandated service bulletin related to WFD without extensive new data that would substantiate and clearly warrant such an extension.

    Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD affects 84 airplanes of U.S. registry.

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

    Estimated Costs Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per product Cost on U.S.
  • operators
  • Inspections Up to 1,568 work-hours × $85 per hour = Up to $133,280 $0 Up to $133,280 Up to $11,195,520. Skin replacement 698 work-hours × $85 per hour = $59,330 $185,147 $244,477 $20,536,068.

    We estimate the following costs to do any necessary repairs that would be required based on the results of the proposed inspections. 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 Time limited repair 24 work-hours × $85 per hour = $2,040 per repair [1] $2,040 per repair. Permanent repair Up to 39 work-hours × $85 per hour = $3,315 per repair [1] Up to $3,315 per repair. [1] We have received no definitive data that would enable us to provide the part cost estimates for the on-condition actions specified in this proposed AD.

    We estimate the following costs to do any necessary post-repair inspections that would be required. We have no way of determining the number of aircraft that might need these inspections:

    Post-Repair Inspection Costs Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per product Post-repair inspection Up to 7 work-hours × $85 per hour = $595 $0 Up to $595. Authority for This Rulemaking

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

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

    Regulatory Findings

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

    For the reasons discussed above, I certify this proposed regulation:

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

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

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

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

    List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

    The Proposed Amendment

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

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

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

    § 39.13 [Amended]
    2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): The Boeing Company: Docket No. FAA-2016-6666; Directorate Identifier 2015-NM-124-AD. (a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by June 27, 2016.

    (b) Affected ADs

    None.

    (c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Boeing Model 737-400 series airplanes, certificated in any category, as identified in Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1187, Revision 3, dated July 10, 2015.

    (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) which indicates that the aft fuselage skin is subject to widespread fatigue damage (WFD) and reports of aft fuselage skin cracking. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct cracking in the aft fuselage skin along the longitudinal edges of the bonded skin doubler, which could result in possible rapid decompression and reduced structural integrity of the airplane.

    (f) Compliance

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

    (g) Inspections, Related Investigative and Corrective Actions

    At the applicable times specified in tables 1, 2, and 3 of paragraph 1.E., “Compliance,” of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1187, Revision 3, dated July 10, 2015, except as provided by paragraph (h)(1) and (h)(2) of this AD: Do the applicable inspections to detect cracks in the aft fuselage skin panels; and do all applicable related investigative and corrective actions; in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1187, Revision 3, dated July 10, 2015, except as required by paragraphs (h)(3) and (h)(4) of this AD. Do all applicable related investigative and corrective actions before further flight. Repeat the applicable inspections thereafter at the applicable intervals specified in tables 1, 2, and 3 of paragraph 1.E., “Compliance,” of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1187, Revision 3, dated July 10, 2015. Accomplishment of a repair in accordance with “Part 4: Repair” of the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1187, Revision 3, dated July 10, 2015, except as required by paragraph (h)(3) of this AD, is terminating action for the repetitive inspections required by this paragraph at the repaired locations only.

    (h) Exceptions to Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1187, Revision 3, Dated July 10, 2015

    (1) Where Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1187, Revision 3, dated July 10, 2015, specifies compliance times “after the Revision 3 date of this service bulletin,” this AD requires compliance within the specified compliance times after the effective date of this AD.

    (2) The Condition column of Paragraph 1.E., “Compliance,” of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1187, Revision 3, dated July 10, 2015, refers to airplanes in certain configurations as of the “issue date of Revision 3 of this service bulletin.” However, this AD applies to airplanes in the specified configurations “as of the effective date of this AD.”

    (3) Where Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1187, Revision 3, dated July 10, 2015, specifies contacting Boeing for repair instructions or work instructions, before further flight, repair or perform the work instructions using a method approved in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (n) of this AD, except as required by paragraph (h)(4) of this AD.

    (4) For airplanes on which an operator has a record that a skin panel was replaced with a production skin panel before 53,000 total flight cycles: At the applicable time for the next inspection as specified in tables 1, 2, and 3 of paragraph 1.E., “Compliance,” of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1187, Revision 3, dated July 10, 2015, except as provided by paragraph (h)(1) and (h)(2) of this AD: Perform inspections and applicable corrective actions using a method approved in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (n) of this AD.

    (i) Actions for Airplanes With a Time Limited Repair Installed

    (1) For airplanes with a time limited repair installed as specified in Boeing Service Bulletin 737-53-1187, Revision 2, dated May 9, 2007: At the applicable times specified in table 4 of paragraph 1.E., “Compliance,” of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1187, Revision 3, dated July 10, 2015, except as provided by paragraphs (h)(1) and (h)(2) of this AD: Do the actions specified in paragraphs (i)(1)(i) and (i)(1)(ii) of this AD.

    (i) Do the applicable inspections to detect missing or loose fasteners and any disbonding or cracking of bonded doublers; and do all applicable related investigative and corrective actions; in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1187, Revision 3, dated July 10, 2015, except as required by paragraph (h)(3) of this AD. Do all applicable related investigative and corrective actions before further flight. Repeat the applicable inspections thereafter at the applicable intervals specified in table 4 of paragraph 1.E., “Compliance,” of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1187, Revision 3, dated July 10, 2015.

    (ii) Make the time limited repair permanent; and do all applicable related investigative and corrective actions; in accordance the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1187, Revision 3, dated July 10, 2015, except as required by paragraph (h)(3) of this AD. Do all applicable related investigative and corrective actions before further flight. Accomplishing the permanent repair required by this paragraph terminates the inspections required by paragraph (i)(1)(i) of this AD for the permanently repaired area only.

    (2) For airplanes with a time limited repair installed as specified in Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1187, Revision 3, dated July 10, 2015: At the applicable times specified in table 5 of paragraph 1.E., “Compliance,” of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1187, Revision 3, dated July 10, 2015, except as provided by paragraph (h)(2) of this AD: Do the actions specified in paragraphs (i)(2)(i) and (i)(2)(ii) of this AD.

    (i) Do the applicable inspections to detect missing or loose fasteners and any disbonding or cracking of bonded doublers; and do all applicable corrective actions; in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1187, Revision 3, dated July 10, 2015, except as required by paragraph (h)(3) of this AD. Do all applicable corrective actions before further flight. Repeat the applicable inspections thereafter at the applicable intervals specified in table 5 of paragraph 1.E., “Compliance,” of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1187, Revision 3, dated July 10, 2015.

    (ii) Make the time limited repair permanent; and do all applicable related investigative and corrective actions; in accordance the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1187, Revision 3, dated July 10, 2015, except as required by paragraph (h)(3) of this AD. Do all applicable related investigative and corrective actions before further flight. Accomplishing the permanent repair required by this paragraph terminates the inspections required by paragraph (i)(2)(i) of this AD for the permanently repaired area only.

    (j) Modification of Certain Permanent Repairs

    For airplanes with an existing time limited repair that was made permanent as specified in Boeing Service Bulletin 737-53-1187, Revision 2, dated May 9, 2007: At the applicable time specified in table 6 of paragraph 1.E., “Compliance,” of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1187, Revision 3, dated July 10, 2015, except as provided by paragraph (h)(1) of this AD: Modify the existing permanent repair; and do all applicable related investigative and corrective actions; in accordance the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1187, Revision 3, dated July 10, 2015, except as required by paragraph (h)(3) of this AD. Do all applicable related investigative and corrective actions before further flight.

    (k) Post-Repair Inspections

    Table 7 of paragraph 1.E., “Compliance,” of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1187, Revision 3, dated July 10, 2015, specifies post-repair airworthiness limitation inspections in compliance with 14 CFR 25.571(a)(3) at the repaired locations, which support compliance with 14 CFR 121.1109(c)(2) or 129.109(b)(2). As airworthiness limitations, these inspections are required by maintenance and operational rules. It is therefore unnecessary to mandate them in this AD. Deviations from these inspections require FAA approval, but do not require an alternative method of compliance.

    (l) Skin Panel Replacement

    At the later of the times specified in paragraphs (l)(1) and (l)(2) of this AD: Replace the applicable skin panels, and do all applicable related investigative and corrective actions, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1187, Revision 3, dated July 10, 2015. Do all applicable related investigative and corrective actions before further flight. Doing the skin panel replacement required by this paragraph terminates the inspection requirements of paragraphs (g), (i), and (j) of this AD for that skin panel only, provided the skin panel replacement was done with a production skin panel after 53,000 total flight cycles.

    (1) Before 60,000 total flight cycles, but not before 53,000 total flight cycles.

    (2) Within 6,000 flight cycles after the effective date of this AD, but not before 53,000 total flight cycles.

    (m) Credit for Previous Actions

    (1) This paragraph provides credit for the actions required by paragraph (g) of this AD, if those actions were performed before the effective date of this AD using Boeing Service Bulletin 737-53-1187, Revision 2, dated May 9, 2007, except as required by paragraph (h)(4) of this AD. Boeing Service Bulletin 737-53-1187, Revision 2, dated May 9, 2007, was incorporated by reference in AD 2009-21-01, Amendment 39-16038 (74 FR 52395, October 13, 2009) (“AD 2009-21-01”).

    (2) This paragraph provides credit for the actions required by paragraph (l) of this AD, if those actions were performed before the effective date of this AD using Boeing Service Bulletin 737-53-1187, Revision 2, dated May 9, 2007, except as required by paragraph (h)(4) of this AD; provided the skin panel replacement was done with a production skin panel after 53,000 total flight cycles. Boeing Service Bulletin 737-53-1187, Revision 2, dated May 9, 2007, was incorporated by reference in AD 2009-21-01.

    (3) This paragraph provides credit for the actions required by paragraph (l) of this AD, if those actions were performed before November 17, 2009 (the effective date of AD 2009-21-01) using Part III of the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 737-53-1187, dated November 2, 1995; or Part III of the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 737-53-1187, Revision 1, dated January 16, 1997, except as required by paragraph (h)(4) of this AD; provided the skin panel replacement was done with a production skin panel after 53,000 total flight cycles. Boeing Service Bulletin 737-53-1187, dated November 2, 1995; and Boeing Service Bulletin 737-53-1187, Revision 1, dated January 16, 1997; are not incorporated by reference in this AD.

    (n) 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 (o)(1) 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.

    (4) AMOCs approved for repairs for AD 2009-21-01 are approved as AMOCs for the corresponding provisions of paragraph (g) of this AD.

    (5) AMOCs approved for previous modifications done as optional terminating action for AD 2009-21-01 are approved as AMOCs for the modification required by paragraph (l) of this AD provided the previous modification was done after the airplane had accumulated 53,000 total flight cycles or more.

    (o) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Wade Sullivan, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle ACO, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; phone: 425-917-6430; fax: 425-917-6590; email: [email protected]

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

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on May 4, 2016. Michael Kaszycki, Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
    [FR Doc. 2016-11169 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2016-6664; Directorate Identifier 2015-NM-177-AD] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes AGENCY:

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

    SUMMARY:

    We propose to supersede Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2012-16-07, which applies to certain Boeing Model 737-500 series airplanes. AD 2012-16-07 currently requires inspections of the fuselage skin at the chem-milled steps, and repair if necessary. Since we issued AD 2012-16-07, an evaluation by the design approval holder (DAH) indicates that the fuselage skin is subject to widespread fatigue damage (WFD), and we have received reports of cracks at the chem-milled steps in the fuselage skin. This proposed AD would add new fuselage skin inspections for cracking, inspections to detect missing or loose fasteners and any disbonding or cracking of bonded doublers, permanent repairs of time-limited repairs, related investigative and corrective actions if necessary, and skin panel replacement. We are proposing this AD to detect and correct cracking on the aft lower lobe fuselage skins, which could result in rapid decompression of the airplane.

    DATES:

    We must receive comments on this proposed AD by June 27, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

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

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

    Fax: 202-493-2251.

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

    Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

    For service information identified in this NPRM, 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-2016-6664.

    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-2016-6664; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street address for the Docket Office (phone: 800-647-5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Wade Sullivan, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; phone: 425-917-6430; fax: 425-917-6590; email: [email protected].

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include “Docket No. FAA-2016-6664; Directorate Identifier 2015-NM-177-AD” at the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this proposed AD because of those comments.

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

    Discussion

    Fatigue damage can occur locally, in small areas or structural design details, or globally, in widespread areas. Multiple-site damage is widespread damage that occurs in a large structural element such as a single rivet line of a lap splice joining two large skin panels. Widespread damage can also occur in multiple elements such as adjacent frames or stringers. Multiple-site damage and multiple-element damage cracks are typically too small initially to be reliably detected with normal inspection methods. Without intervention, these cracks will grow, and eventually compromise the structural integrity of the airplane. This condition is known as widespread fatigue damage. It is associated with general degradation of large areas of structure with similar structural details and stress levels. As an airplane ages, WFD will likely occur, and will certainly occur if the airplane is operated long enough without any intervention.

    The FAA's WFD final rule (75 FR 69746, November 15, 2010) became effective on January 14, 2011. The WFD rule requires certain actions to prevent structural failure due to WFD throughout the operational life of certain existing transport category airplanes and all of these airplanes that will be certificated in the future. For existing and future airplanes subject to the WFD rule, the rule requires that DAHs establish a limit of validity (LOV) of the engineering data that support the structural maintenance program. Operators affected by the WFD rule may not fly an airplane beyond its LOV, unless an extended LOV is approved.

    The WFD rule (75 FR 69746, November 15, 2010) does not require identifying and developing maintenance actions if the DAHs can show that such actions are not necessary to prevent WFD before the airplane reaches the LOV. Many LOVs, however, do depend on accomplishment of future maintenance actions. As stated in the WFD rule, any maintenance actions necessary to reach the LOV will be mandated by airworthiness directives through separate rulemaking actions.

    In the context of WFD, this action is necessary to enable DAHs to propose LOVs that allow operators the longest operational lives for their airplanes, and still ensure that WFD will not occur. This approach allows for an implementation strategy that provides flexibility to DAHs in determining the timing of service information development (with FAA approval), while providing operators with certainty regarding the LOV applicable to their airplanes.

    On July 31, 2012, we issued AD 2012-16-07, Amendment 39-17154 (77 FR 48423, August 14, 2012) (“AD 2012-16-07”), for certain The Boeing Company Model 737-500 series airplanes. AD 2012-16-07 requires inspections of the fuselage skin at the chem-milled steps, and repair if necessary. AD 2012-16-07 resulted from reports of chem-milled steps cracking on the aft lower lobe fuselage skins. We issued AD 2012-16-07 to detect and correct cracking on the aft lower lobe fuselage skins, which could result in rapid decompression of the airplane.

    Actions Since AD 2012-16-07 Was Issued

    Since we issued AD 2012-16-07, an evaluation by the DAH indicates that the lower lobe skin panels are subject to WFD, and we have received reports of cracks at the chem-milled steps in the fuselage skin.

    Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    We reviewed Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1315, Revision 1, dated June 30, 2015. The service information describes procedures for inspection and repair of the fuselage skin panels between station 727 and station 1016, and between stringers S-14 and S-25; and also describes procedures for skin panel replacement. 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 proposing this AD because we evaluated all the relevant information and determined the unsafe condition described previously is likely to exist or develop in other products of the same type designs.

    Proposed AD Requirements

    Although this proposed AD does not explicitly restate the requirements of AD 2012-16-07, this proposed AD would retain all of the requirements of AD 2012-16-07. Those requirements are referenced in the service information identified previously, which, in turn, is referenced in paragraphs (g) and (h) of this proposed AD.

    This proposed AD would also require accomplishing the actions specified in the service information described previously, except as discussed under “Differences Between This Proposed AD and the Service Information.”

    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-2016-6664.

    The phrase “related investigative actions” is used in this proposed AD. “Related investigative actions” are follow-on actions that (1) are related to the primary actions, and (2) further investigate the nature of any condition found. Related investigative actions in an AD could include, for example, inspections.

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

    Differences Between This Proposed AD and the Service Information

    Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1315, Revision 1, dated June 30, 2015, specifies to contact the manufacturer for instructions on how to repair certain conditions and also to obtain certain work instructions, but this proposed AD would require repairing those conditions and also to obtain those work instructions in one of the following ways:

    • In accordance with a method that we approve; or

    • Using data that meet the certification basis of the airplane, and that have been approved by the Boeing Commercial Airplanes Organization Designation Authorization (ODA) whom we have authorized to make those findings.

    Explanation of Compliance Time

    The compliance time for the replacement specified in this proposed AD for addressing WFD was established to ensure that discrepant structure is replaced before WFD develops in airplanes. Standard inspection techniques cannot be relied on to detect WFD before it becomes a hazard to flight. We will not grant any extensions of the compliance time to complete any AD-mandated service bulletin related to WFD without extensive new data that would substantiate and clearly warrant such an extension.

    Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD affects 33 airplanes of U.S. registry.

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

    Estimated Costs Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per product Cost on U.S.
  • operators
  • Inspections [actions retained from AD 2012-16-07] 23 work-hours × $85 per hour = $1,955 per inspection cycle $0 $1,955 per inspection cycle $64,515 per inspection cycle. Inspections [new proposed action] Up to 1,515 work-hours × $85 per hour = $128,775 per inspection cycle $0 Up to $128,775 per inspection cycle Up to $4,249,575 per inspection cycle. Skin panel replacement [new proposed action] 688 work-hours × $85 per hour = $58,480 $96,000 $154,480 $5,097,840.

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

    On-Condition Costs Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per product Time-limited repair 24 work-hours × $85 per hour = $2,040 [1] $2,040.1 Permanent repair 31 work-hours × $85 per hour = $2,635 [1] $2,635.1 Permanent repair inspection 4 work-hours × $85 per hour = $340 per inspection cycle [1] $340 1 per inspection cycle. [1] We have received no definitive data that would enable us to provide parts cost estimates for the on-condition actions specified in this proposed AD. Authority for This Rulemaking

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

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

    Regulatory Findings

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

    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that the proposed regulation:

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

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

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

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

    List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

    The Proposed Amendment

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

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

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

    § 39.13 [Amended]
    2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by removing Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2012-16-07, Amendment 39-17154 (77 FR 48423, August 14, 2012), and adding the following new AD: The Boeing Company: Docket No. FAA-2016-6664; Directorate Identifier 2015-NM-177-AD. (a) Comments Due Date

    The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by June 27, 2016.

    (b) Affected ADs

    This AD replaces AD 2012-16-07, Amendment 39-17154 (77 FR 48423, August 14, 2012) (“AD 2012-16-07”).

    (c) Applicability

    This AD applies to all The Boeing Company Model 737-500 series airplanes, certificated in any category.

    (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) that indicates that the fuselage skin is subject to widespread fatigue damage (WFD), and reports of cracks at the chem-milled steps in the fuselage skin. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct cracking on the aft lower lobe fuselage skins, which could result in rapid decompression of the airplane.

    (f) Compliance

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

    (g) Inspections, Related Investigative and Corrective Actions

    At the applicable times specified in table 1 of paragraph 1.E., “Compliance,” of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1315, Revision 1, dated June 30, 2015, except as required by paragraphs (h)(1) and (h)(2) of this AD: Do the applicable inspections to detect cracks in the fuselage skin panels; and do all applicable related investigative and corrective actions; in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1315, Revision 1, dated June 30, 2015, except as required by paragraphs (h)(3), (h)(4), and (h)(5) of this AD. Do all applicable related investigative and corrective actions before further flight. Repeat the applicable inspections thereafter at the applicable intervals specified Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1315, Revision 1, dated June 30, 2015. Accomplishment of a repair in accordance with “Part 3: Repair” of the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1315, Revision 1, dated June 30, 2015, except as required by paragraph (h)(3) of this AD, is terminating action for the repetitive inspections required by this paragraph at the repaired locations only.

    (h) Exceptions to Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1315, Revision 1, Dated June 30, 2015

    (1) Where Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1315, Revision 1, dated June 30, 2015, specifies compliance times “after the Revision 1 date of this service bulletin,” this AD requires compliance within the specified compliance times after the effective date of this AD.

    (2) The Condition column of table 1 of Paragraph 1.E., “Compliance,” of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1315, Revision 1, dated June 30, 2015, refers to airplanes in certain configurations as of the “issue date of Revision 1 of this service bulletin.” However, this AD applies to airplanes in the specified configurations “as of the effective date of this AD.”

    (3) Where Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1315, Revision 1, dated June 30, 2015, specifies contacting Boeing for repair instructions or work instructions, before further flight, repair or perform the work instructions using a method approved in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (m) of this AD, except as required by paragraph (h)(4) of this AD.

    (4) For airplanes on which an operator has a record that a skin panel was replaced with a production skin panel at or before 53,000 total flight cycles: At the applicable time for the next inspection as specified in table 1 of paragraph 1.E., “Compliance,” Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1315, Revision 1, dated June 30, 2015, except as provided by paragraphs (h)(1) and (h)(2) of this AD: Perform inspections and applicable corrective actions using a method approved in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (m) of this AD.

    (5) The Condition column of table 2 of Paragraph 1.E., “Compliance,” of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1315, Revision 1, dated June 30, 2015, refers to airplanes in certain configurations as of the “issue date of Revision 1 of this service bulletin.” However, this AD applies to airplanes in the specified configurations regardless of when the time limited repair is installed.

    (i) Actions for Airplanes With a Time Limited Repair Installed

    For airplanes with a time limited repair installed as specified in Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1315, dated July 29, 2011; or Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin, Revision 1, dated June 30, 2015: At the applicable times specified in table 2 of paragraph 1.E., “Compliance,” of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1315, Revision 1, dated June 30, 2015, except as provided by paragraphs (h)(1) and (h)(5) of this AD: Do the actions specified in paragraphs (i)(1) and (i)(2) of this AD.

    (1) Do the applicable inspections to detect missing or loose fasteners and any disbonding or cracking of bonded doublers; and do all applicable related investigative and corrective actions; in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1315, Revision 1, dated June 30, 2015, except as required by paragraph (h)(3) of this AD. Do all applicable related investigative and corrective actions before further flight. Repeat the applicable inspections thereafter at the applicable intervals specified Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1315, Revision 1, dated June 30, 2015.

    (2) Make the time limited repair permanent; and do all applicable related investigative and corrective actions; in accordance the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1315, Revision 1, dated June 30, 2015, except as required by paragraph (h)(3) of this AD. Do all applicable related investigative and corrective actions before further flight. Accomplishing the permanent repair required by this paragraph terminates the inspections required by paragraph (i)(1) of this AD for the permanently repaired area only.

    (j) Certain Post-Repair Inspections

    For airplanes with a permanent repair installed as specified in Boeing Special Attention Services Bulletin 737-53-1315, Revision 1, dated June 30, 2015: At the applicable time specified in table 3 of paragraph 1.E., “Compliance,” of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1315, Revision 1, dated June 30, 2015, except as provided by paragraph (h)(1) of this AD: Do an external low frequency eddy current (LFEC) inspection for cracking of the skin at the critical fastener row of the repair doubler; and do all applicable corrective actions; in accordance the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1315, Revision 1, dated June 30, 2015, except as required by paragraph (h)(3) of this AD. Do all applicable corrective actions before further flight. Repeat the LFEC inspection thereafter at the applicable intervals specified Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1315, Revision 1, dated June 30, 2015.

    (k) Skin Panel Replacement

    At the later of the times specified in paragraphs (k)(1) and (k)(2) of this AD: Replace the applicable skin panels, and do all applicable related investigative and corrective actions, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1315, Revision 1, dated June 30, 2015. Do all applicable related investigative and corrective actions before further flight. Doing the skin panel replacement required by this paragraph terminates the inspection requirements of paragraph (g) of this AD for that skin panel only, provided the skin panel replacement was done with a production skin panel after 53,000 total flight cycles.

    (1) Before 60,000 total flight cycles, but not at or before 53,000 total flight cycles.

    (2) Within 6,000 flight cycles after the effective date of this AD, but not at or before 53,000 total flight cycles.

    (l) Credit for Previous Actions

    This paragraph provides credit for the zone 1 actions required by paragraph (g) of this AD, as described in Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1315, Revision 1, dated June 30, 2015, if the zone 1, 2, and 3 actions, as described in Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1315, dated July 29, 2011, were performed before the effective date of this AD using Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1315, dated July 29, 2011, except as required by paragraph (h)(4) of this AD. Boeing Special Attention Bulletin 737-53-1315, dated July 29, 2011, was incorporated by reference in AD 2012-16-07.

    (m) 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 (n)(1) 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.

    (4) AMOCs approved previously for AD 2012-16-07 are approved as AMOCs for the corresponding provisions of paragraph (g) of this AD.

    (n) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Wade Sullivan, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; phone: 425-917-6430; fax: 425-917-6590; email: [email protected]

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

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on May 5, 2016. Michael Kaszycki, Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
    [FR Doc. 2016-11173 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2016-6640; Directorate Identifier 2015-SW-084-AD] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation Helicopters AGENCY:

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

    SUMMARY:

    We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation (Sikorsky) Model S-92A helicopters. This proposed AD would require altering the fire bottle inertia switch wiring and performing a cartridge functional test of the fire extinguishing system. This proposed AD is prompted by the inadvertent tripping of inertia-switches that has led to unintentional discharging of the fire bottles, leaving the helicopter's auxiliary power unit and engines without fire protection. The proposed actions are intended to prevent unintentional and undetected fire bottle discharges and subsequent unavailability of fire suppression in case of a fire.

    DATES:

    We must receive comments on this proposed AD by July 12, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may send comments by any of the following methods:

    Federal eRulemaking Docket: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for sending your comments electronically.

    Fax: 202-493-2251.

    Mail: Send comments to the U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001.

    Hand Delivery: Deliver to the “Mail” address 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-2016-6640; or in person at the Docket Operations Office between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed AD, the economic evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street address for the Docket Operations Office (telephone 800-647-5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

    For service information identified in this proposed 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 the referenced service information at the FAA, Office of the Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy, Room 6N-321, Fort Worth, TX 76177.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Kris Greer, Aviation Safety Engineer, Boston Aircraft Certification Office, Engine & Propeller Directorate, 1200 District Avenue, Burlington, Massachusetts 01803; telephone (781) 238-7799; email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Comments Invited

    We invite you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting written comments, data, or views. We also invite comments relating to the economic, environmental, energy, or federalism impacts that might result from adopting the proposals in this document. The most helpful comments reference a specific portion of the proposal, explain the reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data. To ensure the docket does not contain duplicate comments, commenters should send only one copy of written comments, or if comments are filed electronically, commenters should submit only one time.

    We will file in the docket all comments that we receive, as well as a report summarizing each substantive public contact with FAA personnel concerning this proposed rulemaking. Before acting on this proposal, we will consider all comments we receive on or before the closing date for comments. We will consider comments filed after the comment period has closed if it is possible to do so without incurring expense or delay. We may change this proposal in light of the comments we receive.

    Discussion

    We propose to adopt a new AD for certain serial-numbered Sikorsky Model S-92A helicopters. Sikorsky has informed us that the inadvertent tripping of inertia switches has caused several engine and auxiliary power unit fire bottle discharges during taxi, flight, and landing operations. Because these discharges are undetected, the fire bottles remain unavailable in the event of a fire.

    This proposed AD would require altering the fire bottle inertia switch wiring to disable the automatic feature of the fire extinguishing system. This proposed AD would also require performing a cartridge functional test. The proposed actions are intended to prevent an unintentional and undetected fire bottle discharge and subsequent unavailability of fire suppression in the event of a fire.

    FAA's Determination

    We are proposing this AD because we evaluated all known relevant information and determined that an unsafe condition exists and is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same type design.

    Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    We reviewed Sikorsky Alert Service Bulletin 92-26-005A, Revision A, dated June 27, 2014 (ASB 92-26-005A). ASB 92-26-005A specifies performing a one-time alteration of the fire bottle inertia switch wiring to disable the automatic actuation feature of the fire extinguishing system. ASB 92-26-005A includes figures that depict the wiring and electrical connector pin changes.

    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.

    Other Related Service Information

    We also reviewed Sikorsky Alert Service Bulletin 92-26-005, Basic Issue, dated June 18, 2014 (ASB 92-26-005). ASB 92-26-005 contains the same procedures as ASB 92-26-005A. However, ASB 92-26-005A contains an additional figure.

    Proposed AD Requirements

    This proposed AD would require, within 90 days, altering the fire bottle inertia switch wiring to disable the automatic discharge of fire bottles and performing a post-alteration cartridge functional test.

    Differences Between This Proposed AD and the Service Information

    This proposed AD has a compliance date within 90 days, and the service information has a calendar date, which has already passed. This proposed AD does not require performing a cartridge functional test prior to alteration. The service information does specify performing a cartridge functional test prior to alteration.

    Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD would affect 80 helicopters of U.S. Registry. Labor costs are estimated at $85 per work-hour. Altering the fire bottle switch and performing a cartridge functional test would take about 2 work-hours. No parts would be needed for an estimated cost of $170 per helicopter and $13,600 for the U.S. 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 determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.

    For the reasons discussed, I certify this proposed regulation:

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

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

    3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska 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.

    We prepared an economic evaluation of the estimated costs to comply with this proposed AD and placed it in the AD docket.

    List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

    The Proposed Amendment

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

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

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

    § 39.13 [Amended]
    2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation: Docket No. FAA-2016-6640; Directorate Identifier 2015-SW-084-AD. (a) Applicability

    This AD applies to Model S-92A helicopters, serial number 920006 through 920250, certificated in any category.

    (b) Unsafe Condition

    This AD defines the unsafe condition as inadvertent tripping of a fire bottle inertia-switch. This condition results in an unintentional and undetected fire bottle discharge and subsequent unavailability of fire suppression in the event of a fire.

    (c) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by July 12, 2016.

    (d) 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.

    (e) Required Actions

    Within 90 days:

    (1) Alter each fire bottle inertia switch by following the Accomplishment Instructions, paragraph 3.B., of Sikorsky Alert Service Bulletin 92-26-005A, Revision A, dated June 27, 2014.

    (2) Perform a cartridge functional test.

    (f) Credit for Actions Previously Completed

    Compliance with Sikorsky Alert Service Bulletin ASB 92-26-005, Basic Issue, dated June 18, 2014, before the effective date of this AD is considered acceptable for compliance with the actions specified in paragraph (e) of this AD.

    (g) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOC)

    (1) The Manager, Boston Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, may approve AMOCs for this AD. Send your proposal to: Kris Greer, Aviation Safety Engineer, Boston Aircraft Certification Office, Engine & Propeller Directorate,1200 District Avenue, Burlington, Massachusetts 01803; telephone (781) 238-7799; 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 Alert Service Bulletin 92-26-005, Basic Issue, dated June 18, 2014, which is not incorporated by reference, contains additional information about the subject of this proposed rule. For service information identified in this proposed 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 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: 2621 Fire Bottle, Fixed.

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on May 5, 2016. Scott A. Horn, Acting Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
    [FR Doc. 2016-11196 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 165 [Docket Number USCG-2016-0287] RIN 1625-AA00 Safety Zone; Allegheny River Mile 12.0 to 12.5, Oakmont, Pennsylvania AGENCY:

    Coast Guard, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice of proposed rulemaking.

    SUMMARY:

    The Coast Guard proposes to establish a temporary safety zone for all navigable waters of the Allegheny River mile 12.0 to mile 12.5. The safety zone is needed to protect personnel, vessels, and the marine environment from potential hazards created from a land based firework display. Entry of vessels or persons into this zone is prohibited unless specifically authorized by the Captain of the Pittsburgh or a designated representative. We invite your comments on this proposed rulemaking.

    DATES:

    Comments and related material must be received by the Coast Guard on or before June 13, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-2016-0287 using the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. See the “Public Participation and Request for Comments” portion of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for further instructions on submitting comments.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    If you have questions about this proposed rulemaking, call or email MST1 Jennifer Haggins, Marine Safety Unit Pittsburgh, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone 412-221-0807, email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Table of Abbreviations CFR Code of Federal Regulations DHS Department of Homeland Security FR Federal Register NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking § Section U.S.C. United States Code II. Background, Purpose, and Legal Basis

    On March 10, 2016, the Oakmont Yacht Club notified the Coast Guard that it will be conducting a fireworks display from 9:00 p.m. to 11:00 p.m. on July 16, 2016. The fireworks will be launched from land in the vicinity of Allegheny River mile 12.0-12.5. Hazards from firework displays include accidental discharge of fireworks, dangerous projectiles, and falling hot embers or other debris.

    The purpose of this rulemaking is to ensure the safety of vessels and the navigable waters before, during, and after the scheduled event. The Coast Guard proposes this rulemaking under authority in 33 U.S.C. 1231.

    III. Discussion of Proposed Rule

    The COTP proposes to establish a safety zone from 9 p.m. to 11 p.m. on July 16, 2016. The safety zone would cover all navigable waters of the Allegheny River mile 12.0 to mile 12.5. The duration of the zone is intended to ensure the safety of vessels and these navigable waters before, during, and after the scheduled fireworks display. No vessel or person would be permitted to enter the safety zone without obtaining permission from the COTP or a designated representative. The regulatory text we are proposing appears at the end of this document.

    IV. Regulatory Analyses

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

    A. Regulatory Planning and Review

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

    This regulatory action determination is based on the size, location, duration, and time-of-day of the safety zone. The safety zone will close a small section of the Allegheny River for only 2 hours. Moreover, the Coast Guard would issue a Broadcast Notice to Mariners via VHF-FM marine channel 16 about the zone, and the rule would allow vessels to seek permission to enter the zone.

    B. Impact on Small Entities

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

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

    If you think that your business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this rule would have a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to what degree this rule would economically affect it.

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small entities in understanding this proposed rule. If the rule would affect your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that question or complain about this proposed rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard.

    C. Collection of Information

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

    D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

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

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

    E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

    F. Environment

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Department of Homeland Security Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have made a preliminary determination that this action is one of a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This proposed rule involves a safety zone lasting less than two hours that would prohibit entry into the safety zone. Normally such actions are categorically excluded from further review under paragraph 34(x) of Figure 2-1 of Commandant Instruction M16475.lD. A preliminary environmental analysis checklist and Categorical Exclusion Determination are available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES. We seek any comments or information that may lead to the discovery of a significant environmental impact from this proposed rule.

    G. Protest Activities

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

    V. Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We view public participation as essential to effective rulemaking, and will consider all comments and material received during the comment period. Your comment can help shape the outcome of this rulemaking. If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this rulemaking, indicate the specific section of this document to which each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or recommendation.

    We encourage you to submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. If your material cannot be submitted using http://www.regulations.gov, contact the person in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document for alternate instructions.

    We accept anonymous comments. All comments received will be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov and will include any personal information you have provided. For more about privacy and the docket, you may review a Privacy Act notice regarding the Federal Docket Management System in the March 24, 2005, issue of the Federal Register (70 FR 15086).

    Documents mentioned in this NPRM as being available in the docket, and all public comments, will be in our online docket at http://www.regulations.gov and can be viewed by following that Web site's instructions. Additionally, if you go to the online docket and sign up for email alerts, you will be notified when comments are posted or a final rule is published.

    List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

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

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

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

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

    2. Add § 165.T08-0287 to read as follows:
    § 165.T08-0287 Safety Zone; Allegheny River Mile 12.0 to Mile 12.5, Oakmont, PA.

    (a) Location. The following area is a safety zone: All navigable waters of the Allegheny River from mile 12.0 to mile 12.5.

    (b) Definitions. As used in this section, designated representative means a Coast Guard Patrol Commander, including a Coast Guard coxswain, petty officer, or other officer operating a Coast Guard vessel and a Federal, State, and local officer designated by or assisting the Captain of the Port Pittsburgh (COTP) in the enforcement of the safety zone.

    (c) Regulations. (1) Under the general safety zone regulations in subpart C of this part, you may not enter the safety zone described in paragraph (a) of this section unless authorized by the COTP or the COTP's designated representative.

    (2) To seek permission to enter, contact the COTP or the COTP's representative at 412-221-0807. Those in the safety zone must comply with all lawful orders or directions given to them by the COTP or the COTP's designated representative.

    (d) Enforcement period. This section will be enforced from 9 p.m. to 11 p.m. on July 16, 2016.

    Dated: April 20, 2016. L. McClain, Jr., Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Pittsburgh.
    [FR Doc. 2016-11365 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 63 [EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0021; FRL-9946-17-OAR] RIN 2060-AN36 National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Site Remediation AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Proposed rule; notice of reconsideration of final rule; request for public comment.

    SUMMARY:

    This action proposes to amend the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP): Site Remediation (Site Remediation Rule) by removing exemptions from the rule for site remediation activities performed under authority of the Comprehensive Environmental Response and Compensation Liability Act (CERCLA) and for site remediation activities performed under a Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) corrective action or other required RCRA order. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is also proposing to remove the applicability requirement that site remediations be co-located with at least one other stationary source regulated by another NESHAP. The EPA is seeking comment on these issues, but is not requesting comment on any other issues or provisions of the final Site Remediation Rule at this time.

    DATES:

    Comments. Comments must be received on or before June 27, 2016. Under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), comments on the information collection provisions are best assured of consideration if the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) receives a copy of your comments on or before June 13, 2016.

    Public Hearing. If anyone contacts the EPA requesting a public hearing by May 18, 2016, we will hold a public hearing on May 31, 2016. If the EPA holds a public hearing, the EPA will keep the record of the hearing open for 30 days after completion of the hearing to provide an opportunity for submission of rebuttal and supplementary information.

    ADDRESSES:

    Comments. Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0021, at http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

    Instructions. Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0021. The EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change and may be made available on-line at http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through http://www.regulations.gov or email. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site is an “anonymous access” system, which means the EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email comment directly to the EPA without going through http://www.regulations.gov, your email address will be automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, the EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If the EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, the EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should not include special characters or any form of encryption and be free of any defects or viruses. For additional information about the EPA's public docket, visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

    A red-line version of the regulatory language that incorporates the proposed changes in this action is available in the docket for this action (Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0021).

    Docket: The EPA has established a docket for this rulemaking under Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0021. All documents in the docket are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy. Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically in http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the EPA Docket Center, Room 3334, EPA WJC West Building, 1301 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the EPA Docket Center is (202) 566-1742.

    Public Hearing: If a public hearing is requested by May 18, 2016, it will be held on May 31, 2016 at the EPA's Research Triangle Park Campus, 109 T.W. Alexander Drive, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711. The hearing will convene at 10:00 a.m. (Eastern Standard Time) and end at 5:00 p.m. (Eastern Standard Time). A lunch break will be held from 12:00 p.m. (Eastern Standard Time) until 1:00 p.m. (Eastern Standard Time). Please contact Ms. Virginia Hunt at (919) 541-0832 or at [email protected] to request a hearing, to determine if a hearing will be held, and to register to speak at the hearing, if one is held. If a hearing is requested, the last day to pre-register in advance to speak at the hearing will be May 25, 2016.

    Additionally, requests to speak will be taken the day of the hearing at the hearing registration desk, although preferences on speaking times may not be able to be fulfilled. If you require the service of a translator or special accommodations such as audio description, please let us know at the time of registration. If you require an accommodation, we ask that you pre-register for the hearing, as we may not be able to arrange such accommodations without advance notice.

    If no one contacts the EPA requesting a public hearing to be held concerning this proposed rule by May 18, 2016, a public hearing will not take place. If a hearing is held, it will provide interested parties the opportunity to present data, views, or arguments concerning the proposed action. The EPA will make every effort to accommodate all speakers who arrive and register. Because the hearing will be held at a U.S. governmental facility, individuals planning to attend the hearing should be prepared to show valid picture identification to the security staff in order to gain access to the meeting room. Please note that the REAL ID Act, passed by Congress in 2005, established new requirements for entering federal facilities. If your driver's license is issued by Alaska, American Samoa, Arizona, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Montana, New York, Oklahoma, or the state of Washington, you must present an additional form of identification to enter the federal building. Acceptable alternative forms of identification include: Federal employee badges, passports, enhanced driver's licenses, and military identification cards. In addition, you will need to obtain a property pass for any personal belongings you bring with you. Upon leaving the building, you will be required to return this property pass to the security desk. No large signs will be allowed in the building, cameras may only be used outside of the building, and demonstrations will not be allowed on federal property for security reasons.

    The EPA may ask clarifying questions during the oral presentations, but will not respond to the presentations at that time. Written statements and supporting information submitted during the comment period will be considered with the same weight as oral comments and supporting information presented at the public hearing. Commenters should notify Ms. Hunt if they will need specific equipment, or if there are other special needs related to providing comments at the hearing. Verbatim transcripts of the hearings and written statements will be included in the docket for the rulemaking. The EPA will make every effort to follow the schedule as closely as possible on the day of the hearing; however, please plan for the hearing to run either ahead of schedule or behind schedule. Again, a hearing will not be held unless requested.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For questions about this proposed action, contact Ms. Paula Hirtz, Refining and Chemicals Group, Sector Policies and Programs Division (E143-01), Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711; telephone number: (919) 541-2618; fax number: (919) 541-0246; email address: [email protected]. For information about the applicability of the NESHAP to a particular entity, contact Tavara Culpepper, Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance (OECA); (202)564-0902; [email protected].

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Preamble Acronyms and Abbreviations. We use multiple acronyms and terms in this preamble. While this list may not be exhaustive, to ease the reading of this preamble and for reference purposes, the EPA defines the following terms and acronyms here:

    CAA Clean Air Act CBI Confidential business information CERCLA Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act EPA Environmental Protection Agency FR Federal Register HAP Hazardous air pollutants ICR Information collection request NESHAP National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants NTTAA National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act OMB Office of Management and Budget PRA Paperwork Reduction Act RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act RFA Regulatory Flexibility Act UMRA Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Organization of this Document. The information in this preamble is organized as follows:

    I. General Information A. What is the source of authority for the reconsideration action? B. Does this action apply to me? C. Where can I get a copy of this document and other related information? D. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for the EPA? II. Background III. Discussion of the Proposed Action To Remove the CERCLA and RCRA Exemption A. What is the EPA proposing regarding site remediations performed under the authority of CERCLA or performed under a RCRA corrective action or other required RCRA order? B. What compliance dates are we proposing? IV. Summary of Cost, Environmental, and Economic Impacts and Additional Analyses Conducted A. What are the affected sources? B. What are the air quality impacts? C. What are the cost impacts? D. What are the economic impacts? E. What are the benefits? V. Solicitation of Public Comment and Participation VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations I. General Information A. What is the source of authority for the reconsideration action?

    The statutory authority for this action is provided by sections 112 and 307(d)(7)(B) of the Clean Air Act (CAA) as amended (42 U.S.C. 7412 and 7607(d)(7)(B)).

    B. Does this action apply to me?

    The table below lists the industry categories and entities potentially regulated by this action and is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a guide for readers regarding the entities that this proposed action is likely to affect. Parties potentially affected by this action include major sources, as defined in 40 CFR 63.2, that conduct one or more site remediations under the authority of CERCLA or under a RCRA corrective action or other required RCRA order; and any other site remediation that is a major source of hazardous air pollutants (HAP) itself and is not co-located with another facility regulated under 40 CFR 63. As defined under the “Waste Treatment and Disposal” industry sector in the “Initial List of Categories of Sources Under Section 112(c)(1) of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990” (see 57 FR 31576, July 16, 1992), the Site Remediation source category includes any facility taking action to remove, store, treat, and/or dispose of hazardous substances that have been released into the environment (e.g., soil, groundwater, or other environmental media). The table below is provided for illustrative purposes only; to determine whether your site remediation is regulated by this action, you should examine the applicability criteria in 40 CFR 63.7881 of subpart GGGGG (National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Site Remediation).

    Industrial Source Categories Affected by This Action Industry category NAICS Code 1 Examples of regulated entities Industry 325110
  • 325180
  • 325199
  • 325211
  • 325320
  • 333316
  • 562112
  • Site remediation activities at currently operating or closed businesses at which organic materials currently are or have been in the past stored, processed, treated, or otherwise managed at the facility. These facilities include, but are not limited to: Manufacturing of petrochemicals, inorganic chemicals, organic chemicals, plastics and resins, pesticides and agricultural chemicals, and photographic and photocopying equipment; other warehousing and storage; and hazardous waste collection facilities.
    Federal Government 92811 Federal agencies that conduct site remediation activities, including agencies or activities related to national security. 1 North American Industry Classification System.
    C. Where can I get a copy of this document and other related information?

    In addition to being available in the docket, an electronic copy of this action is available on the Internet through the EPA's Technology Transfer Network (TTN) Web site, a forum for information and technology exchange in various areas of air pollution control. Following signature by the EPA Administrator, the EPA will post a copy of this proposed action at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/siterm/sitermpg.html. Following publication in the Federal Register, the EPA will post the Federal Register version of the proposal and key technical documents at this same Web site.

    D. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for the EPA?

    Do not submit information containing CBI to the EPA through http://www.regulations.gov or email. Clearly mark the part or all of the information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or CD-ROM that you mail to the EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM as CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as CBI, you must submit a copy of the comment that does not contain the information claimed as CBI for inclusion in the public docket. If you submit a CD-ROM or disk that does not contain CBI, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM clearly that it does not contain CBI. Information not marked as CBI will be included in the public docket and the EPA's electronic public docket without prior notice. Information marked as CBI will not be disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. Send or deliver information identified as CBI to only the following address: Ms. Paula Hirtz, c/o OAQPS Document Control Officer (Room C404-02), U.S. EPA, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, Attention: Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0021.

    II. Background

    The EPA finalized the Site Remediation Rule on October 8, 2003 (68 FR 58172). The rule exempted site remediations performed under the authority of CERCLA and those conducted under a RCRA corrective action or other required RCRA order. The final rule also did not regulate metal or other inorganic HAP due to the low potential of emissions of these chemicals from site remediation activities. On December 8, 2003, pursuant to section 307(d)(7)(B) of the CAA, the EPA received a petition for reconsideration from Sierra Club, the Blue Ridge Environmental Defense League, and Concerned Citizens for Nuclear Safety. The reconsideration petition stated that (1) the EPA lacked the statutory authority to exempt site remediation activities conducted under the authority of CERCLA or RCRA from NESHAP requirements, and (2) the EPA had a duty to set standards for each listed HAP emitted from a source category.

    Petitioners also filed a petition for judicial review of the Site Remediation Rule on December 5, 2003, in the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (D.C. Circuit or Court) under CAA section 307(b)(1). In response to the plaintiffs' and EPA's joint motion, the D.C. Circuit held this action in abeyance by order dated January 22, 2004, so that settlement discussions could take place to assess whether the case could be resolved without the Court.

    On November 29, 2006, the EPA promulgated amendments to the Site Remediation Rule (71 FR 69011), but did not resolve, address, or respond to the issues in the petition for reconsideration. On October 14, 2014, the D.C. Circuit ordered the parties to show cause why the case should not be administratively terminated, and on November 13, 2014, the parties filed a joint response informing the Court that they were actively exploring a new approach. On March 25, 2015, the EPA issued a letter to the petitioners granting reconsideration on the issues raised in the petition and indicated that the agency would issue a Federal Register notice regarding the reconsideration process. The petition for reconsideration is available for review in the rulemaking docket (see Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0021-0024).

    The EPA now requests comment on the first of the two issues raised in the December 8, 2003, petition for reconsideration: The exemption for site remediations performed under the authority of CERCLA or RCRA. We are not addressing the second issue, whether the EPA has a duty to set standards for heavy metal HAP emissions from site remediation activities, in this action. Since evaluation of this second issue fits most naturally into the residual risk and technology review (RTR) process, the EPA will initiate reconsideration of the issue of regulating heavy metal HAP when it issues a proposed rule presenting the RTR for the Site Remediation source category. The EPA is not seeking comments on this issue until such a proposal is made.

    III. Discussion of the Proposed Action To Remove the CERCLA and RCRA Exemption

    The October 8, 2003, NESHAP exempts site remediations performed under the authority of CERCLA and those conducted under a RCRA corrective action or other required RCRA order. The EPA now proposes to remove this exemption and establish requirements and compliance dates for site remediation activities conducted under the authority of CERCLA or RCRA that would be affected by the proposed rule changes.

    A. What is the EPA proposing regarding site remediations performed under the authority of CERCLA or performed under a RCRA corrective action or other required RCRA order?

    On October 8, 2003, the EPA finalized the July 2002 proposal to exempt site remediations performed under the authority of CERCLA and those performed under RCRA corrective action or other orders authorized under RCRA (i.e., RCRA/CERCLA exemption). Several commenters on the 2002 proposed rule opposed the exemption. These commenters asserted that neither the RCRA nor CERCLA programs have air emission standards for site remediation activities and that the intent of CAA section 112 is to establish NESHAP for HAP emissions from these activities. In contrast, other commenters supported the proposed exemption, stating that the RCRA and CERCLA cleanup programs have appropriate site-specific provisions to provide for the protection of public health and the environment from air pollutants emitted during site remediation activities. We determined the proposed provisions were appropriate, and we explained in the preamble to the October 8, 2003, final rule and in the Background Information Document for the final rule that the hazardous waste corrective action program under RCRA and the Superfund program under CERCLA serve as the functional equivalents of the establishment of NESHAP under CAA section 112. This conclusion was based on the requirements of these programs to consider the same HAP emissions that we regulate under the NESHAP and that these programs provide opportunities for public involvement through the Record of Decision process for Superfund cleanups and the RCRA permitting process for corrective action cleanups.

    The EPA then received the December 8, 2003, petition asserting that the public lacked an opportunity to comment on this new rationale presented in the final rule. The EPA granted reconsideration on this issue in response to the December 8, 2003, petition. Upon further consideration and re-evaluation of petitioners' arguments, we now propose to remove the exemptions for activities conducted under the authority of CERCLA or RCRA from the Site Remediation Rule.

    In listing Site Remediation as a source category under CAA section 112(c)(1) in 1992, we defined it to include the cleanup of sites that possess contaminated media, including National Priorities List Sites and Corrective Action Sites. See the document titled Documentation for Developing the Initial Source Category List, Final Report EPA-450/3-91-030, July 1992, which is available in the rulemaking docket (Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0021). Once the EPA has listed a source category or subcategory under CAA section 112(c)(1), CAA section 112(c)(2) requires the EPA to establish emissions standards under CAA section 112(d) for the source category or subcategory. The EPA, thus, has an obligation to extend its existing technology-based NESHAP to establish emission standards for all such sources in the Site Remediation source category, including those conducted under the authority of CERCLA and RCRA, under CAA section 112(d). The site remediation activities conducted under the authority of CERCLA and RCRA are similar to site remediation activities that were not exempt from the Site Remediation Rule, and the requirements of the Site Remediation Rule are appropriate for and achievable by all site remediation activities.

    Specifically, we are proposing to amend the rule by removing 40 CFR 63.7881(b)(2) and (3), the provisions that expressly exempt site remediations conducted under CERCLA or RCRA from the Site Remediation Rule's requirements. With the removal of this exemption, site remediations conducted under the authority of CERCLA or RCRA will become subject to all applicable requirements of the Site Remediation Rule. These requirements include emission limitations and work practice standards for HAP emitted from site remediation activities. The Rule also establishes requirements to demonstrate initial and continuous compliance with the emission limitations and work practice standards. The Rule applies to sites that clean up remediation material containing 1 megagram per year or more organic HAP listed in Table 1 of the Site Remediation Rule. It specifically requires emissions controls and/or work practice requirements for three groups of emission points: Process vents, remediation material management units (tanks, containers, surface impoundments, oil/water separators, organic/water separators, drain systems), and equipment leaks. In addition, the rule contains monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements.

    In order to make the rule applicable to CERCLA and RCRA site remediations, we are further proposing to remove the requirement in 40 CFR 63.7881(a)(2) that an affected site remediation be co-located with a facility that is regulated by other NESHAP (i.e., by a separate subpart under 40 CFR part 63). This is necessary to ensure that site remediations that are themselves major sources of HAP, without regard for co-location with another facility, are now covered by the rule.

    We are soliciting comment on these proposed rule amendments. The EPA is accepting comment only on the proposed removal of the exemptions for site remediations conducted under the authority of CERCLA or RCRA. The analyses presented in this notice and in supporting documents in the docket do not affect or alter other aspects of the Site Remediation Rule.

    B. What compliance dates are we proposing?

    We are proposing to make the recordkeeping and reporting requirements specified in 40 CFR 63.7950-7953 and 63.7955 applicable to new and existing affected sources conducting site remediations under CERCLA or RCRA on the effective date of the final amendment removing the RCRA/CERCLA exemption. The effective date is the date of publication of the final rule in the Federal Register. We are proposing this applicability date for these recordkeeping and reporting requirements because we believe that the recordkeeping and reporting schedule that applied to new and existing site remediation affected sources in the 2003 final rule is still applicable to new and existing sources that become subject to the Site Remediation Rule as a result of removing the CERCLA and RCRA exemptions. In addition, the available information indicated this requirement should be immediately implementable by the affected facilities.

    The proposed compliance dates for the rule's substantive requirements differ according to whether a site remediation is an existing or new affected source. For the purpose of this proposed rule revision, you are an existing affected source if you commenced construction or reconstruction of the affected source before the date of publication of this proposed rule in the Federal Register and you conduct site remediation activities that are overseen by the EPA or another authorized agency (e.g., a state or local environmental protection agency) under the authorities of CERCLA or RCRA. For these existing affected sources, we are proposing a compliance date for the process vent, remediation material management unit, and equipment leak requirements of 18 months from the effective date of the final amendment removing the RCRA/CERCLA exemption.

    You are a new affected source if you commenced construction or reconstruction of the affected source after the date of publication of this proposed rule in the Federal Register and you conduct site remediation activities that are overseen by the EPA or another authorized agency under the authorities of CERCLA or RCRA. For these new affected sources, we are proposing a compliance date for the process vent, remediation material management unit, and equipment leak requirements on the effective date of the final amendment removing the RCRA/CERCLA exemption.

    IV. Summary of Cost, Environmental, and Economic Impacts and Additional Analyses Conducted A. What are the affected sources?

    We estimate 69 major source facilities will become subject to the Site Remediation Rule as a result of the proposed removal of the RCRA/CERCLA exemption. Based on available information from the RCRA and CERCLA programs, 24 of these facilities are expected to be subject to a limited set of the rule requirements under 40 CFR 63.7881(c)(1) due to the low annual quantity of HAP contained in the remediation material excavated, extracted, pumped, or otherwise removed during the site remediations conducted at the facilities. These facilities will only be required to prepare and maintain written documentation to support the determination that the total annual quantity of the HAP contained in the remediation material excavated, extracted, pumped, or otherwise removed at the facility is less than 1 megagram per year. They are not subject to any other emissions limits, work practices, monitoring, reporting, or recordkeeping requirements. For the remaining 45 facilities, we anticipate each facility will have an annual quantity of HAP in the removed remediation material of 1 megagram or more. For these facilities, we expect that either the facilities already meet the emission control and work practice requirements of the Site Remediation Rule or no emission control requirements or work practice standards will apply because the waste is shipped offsite for treatment and no controls or work practice requirements would be applicable prior to treatment (e.g., contaminated soil before it is shipped offsite for destruction). For these 45 facilities, we anticipate the only new requirements for the Site Remediation Rule will be the initial and ongoing recordkeeping and reporting obligations required by 40 CFR 63.7936 and 40 CFR 63.7950 through 63.7952. These sections describe the recordkeeping and reporting activities required for transferring the remediation material off-site to another facility; the initial notification and on-going notification requirements; the ongoing semi-annual compliance reporting requirements; and recordkeeping requirements for continuous monitoring, planned routine maintenance, and for units that are exempt from control requirements. While new site remediations are likely to be conducted under the authority of CERCLA or RCRA in the future, we are currently not aware of any specific new site remediation facilities that are expected to be constructed.

    The potential scope of this action's impacts on affected entities is discussed in greater depth in the memorandum, National Impacts Associated with the Proposed Amendments to Remove the Exemption for Facilities Performing Site Remediations under CERCLA or RCRA in the NESHAP for Site Remediation, which is available in the rulemaking docket (Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0021).

    B. What are the air quality impacts?

    We do not anticipate any HAP emission reductions from the proposed removal of the RCRA/CERCLA exemption. We expect that facilities newly becoming subject to the rule will either be subject to a limited set of the emissions control requirements of the rule due to the low amount of HAP contained in the remediation material handled, will already meet the emissions control requirements of the rule, or will not have any applicable emissions control requirements for the specific remediation activities and material handled.

    C. What are the cost impacts?

    None of the 69 affected facilities are anticipated to implement additional emissions control to meet the requirements of the Site Remediation Rule and, therefore, we estimate no capital costs associated with the proposed removal of the RCRA/CERCLA exemption. We have estimated the nationwide costs for compliance with the reporting and recordkeeping requirements to be approximately $2.16 million.

    D. What are the economic impacts?

    Both the magnitude of control costs needed to comply with a regulation and the distribution of these costs among affected facilities can have a role in determining how the market will change in response to that regulation. We estimate an annualized cost of $13,000 per affected facility for the facilities with remediation waste containing HAP below the rule annual threshold of 1 megagram and $41,000 per affected facility for the facilities with remediation waste containing the rule threshold amount of 1 megagram or more HAP annually. We, therefore, estimate the average annualized cost per affected facility to be about $31,000 and the total annualized costs for the proposed amendments are estimated to be about $2.16 million. Without detailed industry data, it is not possible to conduct a complete quantitative analysis of economic impacts. However, prior economic impact screening analyses suggest the impacts of the proposed amendment will be minimal. In the economic analysis for this action, Economic Impact Analysis for Site Remediation NESHAP Amendments (Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0021), we found that all firms with compliance costs are estimated to have firm-level cost-to-sales ratios of less than 0.03 percent.

    E. What are the benefits?

    The proposed standards will ensure existing air emissions controls implemented at facilities that become subject to the rule with the removal of the RCRA/CERCLA exemption will continue to reduce emissions to at least the required levels of the rule. In addition, any future remediation activities at these facilities or facilities constructed in the future will include the required levels of HAP emissions control. We have not quantified the monetary benefits associated with the amendment; however, any future avoided emissions will result in improvements in air quality and reduce negative health effects associated with exposure to such air pollution.

    V. Solicitation of Public Comment and Participation

    The EPA seeks full public participation in arriving at its final decisions. The EPA requests public comment on the issues under reconsideration addressed in this notice: (1) The proposed removal of the RCRA and CERCLA exemptions and (2) the proposed removal of the applicability requirement that a site remediation activity be co-located with other source categories subject to other NESHAP. At this time, the EPA is seeking comment only on the amendments described above. The EPA will not respond to any comments addressing any other issues or any other provisions of the final rule or any other rule.

    VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Additional information about these statutes and Executive Orders can be found at http://www2.epa.gov/laws-regulations/laws-and-executive-orders.

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

    This action is not a significant regulatory action and was, therefore, not submitted to the OMB for review.

    B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)

    The information collection activities in this proposed rule have been submitted for approval to the OMB under the PRA. The Information Collection Request (ICR) document that the EPA prepared has been assigned EPA ICR number 2062.06. You can find a copy of the ICR in the docket for this rule, and it is briefly summarized here.

    The information requirements in this rulemaking are based on the notification, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements in the NESHAP General Provisions (40 CFR part 63, subpart A), which are mandatory for all operators subject to national emission standards. These notifications, reports, and records are essential in determining compliance, and are specifically authorized by CAA section 114 (42 U.S.C. 7414). All information submitted to the EPA pursuant to the recordkeeping and reporting requirements for which a claim of confidentiality is made is safeguarded according to agency policies set forth in 40 CFR part 2, subpart B.

    Respondents/affected entities: Unlike a specific industry sector or type of business, the respondents potentially affected by this ICR cannot be easily or definitively identified. Potentially, the Site Remediation Rule may be applicable to any type of business or facility at which a site remediation is conducted to clean up media contaminated with organic HAP when the remediation activities are performed, the authority under which the remediation activities are performed, and the magnitude of the HAP in the remediation material meets the applicability criteria specified in the rule. A site remediation that is subject to this rule potentially may be conducted at any type of privately-owned or government-owned facility at which contamination has occurred due to past events or current activities at the facility. For site remediation performed at sites where the facility has been abandoned and there is no owner, a government agency takes responsibility for the cleanup.

    Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory (42 U.S.C. 7414).

    Estimated number of respondents: 355 total for the source category, of which 69 are estimated to become respondents as a result of this proposed action.

    Frequency of response: Semiannual.

    Total estimated burden: 146,265 total hours (per year) for the source category, of which 13,268 hours are estimated as a result of this proposed action. Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).

    Total estimated cost: $8.9 million total (per year) for the source category, of which approximately $811,000 is estimated as a result of this proposed action. This includes $582,000 total annualized capital or operation and maintenance costs for the source category, of which $0 is estimated as a result of this proposed action.

    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for the EPA's regulations in 40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9.

    Submit your comments on the Agency's need for this information, the accuracy of the provided burden estimates and any suggested methods for minimizing respondent burden to the EPA using the docket identified at the beginning of this rule. You may also send your ICR-related comments to OMB's Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs via email to [email protected], Attention: Desk Officer for the EPA. Since OMB is required to make a decision concerning the ICR between 30 and 60 days after receipt, OMB must receive comments no later than June 13, 2016. The EPA will respond to any ICR-related comments in the final rule.

    C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

    I certify that this action will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA. This action will not impose any requirements on small entities. There are no small entities subject to the requirements of this action. The proposed amendments to the Site Remediation Rule are estimated to affect 69 facilities. Of these 69 facilities, 13 are owned by the federal government, which is not a small entity. The remaining 56 facilities are owned by 46 firms, and the Agency has determined that none of these can be classified as small entities using the Small Business Administration size standards for their respective industries. Details of this analysis are presented in the memorandum, Economic Impact Analysis for Site Remediation NESHAP Amendments, which is available in the docket for this action (Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0021).

    D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)

    This action does not contain an unfunded mandate of $100 million or more as described in UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not significantly or uniquely affect small governments. The action imposes no enforceable duty on any state, local, or tribal governments or the private sector.

    E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

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

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

    This action does not have tribal implications as specified in Executive Order 13175. There are no site remediations at facilities that would be affected by the proposed amendments that are owned or operated by tribal governments. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this action.

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

    The EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those regulatory actions that concern environmental health or safety risks that the EPA has reason to believe may disproportionately affect children, per the definition of “covered regulatory action” in section 2-202 of the Executive Order. This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it does not concern an environmental health risk or safety risk.

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

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

    I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)

    This rulemaking does not involve technical standards.

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

    The EPA believes the human health or environmental risk addressed by this action will not have potential disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects on minority, low-income, or indigenous populations. The proposed amendments increase the level of protection provided to human health or the environment by regulating site remediations previously exempt from the rule.

    List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, Air pollution control, Hazardous substances, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: May 2, 2016. Gina McCarthy, Administrator.

    For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposes to amend Title 40, chapter I, of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) as follows:

    PART 63—NATIONAL EMISSION STANDARDS FOR HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANTS FOR SOURCE CATEGORIES 1. The authority citation for part 63 continues to read as follows: Authority:

    42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    Subpart GGGGG—National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Site Remediation 2. Section 63.7881 is amended by: a. Revising paragraphs (a)(2) introductory text, (a)(2(i) and (ii), (a)(3) introductory text, and (b) introductory text; b. Removing paragraphs (b)(2) and (3); and c. Redesignating paragraphs (b)(4) through (6) as (b)(2) through (4).

    The revisions read as follows:

    § 63.7881 Am I subject to this subpart?

    (a) * * *

    (2) Your site remediation satisfies either paragraph (a)(2)(i) or (ii) of this section.

    (i) Your site remediation is co-located at your facility with one or more other stationary sources that emit HAP and meet an affected source definition specified for a source category that is regulated by another subpart under 40 CFR part 63. This condition applies regardless whether or not the affected stationary source(s) at your facility is subject to the standards under the applicable subpart(s).

    (ii) Your site remediation is not co-located with one or more other stationary sources.

    (3) Your site remediation, either alone or when aggregated with a co-located facility, is a major source of HAP as defined in § 63.2, except as specified in paragraph (a)(3)(i) or (ii) of this section. A major source emits or has the potential to emit any single HAP at the rate of 10 tons (9.07 megagrams) or more per year or any combination of HAP at a rate of 25 tons (22.68 megagrams) or more per year.

    (b) You are not subject to this subpart if your site remediation qualifies for any of one of the exemptions listed in paragraphs (b)(1) through (4) of this section.

    3. Section 63.7882 is amended by revising paragraph (b) and removing paragraph (c).

    The revision reads as follows:

    § 63.7882 What site remediation sources at my facility does this subpart affect?

    (b) Affected existing and new sources. Each affected source for your site is existing if you meet the conditions specified in paragraph (b)(1) or (2) of this section. Each affected source for your site is new if you meet the conditions specified in paragraph (b)(3) or (4) of this section.

    (1) Your affected source is an existing source if you commenced construction or reconstruction of the affected source before July 30, 2002, and you are not conducting the site remediation under the authority specified in either paragraph (b)(5)(i) or (ii) of this section.

    (2) Your affected source is an existing source if you commenced construction or reconstruction of the affected source before May 13, 2016 and you are conducting the site remediation under the authority specified in either paragraph (b)(5)(i) or (ii) of this section.

    (3) Your affected source is a new source if you commenced construction or reconstruction of the affected source on or after July 30, 2002, and you are not conducting the site remediation under the authority specified in either paragraph (b)(5)(i) or (ii) of this section. An affected source is reconstructed if it meets the definition of reconstruction in § 63.2.

    (4) Your affected source is a new source if you commenced construction or reconstruction of the affected source on or after May 13, 2016, and you are conducting the site remediation under the authority specified in either paragraph (b)(5)(i) or (ii) of this section.

    (5) Your site remediation conducted under the authority specified in paragraphs (b)(5)(i) or (ii) is existing or new as specified in paragraphs (b)(1) through (4) of this section.

    (i) Your site remediation is performed under the authority of the Comprehensive Environmental Response and Compensation Liability Act (CERCLA) as a remedial action or a non time-critical removal action.

    (ii) Your site remediation is performed under a Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) corrective action conducted at a treatment, storage and disposal facility (TSDF) that is either required by your permit issued by either the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) or a State program authorized by the EPA under RCRA section 3006; required by orders authorized under RCRA; or required by orders authorized under RCRA section 7003.

    4. Section 63.7883 is amended by revising paragraphs (a), (b), and (c) to read as follows:
    § 63.7883 When do I have to comply with this subpart?

    (a) If you have an existing affected source, you must comply with each emission limitation, work practice standard, and operation and maintenance requirement in this subpart as specified in paragraph (a)(1) or (a)(2), as applicable to your affected source.

    (1) If the affected source meets the conditions specified in § 63.7882(b)(1), you must comply no later than October 9, 2006.

    (2) If the affected source meets the conditions specified in § 63.7882(b)(2), you must comply no later than [insert date 18 months after date of final rule publication in the Federal Register].

    (b) If you have a new affected source that manages remediation material other than a radioactive mixed waste as defined in § 63.7957, then you must meet the compliance date specified in one of paragraphs (b)(1) through (4) of this section, as applicable to your affected source.

    (1) If the affected source meets the conditions specified in § 63.7882(b)(3) and the affected source's initial startup date is on or before October 8, 2003, you must comply with each emission limitation, work practice standard, and operation and maintenance requirement in this subpart that applies to you by October 8, 2003.

    (2) If the affected source meets the conditions specified in § 63.7882(b)(3) and the affected source's initial startup date is after October 8, 2003, you must comply with each emission limitation, work practice standard, and operation and maintenance requirement in this subpart that applies to you upon initial startup.

    (3) If the affected source meets the conditions specified in § 63.7882(b)(4) and the affected source's initial startup date is on or before [insert date of final rule publication in the Federal Register], you must comply with each emission limitation, work practice standard, and operation and maintenance requirement in this subpart that applies to you by [insert date of final rule publication in the Federal Register].

    (4) If the affected source meets the conditions specified in § 63.7882(b)(4) and the affected source's initial startup date is after [insert date of final rule publication in the Federal Register], you must comply with each emission limitation, work practice standard, and operation and maintenance requirement in this subpart that applies to you upon initial startup.

    (c) If you have a new affected source that manages remediation material that is a radioactive mixed waste as defined in § 63.7957, then you must meet the compliance date specified in one of paragraphs (c)(1) through (4) of this section, as applicable to your affected source.

    (1) If the affected source meets the conditions specified in § 63.7882(b)(3) and the affected source's initial startup date is on or before October 8, 2003, you must comply with each emission limitation, work practice standard, and operation and maintenance requirement in this subpart that applies to you no later than October 9, 2006.

    (2) If the affected source meets the conditions specified in § 63.7882(b)(3) and the affected source's initial startup date is after October 8, 2003, you must comply with each emission limitation, work practice standard, and operation and maintenance requirement in this subpart that applies to you upon initial startup.

    (3) If the affected source meets the conditions specified in § 63.7882(b)(4) and the affected source's initial startup date is on or before [insert date of final rule publication in the Federal Register], you must comply with each emission limitation, work practice standard, and operation and maintenance requirement in this subpart that applies to you no later than [insert date of final rule publication in the Federal Register].

    (4) If the affected source meets the conditions specified in § 63.7882(b)(4) and the affected source's initial startup date is after [insert date of final rule publication in the Federal Register], you must comply with each emission limitation, work practice standard, and operation and maintenance requirement in this subpart that applies to you upon initial startup.

    5. Section 63.7950 is amended by revising paragraphs (b) and (c) to read as follows:
    § 63.7950 What notifications must I submit and when?

    (b)(1) As specified in § 63.9(b)(2), if you start up your affected source before October 8, 2003 and you are not conducting the site remediation under the authority specified in either § 63.7882(b)(5)(i) or (ii), you must submit an Initial Notification not later than 120 calendar days after October 8, 2003.

    (2) As specified in § 63.9(b)(2), if you start up your affected source before May 13, 2016 and you are conducting the site remediation under the authority specified in either § 63.7882(b)(5)(i) or (ii), you must submit an Initial Notification not later than 120 calendar days after [insert date of final rule publication in the Federal Register].

    (c) As specified in § 63.9(b)(3), if your affected source is new or reconstructed as specified in § 63.7882 (b)(3) or (4) and you start your new or reconstructed affected source on or after the respective effective date, you must submit an Initial Notification no later than 120 calendar days after initial startup.

    [FR Doc. 2016-10988 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 47 CFR Part 11 [PS Docket No. 15-94; PS Docket No. 15-91; DA 16-482] Rules Regarding the Emergency Alert System and Wireless Emergency Alerts AGENCY:

    Federal Communications Commission.

    ACTION:

    Proposed rule; extension of comment and reply comment deadlines.

    SUMMARY:

    In this document, the Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau (Bureau) extends the deadline for filing comments and reply comments on its Emergency Alert System (EAS) and Wireless Emergency Alerts (WEA) Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (Emergency Alerting NPRM), which sought comment on proposed changes in four areas: Improving alerting organization at the state and local levels; building effective community-based public safety exercises; ensuring that alerting mechanisms are able to leverage advancements in technology, including IP-based technologies; and securing the EAS against accidental misuse and malicious intrusion.

    DATES:

    The comment period for the proposed rule published at 81 FR 15792, March 24, 2016 is extended. Comments are due on or before June 8, 2016, and reply comments are due on or before July 8, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments to the Emergency Alerting NPRM, identified by PS Docket Nos. 15-94 and 15-91, by any of the following methods:

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

    Federal Communications Commission's Web site: http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs2/. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.

    • Paper Filers: Parties that choose to file by paper must file an original and one copy of each filing. If more than one docket or rulemaking number appears in the caption of this proceeding, filers must submit two additional copies for each additional docket or rulemaking number. Filings can be sent by hand or messenger delivery, by commercial overnight courier, or by first-class or overnight U.S. Postal Service mail. All filings must be addressed to the Commission's Secretary, Office of the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission. All hand-delivered or messenger-delivered paper filings for the Commission's Secretary must be delivered to FCC Headquarters at 445 12th St. SW., Room TW-A325, Washington, DC 20554. The filing hours are 8:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. All hand deliveries must be held together with rubber bands or fasteners. Any envelopes and boxes must be disposed of before entering the building. Commercial overnight mail (other than U.S. Postal Service Express Mail and Priority Mail) must be sent to 9300 East Hampton Drive, Capitol Heights, MD 20743. U.S. Postal Service first-class, Express, and Priority mail must be addressed to 445 12th St. SW., Washington, DC 20554.

    People with Disabilities: Contact the FCC to request reasonable accommodations (accessible format documents, sign language interpreters, CART, etc.) by email: [email protected] or phone: 202-418-0530 or TTY: 202-418-0432.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Lisa Fowlkes, Deputy Bureau Chief, Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau, at (202) 418-7452, or by email at [email protected].

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This is a summary of the Bureau's Order in PS Docket Nos. 15-94 and 15-91, DA 16-482, adopted and released on May 5, 2016, and pertaining to the proposed rules published March 24, 2016 (81 FR 15792). The complete text of this document is available for public inspection and copying from 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. ET Monday through Thursday or from 8 a.m. to 11:30 a.m. ET on Fridays in the FCC Reference Information Center, 445 12th Street SW., Room CY-A257, Washington, DC 20554. The complete text is also available on the Commission's Web site at http://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2016/db0505/DA-16-482A1.pdf, or by using the search function on the ECFS Web page at http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/ecfs/.

    Synopsis

    The Bureau released an Order on May 5, 2016, which extends the comment and reply comment filing deadlines for the Emergency Alerting NPRM, 81 FR 15792, March 24, 2016. The Order responds to requests from Monroe Electronics, Inc., the National Alliance of State Broadcasters Associations, the Broadcast Warning Working Group, and the Washington State SECC seeking an extension of the comment period. Pursuant to Sections 4(i) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 154(i), and Sections 0.191, 0.392, and 1.46 of the Commission's rules, 47 CFR 0.191, 0.392, and 1.46, the Bureau extends the deadline for filing comments until June 8, 2016, and extends the deadline for filing reply comments until July 8, 2016.

    Federal Communications Commission. Lisa M. Fowlkes, Deputy Bureau Chief, Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau.
    [FR Doc. 2016-11232 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
    FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 47 CFR Part 90 [PS Docket 13-239, PS Docket 11-60; DA 16-463] Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau Seeks Comment on Wireless Carriers' Proposal To Increase Resilience and Enhance Information Sharing During Disasters AGENCY:

    Federal Communications Commission.

    ACTION:

    Proposed rule.

    SUMMARY:

    This document seeks comment on the ex parte proposal made by AT&T, Sprint, T-Mobile, US Cellular, and Verizon, together with CTIA (collectively, “the carriers”), in which they announce a “Wireless Resiliency Cooperative Framework” described as “a voluntary initiative that will enhance coordination and communication to advance wireless service continuity and information sharing during and after emergencies and disasters.”

    DATES:

    Comments are due on or before May 31, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    See the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Renee Roland, Special Counsel, Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau, at (202) 418-2352, or Lauren Kravetz, Chief of Staff, Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau, at (202) 418-7944.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This is a summary of the Commission's document, DA 16-463, released on April 28, 2016. The document is available for download at http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/. The complete text of this document also available for inspection and copying during normal business hours in the FCC Reference Information Center, Portals II, 445 12th Street SW., Room CY-A257, Washington, DC 20554. To request materials in accessible formats for people with disabilities (Braille, large print, electronic files, audio format), send an email to [email protected] or call the Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau at (202) 418-0530 (voice), (202) 418-0432 (tty).

    1. On April 27, 2016, the carriers filed an ex parte letter detailing a five prong approach to enhance industry coordination to “facilitate greater network resiliency and faster restoration of service” which they assert will “obviate the need for legislative action or inflexible rules that could have unintended consequences.” Specifically, the five prongs include: (1) Providing for reasonable roaming under disaster arrangements when technically feasible; (2) fostering mutual aid during emergencies; (3) enhancing municipal preparedness and restoration; (4) increasing consumer readiness and preparation; and (5) improving public awareness and stakeholder communications on service and restoration status. Under each prong, the carriers provide specific actions that they will undertake designed to “enhance coordination among wireless carriers and all key stakeholders, improving information sharing and making wireless network resiliency more robust.”

    2. In its 2013 Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in this docket (Resiliency Notice), the Commission sought comment on, inter alia, the means to enable greater resiliency and consumer transparency with respect to the performance of wireless communications networks during disasters, including seeking comment on mandatory disclosures or the use of voluntary industry measures. 78 FR 69018, November 18, 2013. In addition, since the Resiliency Notice was issued and the record compiled, the Commission's Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau has engaged in a number of meetings with a variety of stakeholders to understand the data that different segments value in evaluating the overall resiliency of wireless networks and outage impacts, as well as other factors in developing more resilient wireless networks. Accordingly, the Commission seeks comment on the carriers' “Wireless Resiliency Cooperative Framework” in light of the aims of the Resiliency Notice and the associated record.

    3. Interested parties may file comments until fifteen days after the publication of this document in the Federal Register. All pleadings are to reference PS Dockets 13-239 and 11-60. This proceeding is a “permit-but-disclose” proceeding in accordance with the Commission's ex parte rules.1 Persons making ex parte presentations must file a copy of any written presentation or a memorandum summarizing any oral presentation within two business days after the presentation (unless a different deadline applicable to the Sunshine period applies). Persons making oral ex parte presentations are reminded that memoranda summarizing the presentation must (1) list all persons attending or otherwise participating in the meeting at which the ex parte presentation was made, and (2) summarize all data presented and arguments made during the presentation. If the presentation consisted in whole or in part of the presentation of data or arguments already reflected in the presenter's written comments, memoranda or other filings in the proceeding, the presenter may provide citations to such data or arguments in his or her prior comments, memoranda, or other filings (specifying the relevant page and/or paragraph numbers where such data or arguments can be found) in lieu of summarizing them in the memorandum. Documents shown or given to Commission staff during ex parte meetings are deemed to be written ex parte presentations and must be filed consistent with section 1.1206(b). In proceedings governed by section 1.49(f) or for which the Commission has made available a method of electronic filing, written ex parte presentations and memoranda summarizing oral ex parte presentations, and all attachments thereto, must be filed through the electronic comment filing system available for that proceeding, and must be filed in their native format (e.g., .doc, .xml, .ppt, searchable .pdf). Participants in this proceeding should familiarize themselves with the Commission's ex parte rules.

    1Id. para.74.

    4. Comments may be filed using the Commission's Electronic Comment Filing System (ECFS). See Electronic Filing of Documents in Rulemaking Proceedings, 63 FR 24121 (1998).

    Electronic Filers: Comments may be filed electronically using the Internet by accessing the ECFS: http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs2/.

    Paper Filers: Parties that choose to file by paper must file an original and one copy of each filing. If more than one docket or rulemaking number appears in the caption of this proceeding, filers must submit two additional copies for each additional docket or rulemaking number.

    5. Filings can be sent by hand or messenger delivery, by commercial overnight courier, or by first-class or overnight U.S. Postal Service mail. All filings must be addressed to the Commission's Secretary, Office of the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission.

    • All hand-delivered or messenger-delivered paper filings for the Commission's Secretary must be delivered to FCC Headquarters at 445 12th St. SW., Room TW-A325, Washington, DC 20554. The filing hours are 8:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. All hand deliveries must be held together with rubber bands or fasteners. Any envelopes and boxes must be disposed of before entering the building.

    • Commercial overnight mail (other than U.S. Postal Service Express Mail and Priority Mail) must be sent to 9300 East Hampton Drive, Capitol Heights, MD 20743.

    • U.S. Postal Service first-class, Express, and Priority mail must be addressed to 445 12th Street SW., Washington, DC 20554.

    6. To request materials in accessible formats for people with disabilities (Braille, large print, electronic files, audio format), send an email to [email protected] or call the Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau at (202) 418-0530 (voice), (202) 418-0432 (tty).

    7. For further information, contact: Renee Roland, Special Counsel, Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau, at (202) 418-2352, [email protected], or Lauren Kravetz, Chief of Staff, Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau, at (202) 418-7944, [email protected].

    Federal Communications Commission. Lisa M. Fowlkes, Deputy Bureau Chief, Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau.
    [FR Doc. 2016-11233 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration 49 CFR Parts 191 and 192 [Docket No. PHMSA-2011-0023] RIN 2137-AE72 Pipeline Safety: Safety of Gas Transmission and Gathering Pipelines AGENCY:

    Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Proposed rule; extension of comment period.

    SUMMARY:

    On April 8, 2016, (81 FR 20722) PHMSA published in the Federal Register a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) titled: “Pipeline Safety: Safety of Gas Transmission and Gathering Pipelines” seeking comments on changes to the pipeline safety regulations for gas transmission and gathering pipelines. PHMSA has received several requests to extend the comment period. PHMSA is granting these requests and extending the comment period from June 7, 2016, to July 7, 2016.

    DATES:

    The closing date for filing comments is extended from June 7, 2016, to July 7, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Comments should reference Docket No. PHMSA-2011-0023 and may be submitted in the following ways:

    E-Gov Web site: http://www.Regulations.gov. This site allows the public to enter comments on any Federal Register notice issued by any agency.

    Fax: 1-202-493-2251.

    Mail: DOT Docket Management System: U.S. DOT, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001.

    Hand Delivery: U.S. DOT Docket Management System; West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001, between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

    Instructions: You should identify the Docket No. PHMSA-2011-0023 at the beginning of your comments. If you submit your comments by mail, please submit two copies. To receive confirmation that PHMSA received your comments, include a self-addressed stamped postcard. Internet users may submit comments to the Docket at http://www.regulations.gov.

    Note:

    Comments are posted without changes or edits to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided. There is a privacy statement published on http://www.regulations.gov.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For further information contact Mike Israni at 202-366-4571 or by email at [email protected].

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background

    On April 8, 2016, PHMSA issued a NPRM that would make amendments to the pipeline safety regulations for gas transmission and gathering pipelines. Since the issuance of the NPRM, PHMSA has received comment extension requests from the following entities:

    • American Gas Association • American Petroleum Institute • American Public Gas Association • California Public Utilities Commission • Consol Energy Inc. • Gas Processors Association • Independent Petroleum Association of American • Interstate Natural Gas Association of America • Marcellus Shale Coalition • National Association of Pipeline Safety Representatives • National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners • New York State Public Service Commission • Texas Pipeline Association

    PHMSA believes that extension of the comment period is warranted based on the information provided in these requests. Therefore, PHMSA has extended the comment period from June 7, 2016, to July 7, 2016.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on May 9, 2016, under authority delegated in 49 CFR 1.97. Alan K. Mayberry, Acting Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety.
    [FR Doc. 2016-11240 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-60-P
    81 93 Friday, May 13, 2016 Notices DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Agricultural Marketing Service [Doc. No. AMS-SC-16-0044; SC16-900-1 NC] Generic Fruit Crops; Notice of Request for Extension and Revision of a Currently Approved Information Collection AGENCY:

    Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA.

    ACTION:

    Notice and request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35), this notice announces the Agricultural Marketing Service's (AMS) intention to request an extension and revision to the approved forms and generic information collection for marketing orders covering fruit crops.

    DATES:

    Comments on this notice are due by July 12, 2016 to be assured of consideration.

    ADDRESSES:

    Interested persons are invited to submit written comments concerning this notice. Comments must be sent to the Docket Clerk, Marketing Order and Agreement Division, Specialty Crops Program, AMS, USDA, 1400 Independence Avenue SW., STOP 0237, Washington, DC 20250-0237; Fax: (202) 720-8938; or Internet: www.regulations.gov. Comments should reference the docket number and the date and page number of this issue of the Federal Register and will be available for public inspection in the Office of the Docket Clerk during regular business hours, or can be viewed at: www.regulations.gov. All comments submitted in response to this notice will be included in the record and will be made available to the public. Please be advised that the identity of individuals or entities submitting the comments will be made public on the internet at the address provided above.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Andrew Hatch, Marketing Order and Agreement Division, Specialty Crops Program, AMS, USDA, 1400 Independence Avenue SW., STOP 0237, Room 1406-S, Washington, DC 20250-0237; Telephone: (202) 720-6862; Fax: (202) 720-8938; or Email: [email protected]

    Small businesses may request information on this notice by contacting Antoinette Carter, Marketing Order and Agreement Division, Specialty Crops Program, AMS, USDA, 1400 Independence Avenue SW., STOP 0237, Room 1406-S, Washington, DC 20250-0237; Telephone (202) 720-2491; Fax: (202) 720-8938; or Email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Title: Marketing Orders for Fruit Crops.

    OMB Number: 0581-0189.

    Expiration Date of Approval: December 31, 2016.

    Type of Request: Extension and Revision of a currently approved information collection.

    Abstract: Marketing orders provide an opportunity for producers of fresh fruits, vegetables and specialty crops, in specified production areas, to work together to solve marketing problems that cannot be solved individually. This notice covers the following marketing order citations: 7 CFR parts 905 (Florida citrus), 906 (Texas citrus), 915 (Florida avocados), 920 (California kiwifruit), 922 (Washington apricots), 923 (Washington cherries), 924 (Oregon/Washington prunes), 925 (California table grapes), 927 (Oregon/Washington pears), and 929 (Cranberries grown in 10 States). Marketing order regulations help ensure adequate supplies of high quality product and adequate returns to producers. Marketing orders are authorized under the Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act of 1937 (Act), as amended (7 U.S.C. 601-674). The Secretary of Agriculture is authorized to oversee the marketing order operations and issue regulations recommended by a committee of representatives from each commodity industry.

    The information collection requirements in this request are essential to carry out the intent of the Act, to provide the respondents the type of service they request, and to administer the marketing orders. Under the Act, marketing orders may authorize: Production and marketing research, including paid advertising; volume regulations; reserves, including pools and producer allotments; container regulations; and quality control. Assessments are levied on handlers regulated under the marketing orders.

    USDA requires several forms to be filed to enable the administration of each marketing order. These include forms covering the selection process for industry members to serve on a marketing order's committee or board and ballots used in referenda to amend or continue marketing orders.

    Under Federal marketing orders, producers and handlers are nominated by their peers to serve as representatives on a committee or board which administers each program. Nominees must provide information on their qualifications to serve on the committee or board. Qualified nominees are then appointed by the Secretary. Formal rulemaking amendments must be approved in referenda conducted by USDA and the Secretary. For the purposes of this action, ballots are considered information collections and are subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act. If a marketing order is amended, handlers are asked to sign an agreement indicating their willingness to abide by the provisions of the amended marketing order.

    Some forms are required to be filed with the committee or board. The marketing orders and their rules and regulations authorize the respective commodities' committees and boards, the agencies responsible for local administration of the marketing orders, to require handlers and producers to submit certain information. Much of the information is compiled in aggregate and provided to the respective industries to assist in marketing decisions. The committees and boards have developed forms as a means for persons to file required information relating to supplies, shipments, and dispositions of their respective commodities, and other information needed to effectively carry out the purpose of the Act and their respective orders, and these forms are utilized accordingly.

    The forms covered under this information collection require respondents to provide the minimum information necessary to effectively carry out the requirements of the marketing orders, and use of these forms is necessary to fulfill the intent of the Act as expressed in the marketing orders' rules and regulations.

    The information collected is used only by authorized employees of the committees and authorized representatives of the USDA, including AMS, Specialty Crops Program's regional and headquarters' staff. Authorized committee or board employees are the primary users of the information and AMS is the secondary user.

    Estimate of Burden: Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average .31 hours per response.

    Respondents: Producers, handlers, processors, cooperatives, and public members.

    Estimated Number of Respondents: 15,950.

    Estimated Number of Responses: 26,761.

    Estimated Number of Responses per Respondent: 1.68.

    Estimated Total Annual Burden on Respondents: 8,294 hours.

    Comments are invited on: (1) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

    Comments should reference OMB No. 0581-0189 Generic OMB Fruit Crops, and be sent to the USDA in care of the Docket Clerk at the address above. All comments received will be available for public inspection during regular business hours at the same address.

    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.

    AMS is committed to compliance 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.

    A 60-day comment period is provided to allow interested persons to respond to the notice.

    Dated: May 10, 2016. Elanor Starmer, Administrator, Agricultural Marketing Service.
    [FR Doc. 2016-11319 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
    DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Agricultural Marketing Service [Doc. No. AMS-LPS-16-0032] Request for Revision to and Extension of a Currently Approved Information Collection AGENCY:

    Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA.

    ACTION:

    Notice and request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35), this notice announces the Agricultural Marketing Service's (AMS) intention to request approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for an extension of and revision to the currently approved information collection “Livestock, Poultry, Meat, and Grain Market News Reports” (0186-0033), which AMS is proposing to retitle as the “Livestock, Poultry, and Grain Market News.”

    DATES:

    Comments received by July 12, 2016.

    Additional Information or Comments: Interested persons are invited to submit comments concerning this information collection document. Comments should be submitted online at www.regulations.gov or sent to Anjeanette Johnson, Market News Reporter; Livestock, Poultry, and Grain Market News Division; Livestock, Poultry, and Seed Program; Agricultural Marketing Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1400 Independence Ave. SW., Room 2619-S, STOP 0252; Washington, DC 20250-0252; telephone (202) 692-0086; fax (202) 690-3732; or email [email protected] All comments should reference the docket number (AMS-LPS-16-0032), date, and page number of this issue in the Federal Register. All comments received will be posted without change, including any personal information provided, online at www.regulations.gov and will be made available for public inspection at the above physical address during regular business hours.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Title: Livestock, Poultry, and Grain Market News.

    OMB Number: 0581-0033.

    Expiration Date of Approval: September 30, 2016.

    Type of Request: Revision to and extension of a currently approved information collection.

    Abstract: The Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946, as amended, 7 U.S.C. 1621-1627, authorizes the Secretary of Agriculture to provide up-to-the-minute nationwide coverage of prices, supply, demands, trends, movement, and other pertinent information affecting the trading of livestock, poultry, meat, eggs, grain, and their related products, as well as locally produced and marketed products. The market reports compiled and disseminated by the Livestock, Poultry, and Grain Market News (LPGMN) Division of AMS' Livestock, Poultry, and Seed Program provide current, unbiased, and factual information to all stakeholders in the U.S. agricultural industry. LPGMN reports assist producers, processors, wholesalers, retailers, and others to make informed production, purchasing, and sales decisions. LPGMN reports also promote orderly marketing by placing buyers and sellers on a more equal negotiation basis.

    LPGMN reporters communicate with buyers and sellers of livestock, poultry, meat, eggs, grain, local products, and their respective commodities on a daily basis to accomplish LPGMN's mission. This communication and information gathering is accomplished through the use of telephone conversations, facsimile transmissions, face-to-face meetings, and email messages. The information provided by respondents initiates LPGMN reporting, which must be timely, accurate, unbiased, and continuous if it is to be meaningful to the industry. AMS collects information on price, supply, demand, trends, movement, and other information of livestock, poultry, meat, grain, eggs, local products, and their respective commodities. LPGMN uses one OMB approved form, PY-90: “Monthly Dried Egg Solids Stocks Report,” to collect inventory information from commercially dried egg product plants throughout the U.S. Cooperating firms voluntarily submit this form to LPGMN primarily via email and facsimile transmissions.

    This collection was previously titled “Livestock, Poultry, Meat, and Grain Market News Reports” (0186-0033), and AMS is proposing to retitle the collection as “Livestock, Poultry, and Grain Market News” collection.

    Estimate of Burden: Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 0.0600 hours per response.

    Respondents: Business or other for-profit and farms.

    Estimated Number of Respondents: 2,990.

    Estimated Number of Responses per Respondent: 93.

    Estimated Total Annual Responses: 279,119.

    Estimated Total Annual Burden on Respondents: 16,110.

    Comments are invited on: (1) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

    All responses to this notice will be summarized and included in the request for OMB approval. All comments will become a matter of public record.

    Dated: May 10, 2016. Elanor Starmer, Administrator, Agricultural Marketing Service.
    [FR Doc. 2016-11318 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-02-P
    DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service [Docket No. APHIS-2015-0103] General Conference Committee of the National Poultry Improvement Plan; Solicitation for Membership; Correction AGENCY:

    Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA.

    ACTION:

    Notice; correction.

    SUMMARY:

    We are correcting an error in a notice announcing that the Secretary of Agriculture is soliciting nominations for the election of members and alternates to the General Conference Committee of the National Poultry Improvement Plan. The notice was published in the Federal Register on March 1, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Dr. Denise L. Brinson, Senior Coordinator, National Poultry Improvement Plan, VS, APHIS, 1506 Klondike Road, Suite 101, Conyers, GA 30094-5173; phone (770) 922-3496; fax (770) 922-3498; email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    In a notice 1 published in the Federal Register on March 1, 2016 (81 FR 10568, Docket No. APHIS-2015-0103), we announced that the Secretary of Agriculture is soliciting nominations for the election of members and alternates to the General Conference Committee (the Committee) of the National Poultry Improvement Plan.

    1 To view the notice and related documents, go to http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2015-0103.

    In the notice, we stated that the terms will expire for three of the current regional members of the Committee as well as the member-at-large in July 2016. However, the term for the member-at-large does not expire until July 2018. The membership solicitation should have omitted the member-at-large.

    Done in Washington, DC, this 9th day of May 2016. Michael C. Gregoire, Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.
    [FR Doc. 2016-11314 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-34-P
    DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service [Docket No. APHIS-2015-0102] Notice of Availability of an Evaluation of the Classical Swine Fever, Swine Vesicular Disease, African Swine Fever, Foot-and-Mouth Disease, and Rinderpest Status of Malta AGENCY:

    Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA.

    ACTION:

    Notice of availability.

    SUMMARY:

    We are advising the public that we are proposing to recognize the Republic of Malta as being free of swine vesicular disease, African swine fever, foot-and-mouth disease, and rinderpest subject to conditions in the regulations governing the importation of certain animals and animal products into the United States. We are also proposing adding the Republic of Malta to the APHIS-defined European classical swine fever region that is subject to conditions described in the regulations. We are proposing these actions based on a risk evaluation we have prepared in connection with this action, which we are making available for review and comment.

    DATES:

    We will consider all comments that we receive on or before July 12, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments by either of the following methods:

    Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2015-0102.

    Postal Mail/Commercial Delivery: Send your comment to Docket No. APHIS-2015-0102, 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-2015-0102 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:

    Dr. Chip Wells, Senior Staff Veterinarian, Regionalization Evaluation Services, National Import Export Services, VS, APHIS, USDA, 4700 River Road Unit 38, Riverdale, MD 20737-1231; [email protected]; (301) 851-3317.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The regulations in 9 CFR part 94 (referred to below as the regulations) govern the importation of certain animals and animal products into the United States to prevent the introduction of various animal diseases, including African swine fever (ASF), classical swine fever (CSF), foot-and-mouth disease (FMD), swine vesicular disease (SVD), and rinderpest.1 The regulations prohibit or restrict the importation of live ruminants and swine, and products from these animals, from regions where these diseases are considered to exist.

    1 The World Organization for Animal Health (OIE) recognizes rinderpest as having been globally eradicated, and recommends that countries not impose any rinderpest-related conditions on import or transit of livestock and livestock products. In addition, the OIE recently delisted SVD as a disease of concern for international trade. However, APHIS continues to regulate for rinderpest and SVD through its import regulations for animals and animal products.

    Within part 94, § 94.1 contains requirements governing the importation of ruminants and swine from regions where rinderpest or FMD exists and the importation of the meat of any ruminants or swine from regions where rinderpest or FMD exists to prevent the introduction of either disease into the United States. We consider rinderpest and FMD to exist in all regions except those listed in accordance with paragraph (a) of that section as free of rinderpest and FMD.

    Section 94.8 contains requirements governing the importation of pork and pork products from regions where ASF exists or is reasonably believed to exist.

    Section 94.9 contains requirements governing the importation of pork and pork products from regions where CSF exists. Section 94.10 contains importation requirements for swine from regions where CSF is considered to exist and designates the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS)-defined European CSF region as a single region of low-risk for CSF. Section 94.31 contains requirements governing the importation of pork, pork products, and swine from the APHIS-defined European CSF region. We consider CSF to exist in all regions of the world except those listed in accordance with paragraph (a) of § 94.9 2 as free of the disease.

    2 The list of regions comprising the APHIS-defined European CSF region and the lists of regions considered free of FMD, ASF, SVD, and rinderpest are located on the APHIS Web site at: http://www.aphis.usda.gov/wps/portal/aphis/ourfocus/importexport?1dmy&urile=wcm%3apath%3a%2Faphis_content_library%2Fsa_our_focus%2Fsa_animal_health%2Fsa_import_into_us%2Fct_animal_disease_status.

    Section 94.11 of the regulations contains requirements governing the importation of meat of any ruminants or swine from regions that have been determined to be free of rinderpest and FMD, but that are subject to certain restrictions because of their proximity to or trading relationships with rinderpest- or FMD-affected regions. Such regions are listed in accordance with paragraph (a) of that section.

    Section 94.12 of the regulations contains requirements governing the importation of pork or pork products from regions where SVD exists. We consider SVD to exist in all regions of the world except those listed in accordance with paragraph (a) of that section as free of SVD.

    Section 94.13 contains importation requirements governing the importation of pork or pork products from regions that have been declared free of SVD as provided in § 94.12(a) but supplement their national pork supply by the importation of fresh (chilled or frozen) meat of animals from regions where SVD is considered to exist, or have a common border with such regions, or have trade practices that are less restrictive than are acceptable to the United States. Such regions are listed in accordance with paragraph (a) of § 94.13.

    Section 94.14 states that no swine which are moved from or transit any region in which SVD is known to exist may be imported into the United States except wild swine imported in accordance with § 94.14(b).

    Section 94.17 sets forth restrictions for importation of dry-cured pork products from regions where ASF, CSF, SVD, FMD, or rinderpest exists.

    The regulations in 9 CFR part 92, § 92.2, contain requirements for requesting the recognition of the animal health status of a region (as well as for the approval of the export of a particular type of animal or animal product to the United States from a foreign region). If, after review and evaluation of the information submitted in support of the request, APHIS believes the request can be safely granted, APHIS will make its evaluation available for public comment through a document published in the Federal Register. Following the close of the comment period, APHIS will review all comments received and will make a final determination regarding the request that will be detailed in another document published in the Federal Register.

    Under the current regulations, Malta is considered to be a region affected with CSF, SVD, ASF, FMD, and rinderpest. As such, APHIS restricts the importation of susceptible species and products derived from susceptible species from Malta.

    In July 2006, the Government of the Republic of Malta requested that APHIS evaluate its CSF, SVD, ASF, FMD, and rinderpest status. In response to this request, we conducted a qualitative risk evaluation to evaluate Malta with respect to these diseases. This evaluation included site visits to farms and processing facilities in Malta, as well as examinations of Malta's capabilities with respect to veterinary control and oversight, disease history and vaccination, livestock demographics and traceability, epidemiological separation from potential sources of infection, disease surveillance, diagnostic laboratory capabilities, and emergency preparedness and response. Malta also provided additional information requested by APHIS in order to complete the evaluation in 2008 and 2014.

    Based on the results of our evaluation, APHIS recognizes Malta to be free of SVD, ASF, FMD, and rinderpest, and low risk for CSF. APHIS has also determined that the surveillance, prevention, and control measures implemented by the European Union (EU) and Malta, an EU Member State since 2004, are sufficient to minimize the likelihood of introducing CSF, SVD, ASF, FMD, and rinderpest into the United States via imports of species or products susceptible to these diseases. Additionally, our determinations support adding Malta to the Web-based list of regions comprising the APHIS-defined European CSF region, which APHIS considers to be low risk for CSF, and to the respective Web-based lists of regions APHIS considers free of SVD, ASF, FMD, and rinderpest. Accordingly, we consider the risk of infected live swine and ruminants, or commodities derived from these species, entering the United States from Malta under mitigated conditions and exposing U.S. livestock to disease to be very low.

    Therefore, in accordance with § 92.2(e), we are announcing the availability of our risk evaluation of the CSF, SVD, ASF, FMD, and rinderpest status of Malta for public review and comment. We are also announcing the availability of an environmental assessment (EA) and a finding of no significant impact (FONSI) 3 which have been prepared in accordance with: (1) The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), as amended (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), (2) regulations of the Council on Environmental Quality for implementing the procedural provision of NEPA (40 CFR parts 1500-1508), (3) USDA regulations implementing NEPA (7 CFR part 1b), and (4) APHIS' NEPA Implementing Procedures (7 CFR part 372). The evaluation, EA, and FONSI may be viewed on the Regulations.gov Web site or in our reading room. (Instructions for accessing Regulations.gov and information on the location and hours of the reading room are provided under the heading ADDRESSES at the beginning of this notice.) The documents are also available by contacting the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

    3 The FONSI for Malta incorporates by reference an EA prepared for Slovakia that addresses the potential environmental impacts of CSF, FMD, SVD, and rinderpest for Slovakia and other EU Member States.

    Information submitted in support of Malta's request is available by contacting the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

    After reviewing any comments we receive, we will announce our decision regarding the disease status of Malta under consideration with respect to CSF, SVD, ASF, FMD, and rinderpest and the import status of susceptible animals and products of such animals in a subsequent notice.

    Authority:

    7 U.S.C. 450, 7701-7772, 7781-7786, and 8301-8317; 21 U.S.C. 136 and 136a; 31 U.S.C. 9701; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 371.4.

    Done in Washington, DC, this 9th day of May 2016. Michael C. Gregoire, Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.
    [FR Doc. 2016-11316 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-34-P
    COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS Sunshine Act Meeting Notice AGENCY:

    United States Commission on Civil Rights.

    ACTION:

    Notice of Commission briefing.

    DATES:

    Friday, May 20, 2016, at 9 a.m. EDT.

    ADDRESSES:

    Place: National Place Building, 1331 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., 11th Floor, Suite 1150, Washington, DC 20245 (Entrance on F Street NW).

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Gerson Gomez, Media Advisor at telephone: (202) 376-8371, TTY: (202) 376-8116 or email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This briefing and business meeting are open to the public. The public may listen on the following toll-free number: 1-888-572-7034. Please provide the operator with conference ID number 7822144.

    Hearing-impaired persons who will attend the briefing and require the services of a sign language interpreter should contact Pamela Dunston at (202) 376-8105 or at [email protected] at least seven business days before the scheduled date of the meeting. During the briefing, Commissioners will ask questions and discuss the briefing topic with the panelists. The public may submit written comments on the topic of the briefing to the above address for 30 days after the briefing. Please direct your comments to the attention of the “Staff Director” and clearly mark “Briefing Comments Inside” on the outside of the envelope. Please note we are unable to return any comments or submitted materials. Comments may also be submitted by email to [email protected]

    Briefing Agenda Topic: Public Education Funding Inequality in an Era of Increasing Concentration of Poverty and Resegregation I. Introductory Remarks—9:00 a.m.-9:15 a.m. II. Panel One: Introduction to Public School Financing and Equity—9:15 a.m.-10:35 a.m. Speakers' Remarks • Joseph Rogers, Director of Public Engagement/Senior Researcher, Campaign for Educational Equity, Teachers College, Columbia University • Danielle Farrie, Research Director, Education Law Center • Beth Schiavano-Narvaez, Superintendent, Hartford, CT Public Schools • David Volkman, Executive Assistant Secretary of Education for Pennsylvania • Jamella Miller, Parent, William Penn School District Questions from Commissioners III. Panel Two: Funding Impact on Low-Income Children of Color—10:35 a.m.-11:45 a.m. Speakers' Remarks • Wade Henderson, President, Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights • Fatima Goss Graves, Senior Vice President for Program, National Women's Law Center • Becky Pringle, Vice President, National Education Association • Jessie Brown, Senior Counsel to the Assistant Secretary, Office for Civil Rights, Department of Education Questions from Commissioners IV. Break 11:45 a.m.-12:45 p.m. V. Panel Three: The Role and Effect of Money on Outcomes—12:45 p.m.-2:05 p.m. Speakers' Remarks • Jesse Rothstein, Professor of Public Policy and Economics, University of California, Berkeley • Sean P. Corcoran, Associate Professor of Economics, New York University • Steven Rivkin, Professor of Economics, University of Illinois at Chicago • Doug Mesecar, Vice President, American Action Forum • Gerard Robinson, Resident Fellow, Education Policy Studies, American Enterprise Institute Questions from Commissioners VI. Panel Four: Segregation: The Nexus Between School Funding and Housing—2:05 p.m.-3:25 p.m. Speakers' Remarks • Jacob Vigdor, Professor of Public Policy and Governance, University of Washington • Phil Tegeler, Executive Director, Poverty and Race Research Action Council • Catherine Brown, Vice President, Center for American Progress • Monique Lin-Luse, Special Counsel, NAACP Legal Defense and Education Fund, Inc. • Katherine M. O'Regan, Assistant Secretary for Policy Development and Research, Department of Housing and Urban Development Questions from Commissioners VII. Break 3:25 p.m.-3:35 p.m. VIII. Panel Five: Federal Government on Equitable Funding—3:35 p.m.-4:48 p.m. Speakers' Remarks • Becky Monroe, Senior Counsel, Office of the Assistant Attorney General, Civil Rights Division, Department of Justice • Honorable Bobby Scott (D-VA) or Designee • Tanya Clay House, Deputy Assistant Secretary for P-12 Education, Office of Planning, Evaluation and Policy Development, Department of Education • Ary Amerikaner, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy and Strategic Initiatives, Office of Elementary and Secondary Education, Department of Education Questions from Commissioners IX. Adjourn Briefing Dated: May 11, 2016. David Mussatt, Regional Programs Unit Chief, U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.
    [FR Doc. 2016-11451 Filed 5-11-16; 11:15 am] BILLING CODE 6335-01-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: International Trade Administration (ITA).

    Title: Procedures for Considering Requests and Comments from the Public for Textile and Apparel Safeguard Actions on Imports from Oman.

    Form Number(s): None.

    OMB Control Number: 0625-0266.

    Type of Request: Regular submission.

    Burden Hours: 24.

    Number of Respondents: 6 (1 for Request; 5 for Comments).

    Average Hours Per Response: 4 hours for a Request; and 4 hours for a Comment.

    Needs and Uses: Title III, Subtitle B, Section 321 through Section 328 of the United States-Oman Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act (the “Act”) implements the textile and apparel safeguard provisions, provided for in Article 3.1 of the United States-Oman Free Trade Agreement (the “Agreement”). This safeguard mechanism applies when, as a result of the elimination of a customs duty under the Agreement, an Omani textile or apparel article is being imported into the United States in such increased quantities, in absolute terms or relative to the domestic market for that article, and under such conditions as to cause serious damage or actual threat thereof to a U.S. industry producing a like or directly competitive article. In these circumstances, Article 3.1 permits the United States to increase duties on the imported article from Oman to a level that does not exceed the lesser of the prevailing U.S. normal trade relations (NTR)/most-favored-nation (MFN) duty rate for the article or the U.S. NTR/MFN duty rate in effect on the day before the Agreement entered into force.

    The Statement of Administrative Action accompanying the Act provides that the Committee for the Implementation of Textile Agreements (CITA) will issue procedures for requesting such safeguard measures, for making its determinations under section 322(a) of the Act, and for providing relief under section 322(b) of the Act.

    In Proclamation No. 8332 (73 FR 80289, December 31, 2008), the President delegated to CITA his authority under Subtitle B of Title III of the Act with respect to textile and apparel safeguard measures.

    CITA must collect information in order to determine whether a domestic textile or apparel industry is being adversely impacted by imports of these products from Oman, thereby allowing CITA to take corrective action to protect the viability of the domestic textile or apparel industry, subject to section 322(b) of the Act.

    Affected Public: Individuals or households; business or other for-profit organizations.

    Frequency: On occasion.

    Respondent's Obligation: Voluntary.

    This information collection request may be viewed at www.reginfo.gov. Follow the instructions to view the 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 OIRA [email protected] or fax to (202) 395-5806.

    Dated: May 9, 2016. Glenna Mickelson, Management Analyst, Office of the Chief Information Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2016-11241 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Telecommunications and Information Administration [Docket Number: 160429380-6380-01] RIN 0660-XC025 First Responder Network Authority; Notice of Availability of a Draft Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement for the East Region of the Nationwide Public Safety Broadband Network and Notice of Public Meetings; Correction AGENCY:

    First Responder Network Authority, National Telecommunications and Information Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce.

    ACTION:

    Notice announcing availability of a draft programmatic environmental impact statement and of public meetings; correction.

    SUMMARY:

    The First Responder Network Authority (“FirstNet”) published a notice in the Federal Register of May 6, 2016 announcing the availability of the Draft Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement for the East Region (“Draft PEIS”). FirstNet also announced a series of public meetings to be held throughout the East Region to receive comments on the Draft PEIS. The Draft PEIS evaluates the potential environmental impacts of the proposed nationwide public safety broadband network in the East Region, composed of Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, and West Virginia. The May 6, 2016 notice contained an incorrect location for the public meeting to be held in New York and is corrected by this notice.

    DATES:

    Submit comments on the Draft PEIS for the East Region on or before July 6, 2016. FirstNet will also hold public meetings in each of the 13 states and the District of Columbia. See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for meeting dates.

    ADDRESSES:

    At any time during the public comment period, members of the public, public agencies, and other interested parties are encouraged to submit written comments, questions, and concerns about the project for FirstNet's consideration or to attend any of the public meetings. Written comments may be submitted electronically via www.regulations.gov, FIRSTNET-2016-0002, or by mail to Amanda Goebel Pereira, NEPA Coordinator, First Responder Network Authority, National Telecommunications and Information Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 12201 Sunrise Valley Drive, M/S 243, Reston, VA 20192. Comments received will be made a part of the public record and may be posted to FirstNet's Web site (www.firstnet.gov) without change. Comments should be machine readable and should not be copy-protected. All personally identifiable information (e.g., name, address) voluntarily submitted by the commenter may be publicly accessible. Do not submit confidential business information or otherwise sensitive or protected information. The Draft PEIS is available for download from www.regulations.gov FIRSTNET-2016-0002. A CD of this document is also available for viewing at public libraries (see Chapter 22 of the Draft PEIS for the complete distribution list). See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for public meeting addresses.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For more information on the Draft PEIS, contact Amanda Goebel Pereira, NEPA Coordinator, First Responder Network Authority, National Telecommunications and Information Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 12201 Sunrise Valley Drive, M/S 243, Reston, VA 20192.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Correction

    In the Federal Register of May 6, 2016, in FR Doc. 81-27409, on page 27410, in the first column, correct the fourth bullet point under the “Public Meetings” section of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section to read:

    • New York City, NY, May 24, 2016, from 4 p.m. to 8 p.m., New York Marriott Marquis, 1535 Broadway, New York, NY 10036

    Background

    The Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012 (Pub. L. 112-96, Title VI, 126 Stat. 156 (codified at 47 U.S.C. 1401 et seq.)) (the “Act”) created and authorized FirstNet to take all actions necessary to ensure the deployment, operation, and maintenance of an interoperable, nationwide public safety broadband network (“NPSBN”) based on a single, national network architecture. The Act meets a longstanding and critical national infrastructure need, to create a single, nationwide network that will, for the first time, allow police officers, fire fighters, emergency medical service professionals, and other public safety entities to effectively communicate with each other across agencies and jurisdictions. The NPSBN is intended to enhance the ability of the public safety community to perform more reliably, effectively, and safely; increase situational awareness during an emergency; and improve the ability of the public safety community to effectively engage in those critical activities.

    The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4347) (“NEPA”) requires federal agencies to undertake an assessment of environmental effects of their proposed actions prior to making a final decision and implementing the action. NEPA requirements apply to any federal project, decision, or action that may have a significant impact on the quality of the human environment. NEPA also establishes the Council on Environmental Quality (“CEQ”), which issued regulations implementing the procedural provisions of NEPA (see 40 CFR parts 1500-1508). Among other considerations, CEQ regulations at 40 CFR 1508.28 recommend the use of tiering from a “broader environmental impact statement (such as a national program or policy statements) with subsequent narrower statements or environmental analysis (such as regional or basin wide statements or ultimately site-specific statements) incorporating by reference the general discussions and concentrating solely on the issues specific to the statement subsequently prepared.”

    Due to the geographic scope of FirstNet (all 50 states, the District of Columbia, and five territories) and the diversity of ecosystems potentially traversed by the project, FirstNet has elected to prepare five regional PEISs. The five PEISs will be divided into the East, Central, West, South, and Non-Contiguous Regions. The East Region consists of Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, and West Virginia. The Draft PEIS analyzes potential impacts of the deployment and operation of the NPSBN on the natural and human environment in the East Region, in accordance with FirstNet's responsibilities under NEPA.

    Dated: May 10, 2016. Amanda Goebel Pereira, NEPA Coordinator, First Responder Network Authority.
    [FR Doc. 2016-11370 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-TL-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Foreign-Trade Zones Board [B-31-2016] Foreign-Trade Zone 20—Norfolk, Virginia; Application for Reorganization (Expansion of Service Area) Under Alternative Site Framework

    An application has been submitted to the Foreign-Trade Zones (FTZ) Board by the Virginia Port Authority, grantee of Foreign-Trade Zone 20, requesting authority to reorganize the zone to expand its service area under the alternative site framework (ASF) adopted by the FTZ Board (15 CFR Sec. 400.2(c)). The ASF is an option for grantees for the establishment or reorganization of zones and can permit significantly greater flexibility in the designation of new subzones or “usage-driven” FTZ sites for operators/users located within a grantee's “service area” in the context of the FTZ Board's standard 2,000-acre activation limit for a zone. The application was submitted pursuant to the Foreign-Trade Zones Act, as amended (19 U.S.C. 81a-81u), and the regulations of the FTZ Board (15 CFR part 400). It was formally docketed on May 9, 2016.

    FTZ 20 was approved by the Board on April 15, 1975 (Board Order 105, 40 FR 17884, April 23, 1975) and reorganized under the ASF on February 28, 2014 (Board Order 1933, 79 FR 14214-14215, March 13, 2014). The zone currently has a service area that includes the Counties of Accomack (partial), Gloucester, Isle of Wight, James City, Mathews, Northampton, Southampton, Sussex, Surry and York, Virginia, and the Cities of Chesapeake, Franklin, Hampton, Newport News, Norfolk, Poquoson, Portsmouth, Suffolk, Virginia Beach and Williamsburg, Virginia, within and adjacent to the Norfolk-Newport News Customs and Border Protection port of entry.

    The applicant is now requesting authority to expand the service area of the zone to include Elizabeth City, North Carolina, and the Counties of Camden, Chowan, Currituck, Gates, Hertford, Pasquotank and Perquimans, North Carolina, as described in the application. If approved, the grantee would be able to serve sites throughout the expanded service area based on companies' needs for FTZ designation. The application indicates that the proposed expanded service area is adjacent to the Norfolk-Newport News Customs and Border Protection port of entry.

    In accordance with the FTZ Board's regulations, Kathleen Boyce of the FTZ Staff is designated examiner to evaluate and analyze the facts and information presented in the application and case record and to report findings and recommendations to the FTZ Board.

    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 July 12, 2016. Rebuttal comments in response to material submitted during the foregoing period may be submitted during the subsequent 15-day period to July 27, 2016.

    A copy of the application 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 Kathleen Boyce at [email protected] or (202) 482-1346.

    Dated: May 9, 2016. Andrew McGilvray, Executive Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-11391 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-821-811] Solid Fertilizer Grade Ammonium Nitrate From the Russian Federation; Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; Preliminary Determination of No Shipments; 2014-2015 AGENCY:

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

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Commerce (the Department) is conducting an administrative review of the antidumping duty order on solid fertilizer grade ammonium nitrate (ammonium nitrate) from the Russian Federation. The review covers two producer/exporters of the subject merchandise, JSC Acron and its affiliate JSC Dorogobuzh (collectively, Acron) and MCC EuroChem and its affiliates OJSC NAK Azot and OJSC Nevinnomyssky Azot (collectively, EuroChem). The period of review (POR) is April 1, 2014, through March 31, 2015. We preliminarily determine that sales of subject merchandise to the United States have not been made at prices below normal value (NV). The Department preliminarily finds that EuroChem made no shipments of subject merchandise during the POR. We invite all interested parties to comment on these preliminary results.

    DATES:

    Effective Date: May 13, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Elizabeth Eastwood or David Crespo, AD/CVD Operations, Office II, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-3874, or (202) 482-3693, respectively.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    As explained in the memorandum from the Acting Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, the Department has exercised its discretion to toll all administrative deadlines due to the recent closure of the Federal Government. All deadlines in this segment of the proceeding have been extended by four business days. The revised deadline for the preliminary results of this review is now May 5, 2016.1

    1See Memorandum to the Record from Ron Lorentzen, Acting A/S for Enforcement & Compliance, regarding “Tolling of Administrative Deadlines As a Result of the Government Closure During Snowstorm Jonas,” dated January 27, 2016.

    Scope of the Order

    The merchandise subject to this order is solid, fertilizer grade ammonium nitrate products. The merchandise subject to this order is classified in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) at subheadings 3102.30.00.00 and 3102.290000. Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the merchandise within the scope is dispositive.2

    2 For a complete description of the scope of the order, see the memorandum from Gary Taverman, Associate Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, to Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, entitled, “Decision Memorandum for the Preliminary Results of the 2014-2015 Administrative Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on Solid Fertilizer Grade Ammonium Nitrate from the Russian Federation,” (Preliminary Decision Memorandum), dated concurrently with and hereby adopted by this notice.

    Methodology

    The Department is conducting this review in accordance with section 751(a)(2) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). Constructed export price is calculated in accordance with section 772 of the Act. NV is calculated in accordance with section 773 of the Act.

    For a full description of the methodology underlying our conclusions, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum. A list of the topics included in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum is attached as an Appendix to this notice. The Preliminary Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on file electronically via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS). ACCESS is available to registered users at https://access.trade.gov, and it is available to all paries in the Central Records Unit, Room B8024 of the main Department of Commerce building. In addition, a complete version of the Preliminary Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly at http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/. The signed and the electronic versions of the Preliminary Decision Memorandum are identical in content.

    Preliminary Determination of No Shipments

    On June 25, 2015, EuroChem properly filed a statement reporting that it made no shipments of subject merchandise to the United States during the POR. Additionally, our inquiry to U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) did not identify any POR entries of EuroChem's subject merchandise. Based on the foregoing, the Department preliminarily determines that EuroChem did not have any reviewable transactions during the POR. For additional information regarding this determination, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum. Consistent with our practice, we are not preliminarily rescinding the review with respect to EuroChem but, rather, we will complete the review with respect to this company and issue appropriate instructions to CBP based on the final results of this review.3

    3See e.g., Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp From Thailand; Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, Partial Rescission of Review, Preliminary Determination of No Shipments; 2012-2013, 79 FR 15951, 15952 (March 24, 2014), unchanged in Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp From Thailand: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, Final Determination of No Shipments, and Partial Rescission of Review; 2012-2013, 79 FR at 51306 (August 28, 2014).

    Preliminary Results of the Review

    The Department preliminarily determines that the following weighted-average dumping margin exists:

    Producer/exporter Weighted-
  • average
  • dumping
  • margin
  • (percent)
  • JSC Acron/JSC Dorogobuzh 0.00
    Disclosure and Public Comment

    The Department intends to disclose the calculations performed in connection with these preliminary results to interested parties within five days after the date of publication of this notice.4 Interested parties may submit cases briefs to the Department no later than 30 days after the date of publication of this notice.5 Rebuttal briefs, limited to issues raised in the case briefs, may be filed no later than five days after the time limit for filing case briefs.6 Parties who submit case briefs or rebuttal briefs in this proceeding are encouraged to submit with each argument: (1) A statement of the issue; (2) a brief summary of the argument; and (3) a table of authorities.7 Case and rebuttal briefs should be filed using ACCESS.8

    4See 19 CFR 351.224(b).

    5See 19 CFR 351.309(c)

    6See 19 CFR 351.309(d).

    7See 19 CFR 351.309(c)(2) and (d)(2).

    8See 19 CFR 351.303.

    Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.310(c), interested parties who wish to request a hearing must submit a written request to the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance within 30 days of the date of publication of this notice. Requests should contain: (1) The party's name, address and telephone number; (2) The number of participants; and (3) A list of issues parties intend to discuss. Issues raised in the hearing will be limited to those raised in the respective case and rebuttal briefs. If a request for a hearing is made, parties will be notified of the time and date for the hearing to be held at the U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230.9

    9See 19 CFR 351.310(d).

    The Department intends to issue the final results of this administrative review, including the results of its analysis of the issues raised in any written briefs, not later than 120 days after the date of publication of this notice, pursuant to section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.213(h), unless this deadline is extended.

    Assessment Rates

    Upon issuance of the final results, the Department shall determine, and CBP shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries covered by this review.10 We will instruct CBP to assess antidumping duties on all appropriate entries covered by this review when the importer-specific assessment rate calculated in the final results of this review is not zero or de minimis. Where the respondent's weighted-average dumping margin is zero or de minimis, or an importer-specific assessment rate is zero or de minimis, we will instruct CBP to liquidate the appropriate entries without regard to antidumping duties.

    10See 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1).

    The Department clarified its “automatic assessment” regulation on May 6, 2003.11 This clarification will apply to entries of subject merchandise during the POR produced by the respondents for which the company did not know that the merchandise was destined for the United States. In such instances, we will instruct CBP to liquidate unreviewed entries at the all others rate if there is no rate for the intermediate company(ies) involved in the transaction.

    11 For a full discussion of this clarification, see Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 68 FR 23954 (May 6, 2003).

    We intend to issue instructions to CBP 15 days after publication of the final results of this review.

    Cash Deposit Requirements

    The following deposit requirements will be effective upon publication of the notice of final results of administrative review for all shipments of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication as provided by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) The cash deposit rate for Acron will be equal to the weighted-average dumping margins established in the final results of this administrative review, except if the rate is less than 0.50 percent and, therefore, de minimis within the meaning of 19 CFR 351.106(c)(1), in which case the cash deposit rate will be zero; (2) for merchandise exported by EuroChem or by manufacturers or exporters not covered in this review but covered in a prior segment of the proceeding, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the company-specific rate published for the most recently completed segment; (3) if the exporter is not a firm covered in this review, or the original investigation, but the manufacturer is, the cash deposit rate will be the rate established for the most recently completed segment for the manufacturer of the merchandise; and (4) the cash deposit rate for all other manufacturers or exporters will continue to be 253.98 percent, the all-others rate established in the order.12 These cash deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice.

    12See Termination of the Suspension Agreement on Solid Fertilizer Grade Ammonium Nitrate From the Russian Federation and Notice of Antidumping Duty Order, 76 FR 23569, 23570 (April 27, 2011).

    Notification to Importers

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

    Notification to Interested Parties

    We are issuing and publishing these results in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.

    Dated: May 5, 2016. Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. Appendix—List of Topics Discussed in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum I. Summary II. Background III. Scope of the Order IV. Preliminary Determination of No Shipments V. Discussion of the Methodology a. Normal Value Comparisons b. Determination of Comparison Method c. Results of the Differential Pricing Analysis d. Product Comparisons e. Date of Sale f. Constructed Export Price g. Normal Value h. Currency Conversion VI. Recommendation
    [FR Doc. 2016-11388 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-580-809] Circular Welded Non-Alloy Steel Pipe From the Republic of Korea: Initiation and Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Changed Circumstances Review AGENCY:

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

    SUMMARY:

    In response to a request from Hyundai Steel, a producer/exporter of circular welded non-alloy steel pipe (CWP) from the Republic of Korea, and pursuant to section 751(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), and 19 CFR 351.216 and 351.221(c)(3)(ii), the Department is initiating a changed circumstances review and issuing this notice of preliminary results. We preliminarily determine that Hyundai Steel is the successor-in-interest to Hyundai HYSCO (HYSCO).

    DATES:

    Effective Date: May 13, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Joseph Shuler, AD/CVD Operations, Office I, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-1293.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background

    On November 2, 1992, the Department published the antidumping duty order for circular welded non-alloy steel pipe from the Republic of Korea.1

    1See Notice of Antidumping Duty Orders: Certain Circular Welded Non-Alloy Steel Pipe from Brazil, the Republic of Korea (Korea), Mexico, and Venezuela, and Amendment to Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Certain Circular Welded Non-Alloy Steel Pipe from Korea, 57 FR 49453 (November 2, 1992).

    On February 24, 2016, Hyundai Steel informed the Department that effective July 1, 2015, it had merged with HYSCO,2 and requested that: (1) The Department conduct a changed circumstances review under 19 CFR 351.216(b) to determine that it is the successor-in-interest to HYSCO for purposes of determining antidumping duty cash deposits and liabilities; and (2) the Department conduct the changed circumstances review on an expedited basis under 19 CFR 351.221(c)(3)(ii). No interested parties commented on Hyundai Steel's request.

    2See letter from Hyundai Steel to the Department, “Certain Circular Welded Non-Alloy Steel Pipe from the Republic of Korea: Request for Changed Circumstances Review (CCR Request), dated February 24, 2016.

    Scope of the Order

    The merchandise subject to the order is circular welded non-alloy steel pipe and tube, of circular cross-section, not more than 406.4 millimeters (16 inches) in outside diameter, regardless of wall thickness, surface finish (black, galvanized, or painted), or end finish (plain end, beveled end, threaded, or threaded and coupled). These pipes and tubes are generally known as standard pipes and tubes and are intended for the low-pressure conveyance of water, steam, natural gas, air, and other liquids and gases in plumbing and heating systems, air-conditioning units, automatic sprinkler systems, and other related uses. Standard pipe may also be used for light load-bearing applications, such as for fence tubing, and as structural pipe tubing used for framing and as support members for reconstruction or load-bearing purposes in the construction, shipbuilding, trucking, farm equipment, and other related industries. Unfinished conduit pipe is also included in the order.

    All carbon-steel pipes and tubes within the physical description outlined above are included within the scope of the order except line pipe, oil-country tubular goods, boiler tubing, mechanical tubing, pipe and tube hollows for redraws, finished scaffolding, and finished conduit.3

    3See Final Negative Determination of Scope Inquiry on Certain Circular Welded Non-Alloy Steel Pipe and Tube from Brazil, the Republic of Korea, Mexico, and Venezuela, 61 FR 11608 (March 21, 1996). In accordance with this determination, pipe certified to the API 5L line-pipe specification and pipe certified to both the API 5L line-pipe specifications and the less-stringent ASTM A-53 standard-pipe specifications, which falls within the physical parameters as outlined above, and entered as line pipe of a kind used for oil and gas pipelines, is outside of the scope of the AD order.

    Imports of these products are currently classifiable under the following Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) numbers: 7306.30.1000, 7306.30.5025, 7306.30.5032, 7306.30.5040, 7306.30.5055, 7306.30.5085, and 7306.30.5090. Although the HTSUS numbers are provided for convenience and customs purposes, our written description of the scope of the order is dispositive.

    All carbon-steel pipes and tubes within the physical description outlined above are included within the scope of the order except line pipe, oil-country tubular goods, boiler tubing, mechanical tubing, pipe and tube hollows for redraws, finished scaffolding, and finished conduit.

    Imports of these products are currently classifiable under the following Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) numbers: 7306.30.1000, 7306.30.5025, 7306.30.5032, 7306.30.5040, 7306.30.5055, 7306.30.5085, and 7306.30.5090. Although the HTSUS numbers are provided for convenience and customs purposes, our written description of the scope of the order is dispositive.

    Initiation and Preliminary Results

    Pursuant to section 751(b)(1) of the Act, the Department will conduct a changed circumstances review upon receipt of a request from an interested party or receipt of information concerning an antidumping duty order which demonstrates changed circumstances sufficient to warrant a review of the order. As noted above in the “Background” section, we received information indicating that on July 1, 2015, Hyundai Steel merged with HYSCO. The information further indicates that at that time, Hyundai Steel assumed all of HYSCO's operations for the production and sale of subject merchandise. This constitutes changed circumstances warranting a review of this order.4 Therefore, in accordance with section 751(b)(1) of the Act, we are initiating a changed circumstances review based upon the information contained in Hyundai Steel's submission.5

    4See 19 CFR 351.216(d).

    5See the CCR Request.

    Section 351.221(c)(3)(ii) of the Department's regulations permits the Department to combine the notice of initiation of a changed circumstances review and the preliminary results of review if the Department concludes that expedited action is warranted. In this instance, we find that expedited action is warranted, and are issuing a combined notice of initiation and preliminary results based on the information placed on the record by Hyundai Steel.

    In making a successor-in-interest determination, the Department examines several factors including, but not limited to, whether there were changes in: (1) Management; (2) production facilities; (3) supplier relationships; and (4) customer base.6 While no single factor or combination of these factors will necessarily provide a dispositive indication of a successor-in-interest relationship, the Department will generally consider the new company to be the successor to the previous company if the new company's resulting operation is not materially dissimilar to that of its predecessor.7 Thus, if the evidence demonstrates that, with respect to the production and sale of the subject merchandise, the new company operates as the same business entity as the former company, the Department will accord the new company the same treatment under the antidumping duty order as its predecessor.

    6See, e.g., Pressure Sensitive Plastic Tape from Italy: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Changed Circumstances Review, 75 FR 8925 (Feb. 26, 2010), unchanged in Pressure Sensitive Plastic Tape From Italy: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Changed Circumstances Review, 75 FR 27706 (May 18, 2010); Brake Rotors From the People's Republic of China: Final Results of Changed Circumstances Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 70 FR 69941 (November 18, 2005) (Brake Rotors), citing Brass Sheet and Strip from Canada; Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 57 FR 2460 (May 13, 1992); and Structural Steel Beams from Korea: Preliminary Results of Changed Circumstances Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 66 FR 15834 (March 21, 2001).

    7See, e.g., Brake Rotors.

    In its submission, Hyundai Steel explained that it merged with HYSCO effective July 1, 2015. Hyundai Steel stated that the merger was approved by shareholders of both companies, but procedurally, the merger took the form of an “absorption” through which Hyundai Steel “absorbed” HYSCO, which no longer exists as a corporate entity.8 Hyundai Steel claimed that since the effective date of the merger, Hyundai Steel is operating essentially the same business as HYSCO did, and that there have been no significant changes in management or production facilities, with only minimal impact on the company's supplier relationships and its customer base with respect to the production and sale of the subject merchandise.9 Hyundai Steel submitted detailed documentation relating to the merger of the two companies (e.g., shareholder meeting report, articles of incorporation, and a copy of the merger announcement).10

    8See CCR Request at 2.

    9See CCR Request at 3-4.

    10Id. at 3 and Exhibits 1 through 14.

    With respect to management, Hyundai Steel retained its board of directors and discharged the board of directors of HYSCO, with the exception of Mr. Heon-seok Lee, who was a board member and executive (Chief Director of Pipe Factory Manufacturing Support Group) of HYSCO and who remains with Hyundai Steel as a member of the board of directors and an executive (Chief Director of Pipe Factory and Head of Automotive Parts Production Office).11 In addition, 12 of 17 HYSCO executives remain at Hyundai Steel, nine of whom continue to work in business units similar to the HYSCO units where they were employed.

    11Id. at 8 and Exhibit 3.

    Hyundai Steel further explained that its current organizational structure is substantially similar to that of HYSCO; the only difference is that the management team of the former company is now integrated into the larger management structure of Hyundai Steel.12 Hyundai Steel explained that the only changes within the organizational structure are that certain business units (of HYSCO) were divided and integrated into Hyundai Steel's business units.13 The documentation submitted in the CCR Request demonstrates that the units specifically related to the production and sale of the subject merchandise by Hyundai Steel remain the same, other than changes in the names of the plants and divisions, as they were for HYSCO.14

    12Id. at 7.

    13Id. at 7.

    14See CCR Request at 7-8.

    Based on this information, and in particular, based on the fact that Hyundai Steel's management team continues to include the majority of the former HYSCO managers, we preliminarily find that the reorganization resulting from the merger of the two companies did not result in management that was materially dissimilar with respect to the subject merchandise.

    With respect to production facilities, Hyundai Steel reported that there have been no changes.15 Hyundai Steel provided copies of HYSCO's company brochure and noted that the location of the production facility, in Ulsan, Korea, also remains unchanged.16 Based on this information, we preliminarily find that the merger did not result in material changes to the production of the subject merchandise.

    15Id. at 9.

    16Id.

    With respect to suppliers and customers, Hyundai Steel provided information that demonstrates that there are only marginal differences to its supplier relationships. Specifically, prior to the merger, Hyundai Steel was HYSCO's largest supplier of hot-rolled coil; after the merger, Hyundai Steel continues to be the largest supplier of this input to the production of the subject merchandise. Although other suppliers of hot-rolled coil to HYSCO prior to the merger are no longer providing hot-rolled coil, Hyundai Steel explained that these suppliers provided only a small portion of the input to HYSCO before the merger.17 Hyundai Steel explained that the merger had no effect on the customers or sales practices in the U.S. (other than a short interruption in sales) or domestic markets because Hyundai Steel is now selling the subject merchandise to the same customers in exactly the same manner as HYSCO did. Hyundai Steel elaborated that the same customers accounted for 98 percent of the customer base following the merger.

    17Id. at 8-9.

    Based on our consideration of the totality of the evidence provided by Hyundai Steel, we preliminarily determine that Hyundai Steel is the successor-in-interest to HYSCO, for purposes of the application of the antidumping duty order. Specifically, with respect to the production and sale of the subject merchandise, we find that the merger of these two companies resulted in no significant changes to management or production facilities. Additionally, the minor changes in supplier relationships and customers that Hyundai Steel identified indicate that there had been no material change in suppliers of inputs or services related to the production, sale and distribution of the subject merchandise, and thus do not weigh against finding that Hyundai Steel is the successor-in-interest to HYSCO. Thus, Hyundai Steel operates as the same business entity as HYSCO with respect to the subject merchandise. If the Department upholds this preliminary determination in the final results, Hyundai Steel will retain the antidumping duty deposit rate currently assigned to HYSCO with respect to the subject merchandise (i.e., 3.69 percent). If these preliminary results are adopted in the final results of this changed circumstances review, we will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection to suspend liquidation of entries of CWP made by Hyundai Steel, effective the date of publication of the final results.

    Public Comment

    Interested parties may submit case briefs and/or written comments not later than 14 days after the date of publication of this notice. Rebuttal briefs and rebuttals to written comments, which must be limited to issues raised in such briefs or comments, may be filed not later than 21 days after the date of publication of this notice.18 Parties who submit case or rebuttal briefs are encouraged to submit with each argument: (1) A statement of the issue; (2) a brief summary of the argument; and (3) a table of authorities. Parties submitting briefs should do so pursuant to the Department's electronic filing system, ACCESS.19 Electronically-filed documents must be received successfully in their entirety by 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on the due dates established above.20

    18 See 19 CFR 351.309(d).

    19See 19 CFR 351.303(f).

    20See 19 CFR 351.303(b)(1).

    Any interested party may request a hearing within 14 days of publication of this notice.21 Parties will be notified of the time and date of any hearing if requested.22

    21See 19 CFR 351.310(c).

    22See 19 CFR 351.310(d).

    Consistent with 19 CFR 351.216(e), we will issue the final results of this changed circumstances review no later than 270 days after the date on which this review was initiated, or within 45 days if all parties agree to our preliminary finding. This initiation and preliminary results of review notice is published in accordance with sections 751(b)(l) and 777(i)(l) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.216, 19 CFR 351.221(b)(l), (4), and 19 CFR 351.222(g).

    Dated: May 9, 2016. Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
    [FR Doc. 2016-11390 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration Meeting of the President's Export Council AGENCY:

    International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce.

    ACTION:

    Notice of an open meeting by teleconference.

    SUMMARY:

    The President's Export Council (Council) will hold an open call to present observations from a recent trip to Cuba by the Council's Chair and Vice Chair and to deliberate a recommendation related to Cuba. The final agenda will be posted at least one week in advance of the meeting on the Council's Web site at http://trade.gov/pec.

    DATES:

    June 8, 2016 at 10:00 a.m. EDT. The deadline for members of the public to register, including requests for auxiliary aids, or to submit written comments for dissemination prior to the meeting, is 5:00 p.m. EDT on June 6, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Via teleconference. The call-in number and passcode will be provided by email to registrants. Requests to register (including for auxiliary aids) and any written comments should be submitted to Tricia Van Orden, Executive Secretary, President's Export Council, electronically via email to [email protected] or via letter to Room 4043, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230. Members of the public are encouraged to submit registration requests and written comments via email to ensure timely receipt.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Tricia Van Orden, Executive Secretary, President's Export Council, Room 4043, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230, telephone: 202-482-5876, email: [email protected].

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background: The President's Export Council was first established by Executive Order on December 20, 1973 to advise the President on matters relating to U.S. export trade and to report to the President on its activities and recommendations for expanding U.S. exports and was reconstituted pursuant to Executive Order 12131 of May 4, 1979. The President's Export Council was renewed most recently by Executive Order 13708 of September 30, 2015, for the two-year period ending September 30, 2017. This Committee is established in accordance with the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), as amended, 5 U.S.C. App.

    Public Participation: The meeting will be open to the public and will be accessible to people with disabilities. All listeners are required to register in advance by sending an electronic request by email to [email protected] or by sending a paper request to the address listed above. Requests must be received by 5:00 p.m. EDT on June 6, 2016. Requests for auxiliary aids must be submitted by the registration deadline. Last minute requests will be accepted, but may be impossible to fill.

    Public Submissions: The public is invited to submit written statements to the President's Export Council. Statements must be received by 5:00 p.m. EDT on June 6, 2016, by either of the following methods:

    a. Electronic Submissions

    Submit statements electronically to Tricia Van Orden, Executive Secretary, President's Export Council, via email: [email protected].

    b. Paper Submissions

    Send paper statements to Tricia Van Orden, Executive Secretary, President's Export Council, Room 4043, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230.

    Statements will be provided to the members in advance of the meeting for consideration and will be posted on the President's Export Council Web site (http://trade.gov/pec) without change, including any business or personal information provided such as names, addresses, email addresses, or telephone numbers. All statements received, including attachments and other supporting materials, are part of the public record and subject to public disclosure. You should submit only information that you wish to make publicly available.

    Meeting Recording: A recording of the Council's call will be available within ninety (90) days of the meeting on the Council's Web site at http://trade.gov/pec.

    Dated: May 11, 2016. Tricia Van Orden, Executive Secretary, President's Export Council.
    [FR Doc. 2016-11485 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DR-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-570-932] Certain Steel Threaded Rod From the People's Republic of China: Preliminary Results and Partial Rescission of the Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2014-2015 AGENCY:

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

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Commerce (the “Department”) is conducting the sixth administrative review of the antidumping duty order on certain steel threaded rod (“STR”) from the People's Republic of China (“PRC”),1 for the period of review (“POR”), April 1, 2014, to March 31, 2015. The Department selected two respondents for individual review, Zhejiang New Oriental Fastener Co., Ltd. (“New Oriental”), and the RMB/IFI Group.2 The Department preliminarily determines that New Oriental sold subject merchandise in the United States at prices below normal value (“NV”) and that the RMB/IFI Group did not sell subject merchandise in the United States at prices below NV. If these preliminary results are adopted in the final results, the Department will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”) to assess antidumping duties on all appropriate entries of subject merchandise during the POR. Interested parties are invited to comment on these preliminary results.

    1See Certain Steel Threaded Rod from the People's Republic of China: Notice of Antidumping Duty Order, 74 FR 17154 (April 14, 2009) (“Order”).

    2 RMB Fasteners Ltd., IFI & Morgan Ltd., and Jiaxing Brother Standard Part Co., Ltd. (collectively “the RMB/IFI Group”).

    DATES:

    Effective Date: May 13, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Jerry Huang or Andrew Devine, AD/CVD Operations, Office V, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-4047 or (202) 482-0238, respectively.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Scope of the Order

    The merchandise covered by the order includes steel threaded rod. The subject merchandise is currently classifiable under subheading 7318.15.5051, 7318.15.5056, 7318.15.5090, and 7318.15.2095 of the United States Harmonized Tariff Schedule (“HTSUS”). Although the HTSUS subheading is provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the merchandise is dispositive.3

    3 For a full description of the scope of the Order, see Memorandum from Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary, AD/CVD Operations, to Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, “Decision Memorandum for Preliminary Results of Sixth Antidumping Duty Administrative Review: Certain Steel Threaded Rod from the People's Republic of China” (“Preliminary Decision Memorandum”) (May 5, 2016).

    Partial Rescission of the Administrative Review

    On April 1, 2015, the Department published in the Federal Register a notice of opportunity to request an administrative review of the AD order on certain steel threaded rod.4 The Department received multiple timely requests for an administrative review of the AD order on certain steel threaded rod and on May 26, 2015, in accordance with section 751(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (“the Act”), the Department published in the Federal Register a notice of the initiation of an administrative review of that order.5 The administrative review was initiated with respect to 91 companies or groups of companies on June 24, 2015, Vulcan Threaded Products, Inc. (“Petitioner”) withdrew its request for an administrative review on 83 companies.6

    4See Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Order, Finding, or Suspended Investigation; Opportunity To Request Administrative Review, 80 FR 17392 (April 1, 2015).

    5See Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews, 80 FR 30041, 30046-47 (May 26, 2015).

    6See Letter to the Department from Petitioner, Re: Sixth Administrative Review of Certain Steel Threaded Rod from China—Petitioner's Withdrawal of Review Requests for Specific Companies (June 24, 2015).

    Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), the Secretary will rescind an administrative review, in whole or in part, if a party who requested the review withdraws the request within 90 days of the date of publication of notice of initiation of the requested review. Petitioner timely withdrew its request for an administrative review of the 83 companies listed in the Appendix I. Petitioner was the only party to request a review of these companies. Accordingly, the Department is rescinding this review, in part, with respect to these entities, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1).7

    7See Appendix I.

    PRC-Wide Entity

    Of the eight companies for which requests for review remain, two are the mandatory respondents New Oriental and the RMB/IFI Group which have demonstrated eligibility for separate rate. The remaining six companies are not eligible for separate rate status or rescission, as they did not submit completed separate rate applications or certifications.

    The Department's change in policy regarding conditional review of the PRC-wide entity applies to this administrative review.8 Under this policy, the PRC-wide entity will not be under review unless a party specifically requests, or the Department self-initiates, a review of the entity. Because no party requested a review of the PRC-wide entity in this review, the PRC-wide entity is not under review and therefore its rate is not subject to change (i.e., 206 percent).9 Accordingly, the remaining six companies subject to this review that are not eligible for separate rate status or rescission are determined to be part of the PRC-wide entity. These companies are: Brother Holding Group Co., Ltd.; Jiaxing Xinyue Standard Part Co., Ltd.; Zhejiang Heiter Industries Co., Ltd.; Zhejiang Heiter MFG & Trade Co., Ltd.; Zhejiang Junyue Standard Part Co., Ltd.; and Zhejiang Morgan Brother Technology Co., Ltd.

    8See Antidumping Proceedings: Announcement of Change in Department Practice for Respondent Selection in Antidumping Duty Proceedings and Conditional Review of the Nonmarket Economy Entity in NME Antidumping Duty Proceedings, 78 FR 65963 (November 4, 2013).

    9See Certain Steel Threaded Rod from the People's Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2012-2013, 79 FR 71743, 71744 and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum.

    Methodology

    The Department is conducting this review in accordance with section 751(a)(1)(B) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the “Act”). Export prices have been calculated in accordance with section 772 of the Act. Because the PRC is a non-market economy (“NME”) within the meaning of section 771(18) of the Act, NV has been calculated in accordance with section 773(c) of the Act.

    For a full description of the methodology underlying our conclusions, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum. A list of topics discussed in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum can be found at Appendix II to this notice. The Preliminary Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on file electronically via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (“ACCESS”). ACCESS is available to registered users at http://access.trade.gov, and is available to all parties in the Central Records Unit, room B8024 of the main Department of Commerce building. In addition, a complete version of the Preliminary Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly on the Internet at http://www.enforcement.trade.gov/frn/index.html. The signed Preliminary Decision Memorandum and the electronic versions of the Preliminary Decision Memorandum are identical in content.

    Preliminary Results of Review

    The Department preliminarily determines that the following weighted-average dumping margins exist for the period April 1, 2014, through March 31, 2015:

    Exporter Weighted-
  • average
  • margin
  • (Ad valorem)
  • IFI & Morgan Ltd. and RMB Fasteners Ltd. (collectively, the RMB/IFI Group) 0.0 Zhejiang New Oriental Co., Ltd. 12.10
    Disclosure, Public Comment and Opportunity To Request a Hearing

    The Department will disclose the calculations used in our analysis to parties in this review within five days of the date of publication of this notice in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).

    Interested parties may submit case briefs within 30 days after the date of publication of these preliminary results of review.10 Rebuttals to case briefs, which must be limited to issues raised in the case briefs, must be filed within five days after the time limit for filing case briefs.11 Parties who submit arguments are requested to submit with the argument (a) a statement of the issue, (b) a brief summary of the argument, and (c) a table of authorities.12 Parties submitting briefs should do so pursuant to the Department's electronic filing system, ACCESS.

    10See 19 CFR 351.309(c)(1)(ii).

    11See 19 CFR 351.309(d)(1)-(2).

    12See 19 CFR 351.309(c)(2), (d)(2).

    Any interested party may request a hearing within 30 days of publication of this notice.13 Hearing requests should contain the following information: (1) The party's name, address, and telephone number; (2) the number of participants; and (3) a list of the issues to be discussed. Oral presentations will be limited to issues raised in the briefs. If a request for a hearing is made, parties will be notified of the time and date for the hearing to be held at the U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230.14

    13See 19 CFR 351.310(c).

    14See 19 CFR 351.310(d).

    The Department intends to issue the final results of this administrative review, which will include the results of our analysis of all issues raised in the case briefs, within 120 days of publication of these preliminary results in the Federal Register, unless extended, pursuant to section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act.

    Assessment Rates

    Upon issuance of the final results, the Department will determine, and CBP shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries covered by this review.15 The Department intends to issue assessment instructions to CBP 15 days after the publication date of the final results of this review.

    15See 19 CFR 351.212(b).

    For any individually examined respondent whose weighted average dumping margin is above de minimis (i.e., 0.50 percent) in the final results, the Department will calculate importer-specific assessment rates on the basis of the ratio of the total amount of dumping calculated for the importer's examined sales to the total entered value of sales, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1). Where an importer- (or customer-) specific ad valorem rate is greater than de minimis, the Department will instruct CBP to collect the appropriate duties at the time of liquidation.16 Where either a respondent's weighted average dumping margin is zero or de minimis, or an importer- (or customer-) specific ad valorem is zero or de minimis, the Department will instruct CBP to liquidate appropriate entries without regard to antidumping duties.17 We intend to instruct CBP to liquidate entries containing subject merchandise exported by the PRC-wide entity at the PRC-wide rate.

    16See 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1).

    17See 19 CFR 351.106(c)(2).

    Pursuant to the Department's assessment practice in NME cases, for entries that were not reported in the U.S. sales databases submitted by companies individually examined during the administrative review, the Department will instruct CBP to liquidate such entries at the PRC-wide rate. Additionally, if the Department determines that an exporter had no shipments of the subject merchandise, any suspended entries that entered under that exporter's case number (i.e., at that exporter's rate) will be liquidated at the PRC-wide rate.18 The final results of this review shall be the basis for the assessment of antidumping duties on entries of merchandise covered by the final results of this review and for future deposits of estimated duties, where applicable.

    18 For a full discussion of this practice, see Non-Market Economy Antidumping Proceedings: Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 76 FR 65694 (October 24, 2011).

    Cash Deposit Requirements

    The following cash deposit requirements will be effective upon publication of the final results of this review for shipments of the subject merchandise from the PRC entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date, as provided by sections 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) For the companies listed above that have a separate rate, the cash deposit rate will be that established in the final results of this review (except, if the rate is zero or de minimis, then zero cash deposit will be required); (2) for previously investigated or reviewed PRC and non-PRC exporters not listed above that received a separate rate in a prior segment of this proceeding, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the existing exporter-specific rate; (3) for all PRC exporters of subject merchandise that have not been found to be entitled to a separate rate, the cash deposit rate will be that for the PRC-wide entity; and (4) for all non-PRC exporters of subject merchandise which have not received their own rate, the cash deposit rate will be the rate applicable to the PRC exporter that supplied that non-PRC exporter.

    These deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice.

    Notification to Importers

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

    These preliminary results are issued and published in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.221(b)(4).

    Dated: May 5, 2016. Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. Appendix I (1) Aerospace Precision Corp. (Shanghai) Industry Co., Ltd. (2) Aihua Holding Group Co., Ltd. (3) Autocraft Industry (Shanghai) Ltd. (4) Autograft Industry Ltd. (5) Billion Land Ltd. (6) Bolt MFG. Trade Ltd. (7) C and H International Corporation (8) Certified Products International Inc. (9) Changshu City Standard Parts Factory (10) China Friendly Nation Hardware Technology Limited (11) EC International (Nantong) Co., Ltd. (12) Fastco (Shanghai) Trading Co., Ltd. (13) Fasten International Co., Ltd. (14) Fastwell Industry Co., Ltd. (15) Fuda Xiongzhen Machinery Co., Ltd. (16) Fuller Shanghai Co., Ltd. (17) Gem-Year Industrial Co., Ltd. (18) Guangdong Honjinn Metal & Plastic Co., Ltd. (19) Haiyan Da YU Fasteners Co., Ltd. (20) Haiyan Evergreen Standard Parts Co., Ltd. (21) Haiyan Hurras Import & Export Co., Ltd. (22) Haiyan Jianhe Hardware Co., Ltd. (23) Haiyan Julong Standard Part Co., Ltd. (24) Hangzhou Everbright Imp. & Exp. Co,. Ltd. (25) Hangzhou Grand Imp. & Exp. Co., Ltd. (26) Hangzhou Great Imp. & Exp. Co., Ltd. (27) Hangzhou Lizhan Hardware Co., Ltd. (28) Hangzhou Tongwang Machinery Co., Ltd. (29) Jiangsu Zhongweiyu Communication Equipment Co., Ltd. (30) Jiashan Steelfit Trading Co., Ltd. (31) Jiashan Zhongsheng Metal Products Co., Ltd. (32) Jiaxing Yaoliang Import & Export Co., Ltd. (33) Jinan Banghe Industry & Trade Co., Ltd. (34) Macropower Industrial Inc. (35) Midas Union Co., Ltd. (36) Nanjing Prosper Import & Export Corporation Ltd. (37) New Pole Power System Co., Ltd. (38) Ningbiao Bolts & Nuts Manufacturing Co. (39) Ningbo Beilun Milfast Metalworks Co., Ltd. (40) Ningbo Beilun Pingxin Hardware Co., Ltd. (41) Ningbo Dexin Fastener Co., Ltd. (42) Ningbo Dongxin High-Strength Nut Co., Ltd. (43) Ningbo Fastener Factory (44) Ningbo Fengya Imp. and Exp. Co., Ltd. (45) Ningbo Fourway Co., Ltd. (46) Ningbo Haishu Holy Hardware Import and Export Co., Ltd. (47) Ningbo Haishu Wit Import & Export Co., Ltd. (48) Ningbo Haishu Yixie Import & Export Co., Ltd. (49) Ningbo Jinding Fastening Pieces Co., Ltd. (50) Ningbo MPF Manufacturing Co., Ltd. (51) Ningbo Panxiang Imp. & Exp. Co., Ltd. (52) Ningbo Yili Import & Export Co., Ltd. (53) Ningbo Yinzhou Foreign Trade Co., Ltd. (54) Ningbo Yinzhou Woafan Industry & Trade Co., Ltd. (55) Ningbo Zhongjiang High Strength Bolts Co., Ltd. (56) Ningbo Zhongjiang Petroleum Pipes & Machinery Co., Ltd. (57) Orient International Holding Shanghai Rongheng Intl Trading Co., Ltd. (58) Prosper Business and Industry Co., Ltd. (59) Qingdao Free Trade Zone Health Intl. (60) Qingdao Top Steel Industrial Co., Ltd. (61) Shaanxi Succeed Trading Co., Ltd. (62) Shanghai Autocraft Co., Ltd. (63) Shanghai East Best Foreign Trade Co. (64) Shanghai East Best International Business Development Co., Ltd. (65) Shanghai Fortune International Co., Ltd. (66) Shanghai Furen International Trading (67) Shanghai Hunan Foreign Economic Co., Ltd. (68) Shanghai Jiabao Trade Development Co., Ltd. (69) Shanghai Nanshi Foreign Economic Co. (70) Shanghai Overseas International Trading Co., Ltd. (71) Shanghai Prime Machinery Co., Ltd. (72) Shanghai Printing & Dyeing And Knitting Mill (73) Shanghai Printing & Packaging Machinery Corp. (74) Shanghai Recky International Trading Co., Ltd. (75) Shanghai Sinotex United Corp. Ltd. (76) Suntec Industries Co., Ltd. (77) Suzhou Henry International Trading Co., Ltd. (78) T and C Fastener Co., Ltd. (79) T and L Industry Co., Ltd. (80) Wuxi Metec Metal Co., Ltd. (81) Zhejiang Jin Zeen Fasteners Co., Ltd. (82) Zhejiang Zhenglian Industry Development Co., Ltd. (83) Zhoushan Zhengyuan Standard Parts Co., Ltd. Appendix II List of Topics Discussed in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum 1. Summary 2. Background 3. Verification 4. Scope of the Order 5. Respondent Selection 6. Non-Market Economy Country 7. Separate Rates 8. PRC-Wide Entity 9. Surrogate Country and Surrogate Value Data 10. Surrogate Country 11. Date of Sale 12. Comparisons to Normal Value 13. U.S. Price—Export Price 14. Normal Value 15. Factor Valuations 16. Currency Conversion 17. Conclusion
    [FR Doc. 2016-11389 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XE615 Marine Mammals; File No. 20324 AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Notice; receipt of application.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given that Living Planet Productions/Silverback Films, 1 St. Augustines Yard, Gaunts Lane, Bristol, BS1 5DE, United Kingdom, has applied in due form for a permit to conduct commercial or educational photography on bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus).

    DATES:

    Written, telefaxed, or email comments must be received on or before June 13, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    The application and related documents are available for review by selecting “Records Open for Public Comment” from the “Features” box on the Applications and Permits for Protected Species (APPS) home page, https://apps.nmfs.noaa.gov, and then selecting File No. 20324 from the list of available applications.

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

    Written comments on this application should be submitted to the Chief, Permits and Conservation Division, at the address listed above. Comments may also be submitted by facsimile to (301) 713-0376, or by email to [email protected] Please include the File No. 20324 in the subject line of the email comment.

    Those individuals requesting a public hearing should submit a written request to the Chief, Permits and Conservation Division at the address listed above. The request should set forth the specific reasons why a hearing on this application would be appropriate.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Jennifer Skidmore or Amy Hapeman, (301) 427-8401.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The subject permit is requested under the authority of the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972, as amended (MMPA; 16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.), the regulations governing the taking and importing of marine mammals (50 CFR part 216).

    The applicant proposes to film and photograph the Florida Bay stock of bottlenose dolphins for purposes of a documentary film. The applicant is requesting up to 140 takes of these animals by Level B harassment via aircraft (helicopter) and up to 828 takes by Level B harassment from a small 20 ft. vessel. Filming would take place for approximately 30 filming days. Obtained footage will be part of a documentary film series and featured in the episode describing shallow seas. The permit is requested for a 2 year period.

    In compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), an initial determination has been made that the activity proposed is categorically excluded from the requirement to prepare an environmental assessment or environmental impact statement.

    Concurrent with the publication of this notice in the Federal Register, NMFS is forwarding copies of the application to the Marine Mammal Commission and its Committee of Scientific Advisors.

    Dated: May 10, 2016. Julia Harrison, Chief, Permits and Conservation Division, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2016-11348 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XE599 Marine Mammals; File No. 19638 AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Notice; receipt of application.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given that Paul Ponganis, Ph.D., University of California at San Diego, La Jolla, CA 92093, has applied in due form for a permit to conduct research on California sea lions (Zalophus californianus).

    DATES:

    Written, telefaxed, or email comments must be received on or before June 13, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    The application and related documents are available for review by selecting “Records Open for Public Comment” from the “Features” box on the Applications and Permits for Protected Species (APPS) home page, https://apps.nmfs.noaa.gov, and then selecting File No. 19638 from the list of available applications.

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

    Written comments on this application should be submitted to the Chief, Permits and Conservation Division, at the address listed above. Comments may also be submitted by facsimile to (301) 713-0376, or by email to [email protected] Please include the File No. in the subject line of the email comment.

    Those individuals requesting a public hearing should submit a written request to the Chief, Permits and Conservation Division at the address listed above. The request should set forth the specific reasons why a hearing on this application would be appropriate.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Sara Young or Amy Sloan, (301) 427-8401.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The subject permit is requested under the authority of the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972, as amended (MMPA; 16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.) and the regulations governing the taking and importing of marine mammals (50 CFR part 216).

    The purpose of this research is to determine the role of blood oxygen store depletion in the dive behavior and foraging ecology of California sea lions. This research would help determine the ability of these animals to adapt to environmental change. Over the course of five years, up to 70 lactating females would be captured, flipper tagged, anesthetized, and equipped with a venous or arterial blood oxygen recorder, a velocity-acceleration-depth recorder, kinematic recorders, intravascular lactate sensor, or intravascular thermistor probe during foraging trips to sea. Animals would be recaptured after the foraging trip to remove the recorders. The pups of the females would also be captured and marked for ID purposes. Research would occur on San Nicolas Island off the coast of California. Annually, up to 4,000 California sea lions, 100 harbor seals (Phoca vitulina), 200 northern elephant seals (Mirounga angustirostris), and 30 northern fur seals (Callorhinus ursinus) may be incidentally harassed during research. A limited number of California sea lion mortalities (one per year) are requested. The permit would be valid for five years.

    In compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), an initial determination has been made that the activity proposed is categorically excluded from the requirement to prepare an environmental assessment or environmental impact statement.

    Concurrent with the publication of this notice in the Federal Register, NMFS is forwarding copies of the application to the Marine Mammal Commission and its Committee of Scientific Advisors.

    Dated: May 10, 2016. Julia Harrison, Chief, Permits and Conservation Division, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2016-11311 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XE580 Marine Mammals; File No. 19116 AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Notice; receipt of application.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given that the NOAA Office of Science and Technology (Ned Cyr, Responsible Party), 1315 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910, has applied in due form for a permit to conduct research on sixteen species of marine mammals in the Pacific Ocean.

    DATES:

    Written, telefaxed, or email comments must be received on or before June 13, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    The application is available for review by selecting “Records Open for Public Comment” from the “Features” box on the Applications and Permits for Protected Species (APPS) home page, https://apps.nmfs.noaa.gov, and then selecting File No. 19116 from the list of available applications.

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

    Written comments on this application should be submitted to the Chief, Permits and Conservation Division, at the address listed above. Comments may also be submitted by facsimile to (301) 713-0376, or by email to [email protected] Please include the File No. in the subject line of the email comment.

    Those individuals requesting a public hearing should submit a written request to the Chief, Permits and Conservation Division at the address listed above. The request should set forth the specific reasons why a hearing on this application would be appropriate.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Sara Young or Carrie Hubard, (301) 427-8401.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The subject permit is requested under the authority of the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972, as amended (MMPA; 16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.), the regulations governing the taking and importing of marine mammals (50 CFR part 216), the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (ESA; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), and the regulations governing the taking, importing, and exporting of endangered and threatened species (50 CFR 222-226).

    The applicant requests a five-year permit to conduct a research program involving studies of sound production, diving and other behavior, and responses to sound of marine mammals, including endangered species. The results would be integrated with related studies and directly contribute to conservation management for sound producers and regulatory agencies by identifying characteristics of target species that are critical for passive monitoring, detection, and/or density estimation; and, by demonstrating how specific sounds, including simulated military sonar, may evoke behavioral responses in marine mammals. The experimental design involves temporarily attaching individual recording tags to measure vocalization, behavior, and physiological parameters as well as sound exposure. Behavior will be measured before, during, and after carefully controlled exposures of sound in conventional playback experiments. Tagged subjects will be exposed to received sound levels up to 180 dB re: 1μPa. This study will involve various activities that could take animals by harassment, including close approaches, attachment of tags, and sound exposure. Small fragments of sloughed skin, which often remain attached to retrieved tags, would be used for genetic analyses. Target species include beaked whales and other odontocetes, key baleen whales, and pinniped species for whom such data have not been previously obtained; other marine species may be incidentally impacted. Please refer to the tables in the application for the numbers of marine mammals, by species and stock, proposed for this permit. The research will be focused in the waters within the U.S. Navy's Southern California Range Complex, and primarily near the vicinity of San Clemente Island northward to Monterey Bay.

    NMFS prepared a draft environmental assessment (EA) under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), to examine whether significant environmental impacts could result from issuance of the proposed scientific research permit and conduct of the research. The draft EA is available upon request for review and comment simultaneous with the scientific research permit application.

    Concurrent with the publication of this notice in the Federal Register, NMFS is forwarding copies of the application to the Marine Mammal Commission and its Committee of Scientific Advisors.

    Dated: May 10, 2016. Julia Harrison, Chief, Permits, Conservation and Education Division, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2016-11309 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    COMMITTEE FOR PURCHASE FROM PEOPLE WHO ARE BLIND OR SEVERELY DISABLED Procurement List; Proposed Additions and Deletions AGENCY:

    Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled.

    ACTION:

    Proposed additions to and deletions from the Procurement List.

    SUMMARY:

    The Committee is proposing to add services to the Procurement List that will be furnished by nonprofit agencies employing persons who are blind or have other severe disabilities, and deletes products and a service previously furnished by such agencies.

    DATES:

    Comments must be received on or before: 6/12/2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled, 1401 S. Clark Street, Suite 715, Arlington, Virginia, 22202-4149.

    For Further Information or to Submit Comments Contact:

    Barry S. Lineback, Telephone: (703) 603-7740, Fax: (703) 603-0655, or email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This notice is published pursuant to 41 U.S.C. 8503 (a)(2) and 41 CFR 51-2.3. Its purpose is to provide interested persons an opportunity to submit comments on the proposed actions.

    Additions

    If the Committee approves the proposed additions, the entities of the Federal Government identified in this notice will be required to procure the services listed below from nonprofit agencies employing persons who are blind or have other severe disabilities.

    The following services are proposed for addition to the Procurement List for production by the nonprofit agencies listed:

    Services Service Type: Facility Maintenance Service Mandatory For: U.S. Coast Guard, Shore Facilities and Coast Guard Cutter Cheboygan, MI Mandatory Source(s) of Supply: Grand Traverse Industries, Inc., Traverse City, MI Contracting Activity: USCG, 1301 Clay Street, Suite 801N, Oakland, CA Service Type: Engineering and Environmental Service Mandatory for: U.S. Air Force, 61st Civil Engineer & Logistics Squadron, Los Angeles Air Force Base, 43 North Aviation Boulevard, El Segundo, CA Mandatory Source(s) of Supply: PRIDE Industries, Roseville, CA Contracting Activity: Dept of the Air Force, FA2816 SMC PKO, El Segundo, CA Service Type: Custodial and Related Service Mandatory for: GSA PBS Region 5, SSA Federal Building, 611 E. Genesee Avenue, Saginaw, MI Mandatory Source(s) of Supply: SVRC Industries, Inc., Saginaw, MI Contracting Activity: GSA, Public Buildings Service, Acquisition Management Division, Dearborn, MI Deletions

    The following products and service are proposed for deletion from the Procurement List:

    Products NSN(s)—Product Name(s): 3990-00-NSH-0065—Skid, Wood Contracting Activity: Government Printing Office, Washington, DC NSN(s)—Product Name(s): 6532-00-083-6534—Gown, Operating, Surgical 6532-00-083-6535—Gown, Operating, Surgical 6532-00-083-6536—Gown, Operating, Surgical 6532-00-104-9895—Gown, Hospital Mandatory Source(s) of Supply: Unknown Contracting Activity: Defense Logistics Agency Troop Support Service Service Type: Toner Cartridge Remanufacturing Malmstrom Air Force Base Malmstrom AFB, MT Mandatory Source(s) of Supply: Community Option Resource Enterprises, Inc., (COR Enterprises), Billings, MT Contracting Activity: Dept of the Air Force, FA7014 AFDW PK Barry S. Lineback, Director, Business Operations.
    [FR Doc. 2016-11330 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6353-01-P
    COMMITTEE FOR PURCHASE FROM PEOPLE WHO ARE BLIND OR SEVERELY DISABLED Procurement List; Additions and Deletions AGENCY:

    Committee for Purchase from People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled.

    ACTION:

    Additions to and deletions from the procurement list.

    SUMMARY:

    This action adds services to the Procurement List that will be provided by nonprofit agencies employing persons who are blind or have other severe disabilities, and deletes products and services from the Procurement List previously furnished by such agencies.

    DATES:

    Effective 6/12/2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled, 1401 S. Clark Street, Suite 715, Arlington, Virginia 22202-4149.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Barry S. Lineback, Telephone: (703) 603-7740, Fax: (703) 603-0655, or email [email protected].

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Additions

    On 4/1/2016 (81 FR 18839-18840), the Committee for Purchase from People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled published notice of proposed additions to the Procurement List.

    After consideration of the material presented to it concerning capability of qualified nonprofit agencies to provide the services and impact of the additions on the current or most recent contractors, the Committee has determined that the services listed below are suitable for procurement by the Federal Government under 41 U.S.C. 8501-8506 and 41 CFR 51-2.4.

    Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification

    I certify that the following action will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities.

    The major factors considered for this certification were:

    1. The action will not result in any additional reporting, recordkeeping or other compliance requirements for small entities other than the small organizations that will provide the services to the Government.

    2. The action will result in authorizing small entities to provide the services to the Government.

    3. There are no known regulatory alternatives which would accomplish the objectives of the Javits-Wagner-O'Day Act (41 U.S.C. 8501-8506) in connection with the services proposed for addition to the Procurement List.

    End of Certification

    Accordingly, the following services are added to the Procurement List:

    Services Service Type: Janitorial Service Service Mandatory For: Library of Congress, Fort Meade Collection Storage Modules, Fort Meade, MD Mandatory Source(s) of Supply: Goodwill Industries of the Chesapeake, Inc., Baltimore, MD Contracting Activity: Library of Congress, Fedlink Contracts, Washington, DC Service Type: Custodial Service Service Mandatory For: National Park Service NE Region, Tri-Site Maintenance Facility, Olmsted, Kennedy & Longfellow/Washington National Historic Sites, Boston, MA Mandatory Source(s) of Supply: Community Workshops, Inc., Boston, MA Contracting Activity: Dept of the Interior, National Park Service, NER NE MABO, Boston, MA Deletions

    On 4/8/2016 (81 FR 20624-20625), the Committee for Purchase from People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled published notice of proposed deletions from the Procurement List.

    After consideration of the relevant matter presented, the Committee has determined that the products and services listed below are no longer suitable for procurement by the Federal Government under 41 U.S.C. 8501-8506 and 41 CFR 51-2.4.

    Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification

    I certify that the following action will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities.

    The major factors considered for this certification were:

    1. The action will not result in additional reporting, recordkeeping or other compliance requirements for small entities.

    2. The action may result in authorizing small entities to furnish the products and services to the Government.

    3. There are no known regulatory alternatives which would accomplish the objectives of the Javits-Wagner-O'Day Act (41 U.S.C. 8501-8506) in connection with the products and services deleted from the Procurement List.

    End of Certification

    Accordingly, the following products and services are deleted from the Procurement List:

    Products NSN(s)—Product Name(s): MR 10654—Bottle, Single Wall MR 10656—Saver, Sandwich MR 10666—Thermos, 25 oz., Licensed MR 10667—Tumbler, Drinking, 16 oz., Licensed MR 10669—Kit, Party, New Year's Mandatory Source(s) of Supply: Winston-Salem Industries for the Blind, Inc., Winston-Salem, NC Contracting Activity: Defense Commissary Agency NSN(s)—Product Name(s): 6545-01-533-7042—Quik Clot Module Mandatory Source(s) of Supply: Chautauqua County Chapter, NYSARC, Jamestown, NY Contracting Activity: Defense Logistics Agency Troop Support Services Service Type: Janitorial/Custodial Service Mandatory for: Fairchild Air Force Base: Air Recovery and Rescue Squadron (Bldg. 2036), SAC/MET Office (Building 2001B), Fairchild AFB, WA Mandatory Source(s) of Supply: Skils'kin, Spokane, WA Contracting Activity: Dept of the Air Force, FA7014 AFDW PK, Andrews AFB, MD Service Type: Operation of Postal Service Center Service Mandatory for: Fairchild Air Force Base, Fairchild AFB, WA Mandatory Source(s) of Supply: Skils'kin, Spokane, WA Contracting Activity: Dept of the Air Force, FA4620 92 CONS LGC, Fairchild AFB, WA Barry S. Lineback, Director, Business Operations.
    [FR Doc. 2016-11331 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6353-01-P
    COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION Sunshine Act Meetings TIME AND DATE:

    10:00 a.m., Friday, May 20, 2016.

    PLACE:

    Three Lafayette Centre, 1155 21st Street NW., Washington, DC, 9th Floor Commission Conference Room.

    STATUS:

    Closed.

    MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:

    Surveillance, enforcement, and examinations matters. In the event that the time, date, or location of this meeting changes, an announcement of the change, along with the new time, date, and/or place of the meeting will be posted on the Commission's Web site at http://www.cftc.gov.

    CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION:

    Christopher Kirkpatrick, 202-418-5964.

    Natise Allen, Executive Assistant.
    [FR Doc. 2016-11548 Filed 5-11-16; 4:30 pm] BILLING CODE 6351-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Department of the Army Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement for Training Mission and Mission Support Activities at Fort Campbell, KY AGENCY:

    Department of the Army, DoD.

    ACTION:

    Notice of availability.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of the Army announces the availability of the Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS) for proposed training mission and mission support activities at Fort Campbell, KY. Pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), the Final PEIS analyzes the potential impacts of training and mission support activities on the environmental resources of Fort Campbell and the surrounding region. The Final PEIS assesses the No Action Alternative, four action alternatives, and a fifth alternative that would implement all of the separate action alternatives. The Proposed Action would meet the Senior Commander's Soldier training requirements, support the Range Complex Master Plan, and streamline the NEPA analysis process for routine range and training land actions occurring at Fort Campbell.

    DATES:

    No decision will be made until at least 30 days after publication of the Notice of Availability in the Federal Register by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, at which time the Army will document its selection of alternative(s) in a Record of Decision.

    ADDRESSES:

    Please send written comments to Mr. Gene Zirkle, NEPA/Wildlife Program Manager, Environmental Division, Building 2159 13th Street, Fort Campbell, KY 42223; or by email to [email protected]

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Please contact Mr. Gene Zirkle, NEPA/Wildlife Program Manager, Environmental Division, 270-798-9854, during normal working business hours Monday through Friday, 7:30 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. CST; or by email to [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Final PEIS has been prepared to meet the requirements of NEPA to evaluate the environmental and socioeconomic impacts, as well as cumulative impacts, of implementing the proposed actions at Fort Campbell. The Final PEIS takes into consideration comments received on the Draft PEIS. No substantial changes were made to the Final PEIS based on comments received during the Draft EIS comment period. The Final information includes impacts to, and mitigation for the Northern Long Eared Bat, which was listed as threatened after the Draft EIS was released. The resource areas evaluated include air quality, airspace, biological resources, cultural resources, energy, facilities, land use, hazardous materials/waste, noise, socioeconomics, soils, traffic and transportation, water resources, and wetland resources. There would be no significant impacts; however, moderate adverse impacts could occur to soils, biological resources, and water resources.

    Fort Campbell covers 105,068 acres in Kentucky and Tennessee. Fort Campbell is home to the 101st Airborne Division (Air Assault), the 5th Special Forces Group, 160th Special Operations Aviation Regiment, and other tenant units. The mission of Fort Campbell is primarily to support and train the units stationed on the installation in preparation for a variety of assigned combat and combat related missions.

    The purpose of the Proposed Action is to provide the forces that train on Fort Campbell with state-of-the-art training facilities and ranges. The action would also implement site-specific range modernization needs contained within the Range Complex Master Plan. The Final PEIS will also support future decisions regarding routine range and training land actions occurring at Fort Campbell that are not covered under an existing NEPA analysis.

    The Final PEIS analyzes the potential environmental impacts of the No Action Alternative—continuing existing training missions and environmental programs, and maintaining existing environmental conditions through current operational controls. The PEIS analyzes four alternatives and one alternative implementing all of these alternatives:

    • Alternative 1—Construct and Operate Site-Specific Projects in Support of Soldier Training.

    • Alternative 2—Create Adaptable Use Zones (AUZs) to Facilitate Future Modernization and Range Facility Construction.

    • Alternative 3—Implement Routine Range and Training Land Actions and Environmental Stewardship Practices.

    • Alternative 4—Evaluate the Reactivation of Installation Controlled Airspace.

    • Alternative 5—Implement Action Alternatives 1-4.

    The preferred alternative is Alternative 5.

    The U.S. Army plans to issue a Record of Decision no earlier than 30 days after the date of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Notice of Availability. The Final PEIS is available at http://www.campbell.army.mil/Pages/TMMSA.aspx.

    Brenda S. Bowen, Army Federal Register Liaison Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2016-11285 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001-03-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Defense Acquisition Regulations System [OMB Control Number 0704-0441; Docket Number DARS-2016-0019] Information Collection Requirement; Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS); Quality Assurance AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Notice and request for comments regarding a proposed revision of an approved information collection requirement.

    SUMMARY:

    In compliance with section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. chapter 35), DoD announces the proposed revision of a public information collection requirement and seeks public comment on the provisions thereof. DoD invites comments on: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of DoD, including whether the information will have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the estimate of the burden of the proposed information collection; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the information collection on respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has approved this information collection for use through July 31, 2016. DoD proposes that OMB extend its approval for use for three additional years beyond the current expiration date.

    DATES:

    DoD will consider all comments received by July 12, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments, identified by OMB Control Number 0704-0441, using any of the following methods:

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

    Email: [email protected] Include OMB Control Number 0704-0441 in the subject line of the message.

    Fax: 571-372-6094.

    Mail: Defense Acquisition Regulations System, Attn: Ms. Jo Ann Reilly, OUSD(AT&L)DPAP(DARS), 3060 Defense Pentagon, Room 3B941, Washington, DC 20301-3060.

    Comments received generally will be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ms. Jo Ann Reilly, at 571-372-6098. The information collection requirements addressed in this notice are available on the World Wide Web at: http://www.acq.osd.mil/dpap/dars/dfarspgi/current/index.html. Paper copies are available from Ms. Jo Ann Reilly, OUSD(AT&L)DPAP(DARS), 3060 Defense Pentagon, Room 3B941, Washington, DC 20301-3060.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Title and OMB Number: Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS), Part 246, Quality Assurance and Related Clauses in 252.246; OMB Control Number 0704-0441.

    Needs and Uses: DoD needs to ensure that the Government receives timely notification of item nonconformances or deficiencies that could impact safety. The Procuring Contracting Officer and the Administrative Contracting Officer use the information to ensure that the customer is aware of potential safety issues in delivered products, has a basic understanding of the circumstances, and has a point of contact to begin addressing a mutually acceptable plan of action. In addition, DoD needs to track warranties for Item Unique Item Identification (IUID) required items in the IUID registry. The identification and enforcement of warranties is essential to the effectiveness and efficiency of DoD's material readiness.

    Affected Public: Businesses or other for-profit and not-for profit institutions.

    Number of Respondents: 54,250.

    Responses per Respondent: 1.

    Annual Responses: 54,250.

    Average Burden per Response: Approximately .5 hour.

    Annual Burden Hours: 27,250.

    Reporting Frequency: On occasion.

    Summary of Information Collection

    This information collection includes requirements relating to DFARS part 246, Quality Assurance. The information collections under OMB Control Number 0704-0441 are expanded to pertain to all information that offerors or contractors must submit related to DFARS part 246 contract quality assurance programs. Therefore, this justification supports a request for renewal of OMB Control Number 0704-0441 to include the incorporation of the burden currently cleared under OMB Control Number 0704-0481, which expires June 30, 2017. Upon the renewal of OMB Control Number 0704-0441, OMB Control Number 0704-0481 and its associated burden will be discontinued.

    a. 252.246-7003, Notification of Potential Safety Issues, requires contractors to provide notification of (1) all nonconformances for parts identified as critical safety items acquired by the Government under the contract, and (2) all nonconformances or deficiencies that may result in a safety impact for systems, or subsystems, assemblies, subassemblies, or parts integral to a system acquired by or serviced for the Government under the contract.

    b. 252.246-7005, Notice of Warranty Tracking of Serialized Items, requires an offeror to provide with its offer, for each contract line item number, warranty tracking information for each warranted item.

    c. 252.246-7006, Warranty Tracking of Serialized Items, requires contractors, for warranted items, to provide (1) the unique item identifier, and (2) the warranty repair source information and instructions.

    Jennifer L. Hawes, Editor, Defense Acquisition Regulations System.
    [FR Doc. 2016-11373 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001-06-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Defense Acquisition Regulations System [OMB Control Number 0704-0434; Docket Number DARS-2016-0018] Information Collection Requirement; Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS); Radio Frequency Identification Advance Shipment Notices AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Notice and request for comments regarding a proposed extension of an approved information collection requirement.

    SUMMARY:

    In compliance with Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35), DoD announces the proposed extension of a public information collection requirement and seeks public comment on the provisions thereof. DoD invites comments on: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of DoD, including whether the information will have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the estimate of the burden of the proposed information collection; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the information collection on respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has approved this information collection for use through August 31, 2013. DoD proposes that OMB extend its approval for use for three additional years beyond the current expiration date.

    DATES:

    DoD will consider all comments received by July 12, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments, identified by OMB Control Number 0704-0434, using any of the following methods:

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

    Email: [email protected] Include OMB Control Number 0704-0434 in the subject line of the message.

    Fax: 571-372-6094.

    Mail: Defense Acquisition Regulations System, Attn: Ms. Dustin Pitsch, OUSD(AT&L)DPAP(DARS), 3060 Defense Pentagon, Room 3B941, Washington, DC 20301-3060.

    Comments received generally will be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Mr. Dustin Pitsch, 571-372-6090. The information collection requirements addressed in this notice are available on the World Wide Web at: http://www.acq.osd.mil/dpap/dars/dfarspgi/current/index.html. Paper copies are available from Mr. Dustin Pitsch, OUSD(AT&L)DPAP(DARS), 3060 Defense Pentagon, Room 3B855, Washington, DC 20301-3060.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Title, Associated Form, and OMB Number: Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS); Radio Frequency Identification Advance Shipment Notices; OMB Control Number 0704-0434.

    Needs and Uses: DoD uses advance shipment notices for the shipment of material containing Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) tag data. DoD receiving personnel use the advance shipment notice to associate the unique identification encoded on the RFID tag with the corresponding shipment. Use of the RFID technology permits DoD an automated and sophisticated end-to-end supply chain that has increased visibility of assets and permits delivery of supplies to the warfighter more quickly.

    Affected Public: Businesses or other for-profit and not-for profit institutions.

    Number of Respondents: 5,217.

    Responses per Respondent: 3,782.

    Annual Responses: 19,732,850.

    Average Burden per Response: Approximately 1.16 seconds.

    Annual Burden Hours: 6,353.

    Frequency: On Occasion.

    Summary of Information Collection

    The clause at DFARS 252.211-7006, Passive Radio Frequency Identification, requires the contractor to ensure that the data on each passive RFID tag are unique and conform to the requirements that they are readable and affixed to the appropriate location on the specific level of packaging in accordance with MIL-STD-129 tag placement specifications. The contractor shall encode an approved RFID tag using the appropriate instructions at the time of contract award. Regardless of the selected encoding scheme, the contractor is responsible for ensuring that each tag contains a globally unique identifier. The contractor shall electronically submit advance shipment notices with the RFID tag identification in advance of the shipment in accordance with the procedures at https://wawf.eb.mil/.

    Jennifer L. Hawes, Editor, Defense Acquisition Regulations System.
    [FR Doc. 2016-11374 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001-06-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Office of the Secretary [Docket ID: DOD-2016-OS-0057] Proposed Collection; Comment Request AGENCY:

    Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, DoD.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness announces a proposed public information collection and seeks public comment on the provisions thereof. Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed information collection; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the information collection on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

    DATES:

    Consideration will be given to all comments received by July 12, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments, identified by docket number and title, by any of the following methods:

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

    Mail: Department of Defense, Office of the Deputy Chief Management Officer, Directorate of Oversight and Compliance, Regulatory and Audit Matters Office, 9010 Defense Pentagon, Washington, DC 20301-9010

    Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name, docket number and title for this Federal Register document. The general policy for comments and other submissions from members of the public is to make these submissions available for public viewing on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov as they are received without change, including any personal identifiers or contact information.

    Any associated form(s) for this collection may be located within this same electronic docket and downloaded for review/testing. Follow the instructions at http://www.regulations.gov for submitting comments. Please submit comments on any given form identified by docket number, form number, and title.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    To request more information on this proposed information collection or to obtain a copy of the proposal and associated collection instruments, please write to the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Readiness, Force Education and Training, Voluntary Education, ATTN: Ms. Dawn Bilodeau, Pentagon, Room 2E573, Washington, DC 20301-1500 or send email to project officer at: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    President Barack Obama signed Executive Order 13607 on April 27, 2012 to address the problem of aggressive and deceptive targeting of Service members, veterans, and their families by some educational institutions. Section 4 of the Executive Order specifically calls for the creation of a robust, centralized complaint process for students receiving Federal military and veterans' educational benefits.

    DoD, along with the participating Federal agencies identified in the Executive Order have determined that this complaint process, in addition to taking in complaints about abusive or deceptive practices by schools, must create an opportunity for schools to resolve those complaints, and must ensure that complaint data is accessible both to the relevant components at the Departments of Defense, Veterans Affairs, and Education that review schools for compliance and program eligibility, as well as the relevant law enforcement agencies that will prosecute any illegal practices. Beyond creation of this complaint process, the agencies seek to prevent abusive, deceptive, and fraudulent marketing practices through the following mechanisms: establishment of risk-based program reviews; limits on access to military installations by educational institutions; and the use of intellectual property and other legal protections to ensure Web sites and programs are not deceptively suggesting military affiliation or endorsement. The centralized complaint system will provide a resource for students receiving military and veteran educational benefits to effectively submit complaints against institutions they feel have acted deceptively or fraudulently. The first step is to make it easier for prospective and current military students and spouse-students to raise these concerns.

    Title; Associated Form; and OMB Number: DoD Postsecondary Education Complaint Intake Form, DD Form 2961; OMB Control Number 0704-0501.

    Needs and Uses: The information collection requirement is necessary to obtain, document, and respond to egregious complaints, questions, and other information concerning actions post-secondary education programs and services provided to military service members and spouse-students. The DoD Postsecondary Education Complaint Intake form will provide pertinent information such as: the content of the complaint, the educational institution the student is attending, the level of study, the education program the student is enrolled in, the type of education benefits being used, the branch of the military service, and the preferred contact information.

    Affected Public: Individuals or households.

    Annual Burden Hours: 25.

    Number of Respondents: 100.

    Responses per Respondent: 1.

    Annual Responses: 100.

    Average Burden per Response: 15 minutes.

    Frequency: On Occasion.

    Respondents are military spouses who submit complaints via the Department of Defense (DoD) Postsecondary Education Complaint Intake form. The PECS Intake form is used to record complaints concerning educational institutions that military spouses feel have acted deceptively, aggressively or fraudulently towards them. The Intake form documents information such as the level of study of the student, the educational institution the student is attending, the type of education benefits being used, the branch of the military service the spouses' sponsor, the content of the complaint, and the preferred contact information for the person making the contact. Complaint Case Managers use information from the Intake form to track and manage cases and to coordinate a resolution with educational institutions, and to provide feedback to the respondent throughout the process and once a resolution has been reached.

    Dated: May 9, 2016. Aaron Siegel, Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
    [FR Doc. 2016-11290 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001-06-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Office of the Secretary Charter Renewal of Department of Defense Federal Advisory Committees AGENCY:

    Department of Defense.

    ACTION:

    Renewal of Federal Advisory Committee.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Defense (DoD) is publishing this notice to announce that it is renewing the charter for the U.S. Air Force Scientific Advisory Board (“the Board”).

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Jim Freeman, Advisory Committee Management Officer for the Department of Defense, 703-692-5952.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This committee's charter is being renewed in accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) of 1972 (5 U.S.C., Appendix, as amended) and 41 CFR 102-3.50(d). The charter and contact information for the Board's Designated Federal Officer (DFO) can be obtained at http://www.facadatabase.gov/.

    The Board provides the Secretary of Defense and the Deputy Secretary of Defense, through the Secretary of the Air Force, independent advice and recommendations on matters relating to the Department of the Air Force's scientific, technical, manufacturing, acquisition, logistics, and business management functions, as well as other Department of the Air Force related matters. The Board shall be composed of no more than 20 members, all of whom are distinguished members of the science and technology communities, Federally Funded Research and Development Centers, National Laboratories, industry, and academia (universities and colleges). Members who are not full-time or permanent part-time Federal officers or employees are appointed as experts or consultants pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 3109 to serve as special government employee members. Members who are full-time or permanent part-time Federal officers or employees are appointed pursuant to 41 CFR 102-3.130(a) to serve as regular government employee members. All members are appointed to provide advice on behalf of the Government on the basis of their best judgment without representing any particular point of view and in a manner that is free from conflict of interest. Except for reimbursement of official Board-related travel and per diem, members serve without compensation. The DoD, as necessary and consistent with the Board's mission and DoD policies and procedures, may establish subcommittees, task forces, or working groups to support the Board, and all subcommittees must operate under the provisions of FACA and the Government in the Sunshine Act. Subcommittees will not work independently of the Board and must report all recommendations and advice solely to the Board for full deliberation and discussion. Subcommittees, task forces, or working groups have no authority to make decisions and recommendations, verbally or in writing, on behalf of the Board. No subcommittee or any of its members can update or report, verbally or in writing, directly to the DoD or any Federal officers or employees. The Board's DFO, pursuant to DoD policy, must be a full-time or permanent part-time DoD employee, and must be in attendance for the duration of each and every Board/subcommittee meeting. The public or interested organizations may submit written statements to the Board membership about the Board's mission and functions. Such statements may be submitted at any time or in response to the stated agenda of planned Board. All written statements must be submitted to the Board's DFO who will ensure the written statements are provided to the membership for their consideration.

    Dated: May 10, 2016. Aaron Siegel, Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
    [FR Doc. 2016-11308 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001-06-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Office of the Secretary Defense Health Board; Notice of Federal Advisory Committee Meeting AGENCY:

    Department of Defense (DoD).

    ACTION:

    Notice of Federal Advisory Committee meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Defense is publishing this notice to announce that the following Federal Advisory Committee meeting of the Defense Health Board will take place.

    DATES:

    Thursday, June 2, 2016 9:00 a.m.-10:15 a.m. (Closed Session) 10:15 a.m.-11:45 a.m. (Open Session) 11:45 a.m.-12:45 p.m. (Administrative Session) 12:45 p.m.-5:00 p.m. (Open Session) ADDRESSES:

    Defense Health Headquarters (DHHQ), Pavilion Salons B-C, 7700 Arlington Blvd., Falls Church, Virginia 22042 (escort required; see guidance in SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION, “Public's Accessibility to the Meeting”).

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    The Executive Director of the Defense Health Board is Ms. Christine Bader, 7700 Arlington Boulevard, Suite 5101, Falls Church, Virginia 22042, (703) 681-6653, Fax: (703) 681-9539, [email protected] For meeting information, please contact Ms. Kendal Brown, 7700 Arlington Boulevard, Suite 5101, Falls Church, Virginia 22042, [email protected], (703) 681-6670, Fax: (703) 681-9539.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

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

    Additional information, including the agenda and electronic registration, is available at the DHB Web site, http://www.health.mil/About-MHS/Other-MHS-Organizations/Defense-Health-Board/Meetings.

    Purpose of the Meeting

    The purpose of the meeting is to provide progress updates on specific taskings before the DHB. In addition, the DHB will receive information briefings on current issues or lessons learned related to military medicine, health policy, health research, disease/injury prevention, health promotion, and healthcare delivery.

    Agenda

    Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552b and 41 CFR 102-3.155, in the interest of national security, the DoD has determined that the first presentation in the morning of June 2, 2016 will be closed to the public. The topic is a presentation on the mission and functions of the National Center for Medical Intelligence. The Assistant Secretary of Defense (Health Affairs), in consultation with the Office of the DoD General Counsel, has determined in writing that the public interest requires that the first presentation in the morning session on June 2, 2016 be closed to the public because it will concern matters listed in section 552b(c)(1) of title 5, United States Code. The classified materials are so inextricably intertwined with the unclassified material that they cannot be reasonably segregated into separate discussions without disclosing SECRET material. Specifically, the information presented meets criteria established by an Executive Order to be kept secret in the interest of national defense and foreign policy.

    Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552b and 41 CFR 102-3.140 through 102-3.165 and subject to availability of space, the DHB meeting is open to the public from 10:15 a.m. to 11:45 a.m. on June 2, 2016, and from 12:45 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. The DHB will receive a progress update from the Health Care Delivery Subcommittee on the pediatric clinical preventive services review and an update from the Public Health Subcommittee on their review of improving Defense Health Program medical research processes. In addition, the DHB anticipates receiving information briefings on Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency medical research, the Army Study to Assess Risk and Resilience in Servicemembers (STARRS), the Infectious Disease Clinical Research Program, and Advances in the Use of Whole Blood for Combat Trauma Resuscitation. Any changes to the agenda can be found at the link provided in this SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section.

    Public's Accessibility to the Meeting

    Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552b, and 41 CFR 102-3.140 through 102-3.165 and subject to availability of space, this meeting is open to the public. Seating is limited and is on a first-come basis. All members of the public who wish to attend the public meeting must contact Ms. Kendal Brown at the number listed in the section FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT no later than 12:00 p.m. on Wednesday, May 25, 2016 to register. Additional details will be provided to all registrants.

    Special Accommodations

    Individuals requiring special accommodations to access the public meeting should contact Ms. Kendal Brown at least five (5) business days prior to the meeting so that appropriate arrangements can be made.

    Written Statements

    Any member of the public wishing to provide comments to the DHB may do so in accordance with section 10(a)(3) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 41 CFR 102-3.105(j) and 102-3.140, and the procedures described in this notice.

    Individuals desiring to provide comments to the DHB may do so by submitting a written statement to the DHB Designated Federal Officer (DFO) (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). Written statements should not be longer than two type-written pages and address the following details: The issue, discussion, and a recommended course of action. Supporting documentation may also be included, as needed, to establish the appropriate historical context and to provide any necessary background information.

    If the written statement is not received at least five (5) business days prior to the meeting, the DFO may choose to postpone consideration of the statement until the next open meeting.

    The DFO will review all timely submissions with the DHB President and ensure they are provided to members of the DHB before the meeting that is subject to this notice. After reviewing the written comments, the President and the DFO may choose to invite the submitter to orally present their issue during an open portion of this meeting or at a future meeting. The DFO, in consultation with the DHB President, may allot time for members of the public to present their issues for review and discussion by the Defense Health Board.

    Dated: May 10, 2016. Aaron Siegel, Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
    [FR Doc. 2016-11342 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001-06-P
    DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION [Docket No. ED-2016-ICCD-0025] Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to the Office of Management and Budget for Review and Approval; Comment Request; Formula Grant EASIE (Electronic Application System for Indian Education) AGENCY:

    Department of Education (ED), Office of Elementary and Secondary Education (OESE).

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. chapter 3501 et seq.), ED is proposing an extension of an existing information collection.

    DATES:

    Interested persons are invited to submit comments on or before June 13, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    To access and review all the documents related to the information collection listed in this notice, please use http://www.regulations.gov by searching the Docket ID number ED-2016-ICCD-0025. Comments submitted in response to this notice should be submitted electronically through the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov by selecting the Docket ID number or via postal mail, commercial delivery, or hand delivery. Please note that comments submitted by fax or email and those submitted after the comment period will not be accepted. Written requests for information or comments submitted by postal mail or delivery should be addressed to the Director of the Information Collection Clearance Division, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., LBJ, Room 2E-115 Washington, DC 20202-4537.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For specific questions related to collection activities, please contact Kimberly Smith, 202-453-6469.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Department of Education (ED), in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)), provides the general public and Federal agencies with an opportunity to comment on proposed, revised, and continuing collections of information. This helps the Department assess the impact of its information collection requirements and minimize the public's reporting burden. It also helps the public understand the Department's information collection requirements and provide the requested data in the desired format. ED is soliciting comments on the proposed information collection request (ICR) that is described below. The Department of Education is especially interested in public comment addressing the following issues: (1) Is this collection necessary to the proper functions of the Department; (2) will this information be processed and used in a timely manner; (3) is the estimate of burden accurate; (4) how might the Department enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (5) how might the Department minimize the burden of this collection on the respondents, including through the use of information technology. Please note that written comments received in response to this notice will be considered public records.

    Title of Collection: Formula Grant EASIE (Electronic Application System for Indian Education).

    OMB Control Number: 1810-0021.

    Type of Review: An extension of an existing information collection.

    Respondents/Affected Public: State, Local, and Tribal Governments.

    Total Estimated Number of Annual Responses: 11,300.

    Total Estimated Number of Annual Burden Hours: 9,103.

    Abstract: The Indian Education Formula Grant (CFDA 84.060A) requires the annual submission of the application from the local educational agency and/or tribe. The amount of each applicant's award is determined by formula, based upon the reported number of American Indian/Alaska Native students identified in the application, the state per pupil expenditure, and the total appropriation available. Applicants provide the data required for funding electronically, and the Office of Indian Education (OIE) is able to apply electronic tools to facilitate the review and analysis leading to grant awards. The system has been named Formula Grant Electronic Application System for Indian Education (EASIE), and is located in the EDFacts System (ESS) Web site.

    Dated: May 10, 2016. Tomakie Washington, Acting Director, Information Collection Clearance Division, Office of the Chief Privacy Officer, Office of Management.
    [FR Doc. 2016-11303 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4000-01-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [EPA-HQ-OPPT-2003-0004; FRL-9946-05] Access to Confidential Business Information by Abt Associates, Inc. AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    EPA has authorized its contractor, Abt Associates of Bethesda, MD, to access information which has been submitted to EPA under all sections of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). Some of the information may be claimed or determined to be Confidential Business Information (CBI).

    DATES:

    Access to the confidential data occurred on April 27, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For technical information contact: Scott Sherlock, Environmental Assistance Division (7408M), Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number: (202) 564-8257; email address: [email protected]

    For general information contact: The TSCA-Hotline, ABVI-Goodwill, 422 South Clinton Ave., Rochester, NY 14620; telephone number: (202) 554-1404; email address: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. General Information A. Does this action apply to me?

    This action is directed to the public in general. This action may, however, be of interest to all who manufacture, process, or distribute industrial chemicals. Since other entities may also be interested, the Agency has not attempted to describe all the specific entities that may be affected by this action.

    B. How can I get copies of this document and other related information?

    The docket for this action, identified by docket identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPPT-2003-0004, is available at http://www.regulations.gov or at the Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics Docket (OPPT Docket), Environmental Protection Agency Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the OPPT Docket is (202) 566-0280. Please review the visitor instructions and additional information about the docket available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

    II. What action is the Agency taking?

    Under EPA contract number EP-W-16-009, contractor Abt Associates of 4800 Montgomery Lane, Bethesda, MD and 55 Wheeler Street, Cambridge, MA is assisting the Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics (OPPT) in the development of economic assessments; surveys; and non-regulatory activities that will require access to data and other confidential business information. The contractor is also assisting in evaluating the potential risks of new chemical substances including microorganisms and evaluating existing chemicals for risk and for the need to develop data bearing on such risks.

    In accordance with 40 CFR 2.306(j), EPA has determined that under EPA contract number EP-W-16-009, Abt Associates required access to CBI submitted to EPA under all section(s) of TSCA to perform successfully the duties specified under the contract. Abt Associates personnel were given access to information submitted to EPA under all section(s) of TSCA. Some of the information may be claimed or determined to be CBI.

    EPA is issuing this notice to inform all submitters of information under all sections of TSCA that EPA has provided Abt Associates access to these CBI materials on a need-to-know basis only. All access to TSCA CBI under this contract is taking place at EPA Headquarters and Abt Associates' sites located in Bethesda, MD and Cambridge, MA, in accordance with EPA's TSCA CBI Protection Manual.

    Access to TSCA data, including CBI, will continue until March 30, 2021. If the contract is extended, this access will also continue for the duration of the extended contract without further notice.

    Abt Associates personnel have signed nondisclosure agreements and were briefed on appropriate security procedures before they were permitted access to TSCA CBI.

    Authority:

    15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.

    Dated: May 4, 2016. Megan J. Carroll, Acting Director, Information Management Division, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics.
    [FR Doc. 2016-11379 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ER-FRL-9026-9] Environmental Impact Statements; Notice of Availability

    Responsible Agency: Office of Federal Activities, General Information (202) 564-7146 or http://www2.epa.gov/nepa.

    Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact Statements (EISs) filed 05/02/2016 through 05/06/2016 pursuant to 40 CFR 1506.9. Notice

    Section 309(a) of the Clean Air Act requires that EPA make public its comments on EISs issued by other Federal agencies. EPA's comment letters on EISs are available at: https://cdxnodengn.epa.gov/cdx-enepa-public/action/eis/search.

    EIS No. 20160098, Final, USFWS, AZ, Pima County Multi-species Conservation Plan, review period ends: 06/13/2016, Contact: Michelle Shaughnessy 505-248-6654. EIS No. 20160099, Final, USFS, OR, Granite Creek Watershed Mining Project, review period ends: 06/13/2016, Contact: Sophia Millar 541-263-1735. EIS No. 20160100, Final, FTA, MN, Southwest Light Rail Transit, review period ends: 06/13/2016, Contact: Maya Sarna 202-366-5811. EIS No. 20160101, Draft, USFS, CA, Littlerock Reservoir Sediment Removal Project, comment period ends: 06/30/2016, Contact: Lorraine Gerchas 626-574-5281. EIS No. 20160102, Draft, FERC, PA, Atlantic Sunrise Project, comment period ends: 06/27/2016, Contact: Joanne Wachholder 202-502-8056. EIS No. 20160103, Final, USA, KY, PROGRAMMATIC—U.S. Army Garrison Fort Campbell, Training Mission and Mission Support Activities, review period ends: 06/13/2016, Contact: Trudy Carr 270-798-2877. EIS No. 20160104, Final, BLM, WY, Energy Gateway South Transmission Project, review period ends: 06/13/2016, Contact: Tamara Gertsch 307-775-6115. Final Supplement, NRC, NV, Supplement to the U.S. Department of Energy's Environmental Impact Statement for a Geologic Repository for the Disposal of Spent Nuclear Fuel and High-Level Radioactive Waste at Yucca Mountain, Nye County, Nevada—Final Report, NUREG-2184, Contact: Christine Pineda 301-415-6789. Prepared in accordance with NWPA § 114 and 10 CFR 51.109, which describes the NRC's NEPA process for its review of the proposed geologic repository at Yucca Mountain, Nevada. Amended Notices EIS No. 20150333, Draft, NMFS, USFWS, CA, Butte Regional Conservation Plan, comment period ends: 06/08/2016, Contact: Dan Cox 916-414-6593.

    Revision to FR Notice Published 02/19/2016; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the U.S. National Marine Fisheries Service jointly are reopening the comment period to end 06/08/2016.

    Dated: May 10, 2016. Karin Leff, Acting Director, NEPA Compliance Division, Office of Federal Activities.
    [FR Doc. 2016-11347 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [EPA-HQ-OW-2015-0613; FRL-9946-06-OEI] Information Collection Request Submitted to OMB for Review and Approval; Comment Request; Title I of the Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency has submitted an information collection request (ICR), “Title I of the Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act” (EPA ICR No. 0824.06, OMB Control No. 2040-0008) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). This is a proposed reinstatement of the ICR (formerly known as “Ocean Dumping Regulations—reports and record keeping to obtain a permit, request designation, and report on permitted dumping activities”), which is currently expired. Public comments were previously requested via the Federal Register (81 FR 484) on January 6, 2016 during a 60-day comment period. This notice allows for an additional 30 days for public comments. A fuller description of the ICR is given below, including its estimated burden and cost to the public. An Agency may not conduct or sponsor and a person is not required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

    DATES:

    Additional comments may be submitted on or before June 13, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-2015-0613, online using www.regulations.gov (our preferred method), by email to [email protected], or by mail to: EPA Docket Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460.

    EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    David Redford, Oceans and Coastal Protection Division, Environmental Protection Agency, 4504T 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone 202-566-1288; email address: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Supporting documents which explain in detail the information that the EPA will be collecting are available in the public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at www.regulations.gov or in person at the EPA Docket Center, WJC West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC. The telephone number for the Docket Center is 202-566-1744. For additional information about EPA's public docket, visit www.epa.gov/dockets.

    Abstract: Ocean dumping—the transportation of any material for the purpose of dumping in ocean waters—cannot occur unless a permit is issued under the Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act (MPRSA). EPA is responsible for issuing ocean dumping permits for all materials except dredged material. EPA collects or sponsors the collection of information for the purposes of permit issuance, reporting of emergency dumping to safety of life at sea, compliance with permit requirements, including specifically general permits for burial at sea and for transportation and disposal of vessels.

    Form numbers: None.

    Respondents/affected entities: Respondents/affected entities may include any private person or entity, or State, local or foreign governments.

    Respondent's obligation to respond: Required to obtain or retain a benefit, specifically permit authorization and/or compliance with permits required under MPRSA sections 102 and 104, 33 U.S.C. 1402 & 1404, and implementing regulations at 40 CFR parts 220-229.

    Estimated number of respondents: 2,767 respondents per year.

    Frequency of response: The frequency of response varies for application and reporting requirements for different permits. Other than the general permit for transportation and disposal of vessels, response is required once for each permit application, whether a single notification to EPA or a permit application. Depending on the type of MPRSA permit, a permit application would be required prior to expiration if the permittee seeks re-issuance: general permit (once every seven years); special permit (once every three years), and research permit (once every 18 months).

    Total estimated burden: 3,207 hours per year. Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).

    Total estimated cost: $349,157, which includes $195,857 for capital or operation & maintenance costs.

    Changes in Estimates: EPA estimates an increase in the number of respondents from 21 to 2,767 with a corresponding decrease in total estimated burden from 27,004 to 3,207 hours as compared to the most recently approved ICR, which expired January 31, 1992. The estimated increase in the number of respondents is due to the significant increase in the number of entities using the burial at sea and vessel general permits, which were not widely used at the time of the earlier ICR. The estimated decrease in the total estimated burden is due to the implementation of the Ocean Dumping Ban Act of 1988, which led to the cessation of the dumping of sewage sludge and industrial wastes. The respondent burden for these special permits was high due the potentially significant impacts from dumping these wastes, and the data required from the respondents to ensure permit compliance.

    Courtney Kerwin, Acting Director, Collection Strategies Division.
    [FR Doc. 2016-11275 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [EPA-HQ-SFUND-2012-0104; FRL-9945-81-OEI] Information Collection Request Submitted to OMB for Review and Approval; Comment Request; Brownfields Program—Accomplishment Reporting (Renewal) AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency has submitted an information collection request (ICR), “Brownfields Program—Accomplishment Reporting (Renewal)” (EPA ICR No. 2104.06, OMB Control No. 2050-0192) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). This is a proposed extension of the ICR, which is currently approved through May 31, 2016. Public comments were previously requested via the Federal Register (81 FR 10859) on March 2, 2016 during a 60-day comment period. This notice allows for an additional 30 days for public comments. A fuller description of the ICR is given below, including its estimated burden and cost to the public. An Agency may not conduct or sponsor and a person is not required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

    DATES:

    Additional comments may be submitted on or before June 13, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-SFUND-2012-0104, to (1) EPA online using www.regulations.gov (our preferred method), by email to [email protected], or by mail to: EPA Docket Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460, and (2) OMB via email to [email protected]. Address comments to OMB Desk Officer for EPA.

    EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Kelly Gorini, Office of Brownfields and Land Revitalization, (5105T), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: (202)-566-1702; fax number: (202)-566-1476; email address: [email protected].

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Supporting documents which explain in detail the information that the EPA will be collecting are available in the public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at www.regulations.gov or in person at the EPA Docket Center, WJC West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC. The telephone number for the Docket Center is 202-566-1744. For additional information about EPA's public docket, visit http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

    Abstract: The Small Business Liability Relief and Brownfields Revitalization Act (Pub. L. 107-118) (“the Brownfields Amendments”) was signed into law on January 11, 2002. The Act amends the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), as amended, and authorizes EPA to award cooperative agreements to states, tribes, local governments, and other eligible entities to assess and clean up brownfield sites. Under CERCLA 101(39), a brownfields site means real property, the expansion, redevelopment, or reuse of which may be complicated by the presence or potential presence of a hazardous substance, pollutant, or contaminant. For funding purposes, EPA uses the term “brownfields property(ies)” synonymously with the term “brownfields sites.” CERCLA 104(k) authorizes EPA to award several types of cooperative agreements to eligible entities on a competitive basis.

    Under CERCLA 104(k), states, tribes, local governments, and other eligible entities may receive assessment cooperative agreements to inventory, characterize, assess, and conduct planning and community involvement related to brownfields properties; cleanup cooperative agreements to carry out cleanup activities at brownfields properties; cooperative agreements to capitalize revolving loan funds and provide subawards for cleanup activities; area-wide planning cooperative agreements to develop revitalization plans for brownfields; and environmental workforce and development job training and placement programs. Under CERCLA 128(a), states and tribes may receive cooperative agreements to establish and enhance their response programs.

    Cooperative agreement recipients (“recipients”) have general reporting and record keeping requirements as a condition of their cooperative agreement that result in burden. A portion of this reporting and record keeping burden is authorized under 2 CFR 200.328, 200.333 and 200.335 and identified in the EPA's general grants ICR (OMB Control Number 2030-0020). However, EPA also requires Brownfields program recipients to maintain and report additional information to EPA on the uses and accomplishments associated with funded brownfields activities. EPA uses several forms to assist recipients in reporting the information and to ensure consistency of the information collected. EPA uses this information to meet Federal stewardship responsibilities to manage and track how program funds are being spent, to evaluate the performance of the Brownfields Cleanup and Land Revitalization Program, to meet the Agency's reporting requirements under the Government Performance Results Act, and to report to Congress and other program stakeholders on the status and accomplishments of the program.

    Form Numbers: 6200-14, 6200-13, 6200-04, 6200-03.

    Respondents/affected entities: State/local/tribal governments; Non-Profits.

    Respondent's obligation to respond: Required to obtain or Retain Benefits (2 CFR part 1500).

    Estimated number of respondents: 2,890 (total).

    Frequency of response: Bi-annual; quarterly, on occasion.

    Total estimated burden: 3,877 hours (per year). Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.03(b).

    Total estimated cost: $414,197 (per year), includes $0 annualized capital or operation & maintenance costs.

    Changes in the Estimates: There is an increase of 710 hours in the total estimated respondent burden compared with the ICR currently approved by OMB. This increase is due to the overall increase in wages and the overall increase in the number of respondents submitting the Property Profile Forms. Even with this slight increase, respondents indicated that improvements in the ACRES reporting system and increased familiarity with the program led to a lower burden per individual entry.

    Courtney Kerwin, Acting Director, Collection Strategies Division.
    [FR Doc. 2016-11277 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [EPA-HQ-RCRA-2016-0071; FRL-9945-35-OEI] Information Collection Request Submitted to OMB for Review and Approval; Comment Request; Solid Waste Disposal Facility Criteria (Renewal) AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency has submitted an information collection request (ICR), “Solid Waste Disposal Facility Criteria (Renewal)” (EPA ICR No. 1381.11, OMB Control No. 2050-0122) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). This is a proposed extension of the ICR, which is currently approved through May 31, 2016. Public comments were previously requested via the Federal Register (81 FR 8956) on February 23, 2016 during a 60-day comment period. This notice allows for an additional 30 days for public comments. A fuller description of the ICR is given below, including its estimated burden and cost to the public. An Agency may not conduct or sponsor and a person is not required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

    DATES:

    Additional comments may be submitted on or before June 13, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-RCRA-2016-0071, to (1) EPA online using www.regulations.gov (our preferred method), by email to [email protected], or by mail to: EPA Docket Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460, and (2) OMB via email to [email protected] Address comments to OMB Desk Officer for EPA.

    EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Craig Dufficy, Materials Recovery and Waste Management Division, Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery, Mail Code 5304P, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: 703-308-9037; fax number: 703-308-0514; email address: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Supporting documents which explain in detail the information that the EPA will be collecting are available in the public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at www.regulations.gov or in person at the EPA Docket Center, WJC West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC. The telephone number for the Docket Center is 202-566-1744. For additional information about EPA's public docket, visit http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

    Abstract: In order to effectively implement and enforce final changes to 40 CFR part 258 on a State level, owners/operators of municipal solid waste landfills have to comply with the final reporting and recordkeeping requirements. Respondents include owners or operators of new municipal solid waste landfills (MSWLFs), existing MSWLFs, and lateral expansions of existing MSWLFs. The respondents, in complying with 40 CFR part 258, are required to record information in the facility operating record, pursuant to § 258.29, as it becomes available. The operating record must be supplied to the State as requested until the end of the post-closure care period of the MSWLF. The information collected will be used by the State Director to confirm owner or operator compliance with the regulations under part 258. These owners or operators could include Federal, State, and local governments, and private waste management companies.

    Form Numbers: None.

    Respondents/affected entities: Owners or operators of MSWLFs; State, Local, and Tribal governments.

    Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory, see 40 CFR part 258.29.

    Estimated number of respondents: 1,950 (total).

    Frequency of response: On occasion.

    Total estimated burden: 204,868 hours (per year). Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.03(b)

    Total estimated cost: $15,255,544 (per year), includes $2,210,853 annualized capital or operation & maintenance costs.

    Changes in the Estimates: There is an increase of 60 hours in the total estimated respondent burden compared with the ICR currently approved by OMB. This increase is due to the increased number of states adopting the Research, Development, and Demonstration section (§ 258.4) since the last renewal.

    Courtney Kerwin, Acting Director, Collection Strategies Division.
    [FR Doc. 2016-11276 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    EXPORT-IMPORT BANK [Public Notice 2016-3021] Agency Information Collection Activities: Comment Request AGENCY:

    Export-Import Bank of the United States.

    ACTION:

    Submission for OMB review and comments request.

    Form Title: EIB 10-06 Application for Approved Finance Provider.

    SUMMARY:

    The Export-Import Bank of the United States (Ex-Im Bank), as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other Federal Agencies to comment on the proposed information collection, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

    Financial institutions interested in becoming an Approved Finance Provider (AFP) with EXIM Bank must complete this application in order to obtain approval to make loans under EXIM Bank insurance policies and/or enter into one or more Master Guarantee Agreements (MGA) with EXIM Bank. An AFP may participate in the Medium-Term Insurance, Bank Letter of Credit, and Financial Institution Buyer Credit programs as an insured lender, while AFPs approved for an MGA may apply for multiple loan or lease transactions to be guaranteed by EXIM Bank.

    EXIM Bank uses the information provided in the form and the supplemental information required to be submitted with the form to determine whether the lender qualifies to participate in its lender insurance and guarantee programs. The details are necessary to evaluate whether the lender has the capital to fund potential transactions, proper due diligence procedures, and the monitoring capacity to carry out transactions.

    The information collection tool can be reviewed at: http://exim.gov/sites/default/files/pub/pending/eib10_06.pdf.

    DATES:

    Comments must be received on or before June 13, 2016 to be assured of consideration.

    ADDRESSES:

    Comments may be submitted electronically on WWW.REGULATIONS.GOV or by mail to Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, 725 17th Street NW., Washington, DC 20038 Attn: OMB 3048-0032.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Title and Form Number: EIB 10-06 Application for Approved Finance Provider.

    OMB Number: 3048-0032.

    Type of Review: Regular.

    Need and Use: The information collected will allow EXIM Bank to determine compliance and content for transaction requests submitted to the Export-Import Bank under its insurance, guarantee, and direct loan programs.

    Affected Public

    This form affects entities involved in the export of U.S. goods and services.

    Annual Number of Respondents: 50.

    Estimated Time per Respondent: 30 minutes.

    Annual Burden Hours: 25 hours.

    Frequency of Reporting of Use: As required.

    Government Expenses

    Reviewing time per year: 25 hours.

    Average Wages per Hour: $42.50.

    Average Cost per Year (time*wages): $1,062.50.

    Benefits and Overhead: 20%.

    Total Government Cost: $1,275.

    Bonita Jones-McNeil, Program Analyst, Agency Clearance Officer, Office of the Chief Information Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2016-11340 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6690-01-P
    FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION [OMB 3060-1184] Information Collection Being Reviewed by the Federal Communications Commission Under Delegated Authority AGENCY:

    Federal Communications Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice and request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, and as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), the Federal Communications Commission (FCC or Commission) invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the following information collections. Comments are requested concerning: Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Commission, including whether the information shall have practical utility; the accuracy of the Commission's burden estimate; ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on the respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and ways to further reduce the information collection burden on small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees.

    The FCC may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. No person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information subject to the PRA that does not display a valid OMB control number.

    DATES:

    Written PRA comments should be submitted on or before July 12, 2016. If you anticipate that you will be submitting comments, but find it difficult to do so within the period of time allowed by this notice, you should advise the contact listed below as soon as possible.

    ADDRESSES:

    Direct all PRA comments to Cathy Williams, FCC, via email [email protected] and to [email protected].

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For additional information about the information collection, contact Cathy Williams at (202) 418-2918.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    OMB Control Number: 3060-1184.

    Title: Sections 1.946(d), 27.10(d), 27.12, 27.14 and 27.17, Service Rules for the Advanced Wireless Services H Block—Implementing Section 6401 of the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012 Related to the 1915-1920 MHz and 1995-2000 MHz Bands—R&O, FCC 13-88.

    Form Number: N/A.

    Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection.

    Respondents: Business or other for-profit entities, and not-for-profit institutions.

    Number of Respondents: 1 respondent; 176 responses.

    Estimated Time per Response: .5 hours.

    Frequency of Response: Fourth and tenth year from the year the respondent obtained each license and on occasion reporting requirement.

    Obligation to Respond: Required to obtain or retain benefits. The statutory authority for these collections are contained in 15 U.S.C. 79 et seq.; 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i), 154(j), 155, 157, 225, 227, 303(r), 309, 310, 1404, and 1451.

    Total Annual Burden: 88 hours.

    Total Annual Cost: No cost.

    Privacy Impact Assessment: No impact(s).

    Nature and Extent of Confidentiality: There is no need for confidentiality with this collection of information.

    Needs and Uses: The Commission will submit this information collection to the Office of Management and Budget for a three-year extension of OMB Control Number 3060-1184. Part 27 rule sections require respondents to report or disclose information to the Commission or third parties, respectively, and to maintain records. These requirements are necessary for the Commission staff to carry out its duties to determine technical, legal and other qualifications of applicants to operate and remain licensed to operate a station(s) for Personal Communications Services (PCS). In addition, the information is used to determine whether the public interest, convenience, and necessity are being served as required by 47 U.S.C. 309 and to ensure that applicants and licenses comply with ownership and transfer restrictions imposed by 47 U.S.C. 310. Without this information, the Commission would not be able to carry out its statutory responsibilities. The Commission is submitting this rulemaking for the Advanced Wireless Services (AWS) H Block to make available ten megahertz of spectrum for flexile use, extending the current PCS band. The rule allows the implementation of the Congressional directive in the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012 (Spectrum Act) to grant licenses for the 1915-1920 MHz (Lower H Block) and 1995-2000 MHz (Upper H Block) bands. The mandatory requirements will continue with this PRA collection, and there is no change in the third party disclosure requirements.

    Federal Communications Commission. Gloria J. Miles, Federal Register Liaison Officer. Office of the Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-11335 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
    FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION Notice to All Interested Parties of the Termination of the Receivership of 10002, Miami Valley Bank, Lakeview, OH

    Notice is hereby given that the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”) as Receiver for Miami Valley Bank, Lakeview, Ohio (“the Receiver”) intends to terminate its receivership for said institution. The FDIC was appointed receiver of Miami Valley Bank on October 4, 2007. The liquidation of the receivership assets has been completed. To the extent permitted by available funds and in accordance with law, the Receiver will be making a final dividend payment to proven creditors.

    Based upon the foregoing, the Receiver has determined that the continued existence of the receivership will serve no useful purpose. Consequently, notice is given that the receivership shall be terminated, to be effective no sooner than thirty days after the date of this Notice. If any person wishes to comment concerning the termination of the receivership, such comment must be made in writing and sent within thirty days of the date of this Notice to: Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, Division of Resolutions and Receiverships, Attention: Receivership Oversight Department 34.1, 1601 Bryan Street, Dallas, TX 75201.

    No comments concerning the termination of this receivership will be considered which are not sent within this time frame.

    Dated: May 10, 2016. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. Robert E. Feldman, Executive Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-11355 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6714-01-P
    FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION Update to Notice of Financial Institutions for Which the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Has Been Appointed Either Receiver, Liquidator, or Manager AGENCY:

    Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.

    ACTION:

    Update Listing of Financial Institutions in Liquidation.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given that the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (Corporation) has been appointed the sole receiver for the following financial institutions effective as of the Date Closed as indicated in the listing. This list (as updated from time to time in the Federal Register) may be relied upon as “of record” notice that the Corporation has been appointed receiver for purposes of the statement of policy published in the July 2, 1992 issue of the Federal Register (57 FR 29491). For further information concerning the identification of any institutions which have been placed in liquidation, please visit the Corporation Web site at www.fdic.gov/bank/individual/failed/banklist.html or contact the Manager of Receivership Oversight in the appropriate service center.

    Dated: May 9, 2016. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. Robert E. Feldman, Executive Secretary. Institutions in Liquidation [In alphabetical order] FDIC Ref. No. Bank name City State Date closed 10520 First CornerStone Bank King of Prussia PA 5/6/2016
    [FR Doc. 2016-11357 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6714-01-P
    FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION Notice to All Interested Parties of the Termination of the Receivership of 10261, Turnberry Bank, Aventura, Florida

    Notice is hereby given that the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”) as Receiver for Turnberry Bank, Aventura, Florida (“the Receiver”) intends to terminate its receivership for said institution. The FDIC was appointed receiver of Turnberry Bank on July, 16, 2010. The liquidation of the receivership assets has been completed. To the extent permitted by available funds and in accordance with law, the Receiver will be making a final dividend payment to proven creditors.

    Based upon the foregoing, the Receiver has determined that the continued existence of the receivership will serve no useful purpose. Consequently, notice is given that the receivership shall be terminated, to be effective no sooner than thirty days after the date of this Notice. If any person wishes to comment concerning the termination of the receivership, such comment must be made in writing and sent within thirty days of the date of this Notice to: Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, Division of Resolutions and Receiverships, Attention: Receivership Oversight Department 32.1, 1601 Bryan Street, Dallas, TX 75201.

    No comments concerning the termination of this receivership will be considered which are not sent within this time frame.

    Dated: May 3, 2016. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. Robert E. Feldman, Executive Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-11324 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6714-01-P
    FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION Notice of Termination, 10292 The Peoples Bank, Winder, Georgia

    The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), as Receiver for 10292 The Peoples Bank, Winder, Georgia (Receiver) has been authorized to take all actions necessary to terminate the receivership estate of The Peoples Bank (Receivership Estate); the Receiver has made all dividend distributions required by law.

    The Receiver has further irrevocably authorized and appointed FDIC-Corporate as its attorney-in-fact to execute and file any and all documents that may be required to be executed by the Receiver which FDIC-Corporate, in its sole discretion, deems necessary; including but not limited to releases, discharges, satisfactions, endorsements, assignments and deeds.

    Effective May 1, 2016, the Receivership Estate has been terminated, the Receiver discharged, and the Receivership Estate has ceased to exist as a legal entity.

    Dated: May 10, 2016. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. Robert E. Feldman, Executive Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2016-11356 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6714-01-P
    FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION [Notice 2016-02] Policy Statement Regarding a Program for Requesting Consideration of Legal Questions by the Commission AGENCY:

    Federal Election Commission.

    ACTION:

    Policy statement.

    SUMMARY:

    The Federal Election Commission (“Commission”) adopted a program on August 1, 2011, providing for a means by which persons and entities may have a legal question considered by the Commission earlier in both the report review process and the audit process. On October 23, 2013, the Commission revised this policy to provide an alternative electronic means to file a request with the Commission. This new policy is identical to the October 23, 2013 program, except that it makes two modifications: (1) To clarify that requests for consideration be submitted to the Commission Secretary to ensure that such request are processed in timely manner, and (2) to build five business days into the program to allow time for informal resolution of matters.

    DATES:

    Effective May 13, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Mr. Lorenzo Holloway, Assistant General Counsel, or Margaret Forman, Attorney, 999 E Street NW., Washington, DC 20463, (202) 694-1650 or (800) 424-9530.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    On August 1, 2011, the Commission adopted a program providing for a means by which persons and entities may have a legal question considered by the Commission earlier in both the report review process and the audit process. Specifically, when the Office of Compliance (“OC”) (which includes the Reports Analysis Division and the Audit Division) requests that a person or entity take corrective action during the report review or audit process, if the person or entity disagrees with the request based upon a material dispute on a question of law, the person or entity may seek Commission consideration of the issue pursuant to this procedure. This Commission is now revising this program. The October 23, 2013 revision of the program was identical to that August 1, 2011 program, except that it provided alternative means to file a request with the Commission. This change was made to address and clarify timeliness issues due to delays in the processing and receipt of requests mailed to the Commission, by encouraging requests to be filed electronically by email. Processing delays can result in an untimely submission of a request under the program. Persons and entities making such a request may not be aware that these processing delays can occur when documents are sent via first class mail to a federal government agency. As currently revised, the program is identical to the October 23, 2013 program, except that it makes two modifications: (1) To clarify that requests for consideration be submitted to the Commission Secretary to ensure that such request are processed in timely manner, and (2) to build five business days into the program to allow time for informal resolution of matters. The first change was made to address and clarify that these requests must be sent to the attention of the Commission Secretary, either through the dedicated email address, [email protected], or by mail to the Commission's mailing address. There are two reasons for this change. First, the Commission Secretary is the person responsible for transmitting the Request to each Commissioner, the General Counsel, and the Staff Director, and therefore must be the recipient of any requests. Second, if the request is sent to another staff member, by email or otherwise, the processing of the request could be delayed. The second change was made to build five business days into the program to allow time for informal resolution of matters. This informal resolution process will be especially helpful in situations where the information related to or generated in the request reveals information that could potentially result in the informal resolution of the matter, without using additional Commission resources to submit the request formally through the entire Program. Allowing five business days to attempt to informally resolve matters will provide OGC and OC with an amount of time dedicated exclusively to informal resolution efforts instead of dividing their time and resources between attempting informal resolution and preparing the recommendation memorandum in a compressed time period intended solely for drafting the recommendation to the Commission. This informal resolution process would allow for a more efficient use of Commission resources. The policy statement regarding this program is reprinted in its entirety, below. It includes the revisions outlined above, which appear in the third and fourth paragraphs of the “Procedures” section, below.

    I. Procedures

    Within 15 business days of a determination by the Reports Analysis Division or Audit Division that a person or entity remains obligated to take corrective action to resolve an issue that has arisen during the report review or audit process, the person or entity may seek Commission consideration if a material dispute on a question of law exists with respect to the recommended corrective action.1 A “determination” for purposes of triggering the 15 business days is either: (1) Notification to the person or entity of legal guidance prepared by the Office of General Counsel (“OGC”) at the request of the Reports Analysis Division recommending the corrective action; or (2) the end of the Committee's Audit Exit Conference response period.

    1 Many disputes involving corrective action requests hinge on questions of fact rather than questions of law, and thus are not appropriate for this procedure.

    Any request for consideration by a Committee during the report review process or the audit process shall be limited to questions of law on material issues, when: (1) The legal issue is novel, complex, or pertains to an unsettled question of law; (2) there has been intervening legislation, rulemaking, or litigation since the Commission last considered the issue; or (3) the request to take corrective action is contrary to or otherwise inconsistent with prior Commission matters dealing with the same issue. The request must specify the question of law at issue and why it is subject to Commission consideration. It should discuss, when appropriate, prior Commission matters raising the same issue, relevant court decisions, and any other analysis of the issue that may assist the Commission in its decision making. The Commission will not consider factual disputes under this procedure, and any requests for consideration other than on questions of law on material issues will not be granted.

    All requests, including any extension requests, must be received by the Commission within 15 business days of the determination of corrective action. All requests must be directed to the attention of the Commission Secretary. Requestors may submit requests electronically via email. If a Requestor chooses to submit a request electronically via email, the email must be sent to [email protected] Requestors are encouraged to submit comments electronically to ensure timely receipt and consideration. Alternatively, requests may be submitted in paper form. Paper requests must be sent to the Federal Election Commission, Attn.: Commission Secretary, 999 E Street NW., Washington, DC 20463. Requestors are advised that if they submit a request, electronically or otherwise, to a different address than designated in this Policy, the processing of the request may be delayed. Upon receipt of a request, the Commission Secretary shall forward a copy of any request to each Commissioner, the General Counsel, and the Staff Director.

    Any request for an extension of time to file will be considered on a case-by-case basis and will only be granted if good cause is shown, and the Commission approves the extension request by four affirmative votes within five business days of receipt of the extension request. Within five business days of notification to the Commissioners of a request for consideration of a legal question, if two or more Commissioners agree that the Commission should consider the request, OGC may, at that time, attempt to resolve the matter informally over the course of five business days. Within 15 business days from the date upon which OC and OGC conclude that the matter cannot be resolved informally, or from the expiration of the five business day period, whichever occurs first, OGC will prepare and circulate a recommendation in accordance with all applicable Commission Directives. If the matter is resolved informally, OC and OGC will notify the Commission that the matter has been resolved, and notify the Requestor in writing of the notification to the Commission. Informal resolution of a matter does not prevent the Requestor from seeking Commission consideration, in an additional or subsequent determination, subject to the requirements of this program.

    After the recommendation is circulated for a Commission vote, in the event of an objection, the matter shall be automatically placed on the next meeting agenda consistent with the Sunshine Act, 5 U.S.C. 552b(g), and applicable Commission regulations, 11 CFR part 2. However, if within 60 business days of the filing of a request for consideration, the Commission has not resolved the issue or provided guidance on how to proceed with the matter by the affirmative vote of four or more Commissioners, the OC may proceed with the matter. After the 60 business days has elapsed, any requestor will be provided a copy of OGC's recommendation memorandum and an accompanying vote certification, or if no such certification exists, a cover page stating the disposition of the memoranda. Confidential information will be redacted as necessary.

    After the request review process has concluded, or a Final Audit Report has been approved, a copy of the request for consideration, as well as the recommendation memorandum and accompanying vote certification or disposition memorandum, will be placed with the Committee's filings or audit documents on the Commission's Web site within 30 days. These materials will also be placed on the Commission's Web page dedicated to legal questions considered by the Commission under this program.

    This procedure is not intended to circumvent or supplant the Advisory Opinion process provided under 52 U.S.C. 30108 and 11 CFR part 112. Accordingly, any legal issues that qualify for consideration under the Advisory Opinion process are not appropriate for consideration under this new procedure. Additionally, this policy statement does not supersede the procedures regarding eligibility and entitlement to public funds set forth in Commission Directive 24 and 11 CFR 9005.1, 9033.4, 9033.6 or 9033.10.

    II. Annual Review

    No later than July 1 of each year, the OC and OGC shall jointly prepare and distribute to the Commission a written report containing a summary of the requests made under the program over the previous year and a summary of the Commission's consideration of those requests and any action taken thereon. The annual report shall also include the Chief Compliance Officer's and the General Counsel's assessment of whether, and to what extent, the program has promoted efficiency and fairness in both the Commission's report review process and in the audit process, as well as their recommendations, if any, for modifications to the program.

    The Commission may terminate or modify this program through additional policy statements at any time by an affirmative vote of four of its members.

    On behalf of the Commission.

    Dated: May 5, 2016. Matthew S. Petersen, Chairman, Federal Election Commission.
    [FR Doc. 2016-11145 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6715-01-P
    FEDERAL MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION Sunshine Act Notice May 11, 2016. TIME AND DATE:

    10:00 a.m., Thursday, May 26, 2016.

    PLACE:

    The Richard V. Backley Hearing Room, Room 511N, 1331 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20004 (enter from F Street entrance).

    STATUS:

    Open.

    MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:

    The Commission will consider and act upon the following in open session: Secretary of Labor v. Hecla Limited, et al., Docket Nos. WEST 2012-760-M, et al. (Issues include whether the Judge erred in ruling that the operator did not violate the standard requiring that ground conditions be examined and tested.).

    Any person attending this meeting who requires special accessibility features and/or auxiliary aids, such as sign language interpreters, must inform the Commission in advance of those needs. Subject to 29 CFR 2706.150(a)(3) and § 2706.160(d).

    CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFO:

    Emogene Johnson (202) 434-9935/(202) 708-9300 for TDD Relay/1-800-877-8339 for toll free.

    Sarah L. Stewart, Deputy General Counsel.
    [FR Doc. 2016-11453 Filed 5-11-16; 11:15 am] BILLING CODE 6735-01-P
    FEDERAL MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION Sunshine Act Notice May 11, 2016. TIME AND DATE:

    10:00 a.m., Wednesday, May 25, 2016.

    PLACE:

    The Richard V. Backley Hearing Room, Room 511N, 1331 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20004 (enter from F Street entrance).

    STATUS:

    Open.

    MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:

    The Commission will hear oral argument in the matter Secretary of Labor v. Hecla Limited, et al., Docket Nos. WEST 2012-760-M, et al. (Issues include whether the Judge erred in ruling that the operator did not violate the standard requiring that ground conditions be examined and tested.).

    Any person attending this oral argument who requires special accessibility features and/or auxiliary aids, such as sign language interpreters, must inform the Commission in advance of those needs. Subject to 29 CFR 2706.150(a)(3) and § 2706.160(d).

    CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFO:

    Emogene Johnson (202) 434-9935/(202) 708-9300 for TDD Relay/1-800-877-8339 for toll free.

    Sarah L. Stewart, Deputy General Counsel.
    [FR Doc. 2016-11454 Filed 5-11-16; 11:15 am] BILLING CODE 6735-01-P
    FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM Change in Bank Control Notices; Acquisitions of Shares of a Bank or Bank Holding Company

    The notificants listed below have applied under the Change in Bank Control Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)) and § 225.41 of the Board's Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.41) to acquire shares of a bank or bank holding company. The factors that are considered in acting on the notices are set forth in paragraph 7 of the Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)(7)).

    The notices are available for immediate inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The notices also will be available for inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their views in writing to the Reserve Bank indicated for that notice or to the offices of the Board of Governors. Comments must be received not later than June 3, 2016.

    A. Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis (Yvonne Sparks, Community Development Officer) P.O. Box 442, St. Louis, Missouri 63166-2034:

    1. First State Bank of St. Charles Employee Stock Ownership Plan, St. Charles, Missouri, with GreatBanc Trust Company, Lisle, Illinois, as trustee, and Kjersti L. Cory, Quincy, Illinois, as the individual acting as corporate trustee; to acquire voting shares of First State Bancshares, Inc., St. Charles, Missouri, and thereby increase its indirect control of First State Bank of St. Charles, Missouri, St. Charles, Missouri.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, May 9, 2016. Michael J. Lewandowski, Associate Secretary of the Board.
    [FR Doc. 2016-11242 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6210-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services [CMS-1646-N] Medicare Program; Public Meeting on July 18, 2016 Regarding New and Reconsidered Clinical Diagnostic Laboratory Test Codes for the Clinical Laboratory Fee Schedule for Calendar Year 2017 AGENCY:

    Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice announces a public meeting to receive comments and recommendations (including accompanying data on which recommendations are based) from the public on the appropriate basis for establishing payment amounts for new or substantially revised Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System (HCPCS) codes being considered for Medicare payment under the clinical laboratory fee schedule (CLFS) for calendar year (CY) 2017. This meeting also provides a forum for those who submitted certain reconsideration requests regarding final determinations made last year on new test codes and for the public to provide comment on the requests.

    DATES:

    Meeting Date: The public meeting is scheduled for Monday, July 18, 2016 from 9:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m., Eastern Daylight Savings Time (E.D.T.)

    Deadline for Registration of Presenters and Submission of Presentations: All presenters for the public meeting must register and submit their presentations electronically to Glenn McGuirk at [email protected] by July 1, 2016 E.D.T.

    Deadline for Submitting Requests for Special Accommodations: Requests for special accommodations must be received no later than 5:00 p.m. on July 1, 2016 E.D.T.

    Deadline for Submission of Written Comments: We intend to publish our proposed determinations for new test codes and our preliminary determinations for reconsidered codes (as described below in section II. Format) for CY 2017 by early September 2016. Interested parties may submit written comments on these determinations by early October, 2016, to the address specified in the ADDRESSES section of this notice or electronically to Glenn McGuirk at [email protected] (the specific date for the publication of these determinations on the CMS Web site, as well as the deadline for submitting comments regarding these determinations will be published on the CMS Web site).

    ADDRESSES:

    The public meeting will be held in the main auditorium of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Central Building, 7500 Security Boulevard, Baltimore, Maryland 21244-1850.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Glenn McGuirk, (410) 786-5723.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Background

    Section 531(b) of the Medicare, Medicaid, and SCHIP Benefits Improvement and Protection Act of 2000 (BIPA) (Pub. L. 106-554) requires the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (the Secretary) to establish procedures for coding and payment determinations for new clinical diagnostic laboratory tests under Part B of title XVIII of the Social Security Act (the Act) that permit public consultation in a manner consistent with the procedures established for implementing coding modifications for International Classification of Diseases (ICD-9-CM). The procedures and public meeting announced in this notice for new tests are in accordance with the procedures published on November 23, 2001 in the Federal Register (66 FR 58743) to implement section 531(b) of BIPA.

    Section 942(b) of the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003 (MMA) (Pub. L. 108-173) added section 1833(h)(8) of the Act. Section 1833(h)(8)(A) of the Act requires the Secretary to establish by regulation procedures for determining the basis for, and amount of, payment for any clinical diagnostic laboratory test with respect to which a new or substantially revised Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System (HCPCS) code is assigned on or after January 1, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as “new tests”). A code is considered to be substantially revised if there is a substantive change to the definition of the test or procedure to which the code applies (such as, a new analyte or a new methodology for measuring an existing analyte-specific test). (See section 1833(h)(8)(E)(ii) of the Act.)

    Section 1833(h)(8)(B) of the Act sets forth the process for determining the basis for, and the amount of, payment for new tests. Pertinent to this notice, section 1833(h)(8)(B)(i) and (ii) of the Act requires the Secretary to make available to the public a list that includes any such test for which establishment of a payment amount is being considered for a year and, on the same day that the list is made available, causes to have published a notice in the Federal Register of a meeting to receive comments and recommendations (including accompanying data on which recommendations are based) from the public on the appropriate basis for establishing payment amounts for the tests on such list. This list of codes for which the establishment of a payment amount under the clinical laboratory fee schedule (CLFS) is being considered for calendar year (CY) 2017 is posted on the CMS Web site at http://www.cms.gov/Medicare/Medicare-Fee-for-Service-Payment/ClinicalLabFeeSched/index.html?redirect=/ClinicalLabFeeSched/. Section 1833(h)(8)(B)(iii) of the Act requires that we convene the public meeting not less than 30 days after publication of the notice in the Federal Register. These requirements are codified at 42 CFR part 414, subpart G.

    Two bases of payment are used to establish payment amounts for new tests. The first basis, called “crosswalking,” is used when a new test code is determined to be comparable to an existing test code, multiple existing test codes, or a portion of an existing test code. The new test code is assigned the local fee schedule amounts and the national limitation amount of the existing test. Payment for the new test is made at the lesser of the billed amount, the local fee schedule amount, or the national limitation amount. (See § 414.508(a).)

    The second basis called “gapfilling,” is used when no comparable existing test is available. When using this method, instructions are provided to each Part A and Part B Medicare Administrative Contractor (MAC) to determine a payment amount for its Part B geographic area) for use in the first year. The contractor-specific amounts are established for the new test code using the following sources of information, if available: (1) Charges for the test and routine discounts to charges; (2) resources required to perform the test; (3) payment amounts determined by other payers; and (4) charges, payment amounts, and resources required for other tests that may be comparable or otherwise relevant. (See § 414.508(b) and § 414.509 for more information regarding the gapfilling process.)

    Under section 1833(h)(8)(B)(iv) of the Act, the Secretary, taking into account the comments and recommendations (and accompanying data) received at the public meeting, develops and makes available to the public a list of proposed determinations with respect to the appropriate basis for establishing a payment amount for each code, an explanation of the reasons for each determination, the data on which the determinations are based, and a request for public written comments on the proposed determinations. Under section 1833(h)(8)(B)(v) of the Act, taking into account the comments received on the proposed determinations during the public comment period, the Secretary then develops and makes available to the public a list of final determinations of final payment amounts for new test codes along with the rationale for each determination, the data on which the determinations are based, and responses to comments and suggestions received from the public.

    After the final determinations have been posted on the CMS Web site, the public may request reconsideration of the basis and amount of payment for a new test as set forth in § 414.509. Pertinent to this notice, those requesting that CMS reconsider the basis for payment or, for crosswalking, reconsider the payment amount as set forth in § 414.509(a) and (b)(1) may present their reconsideration requests at the following year's public meeting provided that the requestor made the request to present at the public meeting in the written reconsideration request. For purposes of this notice, we refer to these codes as the “reconsidered codes.” The public may comment on the reconsideration requests. (See the November 27, 2007 CY 2008 Physician Fee Schedule final rule with comment period (72 FR 66275 through 66280) for more information on these procedures.)

    II. Format

    We are following our usual process, including an annual public meeting to determine the appropriate basis and payment amount for new and reconsidered test codes under the CLFS for CY 2017.

    This meeting is open to the public. The on-site check-in for visitors will be held from 8:30 a.m. to 9:00 a.m., followed by opening remarks. Registered persons from the public may discuss and make recommendations for specific new and reconsidered test codes for the CY 2017 CLFS.

    We note that the July 2016 Clinical Diagnostic Laboratory Tests (CDLT) Advisory Panel meeting and the laboratory public meeting will be a joint meeting this year, on July 18, 2016. The announcement for the CDLT Advisory Panel meeting will be included in a separate Federal Register notice.

    Because of time constraints, presentations must be brief, lasting no longer than 10 minutes, and must be accompanied by three written copies. In addition, presenters should make copies available for approximately 50 meeting participants, since CMS will not be providing additional copies. Written presentations must be electronically submitted to CMS on or before July 1, 2016. Presentation slots will be assigned on a first-come, first-served basis. In the event that there is not enough time for presentations by everyone who is interested in presenting, CMS will gladly accept written presentations from those who were unable to present due to time constraints. Presentations should be sent via email to Glenn McGuirk, at [email protected] For reconsidered and new test codes, presenters should address all of the following 5 items:

    (1) Reconsidered or new test codes and descriptor.

    (2) Test purpose and method.

    (3) Costs.

    (4) Charges.

    (5) Recommendation with rationale for one of the two bases (crosswalking or gapfilling) for determining payment for reconsidered and new tests.

    Additionally, the presenters should provide the data on which their recommendations are based. Written presentations from the public meeting will be available upon request, via email to Glenn McGuirk at [email protected] Presentations regarding reconsidered and new test codes that do not address the above five items for presenters may be considered incomplete and may not be considered by CMS when making a determination. However, we may request missing information following the meeting to prevent a recommendation from being considered incomplete.

    Taking into account the comments and recommendations (and accompanying data) received at the public meeting, we intend to post our proposed determinations with respect to the appropriate basis for establishing a payment amount for each new test code and our preliminary determinations with respect to the reconsidered codes along with an explanation of the reasons for each determination, the data on which the determinations are based, and a request for public written comments on these determinations on the CMS Web site by early September 2016. This Web site can be accessed at http://www.cms.gov/Medicare/Medicare-Fee-for-Service-Payment/ClinicalLabFeeSched/index.html?redirect=/ClinicalLabFeeSched/. We also will include a summary of all comments received by August 8, 2016 (15 business days after the meeting). Interested parties may submit written comments on the proposed determinations for new test codes or the preliminary determinations for reconsidered codes by early October, 2016, to the address specified in the ADDRESSES section of this notice or electronically to Glenn McGuirk at [email protected] (the specific date for the publication of the determinations on the CMS Web site, as well as the deadline for submitting comments regarding the determinations, will be published on the CMS Web site). Final determinations for new test codes to be included for payment on the CLFS for CY 2017 and reconsidered codes will be posted on the CMS Web site in November 2016, along with the rationale for each determination, the data on which the determinations are based, and responses to comments and suggestions received from the public. The final determinations with respect to reconsidered codes are not subject to further reconsideration. With respect to the final determinations for new test codes, the public may request reconsideration of the basis and amount of payment as set forth in § 414.509.

    III. Registration Instructions

    The Division of Ambulatory Services in the CMS Center for Medicare is coordinating the public meeting registration. Beginning June 6, 2016, registration may be completed on-line at the following Web site: http://www.cms.gov/Medicare/Medicare-Fee-for-Service-Payment/ClinicalLabFeeSched/index.html?redirect=/ClinicalLabFeeSched/. All the following information must be submitted when registering:

    • Name.

    • Company name.

    • Address.

    • Telephone numbers.

    • Email addresses.

    When registering, individuals who want to make a presentation must also specify, which new test codes they will be presenting comments. A confirmation will be sent upon receipt of the registration. Individuals must register by the date specified in the DATES section of this notice.

    IV. Security, Building, and Parking Guidelines

    The meeting will be held in a Federal government building; therefore, Federal security measures are applicable. In planning your arrival time, we recommend allowing additional time to clear security. It is suggested that you arrive at the CMS facility between 8:15 a.m. and 8:30 a.m., so that you will be able to arrive promptly at the meeting by 9:00 a.m. Individuals who are not registered in advance will not be permitted to enter the building and will be unable to attend the meeting. The public may not enter the building earlier than 8:15 a.m. (45 minutes before the convening of the meeting).

    Security measures include the following:

    • Presentation of government-issued photographic identification to the Federal Protective Service or Guard Service personnel. Persons without proper identification may be denied access to the building.

    • Interior and exterior inspection of vehicles (this includes engine and trunk inspection) at the entrance to the grounds. Parking permits and instructions will be issued after the vehicle inspection.

    • Passing through a metal detector and inspection of items brought into the building. We note that all items brought to CMS, whether personal or for the purpose of demonstration or to support a demonstration, are subject to inspection. We cannot assume responsibility for coordinating the receipt, transfer, transport, storage, set-up, safety, or timely arrival of any personal belongings or items used for demonstration or to support a demonstration.

    V. Special Accommodations

    Individuals attending the meeting who are hearing or visually impaired and have special requirements, or a condition that requires special assistance, should provide that information upon registering for the meeting. The deadline for registration is listed in the DATES section of this notice.

    Dated: April 11, 2016. Andrew M. Slavitt, Acting Administrator, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services.
    [FR Doc. 2016-11269 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4120-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Administration for Children and Families Proposed Information Collection Activity; Comment Request Proposed Projects

    Title: Tribal Child Support Enforcement Direct Funding Request: 45 CFR 309—Plan.

    OMB No.: 0970-0218.

    Description: The final rule within 45 CFR part 309, published in the Federal Register on March 30, 2004, contains a regulatory reporting requirement that, in order to receive funding for a Tribal IV-D program a Tribe or Tribal organization must submit a plan describing how the Tribe or Tribal organization meets or plans to meet the objectives of section 455(f) of the Social Security Act, including establishing paternity, establishing, modifying, and enforcing support orders, and locating noncustodial parents. The plan is required for all Tribes requesting funding; however, once a Tribe has met the requirements to operate a comprehensive program, a new plan is not required annually unless a Tribe makes changes to its title IV-D program. Tribes and Tribal organizations must respond if they wish to operate a fully funded program. This paperwork collection activity is set to expire in December 31, 2016.

    Respondents: Tribes and Tribal Organizations.

    Annual Burden Estimates Instrument Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • responses per respondent
  • Average
  • burden hours per response
  • Total burden hours
    45 CFR 309—Plan 60 2 480 57,600

    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 57,600.

    In compliance with the requirements of Section 506(c)(2)(A) of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Administration for Children and Families is soliciting public comment on the specific aspects of the information collection described above. Copies of the proposed collection of information can be obtained and comments may be forwarded by writing to the Administration for Children and Families, Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation, 330 C Street SW., Washington DC 20201. Attn: ACF Reports Clearance Officer. Email address: [email protected] All requests should be identified by the title of the information collection.

    The Department specifically requests comments on: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information; (c) the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Consideration will be given to comments and suggestions submitted within 60 days of this publication.

    Robert Sargis, Reports Clearance Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2016-11325 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4184-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2013-D-0880] Frequently Asked Questions About Medical Foods; Second Edition; Guidance for Industry; Availability AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice of availability.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or we) is announcing the availability of a guidance for industry entitled “Frequently Asked Questions About Medical Foods; Second Edition.” FDA published earlier versions of the guidance in May 1997 and May 2007. The second edition of the guidance provides responses to additional questions regarding the definition and labeling of medical foods and updates some prior responses.

    DATES:

    Submit either electronic or written comments on FDA guidances at any time.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments as follows:

    Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:

    • Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Comments submitted electronically, including attachments, to http://www.regulations.gov will be posted to the docket unchanged. Because your comment will be made public, you are solely responsible for ensuring that your comment does not include any confidential information that you or a third party may not wish to be posted, such as medical information, your or anyone else's Social Security number, or confidential business information, such as a manufacturing process. Please note that if you include your name, contact information, or other information that identifies you in the body of your comments, that information will be posted on http://www.regulations.gov.

    • If you want to submit a comment with confidential information that you do not wish to be made available to the public, submit the comment as a written/paper submission and in the manner detailed (see “Written/Paper Submissions” and “Instructions”).

    Written/Paper Submissions

    Submit written/paper submissions as follows:

    • Mail/Hand delivery/Courier (for written/paper submissions): Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

    • For written/paper comments submitted to the Division of Dockets Management, FDA will post your comment, as well as any attachments, except for information submitted, marked and identified, as confidential, if submitted as detailed in “Instructions.”

    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket No. FDA-2013-D-0880 for “Frequently Asked Questions About Medical Foods; Second Edition.” Received comments will be placed in the docket and, except for those submitted as “Confidential Submissions,” publicly viewable at http://www.regulations.gov or at the Division of Dockets Management between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.

    • Confidential Submissions—To submit a comment with confidential information that you do not wish to be made publicly available, submit your comments only as a written/paper submission. You should submit two copies total. One copy will include the information you claim to be confidential with a heading or cover note that states “THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.” The Agency will review this copy, including the claimed confidential information, in its consideration of comments. The second copy, which will have the claimed confidential information redacted/blacked out, will be available for public viewing and posted on http://www.regulations.gov. Submit both copies to the Division of Dockets Management. If you do not wish your name and contact information to be made publicly available, you can provide this information on the cover sheet and not in the body of your comments and you must identify this information as “confidential.” Any information marked as “confidential” will not be disclosed except in accordance with 21 CFR 10.20 and other applicable disclosure law. For more information about FDA's posting of comments to public dockets, see 80 FR 56469, September 18, 2015, or access the information at: http://www.fda.gov/regulatoryinformation/dockets/default.htm.

    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or the electronic and written/paper comments received, go to http://www.regulations.gov and insert the docket number, found in brackets in the heading of this document, into the “Search” box and follow the prompts and/or go to the Division of Dockets Management, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

    Submit written requests for single copies of the guidance to Office of Nutrition and Food Labeling, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition (HFS-850), Food and Drug Administration, 5100 Paint Branch Pkwy., College Park, MD 20740. Send two self-addressed adhesive labels to assist that office in processing your request. See the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for electronic access to the guidance.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Shawne Suggs-Anderson, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition (HFS-850), Food and Drug Administration, 5100 Paint Branch Pkwy., College Park, MD 20740, 240-402-1451.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Background

    We are announcing the availability of a guidance for industry, entitled “Frequently Asked Questions About Medical Foods; Second Edition.” We are issuing this guidance consistent with our good guidance practices regulation (21 CFR 10.115). The guidance represents the current thinking of FDA on this topic. It does not establish any rights for any person and is not binding on FDA or the public. You can use an alternative approach if it satisfies the requirements of the applicable statutes and regulations.

    In the Federal Register of August 13, 2013 (78 FR 49271), we announced the availability of a draft guidance for industry entitled “Frequently Asked Questions About Medical Foods; Second Edition.” We invited comment on the draft guidance by October 15, 2013. On November 14, 2013, we reopened the comment period giving interested parties an additional 30 days until December 16, 2013, to submit comments (78 FR 68460).

    This guidance is intended to provide industry with a convenient place to find answers to frequently asked questions about medical foods. FDA published earlier versions of the guidance in May 1997 and May 2007. This guidance is a second edition of the May 2007 guidance entitled “Guidance for Industry: Frequently Asked Questions About Medical Foods.” The second edition of the guidance provides responses to additional questions regarding the definition and labeling of medical foods and updates some of the prior responses. The second edition also provides FDA's thinking relating to the labeling of medical foods to be used under supervision by a physician, whether medical foods can be labeled with “Rx Only,” and types of diseases and conditions that a medical food could be used to manage.

    We received numerous comments on the draft guidance and have modified the final guidance where appropriate. In addition, we made editorial changes to improve clarity. The guidance announced in this notice finalizes the draft guidance dated August 2013.

    II. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

    This guidance refers to previously approved collections of information found in FDA regulations. These collections of information are subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520). The collections of information in 21 CFR 101.3, 101.4, 101.5, 101.15, and 101.105 have been approved under OMB control number 0910-0381. The collection of information under 21 CFR 1, part 1 subpart H has been approved under OMB control number 0910-0502. The collections of information in 21 CFR 113.100 and 114.100 (a) through (d) have been approved under OMB control number 0910-0037.

    III. Electronic Access

    Persons with access to the Internet may obtain the guidance at either http://www.fda.gov/FoodGuidances or http://www.regulations.gov. Use the FDA Web site listed in the previous sentence to find the most current version of the guidance.

    Dated: May 9, 2016. Leslie Kux, Associate Commissioner for Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-11268 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2009-N-0221] Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Submission for Office of Management and Budget Review; Food Labeling; Notification Procedures for Statements on Dietary Supplements AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing that a proposed collection of information has been submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and clearance under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (the PRA).

    DATES:

    Fax written comments on the collection of information by June 13, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    To ensure that comments on the information collection are received, OMB recommends that written comments be faxed to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, OMB, Attn: FDA Desk Officer, FAX: 202-395-7285, or emailed to [email protected] All comments should be identified with the OMB control number 0910-0331. Also include the FDA docket number found in brackets in the heading of this document.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    FDA PRA Staff, Office of Operations, Food and Drug Administration, 8455 Colesville Rd., COLE-14526, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    In compliance with 44 U.S.C. 3507, FDA has submitted the following proposed collection of information to OMB for review and clearance.

    Food Labeling; Notification Procedures for Statements on Dietary Supplements—21 CFR 101.93 OMB Control Number 0910-0331—Extension

    Section 403(r)(6) of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 343(r)(6)) and its implementing regulation, 21 CFR 101.93, require that we be notified by the manufacturer, packer, or distributor of a dietary supplement that it is marketing a dietary supplement product that bears on its label or in its labeling a statement provided for in section 403(r)(6) of the FD&C Act. These provisions require that we be notified, with a submission about such statements, no later than 30 days after the first marketing of the dietary supplement. Information that is required in the submission includes: (1) The name and address of the manufacturer, packer, or distributor of the dietary supplement product; (2) the text of the statement that is being made; (3) the name of the dietary ingredient or supplement that is the subject of the statement; (4) the name of the dietary supplement (including the brand name); and (5) the signature of a responsible individual or the person who can certify the accuracy of the information presented, and who must certify that the information contained in the notice is complete and accurate, and that the notifying firm has substantiation that the statement is truthful and not misleading.

    We have developed an electronic form (Form FDA 3955) that interested persons will be able to use to electronically submit their notifications to us via FDA's Unified Registration and Listing System (FURLS). Firms that prefer to submit a paper notification in a format of their own choosing will still have the option to do so, however. Form FDA 3955 prompts a respondent to include certain elements in their structure/function claim notification (SFCN) described in § 101.93 in a standard format electronically and helps the respondent organize their SFCN to include only the information needed for our review of the claim. Note that the SFCN, whether electronic or paper, is used for all claims made pursuant to section 403(r)(6) of the FD&C Act, including nutrient deficiency claims and general well-being claims in addition to structure/function claims. The electronic form, and any optional elements that would be prepared as attachments to the form (e.g., label), can be submitted in electronic format via FURLS. Submissions of SFCNs will continue to be allowed in paper format. We use this information to evaluate whether statements made for dietary ingredients or dietary supplements are permissible under section 403(r)(6) of the FD&C Act. Draft screenshots of Form FDA 3955 and instructions are available for comment at http://www.fda.gov/Food/DietarySupplements/IndustryInfo/ucm485532.htm.

    Description of Respondents: Respondents to this collection of information include manufacturers, packers, or distributors of dietary supplements that bear section 403(r)(6) of the FD&C Act statements on their labels or labeling.

    In the Federal Register of March 11, 2016 (81 FR 12910), FDA published a 60-day notice requesting public comment on the proposed collection of information. FDA received one comment in support of the information collection.

    We estimate the burden of this collection of information as follows:

    Table 1—Estimated Annual Reporting Burden 1 21 CFR section Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • responses per
  • respondent
  • Total annual
  • responses
  • Average burden per response Total hours
    101.93 2,200 1 2,200 0.75 (45 minutes) 1,650 1 There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of information.

    We believe that there will be minimal burden on the industry to generate information to meet the notification requirements of section 403(r)(6) of the FD&C Act by submitting information regarding section 403(r)(6) of the FD&C Act statements on labels or in labeling of dietary supplements. We also believe that submission via FURLS will not affect the burden estimates. We are requesting only information that is immediately available to the manufacturer, packer, or distributor of the dietary supplement that bears such a statement on its label or in its labeling. We estimate that, each year, approximately 2,200 firms will submit the information required by section 403(r)(6) of the FD&C Act. This estimate is based on the average number of notification submissions received by us in the preceding 3 years. We estimate that a firm will require 0.75 hours to gather the information needed and prepare a communication to us, for a total of 1,650 hours (2,200 × 0.75).

    Dated: May 9, 2016. Leslie Kux, Associate Commissioner for Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-11272 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2016-N-0001] Advisory Committee; Pulmonary-Allergy Drugs Advisory Committee, Renewal AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice; renewal of advisory committee.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing the renewal of the Pulmonary-Allergy Drugs Advisory Committee by the Commissioner of Food and Drugs (the Commissioner). The Commissioner has determined that it is in the public interest to renew the Pulmonary-Allergy Drugs Advisory Committee for an additional 2 years beyond the charter expiration date. The new charter will be in effect until May 30, 2018.

    DATES:

    Authority for the Pulmonary-Allergy Drugs Advisory Committee will expire on May 30, 2016, unless the Commissioner formally determines that renewal is in the public interest.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Cindy Hong, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 31, Rm. 2417, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 301-796-9001, [email protected].

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Issued in 41 CFR 102-3.65 and approval by the Department of Health and Human Services issued in 45 CFR part 11 and by the General Services Administration, FDA is announcing the renewal of the Pulmonary-Allergy Drugs Advisory Committee. The committee is a discretionary Federal advisory committee established to provide advice to the Commissioner. The Pulmonary-Allergy Drugs Advisory Committee advises the Commissioner or designee in discharging responsibilities as they relate to helping to ensure safe and effective drugs for human use and, as required, any other product for which the Food and Drug Administration has regulatory responsibility. The Committee reviews and evaluates available data concerning the safety and effectiveness of marketed and investigational human drug products for use in the treatment of pulmonary disease and diseases with allergic and/or immunologic mechanisms and makes appropriate recommendations to the Commissioner of Food and Drugs.

    The Committee shall consist of a core of 11 voting members including the Chair. Members and the Chair are selected by the Commissioner or designee from among authorities knowledgeable in the fields of pulmonary medicine, allergy, clinical immunology, and epidemiology or statistics. Members will be invited to serve for overlapping terms of up to four years. Almost all non-Federal members of this committee serve as Special Government Employees. The core of voting members may include one technically qualified member, selected by the Commissioner or designee, who is identified with consumer interests and is recommended by either a consortium of consumer-oriented organizations or other interested persons. In addition to the voting members, the Committee may include one non-voting member who is identified with industry interests.

    Further information regarding the most recent charter and other information can be found at http://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/CommitteesMeetingMaterials/Drugs/Pulmonary-AllergyDrugsAdvisoryCommittee/ucm107567.htm or by contacting the Designated Federal Officer (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). Since no change has been made to the committee name or description of duties, no amendment will be made to 21 CFR 14.100.

    This document is issued under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. app.). For general information related to FDA advisory committees, please visit us at http://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/default.htm.

    Dated: May 10, 2016. Jill Hartzler Warner, Associate Commissioner for Special Medical Programs.
    [FR Doc. 2016-11323 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2016-D-0971] Infectious Disease Next Generation Sequencing Based Diagnostic Devices: Microbial Identification and Detection of Antimicrobial Resistance and Virulence Markers; Draft Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff; Availability AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing the availability of a draft guidance entitled “Infectious Disease Next Generation Sequencing Based Diagnostic Devices: Microbial Identification and Detection of Antimicrobial Resistance and Virulence Markers.” This draft guidance provides recommendations to assist industry in designing studies to establish the analytical and clinical performance characteristics of infectious disease next generation sequencing- based diagnostic devices for microbial identification and detection of antimicrobial resistance and virulence markers. This draft guidance is neither final nor is it in effect at this time.

    DATES:

    Although you can comment on any guidance at any time (see 21 CFR 10.115(g)(5)), to ensure that the Agency considers your comment of this draft guidance before it begins work on the final version of the guidance, submit either electronic or written comments on the draft guidance by August 11, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments as follows:

    Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:

    Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Comments submitted electronically, including attachments, to http://www.regulations.gov will be posted to the docket unchanged. Because your comment will be made public, you are solely responsible for ensuring that your comment does not include any confidential information that you or a third party may not wish to be posted, such as medical information, your or anyone else's Social Security number, or confidential business information, such as a manufacturing process. Please note that if you include your name, contact information, or other information that identifies you in the body of your comments, that information will be posted on http://www.regulations.gov.

    • If you want to submit a comment with confidential information that you do not wish to be made available to the public submit the comment as a written/paper submission and in the manner detailed (see “Written/Paper Submissions” and “Instructions”).

    Written/Paper Submissions

    Submit written/paper submissions as follows:

    Mail/Hand delivery/Courier (for written/paper submissions): Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

    • For written/paper comments submitted to the Division of Dockets Management, FDA will post your comment, as well as any attachments, except for information submitted, marked and identified, as confidential, if submitted as detailed in “Instructions.”

    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket No. FDA-2016-D-0971 for “Infectious Disease Next Generation Sequencing Based Diagnostic Devices: Microbial Identification and Detection of Antimicrobial Resistance and Virulence Markers; Draft Guidance for Industry; Availability.” Received comments will be placed in the docket and, except for those submitted as “Confidential Submissions,” publicly viewable at http://www.regulations.gov or at the Division of Dockets Management between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.

    • Confidential Submissions—To submit a comment with confidential information that you do not wish to be made publicly available submit your comments only as a written/paper submission. You should submit two copies total. One copy will include the information you claim to be confidential with a heading or cover note that states “THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION”. The Agency will review this copy, including the claimed confidential information, in its consideration of comments. The second copy, which will have the claimed confidential information redacted/blacked out, will be available for public viewing and posted on http://www.regulations.gov. Submit both copies to the Division of Dockets Management. If you do not wish your name and contact information to be made publicly available, you can provide this information on the cover sheet and not in the body of your comments and you must identify this information as “confidential.” Any information marked as “confidential” will not be disclosed except in accordance with 21 CFR 10.20 and other applicable disclosure law. For more information about FDA's posting of comments to public dockets, see 80 FR 56469, September 18, 2015, or access the information at: http://www.fda.gov/regulatoryinformation/dockets/default.htm.

    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or the electronic and written/paper comments received, go to http://www.regulations.gov and insert the docket number, found in brackets in the heading of this document, into the “Search” box and follow the prompts and/or go to the Division of Dockets Management, 5630 Fishers Lane, rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

    Submit written requests for single copies of the guidance to the Office of the Center Director, Guidance and Policy Development, Center for Devices and Radiological Health, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 66, rm. 5431, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002. Send one self-addressed adhesive label to assist that office in processing your requests. See the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for electronic access to the draft guidance document.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Heike Sichtig, Center for Devices and Radiological Health, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 66, rm. 4526, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 301-796-4574.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background

    This draft guidance provides recommendations to assist industry in designing studies to establish the analytical and clinical performance characteristics of “Infectious Disease Next Generation Sequencing Based Diagnostic Devices” for microbial identification and detection of antimicrobial resistance and virulence markers (hereinafter referred to as “Infectious Disease NGS Dx devices”). Infectious Disease NGS Dx devices are intended for use as an aid in the diagnosis of microbial infection and in selecting appropriate therapies for which next generation sequencing (NGS) technology can now be used to detect the presence of clinically important pathogenic organisms in human specimens.

    In contrast to human sequencing diagnostics, infectious disease sequencing diagnostics carry an absolute need for immediate and actionable results, sometimes within hours, as incorrect initial diagnoses potentially leads to fatalities. Furthermore, the broad range of specimen types (e.g., urine, blood, cerebrospinal fluid (CSF), stool, sputum, etc.) and the large diversity of the infectious disease agents that can be present in the sample do not allow straightforward pre-analytical-, biochemical-, or bioinformatics processes. Each unique specimen type may require a different nucleic acid extraction procedure, a different library preparation protocol, and even a different bioinformatics algorithm to generate the final clinical result. The opportunity for repeat testing is expected to be limited due to a frequently small specimen quantity (e.g., CSF) and the necessity to make a prompt and timely infectious disease treatment decision for the patient.

    This draft guidance, when finalized, provides detailed information on the types of studies the FDA recommends to support a premarket application for these devices. This draft guidance specifically addresses Infectious Disease NGS devices that employ targeted or agnostic (metagenomic) sequencing, to identify the presence or absence of infectious disease organisms, and/or to detect the presence or absence of antimicrobial resistance and virulence markers. This draft guidance is not intended to address devices that utilize detection mechanisms other than nucleic acid based approaches. Further, this draft guidance does not apply to devices that are intended to screen donors of blood and blood components as well as donors of human cells, tissues, and cellular and tissue-based products for communicable diseases.

    II. Significance of Guidance

    This draft guidance is being issued consistent with FDA's good guidance practices regulation (21 CFR 10.115). The draft guidance, when finalized, will represent the Agency's current thinking on “Infectious Disease Next Generation Sequencing Based Diagnostic Devices: Microbial Identification and Detection of Antimicrobial Resistance and Virulence Markers.” It neither creates nor confers any rights for or on any person and is not binding on FDA or the public. An alternative approach may be used if such approach satisfies the requirements of the applicable statutes and regulations.

    III. Electronic Access

    Persons interested in obtaining a copy of the draft guidance may do so by downloading an electronic copy from the Internet. A search capability for all Center for Devices and Radiological Health guidance documents is available at http://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/DeviceRegulationandGuidance/GuidanceDocuments/default.htm. Guidance documents are also available at http://www.regulations.gov. Persons unable to download an electronic copy of “Infectious Disease Next Generation Sequencing Based Diagnostic Devices: Microbial Identification and Detection of Antimicrobial Resistance and Virulence Markers; Draft Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff; Availability” may send an email request to [email protected] to receive an electronic copy of the document. Please use the document number 1500016 to identify the guidance you are requesting.

    IV. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

    This draft guidance refers to previously approved collections of information found in FDA regulations. These collections of information are subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520). The collections of information in 21 CFR parts 801 and 809 have been approved under OMB control number 0910-0485; the collections of information in 21 CFR part 807, subpart E, have been approved under OMB control number 0910-0120; the collections of information in 21 CFR part 812 have been approved under OMB control number 0910-0078; and the collections of information in 21 CFR part 814 have been approved under OMB control number 0910-0231.

    Dated: May 9, 2016. Leslie Kux, Associate Commissioner for Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-11237 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Health Resources and Services Administration Health Center Program AGENCY:

    Health Resources and Services Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice of Class Deviations from the Requirements for Competition and Application Period for the Health Center Program.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Grants Policy and Administration Manual (GPAM) Part F: Chapter 2.b.34 and Part F: Chapter 3.b.16, the Bureau of Primary Health Care (BPHC) has been granted class deviations from the requirements for competition contained in the GPAM Part F: Chapter 2.a.1 and the requirements for application period contained in the GPAM Part F: Chapter 3.b.3 to expeditiously award funds to new health centers to improve access to services and clinical outcomes for the nation's most vulnerable populations through the patient centered medical home model.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Intended Recipient of the Award: Health Center Program award recipients receiving Health Center Program funding for the first time in fiscal years (FYs) 2012, 2013, 2014, and 2015.

    Amount of Competitive Awards: Approximately $10 million will be awarded in FY 2016 through a one-time supplement.

    Period of Supplemental Funding: Anticipated 12 month project period is August 1, 2016, through July 31, 2017.

    CFDA Number: 93.224 Authority:

    Section 330 of the Public Health Service Act, as amended (42 U.S.C. 254b, as amended).

    Justification: Targeting the nation's neediest populations and geographic areas, the Health Center Program supports more than 1,300 health centers that operate over 9,000 service delivery sites in every state, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and the Pacific Basin. Nearly 23 million patients received comprehensive, culturally competent, quality primary health care services through the Health Center Program award recipients in 2014.

    The FY 2016 Health Center Program Patient Centered Medical Home Supplement is a one-time supplemental funding opportunity that supports the upfront costs new Health Center Program award recipients face to become patient centered medical homes. Organizational transformation to achieve initial and more advanced levels of patient centered medical home recognition is costly. As of September 2015, data show that among the health centers eligible for this award only approximately 20 percent have achieved patient centered medical home recognition compared to 65 percent across all health centers. The discrepancy suggests the efficacy of BPHC's past investments in FY 2011 and FY 2012 that supported health centers funded before FY 2012 achieve patient centered medical home recognition. The FY 2016 Health Center Program Patient Centered Medical Home Supplement is the first funding not tied to capital improvements that BPHC has offered to support health centers' evolution to patient centered medical homes since FY 2012.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Olivia Shockey, Expansion Division Director, Office of Policy and Program Development, Bureau of Primary Health Care, Health Resources and Services Administration at 301-443-9282 or [email protected]

    Dated: May 5, 2016. James Macrae, Acting Administrator.
    [FR Doc. 2016-11413 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4165-15-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Office of the Secretary Findings of Research Misconduct AGENCY:

    Office of the Secretary, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given that the Office of Research Integrity (ORI) has taken final action in the following case:

    John G. Pastorino, Ph.D., Rowan University School of Osteopathic Medicine: Based on an assessment conducted by Rowan University School of Osteopathic Medicine (RUSOM), the Respondent's desire to conclude the matter, and analysis conducted by ORI in its oversight review, ORI found that Dr. John G. Pastorino, Associate Professor, Department of Molecular Biology, RUSOM, engaged in research misconduct in research supported by National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA), National Institutes of Health (NIH), grant R01 AA012897 and National Cancer Institute (NCI), NIH, grant R01 CA118356.

    ORI found that Respondent engaged in research misconduct by intentionally falsifying and/or fabricating data reported in the following eight (8) published papers, one (1) unpublished manuscript, and one (1) NIH grant application:

    J. Cell. Sci. 123:894-902, 2010 (hereafter referred to as “J. Cell. Sci. 2010a”) J. Cell. Sci. 123:4117-4127, 2010 (hereafter referred to as “J. Cell. Sci. 2010b”) J. Cell. Sci. 125:2995-3003, 2012 (hereafter referred to as “J. Cell. Sci. 2012”) J. Cell. Sci. 126:274-288, 2013 (hereafter referred to as “J. Cell. Sci. 2013”) J. Cell. Sci. 127:896-907, 2014 (hereafter referred to as “J. Cell. Sci. 2014”) Biol. Open. 1-11:10;bio.014712, 2015 (hereafter referred to as “Biol. Open. 2015”) BioChim Biophys Acta. 1827:38-49, 2013 (hereafter referred to as “BioChim Biophys Acta. 2013”) J. Biol. Chem. 289:26213-26225, 2014 (hereafter referred to as “J. Biol. Chem. 2014”) J. Cell. Science, Submitted manuscript, 2015 (hereafter referred to as “J. Cell. Sci. manuscript 2015”) • R01 HL132672-01, “Regulation by Sirtuin-3 and Mitoneet of the Permeability Transition Pore in Heart during Ischemia/Reperfusion Injury,” John Pastorino, Ph.D., Principal Investigator ORI found that Dr. Pastorino falsified and/or fabricated Western blot data for mitochondrial function related to cell/tissue injury, in fifty-eight (58) blot panels included in forty-two (42) figures in eight (8) publications, one (1) unpublished manuscript, and one (1) grant application. In the absence of valid Western blot images, the Respondent fabricated and/or falsified quantitative data in associated bar graphs, statistical analyses presented in figure legends, and related text.

    Specifically, ORI found that Respondent duplicated images, or trimmed and/or manipulated blot images from unrelated sources to obscure their origin, and relabeled them to represent different experimental results in:

    • Figures 2A, 2C, 3B, 5A, 7B, and 8A in J. Cell. Sci. 2010a • Figures 2B, 5A, 6A, and 6B in J. Cell. Sci. 2010b • Figures 1A, 2A, 2B, 4C, 5A, 5B, 6A, 7A, 7B, and 7C in J. Cell. Sci. 2012 • Figures 4F, 5H, and 6A in J. Cell. Sci. 2013 • Figures 1B, 2B, 2C, 3A, 3B, and 4D in J. Cell. Sci. 2014 • Figures 3A and 6B in Biol. Open 2015 • Figure 2A in BioChim Biophys Acta. 2013 • Figures 1B, 3A, 4D, 5E, and 6C in J. Biol. Chem. 2014 • Figure 3A in J. Cell. Sci. manuscript 2015 • Figures 3, 8A, 12, and 13A in R01 HL132672-01 NIH grant application

    Dr. Pastorino has entered into a Voluntary Exclusion Agreement (Agreement) and has voluntarily agreed for a period of five (5) years, beginning on April 27, 2016:

    (1) To exclude himself from any contracting or subcontracting with any agency of the United States Government and from eligibility or involvement in nonprocurement programs of the United States Government referred to as “covered transactions” pursuant to HHS' Implementation (2 CFR part 376 et seq.) of OMB Guidelines to Agencies on Governmentwide Debarment and Suspension, 2 CFR part 180 (collectively the “Debarment Regulations”);

    (2) that he will neither apply for nor permit his name to be used on any application, proposal, or other request for funds to the United States Government or any of its agencies, as defined in the Debarment Regulations; Respondent will further ensure that during the period of the voluntary exclusion, he will neither receive nor be supported by funds of the United States Government and its agencies made available through grants, subgrants, cooperative agreements, contracts, or subcontracts, as discussed in the Debarment Regulations; and

    (3) to exclude himself from serving in any advisory capacity to the U.S. Public Health Service (PHS) including, but not limited to, service on any PHS advisory committee, board, and/or peer review committee, or as a consultant.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Director, Office of Research Integrity, 1101 Wootton Parkway, Suite 750, Rockville, MD 20852, (240) 453-8200.

    Kathryn Partin, Director, Office of Research Integrity.
    [FR Doc. 2016-11317 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4150-31-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health Request for Information for Developing the National Cancer Moonshot Initiative SUMMARY:

    This Request for Information (RFI) describes ways in which the cancer research community and public can provide new ideas and comment on proceedings of the National Cancer Advisory Board (NCAB) Blue Ribbon Panel under the umbrella of the National Cancer Moonshot Initiative.

    DATES:

    Responses should be submitted to the National Cancer Institute (NCI), National Institutes of Health (NIH) on or before 5:00 p.m. EST on July 1, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Electronic responses are preferred and should be addressed or submitted to either: (1) The online platform, Cancer Research Ideas, at https://cancerresearchideas.cancer.gov; or (2) email to [email protected]. Non-electronic responses will also be accepted by calling the NCI Cancer Information Service at 1-800-422-6237 or by mail to Blue Ribbon Panel, National Cancer Moonshot Initiative, National Cancer Institute, 9609 Medical Center Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892-9760.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:

    Questions about this request for information should be directed to Kelli Marciel, National Cancer Institute, 9609 Medical Center Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892-9760, [email protected], 301-594-3330.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    During his State of the Union address on January 12, 2016, President Barack Obama announced the establishment of a new National Cancer Moonshot Initiative to accelerate cancer research. The initiative, led by Vice President Joe Biden, aims to make more therapies available to more patients, while also improving our ability to prevent cancer and detect it at an early stage. Additional details of the National Cancer Moonshot Initiative are available at http://www.cancer.gov/research/key-initiatives/moonshot-cancer-initiative.

    The White House and Vice President Biden have named a Task Force of 13 heads of federal agencies and offices who will advise the administration on research priorities. To ensure that the National Cancer Moonshot Initiative's goals and approaches are grounded in the best science, President Obama directed the Moonshot Task Force to consult with external experts, including the presidentially appointed National Cancer Advisory Board (NCAB). A Blue Ribbon Panel of experts has been established as a working group of the NCAB that will assist the board in providing this advice.

    The Blue Ribbon Panel is composed of leading experts from a broad range of scientific areas, including biology, immunology, genomics, diagnostics, bioinformatics, and cancer prevention and treatment. Members also include investigators with expertise in clinical trials and cancer health disparities. In addition to researchers, the panel membership also includes clinicians and nurses, and representatives of cancer advocacy organizations and the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries.

    The Blue Ribbon Panel will focus on identifying scientific opportunities in cancer research that could produce major advances with additional emphasis and funding, and propose ways to overcome barriers to pursuing these opportunities.

    Community input is critical to the success of the National Cancer Moonshot Initiative. Indeed, the success of the initiative will depend on breaking down silos and encouraging everyone with an interest in fighting cancer to work together, share information, and collaborate on solutions. To enable the Blue Ribbon Panel to consider a wide range of input from researchers, scientists, physicians, advocates, students, data scientists, and members of the public, anyone with a scientific idea or suggestion for addressing cancer research challenges can contribute by visiting https://cancerresearchideas.cancer.gov.

    Input is sought in the following areas:

    • Expanding clinical trials • Enhanced data sharing • Cancer immunology and prevention • Implementation sciences • Pediatric cancer • Precision, prevention and early detection • Tumor evolution and progression

    This RFI is for planning purposes only and should not be construed as a solicitation for applications or proposals, or as an obligation in any way on the part of the United States Federal government. The Federal government will not pay for the preparation of any information submitted or for the government's use. Additionally, the government cannot guarantee the confidentiality of the information provided.

    Dated: May 5, 2016. Dinah Singer, Acting Deputy Director, National Cancer Institute.
    [FR Doc. 2016-11283 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism; Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism Special Emphasis Panel; RFA Review and Reverse Site Visit of INIA NEUROIMMUNE Consortium.

    Date: June 24, 2016.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Marriott New Orleans, 614 Canal Street, New Orleans, LA 70130.

    Contact Person: Beata Buzas, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, National Institutes of Health, 5635 Fishers Lane, Rm. 2081, Rockville, MD 20852, 301-443-0800, [email protected]

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.271, Alcohol Research Career Development Awards for Scientists and Clinicians; 93.272, Alcohol National Research Service Awards for Research Training; 93.273, Alcohol Research Programs; 93.891, Alcohol Research Center Grants; 93.701, ARRA Related Biomedical Research and Research Support Awards., National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: May 9, 2016. Melanie J. Gray, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-11257 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases; Notice of Meetings

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following meetings.

    The meetings will be open to the public as indicated below, with attendance limited to space available. Individuals who plan to attend and need special assistance, such as sign language interpretation or other reasonable accommodations, should notify the Contact Person listed below in advance of the meeting.

    The meetings will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases Initial Review; Group Diabetes, Endocrinology and Metabolic Diseases B Subcommittee.

    Date: June 8-9, 2016.

    Open: June 08, 2016, 8:00 a.m. to 8:30 a.m.

    Agenda: To review policy and procedures.

    Place: New Orleans Downtown Marriott—Convention Center, 859 Convention Center Blvd., New Orleans, LA 70130.

    Closed: June 08, 2016, 8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications

    Place: New Orleans Downtown Marriott—Convention Center, 859 Convention Center Blvd., New Orleans, LA 70130.

    Closed: June 09, 2016, 8:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: New Orleans Downtown Marriott—Convention Center, 859 Convention Center Blvd., New Orleans, LA 70130.

    Contact Person: John F. Connaughton, Ph.D., Chief, Chartered Committees Section, Review Branch, DEA, NIDDK, National Institutes of Health, Room 7007, 6707 Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892-5452, (301) 594-7797, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases Initial Review Group; Kidney, Urologic and Hematologic Diseases D Subcommittee.

    Date: June 14-16, 2016.

    Open: June 14, 2016, 4:00 p.m. to 4:30 p.m.

    Agenda: To review policy and procedures.

    Place: Residence Inn Bethesda, 7335 Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20814.

    Closed: June 14, 2016, 4:30 p.m. to 8:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Residence Inn Bethesda, 7335 Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20814.

    Closed: June 15, 2016, 8:30 p.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications

    Place: Residence Inn Bethesda, 7335 Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20814.

    Closed: June 16, 2016, 8:30 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Residence Inn Bethesda, 7335 Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20814.

    Contact Person: Barbara A. Woynarowska, Ph.D., Scientific Review Administrator, Review Branch, DEA, NIDDK, National Institutes of Health, Room 7009, 6707 Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892-5452, (301) 402-7172, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases Initial Review Group; Digestive Diseases and Nutrition C Subcommittee.

    Date: June 22-24, 2016.

    Open: June 22, 2016, 3:00 p.m. to 3:30 p.m.

    Agenda: To review policy and procedures.

    Place: Residence Inn Bethesda, 7335 Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20814.

    Closed: June 22, 2016, 3:30 p.m. to 7:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Residence Inn Bethesda, 7335 Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20814.

    Closed: June 23, 2016, 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Residence Inn Bethesda, 7335 Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20814.

    Closed: June 24, 2016, 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Residence Inn Bethesda, 7335 Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20814.

    Contact Person: Robert Wellner, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Review Branch, DEA, NIDDK, National Institutes of Health, Room 7015, 6707 Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892-5452, [email protected]

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.847, Diabetes, Endocrinology and Metabolic Research; 93.848, Digestive Diseases and Nutrition Research; 93.849, Kidney Diseases, Urology and Hematology Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: May 9, 2016. David Clary, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-11261 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Institute of General Medical Sciences; Notice of Closed Meetings

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following meetings.

    The meetings will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute of General Medical Sciences Special Emphasis Panel; Review of Centers of Biomedical Research Excellence (COBRE) (P20) Applications.

    Date: June 30, 2016.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Residence Inn Bethesda Downtown, 7335 Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20814.

    Contact Person: Shinako Takada, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Office of Scientific Review, National Institute of General Medical Sciences, National Institutes of Health, 45 Center Drive, Room 3An.22, Bethesda, MD 20892-6200, 301-402-9448, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: National Institute of General Medical Sciences Special Emphasis Panel; Review of COBRE Phase I Applications.

    Date: July 13, 2016.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Bethesda North Marriott Hotel, 5701 Marinelli Road, Bethesda, MD.

    Contact Person: Robert Horowits, Scientific Review Officer, National Institute of General Medical Sciences, National Institutes of Health, 45 Center Drive, Room 3An.18, Bethesda, MD 20892-6200, 301-594-6904, [email protected]

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.375, Minority Biomedical Research Support; 93.821, Cell Biology and Biophysics Research; 93.859, Pharmacology, Physiology, and Biological Chemistry Research; 93.862, Genetics and Developmental Biology Research; 93.88, Minority Access to Research Careers; 93.96, Special Minority Initiatives; 93.859, Biomedical Research and Research Training, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: May 9, 2016. Melanie J. Gray, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-11262 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases; Notice of Closed Meetings

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following meetings.

    The meetings will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases Special Emphasis Panel; NIDDK DEM Fellowship Grant Review.

    Date: June 5-7, 2016.

    Time: 6:00 p.m. to 2:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Residence Inn Bethesda, 7335 Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20814.

    Contact Person: Carol J. Goter-Robinson, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Review Branch, DEA, NIDDK, National Institutes of Health, Room 7347, 6707 Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892-5452, (301) 594-7791, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases Special Emphasis Panel; NIDDK Clinical Trials.

    Date: June 7, 2016.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 10:00 a.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Two Democracy Plaza, 6707 Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: Elena Sanovich, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Review Branch, DEA, NIDDK, National Institutes Of Health, Room 7351, 6707 Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892-2542, 301-594-8886, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases Special Emphasis Panel; Fellowships in Digestive Diseases and Nutrition.

    Date: June 8-9, 2016.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: St. Gregory Hotel, 2033 M Street NW., Washington, DC 20036.

    Contact Person: Thomas A. Tatham, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Review Branch, DEA, NIDDK, National Institutes Of Health, Room 7021, 6707 Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892-5452, (301) 594-3993, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases Special Emphasis Panel; R01 Telephone SEP.

    Date: June 8, 2016.

    Time: 12:00 p.m. to 1:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Two Democracy Plaza, 6707 Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892.

    Contact Person: Xiaodu Guo, Md, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Review Branch, DEA, NIDDK, National Institutes Of Health, Room 7023, 6707 Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892-5452, (301) 594-4719, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases Special Emphasis Panel; DDK-C Conflicts.

    Date: June 9, 2016.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: St. Gregory Hotel, 2033 M Street NW., Washington, DC 20036.

    Contact Person: Thomas A. Tatham, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Review Branch, DEA, NIDDK, National Institutes Of Health, Room 7021, 6707 Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892-5452, (301) 594-3993, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases Special Emphasis Panel; R13 Conference Grant Applications.

    Date: June 23, 2016.

    Time: 11:00 a.m. to 12:30 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Two Democracy Plaza, 6707 Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892.

    Contact Person: Jian Yang, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Review Branch, DEA, NIDDK, National Institutes Of Health, Room 7111, 6707 Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892-5452, (301) 594-7799, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases Special Emphasis Panel; RFA-DK-15-506: TEDDY DCC (UC4).

    Date: June 24, 2016.

    Time: 1:00 p.m. to 2:30 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Two Democracy Plaza, 6707 Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: Dianne Camp, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Review Branch, DEA, NIDDK, National Institutes Of Health, Room 7013, 6707 Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892-2542, 301-5947682, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases Special Emphasis Panel; Program Project on Mucosal Immunology and IBD.

    Date: July 14, 2016.

    Time: 1:00 p.m. to 5:30 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Two Democracy Plaza, 6707 Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892.

    Contact Person: Maria E. Davila-Bloom, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Review Branch, DEA, NIDDK, Room 7017, 6707 Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 594-7637, [email protected]

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.847, Diabetes, Endocrinology and Metabolic Research; 93.848, Digestive Diseases and Nutrition Research; 93.849, Kidney Diseases, Urology and Hematology Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: May 9, 2016. David Clary, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-11260 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Institute of Dental & Craniofacial Research; Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research Special Emphasis Panel; NIDCR Zika Review.

    Date: June 7, 2016.

    Time: 1:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, One Democracy Plaza, 6701 Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892.

    Contact Person: Latarsha J. Carithers, Ph.D., Program Director, Division of Extramural Activities, NIDCR, 6701 Democracy Boulevard, Suite 672, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-594-4859, [email protected]

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.121, Oral Diseases and Disorders Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: May 9, 2016. Natasha M. Copeland, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-11259 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health Proposed Collection; 60-Day Comment Request Extension to May 31, 2016 Study To Estimate Radiation Doses and Cancer Risks From Radioactive Fallout From the Trinity Nuclear Test—National Cancer Institute (NCI) SUMMARY:

    In compliance with the requirement of section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, for opportunity for public comment on proposed data collection projects, the National Cancer Institute, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) will publish periodic summaries of proposed projects to be submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval.

    Written comments and/or suggestions from the public and affected agencies are invited to address one or more of the following points: (1) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the function of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) The accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) Ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) Ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

    To Submit Comments and For Further Information: To obtain a copy of the data collection plans and instruments, submit comments in writing, or request more information on the proposed project, contact: Steve Simon, Dosimetry Unit Head and Staff Scientist, Radiation Epidemiology Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology & Genetics, National Cancer Institute, NIH, 9609 Medical Center Drive, MSC9778, Bethesda, MD 20892-9778 or call non-toll-free number (240)-276-7371 or Email your request, including your address to: [email protected] Formal requests for additional plans and instruments must be requested in writing.

    Comment Due Date: Comments regarding this information collection are best assured of having their full effect if received by May 31, 2016.

    Proposed Collection: Study to Estimate Radiation Doses and Cancer Risks from Radioactive Fallout from the Trinity Nuclear Test, 0925-NEW, New, National Cancer Institute (NCI), National Institutes of Health (NIH).

    Need and Use of Information Collection: This research plan is for a radiation-related cancer risk projection study for the residents of the state of New Mexico (NM) potentially exposed to radioactive fallout from the Trinity nuclear test conducted in 1945. Data will be collected on diet and lifestyle from three groups in NM (non-Hispanic white, Hispanic, and Native American) alive in the 1940s via focus groups and key informant interviews and will be used to derive means and ranges of exposure-related parameters, such as consumption of contaminated foodstuffs, collection and use of water, time spend outdoors, and building materials. These parameter values will be used with historical fallout deposition data in fallout dose assessment models to estimate external and internal radiation doses to typical persons in all counties in New Mexico by ethnicity and age. The estimated doses will be used with literature-derived risk and parameter values on risk/unit dose to project the excess cancers expected (per 1,000 persons within each stratum) including uncertainty on each estimate. Endpoints are leukemia, thyroid cancer, stomach cancer, colon cancer, and all solid cancers combined.

    This data collection is needed to accomplish the overall Trinity Study goals, which are to: (1) Estimate external and internal radiation dose to the four primary organs/tissues of interest (thyroid, stomach, colon, and red bone marrow) from primary radionuclides in nuclear testing fallout in each county of New Mexico as a result of the Trinity test, stratified by age, gender, ethnicity, and conditions of exposure (low, medium, high); (2) in each county, estimate the number of excess cancer cases to organs of interest per 1,000 (hypothetical) persons stratified by age, gender, ethnicity, and conditions of exposure (low, medium, high).

    The study data will be collected via focus group and individual interview. Between 10 and 15 focus groups with up to 8 participants are planned. These participants will be 70 years old and older, living in New Mexico, who were alive at the time of the Trinity nuclear test and living in any of 19 Native American pueblos/tribes or Hispanic/Latino and non-Hispanic white communities in or near the fallout region in New Mexico. Additionally, up to 30 individual interviews are planned with key informants chosen to represent a variety of experiences and expertise. Individuals who prefer not to take part in a focus group will be interviewed individually as key informants. The investigators will collaborate with community representatives who will recommend potential participants for either the focus groups or interviews.

    The objective of the focus groups and interviews is to collect information directly from community members who were alive at the time of the Trinity test, or with direct knowledge of specific life circumstances, cultural patterns, and dietary practices of Native Americans, Hispanics/Latinos, or non-Hispanic whites living in New Mexico at this time. In this study, two interviewers, including one with extensive experience working with tribal communities, will moderate the focus groups and conduct in-depth interviews. Translators and interpreters with experience in the study populations will be presented when needed. Each focus group and interview will be scheduled for no more than two hours and will take place in office settings, community facilities, or municipal facilities.

    OMB approval is requested for 3 years. There are no costs to respondents other than their time. The total estimated annualized burden hours are 395.

    Estimated Annualized Burden Hours Type of respondents Instrument Number of respondents Frequency of response Average time per
  • response
  • (in hours)
  • Annual
  • burden
  • hours
  • Individuals Screener 300 1 10/60 50 Consent Form 150 1 10/60 25 Focus Groups 120 1 120/60 240 Pre-Focus Group Guide 120 1 10/60 20 Key Informants and Academics Interview 30 1 120/60 60 Totals 300 720 395
    Dated: May 6, 2016. Karla Bailey, Project Clearance Liaison, National Cancer Institute, NIH.
    [FR Doc. 2016-11254 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health Center for Scientific Review; Notice of Closed Meetings

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following meetings.

    The meetings will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: Brain Disorders and Clinical Neuroscience Integrated Review Group; Pathophysiological Basis of Mental Disorders and Addictions Study Section.

    Date: June 2-3, 2016.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Residence Inn Bethesda, 7335 Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20814.

    Contact Person: Boris P Sokolov, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5217A, MSC 7846, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-408-9115, [email protected]

    This notice is being published less than 15 days prior to the meeting due to the timing limitations imposed by the review and funding cycle.

    Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel; Collaborative Applications: Behavioral Genetics and Epidemiology.

    Date: June 7, 2016.

    Time: 8:30 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: The St. Regis Washington DC, 923 16th Street NW., Washington, DC 20006.

    Contact Person: George Vogler, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 3140, MSC 7770, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 237-2693, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: Population Sciences and Epidemiology Integrated Review Group; Infectious Diseases, Reproductive Health, Asthma and Pulmonary Conditions, Study Section.

    Date: June 9-10, 2016

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Pier 2620 hotel fisherman Wharf, 2620 Jones Street, San Francisco, CA 94108.

    Contact Person: Lisa Steele, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 3139, MSC 7770, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 257-2638, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: Brain Disorders and Clinical Neuroscience Integrated Review Group; Brain Injury and Neurovascular Pathologies Study Section.

    Date: June 9-10, 2016

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Wyndham Grand Chicago Riverfront, 71 East Wacker Drive, Chicago, IL 60601.

    Contact Person: Alexander Yakovlev, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5206, MSC 7846, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-435-1254, [email protected]

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.306, Comparative Medicine; 93.333, Clinical Research, 93.306, 93.333, 93.337, 93.393-3.396, 93.837-93.844, 93.846-93.878, 93.892, 93.893, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: May 9, 2016. Sylvia L. Neal, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-11255 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke; Notice of Closed Meetings

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following meetings.

    The meetings will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke Special Emphasis Panel Request to Access Parkinson's Disease Related-Biospecimens (X01) Review.

    Date: May 19, 2016.

    Time: 1:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, Neuroscience Center, 6001 Executive Boulevard, Rockville, MD 20852 (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: Joel Saydoff, Ph.D., Scientific Review Administrator, Scientific Review Branch, NINDS/NIH/DHHS, Neuroscience Center, 6001 Executive Blvd., Suite 3204, MSC 9529, Bethesda, MD 20892-9529, 301-496-9223, [email protected]

    This notice is being published less than 15 days prior to the meeting due to the timing limitations.

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke Special Emphasis Panel, Blueprint Neurotherapeutics Network (BPN): Small Molecule Drug Discovery and Development for Disorders of the Nervous System Review.

    Date: June 10, 2016.

    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.

    Place: Melrose Hotel, 240 Pennsylvania Avenue, Washington, DC 20037.

    Contact Person: Joel Saydoff, Ph.D., Scientific Review Administrator, Scientific Review Branch, NINDS/NIH/DHHS, Neuroscience Center, 6001 Executive Blvd., Suite 3204, MSC 9529, Bethesda, MD 20892-9529, 301-496-9223, [email protected]

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.853, Clinical Research Related to Neurological Disorders; 93.854, Biological Basis Research in the Neurosciences, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: May 9, 2016. Sylvia L. Neal, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-11263 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health Proposed Collection; 60-Day Comment Request NIDDK Office of Minority Health Research Coordination (OMHRC) Research Training and Mentor Programs Applications SUMMARY:

    In compliance with the requirement of Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, for opportunity for public comment on proposed data collection projects, the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK), National Institutes of Health (NIH) will publish periodic summaries of proposed projects to be submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval.

    Written comments and/or suggestions from the public and affected agencies are invited to address one or more of the following points: (1) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the function of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) The accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) Ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) Ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

    To Submit Comments and for Further Information: To obtain a copy of the data collection plans and instruments, submit comments in writing, or request more information on the proposed project, contact: Winnie Martinez, Project Officer, 6707 Democracy Blvd., Bethesda MD, 20892 or call non-toll-free number (301) 435-2988 or Email your request, including your address to: [email protected] Formal requests for additional plans and instruments must be requested in writing.

    Comment Due Date: Comments regarding this information collection are best assured of having their full effect if received within 60 days of the date of this publication.

    Proposed Collection: Office of Minority Health Research Coordination Training and Mentor Programs Applications, 0925—NEW, Existing collection in use without OMB control number, National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK), National Institutes of Health (NIH).

    Need and Use of Information Collection:

    In 2000, the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK) of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) established the Office of Minority Health Research Coordination (OMHRC) to address the burden of diseases and disorders that disproportionately impact the health of minority populations. One of the major goals of the office is to build and sustain a pipeline of researchers from underrepresented populations in the biomedical, behavioral, clinical, and social sciences, with a focus on NIDDK mission areas. The office accomplishes this goal by administering a variety of programs and initiatives to recruit high school through post-doctoral educational level individuals into OMHRC research training and mentor programs: The Short-Term Research Experience for Underrepresented Persons (STEP-UP), the Diversity Summer Research Training Program (DSRTP) for Undergraduate Students, the NIH/NMA Program on Careers in Academic Medicine and the Network of Minority Health Research Investigators (NMRI). Identification of participants to matriculate into the program and initiatives comes from applications and related forms hosted through the NIDDK Web site. The proposed information collection activity is necessary in order to determine the eligibility and quality of potential awardees for traineeship in these programs.

    OMB approval is requested for 3 years. There are no costs to respondents other than their time. The total estimated annualized burden hours are 3,922.

    Estimated Annualized Burden Hours
    Table 1—Estimated Annualized Burden Hours for Each Form Included in This Project Type of respondent Estimated number of
  • respondents
  • Estimated number of
  • responses
  • annually per
  • respondent
  • Estimated total annual burden hours Estimated total annual burden hours
    Short-Term Research Experience for Underrepresented Persons (STEP-UP) 2,000 1 45/60 1,500 STEP-UP Mentor Training Form (SMTF) 200 1 15/60 50 Reference Recommendation form STEP-UP, DSRTP 6000 1 10/60 1000 Survey—STEP-UP Feedback Form 200 1 30/60 100 Survey—Mentor Feedback Form 200 1 15/60 50 Diversity Summer Research Training Program (DSRTP) 100 1 45/60 75 Survey—DSRTP Feedback Form 20 1 30/60 10 Network of Minority Health Research Investigators (NMRI) Criteria Form 200 1 15/60 50 Survey—NMRI Feedback Form 1000 1 30/60 500 Survey—NMRI Mentor Form 1000 1 30/60 500 NIH/NMA Fellows Program on Careers in Academic Medicine (NIH/NMA) 200 1 20/60 67 Survey—NIH/NMA Feedback Form 40 1 30/60 20
    Dated: April 26, 2016. Priscilla Logan, NIDDK Project Clearance Liaison, Office of Management Policy Analysis, National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, NIH.
    [FR Doc. 2016-11416 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences; Notice of Closed Meetings

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following meetings.

    The meetings will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The contract proposals and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the contract proposals, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences Special Emphasis Panel.

    Date: June 8, 2016.

    Time: 1:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate contract proposals.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Democracy Blvd., Bethesda, MD 20892, (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: M. Lourdes Ponce, Scientific Review Officer, Office of Scientific Review, National Center For Advancing Translational, Sciences (NCATS), National Institutes of Health, 6701 Democracy Blvd., Democracy 1, Room 1073, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-435-0810, [email protected]

    Name of Committee: National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences Special Emphasis Panel; SBIR Phase II.

    Date: June 14, 2016.

    Time: 1:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m.

    Agenda: To review and evaluate contract proposals.

    Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Democracy Blvd., Bethesda, MD 20892, (Telephone Conference Call).

    Contact Person: Sailaja Koduri, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Office of Scientific Review, National Center for Advancing, Translational Sciences, 6701 Democracy Blvd., Room 1074, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-435-0813, [email protected]

    (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.859, Pharmacology, Physiology, and Biological Chemistry Research; 93.350, B—Cooperative Agreements; 93.859, Biomedical Research and Research Training, National Institutes of Health, HHS)
    Dated: May 9, 2016. David Clary, Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2016-11256 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration Center for Mental Health Services; Notice of Meeting

    Pursuant to Public Law 92-463, notice is hereby given that the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration's (SAMHSA) Center for Mental Health Services (CMHS) National Advisory Council will meet June 1, 2016, 10:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m.

    The meeting will include discussion and evaluation of grant applications reviewed by Initial Review Groups, an examination of confidential financial, business and personal information concerning the applicants and discussion of grant award proposals. Therefore, the meeting will be closed to the public, as determined by the SAMHSA Administrator, in accordance with title 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(4) and (6) and (c)(9)(B) and 5 U.S.C. App. 2, section 10(d).

    The meeting will be held virtually. Meeting information and a roster of Council members may be obtained either by accessing the SAMHSA Council Web site at: http://www.samhsa.gov/about-us/advisory-councils/cmhs-national-advisory-council or by contacting the CMHS National Advisory Council Designated Federal Official, Ms. Deborah DeMasse-Snell (see contact information below).

    Committee Name: SAMHSA's Center for Mental Health Services National Advisory Council.

    Date/Time/Type: June 1, 2016, 10:00 a.m.-12:00 p.m. CLOSED.

    Place: SAMHSA Building, 5600 Fishers Lane, Conference Room 14E56, Rockville, Maryland 20857.

    Contact: Deborah DeMasse-Snell, M.A. (Than), Designated Federal Official, SAMHSA CMHS National Advisory Council, 5600 Fishers Lane, Room 14E53C, Rockville, Maryland 20857, Telephone: (240) 276-1861, Fax: (240) 276-1850, Email: [email protected]

    Summer King, Statistician, SAMHSA.
    [FR Doc. 2016-11247 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4162-20-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration Center for Mental Health Services; Notice of Meeting

    Pursuant to Public Law 92-463, notice is hereby given that the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration's (SAMHSA) Center for Mental Health Services (CMHS) National Advisory Council will meet June 21, 11:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m.

    The meeting will include discussion and evaluation of grant applications reviewed by Initial Review Groups, an examination of confidential financial, business and personal information concerning the applicants, and discussion of grant award proposals. Therefore, the meeting will be closed to the public, as determined by the SAMHSA Administrator, in accordance with title 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(4) and (6) and (c)(9)(B) and 5 U.S.C. App. 2, section 10(d).

    The meeting will be held virtually. Meeting information and a roster of Council members may be obtained either by accessing the SAMHSA Council Web site at: http://www.samhsa.gov/about-us/advisory-councils/cmhs-national-advisory-council or by contacting Deborah DeMasse-Snell.

    Committee Name: SAMHSA's Center for Mental Health Services National Advisory Council.

    Date/Time/Type: June 21, 11:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. (EDT) CLOSED.

    Place: SAMHSA Building, 5600 Fishers Lane, Conference Room 14E56, Rockville, Maryland 20857.

    Contact: Deborah DeMasse-Snell, M.A. (Than), Designated Federal Officer, SAMHSA CMHS National Advisory Council, 5600 Fishers Lane, Room 14E53C, Rockville, Maryland 20857 (mail), telephone: (240) 276-1861, fax: (240) 276-1850, email: [email protected]

    Summer King, Statistician, SAMHSA.
    [FR Doc. 2016-11248 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4162-20-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY U.S. Customs and Border Protection Quarterly IRS Interest Rates Used in Calculating Interest on Overdue Accounts and Refunds on Customs Duties AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    General notice.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice advises the public that the quarterly Internal Revenue Service interest rates used to calculate interest on overdue accounts (underpayments) and refunds (overpayments) of customs duties will increase 1 percent from the previous quarter. For the calendar quarter beginning April 1, 2016, the interest rates for overpayments will be 3 percent for corporations and 4 percent for non-corporations, and the interest rate for underpayments will be 4 percent for both corporations and non-corporations. This notice is published for the convenience of the importing public and U.S. Customs and Border Protection personnel.

    DATES:

    Effective Date: April 1, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Michael P. Dean, Revenue Division, Collection and Refunds Branch, 6650 Telecom Drive, Suite #100, Indianapolis, Indiana 46278; telephone (317) 614-4882.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background

    Pursuant to 19 U.S.C. 1505 and Treasury Decision 85-93, published in the Federal Register on May 29, 1985 (50 FR 21832), the interest rate paid on applicable overpayments or underpayments of customs duties must be in accordance with the Internal Revenue Code rate established under 26 U.S.C. 6621 and 6622. Section 6621 provides different interest rates applicable to overpayments: one for corporations and one for non-corporations.

    The interest rates are based on the Federal short-term rate and determined by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) on behalf of the Secretary of the Treasury on a quarterly basis. The rates effective for a quarter are determined during the first-month period of the previous quarter.

    In Revenue Ruling 2016-06, the IRS determined the rates of interest for the calendar quarter beginning April 1, 2016, and ending on June 30, 2016. The interest rate paid to the Treasury for underpayments will be the Federal short-term rate (1%) plus three percentage points (3%) for a total of four percent (4%) for both corporations and non-corporations. For corporate overpayments, the rate is the Federal short-term rate (1%) plus two percentage points (2%) for a total of three percent (3%). For overpayments made by non-corporations, the rate is the Federal short-term rate (1%) plus three percentage points (3%) for a total of four percent (4%). These interest rates are subject to change for the calendar quarter beginning July 1, 2016, and ending September 30, 2016.

    For the convenience of the importing public and U.S. Customs and Border Protection personnel the following list of IRS interest rates used, covering the period from before July of 1974 to date, to calculate interest on overdue accounts and refunds of customs duties, is published in summary format.

    Beginning date Ending date Under-
  • payments
  • (percent)
  • Over-
  • payments
  • (percent)
  • Corporate overpayments
  • (eff. 1-1-99)
  • (percent)
  • 070174 063075 6 6 070175 013176 9 9 020176 013178 7 7 020178 013180 6 6 020180 013182 12 12 020182 123182 20 20 010183 063083 16 16 070183 123184 11 11 010185 063085 13 13 070185 123185 11 11 010186 063086 10 10 070186 123186 9 9 010187 093087 9 8 100187 123187 10 9 010188 033188 11 10 040188 093088 10 9 100188 033189 11 10 040189 093089 12 11 100189 033191 11 10 040191 123191 10 9 010192 033192 9 8 040192 093092 8 7 100192 063094 7 6 070194 093094 8 7 100194 033195 9 8 040195 063095 10 9 070195 033196 9 8 040196 063096 8 7 070196 033198 9 8 040198 123198 8 7 010199 033199 7 7 6 040199 033100 8 8 7 040100 033101 9 9 8 040101 063001 8 8 7 070101 123101 7 7 6 010102 123102 6 6 5 010103 093003 5 5 4 100103 033104 4 4 3 040104 063004 5 5 4 070104 093004 4 4 3 100104 033105 5 5 4 040105 093005 6 6 5 100105 063006 7 7 6 070106 123107 8 8 7 010108 033108 7 7 6 040108 063008 6 6 5 070108 093008 5 5 4 100108 123108 6 6 5 010109 033109 5 5 4 040109 123110 4 4 3 010111 033111 3 3 2 040111 093011 4 4 3 100111 033116 3 3 2 040116 063016 4 4 3
    Dated: May 10, 2016. R. Gil Kerlikowske, Commissioner.
    [FR Doc. 2016-11376 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-14-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY U.S. Customs and Border Protection [1651-0061] Agency Information Collection Activities: Application To Establish a Centralized Examination Station AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    30-Day notice and request for comments; Extension of an existing collection of information.

    SUMMARY:

    U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) of the Department of Homeland Security will be submitting the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act: Application to Establish a Centralized Examination Station. This is a proposed extension of an information collection that was previously approved. CBP is proposing that this information collection be extended with no change to the burden hours or to the information collected. This document is published to obtain comments from the public and affected agencies.

    DATES:

    Written comments should be received on or before June 13, 2016 to be assured of consideration.

    ADDRESSES:

    Interested persons are invited to submit written comments on this proposed information collection to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget. Comments should be addressed to the OMB Desk Officer for Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security, and sent via electronic mail to [email protected] or faxed to (202) 395-5806.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Requests for additional information should be directed to Tracey Denning, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Regulations and Rulings, Office of Trade, 90 K Street, NE., 10th Floor, Washington, DC 20229-1177, at 202-325-0265.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This proposed information collection was previously published in the Federal Register (81 FR 7365) on February 11, 2016, allowing for a 60-day comment period. This notice allows for an additional 30 days for public comments. This process is conducted in accordance with 5 CFR 1320.10. CBP invites the general public and other Federal agencies to comment on proposed and/or continuing information collections pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-13; 44 U.S.C. 3507). The comments should address: (a) whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimates of the burden of the collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; (d) ways to minimize the burden, including the use of automated collection techniques or the use of other forms of information technology; and (e) the annual costs to respondents or record keepers from the collection of information (total capital/startup costs and operations and maintenance costs). The comments that are submitted will be summarized and included in the CBP request for OMB approval. All comments will become a matter of public record. In this document, CBP is soliciting comments concerning the following information collection:

    Title: Application to Establish a Centralized Examination Station.

    OMB Number: 1651-0061.

    Abstract: A Customs and Border Protection (CBP) port director decides when his or her port needs one or more Centralized Examination Stations (CES). A CES is a facility where imported merchandise is made available to CBP officers for physical examination. If it is decided that a CES is needed, the port director solicits applications to operate a CES. The information contained in the application will be used to determine the suitability of the applicant's facility; the fairness of fee structure; and the knowledge of cargo handling operations and of CBP procedures. The names of all corporate officers and all employees who will come in contact with uncleared cargo will also be provided so that CBP may perform background investigations. The CES application is provided for by 19 CFR 118.11 and is authorized by 19 U.S.C. 1499, Tariff Act of 1930.

    Current Actions: CBP proposes to extend the expiration date of this information collection with no change to the burden hours or to the information collected.

    Type of Review: Extension (without change).

    Affected Public: Businesses.

    Estimated Number of Respondents: 50.

    Estimated Time per Respondent: 2 hours.

    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 100.

    Dated: May 9, 2016. Tracey Denning, Agency Clearance Officer, U.S. Customs and Border Protection.
    [FR Doc. 2016-11278 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-14-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY [Docket No. DHS-2016-0022] Homeland Security Advisory Council Meeting AGENCY:

    The Office of Partnership and Engagement, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice of partially closed Federal Advisory Committee meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    The Homeland Security Advisory Council (“Council”) will meet in person on June 2, 2016. Members of the public may participate in person. The meeting will be partially closed to the public.

    DATES:

    The Council will meet Thursday, June 2, 2016, from 10:05 a.m. to 5:15 p.m. EDT. The meeting will be open to the public from 1:50 p.m. to 4:25 p.m. EDT. Please note the meeting may close early if the Council has completed its business. The meeting will be closed to the public from 10:05 a.m. to 11:20 a.m. EDT, 1:00 p.m. to 1:40 p.m. EDT, and 4:30 p.m. to 5:15 p.m. EDT.

    ADDRESSES:

    The meeting will be held at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars (“Wilson Center”), located at 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20004. All visitors will be processed through the lobby of the Wilson Center. Written public comments prior to the meeting must be received by 5:00 p.m. EDT on Monday, May 30, 2016, and must be identified by Docket No. DHS-2016-0022. Written public comments after the meeting must be identified by Docket No. DHS-2016-0022 and may be submitted by one of the following methods:

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

    Email: [email protected]. Include Docket No. DHS-2016-0022 in the subject line of the message.

    Fax: (202) 282-9207.

    Mail: Homeland Security Advisory Council, Attention Mike Miron, Department of Homeland Security, Mailstop 0445, 245 Murray Lane SW., Washington, DC 20528.

    Instructions: All submissions received must include the words “Department of Homeland Security” and “DHS-2016-0022,” the docket number for this action. Comments received will be posted without alteration at http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided.

    Docket: For access to the docket to read comments received by the Council, go to http://www.regulations.gov, search “DHS-2016-0022,” “Open Docket Folder” and access your comments.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Mike Miron at [email protected] or at (202) 447-3135.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Notice of this meeting is given under Sec. 10(a) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), Public Law 92-463 (5 U.S.C. appendix), which requires each FACA committee meeting to be open to the public.

    The Council provides organizationally independent, strategic, timely, specific, actionable advice, and recommendations to the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) on matters related to homeland security. The Council is comprised of leaders of local law enforcement, first responders, Federal, State, and local government, the private sector, and academia.

    The Council will meet in an open session between 1:50 p.m. and 4:25 p.m. EDT. The Council will receive reports and recommendations from the Cybersecurity Subcommittee and the Countering Violent Extremism Subcommittee.

    The Council will meet in a closed session from 10:05 a.m. to 11:20 a.m. EDT, 1:00 p.m. to 1:40 p.m. EDT, and 4:30 p.m. to 5:15 p.m. EDT to receive sensitive operational counterterrorism information from senior DHS officials, information on current threats, and a southern border security update.

    Basis for Partial Closure: In accordance with Sec. 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security has determined this meeting requires partial closure. The disclosure of the information relayed would be detrimental to the public interest for the following reasons:

    The Council will receive closed session briefings from senior DHS officials. These briefings will concern matters sensitive to homeland security within the meaning of 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(7)(E) and 552b(c)(9)(B). The Council will receive operational counterterrorism updates on the current threat environment and security measures associated with countering such threats, including those related to aviation security programs, and southwest border security updates. The session is closed under 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(7)(E) because disclosure of that information could reveal investigative techniques and procedures not generally available to the public, allowing terrorists and those with interests against the United States to circumvent the law and thwart the Department's strategic initiatives. In addition, the session is closed pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(9)(B) because disclosure of these techniques and procedures could frustrate the successful implementation of protective measures designed to keep our country safe.

    Participation: Members of the public will have until 5 p.m. EDT on Monday, May 30, 2016, to register to attend the Council meeting on June 2, 2016. Due to limited availability of seating, admittance will be on a first-come first-serve basis. Participants interested in attending the meeting can contact Mike Miron at [email protected] or (202) 447-3135. You are required to provide your full legal name, date of birth, and company/agency affiliation. The public may access the facility via public transportation or use the public parking garages located near the Wilson Center. Wilson Center directions can be found at: http://wilsoncenter.org/directions. Members of the public will meet at 1:15 p.m. EDT at the Wilson Center's main entrance for sign in and escorting to the meeting room for the public session. Late arrivals after 1:45 p.m. EDT will not be permitted access to the facility.

    Facility Access: You are required to present a valid original government-issued ID, to include a State Driver's License or Non-Driver's Identification Card, U.S. Government Common Access Card (CAC), Military Identification Card or Person Identification Verification Card; U.S. Passport, U.S. Border Crossing Card, Permanent Resident Card or Alien Registration Card; or Native American Tribal Document.

    Information of Services for Individuals with Disabilities: For information on facilities or services for individuals with disabilities, or to request special assistance at the meeting, contact Mike Miron at [email protected] or (202) 447-3135 as soon as possible.

    Dated: May 10, 2016. Sarah E. Morgenthau, Executive Director, Homeland Security Advisory Council, DHS.
    [FR Doc. 2016-11345 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-9M-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT [Docket No. FR-5910-N-07] 60-Day Notice of Proposed Information Collection: Continuum of Care Homeless Assistance—Technical Submission AGENCY:

    Office of Community Planning and Development, HUD.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    HUD is seeking approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for the information collection described below. In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act, HUD is requesting comment from all interested parties on the proposed collection of information. The purpose of this notice is to allow for 60 days of public comment.

    DATES:

    Comments Due Date: July 12, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Interested persons are invited to submit comments regarding this proposal. Comments should refer to the proposal by name and/or OMB Control Number and should be sent to: Colette Pollard, Reports Management Officer, QDAM, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street SW., Room 4176, Washington, DC 20410-5000; telephone (202) 402-3400 (this is not a toll-free number) or email at [email protected] for a copy of the proposed forms or other available information. Persons with hearing or speech impairments may access this number through TTY by calling the toll-free Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Norm Suchar, Director, Office of Special Needs Assistance Programs, Office of Community Planning and Development, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street SW., Room 7262, Washington, DC 20410; telephone (202) 708-5015 (this is not a toll-free number). Persons with hearing or speech impairments may access this number through TTY by calling the toll-free Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339.

    Copies of available documents submitted to OMB may be obtained from Ms. Pollard.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This notice informs the public that HUD is seeking approval from OMB for the information collection described in section A.

    A. Overview of Information Collection

    Title of Information Collection: Continuum of Care Homeless Assistance—Technical Submission.

    OMB Approval Number: 2506-0183.

    Type of Request: Extension of currently approved collection.

    Form Number: HUD-40090-3a, HUD-40090-3b.

    Description of the need for the information and proposed use: This submission is to request an extension of a currently approved collection associated with the Technical Submission phase of the Continuum of Care (CoC) Program Application. This submission is limited to the Technical Submission process under the CoC Program interim rule, as authorized by the HEARTH Act. Applicants who are successful in the CoC Program Competition are required to submit more detailed technical information before a grant agreement. The information to be collected will be used to ensure that technical requirements are met prior to the execution of a grant agreement. The technical requirements relate to a more extensive description of the budgets for administration costs, timelines for project implementation, match documentation and other project specific documentation, and information to support the resolution of grant conditions. HUD will use this detailed information to determine if a project is financially feasible and whether all proposed activities are eligible. All information collected is used to carefully consider conditional applicants for funding. If HUD collects less information, or collected it less frequently, the Department could not make a final determination concerning the eligibility of applicants for grant funds and conditional applicants would not be eligible to sign grant agreements and receive funding. To see the regulations for the CoC Program and applicable supplementary documents, visit HUD's Homeless Resource Exchange page at https://www.hudexchange.info/programs/coc/. The statutory provisions and the implementing interim rule (also found at 24 CFR part 587) that govern the program require the information provided by the Technical Submission.

    Respondents (i.e., affected public): Applicants that are successful in the Continuum of Care Homeless Assistance Grant competition.

    Estimated Number of Respondents: 750.

    Estimated Number of Responses: 750.

    Frequency of Response: 1.

    Average Hours per Response: 8.

    Total Estimated Burdens: 6,000.

    Note: Preparer of this notice may substitute the chart for everything beginning with estimated number of respondents above:

    Information collection Number of
  • respondents
  • Frequency of response Responses per annum Burden hour per response Annual burden hours Hourly cost per response Annual cost
    750 1 750 8 6,000 21 126,000 Total 750 1 750 8 6,000 21 126,000
    B. Solicitation of Public Comment

    This notice is soliciting comments from members of the public and affected parties concerning the collection of information described in section A on the following:

    (1) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;

    (2) The accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information;

    (3) Ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

    (4) Ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond; including through the use of appropriate automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.

    HUD encourages interested parties to submit comment in response to these questions.

    Authority:

    Section 3507 of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. chapter 35.

    Dated: May 3, 2016. Harriet Tregoning, Principal Deputy Assistance Secretary for Community Planning and Development.
    [FR Doc. 2016-11354 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4210-67-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT [Docket No. FR-5931-D-01] Consolidated Redelegation of Authority for the Government National Mortgage Association (Ginnie Mae) AGENCY:

    Office of the President of the Government National Mortgage Association, HUD.

    ACTION:

    Notice of delegation of authority.

    SUMMARY:

    In this Notice, the President of the Government National Mortgage Association (Ginnie Mae) retains authority and redelegates authority granted to Ginnie Mae to the Executive Vice President and other subordinate employees.

    DATES:

    Effective Date: May 5, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Office of the Senior Vice President and Chief Risk Officer, Government National Mortgage Association, Department of Housing and Urban Development, Potomac Center South, 550 12th Street SW., 3rd Floor, Washington, DC 20024; telephone number (202) 475-4918. (This is not a toll-free number). Persons with hearing- or speech-impairments may access this number though TTY by calling the toll-free Federal Relay Service at 1-800-877-8339.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    By a notice published in the Federal Register on August 30, 2011 (76 FR 53931), the Secretary issued a consolidated delegation of authority to the President of Ginnie Mae. In that notice, the President of Ginnie Mae was given authority to redelegate the authorities delegated to the President by the Secretary.1 Part I of this notice contains concurrent redelegations from the President of Ginnie Mae to the Executive Vice President and redelegations from the Executive Vice President to Senior Vice Presidents.2 Part II of this notice contains redelegations from the Senior Vice Presidents to subordinate staff. Part III of this notice discusses the ability of the Senior Vice Presidents to redelegate the authority redelegated to them from the Executive Vice President and certain non-delegable duties of the Executive Vice President. Part IV of this notice provides that this delegation supersedes all previous redelegations from the President, Executive Vice President and Senior Vice Presidents and authorizes those parties to revoke the authority contained in this delegation.

    1 The Ginnie Mae Bylaws separately provide the President of Ginnie Mae with other significant authority. These delegations do not supersede or rescind the authority contained in the Bylaws. The Ginnie Mae Bylaws are available at http://www.ginniemae.gov/inside_gnma/executive_leadership/Documents/ginniemae_bylaws_april2016.pdf.

    2 The Ginnie Mae Bylaws authorize Ginnie Mae Vice Presidents to sign all contracts not subject to the Federal Acquisition Regulation, mortgages, pledges, other documents, instruments and other writings that call for Ginnie Mae's execution in the conducting of Ginnie Mae's business. The authority redelegated to the Senior Vice Presidents by the Executive Vice President does not supersede or rescind the authority contained in the Bylaws.

    I. Authority Redelegated Section A. The President of Ginnie Mae Retains and Redelegates Concurrent Authority to the Executive Vice President

    The President of Ginnie Mae hereby retains and redelegates to the Executive Vice President concurrent authority with the President. The Executive Vice President is authorized to perform all duties of the President of Ginnie Mae in place of the President. The Executive Vice President is also authorized to perform the functions delegated by the Secretary to the President of Ginnie Mae, except the authority to waive HUD regulations. The authority to waive regulations is reserved for the President of Ginnie Mae pursuant to the Department of Housing and Urban Development Act (42 U.S.C. 3535(q)). If the President is absent from office, the person authorized to act in the President's absence may exercise the waiver authority of the President consistent with HUD's policies and procedures (73 FR 76674 and 66 FR 13944).

    Section B. The Executive Vice President of Ginnie Mae Retains and Redelegates Authority to the Senior Vice Presidents

    The Executive Vice President of Ginnie Mae hereby retains and redelegates to the Senior Vice Presidents the authority to perform the below enumerated functions.

    1. The Senior Vice President of the Office of Enterprise Risk is hereby delegated to handle matters related to Operational, Counterparty, Market and Credit Risk which includes, but is not limited to, the authority:

    a. To establish, oversee and maintain all appropriate risk management policies, activities, and controls for Ginnie Mae, including analyzing the risk profile of business units, carrying out risk management and evaluation functions, and performing risk assessments.

    b. To approve pool transfers, non-streamlined commitment authority, subservicing arrangements, and acceptance of corporate guaranty.

    c. To approve waivers of net worth, liquidity requirements, and errors and omissions fidelity insurance.

    d. To negotiate and approve asset dispositions.

    2. The Senior Vice President of the Office of Issuer and Portfolio Management is hereby delegated to handle matters related to the Mortgage-Backed Securities (MBS) Program, which includes, but is not limited to, the authority:

    a. To oversee the activities and performance of issuers participating in the MBS Program.

    b. To determine the manner of issuers' participation in the MBS Program.

    c. To approve the ability of institutions to participate as issuers in the MBS Program.

    d. To render decisions concerning the compliance of issuers with MBS Program requirements.

    e. To make determinations related to the servicing of loans contained in defaulted portfolios.

    f. To approve subservicing arrangements and asset disposition.

    g. To initiate and impose civil money penalties.

    h. To establish and maintain policies and procedures for claims collection and coordinate claims collection activities.

    3. The Senior Vice President of the Office of Capital Markets is hereby delegated to handle matters related to the Multiclass Securities Program, which includes, but is not limited to, the authority:

    a. To oversee the operation and management of the Multiclass Securities Program.

    b. To execute documents necessary to the administration of the Multiclass Securities Program.

    c. To execute the Transaction Initiation Letter, Sponsor Agreement, and Guaranty Agreement.

    4. The Senior Vice President of the Office of Chief Financial Officer is hereby delegated to handle finance matters related to Ginnie Mae, which includes, but is not limited to, the authority:

    a. To develop and maintain a financial management system to administer and coordinate the financial and accounting functions for Ginnie Mae.

    b. To be responsible for the financial management needs of Ginnie Mae, to report to the Congress and to external agencies on financial management performance, Ginnie Mae financial statements, and other information requests required by law and regulation.

    c. To establish and maintain policies and procedures for claims collection and coordinate claims collection activities.

    d. To appoint Disbursement and Certifying Officers to approve the disbursal of Ginnie Mae funds.

    e. To certify funds are available for commitments of contracts.

    f. To execute Secure Payment System-Financial Management Services designating individuals as certifying officers.

    g. To certify vouchers for payments.

    h. To designate, delegate, and revoke authority of designated staff members to use the U.S. Treasury's Secure Payment System.

    5. The Senior Vice President of the Office of Securities Operations is hereby delegated to handle matters related to Ginnie Mae Program Operations, which includes, but is not limited to, the authority:

    a. To conduct the issuance of single class securities and follow on bond administration functions, i.e., factor reporting, collection of principal and interest payments from issuers, outstanding securities, remaining principle balance corrections, etc.

    b. To approve any enhancement to Ginnie Mae's business applications used to administer Ginnie Mae's Mortgage-Backed Securities program.

    c. To approve the early termination of a Ginnie Mae pool.

    d. To assign mortgages.

    6. The Senior Vice President of the Office of Enterprise Data and Technology Solutions is hereby delegated to handle matters related to the information, technology, and security management of all Ginnie Mae systems, which includes, but is not limited to, the authority:

    a. To certify and accredit Ginnie Mae business applications;

    b. To ensure security of Ginnie Mae business applications;

    c. To handle matters related to the procurement of hardware, software, and licensing.

    d. To manage Ginnie Mae's infrastructure and security operations.

    e. To handle matters of interagency security agreements for data exchange.

    7. The Senior Vice President of the Office of Management Operations is hereby delegated to handle matters related to Administrative Management, Procurement, and Communications, which includes, but is not limited to, the authority:

    a. To coordinate administrative functions, policies, and programs related to Human Resources management and administration.

    b. To provide oversight of contract activities including reviews of quality and internal controls.

    c. To direct and coordinate all media outreach for Ginnie Mae.

    II. Authority Redelegated to Other Positions Within Ginnie Mae Section A

    The Senior Vice President of Office of Enterprise Risk retains and redelegates the authority to Directors and staff to handle matters related to Operational, Counterparty, Market and Credit Risk:

    1. To establish, oversee, and maintain all appropriate risk management policies, activities, and controls for Ginnie Mae, including analyzing the risk profile of business units, carrying out risk management and evaluation functions, and performing risk assessments.

    2. To approve new issuer applications.

    Section B

    The Senior Vice President of the Office of Issuer Portfolio Management hereby retains and redelegates the authority to Directors and staff:

    1. To oversee the activities and performance of issuers participating in the MBS Program.

    2. To determine the manner of issuers' participation in the MBS Program.

    3. To approve the ability of institutions to participate as issuers in the MBS Program.

    4. To render decisions concerning the compliance of issuers with MBS Program requirements.

    5. To make determinations about the servicing of loans contained in defaulted portfolios.

    6. To approve subservicing arrangements and asset disposition.

    7. To establish and maintain policies and procedures for claims collection and coordinate claims collection activities.

    Section C

    The Senior Vice President of the Office of Capital Markets retains and redelegates the authority to the Deputies, Directors, and securities market specialists:

    1. To oversee the operation and management of the Multiclass Securities Program.

    2. To execute documents necessary to the administration of the Multiclass Securities Program.

    3. To execute the Transaction Initiation Letter, Sponsor Agreement, and Guaranty Agreement.

    Section D

    The Senior Vice President of the Office of Chief Financial Officer retains and redelegates the authority to Directors and specifically designated staff members:

    1. To develop and maintain a financial management system to administer and coordinate the financial and accounting functions for Ginnie Mae.

    2. To be responsible for the financial management needs of Ginnie Mae, to report to the Congress and to external agencies on financial management performance, Ginnie Mae financial statements, and other information requests required by law and regulation.

    3. To establish and maintain policies and procedures for claims collection and coordinate claims collection activities.

    4. To certify on funds available for commitments of contracts.

    5. To certify vouchers for payments.

    6. To execute Secure Payment System-Financial Management Services.

    Section E

    The Senior Vice President of Office of Securities Operations retains and redelegates the authority to directors and staff:

    1. To conduct the issuance of single class securities and follow on bond administration functions, i.e., factor reporting, collection of principal and interest payments from issuers to investors, payments to investors, disclosures on outstanding securities.

    2. To approve any enhancements to Ginnie Mae business applications used to administer Ginnie Mae's MBS program.

    3. To approve the early termination of a Ginnie Mae pool.

    4. To assign mortgages.

    Section F

    The Senior Vice President of Office of Enterprise Data and Technology Solutions retains and redelegates the authority to Directors and staff:

    1. To certify and accredit Ginnie Mae business applications.

    2. To ensure security of Ginnie Mae business applications.

    3. To handle matters related to the procurement of hardware, software, and licensing.

    4. To manage Ginnie Mae's infrastructure and security operations.

    5. To handle matters of interagency security agreements for data exchange.

    Section G

    The Senior Vice President of the Office of Management Operations retains and redelegates the authority to the Directors and staff:

    1. To coordinate Ginnie Mae's administrative functions, policies, and programs related to Human Resources management and administration.

    2. To provide oversight of contract activities including reviews of quality and internal controls.

    3. To direct and coordinate all media outreach for Ginnie Mae.

    III. Authority To Redelegate

    Certain authority redelegated by the President of Ginnie Mae to the Executive Vice President and Senior Vice Presidents in this notice is non-delegable. The non-delegable authorities include, but are not limited to: (1) Authority to issue All Participants Memoranda; (2) Authority to approve the reservation of funds request; and (3) Authority to approve the request for contract services for all contract work. Duties that are delegable have been redelegated by the Senior Vice Presidents in Part II Sections A-G above. Duties that are non-delegable are retained by the President, Executive Vice President, and Senior Vice Presidents.

    IV. Authority Superseded

    This redelegation of authority supersedes all previous redelegations of authority from the President, Executive Vice President and Senior Vice Presidents of Ginnie Mae. The President, Executive Vice President and Senior Vice Presidents of Ginnie Mae may revoke the authority authorized herein, in whole or part, at any time.

    Authority:

    Section 7(d), Department of Housing and Urban Development Act (42 U.S.C. 3535(d)). Section 3.05, Bylaws of the Government National Mortgage Association, Ginnie Mae.gov. 24 CFR part 310.

    Dated: May 5, 2016. Theodore W. Tozer, President, Government National Mortgage Association.
    [FR Doc. 2016-11358 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4210-67-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT [Docket No. FR-5907-N-20] Federal Property Suitable as Facilities To Assist the Homeless AGENCY:

    Office of the Assistant Secretary for Community Planning and Development, HUD.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    This Notice identifies unutilized, underutilized, excess, and surplus Federal property reviewed by HUD for suitability for use to assist the homeless.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Juanita Perry, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 Seventh Street SW., Room 7266, Washington, DC 20410; telephone (202) 402-3970; TTY number for the hearing- and speech-impaired (202) 708-2565 (these telephone numbers are not toll-free), or call the toll-free title V information line at 800-927-7588.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    In accordance with 24 CFR part 581 and section 501 of the Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 11411), as amended, HUD is publishing this Notice to identify Federal buildings and other real property that HUD has reviewed for suitability for use to assist the homeless. The properties were reviewed using information provided to HUD by Federal landholding agencies regarding unutilized and underutilized buildings and real property controlled by such agencies or by GSA regarding its inventory of excess or surplus Federal property. This Notice is also published in order to comply with the December 12, 1988 Court Order in National Coalition for the Homeless v. Veterans Administration, No. 88-2503-OG (D.D.C.).

    Properties reviewed are listed in this Notice according to the following categories: Suitable/available, suitable/unavailable, and suitable/to be excess, and unsuitable. The properties listed in the three suitable categories have been reviewed by the landholding agencies, and each agency has transmitted to HUD: (1) Its intention to make the property available for use to assist the homeless, (2) its intention to declare the property excess to the agency's needs, or (3) a statement of the reasons that the property cannot be declared excess or made available for use as facilities to assist the homeless.

    Properties listed as suitable/available will be available exclusively for homeless use for a period of 60 days from the date of this Notice. Where property is described as for “off-site use only” recipients of the property will be required to relocate the building to their own site at their own expense. Homeless assistance providers interested in any such property should send a written expression of interest to HHS, addressed to: Ms. Theresa M. Ritta, Chief Real Property Branch, the Department of Health and Human Services, Room 5B-17, Parklawn Building, 5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20857, (301) 443-2265 (This is not a toll-free number.) HHS will mail to the interested provider an application packet, which will include instructions for completing the application. In order to maximize the opportunity to utilize a suitable property, providers should submit their written expressions of interest as soon as possible. For complete details concerning the processing of applications, the reader is encouraged to refer to the interim rule governing this program, 24 CFR part 581.

    For properties listed as suitable/to be excess, that property may, if subsequently accepted as excess by GSA, be made available for use by the homeless in accordance with applicable law, subject to screening for other Federal use. At the appropriate time, HUD will publish the property in a Notice showing it as either suitable/available or suitable/unavailable.

    For properties listed as suitable/unavailable, the landholding agency has decided that the property cannot be declared excess or made available for use to assist the homeless, and the property will not be available.

    Properties listed as unsuitable will not be made available for any other purpose for 20 days from the date of this Notice. Homeless assistance providers interested in a review by HUD of the determination of unsuitability should call the toll free information line at 1-800-927-7588 for detailed instructions or write a letter to Ann Marie Oliva at the address listed at the beginning of this Notice. Included in the request for review should be the property address (including zip code), the date of publication in the Federal Register, the landholding agency, and the property number.

    For more information regarding particular properties identified in this Notice (i.e., acreage, floor plan, existing sanitary facilities, exact street address), providers should contact the appropriate landholding agencies at the following addresses: AGRICULTURE: Ms. Debra Kerr, Department of Agriculture, Reporters Building, 300 7th Street SW., Room 300, Washington, DC 20024, (202) 720-8873; AIR FORCE: Mr. Robert E. Moriarty, P.E., AFCEC/CI, 2261 Hughes Avenue, Ste. 155, JBSA Lackland, TX 78236-9853; ARMY: Ms. Veronica Rines, Office of the Assistant Chief of Staff for Installation Management, Department of Army, Room 5A128, 600 Army Pentagon, Washington, DC 20310, (571) 256-8145; ENERGY: Mr. David Steinau, Department of Energy, Office of Property Management, OECM MA-50, 4B122, 1000 Independence Ave. SW., Washington, DC 20585, (202) 287-1503; GSA: Mr. Flavio Peres, General Services Administration, Office of Real Property Utilization and Disposal, 1800 F Street NW., Room 7040 Washington, DC 20405, (202) 501-0084; INTERIOR: Mr. Michael Wright, Acquisition & Property Management, Department of the Interior, 3960 N. 56th Ave. #104, Hollywood, FL 33021; (443) 223-4639; NASA: Mr. Frank T. Bellinger, Facilities Engineering Division, National Aeronautics & Space Administration, Code JX, Washington, DC 20546, (202) 358-1124; NAVY: Mr. Steve Matteo, Department of the Navy, Asset Management Division, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Washington Navy Yard, 1330 Patterson Ave. SW., Suite 1000, Washington, DC 20374; (202) 685-9426; (These are not toll-free numbers).

    Dated: May 5, 2016. Brian P. Fitzmaurice, Director, Division of Community Assistance, Office of Special Needs Assistance Programs. TITLE V, FEDERAL SURPLUS PROPERTY PROGRAM FEDERAL REGISTER REPORT FOR 05/13/2016 Suitable/Available Properties Building California 14 Buildings Naval Base Ventura County Point Mugu CA 93043 Landholding Agency: Navy Property Number: 77201620013 Status: Unutilized Directions: Building 217SNI; 115SNI; 116SNI; 207SNI; 74SNI; 146SNI; 68SNI; 302SNI; 121SNI; 19SNI; 2SNI; 214A; 228SNI; 116A Comments: public access denied and no alternative method to gain access without compromising national security. Idaho Doublewide Trailer #6, Challis 221 South US Highway 93 Challis ID 83226 Landholding Agency: Agriculture Property Number: 15201620020 Status: Excess Directions: 2T1156, RPUID B1084.002901 Comments: off-site removal only; 49+ yrs. old; 1,140 sq. ft.; housing; contact Agriculture for more information. Kentucky Stearns Residence #3 (128) 248 Ranger Station Road Whitley City KY 42653 Landholding Agency: Agriculture Property Number: 15201620018 Status: Unutilized Directions: off-site removal only; removal extremely difficult; no future agency need Comments: 41+ yrs. old; 2,566 sq. ft.; residential; 6+ mos. vacant; good condition; $2,500 in repairs needed; contact Agriculture for more information. Pine Knot Job Corps Residence #2 (131) 132 Job Corps Road Pine Knot KY 42635 Landholding Agency: Agriculture Property Number: 15201620019 Status: Unutilized Comments: off-site removal only no future agency use 40+ yrs. old; 1,300 sq. ft.; residential; 6+ mos. vacant; poor condition; contact Agriculture for more information. Stearns Residence #2 (106) 201 Ranger Station Road Whitley City KY 42653 Landholding Agency: Agriculture Property Number: 15201620021 Status: Unutilized Comments: off-site removal only no future agency use 50+ yrs. old; 1,367 sq. ft.; residential; 6+ mos. vacant; poor condition; $50,000 repairs needed; contact Agriculture for more information. Pine Knot Job Corps Residence #1 (130) 132 Job Corps Road Pine Knot KY 42635 Landholding Agency: Agriculture Property Number: 15201620022 Status: Unutilized Comments: off-site removal only no future agency use 41+ yrs. old, 1,300 sq. ft.; residential; 6+ mos. vacant; poor condition; contact Agriculture for more information. Pine Knot Job Corps Residence #3 (132) 132 Job Corps Road Pine Knot KY 42635 Landholding Agency: Agriculture Property Number: 15201620023 Status: Unutilized Comments: off-site removal only no future agency use; 39+ yrs. old; 1,300 sq. ft.; residential; 6+ mos. vacant; poor condition; contact Agriculture for more information. Stonewall Residence (522) 870 Stonewall Road Monticello KY Landholding Agency: Agriculture Property Number: 15201620024 Status: Unutilized Comments: off-site removal only no future agency use; 40+ yrs. old; 800 sq. ft.; residential; 6+ mos. vacant; poor condition; contact Agriculture for more information. Stearns Residence #1 (107) 142 Ranger Station Road Whitley City KY 42653 Landholding Agency: Agriculture Property Number: 15201620025 Status: Unutilized Comments: off-site removal only; no future agency use: 75+ yrs. old; 1,332 sq. ft.; residential; 6+ mos. vacant; fair condition; contact Agriculture North Carolina 3 Buildings OLF NAS Oceana Plymouth NC Landholding Agency: GSA Property Number: 54201620006 Status: Surplus GSA Number: 4-D-NC-0831-AG Directions: Landholding Agency: Navy; Disposal Agency: GSA 4-D-NC-0831-AG (013); 4-D-NC-0831-AC (004); 4-D-NC-0831-AD (007); 4-D-NC-0831-AE (007A). Comments: 26+ yrs. old; storage; 120+ mos. vacant; good condition; contact GSA for more information. Texas Austin U.S. Courthouse 200 W. 8th Street Austin TX 78701 Landholding Agency: GSA Property Number: 54201620010 Status: Excess GSA Number: 7-G-TX-1170-AA Comments: 63,264 sq. ft.; sits on 0.81 fee acres; on National Register of Historic Places; contact GSA for more information. Utah Timpanogos Cave National Monument 2038 Alpine Loop Road American Fork UT 84003 Landholding Agency: Interior Property Number: 61201620004 Status: Excess Comments: off-site removal only; 25+ yrs. old; 2,343 sq. ft.; 2+ mos. vacant; poor condition; maybe difficult to move; contact Interior for more information. Virginia 2799 Harrison Loop JBLE Ft. Eustis Ft. Eustis VA Landholding Agency: Air Force Property Number: 18201620011 Status: Unutilized Comments: off-site removal only; no future agency need; Admin.; 5,700 sq. ft.; extreme. difficult to remove; very poor conditions; lead; contact Air Force for more info. 2785 Harrison Loop JBLE Ft. Eustis Ft. Eustis VA Landholding Agency: Air Force Property Number: 18201620012 Status: Unutilized Comments: off-site removal only; no future agency need; 7,715 sq. ft.; extreme. difficult to remove; Admin. very poor conditions; contact Air Force for more info. 811 Gaffy Place JBLE Ft. Eustis Ft. Eustis VA Landholding Agency: Air Force Property Number: 18201620013 Status: Unutilized Comments: off-site removal only; no future agency need; extreme. difficult to remove; 40,166 sq. ft.; barracks; very poor conditions; contact Air Force for more info. 652 Williamson Loop JBLE Ft. Eustis Ft. Eustis VA Landholding Agency: Air Force Property Number: 18201620014 Status: Unutilized Comments: off-site removal only; no future agency need; extreme. difficult remove; 3,214 sq. ft.; storage; very poor conditions; contact Air Force for more info. 2749 Taylor Ave. JBLE Ft. Eustis Ft. Eustis VA Landholding Agency: Air Force Property Number: 18201620015 Status: Unutilized Comments: off-site removal only; no future agency need; 100 sq. ft.; storage; very poor conditions; contact Air Force for more info. 3511 Mulberry Island Rd. null Ft. Eustis VA 23604 Landholding Agency: Air Force Property Number: 18201620016 Status: Unutilized Comments: off-site removal only; no future agency need; 437 sq. ft.; 2+ months vacant; very poor conditions; contact Air Force for more info. 822 Lee Blvd. null Ft. Eustis VA 23604 Landholding Agency: Air Force Property Number: 18201620017 Status: Unutilized Comments: off-site removal only; no future agency need; 205 sq. ft.; Heat Plant; 7+ months vacant; very poor conditions; contact Air Force for more info. 876 Lee Blvd. JBLE Ft. Eustis VA 23604 Landholding Agency: Air Force Property Number: 18201620018 Status: Unutilized Comments: off-site removal only; no future agency need; 651 sq. ft.; office; very poor conditions; contact Air Force for more info. 2703 Marshall St. Ft. Eustis VA 23604 Landholding Agency: Air Force Property Number: 18201620019 Status: Unutilized Comments: off-site removal only; no future agency need; difficult to remove; 1,200 sq. ft.; storage; very poor conditions; contact Air Force for more info. 3913 Mulberry Island Rd. Ft. Eustis VA 23604 Landholding Agency: Air Force Property Number: 18201620020 Status: Unutilized Comments: off-site removal only; no future agency need; 767 sq. ft.; very poor conditions; contact Air Force for more info. 2794 Harrison Loop JBLE Ft. Eustis VA Landholding Agency: Air Force Property Number: 18201620022 Status: Unutilized Comments: off-site removal only; no future agency need extreme. difficult to remove; 6,782 sq. ft.; Admin.; very poor conditions; contact Air Force for more info. 2 Buildings Richmond National Battlefield Mechanicsville VA 23111 Landholding Agency: Interior Property Number: 61201620001 Status: Excess Directions: Tract 01-259 Owens House (1,302 sq. ft.) & Tract 01-135 Foss House (1,928 sq. ft.) Comments: off-site removal only; 43+-44+ yrs. old; residential; 15+-27+ mos. vacant; fair condition; does not meet health, safety & fire codes; maybe difficult to move; contact Interior for more information. Thornton Gap Waste Eater Treat 210 Thornton Gap Waste Water Treatment Road Luray VA 22835 Landholding Agency: Interior Property Number: 61201620002 Status: Excess Comments: off-site removal only; 40+ yrs. old; 2,742 sq. ft.; waste water treatment facility; 80+ mos. vacant; poor condition; contact Interior for more information. Loft Mountain Picnic Area Comf 79450 Skyline Dr. to Loft Mountain Access Rd. RT 76 Crozet VA 22932 Landholding Agency: Interior Property Number: 61201620003 Status: Excess Comments: off-site removal only; 53+ yrs. old; 372 sq. ft.; restroom; 102+ mos. vacant; poor condition; contact Interior for more information. Ellwood Garage 36380 Constitution Hwy. Locust Grove VA 22960 Landholding Agency: Interior Property Number: 61201620009 Status: Excess Comments: off-site removal only; 51+ yrs. old; 550 sq. ft.; storage; 2+ mos. vacant; fair condition; contact Interior for more information. 2 Buildings 150 & 162 Meadows Office Rd. Stanley VA 22851 Landholding Agency: Interior Property Number: 61201620010 Status: Excess Directions: Big Meadows Employee Apartment Bldg. BM07-25; Big Meadows Office (former apartments) Bldg. BM07-26 Comments: off-site removal only; 2,313 sq. ft. each; removal difficult due to size/type; poor conditions; asbestos/lead; contact Interior for more information. Washington Royal Quonset Hut Storage 11522 1st Ave. SE Othello WA 99344 Landholding Agency: Interior Property Number: 61201620007 Status: Excess Directions: RPUID: R0222142300B Comments: off-site removal only; 63+ yrs. old; 850 sq. ft.; storage; poor condition; contact Interior for more information. Suitable/Available Properties Land North Carolina 1951.24 Acres of Land OLF NAS Oceana Plymouth NC Landholding Agency: GSA Property Number: 54201620008 Status: Surplus GSA Number: 4-D-NC-0831-AA Directions: Landholding Agency: Navy; Disposal Agency: GSA GSA # 4-D-NC-0831-AH (025); 4-D-NC-0831-AA (002); 4-D-NC-0831-AB (003); 4-D-NC-0831-AF (010); 4-D-NC-0831-AA (Parcel 002) Comments: 1951.24 acres land; agricultural; license for agriculture use expires 03/31/17 with the Government retaining termination rights upon providing licensee 60-day notice. Tennessee Self-Sufficiency Parcel 13 Anderson County Oak Ridge TN 37830 Landholding Agency: GSA Property Number: 54201620005 Status: Surplus GSA Number: 4-B-TN-0664-AH Directions: Landholding Agency: Energy; Disposal Agency: GSA Comments: 20 acres; 2 sinkholes with eroded wet weather conveyance draining to them; contact GSA for more information. Unsuitable Properties Building California 2 Buildings PO Box 273, MS 4811 Edwards CA 93523 Landholding Agency: NASA Property Number: 71201620006 Status: Excess Directions: Building 4875B & 4875A Comments: public access denied and no alternative method to gain access without compromising national security. Reasons: Secured Area 8 Buildings PO Box 273, MS 4811 Edwards CA 93523 Landholding Agency: NASA Property Number: 71201620007 Status: Underutilized Directions: Building 4807; 4806; 4808; 4850; 4803; 4809; 4805; T-20 Comments: public access denied and no alternative method to gain access without compromising national security. Reasons: Secured Area 2 Buildings PO Box 273, MS 4811 Edwards CA 93523 Landholding Agency: NASA Property Number: 71201620009 Status: Unutilized Directions: Building 4985 & 4990 Comments: public access denied and no alternative method to gain access without compromising national security. Reasons: Secured Area 4 Buildings Naval Base Ventura County Point Mugu CA 93043 Landholding Agency: Navy Property Number: 77201620010 Status: Unutilized Directions: Building PM208; PM210; PM11; PM215 Comments: public access denied and no alternative method to gain access without compromising national security. Reasons: Secured Area Building 809SNI 311 Main Street Point Mugu CA 93043 Landholding Agency: Navy Property Number: 77201620011 Status: Unutilized Comments: public access denied and no alternative method to gain access without compromising national security. Reasons: Secured Area Florida Tillie Fowler Admin. & Ground 200 Norman Street Jacksonville FL 32212 Landholding Agency: Navy Property Number: 77201620012 Status: Unutilized Directions: 1906TK & 1906A Comments: public access denied and no alternative method to gain access w/compromising national security; property located w/airport runway clear zone or military airfield. Reasons: Secured Area Building 2277 US Naval Hospital Complex/Corry Station US Naval Hospital Com FL 32508 Landholding Agency: Navy Property Number: 77201620015 Status: Unutilized Comments: public access denied and no alternative method to gain access without compromising national security; property located within floodway, which has not been correct or contained. Reasons: Floodway; Secured Area Georgia Savannah HHIAP Fac. 1907 & 1917 XDQU 1401 Robert B. Miller Dr. Garden City GA Landholding Agency: Air Force Property Number: 18201620010 Status: Underutilized Comments: public access denied and no alternative without compromising national security. Reasons: Secured Area 5 Buildings Cumberland Island National Seashore St. Mary's GA 31558 Landholding Agency: Interior Property Number: 61201620008 Status: Excess Directions: Jenkins #1; #2; #3, Nancy's Fancy; Toonahowie Comments: all properties are located on Cumberland Island, which is not connected to the mainland by road or bridge and only accessible by boat. Reasons: Isolated area Indiana Bldg. 31 181 IW; 8001 Reinoehl Rd. Terre Haute IN 47803 Landholding Agency: Air Force Property Number: 18201620009 Status: Unutilized Comments: public access denied and no alternative method to gain access without compromising national security. Reasons: Secured Area Kansas 123 RPUID: 586630 Ft. Leavenworth Ft. Leavenworth KS 66027 Landholding Agency: Army Property Number: 21201620019 Status: Unutilized Comments: documented deficiencies: structurally unsound; holes in roof that has resulted in significant water damage to interior; clear threat to physical safety. Reasons: Extensive deterioration Mississippi Bldg. 4302 Test Complex Shop Facility Stennis Space Center Hancock County MS 39529 Landholding Agency: NASA Property Number: 71201620010 Status: Unutilized Comments: public access denied and no alternative method to gain access without compromising national security. Reasons: Secured Area Bldg. 4301 Test Complex Office Facility Stennis Space Center Hancock County MS 39529 Landholding Agency: NASA Property Number: 71201620011 Status: Unutilized Comments: public access denied and no alternative method to gain access without compromising national security. Reasons: Secured Area Nevada 4 Buildings Sandia National Laboratories Tonopah NV 89049 Landholding Agency: Energy Property Number: 41201620003 Status: Excess Directions: Buildings 09-50; 09-51; 09-60; 09-54. Comments: public access denied and no alternative method to gain access without compromising national security. Reasons: Secured Area New Mexico 4 Buildings Bandelier National Monument Los Alamos NM 87544 Landholding Agency: Interior Property Number: 61201620005 Status: Excess Directions: Building MH129; MH127; MH128; MH126. Comments: can only be entered wearing tyvek suits & respirator for possible Hanta Virus contaminants. Reasons: Contamination Ohio RPUID #524102 (Traffic Chk Hse Bldg. 108) Springfield Beckley Air National Guard Springfield OH 45502 Landholding Agency: Air Force Property Number: 18201620008 Status: Unutilized Directions: 1337 West Blee Rd. Comments: public access denied and no alternative method to gain access without compromising national security. Reasons: Secured Area Pennsylvania 2 Buildings Gettysburg National Military Park Gettysburg PA 17325 Landholding Agency: Interior Property Number: 61201620006 Status: Excess Directions: Tract 08-103 & Tract 02-107. Comments: documented deficiencies: foundation support posts in the basement are rotted off at the base & no longer can support the floors; walls shifting; numerous structural issues; rotten roof. Reasons: Extensive deterioration South Carolina 13 Buildings MCRD Parris Island MCRD Parris Island SC Landholding Agency: Navy Property Number: 77201620014 Status: Excess Directions: Building 293; 765, 1012, 1013, 4030, 5101, 5102, 5103, 5104, 6201, 6202, 6203, 6204 Comments: public access denied and no alternative method to gain access without compromising national security; property located within floodway which has not been correct or contained. Reasons: Secured Area Virginia 4 Buildings 9713 Plank Rd. Spotsylvania VA 22553 Landholding Agency: Interior Property Number: 61201620011 Status: Excess Directions: Tract #03-178 Verna House; Verna Chicken Coop; Verna Storage Bldg.; Verna Barn Comments: bldgs. are structural unsound; significant overgrowth of vegetation; severe cracks in structures; removal will result in collapse; clear threat to physical safety. Reasons: Extensive deterioration
    [FR Doc. 2016-11046 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4210-67-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT [Docket No. FR-5931-D-02] Order of Succession for Government National Mortgage Association (Ginnie Mae) AGENCY:

    Office of the President of the Government National Mortgage Association, HUD.

    ACTION:

    Notice of order of succession.

    SUMMARY:

    In this Notice, the President of the Government National Mortgage Association (Ginnie Mae) designates the Order of Succession for Ginnie Mae. This Order of Succession supersedes all prior Orders of Succession for Ginnie Mae.

    DATES:

    Effective Date: May 5, 2016.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Office of the Senior Vice President and Chief Risk Officer, Government National Mortgage Association, Department of Housing and Urban Development, Potomac Center South, 550 12th Street SW., 3rd Floor, Washington, DC 20024; telephone number (202) 475-4918. (This is not a toll-free number). Persons with hearing- or speech-impairments may access this number though TTY by calling the toll-free Federal Relay Service at 1-800-877-8339.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The President of the Ginnie Mae hereby issues this Order of Succession pursuant to the Bylaws of Ginnie Mae which authorizes the President of Ginnie Mae to designate the sequence in which other officers of Ginnie Mae shall act. The officers designated below shall perform the duties and exercise the power and authority of the President, when the President is absent or unable to act, or when there is a vacancy in the Office of the President of Ginnie Mae. This Order of Succession is subject to the provisions of the Federal Vacancies Reform Act of 1998 (5 U.S.C. 3345-3349d) and the Bylaws of the Government National Mortgage Association, as published at www.ginniemae.gov. Accordingly, the President of Ginnie Mae designates the following Order of Succession:

    Section A. Order of Succession

    Subject to the provisions of the Federal Vacancies Reform Act of 1998 and the Bylaws of Ginnie Mae, during any period when, by reason of absence, disability, or vacancy in office, the President of Ginnie Mae is not available to exercise the powers or perform the duties of the President, the following officials within Ginnie Mae are hereby designated to exercise the powers and perform the duties of the Office:

    (1) Executive Vice President;

    (2) Senior Vice President, Office of Enterprise Risk;

    (3) Senior Vice President, Office of Issuer and Portfolio Management;

    (4) Senior Vice President, Office of Capital Markets;

    (5) Senior Vice President, Office of Securities Operations;

    (6) Senior Vice President, Office of Chief Financial Officer;

    (7) Senior Vice President, Office of Enterprise Data and Technology Solutions;

    (8) Senior Vice President, Office of Management Operations.

    These officials shall perform the functions and duties of the Office in the order specified herein, and no official shall serve unless all the other officials, whose position titles precede his/hers in this order, are unable to act by reason of absence, disability, or vacancy in office.

    Section B. Authority Superseded

    This Order of Succession supersedes the prior Orders of Succession for the President of Ginnie Mae.

    Authority:

    Section 7(d), Department of Housing and Urban Development Act (42 U.S.C. 3535(d)). Section 3.05, Bylaws of the Government National Mortgage Association, as published in the Bylaws published at www.ginniemae.gov.

    Date: May 5, 2016. Theodore W. Tozer, President, Government National Mortgage Association.
    [FR Doc. 2016-11359 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4210-67-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service [Docket No. FWS-HQ-IA-2016-0068; FXIA16710900000-156-FF09A320000] Endangered Species; Marine Mammals; Receipt of Applications for Permit AGENCY:

    Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice of receipt of applications for permit.

    SUMMARY:

    We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, invite the public to comment on the following applications to conduct certain activities with endangered species, marine mammals, or both. With some exceptions, the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) prohibit activities with listed species unless Federal authorization is acquired that allows such activities.

    DATES:

    We must receive comments or requests for documents on or before June 13, 2016. We must receive requests for marine mammal permit public hearings, in writing, at the address shown in the ADDRESSES section by June 13, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submitting Comments: You may submit comments by one of the following methods:

    Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments on Docket No. FWS-HQ-IA-2016-0068.

    U.S. mail or hand-delivery: Public Comments Processing, Attn: Docket No. FWS-HQ-IA-2016-0068; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Headquarters, MS: BPHC; 5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041-3803.

    When submitting comments, please indicate the name of the applicant and the PRT# you are commenting on. We will post all comments on http://www.regulations.gov. This generally means that we will post any personal information you provide us (see the Public Comments section below for more information). Viewing Comments: Comments and materials we receive will be available for public inspection on http://www.regulations.gov, or by appointment, between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays, at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Division of Management Authority, 5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041-3803; telephone 703-358-2095.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Brenda Tapia, (703) 358-2104 (telephone); (703) 358-2281 (fax); [email protected] (email).

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Public Comment Procedures A. How do I request copies of applications or comment on submitted applications?

    Send your request for copies of applications or comments and materials concerning any of the applications to the contact listed under ADDRESSES. Please include the Federal Register notice publication date, the PRT-number, and the name of the applicant in your request or submission. We will not consider requests or comments sent to an email or address not listed under ADDRESSES. If you provide an email address in your request for copies of applications, we will attempt to respond to your request electronically.

    Please make your requests or comments as specific as possible. Please confine your comments to issues for which we seek comments in this notice, and explain the basis for your comments. Include sufficient information with your comments to allow us to authenticate any scientific or commercial data you include.

    The comments and recommendations that will be most useful and likely to influence agency decisions are: (1) Those supported by quantitative information or studies; and (2) Those that include citations to, and analyses of, the applicable laws and regulations. We will not consider or include in our administrative record comments we receive after the close of the comment period (see DATES) or comments delivered to an address other than those listed above (see ADDRESSES).

    B. May I review comments submitted by others?

    Comments, including names and street addresses of respondents, will be available for public review at the street address listed under ADDRESSES. The public may review documents and other information applicants have sent in support of the application unless our allowing viewing would violate the Privacy Act or Freedom of Information Act. Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment—including your personal identifying information—may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.

    II. Background

    To help us carry out our conservation responsibilities for affected species, and in consideration of section 10(a)(1)(A) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), and the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.), along with Executive Order 13576, “Delivering an Efficient, Effective, and Accountable Government,” and the President's Memorandum for the Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies of January 21, 2009—Transparency and Open Government (74 FR 4685; January 26, 2009), which call on all Federal agencies to promote openness and transparency in Government by disclosing information to the public, we invite public comment on these permit applications before final action is taken. Under the MMPA, you may request a hearing on any MMPA application received. If you request a hearing, give specific reasons why a hearing would be appropriate. The holding of such a hearing is at the discretion of the Service Director.

    III. Permit Applications A. Endangered Species Applicant: Denver Zoological Foundation, Denver, CO; PRT-91925B

    The applicant requests a permit to import one male captive born Siberian tiger (Panthera tigris altaica) for the purpose of enhancement of the survival of the species. This notification covers activities to be conducted by the applicant over a 5-year period.

    Zoological Society of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH; PRT-120130

    The applicant requests a re-issuance of their permit for the interstate commerce of one male and two female captive-born cheetahs (Acinonyx jubatus) for the purpose of enhancement of the survival of the species. This notification covers activities to be conducted by the applicant over a 5-year period.

    Saint Louis Zoo, Saint Louis, MO; PRT-93344B

    The applicant requests a permit to export three male banteng (Bos javanicus) for the purpose of enhancement of the survival of the species. This notification covers activities to be conducted by the applicant over a 5-year period.

    Applicant: Nathan Somero, New Ipswich, NH; PRT-90814B

    The applicant requests a permit to import a sport-hunted trophy of one male bontebok (Damaliscus pygargus pygargus) culled from a captive herd maintained under the management program of the Republic of South Africa, for the purpose of enhancement of the survival of the species.

    B. Endangered Marine Mammals and Marine Mammals Applicant: Silverback Films, Bristol, England, UK; PRT-92150B

    The applicant requests a permit to photograph southern sea otters (Enhydra lutris nereis) by boat and underwater in California for commercial purposes. This notification covers activities to be conducted by the applicant for less than a 2-year period.

    Applicant: Texas A&M University, Galveston, TX; PRT-84799B

    The applicant requests a permit to study northern sea otters (Enhydra lutris kenyoni) in Alaska for scientific research purposes. This notification covers activities to be conducted by the applicant over a 5-year period.

    Concurrent with publishing this notice in the Federal Register, we are forwarding copies of the above applications to the Marine Mammal Commission and the Committee of Scientific Advisors for their review.

    Brenda Tapia, Program Analyst/Data Administrator, Branch of Permits, Division of Management Authority.
    [FR Doc. 2016-11307 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4333-15-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service [FWS-R7-ES-2016-N036; FF07CAMM00-FX-FXFR133707REG04] Marine Mammals; Incidental Take During Specified Activities; Proposed Incidental Harassment Authorization for Northern Sea Otters From the Southcentral Stock in Cook Inlet, Alaska AGENCY:

    Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice of receipt of application and proposed incidental harassment authorization; availability of draft environmental assessment; request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), in response to a request under the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972 (MMPA), as amended, from BlueCrest Alaska Operating LLC (BlueCrest), propose to authorize the incidental taking by harassment of small numbers of northern sea otters from the Southcentral stock in Cook Inlet, Alaska, from date of issuance—October 31, 2016. BlueCrest has requested this authorization for their planned oil and gas exploration activities. We anticipate no take by injury or death and include none in this proposed authorization, which would be for take by harassment only.

    DATES:

    We will consider comments we receive on or before June 13, 2016.

    ADDRESSES:

    Document availability: The incidental harassment authorization request, associated draft environmental assessment, and supporting documentation, such as Literature Cited, are available for viewing at http://www.fws.gov/alaska/fisheries/mmm/iha.htm.

    Comments submission: You may submit comments on the proposed incidental harassment authorization and associated draft environmental assessment by one of the following methods:

    U.S. mail or hand-delivery: Public Comments Processing, Attn: Kimberly Klein, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, MS 341, 1011 East Tudor Road, Anchorage, AK 99503;

    Fax: 907-786-3816, attention to Kimberly Klein; or

    Email comments to: FW7_AK_Marine_Mammal[email protected]

    Please indicate to which document, the proposed incidental harassment authorization, or the draft environmental assessment, your comments apply. We will post all hardcopy comments on http://www.fws.gov/alaska/fisheries/mmm/iha.htm.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    To request copies of the application, the list of references used in the notice, and other supporting materials, contact Kimberly Klein, by mail at Marine Mammals Management, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, MS 341, 1011 East Tudor Road, Anchorage, AK 99503; by email at