Federal Register Vol. 82, No.138,

Federal Register Volume 82, Issue 138 (July 20, 2017)

Page Range33439-33773
FR Document

82_FR_138
Current View
Page and SubjectPDF
82 FR 33773 - Continuation of the National Emergency With Respect to Transnational Criminal OrganizationsPDF
82 FR 33769 - Made in America Day and Made in America Week, 2017PDF
82 FR 33495 - Sunshine Act MeetingPDF
82 FR 33514 - Sunshine Act MeetingPDF
82 FR 33521 - Sunshine Act Meeting; National Science BoardPDF
82 FR 33476 - Submission for OMB Review; Comment RequestPDF
82 FR 33487 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Comment Request; Quick Response Information System (QRIS) 2017-2020 System ClearancePDF
82 FR 33451 - Safety Zone; Marine City Maritime Festival Water Ski Show, St. Clair River, Marine City, MIPDF
82 FR 33517 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed eCollection; eComments Requested; Request for Registration Under the Gambling Devices Act of 1962PDF
82 FR 33471 - Air Plan Approval; ME; Regional Haze 5-Year Progress ReportPDF
82 FR 33449 - Security Zone; Atlantic Ocean, Ft. Lauderdale, FLPDF
82 FR 33521 - Proposal Review Panel for Materials Research; Notice of MeetingPDF
82 FR 33496 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Announcement of Board Approval Under Delegated Authority and Submission to OMBPDF
82 FR 33485 - New England Fishery Management Council; Public MeetingPDF
82 FR 33482 - South Atlantic Fishery Management Council; Public HearingsPDF
82 FR 33483 - North Pacific Fishery Management Council; Public MeetingPDF
82 FR 33483 - Pacific Fishery Management Council; Public Meeting (Webinar)PDF
82 FR 33484 - Fisheries of the South Atlantic; Southeast Data, Assessment, and Review (SEDAR); Public MeetingPDF
82 FR 33481 - Fisheries of the Gulf of Mexico and Atlantic; Southeast Data, Assessment, and Review (SEDAR); Public MeetingPDF
82 FR 33551 - Daimler Trucks North America, LLC, Grant of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential NoncompliancePDF
82 FR 33547 - Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC, Grant of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential NoncompliancePDF
82 FR 33546 - Mack Trucks, Inc., Receipt of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential NoncompliancePDF
82 FR 33549 - Volvo Trucks North America, Receipt of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential NoncompliancePDF
82 FR 33550 - Reports, Forms and Record Keeping Requirements; Agency Information Collection Activity Under OMB ReviewPDF
82 FR 33496 - Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Holding CompaniesPDF
82 FR 33518 - Records Management; General Records Schedule (GRS); GRS Transmittal 28PDF
82 FR 33485 - Grant of Interim Extension of the Term of U.S. Patent No. 7,179,464; BenralizumabPDF
82 FR 33492 - Combined Notice of FilingsPDF
82 FR 33490 - Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC; Notice of Application Accepted for Filing, Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene, and ProtestsPDF
82 FR 33494 - Grand River Dam Authority: Notice of Application for Temporary Variance and Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene, and ProtestsPDF
82 FR 33494 - Freeport LNG Development, L.P.; FLNG Liquefaction 4, LLC; Notice of ApplicationsPDF
82 FR 33489 - Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Company, LLC; Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review of the Gulf Connector Expansion ProjectPDF
82 FR 33490 - Commission Information Collection Activities (FERC Form No. 2 and FERC Form No. 2-A); Comment RequestPDF
82 FR 33488 - Texas Eastern Transmission, LP; Notice of Application for Certificate of Public Convenience and NecessityPDF
82 FR 33453 - Suspension of Community EligibilityPDF
82 FR 33516 - Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993-Wireless Industrial Technology Konsortium, Inc.PDF
82 FR 33521 - Waste Control Specialists LLC's Consolidated Interim Spent Fuel Storage Facility ProjectPDF
82 FR 33516 - Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993-Cooperative Research Group on Hedge IVPDF
82 FR 33517 - Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993-Cable Television Laboratories, Inc.PDF
82 FR 33516 - Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993-Advanced Media Workflow Association, Inc.PDF
82 FR 33482 - United States Global Change Research ProgramPDF
82 FR 33479 - Notice of Public Meetings of the New York Advisory CommitteePDF
82 FR 33479 - Notice of Public Meeting of the Connecticut Advisory CommitteePDF
82 FR 33470 - United States Army, Corps of Engineers; Subgroup to the DoD Regulatory Reform Task Force, Review of Existing RulesPDF
82 FR 33448 - Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Chambers Creek, Steilacoom, WAPDF
82 FR 33481 - Atlantic Coastal Fisheries Cooperative Management Act Provisions; Summer Flounder FisheryPDF
82 FR 33485 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to the Office of Management and Budget for Review and Approval; Comment Request; CNCS Grant Application; Proposed Information Collection; Comment RequestPDF
82 FR 33511 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Archeology Permits and ReportsPDF
82 FR 33537 - Delegation of Authority to the Director of the Office of U.S. Foreign Assistance Resources To Concur in Assistance ProgramsPDF
82 FR 33486 - Defense Health Board; Notice of Federal Advisory Committee MeetingPDF
82 FR 33539 - Notice of Final Federal Agency Actions on Proposed Highway in CaliforniaPDF
82 FR 33455 - Home Mortgage Disclosure (Regulation C) Temporary Increase in Institutional and Transactional Coverage Thresholds for Open-End Lines of CreditPDF
82 FR 33554 - Reports, Forms, and Record Keeping RequirementsPDF
82 FR 33512 - Notice of Inventory Completion for Native American Human Remains and Associated Funerary Objects in the Possession of the U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Lake Meredith National Recreation Area, Fritch, TX; CorrectionPDF
82 FR 33510 - Filing of Plats of Survey: Oregon/WashingtonPDF
82 FR 33537 - Notice of Determinations; Culturally Significant Objects Imported for Exhibition Determinations: “Delirious: Art at the Limits of Reason, 1950-1980” ExhibitionPDF
82 FR 33520 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection; Comment RequestPDF
82 FR 33467 - Return Due Date and Extended Due Date ChangesPDF
82 FR 33441 - Return Due Date and Extended Due Date ChangesPDF
82 FR 33507 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for Office of Management and Budget Review; Comment Request; Index of Legally Marketed Unapproved New Animal Drugs for Minor SpeciesPDF
82 FR 33477 - Submission for OMB Review; Comment RequestPDF
82 FR 33505 - Enhanced Drug Distribution Security Under the Drug Supply Chain Security Act; Public Meetings; Request for CommentsPDF
82 FR 33497 - Pilot Project Program Under the Drug Supply Chain Security Act; Request for CommentsPDF
82 FR 33503 - Patient-Focused Drug Development for Hereditary Angioedema; Public Meeting; Request for CommentsPDF
82 FR 33515 - Cast Iron Soil Pipe Fittings From China; Institution of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Investigations and Scheduling of Preliminary Phase InvestigationsPDF
82 FR 33513 - Certain Automated Teller Machines, ATM Modules, Components Thereof, and Products Containing the Same Commission's Final Determination Finding a Violation of Section 337; Issuance of a Limited Exclusion Order and Cease and Desist Orders; Termination of the InvestigationPDF
82 FR 33517 - Notice of Filing of Proposed Settlement Agreement Under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability ActPDF
82 FR 33487 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Comment Request; Annual Progress Reporting Form for the American Indian Vocational Rehabilitation Services (AIVRS) ProgramPDF
82 FR 33525 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Bats BZX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change to BZX Rule 14.13, Company Listing Fees, To Amend the Fees Applicable to Securities Listed on the ExchangePDF
82 FR 33527 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq MRX, LLC; Notice of Designation of a Longer Period for Commission Action on Proposed Rule Change in Connection With a System Migration to Nasdaq INET TechnologyPDF
82 FR 33534 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC; NYSE MKT LLC; Order Disapproving Proposed Rule Changes Amending Exchange Rule 104 To Delete Subsection (g)(i)(A)(III), Which Prohibits Designated Market Makers From Engaging in Transactions, During the Last Ten Minutes of Trading Before the Close, That Establish a New High (Low) Price for the Day on the Exchange in an Assigned Security in Which the DMM Has a Long (Short) PositionPDF
82 FR 33531 - Self-Regulatory Organizations: Investors Exchange LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Make a Clarifying Amendment to IEX Rule 16.135PDF
82 FR 33530 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq ISE, LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change to Re-Letter Rulebook DefinitionPDF
82 FR 33529 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq GEMX, LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Remove Outdated Language in the Exchange's Rulebook and Fee SchedulePDF
82 FR 33523 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE MKT LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend Rule 7.38E To Specify the Ranking of an Odd Lot Order That Has a Display Price That Is Better Than Its Working PricePDF
82 FR 33533 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Bats BZX Exchange, Inc.; Bats EDGX Exchange, Inc.; BOX Options Exchange LLC; C2 Options Exchange, Incorporated; Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated; Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc.; International Securities Exchange, LLC; Investors Exchange LLC; Miami International Securities Exchange LLC; MIAX PEARL, LLC; The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC; NASDAQ BX, Inc.; NASDAQ PHLX, Inc.; New York Stock Exchange LLC; NYSE Arca, Inc.; NYSE MKT LLC; Notice of Designation of Longer Period for Commission Action on Proposed Rule Changes To Eliminate Requirements That Will Be Duplicative of CATPDF
82 FR 33527 - Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq ISE, LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend the Schedule of Fees in Connection With the ISE System MigrationPDF
82 FR 33477 - Information Collection Activity; Comment RequestPDF
82 FR 33478 - Information Collection Activity; Comment RequestPDF
82 FR 33538 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Request for Comments for a New Information CollectionPDF
82 FR 33541 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Notice of Request for Extension of Currently Approved Information CollectionPDF
82 FR 33540 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Request for Comments for a New Information CollectionPDF
82 FR 33509 - Proposed Flood Hazard DeterminationsPDF
82 FR 33480 - Fine Denier Polyester Staple Fiber From the Socialist Republic of Vietnam: Termination of Less-Than-Fair-Value InvestigationPDF
82 FR 33465 - Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company AirplanesPDF
82 FR 33538 - Union Pacific Railroad Company-Discontinuance Exemption-in Grundy County, ILPDF
82 FR 33439 - Airworthiness Directives; Bell Helicopter Textron, Inc. (Bell) HelicoptersPDF
82 FR 33542 - Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; VisionPDF
82 FR 33544 - Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; DiabetesPDF
82 FR 33558 - Medicare Program: Hospital Outpatient Prospective Payment and Ambulatory Surgical Center Payment Systems and Quality Reporting ProgramsPDF
82 FR 33726 - Procedures for Chemical Risk Evaluation Under the Amended Toxic Substances Control ActPDF
82 FR 33753 - Procedures for Prioritization of Chemicals for Risk Evaluation Under the Toxic Substances Control ActPDF
82 FR 33765 - Guidance To Assist Interested Persons in Developing and Submitting Draft Risk Evaluations Under the Toxic Substances Control Act; Notice of AvailabilityPDF

Issue

82 138 Thursday, July 20, 2017 Contents Agriculture Agriculture Department See

Rural Utilities Service

NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 33476-33477 2017-15205 2017-15234 2017-15272
Antitrust Division Antitrust Division NOTICES Changes Under National Cooperative Research and Production Act: Advanced Media Workflow Association, Inc., 33516 2017-15236 Cable Television Laboratories, Inc., 33517 2017-15237 Cooperative Research Group on HEDGE IV, 33516 2017-15238 Wireless Industrial Technology Konsortium, Inc., 33516 2017-15240 Consumer Financial Protection Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection PROPOSED RULES Home Mortgage Disclosure Temporary Increase in Institutional and Transactional Coverage Thresholds for Open-End Lines of Credit, 33455-33465 2017-15220 Centers Medicare Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services PROPOSED RULES Medicare Program: Hospital Outpatient Prospective Payment and Ambulatory Surgical Center Payment Systems and Quality Reporting Programs, 33558-33724 2017-14883 Civil Rights Civil Rights Commission NOTICES Meetings: Connecticut Advisory Committee, 33479 2017-15232 New York Advisory Committee, 33479-33480 2017-15233 Coast Guard Coast Guard RULES Drawbridge Operations: Chambers Creek, Steilacoom, WA, 33448-33449 2017-15230 Safety Zones: Marine City Maritime Festival Water Ski Show, St. Clair River, Marine City, MI, 33451-33453 2017-15270 Security Zones: Atlantic Ocean, Ft. Lauderdale, FL, 33449-33451 2017-15265 Commerce Commerce Department See

International Trade Administration

See

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

See

Patent and Trademark Office

Corporation Corporation for National and Community Service NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: CNCS Grant Application, 33485-33486 2017-15228 Defense Department Defense Department See

Engineers Corps

NOTICES Meetings: Defense Health Board, 33486-33487 2017-15223
Education Department Education Department NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Annual Progress Reporting Form for the American Indian Vocational Rehabilitation Services Program, 33487 2017-15198 Quick Response Information System 2017-2020 System Clearance, 33487-33488 2017-15271 Energy Department Energy Department See

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Engineers Engineers Corps PROPOSED RULES Review of Existing Rules: Subgroup to the DoD Regulatory Reform Task Force, 33470-33471 2017-15231 Environmental Protection Environmental Protection Agency RULES Procedures for Chemical Risk Evaluation Under the Amended Toxic Substances Control Act, 33726-33753 2017-14337 Procedures for Prioritization of Chemicals for Risk Evaluation Under the Toxic Substances Control Act, 33753-33764 2017-14325 PROPOSED RULES Air Quality State Implementation Plans; Approvals and Promulgations: Maine; Regional Haze 5-Year Progress Report, 33471-33475 2017-15266 NOTICES Guidance To Assist Interested Persons in Developing and Submitting Draft Risk Evaluations Under the Toxic Substances Control Act, 33765-33766 2017-14323 Federal Aviation Federal Aviation Administration RULES Airworthiness Directives: Bell Helicopter Textron, Inc. (Bell) Helicopters, 33439-33441 2017-15031 PROPOSED RULES Airworthiness Directives: The Boeing Company Airplanes, 33465-33467 2017-15120 Federal Deposit Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 33495 2017-15350 Federal Emergency Federal Emergency Management Agency RULES Suspension of Community Eligibility, 33453-33454 2017-15241 NOTICES Flood Hazard Determinations; Proposals, 33509-33510 2017-15179 Federal Energy Federal Energy Regulatory Commission NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 33490-33492 2017-15243 Applications: Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC, 33490 2017-15247 Freeport LNG Development, L.P; FLNG Liquefaction 4, LLC, 33494 2017-15245 Grand River Dam Authority, 33494-33495 2017-15246 Texas Eastern Transmission, LP, 33488-33489 2017-15242 Combined Filings, 33492-33493 2017-15248 Environmental Assessments; Availability, etc.: Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Co., LLC, Gulf Connector Expansion Project, 33489 2017-15244 Federal Highway Federal Highway Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 33538-33542 2017-15183 2017-15184 2017-15185 2017-15186 Final Federal Agency Actions on Proposed Highway in California, 33539-33540 2017-15221 Federal Motor Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration NOTICES Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications: Diabetes, 33544-33546 2017-14917 Vision, 33542-33544 2017-14919 Federal Reserve Federal Reserve System NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 33496-33497 2017-15263 Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Holding Companies, 33496 2017-15251 Food and Drug Food and Drug Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Index of Legally Marketed Unapproved New Animal Drugs for Minor Species, 33507-33509 2017-15206 Meetings: Enhanced Drug Distribution Security Under the Drug Supply Chain Security Act, 33505-33507 2017-15204 Patient-Focused Drug Development for Hereditary Angioedema, 33503-33505 2017-15202 Pilot Project Program Under the Drug Supply Chain Security Act, 33497-33503 2017-15203 Health and Human Health and Human Services Department See

Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services

See

Food and Drug Administration

Homeland Homeland Security Department See

Coast Guard

See

Federal Emergency Management Agency

Interior Interior Department See

Land Management Bureau

See

National Park Service

Internal Revenue Internal Revenue Service RULES Return Due Date and Extended Due Date Changes, 33441-33448 2017-15209 PROPOSED RULES Return Due Date and Extended Due Date Changes, 33467-33470 2017-15211 International Trade Adm International Trade Administration NOTICES Determinations of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Fine Denier Polyester Staple Fiber From the Socialist Republic of Vietnam, 33480-33481 2017-15141 International Trade Com International Trade Commission NOTICES Investigations; Determinations, Modifications, and Rulings, etc.: Cast Iron Soil Pipe Fittings From China, 33515-33516 2017-15201 Certain Automated Teller Machines, ATM Modules, Components Thereof, and Products Containing the Same, 33513-33514 2017-15200 Meetings; Sunshine Act, 33514-33515 2017-15340 Justice Department Justice Department See

Antitrust Division

NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Request for Registration Under the Gambling Devices Act of 1962, 33517 2017-15269 Proposed Settlement Agreements: CERCLA, 33517-33518 2017-15199
Land Land Management Bureau NOTICES Plats of Survey: Oregon/Washington, 33510-33511 2017-15215 National Archives National Archives and Records Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 33520-33521 2017-15212 Records Schedules, 33518-33520 2017-15250 National Highway National Highway Traffic Safety Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 33550-33551 2017-15252 Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Reports, Forms, and Record Keeping Requirements, 33554-33555 2017-15219 Petitions for Decisions of Inconsequential Noncompliance: Daimler Trucks North America, LLC, 33551-33554 2017-15256 Mack Trucks, Inc., 33546-33547 2017-15254 Volvo Trucks North America, 33549-33550 2017-15253 Petitions for Decisions of Inconsequential Noncompliance; Approvals: Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC, 33547-33549 2017-15255 National Oceanic National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NOTICES Atlantic Coastal Fisheries: Cooperative Management Act Provisions; Summer Flounder Fishery, 33481-33482 2017-15229 Meetings: Fisheries of the Gulf of Mexico and Atlantic; Southeast Data, Assessment, and Review, 33481 2017-15257 Fisheries of the South Atlantic; Southeast Data, Assessment, and Review, 33484 2017-15258 New England Fishery Management Council, 33485 2017-15262 North Pacific Fishery Management Council, 33483 2017-15260 Pacific Fishery Management Council, 33483-33484 2017-15259 South Atlantic Fishery Management Council, 33482 2017-15261 Requests for Nominations: United States Global Change Research Program, 33482-33483 2017-15235 National Park National Park Service NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Archeology Permits and Reports, 33511-33512 2017-15227 Inventory Completions: National Park Service, Lake Meredith National Recreation Area, Fritch, TX; Correction, 33512-33513 2017-15217 National Science National Science Foundation NOTICES Meetings: Proposal Review Panel for Materials Research, 33521 2017-15264 Meetings; Sunshine Act, 33521 2017-15309 Nuclear Regulatory Nuclear Regulatory Commission NOTICES License Applications: Waste Control Specialists LLC's Consolidated Interim Spent Fuel Storage Facility Project; Withdrawal of Notice of Opportunity To Request a Hearing, 33521-33523 2017-15239 Patent Patent and Trademark Office NOTICES Patent Term Extensions: Benralizumab, 33485 2017-15249 Presidential Documents Presidential Documents PROCLAMATIONS Special Observances: Made in America Day and Made in America Week (Proc. 9627), 33767-33770 2017-15440 ADMINISTRATIVE ORDERS Transnational Criminal Organizations; Continuation of National Emergency (Notice of July 19, 2017), 33771-33773 2017-15461 Rural Utilities Rural Utilities Service NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 33477-33479 2017-15187 2017-15188 Securities Securities and Exchange Commission NOTICES Self-Regulatory Organizations; Proposed Rule Changes: Bats BZX Exchange, Inc., 33525-33526 2017-15197 Bats BZX Exchange, Inc.; Bats EDGX Exchange, Inc.; BOX Options Exchange LLC; C2 Options Exchange, Inc.; Chicago Board Options Exchange, Inc., et al., 33533-33534 2017-15190 Investors Exchange LLC, 33531-33533 2017-15194 Nasdaq GEMX, LLC, 33529-33530 2017-15192 Nasdaq ISE, LLC, 33527-33531 2017-15189 2017-15193 Nasdaq MRX, LLC, 33527 2017-15196 New York Stock Exchange LLC; NYSE MKT LLC, 33534-33537 2017-15195 NYSE MKT LLC, 33523-33525 2017-15191 State Department State Department NOTICES Culturally Significant Objects Imported for Exhibition: Delirious: Art at the Limits of Reason, 1950-1980, 33537-33538 2017-15214 Delegations of Authority, 33537 2017-15226 Surface Transportation Surface Transportation Board NOTICES Discontinuance of Service Exemptions: Union Pacific Railroad Co. Grundy County, IL, 33538 2017-15115 Transportation Department Transportation Department See

Federal Aviation Administration

See

Federal Highway Administration

See

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

See

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Treasury Treasury Department See

Internal Revenue Service

Separate Parts In This Issue Part II Health and Human Services Department, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, 33558-33724 2017-14883 Part III Environmental Protection Agency, 33726-33766 2017-14337 2017-14325 2017-14323 Part IV Presidential Documents, 33767-33770 2017-15440 Part V Presidential Documents, 33771-33773 2017-15461 Reader Aids

Consult the Reader Aids section at the end of this issue for phone numbers, online resources, finding aids, and notice of recently enacted public laws.

To subscribe to the Federal Register Table of Contents electronic mailing list, go to https://public.govdelivery.com/accounts/USGPOOFR/subscriber/new, enter your e-mail address, then follow the instructions to join, leave, or manage your subscription.

82 138 Thursday, July 20, 2017 Rules and Regulations DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2017-0701; Directorate Identifier 2016-SW-063-AD; Amendment 39-18962; AD 2017-15-02] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Bell Helicopter Textron, Inc. (Bell) Helicopters AGENCY:

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION:

Final rule; request for comments.

SUMMARY:

We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for Bell Model 212 and Model 412 helicopters. This AD requires replacing certain oil and fuel check valves and prohibits installing them on any helicopter. This AD is prompted by a report of cracked or leaking check valves. These actions are intended to address an unsafe condition on these helicopters.

DATES:

This AD becomes effective August 4, 2017.

We must receive comments on this AD by September 18, 2017.

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-2017-0701; 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 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 final rule, contact Bell Helicopter Textron, Inc., P.O. Box 482, Fort Worth, TX 76101; telephone (817) 280-3391; fax (817) 280-6466; or at http://www.bellcustomer.com/files/. 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:

Jurgen E. Priester, Aviation Safety Engineer, Delegation Systems Certification Office, ASW-130, FAA, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Fort Worth, TX 76177; telephone (817) 222-5159; email [email protected]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Comments Invited

This AD is a final rule that involves requirements affecting flight safety, and we did not provide you with notice and an opportunity to provide your comments prior to it becoming effective. However, 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 resulted from adopting this AD. The most helpful comments reference a specific portion of the AD, 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 them 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 rulemaking during the comment period. We will consider all the comments we receive and may conduct additional rulemaking based on those comments.

Discussion

We are adopting a new AD for Bell Model 212 and Model 412 helicopters. This AD is prompted by a report that certain part numbered 209-062-520-001 check valves manufactured by Circor Aerospace as replacement parts have been found cracked or leaking on several Bell Model 427 and Model 429 helicopters. These check valves may be installed as engine oil check valves on Bell Model 212 helicopters. Similar check valves, part number 209-062-607-001, may be installed as fuel check valves on Bell Model 212 or 412 helicopters. These check valves may have a condition induced during assembly that can cause the valve body to crack, resulting in oil or fuel leakage. These suspect check valves are marked “Circle Seal” and were manufactured between October 2011 and March 2015. If not corrected, this condition could result in a crack, fuel or oil leakage, and subsequent failure of the engine or a fire and loss of control of the helicopter.

FAA's Determination

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

Related Service Information

We reviewed Bell Alert Service Bulletin (ASB) 212-15-153, dated September 4, 2015 (212-15-153), and Bell ASB 212-15-155, dated September 15, 2015 (212-15-155), for Model 212 helicopters and Bell ASB 412-15-168, dated September 15, 2015 (412-15-168), for Model 412 helicopters. ASB 212-15-153 describes procedures for inspecting and replacing engine oil check valve part number (P/N) 209-062-520-001 installed on certain serial-numbered Model 212 helicopters. ASB 212-15-155 and ASB 412-15-168 describe procedures for inspecting and replacing fuel check valve P/N 209-062-607-001 installed on certain serial-numbered Model 212 and Model 412 helicopters.

AD Requirements

This AD requires, within 25 hours time-in-service (TIS), replacing the engine oil and fuel check valves.

This AD also prohibits installing a check valve P/N 209-062-520-001 or P/N 209-062-607-001 that was manufactured by Circor Aerospace, marked “Circle Seal,” and marked with a manufacturing date code of “10/11” (October 2011) through “03/15” (March 2015) on any helicopter.

Differences Between This AD and the Service Information

The manufacturer's service information describes procedures for an inspection of the check valves within 25 hours TIS for a crack and allows 300 hours TIS to determine if the valve is affected and to replace any affected check valve. This AD requires replacing all affected check valves within 25 hours TIS.

Costs of Compliance

We estimate that this AD affects 161 (59 Model 212 and 102 Model 412) helicopters of U.S. Registry.

We estimate that operators may incur the following costs in order to comply with this AD. At an average labor rate of $85, replacing each check valve (engine oil or fuel) will require about 1 work-hour, and required parts will cost $85. For the Model 212, we estimate a total cost of $340 per helicopter and $20,060 for the U.S. fleet. For the Model 412, we estimate a total cost of $170 per helicopter and $17,340 for the U.S. fleet.

According to Bell's service information some of the costs of this AD may be covered under warranty, thereby reducing the cost impact on affected individuals. We do not control warranty coverage by Bell. Accordingly, we have included all costs in our cost estimate.

FAA's Justification and Determination of the Effective Date

Providing an opportunity for public comments prior to adopting these AD requirements would delay implementing the safety actions needed to correct this known unsafe condition. Therefore, we find that the risk to the flying public justifies waiving notice and comment prior to the adoption of this rule because the actions required by this AD must be accomplished within 25 hours TIS, a very short interval for helicopters used in firefighting and logging operations.

Since an unsafe condition exists that requires the immediate adoption of this AD, we determined that notice and opportunity for public comment before issuing this AD are impracticable and that good cause exists for making this amendment effective in less than 30 days.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

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

Regulatory Findings

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

For the reasons discussed, I certify that this AD:

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

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

3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska to the extent that it justifies making a regulatory distinction; and

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

We prepared an economic evaluation of the estimated costs to comply with this 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.

Adoption of the Amendment

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

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

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

§ 39.13 [Amended]
2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): 2017-15-02 Bell Helicopter Textron, Inc. (Bell): Amendment 39-18962; Docket No. FAA-2017-0701; Directorate Identifier 2016-SW-063-AD. (a) Applicability

This AD applies to Bell Model 212 and 412 helicopters, certificated in any category, with an engine oil check valve part number (P/N) 209-062-520-001 or fuel check valve P/N 209-062-607-001 manufactured by Circor Aerospace, marked “Circle Seal” and with a manufacturing date code of “10/11” (October 2011) through “03/15” (March 2015), installed.

(b) Unsafe Condition

This AD defines the unsafe condition as a cracked or leaking check valve, which could result in loss of lubrication or fuel to the engine, failure of the engine or a fire, and subsequent loss of control of the helicopter.

(c) Effective Date

This AD becomes effective August 4, 2017.

(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

(1) Within 25 hours time-in-service:

(i) Replace each fuel check valve.

(ii) For Model 212 helicopters, replace each engine oil check valve.

(2) After the effective date of this AD, do not install any check valve P/N 209-062-520-001 or P/N 209-062-607-001 manufactured by Circor Aerospace, marked “Circle Seal” and with a manufacturing date code of “10/11” (October 2011) through “03/15” (March 2015), on any helicopter.

(f) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

(1) The Manager, Delegation Systems Certification Office, FAA, may approve AMOCs for this AD. Send your proposal to: Jurgen E. Priester, Aviation Safety Engineer, Delegation Systems Certification Office, ASW-130, FAA, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Fort Worth, TX 76177; telephone (817) 222-5159; 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.

(g) Additional Information

Bell Alert Service Bulletin (ASB) 212-15-153, dated September 4, 2015; Bell ASB 212-15-155, dated September 15, 2015; and Bell ASB 412-15-168, dated September 15, 2015, which are not incorporated by reference, contain additional information about the subject of this AD. For service information identified in this AD, contact Bell Helicopter Textron, Inc., P.O. Box 482, Fort Worth, TX 76101; telephone (817) 280-3391; fax (817) 280-6466; or at http://www.bellcustomer.com/files/. You may review this service information at the FAA, Office of the Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Room 6N-321, Fort Worth, TX 76177.

(h) Subject

Joint Aircraft Service Component (JASC) Codes: 7900 Engine Oil System and 2800 Aircraft Fuel System.

Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on July 7, 2017. Scott A. Horn, Acting Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2017-15031 Filed 7-19-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Internal Revenue Service 26 CFR Parts 1 and 31 [TD 9821] RIN 1545-BN13 Return Due Date and Extended Due Date Changes AGENCY:

Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury.

ACTION:

Final and temporary regulations.

SUMMARY:

This document contains final and temporary regulations that update the due dates and extensions of time to file certain tax returns and information returns. The dates are updated to reflect the new statutory requirements set by section 2006 of the Surface Transportation and Veterans Health Care Choice Improvement Act of 2015 and section 201 of the Protecting Americans from Tax Hikes Act of 2015. These regulations affect taxpayers who file Form W-2 (series, except Form W-2G), Form W-3, Form 990 (series), Form 1099-MISC, Form 1041, Form 1041-A, Form 1065, Form 1120 (series), Form 4720, Form 5227, Form 6069, Form 8804, or Form 8870.

DATES:

Effective Date: These regulations are effective July 20, 2017.

Applicability Date: For dates of applicability, see §§ 1.1446-3T(g)-(h), 1.6012-6T(c)-(d), 1.6031(a)-1T(f)-(g), 1.6032-1T(b)-(c), 1.6033-2T(k)-(l), 1.6041-2T(d)-(e), 1.6041-6T(c)-(d), 1.6072-2T(g)-(h), 1.6081-1T(c)-(d), 1.6081-2T(h)-(i), 1.6081-3T(g)-(h), 1.6081-5T(f)-(g), 1.6081-6T(g)-(h), 1.6081-9T(f)-(g), and 31.6071(a)-1T(g)-(h). For additional information, see the dates of applicability section of this preamble.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Concerning these temporary regulations, Jonathan R. Black, (202) 317-6845; concerning submissions of comments and/or requests for a hearing, Regina Johnson (202) 317-6901 (not toll-free numbers).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

These updates to the regulations reflect changes in tax return due dates enacted by section 2006 of the Surface Transportation and Veterans Health Care Choice Improvement Act of 2015 (the Surface Transportation Act), Public Law 114-41, 129 Stat. 443 (2015), as well as changes to information return due dates enacted by section 201 of the Protecting Americans from Tax Hikes Act of 2015 (PATH Act), Public Law 114-113, Div. Q, 129 Stat. 2242 (2015).

Prior to amendment by the Surface Transportation Act, section 6072(a) provided that the income tax returns of partnerships (generally Form 1065, “U.S. Return of Partnership Income”), trusts and estates (generally Form 1041, “U.S. Income Tax Return for Estates and Trusts”), and individuals (generally Form 1040, “U.S. Individual Income Tax Return”) were due on the fifteenth day of the fourth month following the close of the taxable year (April 15 for calendar-year taxpayers). Section 6072(b) generally provided that the income tax returns of corporations (most forms in the Form 1120 series) were due on the fifteenth day of the third month following the close of the taxable year (March 15 for calendar-year taxpayers).

Under section 6081(a), the Secretary generally has authority to grant a reasonable extension of time of up to six months for filing any return, statement, or other document (longer in the case of taxpayers who are abroad). Additionally, prior to amendment by the Surface Transportation Act, section 6081(b) provided for a three-month automatic extension of time to file for all corporations.

Immediately prior to the enactment of the Surface Transportation Act, § 1.6081-2 provided an automatic five-month extension of time to file Form 1065 and Form 8804, “Annual Return for Partnership Withholding Tax (Section 1446),” § 1.6081-3 provided a six-month automatic extension of time to file the income tax return of all corporations (three months longer than the minimum three-month automatic extension), and § 1.6081-6 provided an automatic five-month extension of time to file Form 1041, such that the extended due date of these returns was the fifteenth day of the ninth month after the close of the taxable year (September 15 for calendar-year taxpayers). Section 1.6081-4 provided an automatic six-month extension of time to file individual income tax returns, such that the extended due date of an individual's return was the fifteenth day of the tenth month after the close of the taxable year (October 15 for calendar-year taxpayers).

The amendments to section 6072(b) of the Internal Revenue Code made by section 2006(a) of the Surface Transportation Act change the due date for filing an income tax return by a C corporation from the fifteenth day of the third month following the close of the taxable year (March 15 for calendar-year taxpayers) to the fifteenth day of the fourth month following the close of the taxable year (April 15 for calendar-year taxpayers). The amendments also change the due date for filing an income tax return by a partnership from the fifteenth day of the fourth month following the close of the taxable year (April 15 for calendar-year taxpayers) to the fifteenth day of the third month following the close of the taxable year (March 15 for calendar-year taxpayers). Generally these amendments apply to returns for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2015. However, for any C corporation with a taxable year ending on June 30, these amendments apply to returns for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2025.

Section 2006(b) of the Surface Transportation Act provides that for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2015, the Secretary of the Treasury, or the Secretary's designee, shall modify appropriate regulations regarding the due dates of certain returns and the maximum extensions of time to file certain returns, as specified in that section.

Section 2006(c) of the Surface Transportation Act generally changes the automatic extension of time to file the tax return of a C corporation provided by section 6081(b) from three months to six months. However, there are exceptions for C corporations with taxable years that begin before January 1, 2026. These statutory exceptions are (1) if a C corporation files for a calendar year, the automatic extension is five months; and (2) if the C corporation files for a taxable year that ends on June 30, the automatic extension is seven months. These amendments apply to income tax returns for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2015.

Prior to enactment of the PATH Act, the due dates for filing forms in the Form W-2 series, Form W-3, and Form 1099-MISC on paper were either February 28 or the last day of February of the calendar year following the calendar year for which the information was being reported. See § 1.6041-2(a)(3)(ii) (Form W-2 not subject to FICA); § 31.6071(a)-1(a)(3)(i) (Form W-2 subject to FICA); and § 1.6041-6 (Form 1099-MISC). The due date for filing these information returns electronically was March 31 of the calendar year following the calendar year for which the information was being reported. See section 6071(b) prior to amendment by the PATH Act.

Section 201(a) and (c) of the PATH Act amended section 6071(b) and added new section 6071(c) to change the due date for information returns in the Form W-2 series, Form W-3, and “any returns or statements required by the Secretary to report nonemployee compensation.” Nonemployee compensation is currently reportable in box 7 of Form 1099-MISC. The amendments are effective for information returns for calendar years beginning after 2015. Under new section 6071(c), the new due date for returns in the Form W-2 series, Form W-3, and Forms 1099-MISC that report nonemployee compensation is January 31 of the calendar year following the calendar year for which the information is being reported, regardless of whether the returns are filed on paper or electronically. The due date for information returns on Forms 1099-MISC that do not report nonemployee compensation remains unchanged.

Explanation of Provisions I. Section 2006 of the Surface Transportation Act A. Partnership and Corporate Tax Returns

These temporary regulations amend § 1.6072-2 to account for the due dates for the income tax returns of C corporations specified by section 2006(a) of the Surface Transportation Act. Under § 1.6072-2T, except in the case of a C corporation that has a taxable year that ends on June 30, the last date for filing the income tax return of a C corporation is the fifteenth day of the fourth month following the close of the taxable year.

Additionally, § 1.6081-3T conforms to amended section 6081(b) by providing a seven-month automatic extension of time to file the income tax return of any C corporation with a taxable year that ends on June 30 and before January 1, 2026. Prior to the Surface Transportation Act and these temporary regulations, § 1.6081-3 relied on the Secretary's authority under section 6081(a) to provide for a six-month automatic extension of time to file for all corporations, despite section 6081(b) only requiring an automatic three-month extension. Similarly, these temporary regulations provide a six-month automatic extension of time to file a return for all corporations, except for C corporations that have a tax year that ends on June 30 and before January 1, 2026.

As a matter of administrative necessity, the return for a short period (within the meaning of section 443) that ends on any day in June is treated as if it is the return for a taxable year ending on June 30 for purposes of the last date for filing the income tax return of a C corporation under § 1.6072-2 and the duration of the extension of time to file the income tax return of a C corporation under § 1.6081-3.

Section 2006(b)(1) of the Surface Transportation Act specifies a maximum extension of time to file of six months for partnerships filing Form 1065. Accordingly, § 1.6081-2T provides that partnerships may obtain an automatic six-month extension of time to file Forms 1065 and 8804 if the partnership files an application in accordance with § 1.6081-2(b).

B. Form 1041, “U.S. Income Tax Return for Estates and Trusts”

Section 2006(b)(2) of the Surface Transportation Act requires the Secretary to amend appropriate regulations to provide that the maximum extension of time for the returns of trusts filing Form 1041 is five and one-half months (ending on September 30 in the case of calendar-year filers). Section 1.6081-6(a)(1) provides an automatic five-month extension of time for a non-bankruptcy estate or a trust to file this return, provided that the estate or trust files an application in accordance with § 1.6081-6(b). To implement section 2006(b)(2) of the Surface Transportation Act and provide consistency for automatic extensions for non-bankruptcy estates and trusts filing Form 1041, § 1.6081-6T(a)(1) provides both non-bankruptcy estates and trusts an automatic five and one-half month extension of time to file a Form 1041, provided that the estate or trust files an application in accordance with § 1.6081-6(b). These regulations do not amend § 1.6081-6(a)(2), which addresses bankruptcy estates filing Form 1041.

C. Exempt Organizations

Section 2006(b)(4) through (b)(8) of the Surface Transportation Act requires the Secretary to modify appropriate regulations to provide a maximum six-month automatic extension of time to file returns of tax exempt organizations that were eligible for an automatic extension under § 1.6081-9 (except Form 1041-A, “U.S. Information Return-Trust Accumulation of Charitable Amounts,” which section 2006 of the Surface Transportation Act does not address). These returns are those in the Form 990 series (Form 990, “Return of Organization Exempt From Income Tax,” Form 990-BL, “Information and Initial Excise Tax Return for Black Lung Benefit Trusts and Certain Related Persons,” Form 990-EZ, “Short Form Return of Organization Exempt From Income Tax,” Form 990-PF, “Return of Private Foundation,” and Form 990-T, “Exempt Organization Business Tax Return”), Form 4720, “Return of Certain Excise Taxes Under Chapters 41 and 42 of the Internal Revenue Code,” Form 5227, “Split-Interest Trust Information Return,” Form 6069, “Return of Excise Tax on Excess Contributions to Black Lung Benefit Trust Under Section 4953 and Computation of Section 192 Deduction,” and Form 8870, “Information Return for Transfers Associated With Certain Personal Benefit Contracts.”

Section 1.6081-9 provided a six-month automatic extension of time to file the Form 990-T, but provided only a three-month automatic extension of time to file the other forms (including the Form 1041-A). To implement the Surface Transportation Act and for consistency, § 1.6081-9T provides an automatic six-month extension of time to file all of these forms if the exempt organization files an application in accordance with § 1.6081-9(b).

Also, for administrative convenience and to provide filers of Form 1120-POL, “U.S. Tax Return for Certain Political Organizations,” with an automatic extension of time to file that is consistent with the automatic extension of time to file applicable to other exempt organization returns identified above, the automatic extension of time to file Form 1120-POL is removed from the forms eligible for an extension of time to file under § 1.6081-3 and added to the forms eligible for a six-month extension of time to file under § 1.6081-9T.

D. Surface Transportation Act Provisions Not Addressed by These Regulations

Section 2006(b)(3) of the Surface Transportation Act requires the Secretary to amend appropriate regulations to provide that the maximum extension for returns of employee benefit plans filing Form 5500, “Annual Return/Report of Employee Benefit Plan,” is an automatic three and one-half-month period (ending on November 15 in the case of calendar-year plans). Section 32104 of the FAST Act, Public Law 114-94, 129 Stat. 1312 (2015), repealed section 2006(b)(3) of the Surface Transportation Act effective for returns for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2015, such that the provision never took effect. Currently, § 1.6081-11 provides a two and one-half month extension of time to file Form 5500 if the administrator or sponsor files an application in accordance with § 1.6081-11(b), and these regulations do not amend that provision.

Section 2006(b)(9) of the Surface Transportation Act requires the Secretary to provide that the due date for Form 3520-A , “Annual Information Return of Foreign Trust with a US Owner,” shall be the fifteenth day of the third month after the close of the trust's taxable year with a maximum extension of time to file of six months. Although § 404.6048-1(c)(1) provides that the due date of this return is the fifteenth day of the fourth month following the close of the taxable year, the form's instructions currently provide that the due date of this return is the fifteenth day of the third month following the close of the taxable year. Additionally, § 301.6081-2 provides for a six-month extension of time to file this return if the trust files an application in accordance with § 301.6081-2(b).

Section 2006(b)(10) of the Surface Transportation Act requires the Secretary to provide that the due date for Form 3520, “Annual Return to Report Transactions with Foreign Trusts and Receipt of Foreign Gifts,” for calendar year filers shall be April 15 with a maximum extension of time to file of six months ending on October 15. The form's instructions currently provide that the due date of this return is the due date of the taxpayer's income tax return (in the case of a decedent, the decedent's estate and gift tax return), including any extension of time to file, and there are no regulations under section 6081 providing a separate extension of time to file this return. The due dates for the Forms 3520-A and 3520 and the extension of time to file the Form 3520 will be addressed in a separate regulations project. Therefore, these regulations do not affect Forms 3520-A and 3520.

Section 2006(b)(11) of the Surface Transportation Act requires that the Secretary provide a due date of April 15 with a maximum extension of time to file of six months, ending on October 15, and a provision for extension rules similar to those in § 1.6081-5 (extension of time to file and pay until June 15 if taxpayer is out of the country), for FinCEN Report 114, “Report of Foreign Bank and Financial Accounts.” Further, for any taxpayer required to file this return for the first time, section 2006(b)(11) of the Surface Transportation Act provides that the Secretary may waive any penalty for failure to timely request an extension.

On March 10, 2016, FinCEN published a notice of proposed rulemaking to address the extension of time to file FinCEN Report 114 (81 FR 12613). Therefore, these regulations do not address FinCEN Report 114.

The filing date changes enacted by the Surface Transportation Act also indirectly affect various due dates and extended due dates that, although determined by section 6072, are often specified throughout Title 26 of the Code of Federal Regulations by cross-reference to, or by restating the dates in, section 6072 prior to amendment by the Surface Transportation Act. Examples of such regulations include §§ 1.170A-11, 1.316-1, 1.338-10, 1.367(a)-7, 1.381(c)(14)-1, 1.468A-4, 1.468B-2, 1.547-4, 1.563-1, 1.563-2, 1.921-2, 1.923-1T, 1.925(a)-1T, 1.927(b)-1T, 1.936-1, 1.1248(f)-3, 1.1446-6, 1.6425-1, 1.6655-1, and 1.6655-7. Because the Treasury Department must prioritize limited resources, these regulations generally do not make amendments to update, conform, or clarify the due dates and extended due dates referenced in such sections. To the extent that any existing regulations (including examples) are not consistent with the due dates specified by section 6072 (as amended by the Surface Transportation Act), the statutory due dates control. If resources permit, the Treasury Department and the IRS will update outdated examples and regulatory text through future guidance projects. In the meantime, taxpayers should refer to the relevant form instructions for guidance.

E. Miscellaneous Clarifications, Corrections, and Updates

These regulations also include some changes that correct minor typographical errors or make clarifications or updates. The period of underpayment of estimated tax by a corporation under section 6655 for the section 1446 withholding tax described in § 1.1446-3(b)(2)(v)(C) is administratively tied to the due date of Form 8804. These regulations therefore revise § 1.1446-3(b)(2)(v)(C) to update the period of underpayment for the section 1446 withholding tax. Additionally, the due date for returns of banks with respect to common trust funds, commonly filed on Form 1065, is administratively tied to the due date of Form 1065, so these regulations update § 1.6032-1 to clarify that the due date for these returns has changed. Similarly, the annual return filed by a religious or apostolic association or corporation on Form 1065 is to be filed on the due date of a partnership return under section 6072(b), so these regulations update § 1.6033-2(e) to clarify that the due date for these returns has changed.

II. PATH Act

These regulations also contain conforming amendments to reflect that the due date for forms in the Form W-2 series, Form W-3, and Forms 1099-MISC that report nonemployee compensation is January 31 of the calendar year following the calendar year for which the information is being reported, as enacted by section 201 of the PATH Act.

Dates of Applicability

These regulations are generally applicable for returns filed on or after the date of publication of this Treasury Decision. Many of the amendments in these regulations, however, reflect statutory changes that were effective for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2015, and those statutory changes, described in the background section of this preamble, supersede regulations that are amended by this Treasury Decision. Additionally, taxpayers may elect to apply these regulations to returns filed for periods beginning after December 31, 2015. The election is made by filing a return by the due date or extended due date specified in these regulations if that due date is later than the due date specified by regulations in effect at the time the return is filed.

Special Analyses

Certain IRS regulations, including these regulations, are exempt from the requirements of Executive Order 12866, as supplemented and reaffirmed by Executive Order 13563. Therefore, a regulatory assessment is not required. For applicability of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, please refer to the cross-reference notice of proposed rulemaking published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register. Pursuant to section 7805(f) of the Internal Revenue Code, these temporary regulations have been submitted to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration for comment on the impact on small businesses.

Drafting Information

The principal author of these regulations is Jonathan R. Black of the Office of the Associate Chief Counsel (Procedure and Administration).

List of Subjects 26 CFR Part 1

Income taxes, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

26 CFR Part 31

Employment taxes, Income taxes, Penalties, Pensions, Railroad retirement, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Social security, Unemployment compensation.

Amendments to the Regulations

Accordingly, 26 CFR parts 1 and 31 are amended as follows:

PART 1—INCOME TAXES Paragraph 1. The authority citation for part 1 continues to read in part as follows: Authority:

26 U.S.C. 7805 * * *

Par. 2. Revise paragraph (b)(2)(v)(C) and add paragraph (g) to § 1.1446-3 to read as follows:
§ 1.1446-3 Time and manner of calculating and paying over the 1446 tax.

(b) * * *

(2) * * *

(v) * * *

(C) [Reserved]. For further guidance, see § 1.1446-3T(b)(2)(v)(C).

(g) [Reserved]. For further guidance, see § 1.1446-3T(g).

Par. 3. Add § 1.1446-3T to read as follows:
§ 1.1446-3T Time and manner of calculating and paying over the 1446 tax (temporary).

(a) [Reserved]. For further guidance, see § 1.1446-3(a).

(b)(1) [Reserved]. For further guidance, see § 1.1446-3(b)(1).

(2)(i) through (iv) [Reserved]. For further guidance, see § 1.1446-3(b)(2)(i) through (iv).

(v)(A) through (B) [Reserved]. For further guidance, see § 1.1446-3(b)(2)(v)(A) and (B).

(C) Period of underpayment. The period of the underpayment set forth in section 6655(b)(2) shall end on the earlier of the date the partnership is required to file Form 8804 (as provided in paragraph (d)(1)(iii) of this section and without regard to extensions), or with respect to any portion of the underpayment, the date on which such portion is paid.

(c) through (f) [Reserved]. For further guidance, see § 1.1446-3(c) through (f).

(g) Applicability date. This section applies to returns filed on or after July 20, 2017. Sections 1.1446-3 and 1.1446-7 (as contained in 26 CFR part 1, revised April 2017) apply to returns filed before July 20, 2017.

(h) Expiration date. The applicability of this section will expire on or before July 17, 2020.

Par. 4. Revise paragraph (a)(1) of § 1.6012-6 to read as follows:
§ 1.6012-6 Returns by political organizations.

(a) * * * (1) [Reserved]. For further guidance, see § 1.6012-6T(a)(1).

Par. 5. Add § 1.6012-6T to read as follows:
§ 1.6012-6T Returns by political organizations (temporary).

(a) Requirement of return—(1) In general. For taxable years beginning after December 31, 1974, every political organization described in section 527(e)(1), and every fund described in section 527(f)(3) or section 527(g), and every organization described in section 501(c) and exempt from taxation under section 501(a) shall, if a tax is imposed on such an organization or fund by section 527(b), make a return of income on or before the fifteenth day of the fourth month following the close of the taxable year.

(2) [Reserved]. For further guidance, see § 1.6012-6(a)(2).

(b) [Reserved]. For further guidance, see § 1.6012-6(b).

(c) Applicability date. This section applies to returns filed after July 20, 2017. Section 1.6012-6 (as contained in 26 CFR part 1, revised April 2017) applies to returns filed before July 20, 2017.

(d) Expiration date. The applicability of this section will expire on or before July 17, 2020.

Par. 6. Revise paragraph (e)(2) of § 1.6031(a)-1 to read as follows:
§ 1.6031(a)-1 Return of partnership income.

(e) * * *

(2) [Reserved]. For further guidance, see § 1.6031(a)-1T(e)(2).

Par. 7. Add § 1.6031(a)-1T to read as follows:
§ 1.6031(a)-1T Return of partnership income (temporary).

(a) through (d) [Reserved]. For further guidance, see § 1.6031(a)-1(a) through (d).

(e)(1) [Reserved]. For further guidance, see § 1.6031(a)-1(e)(1).

(2) Time for filing. The return of a partnership must be filed on or before the date prescribed by section 6072(b).

(f) Applicability date. This section applies to returns filed on or after July 20, 2017. Section 1.6031(a)-1 (as contained in 26 CFR part 1, revised April 2017) applies to returns filed before July 20, 2017.

(g) Expiration date. The applicability of this section will expire on or before July 17, 2020.

Par. 8. Revise § 1.6032-1 to read as follows:
§ 1.6032-1 Returns of banks with respect to common trust funds.

[Reserved]. For further guidance, see § 1.6032-1T.

Par. 9. Add § 1.6032-1T to read as follows:
§ 1.6032-1T Returns of banks with respect to common trust funds.

(a) Every bank (as defined in section 581) maintaining a common trust fund shall make a return of income of the common trust fund, regardless of the amount of its taxable income. Member banks of an affiliated group that serve as co-trustees with respect to a common trust fund must act jointly in making a return for the fund. If a bank maintains more than one common trust fund, a separate return shall be made for each. No particular form is prescribed for making the return under this section, but Form 1065 may be used if it is designated by the bank as the return of a common trust fund. The return shall be made for the taxable year of the common trust fund and shall be filed on or before the date prescribed by section 6072(b) with the service center prescribed in the relevant IRS revenue procedure, publication, form, or instructions to the form (see § 601.601(d)(2) of this chapter). Such return shall state specifically with respect to the fund the items of gross income and the deductions allowed by subtitle A of the Code, shall include each participant's name and address, the participant's proportionate share of taxable income or net loss (exclusive of gains and losses from sales or exchanges of capital assets), the participant's proportionate share of gains and losses from sales or exchanges of capital assets, and the participant's share of items which enter into the determination of the tax imposed by section 56. See §§ 1.584-2 and 1.58-5. If the common trust fund is maintained by two or more banks that are members of the same affiliated group, the return must also identify the member bank in the group that has contributed each participant's property or money to the fund. A copy of the plan of the common trust fund must be filed with the return. If, however, a copy of such plan has once been filed with a return, it need not again be filed if the return contains a statement showing when and where it was filed. If the plan is amended in any way after such copy has been filed, a copy of the amendment must be filed with the return for the taxable year in which the amendment was made. For the signing of a return of a bank with respect to common trust funds, see § 1.6062-1, relating to the manner prescribed for the signing of a return of a corporation.

(b) This section applies to returns filed on or after July 20, 2017. Section 1.6032-1 (as contained in 26 CFR part 1, revised April 2017) applies to taxable years beginning before July 20, 2017.

(c) The applicability of this section will expire on or before July 17, 2020.

Par. 10. Revise paragraph (e) of § 1.6033-2 to read as follows:
§ 1.6033-2 Returns by exempt organizations (taxable years beginning after December 31, 1969) and returns by certain nonexempt organizations (taxable years beginning after December 31, 1980).

(e) [Reserved]. For further guidance, see § 1.6033-2T(e).

Par. 11. Add § 1.6033-2T to read as follows:
§ 1.6033-2T Returns by exempt organizations (taxable years beginning after December 31, 1969) and returns by certain nonexempt organizations (taxable years beginning after December 31, 1980) (temporary).

(a) through (d) [Reserved]. For further guidance, see § 1.6033-2(a) through (d).

(e) Time and place for filing. The annual return required by this section shall be filed on or before the 15th day of the fifth calendar month following the close of the period for which the return is required to be filed. The annual return on Form 1065 required to be filed by a religious or apostolic association or corporation shall be filed on or before the date prescribed by section 6072(b). Each such return shall be filed in accordance with the instructions applicable thereto.

(f) through (j) [Reserved]. For further guidance, see § 1.6033-2(f) through (j).

(k) Applicability date. This section applies to returns filed on or after July 20, 2017. Section 1.6033-2 (as contained in 26 CFR part 1, revised April 2017) applies to returns filed before July 20, 2017.

(l) Expiration date. The applicability of this section will expire on or before July 17, 2020.

Par. 12. Revise paragraph (a)(3)(ii) of § 1.6041-2 to read as follows:
§ 1.6041-2 Return of information as to payments to employees.

(a) * * *

(3) * * *

(ii) [Reserved]. For further guidance, see § 1.6041-2T(a)(3)(ii).

Par. 13. Add § 1.6041-2T to read as follows:
§ 1.6041-2T Return of information as to payments to employees (temporary).

(a)(1) through (2) [Reserved]. For further guidance, see § 1.6041-2(a)(1) and (2).

(3)(i) [Reserved]. For further guidance, see § 1.6041-2(a)(3)(i).

(ii) Exception. In a case where an employer is not required to file Forms W-3 and W-2 under § 31.6011(a)-4 or § 31.6011(a)-5 of this chapter, returns on Forms W-3 and W-2 required under this paragraph (a) for any calendar year shall be filed on or before January 31 of the following year.

(b) through (c) [Reserved]. For further guidance, see § 1.6041-2(b) through (c).

(d) Applicability date. This section applies to returns filed on or after July 20, 2017. Section 1.6041-2 (as contained in 26 CFR part 1, revised April 2017) applies to returns filed before July 20, 2017.

(e) Expiration date. The applicability of this section will expire on or before July 17, 2020.

Par. 14. Revise § 1.6041-6 to read as follows:
§ 1.6041-6 Returns made on Forms 1096 and 1099 under section 6041; contents and time and place for filing.

[Reserved]. For further guidance, see § 1.6041-6T.

Par. 15. Add § 1.6041-6T to read as follows:
§ 1.6041-6T Returns made on Forms 1096 and 1099 under section 6041; contents and time and place for filing (temporary).

(a) In general. Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, returns made under section 6041 on Forms 1096 and 1099 for any calendar year shall be filed on or before February 28 (March 31 if filed electronically) of the following year with any of the Internal Revenue Service Centers, the addresses of which are listed in the instructions for such forms. The name and address of the person making the payment and the name and address of the recipient of the payment shall be stated on Form 1099. If the present address of the recipient is not available, the last known post office address must be given. See section 6109 and the regulations thereunder for rules requiring the inclusion of identifying numbers in Form 1099.

(b) Exception. Returns made on Form 1099 reporting nonemployee compensation shall be filed on or before January 31 of the year following the calendar year to which such returns relate.

(c) Applicability date. This section applies to returns filed on or after July 20, 2017. Section 1.6041-6 (as contained in 26 CFR part 1, revised April 2017) applies to returns filed before July 20, 2017.

(d) Expiration date. The applicability of this section will expire on or before July 17, 2020.

Par. 16. Revise paragraphs (a) and (d)(1) and (2) of § 1.6072-2 to read as follows:
§ 1.6072-2 Time for filing returns of corporations.

(a) [Reserved]. For further guidance, see § 1.6072-2T(a).

(d) * * *

(1) [Reserved]. For further guidance, see § 1.6072-2T(d)(1); and

(2) [Reserved]. For further guidance, see § 1.6072-2T(d)(2).

Par. 17. Add § 1.6072-2T to read as follows:
§ 1.6072-2T Time for filing returns of corporations (temporary).

(a) Domestic and certain foreign corporations—(1) In general—(i) C corporations. Except as provided in paragraph (a)(2) of this section, the income tax return required under section 6012 of a domestic C corporation (as defined in section 1361(a)(2)) or of a foreign C corporation having an office or place of business in the United States shall be filed on or before the fifteenth day of the fourth month following the close of the taxable year.

(ii) S corporations. The income tax return required under section 6012 and 6037 of an S corporation (as defined in section 1361(a)(1)) shall be filed on or before the fifteenth day of the third month following the close of the taxable year.

(2) Exception. For taxable years beginning before January 1, 2026, the income tax return of a C corporation described in paragraph (a)(1)(i) of this section that has a taxable year that ends on June 30 shall be filed on or before the fifteenth day of the third month following the close of the taxable year. For purposes of this paragraph (a)(2), the return for a short period (within the meaning of section 443) that ends on any day in June shall be treated as the return for a taxable year that ends on June 30.

(b) through (c) [Reserved]. For further guidance, see § 1.6072-2(b) and (c).

(d) introductory text [Reserved]. For further guidance, see § 1.6072-2(d) introductory text.

(1) Section 521 associations. A farmers', fruit growers', or like association, organized and operated in compliance with the requirements of section 521 and § 1.521-1; and

(2) Section 1381 corporations. For a taxable year beginning after December 31, 1962, a corporation described in section 1381(a)(2), which is under a valid enforceable written obligation to pay patronage dividends (as defined in section 1388(a) and paragraph (a) of § 1.1388-1) in an amount equal to at least 50 percent of its net earnings from business done with or for its patrons, or which paid patronage dividends in such an amount out of the net earnings from business done with or for patrons during the most recent taxable year for which it had such net earnings. Net earnings for this purpose shall not be reduced by any taxes imposed by Subtitle A of the Code and shall not be reduced by dividends paid on capital stock or other proprietary interest.

(e) through (f) [Reserved]. For further guidance, see § 1.6072-2(e) and (f).

(g) Applicability date. This section applies to returns filed on or after July 20, 2017. Section 1.6072-2 (as contained in 26 CFR part 1, revised April 2017) applies to returns before July 20, 2017.

(h) Expiration date. The applicability of this section will expire on or before July 17, 2020.

Par. 18. Revise paragraph (a) of § 1.6081-1 to read as follows:
§ 1.6081-1 Extension of time for filing returns.

(a) [Reserved]. For further guidance, see § 1.6081-1T(a).

Par. 19. Add § 1.6081-1T to read as follows:
§ 1.6081-1T Extension of time for filing returns (temporary).

(a) In general. The Commissioner is authorized to grant a reasonable extension of time for filing any return, declaration, statement, or other document that relates to any tax imposed by subtitle A of the Code and that is required under the provisions of subtitle A or F of the Code or the regulations thereunder. However, other than in the case of taxpayers who are abroad or as specified in section 6081(b), such extensions of time shall not be granted for more than six months, and the extension of time for filing the return of a DISC (as defined in section 992(a)), as specified in section 6072(b), shall not be granted. Except in the case of an extension of time pursuant to § 1.6081-5, an extension of time for filing an income tax return shall not operate to extend the time for the payment of the tax unless specified to the contrary in the extension. For rules relating to extensions of time for paying tax, see § 1.6161-1.

(b) [Reserved]. For further guidance, see § 1.6081-1(b).

(c) Applicability date. This section applies to requests for extension of time to file returns on or after July 20, 2017. Section 1.6081-1 (as contained in 26 CFR part 1, revised April 2017) applies to requests for extension of time to file returns before July 20, 2017.

(d) Expiration date. The applicability of this section will expire on or before July 17, 2020.

Par. 20. Revise paragraph (a)(1) of § 1.6081-2 to read as follows:
§ 1.6081-2 Automatic extension of time to file certain returns filed by partnerships.

(a) * * * (1) [Reserved]. For further guidance, see § 1.6081-2T(a)(1).

Par. 21. Add § 1.6081-2T to read as follows:
§ 1.6081-2T Automatic extension of time to file certain returns filed by partnerships (temporary).

(a) In general. (1) A partnership required to file Form 1065, “U.S. Partnership Return of Income,” or Form 8804, “Annual Return for Partnership Withholding Tax,” for any taxable year will be allowed an automatic six-month extension of time to file the return after the date prescribed for filing the return if the partnership files an application under this section in accordance with paragraph (b) of this section. No additional extension will be allowed pursuant to § 1.6081-1(b) beyond the automatic six-month extension provided by this section. In the case of a partnership described in § 1.6081-5(a)(1), the automatic extension of time to file allowed under this section runs concurrently with an extension of time to file granted pursuant to § 1.6081-5.

(2) [Reserved]. For further guidance, see § 1.6081-2(a)(2).

(b) through (g) [Reserved]. For further guidance, see § 1.6081-2(b) through (g).

(h) Applicability date. This section applies to applications for an automatic extension of time to file the partnership returns listed in paragraph (a) of this section on or after July 20, 2017. Section 1.6081-2 (as contained in 26 CFR part 1, revised April 2017) applies to applications for an automatic extension of time to file before July 20, 2017.

(i) Expiration date. The applicability of this section will expire on or before July 17, 2020.

Par. 22. Revise the introductory text of paragraph (a), redesignate paragraph (e) as paragraph (g), revise the heading of newly redesignated paragraph (g), and add paragraphs (e) and (f) to § 1.6081-3 to read as follows:
§ 1.6081-3 Automatic extension of time for filing corporation income tax returns.

(a) introductory text [Reserved]. For further guidance, see § 1.6081-3T(a) introductory text.

(e) [Reserved]. For further guidance, see § 1.6081-3T(e).

(f) [Reserved]. For further guidance, see § 1.6081-3T(f).

(g) Applicability dates. * * *

Par. 23. Add § 1.6081-3T to read as follows:
§ 1.6081-3T Automatic extension of time for filing corporation income tax returns (temporary).

(a) In general. Except as provided in paragraphs (e) and (f) of this section, a corporation or an affiliated group of corporations filing a consolidated return will be allowed an automatic 6-month extension of time to file its income tax return after the date prescribed for filing the return if the following requirements are met.

(1) through (4) [Reserved]. For further guidance, see § 1.6081-3(a)(1) through (4).

(b) through (d) [Reserved]. For further guidance, see § 1.6081-3(b) through (d).

(e) Exception. In the case of any return for a taxable year of a C corporation that ends on June 30 and begins before January 1, 2026, the first sentence of paragraph (a) of this section shall be applied by substituting “7-month” for “6-month.” For purposes of this paragraph (e), the return for a short period (within the meaning of section 443) that ends on any day in June shall be treated as the return for a taxable year that ends on June 30.

(f) Cross reference. For provisions relating to extensions of time to file Form 1120-POL, “U.S. Income Tax Return for Certain Political Organizations,” see § 1.6081-9.

(g) Applicability date. This section applies to requests for extension of time to file corporation income tax returns on or after July 20, 2017. Section 1.6081-3 (as contained in 26 CFR part 1, revised April 2017) applies to applications for an automatic extension of time to file before July 20, 2017.

(h) Expiration date. The applicability of this section will expire on or before July 17, 2020.

Par. 24. Revise paragraph (a)(1) of § 1.6081-5 to read as follows:
§ 1.6081-5 Extensions of time in the case of certain partnerships, corporations and U.S. citizens and residents.

(a) * * *

(1) [Reserved]. For further guidance, see § 1.6081-5T(a)(1);

Par. 25. Add § 1.6081-5T to read as follows:
§ 1.6081-5T Extensions of time in the case of certain partnerships, corporations and U.S. citizens and residents (temporary).

(a) introductory text [Reserved]. For further guidance, see § 1.6081-5(a) introductory text.

(1) Partnerships, which are required under section 6072(b) to file returns on the fifteenth day of the third month following the close of the taxable year of the partnership, that keep their records and books of account outside the United States and Puerto Rico;

(2) through (6) [Reserved]. For further guidance, see § 1.6081-5(a)(2) through (6).

(b) through (e) [Reserved]. For further guidance, see § 1.6081-5(b) through (e).

(f) This section applies to returns filed on or after July 20, 2017. Section 1.6081-5 (as contained in 26 CFR part 1, revised April 2017) applies to applications for an automatic extension of time to file returns before July 20, 2017.

(g) The applicability of this section will expire on or before July 17, 2020.

Par. 26. Revise paragraph (a)(1) of § 1.6081-6 to read as follows:
§ 1.6081-6 Automatic extension of time to file estate or trust income tax return.

(a) * * * (1) [Reserved]. For further guidance, see § 1.6081-6T(a)(1).

Par. 27. Add § 1.6081-6T to read as follows:
§ 1.6081-6T Automatic extension of time to file estate or trust income tax return (temporary).

(a) In general. (1) Except as provided in paragraph (a)(2) of this section, any estate, including but not limited to an estate defined in section 2031, or trust required to file an income tax return on Form 1041, “U.S. Income Tax Return for Estates and Trusts,” will be allowed an automatic five and one-half month extension of time to file the return after the date prescribed for filing the return if the estate or trust files an application under this section in accordance with paragraph (b) of this section. No additional extension will be allowed pursuant to § 1.6081-1(b) beyond the automatic five and one-half month extension provided by this section.

(2) [Reserved]. For further guidance, see § 1.6081-6(a)(2).

(b) through (f) [Reserved]. For further guidance, see § 1.6081-6(b) through (f).

(g) Applicability date. This section applies to applications for an automatic extension of time to file an estate or trust income tax return on or after July 20, 2017. Section 1.6081-6 (as contained in 26 CFR part 1, revised April 2017) applies to applications for an automatic extension of time to file a return before July 20, 2017.

(h) Expiration date. The applicability of this section will expire on or before July 17, 2020.

Par. 28. Revise paragraphs (a), (b)(1) and (3), (c), (d), and (e), of § 1.6081-9 to read as follows:
§ 1.6081-9 Automatic extension of time to file exempt or political organization returns.

(a) [Reserved]. For further guidance, see § 1.6081-9T(a).

(b) * * *

(1) [Reserved]. For further guidance, see § 1.6081-9T(b)(1);

(3) [Reserved]. For further guidance, see § 1.6081-9T(b)(3); and

(c) [Reserved]. For further guidance, see § 1.6081-9T(c).

(d) [Reserved]. For further guidance, see § 1.6081-9T(d).

(e) [Reserved]. For further guidance, see § 1.6081-9T(e).

Par. 29. Add § 1.6081-9T to read as follows:
§ 1.6081-9T Automatic extension of time to file exempt or political organization returns (temporary).

(a) In general. An entity required to file a return on a form in the Form 990 series (Form 990, “Return of Organization Exempt From Income Tax,” Form 990-BL, “Information and Initial Excise Tax Return for Black Lung Benefit Trusts and Certain Related Persons,” Form 990-EZ, “Short Form Return of Organization Exempt From Income Tax,” Form 990-PF, “Return of Private Foundation,” and Form 990-T, “Exempt Organization Business Tax Return”), Form 1041-A, “U.S. Information Return-Trust Accumulation of Charitable Amounts,” Form 1120-POL, “U.S. Income Tax Return for Certain Political Organizations,” Form 4720, “Return of Certain Excise Taxes Under Chapters 41 and 42 of the Internal Revenue Code,” Form 5227, “Split-Interest Trust Information Return,” Form 6069, “Return of Excise Tax on Excess Contributions to Black Lung Benefit Trust Under Section 4953 and Computation of Section 192 Deduction,” and Form 8870, “Information Return for Transfers Associated With Certain Personal Benefit Contracts,” will be allowed an automatic six-month extension of time to file the return after the date prescribed for filing if the entity files an application in accordance with paragraph (b) of this section.

(b) introductory text [Reserved]. For further guidance, see § 1.6081-9(b) introductory text.

(1) Be submitted on Form 7004, “Application for Automatic Extension of Time to File Certain Business Income Tax, Information, and Other Returns” (in the case of an extension of time to file Form 1120-POL), Form 8868, “Application for Automatic Extension of Time to File an Exempt Organization Return” (in the case of an extension of time to file any other return listed in paragraph (a) of this section), or in any other manner as may be prescribed by the Commissioner;

(2) [Reserved]. For further guidance, see § 1.6081-9(b)(2);

(3) Show the full amount properly estimated as tentative tax for the entity for the taxable year; and

(4) [Reserved]. For further guidance, see § 1.6081-9(b)(4).

(c) Termination of automatic extension. The Commissioner may terminate an automatic extension at any time by mailing to the entity a notice of termination. The notice must be mailed at least 10 days prior to the termination date designated in such notice. The notice of termination must be mailed to the address shown on the application for extension or to the entity's last known address. For further guidance regarding the definition of last known address, see § 301.6212-2 of this chapter.

(d) Penalties. See sections 6651 and 6652(c) for failure to file a return or failure to pay the amount shown as tax on the return.

(e) Coordination with § 1.6081-1. No extension of time will be granted under § 1.6081-1 for filing a return listed in paragraph (a) of this section until an automatic extension has been allowed pursuant to this section.

(f) Applicability date. This section applies to requests for extensions of time to file returns listed in paragraph (a) of this section on or after July 20, 2017. Sections 1.6081-3 and 1.6081-9 (as contained in 26 CFR part 1, revised April 2017) apply to requests for extensions before July 20, 2017.

(g) Expiration date. The applicability of this section will expire on or before July 17, 2020.

PART 31—EMPLOYMENT TAXES AND COLLECTION OF INCOME TAX AT THE SOURCE Par. 30. The authority citation for part 31 continues to read in part as follows: Authority:

26 U.S.C. 7805 * * *

Par. 31. Revise paragraph (a)(3) of § 31.6071(a)-1 to read as follows:
§ 31.6071(a)-1 Time for filing returns and other documents.

(a) * * *

(3) [Reserved]. For further guidance, see § 31.6071(a)-1T(a)(3).

Par. 32. Add § 31.6071(a)-1T to read as follows:
§ 31.6071(a)-1T Time for filing returns and other documents (temporary).

(a) Federal Insurance Contributions Act and income tax withheld from wages and from nonpayroll payments. (1) through (2) [Reserved]. For further guidance, see § 31.6071(a)-1(a)(1) and (2).

(3) Information returns—(i) General rule. Each information return in respect of wages as defined in Federal Insurance Contributions Act or of income tax withheld from wages as required under § 31.6051-2 must be filed on or before January 31 of the year following the calendar year for which it is made, except that, if a tax return under § 31.6011(a)-5(a) is filed as a final return for a period ending prior to December 31, the information return must be filed on or before the last day of the first calendar month following the period for which the tax return is filed.

(ii) Expedited filing. If an employer who is required to make a return pursuant to § 31.6011(a)-1 or § 31.6011(a)-4 is required to make a final return on Form 941, or a variation thereof, under § 31.6011(a)-6(a)(1) (relating to the final return for Federal Insurance Contributions Act taxes and income tax withholding from wages), the return which is required to be made under § 31.6051-2 must be filed on or before the last day of the first calendar month following the period for which the final return is filed. The requirements set forth in this paragraph (a)(3)(ii) do not apply to employers with respect to employees whose wages are for domestic service in the private home of the employer. See § 31.6011(a)-1(a)(3).

(b) through (f) [Reserved]. For further guidance, see § 31.6071(a)-1(b) through (f).

(g) Applicability date. This section applies to returns filed after July 20, 2017. Section 31.6071(a)-1 (as contained in 26 CFR part 31, revised April 2017) applies to returns filed before July 20, 2017.

(h) Expiration date. The applicability of this section will expire on or before July 17, 2020.

Kirsten Wielobob, Deputy Commissioner for Services and Enforcement. Approved: July 7, 2017. Tom West, Tax Legislative Counsel.
[FR Doc. 2017-15209 Filed 7-18-17; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 117 [Docket No. USCG-2017-0695] Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Chambers Creek, Steilacoom, WA AGENCY:

Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION:

Notice of temporary deviation from regulations; request for comments.

SUMMARY:

The Coast Guard has issued a temporary deviation from the operating schedule that governs the Chambers Creek Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) railroad vertical lift railroad bridge across Chambers Creek, mile 0.01, near Steilacoom in Pierce County, WA. This deviation will test a change to the drawbridge operation schedule, for the second time within the past year, to determine whether a permanent change to the schedule is appropriate.

DATES:

This deviation is effective from 6 a.m. on July 22, 2017 to 6 a.m. on January 16, 2018.

Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or before January 16, 2018.

ADDRESSES:

You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-2017-0695 using Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov.

See the “Public Participation and Request for Comments” portion of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below for instructions on submitting comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

If you have questions on this temporary deviation, call or email Mr. Danny McReynolds, Bridge Management Specialist, Thirteenth Coast Guard District; telephone 206-220-7234, email [email protected]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background, Purpose and Legal Basis

Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad, the bridge owner, is requesting to test a deviation to the schedule of the Chambers Creek BNSF railroad vertical lift railroad bridge across Chambers Creek, mile 0.01, near Steilacoom in Pierce County, WA. Due to minimal usage of the drawbridge between 10 p.m. and 6 a.m., the bridge owner has requested to test this schedule to see if it better balances the needs of marine and rail traffic. The bridge has a vertical clearance of 10ft in the closed-to-navigation position and 50ft of vertical clearance in the open-to-navigation position (reference plane is MHW elevation of 12.2 feet). The bridge currently operates under 33 CFR 117.5; which requires the bridge to open anytime when a request or signal to open is given.

The following facts support BNSF's proposal: (1) The previous test deviation from December 12, 2016 to Jun 23, 2017 had only one lift opening request (2) over the last 6 years only 2% of the subject bridge lifts have occurred between the hours of 10 p.m. and 6 a.m., which equates to approximately 5 openings a year, (3) from February 2009 to June 2015 there were 1932 total openings of which only 40 occurred between the hours of 10 p.m. and 6 a.m., and (4) the navigation traffic consists primarily of the tenants of Chambers Bay marina (recreational users) that are members of the Chambers Bay Boating Association.

The Coast Guard is publishing this temporary deviation, for a second time within a year, to test the proposed schedule change to determine whether a permanent change to the schedule is appropriate to better balance the needs of marine and rail traffic.

Under this temporary deviation, in effect from 6 a.m. on July 22, 2017 to 6 a.m. on January 15, 2017, the subject bridge shall open on signal, except from 10 p.m. to 6 a.m. the draw shall open on signal if at least 4 hours notice is given. The bridge will be required to open as soon a possible, no later than 1 hour after notification, for vessels engaged in emergency response.

The Coast Guard will inform the users of the waterways of this temporary deviation through our Local and Broadcast Notices to Mariners and through direct outreach with the Chambers Creek Boating Association so that vessel operators can arrange their transits to minimize any impact caused by the temporary deviation. Vessels able to pass underneath the bridge in the closed-to-navigation position may do so at anytime.

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.

II. 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 notice, and all public comments, are 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.

Dated: July 13, 2017. Steven M. Fischer, Bridge Administrator, Thirteenth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2017-15230 Filed 7-19-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 165 [Docket Number USCG-2017-0670] RIN 1625-AA87 Security Zone; Atlantic Ocean, Ft. Lauderdale, FL AGENCY:

Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION:

Temporary final rule.

SUMMARY:

The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary security zone on the waters of the Atlantic Ocean for a United States Navy exercise. There will be a zone approximately 4 nautical miles wide extending from .75 nautical miles off the beach to 4 nautical miles offshore. The zone will begin approximately .4 nautical miles south of Port Everglades Inlet. The security zone is needed to protect personnel, vessels, and the surrounding waterway from terrorist acts, sabotage or other subversive acts, accidents, or other causes of a similar nature. Entry of vessels or persons into this zone is prohibited unless specifically authorized by the Captain of the Port Miami.

DATES:

This rule is effective without actual notice from 5 a.m. to 8 p.m. daily from July 20, 2017 through July 21, 2017. For the purposes of enforcement, actual notice will be used from 5 a.m. to 8 p.m. daily from July 8, 2017 through July 20, 2017.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

If you have questions on this rule, call or email Petty Officer Mara Brown, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone 305-535-4317, email [email protected]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

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

The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary rule without prior notice and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section 4(a) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those procedures are “impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.” Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) with respect to this rule because the Coast Guard did not receive notice of this event until two days prior to the exercise and there is an immediate need to protect the security of the naval vessels, the public, and the surrounding waterway from terrorist acts, sabotage or other subversive acts, accidents, or other causes of similar nature. It is impracticable to publish an NPRM because the zone must be established by July 8, 2017.

Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), 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 impracticable because immediate action is needed to respond to the potential security risks associated with naval exercises.

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 Miami (COTP) has determined the potential security concerns associated with naval exercises starting July 8, 2017. This rule is needed to protect naval vessels, the public, and the surrounding waterway from terrorist acts, sabotage or other subversive acts, accidents, or other causes of a similar nature while the exercise is occurring.

IV. Discussion of the Rule

This rule establishes a security zone from 5 a.m. until 8 p.m. daily from July 8, 2017 through July 21, 2017, while the Navy is performing the exercise. The security zone will cover all navigable waters approximately in an area 4 nautical miles wide extending from .75 nautical miles off the beach to 4 nautical miles offshore. The zone will begin approximately .4 nautical miles south of Port Everglades Inlet. No vessel or person will be permitted to enter the security zone 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 13771 directs agencies to control regulatory costs through a budgeting process. This rule has not been designated a “significant regulatory action,” under Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, this rule has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), and pursuant to OMB guidance it is exempt from the requirements of Executive Order 13771.

The Coast Guard has made a determination this rule is not a significant regulatory action. This regulatory action determination is based on the size, durations and location of the security zone. The zone is only 4 nautical miles wide extending from .75 nautical miles off the beach to 4 nautical miles offshore. Vessel traffic will be able to safely transit around the security zone without significant diversion.

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

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

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

C. Collection of Information

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

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

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

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

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538) requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or more in any one year. Though this rule will not result in such 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 M16475.1D, 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 security zone that will prohibit entry within certain waters of the Atlantic Ocean in Ft. Lauderdale, Florida, in order to protect the safety of life and property on the waters while the exercise is occurring. It is categorically excluded from further review under paragraph 34(g) of Figure 2-1 of the Commandant Instruction. A Record of Environmental Consideration supporting this determination is 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 a temporary § 165.T07-0670 to read as follows:
§ 165.T07-0670 Security Zone; United States Navy Exercise, Ft. Lauderdale, FL.

(a) Regulated area. The following regulated area is established as a security zone: All waters starting at point 1 in position 26°05′03″ N. 80°05′42″ W.; thence east to point 2 in position 26°05′03″ N. 80°02′04″ W.; thence south to point 3 in position 26°00′57″ N. 80°02′25″ W.; thence west to point 4 in position 26°00′57″ N. 80°06′04″ W.; thence north back to origin.

(b) Definition. The term “designated representative” means Coast Guard Patrol Commanders, including Coast Guard coxswains, petty officers, and other officers operating Coast Guard vessels, and Federal, state, and local officers designated by or assisting the Captain of the Port Miami in the enforcement of the regulated area.

(c) Regulations. All persons and vessels are prohibited from entering, transiting through, anchoring in, or remaining within the security zone without authorization from the Captain of the Port Miami or a designated representative.

(d) Effective and enforcement dates. This rule is effective daily from 5 a.m. until 8 p.m. on July 8, 2017 through July 21, 2017, unless cancelled sooner by the Captain of the Port. This rule will be enforced with actual notice by the U.S. Coast Guard representative on scene while operations associated with the naval exercise are in progress.

Dated: July 7, 2017. M.M. Dean, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Miami.
[FR Doc. 2017-15265 Filed 7-19-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 165 [Docket No. USCG-2017-0688] RIN 1625-AA00 Safety Zone; Marine City Maritime Festival Water Ski Show, St. Clair River, Marine City, MI AGENCY:

Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION:

Temporary final rule.

SUMMARY:

The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone for navigable waters within a 2000-foot portion of the St. Clair River in the vicinity of Marine City, MI. This zone is necessary to protect vessels from potential hazards associated with the Marine City Maritime Festival Water Ski Show.

DATES:

This temporary final rule is effective from 10 a.m. though 5 p.m. on August 5, 2017.

ADDRESSES:

To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-2017-0688 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 temporary rule, call or email Tracy Girard, Prevention Department, Sector Detroit, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone 313-568-9564, or email [email protected]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

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

The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary rule without prior notice and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section 4(a) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those procedures are “impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.” Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) with respect to this rule because doing so would be impracticable. The Coast Guard did not receive the final details of this project 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 participants, mariners and vessels from the hazards associated with this event.

We are issuing this rule 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 for the same reason noted above.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

The legal basis for the rule is the Coast Guard's authority to establish safety zones: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.

On August 5, 2017, a Maritime Festival Water Ski Show will take place on the St. Clair River in Marine City, MI. The Captain of the Port Detroit (COTP) has determined that a potential hazard associated with this water ski show will be a safety concern to anyone within 2000-feet of the water ski area. This rule is needed to protect personnel, vessels, and the marine environment in the navigable waters within the safety zone while the show is being conducted.

IV. Discussion of the Rule

This rule establishes a safety zone from 10 a.m. through 5 p.m. on August 5, 2017. A safety zone is established to include all U.S. navigable waters of the St. Clair River, Marine City, MI, bound by: 200 feet seaward of latitude position 42°43.382′ N., and to the south by 2,000 feet to 200 feet seaward of latitude position 42°42.983′ N. This regulated area will be enforced during three 30 minute time periods between 10 a.m. through 5 p.m. on August 5, 2017. No vessel or person will be permitted to enter the safety zone without obtaining permission from the COTP or a designated representative. The Captain of the Port Detroit or a designated on-scene representative may be contacted via VHF Channel 16 or via telephone at 313-568-9464. 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.

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 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. Executive Order 13771 (“Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs”), directs agencies to reduce regulation and control regulatory costs and provides that “for every one new regulation issued, at least two prior regulations be identified for elimination, and that the cost of planned regulations be prudently managed and controlled through a budgeting process.” 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.

As this rule is not a significant regulatory action, this rule is exempt from the requirements of Executive Order 13771. See OMB's Memorandum titled “Interim Guidance Implementing Section 2 of the Executive Order of January 30, 2017 titled `Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs' ” (February 2, 2017).

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. This regulatory action determination is based on the size, location, duration, and time-of-year of the safety zone. Recreational and commercial vessel traffic will be able to safely transit around this safety zone. Moreover, the Coast Guard will issue Broadcast Notice to Mariners via VHF-FM marine channel 16 about the zone and the rule allows vessels to seek permission to enter the zone.

B. Impact on Small Entities

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

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

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

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

C. Collection of Information

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

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

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

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

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538) requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or more in any one year. Though this rule will not result in such 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 7 hours that will prohibit entry within 2000-feet of the water ski show. It is categorically excluded under section 2.B.2, figure 2-1, paragraph 34(g) of the Instruction. A Record of Environmental Consideration (REC) supporting this determination is available in the docket where indicated in the ADDRESSES section of this preamble. 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 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.T09-0688 to read as follows:
§ 165.T09 -0688 Safety Zone; Marine City Maritime Festival Water Ski Show, St. Clair River, Marine City, MI.

(a) Location. A safety zone is established to include all U.S. navigable waters of the St. Clair River, Marine City, MI, bound by: 200 feet seaward of latitude position 42°43.382′ N., and to the south by 2,000 feet to 200 feet seaward of latitude position 42°42.983′ N. This regulated area will be enforced during three 30 minute periods of time between 10 a.m. through 5 p.m. on August 5, 2017.

(b) Enforcement period. The regulated area described in paragraph (a) will be enforced from 10 a.m. thru 10:30 a.m., 1 p.m. through 1:30 p.m., and 4 p.m. through 4:30 p.m. on August 5, 2017.

(c) Regulations. (1) No recreational vessel or person may enter, transit through, or anchor within the safety zone unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Detroit, or his on-scene representative.

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

(3) The “on-scene representative” of the Captain of the Port Detroit is any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant or petty officer or a Federal, State, or local law enforcement officer designated by or assisting the Captain of the Port Detroit to act on his behalf.

(4) Vessel operators shall contact the Captain of the Port Detroit or his on-scene representative to obtain permission to enter or operate within the safety zone. The Captain of the Port Detroit or his on-scene representative may be contacted via VHF Channel 16 or at 313-568-9464. Vessel operators given permission to enter or operate in the regulated area must comply with all directions given to them by the Captain of the Port Detroit or his on-scene representative.

Dated: July 13, 2017. Jeffrey W. Novak, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Detroit.
[FR Doc. 2017-15270 Filed 7-19-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Federal Emergency Management Agency 44 CFR Part 64 [Docket ID FEMA-2017-0002; Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-8489] Suspension of Community Eligibility AGENCY:

Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

This rule identifies communities where the sale of flood insurance has been authorized under the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) that are scheduled for suspension on the effective dates listed within this rule because of noncompliance with the floodplain management requirements of the program. If the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) receives documentation that the community has adopted the required floodplain management measures prior to the effective suspension date given in this rule, the suspension will not occur and a notice of this will be provided by publication in the Federal Register on a subsequent date. Also, information identifying the current participation status of a community can be obtained from FEMA's Community Status Book (CSB). The CSB is available at https://www.fema.gov/national-flood-insurance-program-community-status-book.

DATES:

The effective date of each community's scheduled suspension is the third date (“Susp.”) listed in the third column of the table in the amendment.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

If you want to determine whether a particular community was suspended on the suspension date or for further information, contact Patricia Suber, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 400 C Street SW., Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-4149.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The NFIP enables property owners to purchase Federal flood insurance that is not otherwise generally available from private insurers. In return, communities agree to adopt and administer local floodplain management measures aimed at protecting lives and new construction from future flooding. Section 1315 of the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 4022, prohibits the sale of NFIP flood insurance unless an appropriate public body adopts adequate floodplain management measures with effective enforcement measures. The communities listed in this document no longer meet that statutory requirement for compliance with program regulations, 44 CFR part 59. Accordingly, the communities will be suspended on the effective date in the third column. As of that date, flood insurance will no longer be available in the community. We recognize that some of these communities may adopt and submit the required documentation of legally enforceable floodplain management measures after this rule is published but prior to the actual suspension date. These communities will not be suspended and will continue to be eligible for the sale of NFIP flood insurance. A notice withdrawing the suspension of such communities will be published in the Federal Register.

In addition, FEMA publishes a Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) that identifies the Special Flood Hazard Areas (SFHAs) in these communities. The date of the FIRM, if one has been published, is indicated in the fourth column of the table. No direct Federal financial assistance (except assistance pursuant to the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act not in connection with a flood) may be provided for construction or acquisition of buildings in identified SFHAs for communities not participating in the NFIP and identified for more than a year on FEMA's initial FIRM for the community as having flood-prone areas (section 202(a) of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C. 4106(a), as amended). This prohibition against certain types of Federal assistance becomes effective for the communities listed on the date shown in the last column. The Administrator finds that notice and public comment procedures under 5 U.S.C. 553(b), are impracticable and unnecessary because communities listed in this final rule have been adequately notified.

Each community receives 6-month, 90-day, and 30-day notification letters addressed to the Chief Executive Officer stating that the community will be suspended unless the required floodplain management measures are met prior to the effective suspension date. Since these notifications were made, this final rule may take effect within less than 30 days.

National Environmental Policy Act. FEMA has determined that the community suspension(s) included in this rule is a non-discretionary action and therefore the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) does not apply.

Regulatory Flexibility Act. The Administrator has determined that this rule is exempt from the requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act because the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968, as amended, Section 1315, 42 U.S.C. 4022, prohibits flood insurance coverage unless an appropriate public body adopts adequate floodplain management measures with effective enforcement measures. The communities listed no longer comply with the statutory requirements, and after the effective date, flood insurance will no longer be available in the communities unless remedial action takes place.

Regulatory Classification. This final rule is not a significant regulatory action under the criteria of section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 of September 30, 1993, Regulatory Planning and Review, 58 FR 51735.

Executive Order 13132, Federalism. This rule involves no policies that have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132.

Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform. This rule meets the applicable standards of Executive Order 12988.

Paperwork Reduction Act. This rule does not involve any collection of information for purposes of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.

List of Subjects in 44 CFR Part 64

Flood insurance, Floodplains.

Accordingly, 44 CFR part 64 is amended as follows:

PART 64—[AMENDED] 1. The authority citation for part 64 continues to read as follows: Authority:

42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq.; Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1978, 3 CFR, 1978 Comp.; p. 329; E.O. 12127, 44 FR 19367, 3 CFR, 1979 Comp.; p. 376.

§ 64.6 [Amended]
2. The tables published under the authority of § 64.6 are amended as follows: State and location Community
  • No.
  • Effective date
  • authorization/cancellation of sale of flood
  • insurance in community
  • Current effective
  • map date
  • Date certain
  • Federal
  • assistance no
  • longer available
  • in SFHAs
  • Region V Indiana Delaware County, Unincorporated Areas 180051 June 13, 1975, Emerg; March 16, 1981, Reg; August 2, 2017, Susp. August 2, 2017. August 2, 2017. Muncie, City of, Delaware County 180053 April 4, 1975, Emerg; January 16, 1981, Reg; August 2, 2017, Susp. ......do*   do. Yorktown, Town of, Delaware County 180361 March 18, 1976, Emerg; March 16, 1981, Reg; August 2, 2017, Susp. ......do   do. Region IX California Crescent City, City of, Del Norte County 060039 April 2, 1975, Emerg; November 23, 1982, Reg; August 2, 2017, Susp. ......do   do. *do = Ditto. Code for reading third column: Emerg.—Emergency; Reg.—Regular; Susp.—Suspension.
    Dated: July 7, 2017. Michael M. Grimm, Assistant Administrator for Mitigation, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration, Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
    [FR Doc. 2017-15241 Filed 7-19-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-12-P
    82 138 Thursday, July 20, 2017 Proposed Rules BUREAU OF CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION 12 CFR Part 1003 [Docket No. CFPB-2017-0021] RIN 3170-AA76 Home Mortgage Disclosure (Regulation C) Temporary Increase in Institutional and Transactional Coverage Thresholds for Open-End Lines of Credit AGENCY:

    Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection.

    ACTION:

    Proposed rule with request for public comment.

    SUMMARY:

    The Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection (Bureau or CFPB) proposes amendments to Regulation C that would, for a period of two years, increase the threshold for collecting and reporting data with respect to open-end lines of credit so that financial institutions originating fewer than 500 open-end lines of credit in either of the preceding two years would not be required to begin collecting such data until January 1, 2020.

    DATES:

    Comments must be received on or before July 31, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. CFPB-2017-0021 or RIN 3170-AA76, by any of the following methods:

    Email: [email protected] Include Docket No. CFPB-2017-0021 or RIN 3170-AA76 in the subject line of the email.

    Electronic: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.

    Mail: Monica Jackson, Office of the Executive Secretary, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, 1700 G Street NW., Washington, DC 20552.

    Hand Delivery/Courier: Monica Jackson, Office of the Executive Secretary, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, 1275 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20002.

    Instructions: All submissions should include the agency name and docket number or Regulatory Information Number (RIN) for this rulemaking. Because paper mail in the Washington, DC area and at the Bureau is subject to delay, commenters are encouraged to submit comments electronically. In general, all comments received will be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov. In addition, comments will be available for public inspection and copying at 1275 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20002, on official business days between the hours of 10 a.m. and 5:30 p.m. Eastern Time. You can make an appointment to inspect the documents by telephoning 202-435-7275.

    All comments, including attachments and other supporting materials, will become part of the public record and subject to public disclosure. Sensitive personal information, such as account numbers or Social Security numbers, should not be included. Comments will not be edited to remove any identifying or contact information.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Alexandra W. Reimelt, Counsel, Office of Regulations, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, at 202-435-7700 or [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Summary of the Proposed Rule

    Regulation C implements the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA). For over four decades, HMDA has provided the public and public officials with information about mortgage lending activity within communities by requiring financial institutions to collect, report, and disclose certain data about their mortgage activities. The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (Dodd-Frank Act) amended HMDA and, among other things, expanded the scope of information that must be collected, reported, and disclosed under HMDA and transferred rule writing authority from the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (Board) to the Bureau.1

    1 Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, Public Law 111-203, section 1094, 124 Stat. 1376, 2097-101 (2010).

    In October 2015, the Bureau published a final rule implementing the Dodd-Frank Act amendments to HMDA (2015 HMDA Final Rule).2 In that rule, the Bureau adopted significant changes to Regulation C, most of which will be effective on January 1, 2018. Among other changes, the 2015 HMDA Final Rule required collection and reporting of data with regard to open-end, dwelling-secured lines of credit.3 However, the 2015 HMDA Final Rule contained an exclusion with respect to an open-end line of credit if a financial institution originated fewer than 100 such lines of credit in each of the two preceding calendar years (open-end transactional coverage threshold).4 The 2015 HMDA Final Rule contained parallel provisions as part of the definition of “financial institution,” which limit Regulation C's institutional coverage to include only institutions that, in addition to meeting the other applicable coverage criteria, originated at least 25 closed-end mortgage loans or 100 open-end lines of credit in each of the two preceding calendar years (institutional coverage threshold).5

    2 Home Mortgage Disclosure (Regulation C); Final Rule, 80 FR 66128 (Oct. 28, 2015). In this notice, citations to Regulation C as amended by the 2015 HMDA Final Rule are to the applicable sections of title 12 of the Code of Federal Regulations as they will read following their effective date. See generally 12 CFR 1003.

    3 12 CFR 1003.2(e). Prior to this amendment, reporting with respect to open-end lines of credit was voluntary. See infra note 10.

    4 12 CFR 1003.3(c)(12). As adopted by the 2015 HMDA Final Rule, this provision states the test as “fewer than 100 open-end lines of credit in each of the two preceding calendar years,” but this was a drafting error; the intent was to require that a financial institution have exceeded the threshold in both of the preceding calendar years to be subject to open-end line of credit reporting, thus the exclusion should require that a financial institution originate fewer than 100 such lines of credit in either of the two preceding calendar years. As discussed below, the Bureau has since proposed to correct this error. See 82 FR 19142, 19148-49 (Apr. 25, 2017).

    5 12 CFR 1003.2(g)(1)(v) and (g)(2)(ii).

    The Bureau has heard concerns that, in setting the open-end transactional coverage threshold at 100 transactions, the Bureau set it too low. The Bureau is now proposing to increase that threshold to 500 or more open-end lines of credit for two years (calendar years 2018 and 2019). During that period, the Bureau will reconsider the open-end transactional coverage threshold: This temporary increase would allow the Bureau to do so without requiring financial institutions originating fewer than 500 open-end lines of credit per year to collect and report data with respect to open-end lending in the meanwhile.

    This proposal seeks comment on whether the Bureau should temporarily increase the threshold in this manner.

    II. Background A. Collecting and Reporting Data Concerning Open-End Lines of Credit Under the 2015 HMDA Final Rule

    HMDA and its implementing regulation, Regulation C, require certain banks, savings associations, credit unions, and for-profit nondepository institutions to collect, report, and disclose data about originations and purchases of mortgage loans, as well as mortgage loan applications that do not result in originations (for example, applications that are denied or withdrawn). In 2010, Congress enacted the Dodd-Frank Act, which amended HMDA and also transferred HMDA rulemaking authority and other functions from the Board to the Bureau.6 Among other changes, the Dodd-Frank Act expanded the scope of information relating to mortgage applications and loans that must be collected, reported, and disclosed under HMDA. The Dodd-Frank Act also provides the Bureau with the authority to require “such other information as the Bureau may require.” 7

    6 Public Law 111-203, 124 Stat. 1376, 1980, 2035-38, 2097-101 (2010).

    7Id.

    In October 2015, the Bureau issued the 2015 HMDA Final Rule, which implemented the Dodd-Frank Act amendments to HMDA.8 That final rule modified the types of institutions and transactions subject to Regulation C, the types of data that institutions are required to collect, and the processes for reporting and disclosing the required data.

    8 2015 HMDA Final Rule, 80 FR 66128 (Oct. 28, 2015).

    Home-equity lines of credit were uncommon in the 1970s and early 1980s when Regulation C was first implemented. In 1988, the Board amended Regulation C to permit, but not require, financial institutions to report home-equity lines of credit that were for the purpose of home improvement or home purchase.9 In practice, few financial institutions elected to do so and the Bureau estimated that only about 1 percent of open-end lines of credit secured by dwellings were reported under HMDA.10

    9 53 FR 31683, 31685 (Aug. 19, 1988). Under this provision, data with respect to “home equity lines of credit made in whole or in part for home purchase or home improvement” is “optional data” which a financial institution may report. 12 CFR 1003.4(c)(3). A “home-equity line of credit” is defined in current Regulation C as an “open-end credit plan secured by a dwelling as defined in Regulation Z (Truth in Lending), 12 CFR part 1026.” 12 CFR 1003.2. The definition of “open-end line of credit” in the 2015 HMDA Final Rule, effective January 1, 2018, paralleled this definition, but applies without regard to whether the credit is consumer credit, as defined in 12 CFR 1026.2(a)(12), is extended by a creditor, as defined in 12 CFR 1026.2(a)(17), or is extended to a consumer, as defined in 12 CFR 1026.2(a)(11).

    10 2015 HMDA Final Rule, supra note 8, at 66282.

    In 2000, in response to the increasing importance of open-end lending in the housing market, the Board proposed to revise Regulation C to require mandatory reporting of all home-equity lines of credit.11 However, the Board's 2002 final rule left open-end reporting voluntary, as the Board determined at that time that the benefits of mandatory reporting relative to other then-proposed changes (such as collecting information about higher-priced loans) did not justify the increased burden.12

    11 65 FR 78656, 78659-60 (Dec. 15, 2000).

    12 67 FR 7222, 7225 (Feb. 15, 2002).

    As discussed in the 2015 HMDA Final Rule, open-end mortgage lending continued to increase in the years following the Board's 2002 final rule, particularly in areas with high home-price appreciation. Further, research indicates that speculative real estate investors used open-end, home-secured lines of credit to purchase non-owner occupied properties, which correlated with higher first-mortgage defaults and home-price depression during the financial crisis.13 Furthermore, in the years leading up to the crisis such home-equity lines of credit often were made and fully drawn more or less simultaneously with first-lien home purchase loans, essentially creating high loan-to-value home purchase transactions that were not visible in the HMDA dataset.14 Thus, as the Bureau noted in the 2015 HMDA Final Rule, overleverage due to open-end mortgage lending and defaults on dwelling-secured open-end lines of credit contributed to the foreclosure crises that many communities experienced in the late 2000s.15

    13 2015 HMDA Final Rule, supra note 8, at 66160.

    14Id.

    15Id.

    More generally, as the 2015 HMDA Final Rule also noted, dwelling-secured open-end lines of credit liquefy equity that borrowers have built up in their homes, which often are their most important assets, and increase their risk of losing their homes to foreclosure when property values decline.16 At the same time, home-equity lines of credit have become increasingly important to the housing market, and including data on such lines within the HMDA dataset would help to understand how financial institutions are meeting the housing needs of communities.17 For these and other reasons articulated in the 2015 HMDA Final Rule,18 the Bureau determined that it is important to improve visibility into this key segment of the mortgage market by requiring reporting of open-end lines of credit.19 As noted in the 2015 HMDA Final Rule, the Bureau believes that including dwelling-secured lines of credit within the scope of Regulation C is a reasonable interpretation of HMDA section 303(2), which defines “mortgage loan” as a loan secured by residential real property or a home improvement loan. In the 2015 HMDA Final Rule, the Bureau interpreted “mortgage loan” to include dwelling-secured lines of credit, as they are secured by residential real property and they may be used for home improvement purposes.20 As further noted in the 2015 HMDA Final Rule, pursuant to section 305(a) of HMDA, the Bureau believes that requiring reporting of all dwelling-secured, consumer purpose open-end lines of credit is necessary and proper to effectuate the purposes of HMDA and prevent evasions thereof.21

    16Id.

    17 2015 HMDA Final Rule, supra note 8, at 66157.

    18See id. at 66149, 66160-61.

    19Id. at 66149.

    20Id. at 66160.

    21Id.

    To effectuate this decision, the 2015 HMDA Final Rule defined two new terms: “covered loan,” which is defined to mean “a closed-end mortgage loan or an open-end line of credit that is not an excluded transaction,” 22 and “open-end line of credit,” which is defined to mean an extension of credit that is secured by a lien on a “dwelling” (as that term is defined in the rule) and that is an open-end credit plan as defined in Regulation Z (without regard to certain limitations relevant for Regulation Z, but not Regulation C, purposes).23

    22 12 CFR 1003.2(e).

    23Id. at § 1003.2(o).

    In expanding coverage to include open-end lines of credit, the Bureau recognized that doing so would impose one-time and ongoing operational costs on reporting institutions; that the one-time costs of modifying processes and systems and training staff to begin open-end line of credit reporting likely would impose significant costs on some institutions; and that institutions' ongoing reporting costs would increase as a function of their open-end lending volume.24

    24 2015 HMDA Final Rule, supra note 8, at 66161. The definition of “open-end line of credit” replaced the definition of a “home-equity line of credit. See supra note 9.

    The Bureau sought to avoid imposing these costs on small institutions with limited open-end lending, where the benefits of reporting the data do not justify the costs of reporting.25 In seeking to draw such a line, the Bureau acknowledged that it was handicapped by the lack of available data concerning open-end lending.26 This created challenges both in estimating the distribution of open-end origination volume across financial institutions and estimating the one-time and ongoing costs that would be incurred by institutions of various sizes in collecting and reporting data on open-end lending.

    25 2015 HMDA Final Rule, supra note 8, at 66149.

    26Id.

    With respect to open-end origination volume, the Bureau used multiple data sources, including credit union Call Reports, Call Reports for banks and thrifts, and data from the Bureau's Consumer Credit Panel to develop estimates for different potential thresholds.27 The Bureau assumed that all of the depository institutions that were exempted from HMDA reporting under Regulation C because of their location or asset size would continue to be exempt.28 With respect to the remaining depositories, the Bureau developed the following estimates: 29

    27Id. at 66261, 66275 n.477. As the Bureau explained, credit union Call Reports provide the number of originations of open-end lines of credit secured by real estate but exclude lines of credit with first-lien status and may include business loans that are excluded from reporting under the 2015 HMDA Final Rule. Id. at 66281 n.489.

    28Id. at 66281 n.489. The Bureau limited its estimate to depositories because it believes that most nondepositories do not originate open-end lines of credit. Id. at 66281.

    29 The first row in the chart, labeled “Proposed” assumed that financial institutions would be required to report on their open-end lines of credit regardless of the number originated so long as the institution originated at least 25 closed-end mortgages during each of the prior two calendar years. This row reflects the impact of the rule that the Bureau had proposed. The remaining rows assume that reporting of open-end lines of credit would be required without regard to the number of closed-end loans originated but only if the financial institution originated the number of open-end lines of credit shown in the various rows. Id. at 66281.

    EP20JY17.001

    The Bureau noted that expansions or contractions in the number of financial institutions, or changes in product offerings and demands during implementation could alter the estimated impacts.30

    30Id. at 66275 n.477.

    To estimate the one-time and ongoing costs of collecting and reporting data under HMDA, the Bureau identified seven “dimensions” of compliance operations and used those to define three broadly representative financial institutions according to the overall level of complexity of their compliance operations: “tier 1” (high-complexity); “tier 2” (moderate-complexity); and “tier 3” (low-complexity).31 In estimating costs specific to collecting and reporting data for open-end lines of credit, the Bureau assumed that tier 1 institutions originate more than 7,000 such lines of credit, that tier 2 institutions originate between 200 and 7,000 such lines of credit, and that tier 3 institutions originate fewer than 200 such lines of credit.32 The Bureau then sought to estimate one-time and ongoing costs for the average-size institution in each tier.33

    31Id. at 66261. The seven factors were: The reporting system used; the degree of system integration; the degree of system automation; the compliance program; and the tools for geocoding, performing completeness checks, and editing. Id. at 66269.

    32Id. at 66285.

    33 For purposes of calculating aggregate costs, the Bureau assumed that the average tier 1 institution received 30,000 applications for open-end lines of credit; the average tier 2 institution received 1,000 such applications; and the average tier 3 institution received 150 such applications. Id. at 66286.

    With respect to one-time costs, the Bureau recognized that the one-time cost of reporting open-end lines of credit could be substantial because most financial institutions do not currently report open-end lines of credit and thus would have to develop completely new reporting infrastructures to begin reporting these data. As a result, there would be one-time costs to create processes and systems for open-end lines of credit in addition to the one-time costs to modify processes and systems for other mortgage products.34 However, for tier 3, low-complexity institutions, the Bureau stated that it believed that the additional one-time costs of open-end reporting would be relatively low because the Bureau believed that these institutions are less reliant on information technology systems for HMDA reporting and that they may process open-end lines of credit on the same system and in the same business unit as closed-end mortgage loans, so that their one-time costs would be derived mostly from new training and procedures adopted for the overall changes in the final rule.35

    34Id. at 66264; see also id. at 66284-85.

    35Id. at 66265; see also id. at 66284.

    With respect to ongoing costs, the Bureau acknowledged that costs for open-end reporting vary by institutions due to many factors, such as size, operational structure, and product complexity, and that this variance exists on a continuum that was impossible to fully represent.36 At the same time, the Bureau stated it believed that the HMDA reporting process and ongoing operational cost structure for open-end reporters would be fundamentally similar to closed-end reporting.37 Thus, using the ongoing cost estimates developed for closed-end reporting, the Bureau estimated that for the average tier 1 institutions the ongoing operational costs would be $273,000 per year; for the average tier 2 institution $43,400 per year; and for the average tier 3 institution $8,600 per year.38 These translated into average costs per HMDA record of $9, $43, and $57 respectively.39 Importantly, the Bureau acknowledged that, precisely because no good source of publicly available data exists concerning dwelling-secured open-end lines of credit, it was difficult to predict the accuracy of the Bureau's cost estimates, but also stated its belief that they were reasonably reliable.40

    36Id. at 66285.

    37Id.

    38Id. at 66286.

    39Id.

    40Id. at 66162.

    Drawing on all of these estimates, the Bureau decided to establish an open-end transactional coverage threshold that would require institutions that originate 100 or more open-end lines of credit to collect and report data. The Bureau estimated that this threshold would avoid imposing the burden of establishing open-end reporting on approximately 3,000 predominantly smaller-sized institutions with low open-end lending 41 and would require reporting by only 749 financial institutions, all but 24 of which would also report data on their closed-end mortgage lending.42 The Bureau explained that it believed this threshold appropriately balanced the benefits and burdens of covering institutions based on their open-end mortgage lending.43

    41Id. The estimate of the number of institutions that would be excluded by the transaction coverage threshold was relative to the number that would have been covered under the Bureau's proposal that led to the 2015 HMDA Final Rule. Under that proposal, a financial institution would have been required to report its open-end lines of credit if it had originated at least 25 closed-end mortgage loans in each of the preceding two years without regard to how many open-end lines of credit the institution originated. See 79 FR 51731 (Aug. 29, 2014).

    42Id. at 66281.

    43Id. at 66162.

    To effectuate this decision, the 2015 HMDA Final Rule amended Regulation C to define two discrete thresholds that were intended to work in tandem. First, the rule established an institutional coverage threshold that limits the definition of “depository financial institution” and “nondepository financial institution” to include only those institutions that either originated at least 25 covered closed-end mortgages in each of the preceding years or that originated at least covered 100 open-end lines of credit in each of the two preceding years.44 Second, the rule separately established a transactional coverage threshold for open-end lines of credit by providing that an open-end line of credit is an excluded transaction if the financial institution originated fewer than 100 open-end lines of credit in each of the two preceding calendar years.45

    44 12 CFR 1003.2(g)(1)(v) and (g)(2)(ii). The final rule excluded certain transactions from the definition of covered loans and those excluded transactions do not count towards the institutional transaction threshold.

    45 12 CFR 1003.3(c)(12). As noted above and discussed again below, the exclusion as adopted in the 2015 HMDA Final Rule was intended to apply if the financial institution originated fewer than 100 open-end lines of credit in either of the two preceding calendar years; the current text of the rule was a drafting error that the Bureau has now proposed to correct. The final rule created a separate transactional coverage threshold for closed-end mortgages, treating those as excluded transactions if an institution originated fewer than 25 closed-end mortgage loans in each of the two preceding calendar years. Id. at § 1003.3(c)(11). The Bureau has proposed to change the “each” in this text to “either” as well. See infra note 46, at 19148.

    B. Proposed Technical Corrections and Clarifying Amendments to the 2015 HMDA Final Rule

    On April 13, 2017, the Bureau issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (2017 HMDA Proposal) containing a set of proposed technical corrections and clarifying amendments to the Regulation C as amended by the 2015 HMDA Final Rule.46 Among the corrections included in that proposal is an amendment to the open-end transactional coverage threshold. Under the 2017 HMDA Proposal, an open-end line of credit would be an excluded transaction if the institution originated fewer than 100 open-end lines of credit in either of the two preceding calendar years.47 This would change the provision as adopted by the 2015 HMDA Final Rule to correct a drafting error.

    46 82 FR 19142 (Apr. 25, 2017).

    47Id. at 19168.

    The 2017 HMDA Proposal noted that, under the institutional coverage threshold in the 2015 HMDA Final Rule, the definition of financial institution included only institutions that originate either 25 or more closed-end mortgage loans or 100 or more open-end lines of credit in each of the two preceding calendar years. That threshold and the transaction coverage threshold were intended to be complementary exclusions.48 But, if the transactional coverage threshold is to mirror the loan volume threshold for financial institutions, as the 2017 HMDA Proposal noted, the transactional coverage threshold should provide that an open-end line of credit is an excluded transaction if a financial institution originated fewer than 100 open-end lines of credit in either, rather than each, of the two preceding calendar years.49 The use of the word “each” in the financial transaction threshold in the 2015 HMDA Final Rule thus was a drafting error.50

    48Id. at 19149.

    49Id.

    50Id. at 19148. The proposal similarly would change the transactional coverage threshold for closed-end mortgage loans. Id.

    The 2017 HMDA Proposal sought comment on this and other proposed changes. The comment period closed on May 25, 2017. The Bureau is in the process of reviewing the comments and preparing a final rule, which the Bureau expects to issue on or before the date on which this proposal would be finalized. Accordingly, this proposal reflects the amended language of the 2017 HMDA Proposal.51 Further, if this proposal is finalized, the Bureau would adopt final language that reflects not only this proposal but also the final changes that would be adopted pursuant to the 2017 HMDA Proposal's final rule.

    51 The 2017 HMDA Proposal also added a new category of excluded transaction that would not count towards the institutional transaction threshold, and amended § 1003.2(g)(1)(v) and (g)(2)(ii) accordingly. Those amendments are not reflected in this proposal but are still under consideration by the Bureau.

    C. Questions Regarding the Open-End Transactional Coverage Threshold

    Since the Bureau issued the 2015 HMDA Final Rule, many industry stakeholders have expressed concerns over the levels for the transactional coverage thresholds. The Bureau has sought to listen to and understand the basis for these concerns. In the 2015 HMDA Final Rule, the Bureau modified Regulation C's institutional and transactional coverage to better achieve HMDA's purposes in light of current market conditions and to reduce unnecessary burden on financial institutions. The Bureau adopted uniform loan volume thresholds for depository and nondepository institutions. The loan volume thresholds require an institution that originated at least 25 closed-end mortgage loans or at least 100 open-end lines of credit in each of the two preceding calendar years to report HMDA data, provided that the institution meets all of the other criteria for institutional coverage.

    As discussed above, the Bureau did not have robust data for making the estimates that went into establishing the open-end coverage threshold. The Bureau now has some reason to question whether it struck the appropriate balance in establishing a threshold of 100 open-end lines of credit.

    In striking that balance, the Bureau estimated, based upon 2013 data, that under that threshold 749 depository institutions would be required to report their open-end lines of credit. Since 2013, the number of dwelling-secured open-end lines of credit originated has increased by 36 percent and continues to grow.52 To the extent that institutions that are originating fewer than 100 open-end lines of credit share in that growth, the number of institutions at the margin that will be required to report under the 2015 HMDA Final Rule open-end transaction coverage threshold necessarily will increase.

    52 Experian-Oliver Wyman Market Intelligence Reports show that in 2013 there were 1.14 million home-equity lines of credit originated. In 2016 that number grew to 1.55 million.

    The data available to the Bureau with respect to open-end line of credit institutions by banks and thrifts is not sufficiently robust to allow the Bureau to estimate with any precision the number of such institutions that have crossed over the open-end transactional threshold in the 2015 HMDA Final Rule. However, there is reliable data with respect to credit unions which are required to report open-end originations in their Call Reports. The Bureau's review of credit union Call Report data indicates that the number of credit unions that originated 100 or more open-end lines of credit in 2015 was up 31 percent over 2013.53 If there were a comparable increase among banks and thrifts, that would imply that the total number of open-end reporters under the transactional coverage threshold would be 980, as compared to the estimate of 749 in the 2015 HMDA Final Rule.54 Of course, if volumes have increased at these institutions, the breadth and importance of the credit they extend may also have increased and therefore the benefits from collecting and reporting those data may have as well.

    53 The 2015 HMDA Final Rule contained aggregated estimates for credit unions, banks, and thrifts. In developing those estimates, the Bureau had constructed separate estimates for credit unions using the credit union Call Report data. Specifically, the Bureau estimated that in 2013 there were 534 credit unions that originated 100 or more open-end lines of credit. Based on 2015 credit union Call Report data, that number is now 699.

    54 The estimates contained in the 2015 HMDA Final Rule and those stated in text are based on origination volumes for a single-year. The two-year lookback period intended in the 2015 HMDA Final Rule and contained in the 2017 HMDA Proposal and in this proposal as well—that is, the exclusion for institutions that fell below the transactional coverage threshold in either of the two preceding years—would likely reduce the number of reporters below those stated in text at least during the first year after the rule takes effect. On the other hand, the fact that the estimates are based upon credit union Call Report data which, as noted in the 2015 HMDA Final Rule, exclude open-end lines of credit originated in a first position may mean that the estimates understate the number of reporters.

    Additionally, information received by the Bureau since issuing the 2015 HMDA Final Rule has caused the Bureau to question its assumption, as set forth above, that low-complexity (tier 3) institutions process their home-equity lines of credit on the same data platforms as their closed-end mortgages, which in turn drove the Bureau's corresponding assumptions that the one-time costs for these institutions would be minimal. The Bureau has heard anecdotal evidence suggesting that one-time costs could be as high as $100,000 for tier 3 institutions. The Bureau likewise has heard anecdotal evidence suggesting that the ongoing costs for these institutions—which the Bureau estimated would be under $10,000 per year and add under $60 per line of credit—could be at least three times higher.

    These reports, coupled with the additional evidence discussed above with respect to the number of institutions that would be covered by the open-end transactional coverage test contained in the 2015 HMDA Final Rule, have led the Bureau to believe that it is appropriate to seek comment to determine whether an adjustment in the threshold is appropriate. Although this could be accomplished by delaying the effective date for the reporting requirement for open-end lines of credit in toto, for the reasons set forth above and those articulated in the 2015 HMDA Final Rule, the Bureau continues to believe that it is vitally important to begin to collect data on the burgeoning market for home-equity lines of credit. Accordingly, in light of the considerations set forth above, the Bureau is proposing to increase temporarily the open-end transactional coverage threshold—and to make a parallel change in the institutional coverage threshold—so that institutions originating fewer than 500 open-end lines of credit in either of the two preceding calendar years will not be required to commence collecting or reporting data on their open-end lines of credit until the Bureau has the opportunity to reassess whether to adjust the threshold.

    In developing a proposed temporary adjustment of the threshold, the Bureau has examined the coverage estimates contained in the 2015 HMDA Final Rule, as well as the Bureau's analysis of more recent credit union Call Report data.

    As shown above in Table 8 from the 2015 HMDA Final Rule, the Bureau had estimated, using 2013 data, that a 500 line-of-credit threshold would have reduced the number of reporting institutions from 749 to 231, a 69 percent reduction, while reducing the share of lines of credit reported from 88 percent to 76 percent, a fourteen percent reduction.55 Of the 231 depositories that the Bureau estimated were originating 500 or more open-end lines of credit, 175 were credit unions. The Bureau's review of credit union Call Report data from 2015 suggests that the number of credit unions originating 500 or fewer lines of credit has increased, but at a slightly slower pace than the increase in credit unions originating between 100 and 499 open-end lines of credit.56 Assuming comparable trends among banks and thrifts, the Bureau now estimates that in 2015, 289 depository institutions originated 500 or more open-end lines of credit, as compared to an estimated 980 such institutions that originated at least 100 such lines. On average, the institutions that would be excluded by increasing the threshold to 500 originated fewer than 250 open-end lines of credit per year.57 At the same time, the Bureau estimates that under a 500 loan open-end transactional coverage threshold, roughly three-quarters of the loan application volume in the open-end market would be reported.58

    55 2015 HMDA Final Rule, supra note 8, at 66281. Note that the estimates contained in the 2015 HMDA Final Rule were based on origination volumes in a single year (2013), and did not reflect the intended two-year lookback period for determining whether reporting would be required.

    56 According to the Bureau's analysis of credit union Call Report data, in 2015 there were 219 credit unions that reported originating 500 or more open-end lines of credit.

    57 This estimate is based on an analysis of the credit union Call Report data for 2015. The Bureau also has reviewed 2013 and 2014 credit union Call Report data which likewise shows an average at or below 250 for credit unions originating between 100 and 500 open-end lines of credit.

    58 The 2015 HMDA Final Rule estimated that an open-end transactional coverage threshold of 500 would cover 76 percent of the market. The credit union Call Report data suggests that the share of the credit union market covered by credit unions originating at least 500 open-end lines increased by 6 percent in 2015 relative to 2013. However, we conservatively rely on the estimate contained in the 2015 HMDA Final Rule.

    The Bureau has considered, as an alternative, increasing the open-end transactional coverage threshold to 1,000. The Bureau estimates that there are approximately 110 depository institutions that originated between 500 and 1,000 open-end lines of credit in 2015.59 Increasing the open-end transactional coverage threshold to 1,000 and applying that test to institutions that originated at least 1,000 open-end lines of credit in each of the prior two years (i.e., in 2014 and 2015) would have relieved approximately 90 depository institutions of the obligation to report on their open-end lines of credit in 2016 relative to a 500 threshold. In 2016, those institutions originated, on average, close to 1,000 open-end lines of credit per year.60 Furthermore, a 1,000 loan open-end transactional coverage threshold would reduce coverage of the open-end line of credit market to approximately 68 percent and would reduce coverage of the credit union open-end line of credit marketplace to just 49 percent.61

    59 The estimates contained in the 2015 HMDA Final Rule were predicated on an estimate that in 2013 there were 93 credit unions that originated between 500 and 1,000 open-end lines of credit. The Bureau's analysis of 2015 credit union Call Report data shows that in 2015 there were 95 such credit unions. The Bureau thus assumes that the total number of depository institutions originating between 500 and 1,000 open-end lines of credit held constant between 2013 and 2015.

    60 According to the Bureau's calculations, of the credit unions originating between 500 and 1,000 open-end lines of credit in 2015, fewer than 80 percent had done so in both 2014 and 2015. Those credit unions originated, on average, 959 and 1,032 open-end lines of credit in 2014 and 2015 respectively.

    61 The estimates in the 2015 HMDA Final Rule were predicated on an estimate that an open-end transactional coverage threshold of 1,000 would reduce coverage of the credit union marketplace to 50 percent. The Bureau's review of 2015 credit union Call Report data indicates that remains true.

    Beyond that, the Bureau believes that institutions that have originated at least 500 dwelling-secured open-end lines of credit in each of the last two years—and that are averaging closer to 1,000 such lines—are, at a minimum, moderately-complex operations able to shoulder the costs of collecting and reporting data on their open-end lines of credit. For example, information supplied to the Bureau from the credit league of one State indicates that of the seven credit unions in that State that had originated more than 250 home-equity lines of credit in the first six months of 2016 (and thus were on track to originate 500 for the year), six had assets over $1 billion.

    For all these reasons, the Bureau is proposing to amend the open-end transactional coverage threshold in Regulation C as adopted by the 2015 HMDA Final Rule, effective January 1, 2018, to increase the threshold from 100 to 500 and is proposing to amend the threshold, effective January 1, 2020, to restore it to 100. The Bureau is proposing a parallel change in the institutional coverage threshold. The Bureau believes that this two-year period will give the Bureau sufficient time to assess whether the change being proposed should be made permanent or whether the threshold should be set at some lower level, and to finalize its determination in time to allow institutions who may be covered under the permanent threshold but not by the temporary threshold to complete their implementation process.

    The Bureau seeks comment on whether to increase temporarily the open-end transactional coverage threshold and, if so, whether to raise the threshold to 500 or to a larger or smaller number. The Bureau also seeks comment on whether, if it elects to increase the open-end transactional coverage threshold, it should do so for a period of two years or a longer or shorter period of time.

    The Bureau notes that it is not proposing to adjust the closed-end transactional coverage threshold. As explained above, in establishing that threshold the Bureau was able to base its determination on a robust dataset that enabled the Bureau to evaluate the implications of potential alternative thresholds. This was possible because, prior to January 1, 2017, under Regulation C depository institutions that originated even a single closed-end mortgage and met the location and asset coverage criteria generally were required to report on closed-end mortgage applications under HMDA.

    Relying on these data, the Bureau was able to evaluate the implications of alternative potential transactional coverage threshold for closed-end mortgage loans. The Bureau recognized that setting a threshold above 25 closed-end loans would not significantly impact the value of HMDA data at the national level. But the Bureau also recognized that public officials, community advocates, and researchers rely on HMDA data to analyze access to credit at the neighborhood level and to target programs to assist underserved communities and consumers and that, therefore, it was appropriate to consider local impacts in setting a transactional coverage threshold.62 For example, had the threshold for closed-end mortgage loans been set at 500 loans—the highest level the Bureau considered although well below thresholds urged by some industry stakeholders—more than 5,000 census tracts would have lost 20 percent or more of the then currently-reported HMDA data, of which one-third would have been tracts designated as low- to moderate-income (LMI).63 In contrast, the 25-loan transactional threshold established by the 2015 HMDA Final Rule resulted in only 46 census tracts losing 20 percent or more of their data. Further, the closed-end transactional coverage threshold established by the 2015 HMDA Final Rule also increased reporting by nondepository institutions—and thus increased visibility into their share of the market—by reducing their preexisting threshold from 100 to 25, thereby leveling the playing field.64

    62 2015 HMDA Final Rule, supra note 8, at 66147.

    63Id. at 66279.

    64 The current nondepository institution coverage test includes a loan-volume or asset test, where only nondepository institutions that originated at least 100 applicable loans in the preceding calendar year or had assets of more than $10 million on the preceding December 31 and meet the other applicable criteria are required to report HMDA data. See Section 1026.2 (definition of financial institution).

    Additionally, because many depository financial institutions originating even a small number of loans were at the time of the 2015 HMDA Final Rule required to report under HMDA, in estimating the one-time and incremental ongoing costs of implementing and complying with the final rule, the Bureau was able to draw upon actual experience of institutions of various sizes in collecting and reporting HMDA data.

    Despite the objections the Bureau has heard since issuing the 2015 HMDA Final Rule to the transactional coverage threshold for closed-end mortgage loans, the Bureau does not have reason to believe that it underestimated the costs of implementation or overestimated the adverse consequences of establishing a higher threshold for analyses at the local level. The Bureau also continues to believe that there are significant benefits in obtaining increased visibility into the originations by nondepositories that originate fewer than 100 closed-end mortgages. For these reasons, as well as those set forth in the 2015 HMDA Final Rule, the Bureau does not believe it is necessary or appropriate to reconsider that threshold and therefore is not proposing to do so.

    The Bureau is not proposing in this notice to change the effective date for any other provision of the 2015 HMDA Final Rule or to make any other substantive changes to that rule.

    III. Legal Authority

    The Bureau is issuing this proposal pursuant to its authority under the Dodd-Frank Act and HMDA. This proposed rule consists of amendments to the 2015 HMDA Final Rule.65 Section 1061 of the Dodd-Frank Act transferred to the Bureau the “consumer financial protection functions” previously vested in certain other Federal agencies, including the Board.66 The term “consumer financial protection function” is defined to include “all authority to prescribe rules or issue orders or guidelines pursuant to any Federal consumer financial law, including performing appropriate functions to promulgate and review such rules, orders, and guidelines.” 67 Section 1022(b)(1) of the Dodd-Frank Act authorizes the Bureau's Director to prescribe rules “as may be necessary or appropriate to enable the Bureau to administer and carry out the purposes and objectives of the Federal consumer financial laws, and to prevent evasions thereof.” 68 Both HMDA and title X of the Dodd-Frank Act are Federal consumer financial laws.69 Accordingly, the Bureau has authority to issue regulations to administer HMDA.

    65 2015 HMDA Final Rule, supra note 8, at 66136-37.

    66 12 U.S.C. 5581. Section 1094 of the Dodd-Frank Act also replaced the term “Board” with “Bureau” in most places in HMDA. 12 U.S.C. 2803 et seq.

    67 12 U.S.C. 5581(a)(1)(A).

    68 12 U.S.C. 5512(b)(1).

    69 Dodd-Frank Act section 1002(14), 12 U.S.C. 5481(14) (defining “Federal consumer financial law” to include the “enumerated consumer laws” and the provisions of title X of the Dodd-Frank Act); Dodd-Frank Act section 1002(12), 12 U.S.C. 5481(12) (defining “enumerated consumer laws” to include HMDA).

    HMDA section 305(a) broadly authorizes the Bureau to prescribe such regulations as may be necessary to carry out HMDA's purposes.70 These regulations may include “classifications, differentiations, or other provisions, and may provide for such adjustments and exceptions for any class of transactions, as in the judgment of the Bureau are necessary and proper to effectuate the purposes of [HMDA], and prevent circumvention or evasion thereof, or to facilitate compliance therewith.” 71

    70 12 U.S.C. 2804(a).

    71Id.

    A number of HMDA provisions specify that covered institutions must compile and make their HMDA data publicly available “in accordance with regulations of the Bureau” and “in such formats as the Bureau may require.” 72 HMDA section 304(j)(7) also directs the Bureau to make every effort in prescribing regulations under that subsection to minimize the costs incurred by a depository institution in complying with such regulations.73 HMDA also authorizes the Bureau to issue regulations relating to the timing of HMDA disclosures.74

    72See, e.g., HMDA section 304(a)(1), (j)(2)(A), (j)(3), (m)(2), 12 U.S.C. 2803(a)(1), (j)(2)(A), (j)(3), (m)(2); see also HMDA section 304(b)(6)(I), 12 U.S.C. 2803(b)(6)(I) (requiring covered institutions to use “such form as the Bureau may prescribe” in reporting credit scores of mortgage applicants and mortgagors). HMDA section 304(k)(1) also requires depository institutions covered by HMDA to make disclosure statements available “[i]n accordance with procedures established by the Bureau pursuant to this section.” 12 U.S.C. 2803(k)(1).

    73 12 U.S.C. 2803(j)(7).

    74 HMDA section 304(l)(2)(A), 12 U.S.C. 2803(l)(2)(A) (setting maximum disclosure periods except as provided under other HMDA subsections and regulations prescribed by the Bureau); HMDA section 304(n), 12 U.S.C. 2803(n).

    In preparing this proposed rule, the Bureau has considered the changes below in light of its legal authority under HMDA and the Dodd-Frank Act. The Bureau has determined that each of the changes addressed below is consistent with the purposes of HMDA and is authorized by one or more of the sources of statutory authority identified in this part.

    IV. Section-by-Section Analysis Section 1003.2 Definitions 2(g) Financial Institution 2(g)(1) Depository Financial Institution 2(g)(1)(v) 2(g)(1)(v)(B)

    Regulation C as amended by the 2015 HMDA Final Rule defines “depository financial institution” as a bank, savings association or credit union that meets certain criteria. One of those criteria is that the institution either (A) originated at least 25 closed-end mortgages loans in each of the two preceding calendar years; or (B) originated at least 100 open-end lines of credit in each of the two preceding calendar years. For depositories that do not meet the closed-end mortgage loan component of this test, their status as a depository financial institution under Regulation C turns, in part, on their volume of open-end line of credit originations. Because, as discussed above in section II, the Bureau is proposing to increase temporarily the open-end transactional coverage threshold from 100 to 500, the Bureau is proposing to make a parallel, temporary change in the institutional coverage threshold included in § 1003.2(g) as well. Under this proposed amendment, effective January 1, 2018, a depository institution that did not originate at least 25 closed-end mortgage loans in each of the two preceding years would not be deemed to be a depository financial institution under Regulation C unless it originated 500 or more open-end lines of credit in each of the two preceding years and met the other applicable criteria included in § 1003.2(g)(i).

    In accordance with the proposal with respect to the open-end transactional coverage threshold, the Bureau is proposing conforming amendments to the definition of depository financial institution effective January 1, 2020, to revert to the definition established by the 2015 HMDA Final Rule, i.e., to set the open-end institutional coverage threshold at 100 lines of credit.

    As a result, under this proposal, for calendar years 2018 and 2019, financial institutions that do not meet the closed-end mortgage loan component of the test and that originate between 100 and 499 open-end lines of credit would not meet the definition of “depository financial institution.” Absent further amendments by the Bureau, beginning in calendar year 2020, such depositories would meet the definition of “depository financial institution.”

    The Bureau solicits comment on this proposal.

    2(g)(2) Nondepository Financial Institution 2(g)(2)(ii) 2(g)(2)(ii)(B)

    Under the 2015 HMDA Final Rule a “nondepository financial institution” is defined as a for-profit mortgage lending institution other than a bank, savings association, or credit union that meets certain criteria. One of those criteria is an institutional coverage threshold that is identical to the threshold for depository institutions discussed above. For the reasons discussed above in section II and the section-by-section analysis of § 1003.2(g)(1)(v)(B), the Bureau is proposing conforming amendments to § 1003.2(g)(ii)(B), which includes the open-end loan volume threshold for coverage of nondepository financial institution. Under this proposal, for calendar years 2018 and 2019, the open-end loan volume threshold for institutional coverage of nondepository institutions would be raised from 100 to 500. Absent further amendments by the Bureau, beginning in calendar year 2020, such nondepository institutions would meet the definition of “nondepository financial institution.”

    Comments 2(g)-3 and 2(g)-5 each assumed that the open-end institutional threshold was 100. The proposal would amend these comments effective January 1, 2018, to reflect the temporary higher threshold proposed herein and further amends the comment effective January 1, 2020, to restore the original threshold.

    Section 1003.3 Exempt Institutions and Excluded Transactions 3(c) Excluded transactions 3(c)(12)

    Under Regulation C as amended by the 2015 HMDA Final Rule, an open-end line of credit is an “excluded transaction” and thus not subject to the collection, reporting, and disclosure requirements of Regulation C, if the financial institution originated fewer than 100 open-end lines of credit in each of the two preceding calendar years. As discussed above in section II, the Bureau has previously proposed to amend this provision to substitute the word “either” for “each,” and the Bureau reflects the language of the 2017 HMDA Proposal here. Additionally, for the reasons previously discussed, the Bureau is proposing, effective January 1, 2018, to increase the open-end transactional coverage threshold from 100 to 500 lines of credit. The Bureau is further proposing, effective January 1, 2020, to restore the open-end transactional coverage threshold to the level adopted by the 2015 HMDA Final Rule, i.e., 100 lines of credit.

    Under this proposal, for calendar years 2018 and 2019, a financial institution that originates between 100 and 499 open-end lines of credit in either of the two preceding calendar years would not be required to collect, report, and disclose data on open-end lines of credit. Absent further amendments by the Bureau, beginning in calendar year 2020, such a financial institution would be required to do so.

    The Bureau previously proposed to clarify that financial institutions may voluntarily report open-end lines of credit or closed-end mortgage loans even if the institution may exclude those loans pursuant to the transactional thresholds included in § 1003.3(c)(11) or (12) under the 2015 HMDA Final Rule.75 This proposal reflects this amended language of the 2017 HMDA Proposal and amends that language to reflect the temporary higher threshold proposed herein effective January 1, 2018 and further amends the comment effective January 1, 2020 to restore the original threshold. As noted above, the Bureau is in the process of reviewing the comments on the 2017 HMDA Proposal and preparing a final rule, which the Bureau expects to issue on or before the date on which this proposal would be finalized.

    75 82 FR 19142, 19165 (April 25, 2017).

    Comment 2(c)(12)-1 assumed that the open-end transactional threshold was 100. The proposal would amend this comment effective January 1, 2018, to reflect the temporary higher threshold proposed herein and further amends the comment effective January 1, 2020, to restore the original threshold.

    V. Section 1022(b) of the Dodd-Frank Act

    In developing the proposed rule, the Bureau has considered the potential benefits, costs and impacts required by section 1022(b)(2) of the Dodd-Frank Act. Specifically, section 1022(b)(2) calls for the Bureau to consider the potential benefits and costs of a regulation to consumers and covered persons, including the potential reduction of consumer access to consumer financial products or services, the impact on depository institutions and credit unions with $10 billion or less in total assets as described in section 1026 of the Dodd-Frank Act, and the impact on consumers in rural areas. The Bureau has consulted with, or offered to consult with, the prudential regulators, the Department of the Treasury, the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Department of Housing and Urban Development, the Federal Housing Finance Agency, the Federal Trade Commission, the Department of Veterans Affairs, the Department of Agriculture, the Department of Justice, and the Department of the Treasury regarding consistency with any prudential, market, or systemic objectives administered by these agencies.

    The Bureau previously considered the costs, benefits, and impacts of the 2015 HMDA Final Rule's major provisions, including the institutional coverage threshold and the open-end transactional coverage threshold.76

    76 2015 HMDA Final Rule, supra note 8, at 66282-66287.

    Compared to the baseline established by the 2015 HMDA Final Rule, the proposed temporary increase in the open-end transactional coverage threshold would generally benefit financial institutions that originate between 100 and 499 open-end lines of credit in either of the two preceding calendar years by, at a minimum, allowing them to delay incurring one-time costs and delay the start of ongoing compliance costs associated with collecting and reporting data on open-end lines of credit. Some institutions may incur costs because they have already planned to report open-end lines of credit and now will not be required to and will need to change their systems. The Bureau does not have a reliable basis to estimate those costs. However, as noted above, the Bureau previously proposed to clarify that financial institutions may voluntarily report open-end lines of credit or closed-end mortgage loans even if the institution may exclude those loans pursuant to the transactional thresholds included in § 1003.3(c)(11) or (12) under the 2015 HMDA Final Rule. If the Bureau finalizes this clarification, a temporary increase in the open-end transactional coverage threshold will obviate the need for institutions that are prepared to report open-end lines of credit to change their system. However, to the extent institutions that already have incurred costs in preparing for compliance elect to take advantage of the two-year temporary increase in the open-end transactional coverage threshold, unless the Bureau elects during the two-year review period to make the increase permanent, these institutions would incur one-time expenses which, when added to expenses already incurred, may be greater than the one-time costs that would have been incurred had the institutions completed their compliance work by January 1, 2018. As noted above, the Bureau estimates that roughly 690 such institutions would be able to take advantage of the two-year temporary increase in the open-end transactional coverage threshold.

    The Bureau believes that temporarily increasing the open-end transactional coverage threshold for two years would reduce the benefits to consumers from the open-end reporting provisions of the 2015 HMDA Final Rule as those benefits are described in the rule. However, the Bureau believes that such impact may be minimal because the temporary increase in the open-end transactional coverage threshold would still, in the aggregate, result in reporting on approximately three-quarters of all open-end lines of credit. However, the Bureau recognizes that there may be particular localities where the impact of the temporary increase in the open-end transactional coverage threshold would be more pronounced. The Bureau lacks data to be able to estimate the extent to which that may be true.

    To the extent there are benefits to covered persons resulting from the temporary increase in the open-end transactional coverage threshold, the Bureau believes those benefits would flow almost exclusively to insured depository institutions and credit unions with under $10 billion assets and to a large extent to depository institutions servicing consumers in rural communities. The Bureau does not believe that the proposed temporary increase in the open-end transactional coverage threshold would reduce consumer access to consumer financial products and services, and it may increase consumer access by decreasing the possibility that certain financial institutions increase their pricing as a result of the requirements of the 2015 HMDA Final Rule or seek to cap the number of open-end lines of credit they originate to stay under the open-end transactional coverage threshold.

    The Bureau requests comment on this discussion as well as submission of additional information that could inform the Bureau's consideration of the potential benefits, costs, and impacts of this proposed rule.

    VI. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA),77 as amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996,78 requires each agency to consider the potential impact of its regulations on small entities, including small businesses, small governmental units, and small not-for-profit organizations.79 The RFA defines a “small business” as a business that meets the size standard developed by the Small Business Administration (SBA) pursuant to the Small Business Act.80

    77 Public Law 96-354, 94 Stat. 1164 (1980).

    78 Public Law 104-21, section 241, 110 Stat. 847, 864-65 (1996).

    79 5 U.S.C. 601 through 612. The term “ `small organization' means any not-for-profit enterprise which is independently owned and operated and is not dominant in its field, unless an agency establishes [an alternative definition under notice and comment].” 5 U.S.C. 601(4). The term “ `small governmental jurisdiction' means governments of cities, counties, towns, townships, villages, school districts, or special districts, with a population of less than fifty thousand, unless an agency establishes [an alternative definition after notice and comment].” 5 U.S.C. 601(5).

    80 5 U.S.C. 601(3). The Bureau may establish an alternative definition after consulting with the SBA and providing an opportunity for public comment. Id.

    The RFA generally requires an agency to conduct an initial regulatory flexibility analysis (IRFA) and a final regulatory flexibility analysis (FRFA) of any rule subject to notice-and-comment rulemaking requirements, unless the agency certifies that the rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.81 The Bureau also is subject to certain additional procedures under the RFA involving the convening of a panel to consult with small entity representatives prior to proposing a rule for which an IRFA is required.82

    81 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.

    82 5 U.S.C. 609.

    As discussed above, the Bureau believes that none of the proposed changes would create a significant impact on any covered persons, including small entities. Therefore, an IRFA is not required for this proposal.

    Accordingly, the undersigned certifies that this proposal, if adopted, would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The Bureau requests comment on the analysis above and requests any relevant data.

    VII. Paperwork Reduction Act

    Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), Federal agencies are generally required to seek the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) approval for information collection requirements prior to implementation. The information collection requirements contained in Regulation C have been previously approved by OMB and assigned OMB control number 3170-0008. You may access this information collection on www.reginfo.gov by selecting “Information Collection Review” from the main menu, clicking on “Search,” and then entering the OMB control number. Under the PRA, the Bureau may not conduct or sponsor and, notwithstanding any other provision of law, a person is not required to respond to an information collection unless the information collection displays a valid control number assigned by OMB.

    The Bureau has determined that this proposed rule would not have any new or revised information collection requirements (recordkeeping, reporting, or disclosure requirements) on covered entities or members of the public that would constitute collections of information requiring OMB approval under the PRA. The Bureau welcomes comments on this determination or any other aspects of this proposal for purposes of the PRA. Comments should be submitted to the Bureau as instructed in the addresses part of this notice and to the attention of the Paperwork Reduction Act Officer. All comments will become a matter of public record.

    List of Subjects in 12 CFR Part 1003

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

    Authority and Issuance

    For the reasons set forth above, the Bureau proposes to amend Regulation C, 12 CFR part 1003, as amended October 28, 2015, at 80 FR 66128, and effective January 1, 2018, as set forth below:

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

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

    [The following amendments would be effective January 1, 2018, further amending the sections as amended October 28, 2015, at 80 FR 66128.]

    2. Amend § 1003.2 by revising paragraphs (g)(1)(v)(B) and (g)(2)(ii)(B) to read as follows:
    § 1003.2 Definitions.

    (g) * * *

    (1) * * *

    (v) * * *

    (B) In each of the two preceding calendar years, originated at least 500 open-end lines of credit that are not excluded from this part pursuant to § 1003.3(c)(1) through (10); and

    (2) * * *

    (ii) * * *

    (B) In each of the two preceding calendar years, originated at least 500 open-end lines of credit that are not excluded from this part pursuant to § 1003.3(c)(1) through (10).

    3. Amend § 1003.3 by revising paragraph (c)(12) to read as follows:
    § 1003.3 Exempt institutions and excluded transactions.

    (c) * * *

    (12) An open-end line of credit, if the financial institution originated fewer than 500 open-end lines of credit in either of the two preceding calendar years; or

    4. In Supplement I to Part 1003: a. Under Section 1003.2—Definitions, under 2(g) Financial Institution, paragraphs 3 and 5 are revised. b. Under Section 1003.3—Exempt Institutions And Excluded Transactions, under 3(c) Excluded Transactions, in Paragraph 3(c)(12), paragraph 1 is revised and paragraph 2 is added.

    The revisions and addition read as follows:

    Supplement I to Part 1003—Official Interpretations Section 1003.2—Definitions 2(g) Financial Institution

    3. Merger or acquisition—coverage of surviving or newly formed institution. After a merger or acquisition, the surviving or newly formed institution is a financial institution under § 1003.2(g) if it, considering the combined assets, location, and lending activity of the surviving or newly formed institution and the merged or acquired institutions or acquired branches, satisfies the criteria included in § 1003.2(g). For example, A and B merge. The surviving or newly formed institution meets the loan threshold described in § 1003.2(g)(1)(v)(B) if the surviving or newly formed institution, A, and B originated a combined total of at least 500 open-end lines of credit in each of the two preceding calendar years. Likewise, the surviving or newly formed institution meets the asset-size threshold in § 1003.2(g)(1)(i) if its assets and the combined assets of A and B on December 31 of the preceding calendar year exceeded the threshold described in § 1003.2(g)(1)(i). Comment 2(g)-4 discusses a financial institution's responsibilities during the calendar year of a merger.

    * * *

    5. Originations. Whether an institution is a financial institution depends in part on whether the institution originated at least 25 closed-end mortgage loans in each of the two preceding calendar years or at least 500 open-end lines of credit in each of the two preceding calendar years. Comments 4(a)-2 through -4 discuss whether activities with respect to a particular closed-end mortgage loan or open-end line of credit constitute an origination for purposes of § 1003.2(g).

    Section 1003.3—Exempt Institutions and Excluded Transactions 3(c) Excluded Transactions. Paragraph 3(c)(12).

    1. General. Section 1003.3(c)(12) provides that an open-end line of credit is an excluded transaction if a financial institution originated fewer than 500 open-end lines of credit in either of the two preceding calendar years. For example, assume that a bank is a financial institution in 2019 under § 1003.2(g) because it originated 50 closed-end mortgage loans in 2017, 75 closed-end mortgage loans in 2018, and met all of the other requirements under § 1003.2(g)(1). Also assume that the bank originated 75 and 85 open-end lines of credit in 2017 and 2018, respectively. The closed-end mortgage loans that the bank originated, or for which it received applications, during 2019 are covered loans and must be reported, unless they otherwise are excluded transactions under § 1003.3(c). However, the open-end lines of credit that the bank originated, or for which it received applications, during 2019 are excluded transactions under § 1003.3(c)(12) and need not be reported. See comments 4(a)-2 through -4 for guidance about the activities that constitute an origination.

    2. Voluntary reporting. A financial institution voluntarily may report open-end lines of credit and applications for open-end lines of credit that are excluded transactions because the financial institution originated fewer than 500 open-end lines of credit in either of the two preceding calendar years.

    [The following amendments would be effective January 1, 2020, further amending the sections as amended October 28, 2015, at 80 FR 66128.] 5. Amend § 1003.2 by revising paragraphs (g)(1)(v)(B) and (g)(2)(ii)(B) to read as follows:
    § 1003.2 Definitions.

    (g) * * *

    (1) * * *

    (v) * * *

    (B) In each of the two preceding calendar years, originated at least 100 open-end lines of credit that are not excluded from this part pursuant to § 1003.3(c)(1) through (10); and

    (2) * * *

    (ii) * * *

    (B) In each of the two preceding calendar years, originated at least 100 open-end lines of credit that are not excluded from this part pursuant to § 1003.3(c)(1) through (10).

    6. Amend § 1003.3 by revising paragraph (c)(12) to read as follows:
    § 1003.3 Exempt institutions and excluded transactions.

    (c) * * *

    (12) An open-end line of credit, if the financial institution originated fewer than 100 open-end lines of credit in either of the two preceding calendar years; or

    7. In Supplement I to Part 1003: a. Under Section 1003.2—Definitions, under 2(g) Financial Institution, paragraphs 3 and 5 are revised. b. Under Section 1003.3—Exempt institutions and excluded transactions, under 3(c) Excluded transactions, in paragraph 3(c)(12), paragraph 1 is revised and paragraph 2 is added.

    The revisions and addition read as follows:

    Supplement I to Part 1003—Official Interpretations Section 1003.2—Definitions 2(g) Financial Institution

    3. Merger or acquisition—coverage of surviving or newly formed institution. After a merger or acquisition, the surviving or newly formed institution is a financial institution under § 1003.2(g) if it, considering the combined assets, location, and lending activity of the surviving or newly formed institution and the merged or acquired institutions or acquired branches, satisfies the criteria included in § 1003.2(g). For example, A and B merge. The surviving or newly formed institution meets the loan threshold described in § 1003.2(g)(1)(v)(B) if the surviving or newly formed institution, A, and B originated a combined total of at least 100 open-end lines of credit in each of the two preceding calendar years. Likewise, the surviving or newly formed institution meets the asset-size threshold in § 1003.2(g)(1)(i) if its assets and the combined assets of A and B on December 31 of the preceding calendar year exceeded the threshold described in § 1003.2(g)(1)(i). Comment 2(g)-4 discusses a financial institution's responsibilities during the calendar year of a merger.

    * * *

    5. Originations. Whether an institution is a financial institution depends in part on whether the institution originated at least 25 closed-end mortgage loans in each of the two preceding calendar years or at least 100 open-end lines of credit in each of the two preceding calendar years. Comments 4(a)-2 through -4 discuss whether activities with respect to a particular closed-end mortgage loan or open-end line of credit constitute an origination for purposes of § 1003.2(g).

    Section 1003.3—Exempt Institutions and Excluded Transactions

    3(c) Excluded transactions.

    Paragraph 3(c)(12).

    1. General. Section 1003.3(c)(12) provides that an open-end line of credit is an excluded transaction if a financial institution originated fewer than 100 open-end lines of credit in either of the two preceding calendar years. For example, assume that a bank is a financial institution in 2022 under § 1003.2(g) because it originated 50 closed-end mortgage loans in 2020, 75 closed-end mortgage loans in 2021, and met all of the other requirements under § 1003.2(g)(1). Also assume that the bank originated 75 and 85 open-end lines of credit in 2020 and 2021, respectively. The closed-end mortgage loans that the bank originated, or for which it received applications, during 2022 are covered loans and must be reported, unless they otherwise are excluded transactions under § 1003.3(c). However, the open-end lines of credit that the bank originated, or for which it received applications, during 2022 are excluded transactions under § 1003.3(c)(12) and need not be reported. See comments 4(a)-2 through -4 for guidance about the activities that constitute an origination.

    2. Voluntary reporting. A financial institution voluntarily may report open-end lines of credit and applications for open-end lines of credit that are excluded transactions because the financial institution originated fewer than 100 open-end lines of credit in either of the two preceding calendar years.

    Dated: July 13, 2017. Richard Cordray, Director, Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection.
    [FR Doc. 2017-15220 Filed 7-19-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4810-AM-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2017-0698; Directorate Identifier 2017-NM-047-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) 2017-02-03, which applies to certain The Boeing Company Model 767-200, -300, and -400ER series airplanes. AD 2017-02-03 requires inspection of the plastic potable water coupling, and corrective actions if necessary; installation of new spray shrouds; and inspection of previously installed spray shields, and related investigative and corrective actions if necessary. Since we issued AD 2017-02-03, we have determined that it is necessary to modify a hose assembly installation for certain airplanes, and add airplanes to the applicability. This proposed AD would add airplanes to the applicability and, for certain airplanes, require hose assembly removals and installations. We are proposing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.

    DATES:

    We must receive comments on this proposed AD by September 5, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

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

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

    Fax: 202-493-2251.

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

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

    For service information identified in this NPRM, contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Contractual & Data Services (C&DS), 2600 Westminster Blvd., MC 110-SK57, Seal Beach, CA 90740-5600; telephone 562-797-1717; Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You may view this referenced service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 425-227-1221. It is also available on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2017-0698.

    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-2017-0698; 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:

    Stanley Chen, Aerospace Engineer, Cabin Safety and Environmental Systems Branch, ANM-150S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; phone: 425-917-6585; 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 proposal. Send your comments to an address listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include “Docket No. FAA-2017-0698; Directorate Identifier 2017-NM-047-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

    On January 11, 2017, we issued AD 2017-02-03, Amendment 39-18782 (82 FR 10541, February 14, 2017) (“AD 2017-02-03”), for certain The Boeing Company Model 767-200, -300, and -400ER series airplanes. AD 2017-02-03 requires inspection of the plastic potable water couplings, corrective actions if necessary, and installation of new spray shrouds. It also requires inspection of the prior installed spray shield to determine it has two slits and is installed correctly, and related investigative and corrective actions if necessary. AD 2017-02-03 resulted from a report of a malfunction of the engine indication and crew alerting system (EICAS) during flight. We issued AD 2017-02-03 to prevent an uncontrolled water leak from a defective potable water system coupling, which could cause the main equipment center (MEC) line replaceable units (LRUs) to become wet, resulting in an electrical short and potential loss of several functions essential for safe flight.

    Actions Since AD 2017-02-03 Was Issued

    Since we issued AD 2017-02-03, we have determined that additional airplanes are subject to the unsafe condition and therefore it is necessary to add airplanes to the applicability. We have also determined that the service information specified in AD 2017-02-03 does not adequately address the identified unsafe condition for certain airplanes; therefore, we find it necessary to require, for certain airplanes, removing three hose assemblies and installing four new hose assemblies.

    Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    We reviewed Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-38A0073, Revision 3, dated September 8, 2016 (“Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-38A0073, R3”). The service information describes procedures for, among other actions, removing three hose assemblies and installing four new hose assemblies. 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

    This proposed AD would retain certain requirements of AD 2017-02-03. Although this proposed AD does not explicitly restate the actions in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-38A0073, Revision 2, dated August 10, 2015, that are part of the requirements of AD 2017-02-03, this proposed AD would retain certain requirements. Those requirements are referenced in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-38A0073, R3, which, in turn, is referenced in paragraph (g) of this proposed AD. Paragraph (g) of this proposed AD would require accomplishment of the actions identified as “RC” (required for compliance) in the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-38A0073, R3. This proposed AD would also add airplanes to the applicability. 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-2017-0698.

    Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD affects 139 airplanes of U.S. registry. We estimate the following costs to comply with this proposed AD:

    Estimated Costs for Required Actions Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per
  • product
  • Cost on U.S.
  • operators
  • Inspections (retained actions from AD 2017-02-03) (129 airplanes) Up to 10 work-hours × $85 per hour = $850 $0 $850 $109,650 Installation (retained actions from AD 2017-02-03) (129 airplanes) 3 work-hours × $85 per hour = $255 330 585 75,465 Inspections (new proposed action) (10 airplanes) Up to 10 work-hours × $85 per hour = $850 0 850 8,500 Installation (new proposed actions) (15 airplanes) 3 work-hours × $85 per hour = $255 330 585 8,775

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

    Estimated Cost for On-Condition Actions Labor cost Parts cost Cost per product Up to 4 work-hours × $85 per hour = $340 $53 Up to $393.

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

    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) 2017-02-03, Amendment 39-18782 (82 FR 10541, February 14, 2017), and adding the following new AD: The Boeing Company: Docket No. FAA-2017-0698; Directorate Identifier 2017-NM-047-AD. (a) Comments Due Date

    The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by September 5, 2017.

    (b) Affected ADs

    This AD replaces AD 2017-02-03, Amendment 39-18782 (82 FR 10541, February 14, 2017) (“AD 2017-02-03”).

    (c) Applicability

    This AD applies to The Boeing Company Model 767-200, -300, and -400ER series airplanes, certificated in any category, as identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-38A0073, Revision 3, dated September 8, 2016 (“Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-38A0073, R3”).

    (d) Subject

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

    (e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by a report of a malfunction of the engine indication and crew alerting system (EICAS) during flight. We are issuing this AD to prevent an uncontrolled water leak from a defective potable water system coupling, which could cause the main equipment center (MEC) line replaceable units (LRUs) to become wet, resulting in an electrical short and potential loss of several functions essential for safe flight.

    (f) Compliance

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

    (g) Inspection of Couplings and Installation of Spray Shrouds

    Except as required by paragraph (h) of this AD: At the applicable times specified in paragraph 1.E., “Compliance,” of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-38A0073, R3, do all applicable actions identified as “RC” (required for compliance) in, and in accordance with, the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-38A0073, R3.

    Note 1 to paragraph (g) of this AD:

    Operators can take optional protective measures to cover or shield their equipment against water spray when performing the Potable Water System Leakage Test, as specified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-38A0073, R3.

    (h) Exceptions to the Service Information

    (1) Where Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-38A0073, R3, uses the phrase “after the original issue date of this service bulletin,” for purposes of determining compliance with the requirements of this AD, March 16, 2017 (the effective date of AD 2017-02-03) must be used.

    (2) Where Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-38A0073, R3, uses the phrase “after the Revision 2 date of this service bulletin,” for purposes of determining compliance with the requirements of this AD, March 16, 2017 (the effective date of AD 2017-02-03) must be used.

    (3) Where Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-38A0073, R3, specifies a compliance time “after the Revision 3 date of this service bulletin,” for purposes of determining compliance with the requirements of this AD, the phrase “after the effective date of this AD” must be used.

    (i) Credit for Previous Actions

    (1) For airplanes in Groups 4 through 8, 10, 12, and 13, as identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-38A0073, R3: This paragraph provides credit for the actions specified in paragraph (g) of this AD, if those actions were performed before the effective date of this AD using Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-38A0073, dated November 12, 2013; Boeing Service Bulletin 767-38A0073, Revision 1, dated November 5, 2014; or Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-38A0073, Revision 2, dated August 10, 2015.

    (2) For airplanes in Groups 1 through 3, and Group 9, Configuration 2, as identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-38A0073, R3: This paragraph provides credit for the actions specified in paragraph (g) of this AD, if those actions were performed before the effective date of this AD using Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-38A0073, Revision 2, dated August 10, 2015.

    (j) Parts Installation Prohibition

    As of the effective date of this AD, no person may install any plastic potable water coupling having part number (P/N) CA620 series or P/N CA625 series on any airplane.

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

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

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

    (l) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Stanley Chen, Aerospace Engineer, Cabin Safety and Environmental Systems Branch, ANM-150S, FAA, Seattle ACO, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; phone: 425-917-6585; fax: 425-917-6590; email: [email protected]

    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Contractual & Data Services (C&DS), 2600 Westminster Blvd., MC 110-SK57, Seal Beach, CA 90740-5600; telephone 562-797-1717; Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. 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 July 12, 2017. Dionne Palermo, Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
    [FR Doc. 2017-15120 Filed 7-19-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Internal Revenue Service 26 CFR Parts 1 and 31 [REG-128483-15] RIN 1545-BN12 Return Due Date and Extended Due Date Changes AGENCY:

    Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury.

    ACTION:

    Notice of proposed rulemaking by cross-reference to temporary regulations.

    SUMMARY:

    In the Rules and Regulations section of this issue of the Federal Register, the IRS is issuing temporary regulations that update the due dates and extensions of time to file certain tax returns and information returns. The text of those regulations also serves as the text of these proposed regulations.

    DATES:

    Written or electronic comments and requests for a public hearing must be received by October 18, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Send submissions to: CC:PA:LPD:PR (REG-128483-15), Room 5203, Internal Revenue Service, P.O. Box 7604, Ben Franklin Station, Washington, DC 20044. Submissions may be hand-delivered between the hours of 8 a.m. and 4 p.m. to CC:PA:LPD:PR (REG-128483-15), Courier's Desk, Internal Revenue Service, 1111 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC, or sent via the Federal eRulemaking Portal at www.regulations.gov (IRS REG-128483-15).

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Concerning these proposed regulations, Jonathan R. Black, (202) 317-6845; concerning submissions of comments and/or requests for a hearing, Regina Johnson (202) 317-6901 (not toll-free numbers).

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background and Explanation of Provisions

    Temporary regulations in the Rules and Regulations section of this issue of the Federal Register amend 26 CFR parts 1 and 31. The temporary regulations update the due dates for the income tax returns of corporations and partnerships to reflect section 2006(a) of the Surface Transportation and Veterans Health Care Choice Improvement Act of 2015 (the Surface Transportation Act), Public Law 114-41, 129 Stat. 443 (2015), which amended section 6072 of the Internal Revenue Code. Additionally, the temporary regulations change the duration of automatic extensions of time to file certain tax returns and information returns. The temporary regulations also update the information return due dates to reflect section 201 of the Protecting Americans from Tax Hikes Act of 2015 (PATH Act), Public Law 114-113, Div. Q, 129 Stat. 2242 (2015). The text of those temporary regulations also serves as the text of these proposed regulations, except that the proposed regulations are proposed to be applicable for returns filed on or after the date a Treasury Decision incorporating them as final regulations is published in the Federal Register. The preamble to the temporary regulations explains the temporary regulations and these proposed regulations.

    Special Analysis

    Certain IRS regulations, including these, are exempt from the requirements of Executive Order 12866, as supplemented and reaffirmed by Executive Order 13563. Therefore, a regulatory assessment is not required. These regulations do not impose a collection of information on small entities, therefore the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. chapter 6) does not apply. These regulations only update the due dates and extensions of time to file certain collections of information and include some existing regulatory language concerning collections of information that affect small entities for the convenience of the reader. Pursuant to section 7805(f) of the Internal Revenue Code, these proposed regulations have been submitted to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration for comment on the impact on small businesses.

    Comments and Requests for Public Hearing

    Before these proposed regulations are adopted as final regulations, consideration will be given to any comments that are submitted timely to the IRS as prescribed in the preamble under the ADDRESSES heading. Treasury and the IRS request comments on all aspects of the proposed regulations. All comments submitted will be made available at www.regulations.gov or upon request. A public hearing will be scheduled if requested in writing by any person that timely submits written comments. If a public hearing is scheduled, notice of the date, time, and place for the public hearing will be published in the Federal Register.

    Drafting Information

    The principal author of these regulations is Jonathan R. Black of the Office of the Associate Chief Counsel (Procedure and Administration).

    List of Subjects 26 CFR Part 1

    Income taxes, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    26 CFR Part 31

    Employment taxes, Income taxes, Penalties, Pensions, Railroad retirement, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Social security, Unemployment compensation.

    Proposed Amendments to the Regulations

    Accordingly, 26 CFR parts 1 and 31 are proposed to be amended as follows:

    PART 1—INCOME TAXES Paragraph 1. The authority citation for part 1 continues to read in part as follows: Authority:

    26 U.S.C. 7805 * * *

    Par. 2. Revise paragraph (b)(2)(v)(C) and add paragraph (g) to § 1.1446-3 to read as follows:
    § 1.1446-3 Time and manner of calculating and paying over the 1446 tax.

    (b) * * *

    (2) * * *

    (v) * * *

    (C) [The text of proposed § 1.1446-3(b)(2)(v)(C) is the same as the text of § 1.1446-3T(b)(2)(v)(C) published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register].

    (g) Applicability date. The requirements of paragraph (b)(2)(v)(C) of this section are applicable for returns filed on or after the date a Treasury Decision incorporating these amendments as final regulations is published in the Federal Register.

    Par. 3. Revise paragraph (a)(1) and add paragraph (c) to § 1.6012-6 to read as follows:
    § 1.6012-6 Returns by political organizations.

    (a) * * * (1) [The text of proposed § 1.6012-6(a)(1) is the same as the text of § 1.6012-6T(a)(1) published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register].

    (c) Applicability date. The requirements of paragraph (a)(1) of this section are applicable for returns filed on or after the date a Treasury Decision incorporating these amendments as final regulations is published in the Federal Register.

    Par. 4. Revise paragraphs (e)(2) and (f) of § 1.6031(a)-1 to read as follows:
    § 1.6031(a)-1 Return of partnership income.

    (e) * * *

    (2) [The text of proposed § 1.6031(a)-1(e)(2) is the same as the text of § 1.6031(a)-1T(e)(2) published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register].

    (f) Applicability date. The requirements of paragraph (e)(2) of this section are applicable for returns filed on or after the date a Treasury Decision incorporating these amendments as final regulations is published in the Federal Register.

    Par. 5. Revise § 1.6032-1 to read as follows:
    § 1.6032-1 Returns of banks with respect to common trust funds.

    (a) [The text of proposed § 1.6032-1(a) is the same as the text of § 1.6032-1T(a) published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register].

    (b) The requirements of paragraph (a) of this section are applicable for returns filed on or after the date a Treasury Decision incorporating these amendments as final regulations is published in the Federal Register.

    Par. 6. Revise paragraphs (e) and (k) of § 1.6033-2 to read as follows:
    § 1.6033-2 Returns by exempt organizations (taxable years beginning after December 31, 1969) and returns by certain nonexempt organizations (taxable years beginning after December 31, 1980).

    (e) [The text of proposed § 1.6033-2(e) is the same as the text of § 1.6033-2T(e) published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register].

    (k) Applicability date. The requirements of paragraph (e) of this section are applicable for returns filed on or after the date a Treasury Decision incorporating these amendments as final regulations is published in the Federal Register.

    Par. 7. Revise paragraph (a)(3)(ii) and add paragraph (d) to § 1.6041-2 to read as follows:
    § 1.6041-2 Return of information as to payments to employees.

    (a) * * *

    (3) * * *

    (ii) [The text of proposed § 1.6041-2(a)(3)(ii) is the same as the text of § 1.6041-2T(a)(3)(ii) published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register].

    (d) Applicability date. The requirements of paragraph (a)(3)(ii) of this section are applicable for returns filed on or after the date a Treasury Decision incorporating these amendments as final regulations is published in the Federal Register.

    Par. 8. Revise § 1.6041-6 to read as follows:
    § 1.6041-6 Returns made on Forms 1096 and 1099 under section 6041; contents and time and place for filing.

    (a) and (b) [The text of proposed § 1.6041-6(a) and (b) is the same as the text of § 1.6041-6T(a) and (b) published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register].

    (c) Applicability date. The requirements of paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section are applicable for returns filed on or after the date a Treasury Decision incorporating these amendments as final regulations is published in the Federal Register.

    Par. 9. Revise paragraphs (a) and (d)(1) and (2) and add paragraph (g) to § 1.6072-2 to read as follows:
    § 1.6072-2 Time for filing returns of corporations.

    (a) [The text of proposed § 1.6072-2(a) is the same as the text of § 1.6072-2T(a) published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register].

    (d) * * *

    (1) and (2) [The text of proposed § 1.6072-2(d)(1) and (2) is the same as the text of § 1.6072-2T(d)(1) and (2) published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register].

    (g) Applicability date. The requirements of paragraphs (a) and (d)(1) and (2) of this section are applicable for returns filed on or after the date a Treasury Decision incorporating these amendments as final regulations is published in the Federal Register.

    Par. 10. Revise paragraphs (a) and (c) of § 1.6081-1 to read as follows:
    § 1.6081-1 Extension of time for filing returns.

    (a) [The text of proposed § 1.6081-1(a) is the same as the text of § 1.6081-1T(a) published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register].

    (c) Applicability dates. The requirements of paragraph (a) of this section are applicable for returns filed on or after the date a Treasury Decision incorporating these amendments as final regulations is published in the Federal Register.

    Par. 11. Revise paragraphs (a)(1) and (h) of § 1.6081-2 to read as follows:
    § 1.6081-2 Automatic extension of time to file certain returns filed by partnerships.

    (a) * * * (1) [The text of proposed § 1.6081-2(a)(1) is the same as the text of § 1.6081-2T(a)(1) published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register].

    (h) Applicability date. The requirements of paragraph (a)(1) of this section are applicable for returns filed on or after the date a Treasury Decision incorporating these amendments as final regulations is published in the Federal Register.

    Par. 12. Revise the introductory text of paragraph (a), redesignate paragraph (e) as paragraph (g), revise newly redesignated paragraph (g), and add paragraphs (e) and (f) to § 1.6081-3 to read as follows:
    § 1.6081-3 Automatic extension of time for filing corporation income tax returns.

    (a) [The text of the introductory text of proposed § 1.6081-3(a) is the same as the text of the introductory text of § 1.6081-3T(a) published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register].

    (e) and (f) [The text of proposed § 1.6081-3(e) and (f) is the same as the text of § 1.6081-3T(e) and (f) published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register].

    (g) Applicability date. The requirements of paragraphs (a), (e), and (f) of this section are applicable for returns filed on or after the date a Treasury Decision incorporating these amendments as final regulations is published in the Federal Register.

    Par. 13. Revise paragraphs (a)(1) and (f) of § 1.6081-5 to read as follows:
    § 1.6081-5 Extensions of time in the case of certain partnerships, corporations and U.S. citizens and residents.

    (a) * * *

    (1) [The text of proposed § 1.6081-5(a)(1) is the same as the text of § 1.6081-5T(a)(1) published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register].

    (f) Applicability date. The requirements of paragraph (a)(1) of this section are applicable for returns filed on or after the date a Treasury Decision incorporating these amendments as final regulations is published in the Federal Register.

    Par. 14. Revise paragraphs (a)(1) and (g) of § 1.6081-6 to read as follows:
    § 1.6081-6 Automatic extension of time to file estate or trust income tax return.

    (a) * * * (1) [The text of proposed § 1.6081-6(a)(1) is the same as the text of § 1.6081-6T(a)(1) published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register].

    (g) Applicability date. The requirements of paragraph (a)(1) of this section are applicable for returns filed on or after the date a Treasury Decision incorporating these amendments as final regulations is published in the Federal Register.

    Par. 15. Revise the section heading and paragraphs (a), (b)(1) and (3), and (c) through (f) of § 1.6081-9 to read as follows:
    § 1.6081-9 Automatic extension of time to file exempt or political organization returns.

    (a) [The text of proposed § 1.6081-9(a) is the same as the text of § 1.6081-9T(a) published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register].

    (b) * * *

    (1) [The text of proposed § 1.6081-9(b)(1) is the same as the text of § 1.6081-9T(b)(1) published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register].

    (3) [The text of proposed § 1.6081-9(b)(3) is the same as the text of § 1.6081-9T(b)(3) published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register].

    (c) through (e) [The text of proposed § 1.6081-9(c) through (e) is the same as the text of § 1.6081-9T(c) through (e) published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register].

    (f) Applicability date. The requirements of paragraphs (a), (b)(1) and (3), and (c) through (e) of this section are applicable for returns filed on or after the date a Treasury Decision incorporating these amendments as final regulations is published in the Federal Register.

    PART 31—EMPLOYMENT TAXES AND COLLECTION OF INCOME TAX AT THE SOURCE Par. 16. The authority citation for part 31 continues to read in part as follows: Authority:

    26 U.S.C. 7805 * * *

    Par. 17. Revise paragraph (a)(3) and add paragraph (g) to § 31.6071(a)-1 to read as follows:
    § 31.6071(a)-1 Time for filing returns and other documents.

    (a) * * *

    (3) [The text of proposed § 31.6071(a)-1(a)(3) is the same as the text of § 31.6071(a)-1T(a)(3) published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register]

    (g) Applicability date. The requirements of paragraph (a)(3) of this section are applicable for returns filed on or after the date a Treasury Decision incorporating these amendments as final regulations is published in the Federal Register.

    Kirsten Wielobob, Deputy Commissioner for Services and Enforcement.
    [FR Doc. 2017-15211 Filed 7-18-17; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers 32 CFR Part 644 33 CFR Chapter II 36 CFR Parts 312, 327, 328, 330, and 331 [COE-2017-0004] United States Army, Corps of Engineers; Subgroup to the DoD Regulatory Reform Task Force, Review of Existing Rules AGENCY:

    U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, DoD.

    ACTION:

    Request for comment.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with Executive Order 13777, “Enforcing the Regulatory Reform Agenda,” the United States Army, Corps of Engineers Subgroup to the DoD Regulatory Reform Task Force is seeking input on its existing regulations that may be appropriate for repeal, replacement, or modification. See the Supplementary Information section below for additional guidance.

    DATES:

    Interested parties should submit written comments to the address shown below on or before September 18, 2017, to be considered.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may send comments, identified by docket number COE-2017-0004, by any of the following methods:

    Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Docket number COE-2017-0004. Follow the instructions for sending comments.

    Email: [email protected] and include docket number COE-2017-0004 in the subject line of the message.

    Mail: Headquarters, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Attn: CECW-CO-N (Ms. Mary Coulombe), 441 G Street NW., Washington, DC 20314-1000.

    Hand Delivery/Courier: Due to security requirements, we cannot receive comments by hand delivery or courier.

    Instructions: Direct your comments to docket number COE-2017-0004. 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 commenter indicates that the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI, or otherwise protected, through regulations.gov or email. The regulations.gov Web site is an anonymous access system, which means we will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email directly to the Corps without going through 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, we recommend that you include your name and other contact information in the body of your comment and also include your contact information with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If we cannot read your comment because of technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, we may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic comments should avoid the use of any special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.

    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or comments received, go to www.regulations.gov. All documents in the docket are listed. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, such as CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ms. Mary Coulombe, 202-761-1228, [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    On February 24, 2017, the President signed Executive Order (E.O.) 13777, “Enforcing the Regulatory Reform Agenda,” which established a Federal policy “to alleviate unnecessary regulatory burdens” on the American people.

    Section 3(a) of the E.O. directs Federal agencies to establish a Regulatory Reform Task Force (Task Force). One of the duties of the Task Force is to evaluate existing regulations and “make recommendations to the agency head regarding their repeal, replacement, or modification.” The E.O. further asks that each Task Force “attempt to identify regulations that:

    (i) Eliminate jobs, or inhibit job creation; (ii) are outdated, unnecessary, or ineffective; (iii) impose costs that exceed benefits; (iv) create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with regulatory reform initiatives and policies; (v) are inconsistent with the requirements of section 515 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriation Act, 2001 (44 U.S.C. 3516 note), or the guidance issued pursuant to that provision in particular those regulations that rely in whole or in part on data, information, or methods that are not publicly available or that are insufficiently transparent to meet the standard of reproducibility; or (vi) derive from or implement Executive Orders or other Presidential directives that have been subsequently rescinded or substantially modified.”

    Section 3(e) of the E.O. 13777 calls on the Task Force to “seek input and other assistance, as permitted by law, from entities significantly affected by Federal regulations, including State, local, and tribal governments, small businesses, consumers, non-governmental organizations, trade associations” on regulations that meet some or all of the criteria above. Through this notice, the United States Army, Corps of Engineers is soliciting such input from the public to inform evaluation of the United States Army, Corps of Engineers existing regulations by the Task Force's United States Army, Corps of Engineers Subgroup. Although the agency will not respond to each individual comment, the United States Army, Corps of Engineers may follow-up with respondents to clarify comments. The United States Army, Corps of Engineers values public feedback and will consider all input that it receives. In addition to the regulations listed below, we are open to receiving comments on other Corps of Engineers regulations as well.

    The Corps regulations subject to this review are:

    • 32 CFR part 644—Real Estate Handbook • 33 CFR part 203—Emergency Employment of Army and Other Resources, Natural Disaster Procedures • 33 CFR part 207—Navigation Regulations • 33 CFR part 208—Flood Control Regulations • 33 CFR part 209—Administrative Procedure • 33 CFR part 210—Procurement Activities of the Corps of Engineers • 33 CFR part 214—Emergency Supplies of Drinking Water • 33 CFR part 220—Design Criteria for Dam and Lake Projects • 33 CFR part 221—Work for Others • 33 CFR part 222—Engineering and Design • 33 CFR part 223—Boards, Commissions, and Committees • 33 CFR part 230—Procedures for Implementing NEPA • 33 CFR part 236—Water Resource Policies and Authorities: Corps of Engineers Participation in Improvements for Environmental Quality • 33 CFR part 238—Water Resources Policies and Authorities: Flood Damage Reduction Measures in Urban Areas • 33 CFR part 239—Water Resources Policies and Authorities: Federal Participation in Covered Flood Control Channels • 33 CFR part 240—General Credit for Flood Control • 33 CFR part 241—Flood Control Cost-sharing Requirements Under the Ability to Pay Provision • 33 CFR part 242—Flood Plain Management Services Program Establishment of Fees for Cost Recovery • 33 CFR part 245—Removal of Wrecks and Other Obstructions • 33 CFR part 263—Continuing Authorities Programs • 33 CFR part 273—Aquatic Plant Control • 33 CFR part 274—Pest Control Program for Civil Works Projects • 33 CFR part 276—Water Resources Policies and Authorities: Application of Section 134a of Public Law 94-587 • 33 CFR part 277—Water Resources Policies and Authorities: Navigation Policy: Cost Apportionment of Bridge Alterations • 33 CFR part 279—Resource Use: Establishment of Objectives • 33 CFR part 320—General Regulatory Policies • 33 CFR part 321—Permits for Dams and Dikes in Navigable Waters of the United States • 33 CFR part 322—Permits for Structures or Work In or Affecting Navigable Waters of the United States • 33 CFR part 323—Permits for Discharges of Dredged or Fill Material into Waters of the United States • 33 CFR part 324—Permits for Ocean Dumping of Dredged Material • 33 CFR part 325—Processing of Department of the Army permits • 33 CFR part 326—Enforcement • 33 CFR part 327—Public Hearings • 33 CFR part 328—Definition of Waters of the United States • 33 CFR part 329—Definition of Navigable Waters of the United States • 33 CFR part 330—Nationwide Permit Program • 33 CFR part 331—Administrative Appeal Process • 33 CFR part 332—Compensatory Mitigation for Losses of Aquatic Resources • 33 CFR part 334—Danger Zone and Restricted Area Regulations • 33 CFR part 335—Operation and Maintenance of Army Corps of Engineers Civil Works Projects Involving the Discharge of Dredged or Fill Material into Waters of the United States or Ocean Waters • 33 CFR part 336—Factors to be Considered in the Evaluation of Army Corps of Engineers Dredging Projects Involving the Discharge of Dredged Material into Waters of the United States and Ocean Waters • 33 CFR part 337—Practice and Procedure • 33 CFR part 338—Other Corps Activities Involving the Discharge of Dredged Material or Fill into Waters of the United States • 33 CFR part 384—Intergovernmental Review of Department of the Army Corps of Engineers Programs and Activities • 33 CFR part 385—Programmatic Regulations for the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan • 36 CFR part 312—Prohibition of Discriminatory Practices in Water Resources Development Projects • 36 CFR part 327—Rules and Regulations Governing Public Use of Water Resource Development Projects Administered by the Chief of Engineers • 36 CFR part 328—Regulation of Seaplane Operations at Civil Works Water Resource Development Projects Administered by the Chief of Engineers • 36 CFR part 330, Regulation of Law Enforcement Services Contracts at Civil Works Water Resources Projects Administered by the Chief of Engineers • 36 CFR part 331—Regulations Governing the Protection, Use, and Management of the Falls of Ohio National Wildlife Conservation Area, Kentucky and Indiana Dated: July 17, 2017. Jeffery A. Anderson, Colonel, U.S. Army, Chief of Staff.
    [FR Doc. 2017-15231 Filed 7-19-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3720-58-P
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R01-OAR-2016-0110; A-1-FRL-9965-12Region 1] Air Plan Approval; ME; Regional Haze 5-Year Progress Report AGENCY:

    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    ACTION:

    Proposed rule.

    SUMMARY:

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve Maine's regional haze progress report, submitted on February 23, 2016, as a revision to its State Implementation Plan (SIP). Maine's SIP revision addresses requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA) and EPA's rules that require states to submit periodic reports describing progress toward reasonable progress goals (RPGs) established for regional haze and a determination of the adequacy of the State's existing regional haze SIP. Maine's progress report notes that Maine has implemented the measures in the regional haze SIP due to be in place by the date of the progress report and that visibility in federal Class I areas affected by emissions from Maine is improving and has already met the applicable RPGs for 2018. EPA is proposing approval of Maine's determination that the State's regional haze SIP is adequate to meet these reasonable progress goals for the first implementation period covering through 2018 and requires no substantive revision at this time.

    DATES:

    Written comments must be received on or before August 21, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R01-OAR-2016-0110 at http://www.regulations.gov, or via email to [email protected] For comments submitted at Regulations.gov, follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. For either manner of submission, the EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional submission methods, please contact the person identified in the For Further Information Contact section. For the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Anne McWilliams, Air Quality Unit, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England Regional Office, 5 Post Office Square—Suite 100, (Mail Code OEP05-02), Boston, MA 02109—3912, telephone number (617) 918-1697, fax number (617) 918-0697, email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

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

    Table of Contents I. Background II. EPA's Evaluation of Maine's SIP Revision A. Regional Haze Progress Report B. Determination of Adequacy of Existing Regional Haze Plan III. Proposed Action IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews I. Background

    States are required to submit a progress report in the form of a SIP revision that evaluates progress towards the RPGs for each mandatory Class I Federal area 1 (Class I area) within the state and in each Class I area outside the state which may be affected by emissions from within the state. See 40 CFR 51.308(g). In addition, the provisions under 40 CFR 51.308(h) require states to submit, at the same time as the 40 CFR 51.308(g) progress report, a determination of the adequacy of the state's existing regional haze SIP. The progress report SIP is due five years after submittal of the initial regional haze SIP. On December 9, 2010, the Maine Department of Environmental Protection (ME DEP) submitted the State's first regional haze SIP in accordance with 40 CFR 51.308.2

    1 Areas designated as mandatory Class I Federal areas consist of national parks exceeding 6000 acres, wilderness areas and national memorial parks exceeding 5000 acres, and all international parks that were in existence on August 7, 1977 (42 U.S.C. 7472(a)). Listed at 40 CFR part 81 Subpart D.

    2 On April 24, 2012, EPA approved Maine's Regional Haze SIP submittal addressing the requirements of the first implementation period for regional haze. See 77 FR 24385.

    On February 23, 2016, ME DEP submitted a revision to the Maine SIP detailing the progress made in the first planning period toward implementation of the Long Term Strategy (LTS) outlined in its 2010 regional haze SIP submittal, the visibility improvement measured at the Class I areas affected by emissions from Maine, and a determination of the adequacy of the State's existing regional haze SIP. EPA is proposing to approve Maine's February 23, 2016 SIP submittal.

    II. EPA's Evaluation of Maine's SIP Revision

    On February 23, 2016, Maine submitted its “Regional Haze 5-Year Progress Report” (Progress Report) to EPA as a SIP revision.

    Maine is home to three Class I areas: Acadia National Park (Acadia), Roosevelt-Campobello International Park (RCIP), and Moosehorn Wilderness Area (Moosehorn). Emissions from Maine sources were also found to be contributing to visibility impairment at nearby Great Gulf Wilderness Area (Great Gulf) in New Hampshire. See 76 FR 73956 (November 29, 2011).

    Through the consultation process, Maine agreed to pursue the coordinated course of action agreed to by the Mid-Atlantic/Northeast Visibility Union (MANE-VU) 3 to assure reasonable progress toward preventing any future, and remedying any existing, impairment of visibility in the mandatory Class I areas within the MANE-VU region. These strategies are commonly referred to as the MANE-VU “Ask.” The MANE-VU “Ask” includes: A timely implementation of best available retrofit technology (BART) requirements; 90 percent or more reduction in sulfur dioxide (SO2) emissions at 167 electrical generating units (EGUs) “stacks” identified by MANE-VU (or comparable alternative measures); lower sulfur fuel oil (with limits specified for each State); and continued evaluation of other control measures.4 In summary, Maine is on track to fulfill the MANE-VU “Ask” by meeting the deadlines for BART requirements, as of the date of the Progress Report, for all BART-eligible facilities described in the Progress Report, adopting a low sulfur fuel oil strategy requiring the use of 0.0015% sulfur by weight in distillate and 0.5% sulfur by weight residual fuel oil by July 1, 2018, and reducing SO2 emissions by 57% from the State's one identified contributing EGU, Florida Power and Light's Wyman Station (Wyman). An additional reduction in SO2 emissions from Wyman is expected with the implementation of 0.5% sulfur by weight residual oil requirement by July 1, 2018.

    3 MANE-VU is a collaborative effort of State governments, Tribal governments, and various federal agencies established to initiate and coordinate activities associated with the management of regional haze, visibility and other air quality issues in the Northeastern United States. Member State and Tribal governments include: Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Penobscot Indian Nation, Rhode Island, and Vermont.

    4 The MANE-VU “Ask” was structured around the finding that SO2 emissions were the dominate visibility impairing pollutant at the Northeastern Class I areas and electrical generating units comprised the largest SO2 emission sector. See “Regional Haze and Visibility in the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic States,” January 31, 2001.

    A. Regional Haze Progress Report

    This section includes the EPA's analysis of Maine's Progress Report SIP submittal, and an explanation of the basis of our proposed approval.

    Maine's 2010 regional haze SIP included the following key measures: Implementation of BART for eligible sources, reducing the sulfur in fuel oil content, and reducing SO2 emissions from the Maine EGU identified as contributing to visibility impairment at nearby Class I areas.

    In the Maine 2010 Regional Haze SIP, ME DEP identified 10 facilities subject to BART. For eight of these facilities, the existing controls were determined to be BART. The remaining two sources eligible for BART controls were: Wyman Boiler #3 and Verso Androscoggin at Jay Boilers #1 and #2. As documented in Table 3-1 of the Maine Progress Report, each of these two sources has implemented a permit revision, approved in EPA's April 24, 2012 approval of Maine's regional haze SIP (77 FR 24385), which requires the use of 0.7% sulfur by weight fuel oil by the BART deadline of 2013.5

    5 See EPA's Proposed Approval of Maine's Regional Haze SIP (76 FR 73956, November 29, 2011) for a full discussion of Maine's BART analysis.

    Maine's Progress Report notes the implementation of the MANE-VU “Ask” for sulfur content of fuel oil. The Maine statute, approved by the EPA as part of Maine's regional haze plan, lowers the sulfur content of all distillate fuel oils to 0.0015% sulfur by weight and residual oils to 0.5% sulfur beginning July 1, 2018.6

    6 Maine's Sulfur in Fuel Statute 38 MRSA Section 603-A subsection 2(A) was approved into the Maine SIP on April 24, 2012. See 79 FR 24385.

    Maine has two EGUs among the 167 EGUs stacks identified for control of sulfur dioxide emission in the MANE-VU “Ask.” These stacks are Wyman units #3 and #4. As previously discussed above, unit #3 was required to reduce the sulfur in fuel content to 0.7% by 2013 with a further reduction to 0.5% sulfur by weight in 2018, as required by Maine's sulfur in fuels statute. Unit #4 is following the same timeline. The Progress Report indicates a 1,138 ton/year SO2 (or 57%) emission reduction from Wyman thus far. An additional reduction in SO2 emission is expected from the required use of 0.5% sulfur by weight fuel oil by 2018.

    The Maine Progress Report also includes the status of SO2 emission reductions from states that affect Class I areas in MANE-VU relative to the MANE-VU “Ask.” 7 Maine consulted with states in the eastern United States that affect visibility at the Class I areas at Acadia, Moosehorn, and RCIP, outlining how they could meet the MANE-VU “Ask” and help achieve the progress goals for Class I areas in Maine and other MANE-VU States. These emission reductions were included in the modeling that predicted progress toward meeting RPGs. The EPA is proposing that Maine's summary of the status of the implementation of measures in its Progress Report adequately addresses the applicable provisions under 40 CFR 51.308(g), as the State demonstrated the implementation of measures within Maine, including applying BART at subject sources.

    7 Memorandum from NESCAUM to MANE-VU “Overview of State and Federal Actions Relative to MANE-VU Asks” dated March 28, 2013. http://www.nescaum.org/documents/summary-memo-mane-vuasks-20130328-fianl.pdf/.

    During the development of the regional haze SIP for the first planning period, MANE-VU and Maine determined that SO2 was the greatest contributor to anthropogenic visibility impairment at the State's Class I areas. Therefore, the bulk of visibility improvement achieved in the first planning period was expected to result from reductions in SO2 emissions from sources inside and outside of the State. Table 6-1 of Maine's 2016 Progress Report details the SO2 emission reductions from the 2002 Maine regional haze SIP baseline to 2014 for not only the targeted Wyman units, but all Maine EUGs.8 The Maine EGUs show an emission reduction from 2,022 tons SO2 in 2002 to 856 tons SO2 in 2014, a reduction of 57%. Oxides of nitrogen (NOX) emissions from these same sources were also reduced from 1,154 tons in 2002 to 539 tons in 2014, a reduction of 53%.

    8 Maine's Progress Report SIP includes annual unit-level emissions data for SO2 and NOX from EGUs from EPA's Clean Air Markets Division (CAMD) for the years 2002 and 2014.

    EPA is proposing to find that Maine has adequately addressed the applicable provisions of 40 CFR 51.308(g). Maine has detailed the SO2 and NOX reductions from the 2002 regional haze baseline by using the most recently available year of data at the time of the development of Maine's Progress Report, which is 2014.

    The provisions under 40 CFR 51.308(g) also require that States with Class I areas within their borders provide information on current visibility conditions and the difference between current visibility conditions and baseline visibility conditions expressed in terms of five-year averages of these annual values.

    Maine is home to three Class I areas; Acadia, RCIP, and Moosehorn. Maine relies on the Interagency Monitoring of Protected Visual Environments (IMPROVE) program monitoring network for visibility measurements. One IMPROVE monitor is located within Acadia. A second IMPROVE monitor is located one mile northeast of Moosehorn. The Moosehorn monitor also serves as the monitor for nearby RCIP. In the Progress Report, ME DEP provides the data in deciviews (dv) 9 for the baseline 2000-2004 five-year average visibility, the most recent 2010-2014 five-year average visibility, the 2018 RPG from the 2010 regional haze SIP, and the calculated visibility improvement. See Table 1.

    9 The deciview is a measure for tracking progress in improving visibility. Each deciview change is an incremental change in visibility perceived by the human eye. The preamble to the Regional Haze Rule provides additional details about the deciview (64 FR 35714 (July 1, 1999)).

    Table 1—Observed Visibility vs. Established Visibility Goals (deciviews) for Acadia and Moosehorn Baseline
  • 2000-2004
  • 5-year
  • average
  • visibility
  • (dv)
  • Most recent
  • 2010-2014
  • 5-year
  • average
  • visibility
  • (dv)
  • Visibility
  • improvement
  • (dv)
  • 2018
  • Reasonable
  • progress
  • goal
  • (dv)
  • Meets 2018
  • progress
  • goals?
  • 20% Most Impaired Days Acadia 22.9 17.5 5.4 19.4 Yes. Moosehorn 21.7 16.5 5.2 19.0 Yes. 20% Least Impaired Days Acadia 8.8 7.0 1.8 8.3 Yes. Moosehorn 9.2 6.7 2.5 8.6 Yes.

    The baseline visibility for Acadia and Moosehorn was 22.9 dv and 21.7 dv, respectively, on the 20% most impaired days. On the 20% least impaired days, the baseline visibility was 8.8 dv and 9.2 dv for these two sites, respectively. The most recent five-year average data for both sites shows an improvement of more than 5 dv on the 20% most visibility impaired days and no visibility degradation on the 20% least impaired days. The 2016 Progress Report demonstrates that the State has already achieved the 2018 RPG for the 20% most impaired days and ensured no visibility degradation for the 20% least impaired days for the first planning period. The Class I area outside of Maine affected by sources in Maine also has achieved the 2018 RPGs.

    EPA is proposing to find that Maine provided the required information regarding visibility conditions to meet the applicable provisions under 40 CFR 51.308(g), specifically providing baseline visibility conditions (2000-2004), current conditions based on the most recently available IMPROVE monitoring data (2010-2014), and a comparison with the RPGs.

    In its Progress Report SIP, Maine presents data from statewide emissions inventories developed for the years 2002, 2011, and 2014 (EGUs only), and projected inventories for 2018 for SO2, NOX, fine particulate matter (PM2.5), and volatile organic compounds (VOC).10 Maine's emissions inventories include the following source classifications; Point EGUs, Point Non-EGU, Area, On-Road Mobile, and Non-road. From 2002 through 2014, Maine's overall EGU SO2 emissions were reduced from 2,022 tons to 856 tons, well below the 2018 projected level of 7,422 tons. The largest SO2 sector, Point Non-EGU, saw emissions drop from 21,709 tons in 2002 to 6,434 tons in 2011, well below the 18,492 tons projected for 2018. Overall, State SO2 emissions dropped from 39,589 tons in 2002 to 15,528 tons in 2011, below the 2018 projection of 31,830 tons. Statewide NOX emissions experienced a similar decrease. Overall, State NOX emissions dropped from 91,928 tons in 2002 to 62,633 tons in 2011. The 2018 projected NOX emissions is 41,922 tons. Additional NOX reductions are expected from the mobile sector. Finally, ME DEP indicated that based on 2011 emission data, the State has already achieved the 2018 projected emissions reduction for direct PM2.5 (2% reduction) and VOC (20% reduction).

    10 The 2002 inventory is the MANE-VU V3.3 which is projected to 2018. The 2011 inventory is based on the 2011 National Emission Inventory (NEI). The 2014 inventory was the most recent year of Clean Air Markets Division (CAMD) inventory data as reported to EPA.

    EPA is proposing that Maine has adequately addressed the applicable provisions under 40 CFR 51.308. ME DEP compares the most recent updated emission inventory data available at the time of development of the Progress Report with the baseline emissions in the regional haze SIP. The Progress Report appropriately details the 2011 SO2, NOX, PM2.5, and VOC reductions achieved, by sector, thus far in the regional haze planning period. In addition, the State provided the most recent annual SO2 and NOX emission data for EGUs.

    In its Progress Report SIP, Maine states that sulfates continue to be the biggest single contributor to regional haze at Acadia, Moosehorn, RCIP, and Great Gulf. While Maine mainly focused its analysis on addressing large SO2 emissions from point sources, the State did not find any significant changes in NOX and PM2.5 which might impede or limit progress during the first planning period. In addition, ME DEP cited the 2013 Northeast States for Coordinated Air Use Management (NESCAUM) report, discussed below, which indicates that all of the MANE-VU Class I areas are on track to meet the 2018 visibility goals established by the States in their Regional Haze SIPs.11

    11 NESCAUM for MANE-VU, “Tracking Visibility Progress 2004-2011,” revised May 24, 2013. http://www.nescaum.org/documents/manevu-trends-2004-2011-report-final-20130430.pdf/view. The report was later updated with 2014 IMPROVE data.

    EPA is proposing to conclude that Maine has adequately addressed the applicable provisions under 40 CFR 51.308(g). The State adequately demonstrated that there are no significant changes in emissions of SO2, PM2.5, or NOX within the State which have impeded progress in reducing emissions and improving visibility in the Class I areas impacted by Maine sources.

    In its Progress Report SIP, ME DEP states that the elements and strategies relied on in its original Regional Haze SIP are sufficient to enable Maine and neighboring States to meet all RPGs. To support this conclusion, ME DEP notes in Table 7-1 of the Progress Report that the 2014 EGU SO2 emissions from the entire MANE-VU area are already less than the 2018 projections for that area (323,704 tons versus 365,024 tons). In addition, Maine discusses visibility data from Tracking Visibility Progress, 2004-2011, prepared by NESCAUM, which updated the progress at MANE-VU Class I areas during the five-year period ending in 2014. The data included information for the Maine Class I areas, between 2000 and 2014, in the context of short- and long-term visibility goals. The report indicates that visibility impairment on the best and worst days from 2000-2014 have dropped at Acadia, Moosehorn, and Great Gulf. Maine notes the NESCAUM report indicates that all the MANE-VU Class I states continue to be on track to meet their 2018 RPGs for improved visibility and that further progress may occur through recently adopted or proposed regulatory programs. Based upon the NESCAUM report and visibility data, Maine states in its Progress Report that visibility improvement at Acadia, Moosehorn, RCIP, and Great Gulf has occurred for the most impaired days and no degradation of visibility has occurred for the least impaired days. Therefore, Maine finds that Acadia, Moosehorn, RCIP, and Great Gulf are on track to meet the RPGs for 2018 based on observed visibility improvement.

    EPA is proposing to conclude that Maine has adequately addressed the applicable provisions under 40 CFR 51.308(g). EPA views this requirement as an assessment that should evaluate emissions and visibility trends and other readily available information. In its Progress Report, Maine describes the improving visibility trends using data from the IMPROVE network and the downward emission trends in key pollutants in the State and the MANE-VU region. Maine determined that the State's regional haze SIP is sufficient for the three Class I areas within the State and the Class I area outside of the State impacted by the State's emissions (Great Gulf) to meet their RPGs.

    Maine's visibility monitoring strategy relies upon participation in the IMPROVE network. The IMPROVE monitor serving Acadia is located within Acadia National Park. The IMPROVE monitor serving Moosehorn and RCIP is located one mile northeast of Moosehorn. ME DEP finds that there is no indication of a need for additional monitoring sites or equipment.

    EPA is proposing to find that Maine has adequately addressed the applicable provisions under 40 CFR 51.308(g) by reviewing the State's visibility monitoring strategy and assessing whether any modifications to the monitoring strategy are necessary.

    B. Determination of Adequacy of Existing Regional Haze Plan

    In its Progress Report SIP, Maine submitted a negative declaration to EPA regarding the need for additional actions or emission reductions in Maine beyond those already in place and those to be implemented by 2018 according to Maine's regional haze plan.

    In the 2016 SIP submittal, Maine determined that the existing Regional Haze SIP requires no substantive revision at this time to achieve the RPGs for the Class I areas affected by the State's sources. The basis for the State's negative declaration is the finding that visibility has improved at all Class I areas in the MANE-VU region. In addition, SO2 and PM2.5 emissions for the State have decreased beyond the original 2018 projections. While NOX reductions have yet to fully meet the 2018 projections, additional substantial NOX reductions are expected by 2018.

    EPA is proposing to conclude that Maine has adequately addressed the provisions under 40 CFR 51.308(h) because the visibility and emission trends indicate that Acadia, Moosehorn, RCIP, and Great Gulf are meeting or exceeding the RPGs for 2018, and are expected to continue to meet or exceed the RPGs for 2018.

    EPA is soliciting public comments on the issues discussed in this notice or on other relevant matters. These comments will be considered before taking final action. Interested parties may participate in the Federal rulemaking procedure by submitting written comments to this proposed rule by following the instructions listed in the ADDRESSES section of this Federal Register.

    III. Proposed Action

    EPA is proposing to approve Maine's February 23, 2016 regional haze 5-Year Progress Report SIP as meeting the requirements of 40 CFR 51.308(g) and (h).

    IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    In addition, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land or in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, the rule does not have tribal implications and will not impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).

    List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

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

    Dated: July 5, 2017. Deborah A. Szaro, Acting Regional Administrator, EPA New England.
    [FR Doc. 2017-15266 Filed 7-19-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    82 138 Thursday, July 20, 2017 Notices DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request July 17, 2017.

    The Department of Agriculture has submitted the following information collection requirement(s) to Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and clearance under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. Comments are requested regarding (1) whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of burden including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information to be collected; (4) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

    Comments regarding this information collection received by August 21, 2017 will be considered. Written comments should be addressed to: Desk Officer for Agriculture, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget (OMB), New Executive Office Building, 725 17th Street NW., Washington, DC 20502. Commenters are encouraged to submit their comments to OMB via email to: [email protected] or fax (202) 395-5806 and to Departmental Clearance Office, USDA, OCIO, Mail Stop 7602, Washington, DC 20250-7602. Copies of the submission(s) may be obtained by calling (202) 720-8958.

    An agency may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless the collection of information displays a currently valid OMB control number and the agency informs potential persons who are to respond to the collection of information that such persons are not required to respond to the collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

    Rural Utilities Service

    Title: RUS Specification for Quality Control and Inspection of Timber Products.

    OMB Control Number: 0572-0076.

    Summary of Collection: The Rural Utilities Service (RUS) is a credit agency of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and is authorized to manage loan programs in accordance with the Rural Electrification Act (RE Act) of 1936, 7 U.S.C. 901 et seq., as amended. It makes mortgage loans and loan guarantees to finance telecommunications, electric, and water and waste facilities in rural areas. To ensure the security of loan funds, adequate quality control of timber products is vital to loan security on electric power systems where hundreds of thousands of wood-poles and cross-arms are used. Prior to receiving loan funds, a RUS borrower must enter into a loan contract with RUS. In accordance with Article V, Section 5.14 of the loan contract, “the borrower shall use design standards, construction standards and lists of acceptable materials in conformance with RUS regulations.

    Need and Use of the Information: The purchaser or treating company may obtain the services of an inspection agency or third-party oversight organization to perform certain inspection services to insure that the specifications for wood poles and cross-arms are being met. As required by 7 CFR 1728.202(i) copies of test reports on various preservatives must accompany each charge (a charge being a load of poles treated at the same time in a pressure cylinder). Test reports are needed so that the purchaser, the inspectors, and RUS will be able to spot-check the general accuracy of the tests. RUS will use the information in verifying acceptability of poles and cross-arms purchased by RUS borrowers.

    Description of Respondents: Business or other for-profit; Not-for-profit institutions.

    Number of Respondents: 25.

    Frequency of Responses: Reporting: On occasion.

    Total Burden Hours: 20,332.

    Charlene Parker, Departmental Information Collection Clearance Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2017-15234 Filed 7-19-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-15-P
    DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request July 17, 2017.

    The Department of Agriculture has submitted the following information collection requirement(s) to OMB for review and clearance under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. Comments are requested regarding (1) whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of burden including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques and other forms of information technology.

    Comments regarding this information collection received by August 21, 2017 will be considered. Written comments should be addressed to: Desk Officer for Agriculture, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget (OMB), New Executive Office Building, 725 17th Street NW., Washington, DC 20503. Commentors are encouraged to submit their comments to OMB via email to: [email protected] or fax (202) 395-5806 and to Departmental Clearance Office, USDA, OCIO, Mail Stop 7602, Washington, DC 20250-7602. Copies of the submission(s) may be obtained by calling (202) 720-8681.

    An agency may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless the collection of information displays a currently valid OMB control number and the agency informs potential persons who are to respond to the collection of information that such persons are not required to respond to the collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

    Forest Service

    Title: Significant Cave Nomination.

    OMB Control Number: 0596-NEW.

    Summary of Collection: The Federal Cave Resources Protection Act (FCRPA) [Pub. L. 100-691, 107 Stat. 4546] requires the Secretaries of Agriculture and Interior to identify and protect significant caves on Federal lands within their respective jurisdictions. The information covered in this collection applies to caves on Federal lands administered by the Forest Service. The FCRPA does not define what constitutes a “significant” cave, but it does require the Secretaries, in cooperation and consultation with each other, to issue regulations that define criteria for identification of significant caves found at (16 U.S.C. 4303(a)).

    Need and Use of the Information: In accordance with FCRPA, the FS collects information from appropriate private sector interests, including “cavers,” to update a list of significant caves under USDA's jurisdiction. FS will use form FS-2800-0023 “Significant Cave Nomination Worksheet” to collect name, address, telephone number of individual or organization submitting the nomination and the individual who is knowledgeable about the resources in the cave; name and location of the cave, a discussion of how the cave meets the criteria, studies, maps, research papers and other supporting documentation. If this information is not collected FS might not become aware of potentially significant caves' existence or have insufficient information upon which to base a judgment as to their significance.

    Description of Respondents: Individuals and households.

    Number of Respondents: 10.

    Frequency of Responses: Reporting: One time.

    Total Burden Hours: 110.

    Charlene Parker, Departmental Information Collection Clearance Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2017-15272 Filed 7-19-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3411-15-P
    DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request July 17, 2017.

    The Department of Agriculture has submitted the following information collection requirement(s) to OMB for review and clearance under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. Comments are requested regarding (1) whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of burden including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

    Comments regarding this information collection received by August 21, 2017 will be considered. Written comments should be addressed to: Desk Officer for Agriculture, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget (OMB), New Executive Office Building, 725 17th Street NW., Washington, DC 20502. Commenters are encouraged to submit their comments to OMB via email to: [email protected] or fax (202) 395-5806 and to Departmental Clearance Office, USDA, OCIO, Mail Stop 7602, Washington, DC 20250-7602. Copies of the submission(s) may be obtained by calling (202) 720-8958.

    An agency may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless the collection of information displays a currently valid OMB control number and the agency informs potential persons who are to respond to the collection of information that such persons are not required to respond to the collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

    Animal Plant and Health Inspection Service

    Title: Environmental Monitoring Form.

    OMB Control Number: 0579-0117.

    Summary of Collection: The mission of the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) is to provide leadership in ensuring the health and care of animals and plants, to improve the agricultural productivity and competitiveness, and to contribute to the national economy and the public health. The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), 42 U.S.C. 4321 ET seq, and the regulations of the Council on Environmental Quality that implements the procedural aspects of NEPA (40 CFR 1500-1508). APHIS' regulations require APHIS to implement environmental monitoring for certain activities conducted for pest and disease, control and eradication programs. APHIS Form 2060, Environmental Monitoring Form, will be used to collect information concerning the effects of pesticide used in sensitive habitats.

    Need and Use of the Information: APHIS will collect information on the number of collected samples, description of the samples, the environmental conditions at the collection site including wind speed and direction, temperature, and topography. The supporting information contained on the APHIS form 2060 is vital for interpreting the laboratory tests APHIS conducts on its collected samples. If a sample was not accompanied by this form, APHIS would have no way of knowing from which site the sample was taken. Failure to collect this information would prevent APHIS from actively monitoring the effects of pesticides in areas where the inappropriate use of these chemicals could eventually produce disastrous results for vulnerable habitats and species.

    Description of Respondents: State, Local or Tribal Government; Business or other for-profit.

    Number of Respondents: 110.

    Frequency of Responses: Reporting: On occasion.

    Total Burden Hours: 1,100.

    Ruth Brown, Departmental Information Collection Clearance Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2017-15205 Filed 7-19-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-34-P
    DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Rural Utilities Service Information Collection Activity; Comment Request AGENCY:

    Rural Utilities Service, USDA.

    ACTION:

    Notice and request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Rural Utilities Service (RUS) invites comments on this information collection for which approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) will be requested.

    DATES:

    Comments on this notice must be received by September 18, 2017.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Thomas P. Dickson, Acting Director, Program Development and Regulatory Analysis, Rural Utilities Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1400 Independence Ave. SW., STOP 1522, Room 5164—South Building, Washington, DC 20250-1522. Telephone: (202) 690-4492. Email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Office of Management and Budget's (OMB) regulation (5 CFR 1320) implementing provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-13) requires that interested members of the public and affected agencies have an opportunity to comment on information collection and recordkeeping activities (see 5 CFR 1320.8(d)). This notice identifies an information collection that will be submitted to OMB for extension.

    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 will have practical utility; (b) 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; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on 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 may be sent to: Thomas P. Dickson, Acting Director, Program Development and Regulatory Analysis, Rural Utilities Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1400 Independence Ave. SW., STOP 1522, Room 5164—South Building, Washington, DC 20250-1522 or email: [email protected]

    Title: Servicing of Water Programs Loans and Grants.

    OMB Control Number: 0572-0137.

    Type of Request: Extension of a currently approved information collection.

    Abstract: The Rural Utilities Service (RUS) Water and Environmental Programs (WEP) provide financing and technical assistance for development and operation of safe and affordable water supply systems and sewage and other waste disposal facilities. WEP provides loans, guaranteed loans and grants for water, sewer, storm water, and solid waste disposal facilities in rural areas and towns of up to 10,000 people. The recipients of the assistance covered by 7 CFR part 1782 must be public entities. These public entities can include municipalities, counties, special purpose districts, federally designated Indian tribes, and corporations not operated for profit, including cooperatives. The information, for the most part financial in nature, is needed by the Agency to determine if borrowers, based on their individual situations, qualify for the various servicing options.

    Estimate of Burden: Public reporting for this collection of information is estimated to average 1.22 hours per response.

    Respondents: Business or other for profit and non-profit institutions, and state and local governments.

    Estimated Number of Respondents: 493.

    Estimated Number of Responses per Respondent: 1.

    Estimated Total Annual Burden on Respondents: 641 hours.

    Copies of this information collection can be obtained from Thomas P. Dickson, Program Development and Regulatory Analysis, at (202) 690-4492. Email: [email protected]

    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.

    Dated: July 13, 2017. Christopher A. McLean, Acting Administrator, Rural Utilities Service.
    [FR Doc. 2017-15188 Filed 7-19-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-15-P
    DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Rural Utilities Service Information Collection Activity; Comment Request AGENCY:

    Rural Utilities Service, USDA.

    ACTION:

    Notice and request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Rural Utilities Service (RUS) invites comments on the following information collection for which RUS intends to request approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).

    DATES:

    Comments on this notice must be received by September 18, 2017.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Thomas P. Dickson, Acting Director, Program Development and Regulatory Analysis, Rural Utilities Service, 1400 Independence Ave. SW., STOP 1522, Room 5164, South Building, Washington, DC 20250-1522. Telephone: (202) 690-4492 or email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Office of Management and Budget's (OMB) regulation (5 CFR 1320) implementing provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-13) requires that interested members of the public and affected agencies have an opportunity to comment on information collection and recordkeeping activities (see 5 CFR 1320.8(d)). This notice identifies an information collection that RUS is submitting to OMB for revision.

    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 will have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the Agency's estimate of the burden of the collection of information including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

    Comments may be sent to: Thomas P. Dickson, Acting Director, Program Development and Regulatory Analysis, Rural Utilities Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, STOP 1522, 1400 Independence Ave. SW., Washington, DC 20250-1522. Telephone: (202) 690-4492 or email: [email protected]

    Title: Electric System Emergency Restoration Plan.

    OMB Control Number: 0572-0140.

    Type of Request: Revision of a currently approved collection.

    Abstract: USDA Rural Development administers rural utilities programs through the Rural Utilities Service (Agency). The Agency manages loan programs in accordance with the Rural Electrification Act (RE Act) of 1936, 7 U.S.C. 901 et sec., as amended. One of the Agency's main objectives is to safeguard loan security. An important part of safeguarding loan security is to make sure Agency financed facilities are utilized responsibly, adequately operated and adequately maintained. Accordingly, RUS borrowers have a duty to RUS to maintain their respective systems. In performing this duty, borrowers further the purposes of the RE Act while also preserving the value of electric systems to serve as collateral for repayment of RUS assistance.

    A substantial portion of the electric infrastructure of the United States resides in rural America and is maintained by rural Americans. RUS is uniquely coupled with the electric infrastructure of rural America and its electric borrowers serving rural America. To ensure that the electric infrastructure in rural America is adequately protected, electric borrowers conduct a Vulnerability and Risk Assessment (VRA) of their respective systems and utilize the results of this assessment to enhance an existing Emergency Restoration Plan (ERP) or to create an ERP. The VRA is utilized to identify specific assets and infrastructure owned or served by the electric utility, to determine the criticality and the risk level associated with the assets and infrastructure including a risk versus cost analysis, to identify threats and vulnerabilities, if present, to review existing mitigation procedures and to assist in the development of new and additional mitigating procedures, if necessary. The ERP provides written procedures detailing response and restoration efforts in the event of a major system outage resulting from a natural or man-made disaster. The annual exercise of the ERP ensures operability and employee competency and serves to identify and correct deficiencies in the existing ERP. The exercise may be implemented individually by a single borrower, or by an individual borrower as a participant in a multi-party (to include utilities, government agencies and other participants or combination thereof) tabletop execution or actual implementation of the ERP.

    Electric borrowers maintain ERPs as part of prudent utilities practices. These ERPs are essential to continuous operation of the electric systems. Each electric borrower provides RUS with an annual self-certification that an ERP exists for the system and that an initial VRA has been performed.

    Estimate of Burden: Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average .5 hour per response.

    Respondents: Not-for-profit institutions.

    Estimated Number of Respondents: 625.

    Estimated Number of Responses per Respondent: 1.

    Estimated Total Annual Burden on Respondents: 313 hours.

    Copies of this information collection can be obtained from Thomas P. Dickson, Program Development and Regulatory Analysis, at (202) 690-4492, or email: [email protected]

    All responses to this notice will be summarized and included in the requests for OMB approval. All comments will also become a matter of public record.

    Christopher A. McLean, Acting Administrator, Rural Utilities Service.
    [FR Doc. 2017-15187 Filed 7-19-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
    COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS Notice of Public Meeting of the Connecticut Advisory Committee AGENCY:

    Commission on Civil Rights.

    ACTION:

    Announcement of meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (Commission), and the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), that a meeting of the Connecticut Advisory Committee to the Commission will convene by conference call at 12:00 p.m. (EDT) on: Wednesday, August 9, 2017. The purpose of the meeting is to conclude work on the Committee's Advisory Memorandum on Solitary Confinement. The committee will also possibly vote on the Advisory Memorandum.

    DATES:

    Wednesday, August 9, at 12:00 p.m. EDT.

    ADDRESSES:

    Public call-in information: Conference call-in number: 1-888-438-5448 and conference call 3640132.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ivy L. Davis, at [email protected] or by phone at 202-376-7533.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Interested members of the public may listen to the discussion by calling the following toll-free conference call-in number: 1-888-438-5448 and conference call 3640132. Please be advised that before placing them into the conference call, the conference call operator will ask callers to provide their names, their organizational affiliations (if any), and email addresses (so that callers may be notified of future meetings). Callers can expect to incur charges for calls they initiate over wireless lines, and the Commission will not refund any incurred charges. Callers will incur no charge for calls they initiate over land-line connections to the toll-free conference call-in number.

    Persons with hearing impairments may also follow the discussion by first calling the Federal Relay Service at 1-800-977-8339 and providing the operator with the toll-free conference call-in number: 1-888-438-5448 and conference call 3640132.

    Members of the public are invited to make statements during the open comment period of the meeting or submit written comments. The comments must be received in the regional office approximately 30 days after each scheduled meeting. Written comments may be mailed to the Eastern Regional Office, U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, 1331 Pennsylvania Avenue, Suite 1150, Washington, DC 20425, faxed to (202) 376-7548, or emailed to Evelyn Bohor at [email protected] Persons who desire additional information may contact the Eastern Regional Office at (202) 376-7533.

    Records and documents discussed during the meeting will be available for public viewing as they become available at https://database.faca.gov/committee/meetings.aspx?cid=239; click the “Meeting Details” and “Documents” links. Records generated from this meeting may also be inspected and reproduced at the Eastern Regional Office, as they become available, both before and after the meetings. Persons interested in the work of this advisory committee are advised to go to the Commission's Web site, www.usccr.gov, or to contact the Eastern Regional Office at the above phone numbers, email or street address.

    Agenda Wednesday, August 9, 2017 • Open—Roll Call • Work on Advisory Memorandum • Vote on Memorandum, if ready • Open Comment • Adjourn Dated: July 17, 2017. David Mussatt, Supervisory Chief, Regional Programs Unit.
    [FR Doc. 2017-15232 Filed 7-19-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
    COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS Notice of Public Meetings of the New York Advisory Committee AGENCY:

    Commission on Civil Rights.

    ACTION:

    Announcement of meetings.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (Commission), and the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), that a meetings of the New York Advisory Committee to the Commission will convene by conference call at 12:00 p.m. (EDT) on: Friday, August 11, 2017 and Friday, August 18 and Friday. The purpose of the meeting is to review and edit the draft report on police practices.

    DATES:

    Friday August 11; Friday and August 18; Friday at 12:00 p.m. EDT.

    ADDRESSES:

    Public call-in information: Conference call-in number: 1-888-267-6301 and conference call 1171256.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ivy L. Davis, at [email protected] or by phone at 202-376-7533.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Interested members of the public may listen to the discussion by calling the following toll-free conference call-in number: 1-888-267-6301 and conference call 1171256. Please be advised that before placing them into the conference call, the conference call operator will ask callers to provide their names, their organizational affiliations (if any), and email addresses (so that callers may be notified of future meetings). Callers can expect to incur charges for calls they initiate over wireless lines, and the Commission will not refund any incurred charges. Callers will incur no charge for calls they initiate over land-line connections to the toll-free conference call-in number.

    Persons with hearing impairments may also follow the discussion by first calling the Federal Relay Service at 1-800-977-8339 and providing the operator with the toll-free conference call-in number: 1-888-267-6301 and conference call 1171256.

    Members of the public are invited to make statements during the open comment period of the meetings or submit written comments. The comments must be received in the regional office approximately 30 days after each scheduled meeting. Written comments may be mailed to the Eastern Regional Office, U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, 1331 Pennsylvania Avenue, Suite 1150, Washington, DC 20425, faxed to (202) 376-7548, or emailed to Evelyn Bohor at [email protected] Persons who desire additional information may contact the Eastern Regional Office at (202) 376-7533.

    Records and documents discussed during the meeting will be available for public viewing as they become available at https://database.faca.gov/committee/meetings.aspx?cid=265; click the “Meeting Details” and “Documents” links.Records generated from this meeting may also be inspected and reproduced at the Eastern Regional Office, as they become available, both before and after the meetings. Persons interested in the work of this advisory committee are advised to go to the Commission's Web site, www.usccr.gov, or to contact the Eastern Regional Office at the above phone numbers, email or street address.

    Agenda Friday, August 11 and Friday August 18, Friday • Open—Roll Call • Work on Draft Report • Vote on Draft Report when ready • Open Comment • Adjourn Dated: July 17, 2017 David Mussatt, Supervisory Chief, Regional Programs Unit.
    [FR Doc. 2017-15233 Filed 7-19-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-552-822] Fine Denier Polyester Staple Fiber From the Socialist Republic of Vietnam: Termination of Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigation AGENCY:

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

    SUMMARY:

    On June 27, 2017, the Department of Commerce (the Department) published its initiation of less-than-fair-value investigations of fine denier polyester staple fiber (fine denier PSF) from China, India, Korea, Taiwan, and Vietnam. On June 29, 2017, DAK Americas LLC; Nan Ya Plastics Corporation, America; and Auriga Polymers Inc., (collectively, the petitioners), withdrew the antidumping duty (AD) petition with respect to Vietnam. Accordingly, we are terminating the AD investigation of fine denier PSF from Vietnam.

    DATES:

    Applicable July 20, 2017.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Michael J. Heaney, AD/CVD Operations, Office VI, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone (202) 482-4475.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background

    On May 31, 2017, the Department received an AD petition concerning imports of fine denier PSF from Vietnam, filed on behalf of the petitioners.1 On June 27, 2017, the Department published the initiation of the less-than-fair-value investigation of fine denier PSF from Vietnam.2 On June 29, 2017, the petitioners submitted a letter withdrawing the AD petition with respect to Vietnam.3 Section 351.207(b)(1) of the Department's regulations stipulates that the Secretary may terminate an investigation provided it has concluded that termination of the investigation is in the public interest.4 Because petitioners have withdrawn their May 31, 2017, petition with respect to Vietnam, and have requested that the Department terminate this investigation, we determine that termination of this investigation is in the public interest, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.207(b)(1).5 Accordingly, pursuant to section 734(a)(1)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), and 19 CFR 351.207(b)(1), we are terminating the less-than-fair-value investigation with respect to Vietnam.

    1See Letter to the Secretary of Commerce, Re: “Fine Denier Polyester Staple Fiber from the People's Republic of China, India, the Republic of Korea, Taiwan and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam—Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing Duties,” dated May 31, 2017.

    2See Fine Denier Polyester Staple Fiber from the People's Republic of China, India, the Republic of Korea, Taiwan, and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam: Initiation of Less-Than-Fair Value Investigations, 82 FR 29023 (June 27, 2017) (Initiation Notice).

    3See Letter from the Petitioners, Re: Fine Denier Polyester Staple Fiber from the Socialist Republic of Vietnam—Withdrawal of Vietnam Antidumping Duty Petition, dated June 29, 2017 (Withdrawal Letter).

    4See 19 CFR 351.207(b)(1) of the Regulations.

    5 See Withdrawal Letter at 1-2.

    Scope of the Investigation

    The merchandise covered by this investigation is fine denier polyester staple fiber (fine denier PSF), not carded or combed, measuring less than 3.3 decitex (3 denier) in diameter. The scope covers all fine denier PSF, whether coated or uncoated. The following products are excluded from the scope:

    (1) PSF equal to or greater than 3.3 decitex (more than 3 denier, inclusive) currently classifiable under Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) subheadings 5503.20.0045 and 5503.20.0065.

    (2) Low-melt PSF defined as a bi-component fiber with a polyester core and an outer, polyester sheath that melts at a significantly lower temperature than its inner polyester core currently classified under HTSUS subheading 5503.20.0015.

    Fine denier PSF is classifiable under the HTSUS subheading 5503.20.0025. Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the scope of the investigation is dispositive.

    Termination of Investigation

    In accordance with section 734(a)(1)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.207(b)(1), upon the petitioners' withdrawal of the petition, we are terminating the less-than-fair-value investigation of fine denier PSF with respect to Vietnam.

    Dated: July 13, 2017. Gary Taverman, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, performing the non-exclusive functions and duties of the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
    [FR Doc. 2017-15141 Filed 7-19-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XF543 Fisheries of the Gulf of Mexico and Atlantic; Southeast Data, Assessment, and Review (SEDAR); Public Meeting AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Notice of SEDAR 54 assessment webinar III for HMS Sandbar Shark.

    SUMMARY:

    The SEDAR 54 assessment of the HMS Sandbar will consist of a series of assessment webinars. See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.

    DATES:

    The SEDAR 54 assessment webinar III will be held on Monday, August 7, 2017, from 1 p.m. to 3 p.m.

    ADDRESSES:

    The meeting will be held via webinar. The webinar is open to members of the public. Those interested in participating should contact Julie A. Neer at SEDAR (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT) to request an invitation providing webinar access information. Please request webinar invitations at least 24 hours in advance of each webinar.

    SEDAR address: 4055 Faber Place Drive, Suite 201, North Charleston, SC 29405.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Julie A. Neer, SEDAR Coordinator; (843) 571-4366; email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Gulf of Mexico, South Atlantic, and Caribbean Fishery Management Councils, in conjunction with NOAA Fisheries and the Atlantic and Gulf States Marine Fisheries Commissions have implemented the Southeast Data, Assessment and Review (SEDAR) process, a multi-step method for determining the status of fish stocks in the Southeast Region. SEDAR is a multi-step process including: (1) Data Workshop; (2) Assessment Process utilizing webinars; and (3) Review Workshop. The product of the Data Workshop is a data report that compiles and evaluates potential datasets and recommends which datasets are appropriate for assessment analyses. The product of the Assessment Process is a stock assessment report that describes the fisheries, evaluates the status of the stock, estimates biological benchmarks, projects future population conditions, and recommends research and monitoring needs. The assessment is independently peer reviewed at the Review Workshop. The product of the Review Workshop is a Summary documenting panel opinions regarding the strengths and weaknesses of the stock assessment and input data. Participants for SEDAR Workshops are appointed by the Gulf of Mexico, South Atlantic, and Caribbean Fishery Management Councils and NOAA Fisheries Southeast Regional Office, HMS Management Division, and Southeast Fisheries Science Center. Participants include data collectors and database managers; stock assessment scientists, biologists, and researchers; constituency representatives including fishermen, environmentalists, and NGO's; International experts; and staff of Councils, Commissions, and state and federal agencies.

    The items of discussion in the Assessment Process webinars are as follows:

    1. Using datasets and initial assessment analysis recommended from the Data Webinar, panelists will employ assessment models to evaluate stock status, estimate population benchmarks and management criteria, and project future conditions.

    2. Participants will recommend the most appropriate methods and configurations for determining stock status and estimating population parameters.

    Although non-emergency issues not contained in this agenda may come before this group for discussion, those issues may not be the subject of formal action during this meeting. Action will be restricted to those issues specifically identified in this notice and any issues arising after publication of this notice that require emergency action under section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, provided the public has been notified of the intent to take final action to address the emergency.

    Special Accommodations

    The meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to the Council office (see ADDRESSES) at least 5 business days prior to each webinar.

    Note:

    The times and sequence specified in this agenda are subject to change.

    Authority:

    16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

    Dated: July 17, 2017. Tracey L. Thompson, Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2017-15257 Filed 7-19-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XF511 Atlantic Coastal Fisheries Cooperative Management Act Provisions; Summer Flounder Fishery AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Notice of determination of compliance for the State of New Jersey.

    SUMMARY:

    This notice announces the Secretary of Commerce's compliance decision under the Atlantic Coastal Fisheries Cooperative Management Act regarding New Jersey recreational management of summer flounder. This notice is necessary to alert the public that the Secreatary of Commerce has made a final determination and will not implement a Federal moratorium on fishing, possession, and landing of summer flounder in New Jersey's state waters. The intended effect of this notice is to inform the public of this determination of compliance.

    DATES:

    The date of this determination was July 10, 2017.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Emily Gilbert, Fishery Policy Analyst, (978) 281-9244.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    In accordance with the Atlantic Coastal Fisheries Cooperative Management Act (Atlantic Coastal Act), 16 U.S.C. 5101 et seq., the Secretary of Commerce (Secretary) announces his determination that the State of New Jersey did not implement the measures required by the Atlantic States Marine Fishery Commission's Addendum XXVIII to the Flounder, Scup, and Black Sea Bass Interstate Fishery Management Plan (Addendum XXVIII). However, the Secretary finds that the management measures New Jersey failed to implement are not necessary for the conservation of summer flounder. Based on the analysis provided by the State, it is likely that New Jersey's measures will result in similar levels of total removals as the measures outlined in Addendum XXVIII. As a result, the Secretary is not imposing a moratorium in New Jersey state waters.

    The Atlantic Coastal Act's noncompliance review and determination process was previously outlined in a notice that published in the Federal Register on June 22, 2017, (82 FR 28476) and is not repeated here.

    Authority:

    16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

    Dated: July 17, 2017. Emily H. Menashes, Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2017-15229 Filed 7-19-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XF553 South Atlantic Fishery Management Council; Public Hearings AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Notice of public hearings.

    SUMMARY:

    The South Atlantic Fishery Management Council (Council) will hold public hearings via webinar pertaining to Amendment 43 to the Snapper Grouper Fishery Management Plan (FMP) for the South Atlantic Region. The amendment would revise the annual catch limit for red snapper in the South Atlantic Economic Exclusive Zone (EEZ).

    DATES:

    The public hearings will be held via webinar on August 8, 2017 at 6 p.m. and August 10, 2017 at 10 a.m. and 6 p.m. An informal Question and Answer (Q&A) session will be held via webinar on August 3, 2017 beginning at 6 p.m.

    ADDRESSES:

    Council address: South Atlantic Fishery Management Council, 4055 Faber Place Drive, Suite 201, N. Charleston, SC 29405.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Kim Iverson, Public Information Officer, SAFMC; phone: (843) 571-4366 or toll free: (866) SAFMC-10; fax: (843) 769-4520; email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Q&A session and public hearings will be conducted via webinar. Registration for each webinar is required. Registration information and public hearing materials will be posted on the Council's Web site at http://safmc.net/safmc-meetings/public-hearing-and-scoping-meeting-schedule/ by July 27, 2017.

    During the Q&A session Council staff will present an overview of the amendment and will be available for informal discussions and to answer questions via webinar. During the public hearings, Council staff will review the amendment and members of the public will have the opportunity to provide formal comments for consideration by the Council.

    Written comments may be submitted online beginning July 27, 2017 at: http://safmc.net/safmc-meetings/public-hearing-and-scoping-meeting-schedule/. Written comments may also be submitted to the Council office (see ADDRESSES). Comments will be accepted until 5 p.m. on August 15, 2017.

    Special Accommodations

    These meetings are physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for auxiliary aids should be directed to the council office (see ADDRESSES) 3 days prior to the meeting.

    Note:

    The times and sequence specified in this agenda are subject to change.

    Authority:

    16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

    Dated: July 17, 2017. Tracey L. Thompson, Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2017-15261 Filed 7-19-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration United States Global Change Research Program AGENCY:

    The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Department of Commerce (DOC).

    ACTION:

    Request for public nominations.

    CONTEXT:

    The U.S. Global Change Research Program (USGCRP) is mandated under the Global Change Research Act (GCRA) of 1990 to conduct a quadrennial National Climate Assessment (NCA). Under its current, updated decadal strategic plan (http://go.usa.gov/x9MCQ), USGCRP is building sustained assessment capacity. The sustained assessment supports the Nation's ability to understand, anticipate, and respond to risks and potential impacts brought about by global environmental change. Work on the fourth National Climate Assessment is currently underway.

    SUMMARY:

    NOAA, on behalf of USGCRP, is soliciting nominations for Review Editors for the Fourth National Climate Assessment (NCA4). Refer to the NCA4 Outline (accessible via http://www.globalchange.gov/content/nca4-outline) for a sense of the areas of expertise we seek.

    The report will adhere to the Information Quality Act requirements (http://www.cio.noaa.gov/services_programs/info_quality.html) for quality, transparency, and accessibility as appropriate for a Highly Influential Scientific Assessment (HISA).

    DATES:

    Nominations should be submitted via the web address specified below (https://contribute.globalchange.gov/) and must be received by September 8, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Nominations for Review Editors must be submitted electronically via a Web form accessible via (https://contribute.globalchange.gov/). Nominees are asked to identify their areas of expertise based on NCA4's sectoral, regional, and response topics (see NCA4 Table of Contents below). A CV/resume of no more than 4 pages should be included for optimal consideration. There are no limitations on the nominees' place of employment.

    INSTRUCTIONS:

    Response to this notice is voluntary. Responses to this notice may be used by the government for program planning on a non-attribution basis. NOAA therefore requests that no business proprietary information or copyrighted information be submitted in response to this notice. Please note that the U.S. Government will not pay for response preparation, or for the use of any information contained in the response.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    David Reidmiller, (202) 419-3470, [email protected], U.S. Global Change Research Program.

    DATED:

    Wednesday, July 12, 2017.

    Dan Barrie, Program Manager, Assessments Program, NOAA Climate Program Office.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background information and additional details on NCA4 can be found at https://www.globalchange.gov/nca4.

    This notice seeks nominations for Review Editors to NCA4 with pertinent subject matter expertise and scientific background. The roles of the Review Editor include: (a) Ensuring that all substantive comments submitted during the Public Comment Period and via a National Academies panel review (both currently scheduled for Autumn 2017-Winter 2018) are appropriately addressed, (b) advising Chapter Leads how to handle contentious issues, and (c) ensuring that significant scientific uncertainties are reflected adequately in the text of NCA4. Review Editors do not provide additional comments on assigned draft chapters; rather, they ensure each and every comment has been considered by the author team, and that the `annotation' (i.e., written responses to comments) is responsive to the comment and indicates any revision made to the chapter(s), including the scientific or logical rationale for said action.

    Potential nominees should be accomplished scientists and/or science communicators with climate-related proficiency in at least one of the regions, sectors, or responses topics outlined in the NCA4 Outline, (described below in the Appendix and accessible via http://www.globalchange.gov/content/nca4-outline). Nominees must have demonstrated technical expertise such that the nominees could contribute to the development of a robust scientific, technical assessment as subject matter experts in one or more of the topics listed in the outline.

    Responses to this request for nominations for Review Editors must be submitted by September 8, 2017. Users can access the nominations form via (https://contribute.globalchange.gov/). Interested persons may nominate themselves or third parties, and may nominate more than one person. Each nomination must include: (1) The nominee's full name, title, institutional affiliation, and contact information; (2) the desired chapter(s) the nominee wishes to serve as Review Editor on (i.e., area(s) of expertise); and (3) a short description of his/her qualifications relative to contributing to the report. Nominees are encouraged to submit a CV of no more than 4 pages for optimal consideration.

    More information on the function of Review Editors, the tasks (including reporting) expected of them, as well as the tentative dates of commitment can be found at https://contribute.globalchange.gov.

    Appendix: NCA4 Outline I: Overview II: Our Changing Climate III: National-level Sectoral Overview Chapters Water Energy Land Cover and Land Use Change Forests Ecosystems, Ecosystem Services, and Biodiversity Coastal Effects Oceans and Marine Resources Agriculture and Rural Communities Built Environment, Urban Systems, and Cities Transportation Air Quality Human Health Tribal and Indigenous Communities Climate Effects on US International Interests Sectoral Interdependencies and Compounding Stressors: The Science of Complex Systems IV: Regional Analyses Northeast Southeast US Caribbean Midwest Northern Great Plains Southern Great Plains Northwest Southwest Alaska Hawai`i and Pacific Islands V: Response Near-Term Adaptation Needs and Increased Resiliency Mitigation: Avoiding and Reducing Long-Term Risks Dated: July 12, 2017. David Holst, Acting Chief Financial Officer/CAO, Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
    [FR Doc. 2017-15235 Filed 7-19-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XF551 North Pacific Fishery Management Council; Public Meeting AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Notice of public meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    The North Pacific Fishery Management Council (Council) Observer Advisory Committee (OAC) subgroup on low sampling rates in partial coverage.

    DATES:

    The meeting will be held Thursday, August 3, 2017, from 9 a.m. to 3 p.m. Alaska time.

    ADDRESSES:

    The meeting will be held by teleconference only: (907) 271-2896.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Diana Evans, Council staff; telephone: (907) 271-2809.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Agenda

    The agenda will be to discuss progress on the items on the OAC subgroup's workplan, posted here: https://www.npfmc.org/wp-content/PDFdocuments/conservation_issues/Observer/OACSubgroupWorkplan617.pdf.

    Meeting will be listening-only for those that are not on the OAC subgroup.

    Special Accommodations

    The meeting is via teleconference. Request for auxiliary aids should be directed to Maria Shawback at (907) 271-2809 at least 7 working days prior to the meeting date.

    Dated: July 17, 2017. Tracey L. Thompson, Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2017-15260 Filed 7-19-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XF546 Pacific Fishery Management Council; Public Meeting (Webinar) AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Notice of public meeting (webinar).

    SUMMARY:

    The Pacific Fishery Management Council's (Pacific Council) Ad hoc Sacramento River Winter Chinook Workgroup (SRWCW) and Salmon Advisory Subpanel (SAS) will hold a joint meeting via webinar to discuss the results of the Management Strategy Evaluation. The meeting is open to the public.

    DATES:

    The webinar meeting will be held on Thursday, August 3, 2017, from 11 a.m. until business for the day has been completed.

    ADDRESSES:

    The meeting will be held via webinar. A public listening station is available at the Pacific Council office (address below). To attend the webinar (1) join the meeting by visiting this link https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/955668125, (2) enter the Webinar ID: 955-668-125, and (3) enter your name and email address (required). After logging in to the webinar, please (1) dial this TOLL number 1-786-535-3211 (not a toll-free number), (2) enter the attendee phone audio access code 955-668-125, and (3) then enter your audio phone pin (shown after joining the webinar). Note: We have disabled Mic/Speakers as an option and require all participants to use a telephone or cell phone to participate. Technical Information and System Requirements: PC-based attendees are required to use Windows® 7, Vista, or XP; Mac®-based attendees are required to use Mac OS® X 10.5 or newer; Mobile attendees are required to use iPhone®, iPad®, AndroidTM phone or Android tablet (See the GoToMeeting WebinarApps). You may send an email to Mr. Kris Kleinschmidt at [email protected] or contact him at 503-820-2280, extension 411 for technical assistance. A public listening station will also be available at the Pacific Council office.

    Council address: Pacific Fishery Management Council, 7700 NE Ambassador Place, Suite 101, Portland, OR 97220.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ms. Robin Ehlke, Pacific Council; telephone: (503) 820-2410.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The SRWCW was formed in November 2015 and tasked with exploring and evaluating alternative fishery management frameworks for Sacramento River winter Chinook. The SRWCW first met in 2016 and identified three areas of focus: (1) Develop methods for forecasting abundance, (2) develop a suite of alternative control rules and (3) evaluate the performance of these control rules with regard to conservation benefits and fishery costs using a Management Strategy Evaluation (MSE) approach. Since 2016 the group has addressed these tasks and provided progress reports to the Council as information was available. At this webinar, the SRWCW will focus the discussion on the results of the MSE. The SAS will attend to provide input and feedback to the SRWCW. The SRWCW is tentatively scheduled to present preliminary MSE results to the Pacific Fishery Management Council in September 2017, and provide final MSE results in November 2017. The SRWCW may also discuss materials and reports for the Council's September 2017 meeting, and any future meeting plans.

    Although non-emergency issues not contained in the meeting agenda may be discussed, those issues may not be the subject of formal action during this meeting. Action will be restricted to those issues specifically listed in this document and any issues arising after publication of this document that require emergency action under section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, provided the public has been notified of the intent to take final action to address the emergency.

    Special Accommodations

    This meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to Mr. Kris Kleinschmidt at (503) 820-2411 at least 10 business days prior to the meeting date.

    Dated: July 17, 2017. Tracey L. Thompson, Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2017-15259 Filed 7-19-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XF544 Fisheries of the South Atlantic; Southeast Data, Assessment, and Review (SEDAR); Public Meeting AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Notice of SEDAR 55 Data Scoping webinar.

    SUMMARY:

    The SEDAR 55 assessment of the South Atlantic stock of Vermilion Snapper will consist of a series of webinars. See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.

    DATES:

    A SEDAR 55 Data Scoping webinar will be held on Tuesday, August 8, 2017, from 9 a.m. until 12 p.m.

    ADDRESSES:

    Meeting address: The meeting will be held via webinar. The webinar is open to members of the public. Those interested in participating should contact Julia Byrd at SEDAR (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT) to request an invitation providing webinar access information. Please request webinar invitations at least 24 hours in advance of each webinar.

    SEDAR address: South Atlantic Fishery Management Council, 4055 Faber Place Drive, Suite 201, N. Charleston, SC 29405; www.sedarweb.org.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Julia Byrd, SEDAR Coordinator, 4055 Faber Place Drive, Suite 201, North Charleston, SC 29405; phone: (843) 571-4366; email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Gulf of Mexico, South Atlantic, and Caribbean Fishery Management Councils, in conjunction with NOAA Fisheries and the Atlantic and Gulf States Marine Fisheries Commissions, have implemented the Southeast Data, Assessment and Review (SEDAR) process, a multi-step method for determining the status of fish stocks in the Southeast Region. The product of the SEDAR webinar series will be a report which compiles and evaluates potential datasets and recommends which datasets are appropriate for assessment analyses, and describes the fisheries, evaluates the status of the stock, estimates biological benchmarks, projects future population conditions, and recommends research and monitoring needs. Participants for SEDAR Workshops are appointed by the Gulf of Mexico, South Atlantic, and Caribbean Fishery Management Councils and NOAA Fisheries Southeast Regional Office, Highly Migratory Species Management Division, and Southeast Fisheries Science Center. Participants include: Data collectors and database managers; stock assessment scientists, biologists, and researchers; constituency representatives including fishermen, environmentalists, and non-governmental organizations (NGOs); international experts; and staff of Councils, Commissions, and state and federal agencies.

    The items of discussion in the Data Scoping webinar are as follows:

    Participants will identify who will be providing updated and/or new datasets.

    Although non-emergency issues not contained in this agenda may come before this group for discussion, those issues may not be the subject of formal action during this meeting. Action will be restricted to those issues specifically identified in this notice and any issues arising after publication of this notice that require emergency action under section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, provided the public has been notified of the intent to take final action to address the emergency.

    Special Accommodations

    This meeting is accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for auxiliary aids should be directed to the SAFMC office (see ADDRESSES) at least 5 business days prior to the meeting.

    Note:

    The times and sequence specified in this agenda are subject to change.

    Authority:

    16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

    Dated: July 17, 2017. Tracey L. Thompson, Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2017-15258 Filed 7-19-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XF560 New England Fishery Management Council; Public Meeting AGENCY:

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

    ACTION:

    Notice; public meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    The New England Fishery Management Council (Council) is scheduling a public meeting of its Observer Policy Committee to consider actions affecting New England fisheries in the exclusive economic zone (EEZ). Recommendations from this group will be brought to the full Council for formal consideration and action, if appropriate.

    DATES:

    This meeting will be held on Thursday, August 3, 2017 at 9 a.m.

    ADDRESSES:

    The meeting will be held at the Hilton Garden Inn, 100 Boardman Street, Boston, MA 02128; telephone: (617) 567-6789.

    Council address: New England Fishery Management Council, 50 Water Street, Mill 2, Newburyport, MA 01950.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Thomas A. Nies, Executive Director, New England Fishery Management Council; telephone: (978) 465-0492.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Agenda

    The Committee will discuss recent and planned work related to 2017 priorities, including development of a policy for monitoring commercial fisheries to address multiple information needs and a strategic approach to bycatch monitoring, and recommend appropriate next steps. The Committee will also discuss priorities for 2018; other business will be discussed as necessary.

    Special Accommodations

    This meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. This meeting will be recorded. Consistent with 16 U.S.C. 1852, a copy of the recording is available upon request. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to Thomas A. Nies, Executive Director, at (978) 465-0492, at least 5 days prior to the meeting date.

    Authority:

    16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

    Dated: July 17, 2017. Tracey L. Thompson, Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [FR Doc. 2017-15262 Filed 7-19-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Patent and Trademark Office [Docket No.: PTO-P-2017-0029] Grant of Interim Extension of the Term of U.S. Patent No. 7,179,464; Benralizumab AGENCY:

    United States Patent and Trademark Office, Commerce.

    ACTION:

    Notice of interim patent term extension.

    SUMMARY:

    The United States Patent and Trademark Office has issued an order granting interim extension for a one-year interim extension of the term of U.S. Patent No. 7,179,464.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Mary C. Till by telephone at (571) 272-7755; by mail marked to her attention and addressed to the Commissioner for Patents, Mail Stop Hatch-Waxman PTE, P.O. Box 1450, Alexandria, VA 22313-1450; by fax marked to her attention at (571) 273-7755; or by email to [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Section 156 of title 35, United States Code, generally provides that the term of a patent may be extended for a period of up to five years if the patent claims a product, or a method of making or using a product, that has been subject to certain defined regulatory review, and that the patent may be extended for interim periods of up to one year if the regulatory review is anticipated to extend beyond the expiration date of the patent.

    On June 30, 2017, Kyowa Hakko Kirin Co., Ltd., the patent owner of record, timely filed an application under 35 U.S.C. 156(d)(5) for an interim extension of the term of U.S. Patent No. 7,179,464. The patent claims methods of using the human biological product benralizumab. The application for patent term extension indicates that a Biological License Application (BLA) 761070 was submitted to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on November 16, 2016.

    Review of the patent term extension application indicates that, except for permission to market or use the product commercially, the subject patent would be eligible for an extension of the patent term under 35 U.S.C. 156, and that the patent should be extended for one year as required by 35 U.S.C. 156(d)(5)(B). Because the regulatory review period will continue beyond the original expiration date of the patent, July 21, 2017, interim extension of the patent term under 35 U.S.C. 156(d)(5) is appropriate.

    An interim extension under 35 U.S.C. 156(d)(5) of the term of U.S. Patent No. 7,179,464 is granted for a period of one year from the original expiration date of the patent.

    Dated: July 17, 2017. Robert Bahr, Deputy Commissioner for Patent Examination Policy, United States Patent and Trademark Office.
    [FR Doc. 2017-15249 Filed 7-19-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-16-P
    CORPORATION FOR NATIONAL AND COMMUNITY SERVICE Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to the Office of Management and Budget for Review and Approval; Comment Request; CNCS Grant Application; Proposed Information Collection; Comment Request AGENCY:

    Corporation for National and Community Service.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Corporation for National and Community Service (CNCS) has submitted a public information collection request (ICR) entitled CNCS Grant Application for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Pub. L. 104-13, (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35). Copies of this ICR, with applicable supporting documentation, may be obtained by calling the Corporation for National and Community Service, Amy Borgstrom, at 202-606-6930 or email to [email protected] Individuals who use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TTY-TDD) may call 1-800-833-3722 between 8:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. Eastern Time, Monday through Friday.

    DATES:

    Comments may be submitted, identified by the title of the information collection activity, within August 21, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

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

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

    (2) By email to: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The OMB is particularly interested in comments which:

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

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

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

    • Propose ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

    Comments

    A 60-day Notice requesting public comment was published in the Federal Register on July 1, 2016 at 81 FR 43192. This comment period ended August 30, 2016. No public comments were received from this Notice.

    Description: The CNCS Grant Application is the information collection instrument used for grant competitions which CNCS sponsors when appropriations are available. This is a new information collection that replaces multiple application information collections used in the past. The information collection will otherwise be used in the same manner as the existing applications. CNCS also seeks to continue using the current applications until the revised application is approved by OMB. The current applications are due to expire at various times in the future and will be withdrawn once the new information collection request is approved and the new system is operational.

    Type of Review: Renewal.

    Agency: Corporation for National and Community Service.

    Title: Grants and Member Management System.

    OMB Number: TBD.

    Agency Number: None.

    Affected Public: Applicants for funding.

    Total Respondents: 13,200.

    Frequency: Depending on the availability of appropriations.

    Average Time per Response: Six hours.

    Estimated Total Burden Hours: 79,200.

    Total Burden Cost (capital/startup): None.

    Total Burden Cost (operating/maintenance): None.

    Dated: July 13, 2017. Marlene Zakai, Director of Strategic Initiatives.
    [FR Doc. 2017-15228 Filed 7-19-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6050-28-P
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Office of the Secretary Defense Health Board; Notice of Federal Advisory Committee Meeting AGENCY:

    Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, Department of Defense.

    ACTION:

    Notice of Federal Advisory Committee meeting.

    SUMMARY:

    The Department of Defense (DoD) is publishing this notice to announce that the following Federal Advisory Committee meeting of the Defense Health Board (DHB) will take place.

    DATES:

    Open to the public Thursday, August 10, 2017 from 9:15 a.m. to 12:45 p.m. Open to the public Thursday, August 10, 2017 from 1:30 p.m. to 5:00 p.m.

    ADDRESSES:

    The address of the open meeting is the Defense Health Headquarters (DHHQ), Pavilion Salons B-C, 7700 Arlington Blvd., Falls Church, Virginia 22042 (escort required; see guidance in SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION, “Meeting Accessibility”).

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    CAPT Juliann Althoff, Medical Corps, US Navy, (703) 681-6653 (Voice), (703) 681-9539 (Facsimile), [email protected] (Email). Mailing address is 7700 Arlington Boulevard, Suite 5101, Falls Church, Virginia 22042. Web site: http://www.health.mil/dhb. The most up-to-date changes to the meeting agenda can be found on the Web site.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    This meeting is being held under the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) of 1972 (5 U.S.C., Appendix, as amended), the Government in the Sunshine Act of 1976 (5 U.S.C. 552b, as amended), and 41 CFR 102-3.140 and 102-3.150.

    Availability of Materials for the Meeting: A copy of the agenda or any updates to the agenda for the August 10, 2017 meeting, is available at the Defense Health Board (DHB) Web site, https://health.mil/dhb. Any other materials presented in the meeting, may be obtained at the meeting.

    Purpose of the Meeting: The Department of Defense is publishing this notice to announce a Federal Advisory Committee meeting of the DHB. The DHB provides independent advice and recommendations to maximize the safety and quality of, as well as access to, health care for DoD health care beneficiaries. 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 related to military medicine.

    Agenda: Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552b and 41 CFR 102-3.140 through 102-3.165 and subject to availability of space, the meeting is open to the public from 9:15 a.m. to 12:45 p.m. and from 1:30 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. on August 10, 2017. The DHB anticipates receiving a decision brief from the Health Care Delivery and Neurological/Behavioral Health Subcommittees on a pediatric health care services tasking, a panel discussion on operational medicine from the Joint Staff Surgeon and two Combatant Command Surgeons, and a briefing from the Medical Officer of the Marine Corps. Any changes to the agenda can be found at the link provided in this SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section.

    Meeting Accessibility: 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 register by emailing their name, rank/title, and organization/company to [email protected] or by contacting Ms. Margaret Welsh at (703) 681-8007 or [email protected]

    Special Accommodations: Individuals requiring special accommodations to access the public meeting should contact Ms. Margaret Welsh 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. Written statements may be submitted to the DHB Designated Federal Officer (DFO), CAPT Juliann Althoff, at [email protected] and should be no longer than two type-written pages and include the issue, a short discussion, and a recommended course of action. Supporting documentation may also be included, 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 DHB.

    Dated: July 17, 2017. Aaron Siegel, Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
    [FR Doc. 2017-15223 Filed 7-19-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001-06-P
    DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION [Docket No.: ED-2017-ICCD-0105] Agency Information Collection Activities; Comment Request; Annual Progress Reporting Form for the American Indian Vocational Rehabilitation Services (AIVRS) Program AGENCY:

    Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services (OSERS), Department of Education (ED).

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, ED is proposing an extension of an existing information collection.

    DATES:

    Interested persons are invited to submit comments on or before September 18, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    To access and review all the documents related to the information collection listed in this notice, please use http://www.regulations.gov by searching the Docket ID number ED-2017-ICCD-0105. 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 216-32, Washington, DC 20202-4537.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For specific questions related to collection activities, please contact August Martin, 202-245-7410.

    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: Annual Progress Reporting Form for the American Indian Vocational Rehabilitation Services (AIVRS) Program.

    OMB Control Number: 1820-0655.

    Type of Review: An extension of an existing information collection.

    Respondents/Affected Public: State, Local, and Tribal Governments.

    Total Estimated Number of Annual Responses: 88.

    Total Estimated Number of Annual Burden Hours: 968.

    Abstract: The Rehabilitation Services Administration (RSA) of the U.S. Department of Education's (ED) Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services (OSERS) will use this data collection form to capture the performance data from grantees funded under the American Indian Vocational Rehabilitation Services (AIVRS) program (CFDA # 84.250). RSA and ED will use the information gathered annually to: (a) Comply with reporting requirements under the Education Department General Administration Regulations (EDGAR) 34 CFR part 75.118, (b) provide information annually to Congress on activities conducted under this program, and (c) measure performance on the program in accordance with the program indicators identified in the Government Performance Result Act (GPRA). The proposed changes to the existing form will improve user friendliness, clarity of data questions, and accuracy of data reported. Since the ED no longer collects data regarding common measures, the entire section of the report that collects this data is deleted, further reducing burden. These revisions are not significantly different from the original collection, but are proposed to provide clarity, consistency, and usability. In many areas, the data element language has been modified with direct language instead of passive terminology.

    Dated: July 14, 2017. Tomakie Washington, Acting Director, Information Collection Clearance Division, Office of the Chief Privacy Officer, Office of Management.
    [FR Doc. 2017-15198 Filed 7-19-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4000-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION [Docket No. ED-2017-ICCD-0106] Agency Information Collection Activities; Comment Request; Quick Response Information System (QRIS) 2017-2020 System Clearance AGENCY:

    National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), Department of Education (ED).

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, ED is proposing an extension of an existing information collection.

    DATES:

    Interested persons are invited to submit comments on or before September 18, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    To access and review all the documents related to the information collection listed in this notice, please use http://www.regulations.gov by searching the Docket ID number ED-2017-ICCD-0106. 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 216-34, Washington, DC 20202-4537.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For specific questions related to collection activities, please contact NCES Information Collections at [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Department of Education (ED), in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)), provides the general public and Federal agencies with an opportunity to comment on proposed, revised, and continuing collections of information. This helps the Department assess the impact of its information collection requirements and minimize the public's reporting burden. It also helps the public understand the Department's information collection requirements and provide the requested data in the desired format. ED is soliciting comments on the proposed information collection request (ICR) that is described below. The Department of Education is especially interested in public comment addressing the following issues: (1) Is this collection necessary to the proper functions of the Department; (2) will this information be processed and used in a timely manner; (3) is the estimate of burden accurate; (4) how might the Department enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (5) how might the Department minimize the burden of this collection on the respondents, including through the use of information technology. Please note that written comments received in response to this notice will be considered public records.

    Title of Collection: Quick Response Information System (QRIS) 2017-2020 System Clearance.

    OMB Control Number: 1850-0733.

    Type of Review: An extension of an existing information collection.

    Respondents/Affected Public: State, Local, and Tribal Governments.

    Total Estimated Number of Annual Responses: 104,004.

    Total Estimated Number of Annual Burden Hours: 31,704.

    Abstract: The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) Quick Response Information System (QRIS) consists of the Fast Response Survey System (FRSS) and the Postsecondary Education Quick Information System (PEQIS). The QRIS currently conducts surveys under OMB generic clearance 1850-0733, which expires in February 2018. This submission requests approval to continue the current clearance conditions through the end of 2020. FRSS primarily conducts surveys of the elementary/secondary sector (districts, schools) and public libraries. PEQIS conducts surveys of the postsecondary education sector. FRSS and PEQIS surveys are cleared under the QRIS generic clearance. The QRIS clearance is subject to the regular clearance process at OMB with a 60-day notice and a 30-day notice as part of the 120-day review period. Each individual FRSS or PEQIS survey is then subject to clearance process with an abbreviated clearance package, justifying the particular content of the survey, describing the sample design, the timeline for the survey activities, and the questionnaire. The review period for each individual survey is 45 days, including a 30-day Federal Register notice period. OMB will provide comments as soon after the end of the 30-day notice period as possible. This generic clearance request is for surveys of state education agencies, school districts, schools, postsecondary institutions, and libraries.

    Dated: July 17, 2017. Kate Mullan, Acting Director, Information Collection Clearance Division, Office of the Chief Privacy Officer, Office of Management.
    [FR Doc. 2017-15271 Filed 7-19-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4000-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. CP17-468-000] Texas Eastern Transmission, LP; Notice of Application for Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity

    Take notice that on June 30, 2017, Texas Eastern Transmission, LP (Texas Eastern), 5400 Westheimer Court, Houston, Texas 77056, filed with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission an abbreviated application under section 7 of the Natural Gas Act requesting a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity authorizing Texas Eastern to excavate, elevate, and replace four different sections of pipelines and appurtenant facilities located in Marshall County, West Virginia due to planned long-wall mining activities in October 2018 known as the Marshall County Mine Panel 18W Project. Texas Eastern seeks authorization to perform work due to the anticipated long-wall mining activities of Marshall County Coal Company in Panel 18W of its Marshall County Mine, all as more fully set forth in the application which is on file with the Commission and open to public inspection.

    The filing may also be viewed on the web at http://www.ferc.gov using the “e-Library” link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at [email protected] or toll free at (866) 208-3676, or TTY, contact (202) 502-8659.

    Any questions regarding this application may be directed to Lisa A. Connolly, Director, Rates and Certificates, Texas Eastern Transmission, LP, P.O. Box 1642, Houston, Texas 77251-1642; Phone: (713) 627-4102, or Fax: (713) 627-5947, or email: [email protected]

    Pursuant to section 157.9 of the Commission's rules, 18 CFR 157.9, within 90 days of this Notice the Commission staff will either: Complete its environmental assessment (EA) and place it into the Commission's public record (eLibrary) for this proceeding; or issue a Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review. If a Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review is issued, it will indicate, among other milestones, the anticipated date for the Commission staff's issuance of the EA for this proposal. The filing of the EA in the Commission's public record for this proceeding or the issuance of a Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review will serve to notify federal and state agencies of the timing for the completion of all necessary reviews, and the subsequent need to complete all federal authorizations within 90 days of the date of issuance of the Commission staff's EA.

    There are two ways to become involved in the Commission's review of this project. First, any person wishing to obtain legal status by becoming a party to the proceedings for this project should, on or before the comment date stated below, file with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426, a motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or 385.211) and the Regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.10). A person obtaining party status will be placed on the service list maintained by the Secretary of the Commission and will receive copies of all documents filed by the applicant and by all other parties. A party must submit five copies of filings made with the Commission and must mail a copy to the applicant and to every other party in the proceeding. Only parties to the proceeding can ask for court review of Commission orders in the proceeding.

    However, a person does not have to intervene in order to have comments considered. The second way to participate is by filing with the Secretary of the Commission, as soon as possible, an original and two copies of comments in support of or in opposition to this project. The Commission will consider these comments in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but the filing of a comment alone will not serve to make the filer a party to the proceeding. The Commission's rules require that persons filing comments in opposition to the project provide copies of their protests only to the party or parties directly involved in the protest.

    Persons who wish to comment only on the environmental review of this project should submit an original and two copies of their comments to the Secretary of the Commission. Environmental commentors will be placed on the Commission's environmental mailing list, will receive copies of the environmental documents, and will be notified of meetings associated with the Commission's environmental review process. Environmental commentors will not be required to serve copies of filed documents on all other parties. However, the non-party commentors will not receive copies of all documents filed by other parties or issued by the Commission (except for the mailing of environmental documents issued by the Commission) and will not have the right to seek court review of the Commission's final order.

    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments, protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the “eFiling” link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit original and five copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.

    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on August 3, 2017.

    Dated: July 13, 2017. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2017-15242 Filed 7-19-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. CP16-494-000] Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Company, LLC; Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review of the Gulf Connector Expansion Project

    On August 16, 2016, Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Company, LLC (Transco) filed an application in Docket No. CP16-494-000 requesting a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity pursuant to section 7(c) of the Natural Gas Act to construct and operate certain natural gas pipeline facilities in Wharton, Hardin, San Patricio and Victoria Counties, Texas. The Gulf Connector Expansion Project (Project) would enable 475,000 dekatherms per day of incremental firm natural gas transportation.

    On August 25, 2016, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission or FERC) issued its Notice of Application for the Project. Among other things, that notice alerted agencies issuing federal authorizations of the requirement to complete all necessary reviews and to reach a final decision on a request for a federal authorization within 90 days of the date of issuance of the Commission staff's Environmental Assessment (EA) for the Project. This instant notice identifies the FERC staff's planned schedule for the completion of the EA for the Project.

    Schedule for Environmental Review Issuance of EA, September 21, 2017 90-day Federal Authorization Decision Deadline, December 20, 2017

    If a schedule change becomes necessary, additional notice will be provided so that the relevant agencies are kept informed of the Project's progress.

    Project Description

    Transco proposes to construct new compressor stations in San Patricio, Victoria, and Wharton Counties. The three new compressor stations would total 30,650 horsepower. In addition, there would be modifications to an existing compressor station in Hardin County and modifications to an existing compressor station in Wharton County. Transco would also decommission a compressor station in Refugio County, use the site as a construction storage yard, and construct a new interconnection in San Patricio County.

    Background

    On September 22, 2016, the Commission issued a Notice of Intent to Prepare an Environmental Assessment for the Proposed Gulf Connector Expansion Project and Request for Comments on Environmental Issues (NOI). The NOI was sent to affected landowners; federal, state, and local government agencies; elected officials; environmental and public interest groups; Native American tribes; other interested parties; and local libraries and newspapers. In response to the NOI, the Commission received a letter from the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department that included several recommendations for mitigating impacts on migratory birds, wildlife, and vegetation.

    Additional Information

    In order to receive notification of the issuance of the EA and to keep track of all formal issuances and submittals in specific dockets, the Commission offers a free service called eSubscription. This can reduce the amount of time you spend researching proceedings by automatically providing you with notification of these filings, document summaries, and direct links to the documents. Go to www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp.

    Additional information about the Project is available from the Commission's Office of External Affairs at (866) 208-FERC or on the FERC Web site (www.ferc.gov). Using the eLibrary link, select General Search from the eLibrary menu, enter the selected date range and Docket Number excluding the last three digits (i.e., CP16-494), and follow the instructions. For assistance with access to eLibrary, the helpline can be reached at (866) 208-3676, TTY (202) 502-8659, or at [email protected] The eLibrary link on the FERC Web site also provides access to the texts of formal documents issued by the Commission, such as orders, notices, and rule makings.

    Dated: July 14, 2017. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2017-15244 Filed 7-19-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Project No. 2232-522] Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC; Notice of Application Accepted for Filing, Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene, and Protests

    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been filed with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and is available for public inspection:

    a. Type of Application: Amendment of Project License.

    b. Project No: 2232-522.

    c. Date Filed: May 5, 2017.

    d. Applicant: Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC (licensee).

    e. Name of Project: Catawba-Wateree Hydroelectric Project.

    f. Location: The project includes 11 developments and is located on the Catawba and Wateree Rivers in Burke, McDowell, Caldwell, Catawba, Alexander, Iredell, Mecklenburg, Lincoln, and Gaston Counties, North Carolina, and York, Lancaster, Chester, Fairfield, and Kershaw Counties in South Carolina. The project does not occupy federal land.

    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791a-825r.

    h. Applicant Contact: Jeff Lineberger, Director, Water Strategy and Hydro Licensing, Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC, 526 S. Church St., P.O. Box 1006/EC12Y, Charlotte, NC 28202, [email protected].

    i. FERC Contact: Michael Calloway at 202-502-8041, or [email protected].

    j. Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, and protests is 30 days from the issuance of this notice by the Commission. The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file motions to intervene, protests, and comments using the Commission's eFiling system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can submit brief comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior registration, using the eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You must include your name and contact information at the end of your comments. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at [email protected], (866) 208-3676 (toll free), or (202) 502-8659 (TTY). In lieu of electronic filing, please send a paper copy to: Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426. The first page of any filing should include docket number P-2232-522.

    k. Description of Request: The licensee requests that the Commission amend the project license to include new Water Quality Certificates issued by North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality on February 27, 2017, and South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control on April 5, 2017. The new certificates were included in the May 5, 2017, filing. Additionally, the licensee requests that the Commission amend the Flow and Water Quality Implementation Plan and the Water Quality Monitoring Plan in order to: (1) Raise reservoir target elevation by 6 inches at James, Norman, and Wylie developments from May 1 to October 1; (2) change Wylie Hydro Station recreation release from 6,000 cubic feet per second (cfs) to 3,000 cfs; (3) update the Low Inflow Protocol and Emergency Protocol; (4) update status and implementation schedules contained in the Water Quality Monitoring Plan and Flow and Water Quality Improvement Plan; and (5) evaluate other technologies in addition to a bladder dam to provide the additional flow releases at Wateree Spillway.

    l. Locations of the Application: A copy of the application is available for inspection and reproduction at the Commission's Public Reference Room, located at 888 First Street NE., Room 2A, Washington, DC 20426, or by calling 202-502-8371. This filing may also be viewed on the Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov using the “eLibrary” link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the document. You may also register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to be notified via email of new filings and issuances related to this or other pending projects. For assistance, call 866-208-3676 or email [email protected], for TTY, call 202-502-8659. A copy is also available for inspection and reproduction at the address in item (h) above.

    m. Individuals desiring to be included on the Commission's mailing list should so indicate by writing to the Secretary of the Commission.

    n. Comments, Protests, or Motions to Intervene: Anyone may submit comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211, .214. In determining the appropriate action to take, the Commission will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only those who file a motion to intervene in accordance with the Commission's Rules may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments, protests, or motions to intervene must be received on or before the specified comment date for the particular application.

    o. Filing and Service of Responsive Documents: Any filing must (1) bear in all capital letters the title COMMENTS; PROTEST, or MOTION TO INTERVENE as applicable; (2) set forth in the heading the name of the applicant and the project number of the application to which the filing responds; (3) furnish the name, address, and telephone number of the person protesting or intervening; and (4) otherwise comply with the requirements of 18 CFR 385.2001 through 385.2005. All comments, motions to intervene, or protests must set forth their evidentiary basis and otherwise comply with the requirements of 18 CFR 4.34(b). All comments, motions to intervene, or protests should relate to the amendment application. Agencies may obtain copies of the application directly from the applicant. A copy of any protest or motion to intervene must be served upon each representative of the applicant specified in the particular application. If an intervener files comments or documents with the Commission relating to the merits of an issue that may affect the responsibilities of a particular resource agency, they must also serve a copy of the document on that resource agency. A copy of all other filings in reference to this application must be accompanied by proof of service on all persons listed in the service list prepared by the Commission in this proceeding, in accordance with 18 CFR 4.34(b) and 385.2010.

    Dated: July 13, 2017. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2017-15247 Filed 7-19-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. IC17-10-000] Commission Information Collection Activities (FERC Form No. 2 and FERC Form No. 2-A); Comment Request AGENCY:

    Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Department of Energy.

    ACTION:

    Comment request.

    SUMMARY:

    In compliance with the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission or FERC) is submitting its information collection [FERC Form No. 2 (Major Natural Gas Pipeline Annual Report) and FERC Form No. 2-A (Non-major Natural Gas Pipeline Annual Report).] to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review of the information collection requirements. Any interested person may file comments directly with OMB and should address a copy of those comments to the Commission as explained below. The Commission previously issued a Notice April 11, 2017, in the Federal Register requesting public comments. The Commission received no comments on these collections and is making this notation in its submittal to OMB.

    DATES:

    Comments on the collections of information are due by August 21, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Comments filed with OMB, identified by the OMB Control Nos. 1902-0028 and 1902-0030, should be sent via email to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs: [email protected] Attention: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Desk Officer. The Desk Officer may also be reached via telephone at 202-395-0710.

    A copy of the comments should also be sent to the Commission, in Docket No. IC17-10-000, by either of the following methods:

    eFiling at Commission's Web site: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp.

    Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Secretary of the Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.

    Instructions: All submissions must be formatted and filed in accordance with submission guidelines at: http://www.ferc.gov/help/submission-guide.asp. For user assistance contact FERC Online Support by email at [email protected], or by phone at: (866) 208-3676 (toll-free), or (202) 502-8659 for TTY.

    Docket: Users interested in receiving automatic notification of activity in this docket or in viewing/downloading comments and issuances in this docket may do so at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/docs-filing.asp.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ellen Brown may be reached by email at [email protected], by telephone at (202) 502-8663, and by fax at (202) 273-0873.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Title: FERC Form No. 2 (Annual Report of Major Natural Gas Companies) and FERC Form No. 2-A (Annual Report of Non-major Natural Gas Companies).1

    1 The FERC Form No. 2 and Form 2-A are also part of the Forms Refresh effort (started in Docket No. AD15-11), which is a separate activity and not addressed in this Notice.

    OMB Control Nos.: 1902-0028 (FERC Form No. 2) and 1902-0030 (FERC Form No. 2-A).

    Type of Request: Three-year extension of the FERC Form No. 2 and FERC Form No. 2-A information collection requirements with no changes to the reporting requirements.

    Abstract: Pursuant to sections 8, 10 and 14 of the National Gas Act (NGA), (15 U.S.C. 717g-717m, Pub. L. 75-688), the Commission is authorized to make investigations and collect and record data, to prescribe rules and regulations concerning accounts, records and memoranda as necessary or appropriate for purposes of administering the NGA. The Commission includes the filing requirements in 18 CFR parts 260.1 and 260.2.

    The forms provide information concerning a company's past performance. The information is compiled using a standard chart of accounts contained in the Commission's Uniform System of Accounts (USofA).2 The forms contain schedules which include a basic set of financial statements: Comparative Balance Sheet, Statement of Income and Retained Earnings, Statement of Cash Flows, and the Statement of Comprehensive Income and Hedging Activities. Supporting schedules containing supplementary information are filed, including revenues and the related quantities of products sold or transported; account balances for various operating and maintenance expenses; selected plant cost data; and other information.

    2See 18 CFR part 201.

    The information collected in the forms is used by Commission staff, state regulatory agencies and others in the review of the financial condition of regulated companies. The information is also used in various rate proceedings, industry analyses and in the Commission's audit programs and, as appropriate, for the computation of annual charges based on Page 520 of the forms. The Commission provides the information to the public, interveners and all interested parties to assist in the proceedings before the Commission.

    Print versions of the Forms No. 2 and 2-A are located on the Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/forms.asp#2 and http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/forms.asp#2a respectively.

    Type of Respondents: Each natural gas company whose combined gas transported or stored for a fee exceeds 50 million dekatherms in each of the previous three years must file the Form 2. Each natural gas company not meeting the filing threshold for the Form 2 but having total gas sales or volume transactions exceeding 200,000 dekatherms in each of the previous three calendar years must submit the Form 2-A.

    Estimate of Annual Burden3 : The Commission estimates the annual public reporting burden for the information collections as:

    3 Burden is the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. For further explanation of what is included in the information collection burden, refer to Title 5 Code of Federal Regulations 1320.3.

    4 The estimates for cost per response are derived using the following formula: 2017 Average Burden Hours per Response * $76.50 per Hour = Average Cost per Response. The hourly cost figure of $76.50 is the average FERC employee wage plus benefits. We assume that respondents earn at a similar rate.

    FERC Form No. 2: Annual Report of Major Natural Gas Companies and FERC Form No. 2-A: Annual Report of Non-Major Natural Gas Companies Number of
  • respondents
  • Annual
  • number of
  • responses per
  • respondent
  • Total number of responses Average burden and cost per response 4 Total annual
  • burden and total
  • annual cost
  • Cost per
  • respondent
  • ($)
  • (1) (2) (1) * (2) = (3) (4) (3) * (4) = (5) (5) ÷ (1) FERC Form No. 2 92 1 92 1,629 hrs.; $124,619 149,868 hrs.; $11,464,902 $124,619 FERC Form No. 2-A 66 1 66 253.39 hrs.; 19,384 16,724 hrs.; $1,279,366 $19,384

    Comments: Comments are invited on: (1) Whether the collections of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Commission, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency's estimates of the burden and costs of the collections of information, including the validity of the methodologies and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information collections; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the collections of information on those who are to respond, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

    Dated: July 13, 2017. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2017-15243 Filed 7-19-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Combined Notice of Filings

    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:

    Filings Instituting Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP17-808-000.

    Applicants: Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC.

    Description: Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC—AFT-E Answer to Protests, Docket No. RP17-808.

    Filed Date: 6/29/17.

    Accession Number: 20170629-5210.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/11/17.

    Docket Numbers: RP17-858-000.

    Applicants: Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC.

    Description: Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC submits tariff filing per 154.204: Negotiated Rates—US Gas to Macquarie 794260 & 794261 to be effective 7/1/2017.

    Filed Date: 6/29/17.

    Accession Number: 20170629-5034.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/11/17.

    Docket Numbers: RP17-859-000.

    Applicants: Iroquois Gas Transmission System, L.P.

    Description: Iroquois Gas Transmission System, L.P. submits tariff filing per 154.204: 06/29/17 Negotiated Rates—ENI Trading & Shipping (RTS) 7825-02 to be effective 7/1/2017.

    Filed Date: 6/29/17.

    Accession Number: 20170629-5043.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/11/17.

    Docket Numbers: RP17-861-000.

    Applicants: Texas Gas Transmission, LLC.

    Description: Texas Gas Transmission, LLC submits tariff filing per 154.204: Cap Rel Neg Rate Agmts (RE Gas 35433, 34955 to BP 36398, 36399) to be effective 7/1/2017.

    Filed Date: 6/29/17.

    Accession Number: 20170629-5111.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/11/17.

    Docket Numbers: RP17-862-000.

    Applicants: Gulf South Pipeline Company, LP.

    Description: Gulf South Pipeline Company, LP submits tariff filing per 154.204: Cap Rel Neg Rate Agmts (Atlanta 8438 to various eff 7-1-17) to be effective 7/1/2017.

    Filed Date: 6/29/17.

    Accession Number: 20170629-5115.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/11/17.

    Docket Numbers: RP17-863-000.

    Applicants: Gulf South Pipeline Company, LP.

    Description: Gulf South Pipeline Company, LP submits tariff filing per 154.204: Cap Rel Neg Rate Agmt (PH 41455 to Texla 48365) to be effective 7/1/2017.

    Filed Date: 6/29/17.

    Accession Number: 20170629-5117.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/11/17.

    Docket Numbers: RP17-864-000.

    Applicants: Gulf South Pipeline Company, LP.

    Description: Gulf South Pipeline Company, LP submits tariff filing per 154.204: Remove Expiring Agmts from the Tariff to be effective 7/1/2017.

    Filed Date: 6/29/17.

    Accession Number: 20170629-5120.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/11/17.

    Docket Numbers: RP17-865-000.

    Applicants: Texas Eastern Transmission, LP.

    Description: Texas Eastern Transmission, LP submits tariff filing per 154.204: Gulf Markets Project—Cameron Non-Conforming K911327 to be effective 8/1/2017.

    Filed Date: 6/29/17.

    Accession Number: 20170629-5137.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/11/17.

    Docket Numbers: RP17-866-000.

    Applicants: Natural Gas Pipeline Company of America.

    Description: Natural Gas Pipeline Company of America LLC submits tariff filing per 154.204: Amendment Negotiated Rate Filing—Mercuria Energy America to be effective 6/29/2017.

    Filed Date: 6/29/17.

    Accession Number: 20170629-5165.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/11/17.

    Docket Numbers: RP17-867-000.

    Applicants: Texas Eastern Transmission, LP.

    Description: Texas Eastern Transmission, LP submits tariff filing per 154.204: Lebanon Extension Negotiated Rates—Gulfport/City of Hamilton to be effective 8/1/2017.

    Filed Date: 6/29/17.

    Accession Number: 20170629-5177.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/11/17.

    Docket Numbers: RP17-868-000.

    Applicants: Texas Eastern Transmission, LP.

    Description: Texas Eastern Transmission, LP submits tariff filing per 154.403: EPC AUG 2017 FILING to be effective 8/1/2017.

    Filed Date: 6/29/17.

    Accession Number: 20170629-5190.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/11/17.

    Docket Numbers: RP17-869-000.

    Applicants: Texas Eastern Transmission, LP.

    Description: Texas Eastern Transmission, LP submits tariff filing per 154.203: Lebanon Extension Tariff Compliance Filing to be effective 8/1/2017.

    Filed Date: 6/29/17.

    Accession Number: 20170629-5215.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/11/17.

    Docket Numbers: RP17-870-000.

    Applicants: Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company, L.L.C.

    Description: Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company, L.L.C. submits tariff filing per 154.204: Volume No. 2—Cameron LNG, L.L.C Non-Conforming FT-A to be effective 8/1/2017.

    Filed Date: 6/29/17.

    Accession Number: 20170629-5223.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/11/17.

    Docket Numbers: RP17-879-000.

    Applicants: Iroquois Gas Transmission System, L.P.

    Description: Measurement Variance/Fuel Use Factors of Iroquois Gas Transmission System, L.P. under RP17-879.

    Filed Date: 6/29/17.

    Accession Number: 20170629-5257.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/11/17.

    Docket Numbers: RP88-67-000.

    Applicants: Texas Eastern Transmission, LP.

    Description: Texas Eastern Transmission, LP submits the audit report and related work papers of the independent auditor respecting the costs & recoveries under the Settlement for Year 26 & Year 27 (partial period), the most recently completed annual period under the S.

    Filed Date: 6/29/17.

    Accession Number: 20170629-5131.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/11/17.

    Docket Numbers: RP17-871-000.

    Applicants: NGO Transmission, Inc.

    Description: NGO Transmission, Inc. submits tariff filing per 154.204: Ministerial Filing to Update Preliminary Statement to be effective 8/1/2017.

    Filed Date: 6/30/17.

    Accession Number: 20170630-5060.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/12/17.

    Docket Numbers: RP17-872-000.

    Applicants: Texas Gas Transmission, LLC.

    Description: Texas Gas Transmission, LLC submits tariff filing per 154.204: Cap Rel Neg Rate Agmt (Jay-Bee 34446 to MacQuarie 36400) to be effective 7/1/2017.

    Filed Date: 6/30/17.

    Accession Number: 20170630-5063.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/12/17.

    Docket Numbers: RP17-873-000.

    Applicants: Texas Gas Transmission, LLC.

    Description: Texas Gas Transmission, LLC submits tariff filing per 154.204: Cap Rel Neg Rate Agmt (Gulfport 35446 to BP 36411) to be effective 7/1/2017.

    Filed Date: 6/30/17.

    Accession Number: 20170630-5064.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/12/17.

    Docket Numbers: RP17-874-000.

    Applicants: Rockies Express Pipeline LLC.

    Description: Rockies Express Pipeline LLC submits tariff filing per 154.204: Administrative Updates to FERC Gas Tariff to be effective 8/1/2017.

    Filed Date: 6/30/17.

    Accession Number: 20170630-5081.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/12/17.

    Docket Numbers: RP17-875-000.

    Applicants: WBI Energy Transmission, Inc.

    Description: WBI Energy Transmission, Inc. submits tariff filing per 154.204: 2017 Section 46 Removal—Nomination Aggregation to be effective 7/31/2017.

    Filed Date: 6/30/17.

    Accession Number: 20170630-5082.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/12/17.

    Docket Numbers: RP17-876-000.

    Applicants: El Paso Natural Gas Company, L.L.C.

    Description: El Paso Natural Gas Company, L.L.C. submits tariff filing per 154.601: Negotiated Rate Agreement Update Filing (WPX July 2017) to be effective 7/1/2017.

    Filed Date: 6/30/17.

    Accession Number: 20170630-5087.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/12/17.

    Docket Numbers: RP17-877-000.

    Applicants: Southern Star Central Gas Pipeline, Inc.

    Description: Southern Star Central Gas Pipeline, Inc. submits tariff filing per 154.204: Vol. 2 Negotiated and Non-Conforming Flexible Park & Loan—Tenaska—Amendment to be effective 7/1/2017.

    Filed Date: 6/30/17.

    Accession Number: 20170630-5093.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/12/17.

    Docket Numbers: RP17-878-000.

    Applicants: Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Company.

    Description: Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Company, LLC submits tariff filing per 154.203: Texas Eastern OFO Penalty Sharing Report (Rate Schedule S-2) to be effective N/A.

    Filed Date: 6/30/17.

    Accession Number: 20170630-5102.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/12/17.

    Docket Numbers: RP17-880-000.

    Applicants: Dauphin Island Gathering Partners.

    Description: Dauphin Island Gathering Partners submits tariff filing per 154.204: Negotiated Rate Filing 7-1-2017 to be effective 7/1/2017.

    Filed Date: 6/30/17.

    Accession Number: 20170630-5141.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/12/17.

    Docket Numbers: RP17-881-000.

    Applicants: Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Company.

    Description: Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Company, LLC submits tariff filing per 154.204: FOS—FT—Proj Facilities Effective Date to be effective 7/31/2017.

    Filed Date: 6/30/17.

    Accession Number: 20170630-5147.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/12/17.

    Docket Numbers: RP17-882-000.

    Applicants: Northern Natural Gas Company.

    Description: Northern Natural Gas Company submits tariff filing per 154.204: 20170630 Negotiated Rate to be effective 7/1/2017.

    Filed Date: 6/30/17.

    Accession Number: 20170630-5196.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/12/17.

    Docket Numbers: RP17-883-000.

    Applicants: Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Company.

    Description: Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Company, LLC submits tariff filing per 154.204: Non-Conforming Agreements_Dalton to be effective 8/1/2017.

    Filed Date: 6/30/17.

    Accession Number: 20170630-5200.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/12/17.

    Docket Numbers: RP17-884-000.

    Applicants: Trailblazer Pipeline Company LLC.

    Description: Trailblazer Pipeline Company LLC submits tariff filing per 154.204: Neg Rate 2017-06-30 TIGT, Shell to be effective 7/1/2017.

    Filed Date: 6/30/17.

    Accession Number: 20170630-5264.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/12/17.

    Docket Numbers: RP17-889-000.

    Applicants: East Tennessee Natural Gas, LLC.

    Description: East Tennessee Natural Gas, LLC submits tariff filing per 154.204: PAL FOSA Evergreen Cleanup to be effective 8/6/2017.

    Filed Date: 7/6/17.

    Accession Number: 20170706-5134.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/18/17.

    Docket Numbers: RP17-890-000.

    Applicants: Alliance Pipeline L.P.

    Description: Alliance Pipeline L.P. submits tariff filing per 154.204: Negotiated Rate PAL 2017-07 (Mieco) to be effective 7/7/2017.

    Filed Date: 7/6/17.

    Accession Number: 20170706-5152.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/18/17.

    Docket Numbers: RP17-891-000.

    Applicants: Dominion Energy Transmission, Inc.

    Description: Dominion Energy Transmission, Inc. submits tariff filing per 154.203: DETI—2017 Overrun and Penalty Revenue Distribution to be effective N/A.

    Filed Date: 7/7/17.

    Accession Number: 20170707-5015.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/19/17.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the links or querying the docket number.

    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and § 385.214) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the proceeding.

    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

    Dated: July 7, 2017. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2017-15248 Filed 7-19-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket Nos. CP17-470-000; PF15-25-000] Freeport LNG Development, L.P.; FLNG Liquefaction 4, LLC; Notice of Applications

    Take notice that, on June 29, 2017, Freeport LNG Development, L.P. and FLNG Liquefaction 4, LLC, (Freeport LNG) 333 Clay Street, Suite 5050, Houston, TX 77002, filed an application seeking authorization pursuant to section 3(a) of the Natural Gas Act, and parts 153 and 380 of the regulations of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or Commission), to site, construct, and operate additional natural gas liquefaction facilities at Freeport LNG Development, L.P.'s existing Quintana Island Terminal in Brazoria County, Texas, as well as associated pretreatment and pipeline facilities, for the purpose of liquefying domestic natural gas for export to foreign countries.

    Any questions regarding the application should be directed to: John Tobola, Freeport LNG Development, L.P., 333 Clay Street, Suite 5050, Houston, TX 77002, (713) 980-2888, [email protected]; or Lisa M. Tonery, Partner, Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP, 51 West 52nd Street, New York, NY 10019-6142, (212) 506-3710, [email protected]

    This filing is available for review at the Commission's Washington, DC offices, or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov using the “e-Library” link. Enter the docket number, excluding the last three digits, in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at [email protected], or call toll-free at (866) 208-3676, or for TTY, contact (202) 502-8659.

    On June 3, 2015, FERC granted Freeport LNG's request to initiate the pre-filing review process for the Train 4 Project. During the pre-filing process, Freeport LNG participated in meetings with local, state, and federal officials, as well as individual and agency stakeholders, to identify and resolve issues of potential concern at an early juncture. On August 19, 2015, FERC issued a Notice of Intent to prepare an Environmental Assessment for the Project and Request for Comments. Now, as of the filing of the application on June 29, 2017, the pre-filing process for this project has ended. From this time forward, Freeport LNG's proceeding will be conducted in Docket No. CP17-470-000, as noted in the caption of this Notice.

    There are two ways to become involved in the Commission's review of this Project. First, any person wishing to obtain legal status by becoming a party to the proceeding for this project should file with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426, a motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.214, 385.211 (2016), by the comment date below. A person obtaining party status will be placed on the service list maintained by the Secretary of the Commission, and will receive copies of all documents filed by the applicant and by all other parties. A party must submit filings made with the Commission by mail, hand delivery, or internet, in accordance with Rule 2001 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, id. 385.2001. A copy must be served on every other party in the proceeding. Only parties to the proceeding can ask for court review of Commission orders in the proceeding.

    However, a person does not have to intervene to have comments considered. The second way to participate is by filing with the Secretary of the Commission, as soon as possible, an original and two copies of comments in support of or in opposition to this project. The Commission will consider these comments in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but the filing of a comment alone will not serve to make the filer a party to the proceeding. The Commission's rules require that persons filing comments in opposition to the project provide copies of their protests only to the party or parties directly involved in the protest.

    Protests and interventions may be filed electronically via the Internet in lieu of paper; see 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site under the e-filing link. The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings.

    If the Commission decides to set the application for a formal hearing before an Administrative Law Judge, the Commission will issue another notice describing that process. At the end of the Commission's review process, a final Commission order approving or denying the requested authorization will be issued.

    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Daylight Savings Time August 4, 2017.

    Dated: July 14, 2017. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2017-15245 Filed 7-19-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Project No. 1494-441] Grand River Dam Authority: Notice of Application for Temporary Variance and Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene, and Protests

    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection:

    a. Application Type: Temporary variance from the Article 401 reservoir elevation rule curve in order to keep reservoir levels in the Grand Lake O' the Cherokees (Grand Lake) higher than normal for the period of August 16, 2017 through October 31, 2017.

    b. Project No.: 1494-441.

    c. Date Filed: July 11, 2017.

    d. Applicant: Grand River Dam Authority (GRDA).

    e. Name of Project: Pensacola Hydroelectric Project.

    f. Location: The project is located on the Grand River in Craig, Delaware, Mayes, and Ottawa Counties, Oklahoma.

    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791(a)-825(r).

    h. Applicant Contact: Daniel S. Sullivan, Chief Executive Officer, Grand River Dam Authority, P.O. Box. 409, Vinita, OK 74301; telephone: (918) 256-5545.

    i. FERC Contact: B. Peter Yarrington, telephone (202) 502-6129, email [email protected] or Jeremy Jessup, telephone (202) 502-6779, email [email protected]

    j. Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, and protests is 15 days from the issuance date of this notice by the Commission.

    All documents may be filed electronically via the Internet. See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can submit brief comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior registration, using the eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You must include your name and contact information at the end of your comments. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at [email protected] or toll free at 1-866-208-3676, or for TTY, (202) 502-8659. Although the Commission strongly encourages electronic filing, documents may also be paper-filed. To paper-file, mail a copy to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426. Please include the project number (P-1494-441) on any comments or motions filed.

    k. Description of Request: GRDA requests a temporary variance to deviate from the Article 401 reservoir elevation rule curve during the period of August 16, 2017 through October 31, 2017. GRDA says the requested variance would protect safety and property by reducing the risk of vessel groundings in late summer, improve recreation during a peak recreation season, and provide additional water storage to assist in making releases for maintenance of dissolved oxygen concentrations downstream.

    This temporary variance request is separate from the application GRDA filed May 6, 2016, which proposes a permanent amendment of the project's Article 401 rule curve requirements. The May 6, 2016 permanent amendment application is currently under Commission review.

    Under GRDA's proposed temporary variance, between August 16 and September 15, 2017, GRDA would maintain the reservoir at elevation 743 feet Pensacola Datum (PD), which is up to two feet higher than the current rule curve. Between September 16 and September 30, the elevation would be lowered from 743 to 742 feet PD, which up to two feet higher than the current rule curve. Between October 1 and October 31, the reservoir would then be maintained at elevation 742 feet PD, which is up to one foot higher than the current rule curve. After October 31, reservoir elevations would follow the current rule curve.

    As part of its application, GRDA includes a Storm Adaptive Management Plan that would be followed to address high water conditions upstream and downstream of Grand Lake during major precipitation events in the river basin. GRDA also includes a Drought Adaptive Management Plan that would be followed to determine project operation, including deviations from the rule curve elevations, to allow releases for maintenance of downstream water quality and reliable operation of GRDA's downstream Salina Pumped Storage Project if certain drought conditions occur.

    l. Locations of the Application: A copy of the application is available for inspection and reproduction at the Commission's Public Reference Room, located at 888 First Street NE., Room 2A, Washington, DC 20426, or by calling (202) 502-8371. This filing may also be viewed on the Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the document. A copy is also available for inspection and reproduction at the address in item (h) above.

    You may also register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to be notified via email of new filings and issuances related to this or other pending projects. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support.

    m. Individuals desiring to be included on the Commission's mailing list should so indicate by writing to the Secretary of the Commission.

    n. Comments, Protests, or Motions to Intervene: Anyone may submit comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211, .214. In determining the appropriate action to take, the Commission will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only those who file a motion to intervene in accordance with the Commission's Rules may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments, protests, or motions to intervene must be received on or before the specified comment date for the particular application.

    o. Filing and Service of Responsive Documents: All filings must (1) bear in all capital letters the title COMMENTS, PROTEST, or MOTION TO INTERVENE as applicable; (2) set forth in the heading the name of the applicant and the project number of the application to which the filing responds; (3) furnish the name, address, and telephone number of the person protesting or intervening; and (4) otherwise comply with the requirements of 18 CFR 385.2001 through 385.2005. All comments, motions to intervene, or protests must set forth their evidentiary basis and otherwise comply with the requirements of 18 CFR 4.34(b). All comments, motions to intervene, or protests should relate to project works which are the subject of the amendment application. Agencies may obtain copies of the application directly from the applicant. A copy of any protest or motion to intervene must be served upon each representative of the applicant specified in the particular application. If an intervener files comments or documents with the Commission relating to the merits of an issue that may affect the responsibilities of a particular resource agency, they must also serve a copy of the document on that resource agency. A copy of all other filings in reference to this application must be accompanied by proof of service on all persons listed in the service list prepared by the Commission in this proceeding, in accordance with 18 CFR 4.34(b) and 385.2010.

    Dated: July 13, 2017. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2017-15246 Filed 7-19-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
    FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION Sunshine Act Meeting

    Pursuant to the provisions of the “Government in the Sunshine Act” (5 U.S.C. 552b), notice is hereby given that at 10:19 a.m. on Tuesday, July 18, 2017, the Board of Directors of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation met in closed session to consider matters related to the Corporation's supervision, corporate, and resolution activities.

    In calling the meeting, the Board determined, on motion of Vice Chairman Thomas M. Hoenig, seconded by Director Keith A. Noreika (Acting Comptroller of the Currency), concurred in by Director Richard Cordray (Director, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau), and Chairman Martin J. Gruenberg, that Corporation business required its consideration of the matters which were to be the subject of this meeting on less than seven days' notice to the public; that no earlier notice of the meeting was practicable; that the public interest did not require consideration of the matters in a meeting open to public observation; and that the matters could be considered in a closed meeting by authority of subsections (c)(2), (c)(4), (c)(6), (c)(8), (c)(9)(A)(ii), and (c)(9)(B) of the “Government in the Sunshine Act” (5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(2), (c)(4), (c)(6), (c)(8), (c)(9)(A)(ii), and (c)(9)(B).

    Dated: July 18, 2017. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. Robert E. Feldman, Executive Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2017-15350 Filed 7-18-17; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE 6714-01-P
    FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Holding Companies

    The companies listed in this notice have applied to the Board for approval, pursuant to the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 1841 et seq.) (BHC Act), Regulation Y (12 CFR part 225), and all other applicable statutes and regulations to become a bank holding company and/or to acquire the assets or the ownership of, control of, or the power to vote shares of a bank or bank holding company and all of the banks and nonbanking companies owned by the bank holding company, including the companies listed below.

    The applications listed below, as well as other related filings required by the Board, are available for immediate inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The applications will also be available for inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their views in writing on the standards enumerated in the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1842(c)). If the proposal also involves the acquisition of a nonbanking company, the review also includes whether the acquisition of the nonbanking company complies with the standards in section 4 of the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1843). Unless otherwise noted, nonbanking activities will be conducted throughout the United States.

    Unless otherwise noted, comments regarding each of these applications must be received at the Reserve Bank indicated or the offices of the Board of Governors not later than August 16, 2017.

    A. Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago (Colette A. Fried, Assistant Vice President) 230 South LaSalle Street, Chicago, Illinois 60690-1414:

    1. QCR Holdings, Inc., Moline, Illinois; to acquire 100 percent of the voting shares of Guaranty Bank and Trust Company, Cedar Rapids, Iowa.

    B. Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas (Robert L. Triplett III, Senior Vice President) 2200 North Pearl Street, Dallas, Texas 75201-2272:

    1. Southside Bancshares, Inc., Tyler, Texas; to merge with Diboll State Bancshares, Inc., and thereby indirectly acquire First Bank & Trust East Texas, both of Diboll, Texas.

    C. Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis (David L. Hubbard, Senior Manager) P.O. Box 442, St. Louis, Missouri 63166-2034. Comments can also be sent electronically to [email protected]:

    1. Simmons First National Corporation, Pine Bluff, Arkansas; to merge with Southwest Bancorp, Inc., Stillwater, Oklahoma, and thereby indirectly acquire Bank SNB, Stillwater, Oklahoma.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, July 17, 2017. Yao-Chin Chao, Assistant Secretary of the Board.
    [FR Doc. 2017-15251 Filed 7-19-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6210-01-P
    FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM Agency Information Collection Activities: Announcement of Board Approval Under Delegated Authority and Submission to OMB AGENCY:

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.

    SUMMARY:

    The Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (Board) is adopting a proposal to extend, without revision, the recordkeeping and disclosure requirements associated with Regulation R.

    On June 15, 1984, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) delegated to the Board authority under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) to approve of and assign OMB control numbers to collection of information requests and requirements conducted or sponsored by the Board. Board-approved collections of information are incorporated into the official OMB inventory of currently approved collections of information. Copies of the Paperwork Reduction Act Submission, supporting statements and approved collection of information instrument(s) are placed into OMB's public docket files. The Board may not conduct or sponsor, and the respondent is not required to respond to, an information collection that has been extended, revised, or implemented on or after October 1, 1995, unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Federal Reserve Board Clearance Officer—Nuha Elmaghrabi—Office of the Chief Data Officer, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, Washington, DC 20551, (202) 452-3829. Telecommunications Device for the Deaf (TDD) users may contact (202) 263-4869, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, Washington, DC 20551.

    OMB Desk Officer—Shagufta Ahmed—Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, New Executive Office Building, Room 10235, 725 17th Street NW., Washington, DC 20503 or by fax to (202) 395-6974.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Final approval under OMB delegated authority of the extension for three years, without revision, of the following report:

    Report title: Recordkeeping and Disclosure Requirements Associated with Regulation R.

    Agency form number: FR 4025.

    OMB Control number: 7100-0316.

    Frequency: On occasion.

    Respondents: Commercial banks and savings associations.

    Estimated number of respondents: Section 701 disclosures to customers: 1,500; Section 701 disclosures to brokers: 1,500, Section 723 recordkeeping: 75; Section 741 disclosures to customers: 750.

    Estimated average hours per response: Section 701 disclosures to customers: 5 minutes; Section 701 disclosures to brokers: 15 minutes, Section 723 recordkeeping: 15 minutes; Section 741 disclosures to customers: 5 minutes.

    Estimated annual burden hours: 75,563.

    General description of report: Sections 701, 723, and 741 contain information collection requirements. Details of the requirements for each section are provided below.

    Section 701. Section 701(a)(2)(i) and (b) require banks (or their broker-dealer partners) that utilize the exemption provided in this section to make certain disclosures to high net worth or institutional customers. Specifically, these banks must clearly and conspicuously disclose (i) the name of the broker-dealer and (ii) that the bank employee participates in an incentive compensation program under which the bank employee may receive a fee of more than a nominal amount for referring the customer to the broker- dealer and payment of this fee may be contingent on whether the referral results in a transaction with the broker-dealer.

    In addition, one of the conditions of the exemption is that the broker-dealer and the bank have a contractual or other written arrangement containing certain elements, including notification and information requirements. The bank must provide its broker-dealer partner with the name of the bank employee receiving a referral fee under the exemption and certain other identifying information relating to the bank employee.

    Section 723. Section 723(e)(1) requires a bank that desires to exclude a trust or fiduciary account in determining its compliance with the chiefly compensated test in section 721, pursuant to a de minimis exclusion 5, to maintain records demonstrating that the securities transactions conducted by or on behalf of the account were undertaken by the bank in the exercise of its trust or fiduciary responsibilities with respect to the account.

    Section 741. Section 741(a)(2)(ii)(A) requires a bank relying on this exemption, which permits banks to effect transactions in the shares of a money market fund, to provide customers with a prospectus for the money market fund securities, not later than the time the customer authorizes the bank to effect the transaction in such securities, if the class or series of securities are not no-load. In situations where a bank effects transactions under the exemption as part of a program for the investment or reinvestment of deposit funds of, or collected by, another bank, the Section permits either the effecting bank or the deposit-taking bank to provide the customer a prospectus for the money market fund securities.

    Legal authorization and confidentiality: The Board's Legal Division has determined that section 3(a)(4)(F) of the Exchange Act (15 U.S.C. 78c(a)(4)(F)) authorizes the Board and the SEC to require the information collection. The FR 4025 is required to obtain a benefit because banks wishing to utilize exemptions provided by the rules 701, 723, and 741 are required to comply with the recordkeeping and disclosure requirements. If an institution considers the information to be trade secrets and/or privileged, such information could be withheld from the public under section (b)(4) of the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552(b)(4)). Additionally, to the extent that such information may be contained in an examination report, such information maybe also be withheld from the public under section (b)(8) of the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552 (b)(8)).

    Current Actions: On April 3, 2017, the Board published a notice in the Federal Register (82 FR 16210) requesting public comment for 60 days on the extension, without revision, of the Recordkeeping and Disclosure Requirements Associated with Regulation R. The comment period for this notice expired on June 2, 2017. The Board did not receive any comments.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, July 17, 2017. Ann E. Misback Secretary of the Board.
    [FR Doc. 2017-15263 Filed 7-19-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6210-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2016-N-0407] Pilot Project Program Under the Drug Supply Chain Security Act; Request for Comments AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice; request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or Agency) is announcing its intent to establish a pilot project program under the Drug Supply Chain Security Act (the DSCSA Pilot Project Program) to assist in development of the electronic, interoperable system that will identify and trace certain prescription drugs as these are distributed within the United States. Under this program, FDA will work with stakeholders to establish one or more pilot projects to explore and evaluate methods to enhance the safety and security of the pharmaceutical distribution supply chain. Participation in the DSCSA Pilot Project Program will be voluntary and will be open to pharmaceutical distribution supply chain members. FDA will be particularly interested in participation reflecting the diversity of the supply chain, including large and small entities from all industry sectors. This notice describes the proposed DSCSA Pilot Project Program, including proposed instructions for submitting a request to participate. FDA is soliciting comments on the proposed collection of information associated with establishment of the DSCSA Pilot Project Program before submitting the proposed collection to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for approval. FDA does not intend to begin the proposed DSCSA Pilot Project Program or accept requests to participate in the program until OMB has approved the proposed collection of information.

    DATES:

    Submit written or electronic comments on this pilot project program by September 18, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments as follows. Please note that late, untimely filed comments will not be considered. Electronic comments must be submitted on or before September 18, 2017. The https://www.regulations.gov electronic filing system will accept comments until midnight Eastern Time at the end of September 18, 2017. Comments received by mail/hand delivery/courier (for written/paper submissions) will be considered timely if they are postmarked or the delivery service acceptance receipt is on or before that date.

    Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:

    Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Comments submitted electronically, including attachments, to https://www.regulations.gov will be posted to the docket unchanged. Because your comment will be made public, you are solely responsible for ensuring that your comment does not include any confidential information that you or a third party may not wish to be posted, such as medical information, your or anyone else's Social Security number, or confidential business information, such as a manufacturing process. Please note that if you include your name, contact information, or other information that identifies you in the body of your comments, that information will be posted on https://www.regulations.gov.

    • If you want to submit a comment with confidential information that you do not wish to be made available to the public, submit the comment as a written/paper submission and in the manner detailed (see “Written/Paper Submissions” and “Instructions”).

    Written/Paper Submissions

    Submit written/paper submissions as follows:

    Mail/Hand delivery/Courier (for written/paper submissions): Dockets Management Staff (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

    • For written/paper comments submitted to the Dockets Management Staff, 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-N-0407 for “Pilot Project Program under the Drug Supply Chain Security Act; Request for Comments.” Received comments will be placed in the docket and, except for those submitted as “Confidential Submissions,” publicly viewable at https://www.regulations.gov or at the Dockets Management Staff between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.

    • Confidential Submissions—To submit a comment with confidential information that you do not wish to be made publicly available, submit your comments only as a written/paper submission. You should submit two copies total. One copy will include the information you claim to be confidential with a heading or cover note that states “THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.” The Agency will review this copy, including the claimed confidential information, in its consideration of comments. The second copy, which will have the claimed confidential information redacted/blacked out, will be available for public viewing and posted on https://www.regulations.gov. Submit both copies to the Dockets Management Staff. 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: https://www.thefederalregister.org/fdsys/pkg/FR-2015-09-18/pdf/2015-23389.pdf.

    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or the electronic and written/paper comments received, go to https://www.regulations.gov and insert the docket number, found in brackets in the heading of this document, into the “Search” box and follow the prompts and/or go to the Dockets Management Staff, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Daniel Bellingham, Office of Compliance, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 50, Rm. 4285, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 301-796-3130, [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Background

    On November 27, 2013, the Drug Supply Chain Security Act (DSCSA) (Title II of Pub. L. 113-54) was signed into law. The DSCSA outlines critical steps to build an electronic, interoperable system by November 27, 2023, that will identify and trace certain prescription drugs as they are distributed within the United States. Section 202 of the DSCSA added the new sections 581 and 582 to the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the FD&C Act) (21 U.S.C. 360eee and 360eee-1, respectively). Under section 582(j) of the FD&C Act, FDA is required to establish one or more pilot projects, in coordination with authorized manufacturers, repackagers, wholesale distributors, and dispensers, to explore and evaluate methods to enhance the safety and security of the pharmaceutical distribution supply chain.

    FDA will be establishing the DSCSA Pilot Project Program to implement section 582(j) of the FD&C Act. This program will assist the development of the interoperable electronic system to be established by 2023. The new system has the potential to reduce diversion of drugs distributed domestically as well as help reduce the influx of counterfeit drugs from foreign sources. The program will be designed to explore issues related to utilizing the product identifier for product tracing, improving the technical capabilities of the supply chain, identifying the system attributes that are necessary to implement the requirements established under the DSCSA, and any other issues identified by FDA (see section 582(j)(2)(B) of the FD&C Act). Particular program goals include assessing the ability of supply chain members to: Satisfy the requirements of section 582 of the FD&C Act; identify, manage, and prevent the distribution of suspect and illegitimate products as defined in section 581(21) and 581(8) of the FD&C Act, respectively; and demonstrate the electronic, interoperable exchange of product tracing information across the pharmaceutical distribution supply chain, in addition to identifying the system attributes needed to implement the requirements of section 582, particularly the requirement to utilize a product identifier for product tracing and verification purposes. FDA plans to coordinate with stakeholders who reflect the diversity of the pharmaceutical distribution supply chain, including large and small entities from all industry sectors. The pilot project is designed to allow industry to identify and evaluate the most efficient systems for their unique operational systems.

    II. The Proposed DSCSA Pilot Project Program

    FDA will be seeking pilot project participants from the pharmaceutical distribution supply chain (authorized manufacturers, repackagers, wholesale distributors, and dispensers) and other stakeholders. FDA expects that participants will propose the design and execution of their pilot project in their submission to FDA; however, FDA intends to meet with all pilot project participants to ensure that the learnings from the pilot project(s) will be complementary in informing the direction of the development of the electronic, interoperable system that will go into effect in 2023. FDA encourages supply chain members to focus their proposed pilot project(s) on the DSCSA requirements related to the interoperable, electronic tracing of products at the package level. Specifically, the pilot project(s) should focus on the requirements for package-level tracing and verification that go into effect in 2023. Such pilot projects will be more useful than pilot projects dedicated to lot-level tracing. If there are adequate pilot project submissions, FDA may establish more than one pilot project to accomplish the goals of the DSCSA Pilot Project Program.

    A. Products Eligible for Proposed Pilot Projects

    Proposed pilot projects may include any prescription drug that is a “product” within the meaning of section 581(13) of the FD&C Act. At its discretion, FDA may also consider proposed pilot projects involving product types outside the scope of section 581(13) of the FD&C Act (e.g., over-the-counter medicines) that could further the objectives of the DSCSA Pilot Project Program. Each package and homogenous case of product that is part of a pilot project should bear a “product identifier” as described in sections 581(14) and 582(a)(9) of the FD&C Act.

    B. Potential Issues To Examine and Evaluation Methods To Use in Proposed Pilot Projects

    On April 5 and 6, 2016, FDA held a public workshop entitled “Proposed Pilot Project(s) under the Drug Supply Chain Security Act (DSCSA).” This public workshop provided a forum for members of the pharmaceutical distribution supply chain to discuss the design objectives of pilot projects established by FDA under section 582(j) of the FD&C Act. Based on the information gathered at that workshop and from the comments submitted to the public docket for the workshop (Docket No. FDA-2016-N-0407), FDA has identified several potential issues to examine, and evaluation methods to use, in pilot projects established under the DSCSA Pilot Project Program. These potential issues and evaluation methods are summarized in table 1. This table is intended only to assist in the design of potential pilot projects; it does not represent FDA's views or policies regarding the issues described in the table. For ease of reference, the potential issues to examine and evaluation methods have been grouped by focus areas for the pilot projects.

    Table 1—Potential Issues To Examine and Evaluation Methods To Use in Proposed Pilot Projects Pilot project focus area Potential issues to examine Potential evaluation methods Product Identifier • Processes related to the requirement for manufacturers to affix or imprint a product identifier to each package and homogenous case of product intended to be introduced in a transaction into commerce
  • • Methods used to issue and manage serial numbers (e.g., including a contract manufacturer's role if applicable or how a repackager associates its product identifier with the product identifier assigned by the original manufacturer)
  • • Impacts of different representations of the product identifier on systems or processes.
  • —Number of errors.
  • —Time to process.
  • —Time to reconcile these differences.
  • • Different representations for the product identifier (e.g., different formats of NDC or serial number) Barcode Quality • Readability of barcode printed or affixed including impact of environmental and human factors
  • • Application of linear and 2D barcodes on product
  • • Barcode read error rates.
  • —Number of items unnecessarily quarantined or held up.
  • —Time and resource impacts.
  • • Distinguishing which barcode to read/use and when Interoperability • Process and technical challenges due to variety of solutions expected (e.g., type of database used and system architecture for exchanging information among trading partners)
  • • Maintaining the integrity of information contained in the barcode of serialized product throughout the distribution supply chain (e.g., a trading partner goes out of business or one acquires another business)
  • • Different methods for exchanging information (e.g., the use of Electronic Data Interchange, Electronic Product Code Information Services, and other solutions separately)
  • • For both decentralized and centralized models, time implications.
  • —To investigate suspect and illegitimate products.
  • —For notifications required within the statutory timelines.
  • —Related to scaling up from pilot to full production.
  • • Product tracing information (across multiple partners).
  • —Capability to retrieve the information.
  • —Accuracy of the information (within and between systems).
  • • Security and access.
  • —Evaluate and document access levels for trading partners.
  • Data/Database/System Issues • Data quality from beginning to end of the product lifecycle and vice versa
  • • System performance when full or partially loaded with data
  • • System Performance and Effectiveness.
  • —Time to access and use product tracing information, once that data is received into a system.
  • • Data format or processes for data transfer
  • —Use of technical standards for defining data attributes to enable interoperable transfers
  • —Methods to handle the “master data” (product-specific data) and transaction data separately to minimize “master data” redundancy
  • —Quality of product tracing information.
  • —Number of breaches to system.
  • —Number of attempts to breach the system that were prevented or minimized.
  • • Integration into individual/company data systems
  • • Control and access to data by trading partners, FDA or other Federal or State officials (data governance)
  • • Ability of the system to record product status (e.g., to indicate expired, illegitimate, in error, quarantined) at all packaging levels
  • • Data and product flow.
  • —Number of unsuccessful attempts to access data and operational impacts.
  • —Number of system interactions within one, and amongst multiple, trading partners.
  • —Time and resource changes on operations when data and product not moving at same time (e.g., product arrives before data arrives).
  • —Time for location/ownership/status changes to be reflected in the system. —Time of product flow delays and associated costs due to system or data problems. Aggregation/Disaggregation • Multiple levels of adoption of inference, by different trading partners.
  • —Impact of inference gaps, changes or errors in data, particularly downstream when searching or examining the data; how can errors be corrected
  • • Number of system and product interactions within one, and amongst multiple, trading partners.
  • • Time required to conduct aggregate/disaggregate operations and transactions.
  • • Accuracy of aggregation data (measure error counts). • Time to gather aggregation/disaggregation data for investigations and notifications. • Time to resolve errors in data. Verification/Notification • Process for investigation of suspect or illegitimate product, including any communication or coordination
  • —Making and responding to verification requests
  • —Making, responding, and terminating notifications
  • —Responding to requests for information
  • —Testing boundaries of the system
  • • Response times: Current vs. future process.
  • • Time needed to obtain product tracing information to respond to a request for verification.
  • • Time needed to make, respond to, or terminate a notification.
  • • Time to gather product tracing information to support an investigation for a suspect or illegitimate product, or a recall.
  • • Percentage of items that are successfully verified vs. those that were targeted for verification. • Number of connections/queries needed to gather product tracing information in response to a verification or notification request. Exception Handling/Errors/Inconsistencies • Identify `honest errors' (e.g., over/under shipments, clerical errors or aggregation errors)
  • • Correcting `honest errors'
  • • Percent errors detected: compare exceptions introduced vs. exceptions detected.
  • —Identify the first step in the process where error detected.
  • • Number of new or changed processes needed to accomplish DSCSA goals. —Time and resource impacts. • `Honest Errors'. —Number of items unnecessarily quarantined and held up. —Time required to detect and correct errors. —Impact on trading partners to correct errors. • Barcode read error rates. —Number of items unnecessarily quarantined or held-up. —Time and resource impacts. Special Scenarios • Situations when data and product do not move together
  • • Situations when serialized product are sold and distributed along with non-serialized product
  • • Error rates for special processes.
  • —Number of items unnecessarily quarantined or held-up.
  • —Time and resource impacts.
  • • Accuracy of linkage between original manufacturer product identifier and repackager-issued product identifier.

    FDA also received input from the workshop participants and in the comments submitted to the public docket on factors that the Agency should take into consideration when establishing pilot projects. These factors described in the comments include the extent to which the pilot projects:

    • Represent the mix of products and levels of packaging in the supply chain.

    • Include a diverse set of supply chain stakeholders (types and sizes) and transaction types.

    • Use adaptive design to make the pilot projects more efficient.

    • Target known weaknesses in the supply chain.

    • Can be completed in time to provide useful information for trading partners.

    • Evaluate human factors that could present implementation challenges.

    • Simulate illegitimate products/transactions to test a process or system.

    • Document costs to implement, use, and maintain piloted solutions.

    Although the Agency intends to take these factors into consideration when establishing pilot projects, FDA also recognizes that a single pilot project is unlikely to satisfy every factor. Accordingly, FDA may establish a pilot project based on a request to participate in the program that does not satisfy one or more of the factors listed in this document.

    C. Proposed Instructions for Submitting a Request To Participate in the Proposed DSCSA Pilot Project Program

    Once the DSCSA Pilot Project Program is established, volunteers interested in participating in the DSCSA Pilot Project Program will be able to submit a request to participate by email to a designated FDA email address for the program. For a group of entities that partner to participate in a pilot project, only one submission and one point-of-contact for the proposed pilot project should be provided in the request to participate. Requests to participate may also consider other ideas for a pilot project that are not included in this notice.

    D. Proposed Content of the Submission for a Request To Participate in the Proposed DSCSA Pilot Project Program

    The following information should be included in the request:

    • Contact information for the submitter or point of contact, if different from the submitter (name, mailing address, phone number, email address).

    • Names of all partnering entities that would participate in such pilot project (name of company and name of company representative).

    • Type(s) of each partnering entity participating in the pilot project (partnering entities include authorized trading partners or other supply chain stakeholders).

    • Number of employees for each partnering entity that would participate in such pilot project.

    • Proposed start and finish dates of the pilot project.

    • Commitment to start the pilot project within 4 months of receiving a letter of acceptance from FDA.

    • Product(s) that will be used in the pilot project.

    • Location(s) where pilot project will be performed (facility address).

    • Description of the proposed pilot project, including, but not limited to, the goals, objectives, processes that will be studied, and evaluation methods.

    E. Initiation and Duration of Proposed Pilot Projects

    The selected participants should be ready to start their pilot project within 4 months of receiving a letter of acceptance from FDA into the program. The duration of a pilot project should not exceed 6 months. FDA may consider a pilot project with a later start date or longer duration depending on the proposed goal(s) and objective(s). Each pilot project is expected to be completed within the proposed duration time period. This time period does not include an additional 30-days for completion of a final report (see section G. Proposed Reports).

    F. Participation in Proposed Pilot Projects

    Prior to launching a pilot project, FDA will hold a design strategy meeting with the selected pilot participant(s) to review the goal(s) and objective(s) for the pilot project and discuss the plans and other pertinent details. The participant(s) will be responsible for conducting their pilot project. A group of entities (members of the pharmaceutical distribution supply chain and other stakeholders, including trade associations) that partner to conduct a pilot project may be considered a single participant for purposes of the DSCSA Pilot Project Program. The partners in any pilot project that is selected into the program will be responsible for the funding and resources necessary to conduct the pilot project, and for determining each partner's role and responsibility in their pilot project. Pilot project participants will also be expected to submit reports on the progress of their pilot projects to FDA (see section G. Proposed Reports). Participants should evaluate their pilot project using the evaluation methods they identified during the pilot project design process.

    G. Proposed Reports

    Each pilot project is expected to be completed within the proposed duration time period, and participants will be expected to report progress to FDA while the pilot project is being conducted, in addition to a final report within 30 days of completing the pilot project. These reports will provide insight into the systems and process needed to comply with certain DSCSA requirements for enhance drug distribution security.

    1. Progress Report(s)

    Each pilot project program participant is expected to provide reports on the progress of their pilot project to FDA. The progress reports are intended to capture the ongoing work during the pilot project, including but not limited to, current status or results, changes, challenges, and/or lessons learned. FDA will work with participants to develop an appropriate schedule for the submission of progress reports based on the design and duration of the pilot project. Because the duration of a pilot project should not exceed 6 months, the frequency of progress reports will vary based on the length of the individual pilot project. Pilot projects of relatively shorter duration may result in shorter time intervals between progress reports. For example, FDA may ask for monthly progress reports for a 6-month pilot project, however for a one-month pilot project, FDA may ask for weekly progress reports.

    2. Final Report

    Within 30 business days of completing a pilot project, each participant is expected to provide a final report to FDA that captures the description, objectives, methods, evaluation, costs and key findings and lessons learned from the project. Timely completion of pilot project and the final report will support FDA's DSCSA implementation, including the statutory requirements under section 582(j) to consider information from pilot projects in the development of guidances for unit-level tracing and standards for the interoperable data exchange in section 582(h)(3) and (4) of the FD&C Act. FDA may also request that the participants meet with the Agency upon the completion of their pilot project or the final report.

    H. Proposed Final DSCSA Pilot Project Program Report

    To ensure that all supply chain members benefit from the information generated by the DSCSA Pilot Project Program, FDA intends to make the following information about each of the program's pilot projects available to the public in a final program report: (1) The names and industry sector(s) of the pilot project participant(s); (2) the pilot project's objectives and evaluation methods; (3) the duration of the pilot project; and (4) the key findings and lessons learned from the pilot project. The information related to the DSCSA Pilot Project Program and the final program report will be posted on FDA's Web site.

    I. Proposed Recordkeeping

    Any records generated by a participant for conducting a pilot project should be maintained as an entity would as in a normal course of business. For participants that involve partnering entities, the partnering entities can decide who is responsible for the records generated by conducting a pilot project. FDA recommends that the progress reports and the final report that participants create and submit to FDA for a pilot project should be maintained for at least 1 year after completion of the pilot project.

    J. Initiation of FDA's DSCSA Pilot Project Program

    FDA does not intend to begin the proposed DSCSA Pilot Project Program or accept requests to participate in the program until OMB has approved the proposed collection of information described in this notice.

    III. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

    Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (the PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), Federal Agencies must obtain approval from OMB for each collection of information that they conduct or sponsor. “Collection of information” is defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR 1320.3(c) and includes Agency requests or requirements that members of the public submit reports, keep records, or provide information to a third party. Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA, 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A), requires Federal Agencies to provide a 60-day notice in the Federal Register to solicit comment for each proposed collection of information before submitting the collection to OMB for approval. To comply with this requirement, FDA is publishing this notice of the proposed collection of information set forth in this document.

    With respect to the collection of information associated with the DSCSA Pilot Project Program, FDA invites comments on the following topics: (1) Whether the proposed information collected is necessary for the proper performance of FDA's functions, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of FDA's estimated burden of the proposed information collected, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of information collected on the respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques, when appropriate, and other forms of information technology.

    The estimated burden for the information collection associated with the DSCSA Pilot Project Program consists of the following:

    Submitting a request to participate and reporting activities. FDA estimates that no more than 10 respondents (i.e., the submitter or point of contact identified on the request to participate) will submit a request to participate, and that it will take approximately 80 hours to complete a request and submit the request to FDA. FDA estimates that certain respondents will coordinate with partnering entities to submit a request to participate; the burden estimate associated with that coordination follows. FDA estimates that it will select no more than eight participants for the pilot program. The estimated total time for respondents to submit a request to participate in the program is 800 hours. Once the request to participate is accepted, the submitter is now a participant of the DSCSA Pilot Project Program. FDA estimates that the eight respondents (i.e., participants) will submit an average of five progress reports to FDA. Because the duration of a pilot project should not exceed 6 months, the frequency of progress reports will vary based on the length of the individual pilot project. Pilot projects of relatively shorter duration may result in shorter time intervals between progress reports so that the reports will be sufficient to capture progress while the pilot project is ongoing. FDA estimates that it will take approximately 8 hours to compile and submit each progress report. The estimated total number of hours for submitting progress reports would be 320 hours. After completion of their pilot project, each respondent will provide one final report to FDA. FDA estimates that it will take the eight respondents approximately 40 hours to submit a final report. The estimated total number of hours for submitting the final report is 320 hours. The total hours for the estimated reporting burden are 1,440 hours (table 2).

    Recordkeeping activities. Recordkeeping activities include storing and maintaining records related to submitting a request to participate in the program and compiling reports. Respondents can use current record retention capabilities for electronic or paper storage to achieve these activities. FDA estimates that no more than 10 respondents will have recordkeeping activities related to program participation. FDA believes that it will take 0.5 hour/year to ensure that the documents related to submitting a request to participate in the program are retained properly for a minimum of 1 year after the pilot project is completed (as recommended by FDA). The resulting total to maintain the records related to submitting a request is 5 hours annually. For retaining records related to progress reports and the final report properly for a minimum of 1 year after the pilot project is completed (as recommended by FDA), FDA estimates that it will take approximately 0.5 hour/year. As noted previously, FDA estimates that the eight respondents will submit an average of five progress reports and one final report to FDA. The estimated total for maintaining progress reports and the final report is 20 and 4 hours, respectively. The total recordkeeping burden is estimated to be 29 hours (table 3).

    In developing its burden estimate for records associated with the proposed pilot projects, FDA has taken account of existing industry practices for keeping records in the normal course of their business. In particular, FDA is aware of various supply chain stakeholders that have conducted pilot projects over the past few years, including some pilot projects that occurred before the DSCSA was enacted. These pilot projects covered topics related to serialization, movement of product data, aggregation of data, and verification of product identifiers of returned products. Members of the supply chain who conduct pilot projects of their own accord created associated records as a matter of usual and customary business practice. Therefore, the burden estimates for like records associated with the proposed FDA pilot project program are not included in the calculation of the recordkeeping burden (see 5 CFR 1320.3(b)(2)). FDA welcomes comments on the activities identified for conducting a pilot project that FDA considers to be usual and customary business practice.

    Third-party disclosure activities. For those pilot projects that involve a participant composed of partnering entities in the program, FDA is taking into consideration the time that partnering entities will spend coordinating with each other in a pilot project. For the initial request to participate, FDA estimates that eight respondents will work with their respective partnering entities, and the average number of partnering entities will be two. FDA estimates that each respondent will spend 8 hours coordinating with each partnering entity. Thus, for eight respondents with an average of two partnering entities, the estimated total burden for coordinating with partnering entities related to the submission of the request to participate in the program is 128 hours. FDA estimates that seven respondents will need to coordinate with an average of two partnering entities to create progress reports and the final report to submit to FDA. Earlier, FDA estimated that an average of five progress reports will be submitted to FDA per respondent. If a respondent has an average of 2 partners, it will coordinate 10 times with those partners on the progress reports. FDA estimates that for each progress report, it will take 4 hours to coordinate with each partner, resulting in a total of 280 hours. FDA estimates that for each final report, it will take approximately 20 hours to coordinate with each partner, resulting in a total of 280 hours. The total estimation for third-party disclosure burden is 688 hours (table 4).

    Table 2—Estimated Reporting Burden 1 DSCSA pilot project program Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • responses per
  • respondent
  • Total
  • responses
  • Hours per
  • response
  • Total hours
    Requests to participate 10 1 10 80 800 Progress reports 8 5 40 8 320 Final report to FDA 8 1 8 40 320 Total 1,440 1 There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of information.
    Table 3—Recordkeeping Burden 1 DSCSA Pilot project program Number of
  • recordkeepers
  • Number of
  • records per
  • recordkeeper
  • Total records Hours per record Total hours
    Records related to requests to participate 10 1 10 0.5 (30 minutes) 5 Records related to progress reports 8 5 40 0.5 (30 minutes) 20 Records related to the final report to FDA 8 1 8 0.5 (30 minutes) 4 Total 29 1 There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of information.
    Table 4—Third-Party Disclosure Burden 1 DSCSA pilot project program Number of
  • respondents
  • Number of
  • disclosures per
  • respondent
  • Total
  • disclosures
  • Hours per
  • disclosure
  • Total hours
    Coordination with partnering entities related to requests to participate 8 2 16 8 128 Coordination with partnering entities related to progress reports 7 10 70 4 280 Coordination with partnering entities related to final reports 7 2 14 20 280 Total 688 1 There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of information.
    Dated: July 14, 2017. Anna K. Abram, Deputy Commissioner for Policy, Planning, Legislation, and Analysis.
    [FR Doc. 2017-15203 Filed 7-19-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2017-N-3068] Patient-Focused Drug Development for Hereditary Angioedema; Public Meeting; Request for Comments AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice of public meeting; request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA, the Agency, or we) is announcing a public meeting and an opportunity for public comment on “Patient-Focused Drug Development for Hereditary Angioedema.” Patient-Focused Drug Development is part of FDA's performance commitment under the fifth authorization of the Prescription Drug User Fee Act (PDUFA V). The public meeting is intended to allow FDA to obtain patients' perspectives on the impact of hereditary angioedema (HAE) on daily life. FDA also is seeking patients' views on treatment approaches for HAE.

    DATES:

    The public meeting will be held on September 25, 2017, from 9 a.m. to 3 p.m. Registration to attend must be received by August 10, 2017. Submit either electronic or written comments on the public meeting by November 20, 2017. See the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for registration date and information.

    ADDRESSES:

    The public meeting will be held at the FDA White Oak Campus, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 31 Conference Center, the Great Room (Rm. 1503), Silver Spring, MD 20993. Entrance for the public meeting participants (non-FDA employees) is through Building 1, where routine security check procedures will be performed. For parking and security information, please refer to https://www.fda.gov/AboutFDA/WorkingatFDA/BuildingsandFacilities/WhiteOakCampusInformation/ucm241740.htm.

    You may submit comments as follows. Please note that late, untimely filed comments will not be considered. Electronic comments must be submitted on or before November 20, 2017. The https://www.regulations.gov electronic filing system will accept comments until midnight Eastern Time at the end of November 20, 2017. Comments received by mail/hand delivery/courier (for written/paper submissions) will be considered timely if they are postmarked or the delivery service acceptance receipt is on or before that date.

    Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:

    Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Comments submitted electronically, including attachments, to https://www.regulations.gov will be posted to the docket unchanged. Since your comment will be made public, you are solely responsible for ensuring that your comment does not include any confidential information that you or a third party may not wish to be posted, such as medical information, your or anyone else's Social Security number, or confidential business information, such as a manufacturing process. Please note that if you include your name, contact information, or other information that identifies you in the body of your comments, that information will be posted on https://www.regulations.gov.

    • If you want to submit a comment with confidential information that you do not wish to be made available to the public, submit the comment as a written/paper submission and in the manner detailed (see “Written/Paper Submissions” and “Instructions”).

    Written/Paper Submissions

    Submit written/paper submissions as follows:

    Mail/Hand delivery/Courier (for written/paper submissions): Dockets Management Staff (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

    • For written/paper comments submitted to the Dockets Management Staff, 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-2017-N-3068 for “Patient-Focused Drug Development for Hereditary Angioedema.” Received comments, those filed in a timely manner (see ADDRESSES), will be placed in the docket and, except for those submitted as “Confidential Submissions,” publicly viewable at https://www.regulations.gov or at the Dockets Management Staff between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.

    • Confidential Submissions—To submit a comment with confidential information that you do not wish to be made publicly available, submit your comments only as a written/paper submission. You should submit two copies total. One copy will include the information you claim to be confidential with a heading or cover note that states “THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.” The Agency will review this copy, including the claimed confidential information, in its consideration of comments. The second copy, which will have the claimed confidential information redacted/blacked out, will be available for public viewing and posted on https://www.regulations.gov. Submit both copies to the Dockets Management Staff. 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: https://www.thefederalregister.org/fdsys/pkg/FR-2015-09-18/pdf/2015-23389.pdf.

    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or the electronic and written/paper comments received, go to https://www.regulations.gov and insert the docket number, found in brackets in the heading of this document, into the “Search” box and follow the prompts and/or go to the Dockets Management Staff, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

    FDA will post the agenda approximately 5 days before the meeting at http://www.fda.gov/BiologicsBloodVaccines/NewsEvents/WorkshopsMeetingsConferences/ucm542319.htm.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Barbara Kass, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 71, Rm. 1125, Silver Spring, MD 20993, 240-402-6887; or Loni Warren Henderson, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 71, Rm. 1118, Silver Spring, MD 20993, 240-402-8180, [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Background on Patient-Focused Drug Development

    FDA has selected HAE as the focus of a public meeting under the Patient-Focused Drug Development initiative. This initiative involves obtaining a better understanding of patients' perspectives on the challenges posed by HAE and the impact of current therapies for this condition. The Patient-Focused Drug Development initiative is being conducted to fulfill FDA performance commitments that are part of the PDUFA reauthorization under Title I of the Food and Drug Administration Safety and Innovation Act (Pub. L. 112-144). The full set of performance commitments is available on the FDA Web site at http://www.fda.gov/downloads/forindustry/userfees/prescriptiondruguserfee/ucm270412.pdf.

    FDA committed to obtaining the patient perspective on 20 disease areas during the course of PDUFA V. For each disease area, the Agency is conducting a public meeting to discuss the disease and its impact on patients' daily lives, the types of treatment benefits that matter most to patients, and patients' perspectives on the adequacy of the available therapies. These meetings will include participation of FDA review divisions, the relevant patient communities, and other interested stakeholders.

    On April 11, 2013, FDA published a notice in the Federal Register (78 FR 21613), announcing the disease areas for meetings in fiscal years (FYs) 2013-2015, the first 3 years of the 5-year PDUFA V time frame. The Agency used several criteria outlined in that notice to develop the list of disease areas. FDA obtained public comment on the Agency's proposed criteria and potential disease areas through a public docket and a public meeting that was convened on October 25, 2012. In selecting the set of disease areas, FDA carefully considered the public comments received and the perspectives of review divisions at FDA. FDA initiated a second public process for determining the disease areas for FY 2016-2017 and published a notice in the Federal Register on July 2, 2015 (80 FR 38216), announcing the selection of eight disease areas. More information, including the list of disease areas and a general schedule of meetings, is posted at https://www.fda.gov/ForIndustry/UserFees/PrescriptionDrugUserFee/ucm347317.htm.

    II. Purpose and Scope of the Meeting

    As part of the Patient-Focused Drug Development, FDA will obtain input on the symptoms and other aspects of the disease that matter most to patients with HAE. FDA also intends to seek patients' perspectives on current approaches to treating HAE. FDA expects that this information will come directly from patients, caregivers, and patient advocates.

    HAE is a rare genetic disorder that affects less than 200,000 individuals in the United States. It is associated with episodic recurrent attacks of swelling of the body caused by abnormalities in a protein called C1-Esterase Inhibitor. Most cases occur because there is either not enough of the protein or because the protein does not work normally to help prevent swelling of the body.

    In individuals with HAE, the swelling attacks may involve various areas of the body, including the gastrointestinal tract, arms, legs, face, or throat and larynx (voice box). Symptoms of this condition often begin during childhood but may also appear in adulthood. The swelling episodes are usually self-limited; may or may not be associated with any triggering factors; and in severe cases involving the larynx, may be life-threatening. If not recognized early and left untreated, swelling of the larynx, called laryngeal edema, may acutely restrict airflow to the lungs and could result in death. Gastrointestinal tract swellings are often associated with nausea, vomiting, and abdominal pain, which can be severe and require hospitalization. Several FDA-approved therapies affecting different biological mechanisms are available to treat or prevent acute attacks of HAE.

    The questions that will be asked of patients and patient representatives at the meeting are listed in this section and organized by topic. The two main topics for discussion are: (1) Symptoms and impact on activities of daily life that matter most to patients; and (2) perspectives on current approaches to treatment. For each topic, a brief patient/caregiver panel discussion will begin the dialogue. This will be followed by a facilitated discussion, inviting comments from other patient and caregiver participants. In addition to input generated through this public meeting, FDA is interested in receiving patient input addressing these questions through electronic or written comments, which can be submitted to the Dockets Management Staff (see ADDRESSES). For context, please indicate if you are commenting as a patient with HAE or on behalf of a child or loved one.

    Topic 1: Disease Symptoms and Daily Impacts That Matter Most to Patients

    (1) Of all of the symptoms that you experience because of your condition, which one of these symptoms has the most significant impact on your life? Examples may include nausea, vomiting, abdominal pain, swelling of extremities, facial swelling, tongue swelling, hoarseness or loss of voice, shortness of breath, and difficulty urinating.

    (2) Are there specific activities that are important to you that you cannot do at all or as well as you would like because of your condition? Please describe, using specific examples. Examples may include: Participating in physical activities; and attending work or school and family or social activities, during or between attacks.

    (3) How have your condition and its symptoms changed over time?

    (4) What worries you most about your condition?

    Topic 2: Patients' Perspectives on Current Approaches to Treatment

    (1) What are you currently doing to treat your condition and its symptoms?

    • What, if anything, are you doing to prevent acute HAE attacks? Examples may include treatments with prescription medicines; over-the-counter products; and other therapies, including non-drug therapies.

    • What, if anything, do you self-administer for acute HAE attacks?

    • If you give yourself medication for acute HAE attacks, which types of attacks, with respect to body location(s), are you comfortable treating yourself?

    • What treatment has your health professional used for your acute HAE attacks? Examples may include prescription medicines; over-the-counter products; and other therapies, including non-drug therapies.

    (2) How well do these treatments work for you?

    (3) What are the most significant disadvantages or complications of your current treatments, and how do they affect your daily life?

    (4) How has your treatment regimen changed over time and why?

    (5) What aspects of your condition are not improved by your current treatment regimen?

    (6) What treatment has had the most positive impact on your quality of life?

    (7) Short of a complete cure for your condition, what specific things would you look for in an ideal treatment for your condition?

    (8) If you had the opportunity to consider participating in a clinical trial studying experimental treatments, what things would you consider when deciding whether or not to participate?

    III. Meeting Attendance and Participation

    Registration: If you wish to attend this meeting, visit https://www.eventbrite.com/e/patient-focused-drug-development-for-hereditary-angioedema-public-meeting-tickets-32300298061. Persons interested in attending this public meeting must register by August 10, 2017. If you are unable to attend the meeting in person, you can register to view a live Webcast of the meeting. You will be asked to indicate in your registration if you plan to attend in person or via the Webcast. Registration is free and based on space availability, with priority given to early registrants. Early registration is recommended because seating is limited; therefore, FDA may limit the number of participants from each organization. Registrants will receive confirmation once they have been accepted. Onsite registration on the day of the meeting will be based on space availability. If you need special accommodations due to a disability, please contact Barbara Kass or Loni Warren Henderson (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT) no later than September 18, 2017.

    Requests for Oral Presentations: Patients and patient representatives who are interested in presenting comments as part of the initial panel discussions will be asked to indicate in their registration which topic(s) they wish to address. These patients and patient representatives also must send to [email protected] a brief summary of responses to the topic questions by August 3, 2017. Panelists will be notified of their selection approximately 7 days before the public meeting. We will try to accommodate all patients and patient representatives who wish to speak, either through the panel discussion or audience participation; however, the duration of comments may be limited by time constraints.

    Transcripts: Please be advised that, as soon as a transcript of the public meeting is available, it will be accessible at https://www.regulations.gov. It may be viewed at the Dockets Management Staff (see ADDRESSES). A link to the transcript will also be available on the Internet at http://www.fda.gov/BiologicsBloodVaccines/NewsEvents/WorkshopsMeetingsConferences/ucm542320.htm.

    Dated: July 13, 2017. Anna K. Abram, Deputy Commissioner for Policy, Planning, Legislation, and Analysis.
    [FR Doc. 2017-15202 Filed 7-19-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2017-N-3857] Enhanced Drug Distribution Security Under the Drug Supply Chain Security Act; Public Meetings; Request for Comments AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice of public meetings; request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA, the Agency, or we) is announcing three public meetings entitled “Enhanced Drug Distribution Security Under the Drug Supply Chain Security Act (DSCSA).” These public meetings are intended to provide members of the pharmaceutical distribution supply chain and other interested stakeholders an opportunity to discuss with FDA, and provide input on, strategies and issues related to the enhanced drug distribution security provisions of the DSCSA.

    DATES:

    The public meetings will be held on: August 23, 2017, from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m.; December 5 and 6, 2017, from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m.; and February 28, 2018, from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m.

    ADDRESSES:

    The public meetings will be held at FDA's White Oak Campus, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 31, Rm. 1503A, Silver Spring, MD 20993. Entrance for the public meeting participants (non-FDA employees) is through Building 1 where routine security check procedures will be performed. For parking and security information, please refer to https://www.fda.gov/AboutFDA/WorkingatFDA/BuildingsandFacilities/WhiteOakCampusInformation/ucm241740.htm.

    Comments: To permit the widest possible opportunity to obtain public comment, FDA is soliciting either electronic or written comments on all aspects of the public meeting topics. You may submit comments as follows. Please note that the deadlines for submitting either electronic or written comments are 30 days after the meeting to which the comments relate. Comments received by mail/hand delivery/courier (for written/paper submissions) will be considered timely if they are postmarked or the delivery service acceptance receipt is on or before that date. The https://www.regulations.gov electronic filing system will accept comments until midnight Eastern Time at the end of the specified date. See the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for registration dates and for the deadlines for submitting electronic or written comments related to these public meetings (table 1).

    Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:

    Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Comments submitted electronically, including attachments, to https://www.regulations.gov will be posted to the docket unchanged. Because your comment will be made public, you are solely responsible for ensuring that your comment does not include any confidential information that you or a third party may not wish to be posted, such as medical information, your or anyone else's Social Security number, or confidential business information, such as a manufacturing process. Please note that if you include your name, contact information, or other information that identifies you in the body of your comments, that information will be posted on https://www.regulations.gov.

    • If you want to submit a comment with confidential information that you do not wish to be made available to the public, submit the comment as a written/paper submission and in the manner detailed (see “Written/Paper Submissions” and “Instructions”).

    Written/Paper Submissions

    Submit written/paper submissions as follows:

    Mail/Hand delivery/Courier (for written/paper submissions): Dockets Management Staff (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

    • For written/paper comments submitted to the Dockets Management Staff, 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-2017-N-3857 for “Enhanced Drug Distribution Security Under the Drug Supply Chain Security Act; Public Meetings; Request for Comments.” Received comments, those filed in a timely manner (see ADDRESSES), will be placed in the docket and, except for those submitted as “Confidential Submissions,” publicly viewable at https://www.regulations.gov or at the Dockets Management Staff between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.

    • Confidential Submissions—To submit a comment with confidential information that you do not wish to be made publicly available, submit your comments only as a written/paper submission. You should submit two copies total. One copy will include the information you claim to be confidential with a heading or cover note that states “THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.” The Agency will review this copy, including the claimed confidential information, in its consideration of comments. The second copy, which will have the claimed confidential information redacted/blacked out, will be available for public viewing and posted on https://www.regulations.gov. Submit both copies to the Dockets Management Staff. 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: https://www.thefederalregister.org/fdsys/pkg/FR-2015-09-18/pdf/2015-23389.pdf.

    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or the electronic and written/paper comments received, go to https://www.regulations.gov and insert the docket number, found in brackets in the heading of this document, into the “Search” box and follow the prompts and/or go to the Dockets Management Staff, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Daniel Bellingham, Office of Compliance, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Silver Spring, MD 20993, 301-796-3130, [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Background

    On November 27, 2013, the Drug Supply Chain Security Act (DSCSA) (Title II, Pub. L. 113-54) was signed into law. The DSCSA outlines critical steps to build an electronic, interoperable system by 2023 to identify and trace certain prescription drugs as they are distributed within the United States. This system will enhance FDA's ability to protect U.S. consumers from exposure to drugs that may be counterfeit, diverted, stolen, intentionally adulterated, or otherwise harmful by improving the detection and removal of potentially dangerous drugs from the drug supply chain. Section 582(i) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 360eee-1(i)), which was added by the DSCSA, directs FDA to hold public meetings to enhance the safety and security of the pharmaceutical distribution supply chain and provide opportunities for comment from stakeholders.

    II. Purpose of the Public Meetings

    FDA will hold public meetings on August 23, 2017, December 5 and 6, 2017, and February 28, 2018, on enhanced drug distribution security. The purpose of these public meetings is to provide members of the pharmaceutical distribution supply chain and other interested stakeholders an opportunity to discuss with FDA, and provide input on, strategies and issues related to the enhanced drug distribution security provisions of the DSCSA. These public meetings will focus on the following topics for discussion:

    • What supply chain security should look like in 2023 • What is needed for enhanced drug distribution security • What is needed for electronic interoperability • Standards for product tracing • Data architecture options for an electronic interoperable system • The management and maintenance of product tracing data • The use of aggregation and inference for enhanced product tracing and verification • Building capacity for a unit-level system for product tracing and verification

    FDA may include additional discussion topics. Materials for each public meeting will be provided on FDA's Web site at https://www.fda.gov/Drugs/NewsEvents/UCM559090.htm 10 days before each public meeting.

    III. Registration for the Public Meetings

    To request registration for the public meetings, provide your information including name, company or organization, address, telephone number, and email address to FDA at https://www.fda.gov/Drugs/NewsEvents/UCM559090.htm. Registration requests for each meeting should be received during the time periods specified in table 1. FDA is limiting attendance due to restricted space. In addition, FDA may limit the number of participants from each organization based on space limitations. FDA recommends that each organization determine who should register for the public meeting to represent his/her organization. This will help ensure that the meeting will have broad and varied representation, including across the pharmaceutical distribution supply chain. Registrants will receive confirmation of participation for their chosen meeting from FDA within 14 days of the date of each meeting. There is no registration fee for the public meetings. There will be no onsite registration. If registration reaches maximum capacity, FDA will post a notice closing registration for the meeting on FDA's Web site at https://www.fda.gov/Drugs/NewsEvents/UCM559090.htm. If you need special accommodations due to a disability, please contact Daniel Bellingham (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT) at least 7 days in advance of the public meeting.

    Table 1—Public Meeting Information Public meeting Topics Date/Time Relevant section of this document or electronic address # 1 • Supply chain security in 2023
  • • Enhanced drug distribution security needs
  • August 23, 2017, 9 a.m. to 4 p.m
    Advance registration by July 31, 2017 Online registration only at https://www.fda.gov/Drugs/NewsEvents/UCM559090.htm. No onsite registration. Comment period closes September 22, 2017 See “Comments”. Request special accommodations due to a disability by August 16, 2017 See FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. # 2 • Electronic interoperability
  • • Standards for data exchange
  • December 5-6, 2017, 9 a.m. to 4 p.m
    • Data architecture
  • • Aggregation and inference
  • Advance registration October 2-27, 2017 Online registration only at https://www.fda.gov/Drugs/NewsEvents/UCM559090.htm. No onsite registration. Comment period closes January 5, 2018 See “Comments”. Request special accommodations due to a disability by November 28, 2017 See FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. # 3 • Further refinement of enhanced drug distribution security needs February 28, 2018, 9 a.m. to 4 p.m • Building capacity for a unit-level system Advance registration January 2-26, 2018 Online registration only at https://www.fda.gov/Drugs/NewsEvents/UCM559090.htm. No onsite registration. Comment period closes March 30, 2018 See “Comments”. Request special accommodations due to a disability by February 21, 2018 See FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
    IV. Webcasting of the Public Meeting

    Portions of each public meeting will be recorded and webcast on the day of the meeting. Information for how to access the webcast will be available at https://www.fda.gov/Drugs/NewsEvents/UCM559090.htm within 7 days prior to each public meeting. The webcast will be conducted in listening mode only.

    Dated: July 14, 2017. Anna K. Abram, Deputy Commissioner for Policy, Planning, Legislation, and Analysis.
    [FR Doc. 2017-15204 Filed 7-19-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2010-N-0597] Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for Office of Management and Budget Review; Comment Request; Index of Legally Marketed Unapproved New Animal Drugs for Minor Species AGENCY:

    Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing that a proposed collection of information has been submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and clearance under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

    DATES:

    Fax written comments on the collection of information by August 21, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    To ensure that comments on the information collection are received, OMB recommends that written comments be faxed to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, OMB, Attn: FDA Desk Officer, FAX: 202-395-7285, or emailed to [email protected] All comments should be identified with the OMB control number 0910-0620. Also include the FDA docket number found in brackets in the heading of this document.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ila S. Mizrachi, Office of Operations, Food and Drug Administration, Three White Flint North, 10A63, 11601 Landsdown St., North Bethesda, MD 20852, 301-796-7726.

    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. Index of Legally Marketed Unapproved New Animal Drugs for Minor Species—21 CFR part 516 OMB Control Number 0910-0620—Extension

    The Minor Use and Minor Species Animal Health Act of 2004 (the MUMS Act) (Pub. L. 108-282) added section 572 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the FD&C Act) (21 U.S.C. 360ccc-1), which authorizes FDA to establish new regulatory procedures intended to make more medications legally available to veterinarians and animal owners for the treatment of minor animal species (species other than cattle, horses, swine, chickens, turkeys, dogs, and cats). In enacting the MUMS Act, Congress sought to encourage the development of these new animal drugs. Congress recognized that the markets for drugs intended to treat these species, diseases, or conditions are so small that there are often insufficient economic incentives to motivate drug companies to develop data to support approvals. Further, Congress recognized that some minor species populations are too small or their management systems too diverse to make it practical to conduct traditional studies to demonstrate safety and effectiveness of animal drugs for such uses. As a result of these limitations, drug companies have generally not been willing or able to collect data to support legal marketing of drugs for these species, diseases, or conditions. Consequently, Congress enacted the MUMS Act to provide incentives to develop new animal drugs for minor species, while still ensuring appropriate safeguards for animal and human health. Section 572 of the FD&C Act provides for a public index listing of legally marketed unapproved new animal drugs for minor species. FDA regulations in part 516 (21 CFR part 516) specify, among other things, the criteria and procedures for requesting eligibility for indexing and for requesting addition to the index, as well as the annual reporting requirements for index holders. The administrative procedures and criteria for indexing a new animal drug for use in a minor species are set forth in 21 CFR 516.111 through 516.171. Section 516.165 sets forth the annual reporting requirements for index holders. FDA needs the information to determine: (1) The eligibility of a new animal drug for indexing; (2) that a qualified expert panel proposed to review certain information regarding the new animal drug meets the selection criteria listed in the regulations; (3) whether the Agency agrees with the recommendation of a qualified expert panel that a drug be added to the index; and (4) whether there may be grounds for removing a drug from the index.

    In the Federal Register of December 21, 2016 (81 FR 93689), FDA published a 60-day notice requesting public comment on the proposed collection of information. FDA received one comment, which was outside the scope of the comment requests in the notice.

    FDA estimates 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
    516.119—requires a foreign drug company to submit and update the name and address of a permanent U.S. resident agent 2 1 2 1 2 516.121—written request for a meeting with FDA to discuss the requirements for indexing a new animal drug 30 2 60 4 240 516.123—written request for an informal conference and a requestor's written response to an FDA initial decision denying a request 3 1 3 8 24 516.125—correspondence and information associated with investigational use of new animal drugs intended for indexing 2 3 6 20 120 516.129—content and format of a request for determination of eligibility for indexing 30 2 60 20 1,200 516.141—information to be submitted to FDA by a requestor seeking to establish a qualified expert panel 20 1 20 16 320 516.143—content and format of the written report of the qualified expert panel 20 1 20 120 2,400 516.145—content and format of a request for addition to the Index 20 1 20 20 400 516.161—content and format of a request for modification of an indexed drug 1 1 1 4 4 516.163—information to be contained in a request to FDA to transfer ownership of a drug's index file to another person 1 1 1 2 2 516.165—requires drug experience reports and distributor statements to be submitted to FDA 10 2 20 8 160 Total 4,872 1 There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of information.
    Table 2—Estimated Annual Recordkeeping Burden 1 21 CFR Section Number of recordkeepers Number of records per recordkeeper Total annual records Average burden per recordkeeping Total hours 516.141—requires the qualified expert panel leader to maintain a copy of the written report and all notes or minutes relating to panel deliberations that are submitted to the requestor for 2 years after the report is submitted 30 2 60 *.5 30 516.165—requires the holder of an indexed drug to maintain records of all information pertinent to the safety or effectiveness of the indexed drug, from foreign and domestic sources 10 2 20 1 20 Total 50 1 There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of information. *30 minutes.

    We based our estimates in tables 1 and 2 on our experience with the MUMS indexing program and the requests for eligibility for indexing and for addition to the index, as well as the periodic drug experience reports submitted during the past 3 years. The burden has not changed since the last OMB approval.

    Dated: July 13, 2017. Anna K. Abram, Deputy Commissioner for Policy, Planning, Legislation, and Analysis.
    [FR Doc. 2017-15206 Filed 7-19-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Federal Emergency Management Agency [Docket ID FEMA-2017-0002; Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-B-1724] Proposed Flood Hazard Determinations AGENCY:

    Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    Comments are requested on proposed flood hazard determinations, which may include additions or modifications of any Base Flood Elevation (BFE), base flood depth, Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) boundary or zone designation, or regulatory floodway on the Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs), and where applicable, in the supporting Flood Insurance Study (FIS) reports for the communities listed in the table below. The purpose of this notice is to seek general information and comment regarding the preliminary FIRM, and where applicable, the FIS report that the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has provided to the affected communities. The FIRM and FIS report are the basis of the floodplain management measures that the community is required either to adopt or to show evidence of having in effect an order to qualify or remain qualified for participation in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). In addition, the FIRM and FIS report, once effective, will be used by insurance agents and others to calculate appropriate flood insurance premium rates for new buildings and the contents of those buildings.

    DATES:

    Comments are to be submitted on or before October 18, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    The Preliminary FIRM, and where applicable, the FIS report for each community are available for inspection at both the online location and the respective Community Map Repository address listed in the tables below. Additionally, the current effective FIRM and FIS report for each community are accessible online through the FEMA Map Service Center at www.msc.fema.gov for comparison.

    You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. FEMA-B-1724, to Rick Sacbibit, Chief, Engineering Services Branch, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration, FEMA, 400 C Street SW., Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-7659, or (email) [email protected]

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Rick Sacbibit, Chief, Engineering Services Branch, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration, FEMA, 400 C Street SW., Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-7659, or (email) [email protected]; or visit the FEMA Map Information eXchange (FMIX) online at www.floodmaps.fema.gov/fhm/fmx_main.html.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    FEMA proposes to make flood hazard determinations for each community listed below, in accordance with section 110 of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C. 4104, and 44 CFR 67.4(a).

    These proposed flood hazard determinations, together with the floodplain management criteria required by 44 CFR 60.3, are the minimum that are required. They should not be construed to mean that the community must change any existing ordinances that are more stringent in their floodplain management requirements. The community may at any time enact stricter requirements of its own or pursuant to policies established by other Federal, State, or regional entities. These flood hazard determinations are used to meet the floodplain management requirements of the NFIP and also are used to calculate the appropriate flood insurance premium rates for new buildings built after the FIRM and FIS report become effective.

    The communities affected by the flood hazard determinations are provided in the tables below. Any request for reconsideration of the revised flood hazard information shown on the Preliminary FIRM and FIS report that satisfies the data requirements outlined in 44 CFR 67.6(b) is considered an appeal. Comments unrelated to the flood hazard determinations also will be considered before the FIRM and FIS report become effective.

    Use of a Scientific Resolution Panel (SRP) is available to communities in support of the appeal resolution process. SRPs are independent panels of experts in hydrology, hydraulics, and other pertinent sciences established to review conflicting scientific and technical data and provide recommendations for resolution. Use of the SRP only may be exercised after FEMA and local communities have been engaged in a collaborative consultation process for at least 60 days without a mutually acceptable resolution of an appeal. Additional information regarding the SRP process can be found online at http://floodsrp.org/pdfs/srp_fact_sheet.pdf.

    The watersheds and/or communities affected are listed in the tables below. The Preliminary FIRM, and where applicable, FIS report for each community are available for inspection at both the online location and the respective Community Map Repository address listed in the tables. For communities with multiple ongoing Preliminary studies, the studies can be identified by the unique project number and Preliminary FIRM date listed in the tables. Additionally, the current effective FIRM and FIS report for each community are accessible online through the FEMA Map Service Center at www.msc.fema.gov for comparison.

    (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. 97.022, “Flood Insurance.”) Roy E. Wright, Deputy Associate Administrator for Insurance and Mitigation, Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency.

    I. Watershed-based studies:

    Community Community map repository address Lower Sabine Watershed Maps Available for Inspection Online at: http://www.fema.gov/preliminaryfloodhazarddata Newton County, Texas and Incorporated Areas City of Newton City Hall, 101 West North Street, Newton, TX 75966. Unincorporated Areas of Newton County Newton County Court House, 110 Court Street, Newton, TX 75966.

    II. Non-watershed-based studies:

    Community Community map repository address Lafayette Parish, Louisiana and Incorporated Areas Maps Available for Inspection Online at: http://www.fema.gov/preliminaryfloodhazarddata Project: 16-06-3197S Preliminary Date: February 15, 2017 City of Broussard City Hall, 310 East Main Street, Broussard, LA 70518. City of Lafayette Department of Planning, Zoning and Development, 220 West Willow Street, Building B, Lafayette, LA 70501. City of Youngsville City Hall, 305 Iberia Street, Youngsville, LA 70592. Unincorporated Areas of Lafayette Parish Department of Planning, Zoning and Development, 220 West Willow Street, Building B, Lafayette, LA 70501.
    [FR Doc. 2017-15179 Filed 7-19-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-12-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Land Management [LLOR957000.L63100000. HD0000.17XL1109AF.HAG 17-00] Filing of Plats of Survey: Oregon/Washington AGENCY:

    Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice of official filing.

    SUMMARY:

    The plats of survey of the following described lands are scheduled to be officially filed in the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), Oregon/Washington State Office, Portland, Oregon, 30 calendar days from the date of this publication. The surveys, which were executed at the request of the BLM, are necessary for the management of these lands.

    DATES:

    Protests must be received by the BLM by August 21, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    A copy of the plats may be obtained from the Public Room at the BLM, Oregon/Washington State Office, 1220 SW. 3rd Avenue, Portland, Oregon 97204, upon required payment. The plats may be viewed at this location at no cost. Please use this address when filing written protests.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Kyle Hensley, (503) 808-6132, Branch of Geographic Sciences, BLM, 1220 SW. 3rd Avenue, Portland, Oregon 97204. Persons who use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Relay Service (FRS) at 1-800-877-8339 to contact the above individual during normal business hours. The FRS is available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, to leave a message or question with the above individual. You will receive a reply during normal business hours.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The plats of survey of the following described lands are scheduled to be officially filed in the BLM, Oregon/Washington State Office, Portland, Oregon:

    Willamette Meridian, Oregon T. 22 S., R. 24 E., accepted April 7, 2017 T. 30 S., R. 2 W., accepted April 18, 2017 T. 26 S., R. 2 W., accepted April 18, 2017 T. 38 S., R. 4 W., accepted May 9, 2017 T. 33 S., R. 2 E., accepted May 9, 2017 T. 20 S., R. 9 W., accepted May 9, 2017 T. 39 S., R. 2 W., accepted May 9, 2017 T. 15 S., R. 1 W., accepted May 9, 2017 T. 15 S., R. 11 E., accepted May 9, 2017 T. 31 S., R. 12 W., accepted May 9, 2017 T. 21 S., R. 29 E., accepted May 18, 2017 T. 30 S., R. 5 W., accepted May 18, 2017 T. 28 S., R. 11 W., accepted May 18, 2017 T. 20 S., R. 4 W., accepted May 31, 2017 T. 20 S., R. 3 W., accepted May 31, 2017 T. 30 S., R. 3 W., accepted June 16, 2017 T. 21 S., R. 4 W., accepted June 16, 2017 T. 31 S., R. 4 W., accepted June 23, 2017

    A person or party who wishes to protest one or more plats of survey identified above must file a written notice of protest with the Chief Cadastral Surveyor for Oregon/Washington, BLM. The notice of protest must identify the plat(s) of survey that the person or party wishes to protest. The notice of protest must be filed before the scheduled date of official filing for the plat(s) of survey being protested. Any notice of protest filed after the scheduled date of official filing will not be considered. A notice of protest is considered filed on the date it is received by the Chief Cadastral Surveyor for Oregon/Washington during regular business hours; if received after regular business hours, a notice of protest will be considered filed the next business day. A written statement of reasons in support of a protest, if not filed with the notice of protest, must be filed with the Chief Cadastral Surveyor for Oregon/Washington within 30 calendar days after the notice of protest is filed. If a notice of protest against a plat of survey is received prior to the scheduled date of official filing, the official filing of the plat of survey identified in the notice of protest will be stayed pending consideration of the protest. A plat of survey will not be officially filed until the next business day following dismissal or resolution of all protests of the plat.

    Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personal identifying information in a notice of protest or statement of reasons, you should be aware that the documents you submit—including your personal identifying information—may be made publicly available in their entirety at any time. While you can ask us to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.

    Authority:

    43 U.S.C. Chap. 3.

    F. David Radford, Acting Chief Cadastral Surveyor of Oregon/Washington.
    [FR Doc. 2017-15215 Filed 7-19-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-33-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR National Park Service [NPS-WASO-CR-23588; PPWOCRADI0, PCU00RP14.R50000] Agency Information Collection Activities: Archeology Permits and Reports AGENCY:

    National Park Service, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice; request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    We (National Park Service, NPS) have sent an Information Collection Request (ICR) to OMB for review and approval that includes establishment of a common form. The NPS will be the “host agency” of the common form. Other agencies that may use the information collection are listed below. We summarize the ICR below and describe the nature of the collection and the estimated burden and cost. This information collection is scheduled to expire on July 31, 2017. We 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. However, under OMB regulations, we may continue to conduct or sponsor this information collection while it is pending at OMB.

    DATES:

    You must submit comments on or before August 21, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Send your comments and suggestions on this information collection to the Desk Officer for the Department of the Interior at OMB-OIRA at (202) 395-5806 (fax) or [email protected] (email). Please provide a copy of your comments to Tim Goddard, Information Collection Clearance Officer, National Park Service, 12201 Sunrise Valley Drive, MS-242, Reston, VA 20192 (mail); or [email protected] (email). Please include “1024-0037” in the subject line of your comments.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    To request additional information about this ICR, contact Karen Mudar at [email protected] (email) or 202-354-2103 (telephone). You may review the ICR online at http://www.reginfo.gov. Follow the instructions to review Department of the Interior collections under review by OMB.

    I. Abstract

    Section 4 of the Archeological Resources Protection Act (ARPA) of 1979 (16 U.S.C 470cc), and Section 3 of the Antiquities Act (AA) of 1906 (54 U.S.C. 320301-320303), authorize any individual or institution to apply to Federal land managing agencies to scientifically excavate or remove archeological resources from public or Indian lands. Archeological investigations that require permits include excavation, shovel-testing, coring, pedestrian survey (with and without removal of artifacts), underwater archeology, photogrammetry, and rock art documentation. Individuals, academic and scientific institutions, museums, and businesses that propose to conduct archeological field investigations must obtain a permit before the project may begin.

    To apply for a permit, applicants submit DI Form 1926 (Application for Permit for Archeological Investigations). In general, an application includes, but is not limited to, the following information:

    Statement of Work.

    Statement of Applicant's Capabilities.

    Statement of Applicant's Past Performance.

    Curriculum vitae for Principal Investigator(s) and Project Director(s).

    Written consent by State or tribal authorities to undertake the activity on State or tribal lands that are managed by Federal land managing agencies, if required by the State or tribe.

    Curation Authorization.

    Detailed Schedule of All Project Activities.

    Persons receiving a permit must submit a final report upon completion of the field component of the research project.

    Potential and actual other agencies, besides NPS, that may use the common form and this collection include:

    U.S. Department of Agriculture U.S. Forest Service U.S. Department of Commerce National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration U.S. Department of Defense Department of the Air Force Department of the Army U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Department of the Navy United States Marine Corps U.S. Coast Guard Army National Guard U.S. Department of Energy U.S. Department of Health and Human Services U.S. Department of Homeland Security Bureau of Customs and Border Protection Federal Emergency Management Agency U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Indian Affairs Bureau of Land Management Bureau of Reclamation U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Bureau of Ocean Energy Management Office of Surface Mining U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Department of Justice Bureau of Prisons U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Aviation Administration Federal Highway Administration Federal Railroad Administration Federal Transit Administration U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs Other Agencies General Services Administration National Aeronautics and Space Administration Tennessee Valley Authority The Presidio Trust of San Francisco II. Data

    OMB Control Number: 1024-0037.

    Title: Archeology Permit Applications and Reports, 43 CFR parts 3 and 7.

    Form Number(s): DI Form 1926.

    Type of Request: Extension of a currently approved collection.

    Description of Respondents: Individuals or organizations wishing to excavate or remove archeological resources from public or Indian lands.

    Respondent's Obligation: Required to obtain or retain a benefit.

    Number of Respondents: 100.

    Frequency of Collection: On occasion.

    Activity Total annual responses Completion time per
  • response
  • (hours)
  • Total annual burden hours Total dollar value of
  • annual burden
  • hours
  • ($50.78 per hour)
  • Form DI-1926, “Application for Permit for Archeological Investigations”: Private 43 2.5 * 108 $5,484.24 Individual 1 2.5 * 3 152.34 Government 6 2.5 15 761.70 Reports Private 43 1.0 43 2,183.54 Individual 1 1.0 1 50.78 Government 6 1.0 6 304.68 Totals 100 * 176 8,937.28 * Rounded by ROCIS.

    Estimated Annual Nonhour Burden Cost: None.

    III. Comments

    On December 19, 2016, we published a Federal Register Notice (81 FR 91945) informing the public of our intent to ask OMB to renew approval for this information collection. We solicited comments for a period of 60 days, ending on February 17, 2017. We did not receive any comments in response to this notice.

    We again invite comments concerning this information collection on:

    • Whether or not the collection of information is necessary, including whether or not the information will have practical utility;

    • The accuracy of our estimate of the burden for this collection of information;

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

    • Ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents.

    Comments that you submit in response to this notice are a matter of public record. 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 OMB in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that it will be done.

    Authority:

    The authorities for this action are the National Park Service Organic Act of 1916 (54 U.S.C. 100101 et seq.; P.L. 113-287) and the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).

    Timothy Goddard, Information Collection Clearance Officer, National Park Service.
    [FR Doc. 2017-15227 Filed 7-19-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4312-52-P
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR National Park Service [NPS-WASO-NAGPRA-23486; PPWOCRADN0-PCU00RP14.R50000] Notice of Inventory Completion for Native American Human Remains and Associated Funerary Objects in the Possession of the U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Lake Meredith National Recreation Area, Fritch, TX; Correction AGENCY:

    National Park Service, Interior.

    ACTION:

    Notice; correction.

    SUMMARY:

    The U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Lake Meredith National Recreation Area, has corrected an inventory of human remains and associated funerary objects published in a Notice of Inventory Completion in the Federal Register on June 18, 2001. This notice corrects the minimum number of individuals and number of associated funerary objects. Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains and associated funerary objects should submit a written request to Lake Meredith National Recreation Area. If no additional requestors come forward, transfer of control of the human remains and associated funerary objects to the lineal descendants, Indian Tribes, or Native Hawaiian organizations stated in this notice may proceed.

    DATES:

    Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains and associated funerary objects should submit a written request with information in support of the request to Lake Meredith National Recreation Area at the address in this notice by August 21, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Robert Maguire, Superintendent, Lake Meredith National Recreation Area, P.O. Box 1460, Fritch, TX 79036, telephone (806) 857-3151, email [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Notice is here given in accordance with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), 25 U.S.C. 3003, of the correction of an inventory of human remains and associated funerary objects under the control of the U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Lake Meredith National Recreation Area, Fritch, TX. The human remains and associated funerary objects were removed from sites in Potter County, TX.

    This notice is published as part of the National Park Service's administrative responsibilities under NAGPRA, 25 U.S.C. 3003(d)(3). The determinations in this notice are the sole responsibility of the Superintendent, Lake Meredith National Recreation Area.

    This notice corrects the minimum number of individuals and number of associated funerary objects published in a Notice of Inventory Completion in the Federal Register (66 FR 32845-32846, June 18, 2001). A re-evaluation of the inventory resulted in an increase in the minimum number of individuals removed from the Footprint site. The total number of associated funerary objects has been found to be incorrectly calculated, though all funerary objects are accounted for. Transfer of control of the items in this correction notice has not occurred.

    Correction

    In the Federal Register (66 FR 32845, June 18, 2001), column 2, paragraph 2, sentence 1 is corrected by substituting the following sentence:

    In 1964, human remains representing a minimum of 43 individuals were recovered during legally-authorized excavation by F.E. Green of Texas Tech University at the Footprint site, then under the management of the U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation.

    In the Federal Register (66 FR 32845, June 18, 2001), column 3, paragraph 2, sentences 1 and 2 are corrected by substituting the following sentences:

    Based on the above-mentioned information, the superintendent of Lake Meredith National Recreation Area has determined that, pursuant to 43 CFR 10.2 (d)(1), the human remains listed above represent the physical remains of 49 individuals of Native American ancestry. The superintendent of Lake Meredith National Recreation Area also has determined that, pursuant to 43 CFR 10.2 (d)(2), the 347 objects listed above are reasonably believed to have been placed with or near individual human remains at the time of death or later as a part of a death rite or ceremony.

    Additional Requestors and Disposition

    Lineal descendants or representatives of any Indian Tribe or Native Hawaiian organization not identified in this notice that wish to request transfer of control of these human remains and associated funerary objects should submit a written request with information in support of the request to Robert Maguire, Superintendent, Lake Meredith National Recreation Area, P.O. Box 1460, Fritch, TX 79036, telephone (806) 857-3151, email [email protected], by August 21, 2017. After that date, if no additional requestors have come forward, transfer of control of the human remains and associated funerary objects to the Kiowa Indian Tribe of Oklahoma, and the Wichita & Affiliated Tribes (Wichita, Keechi, Waco & Tawakonie), Oklahoma, may proceed.

    Lake Meredith National Recreation Area is responsible for notifying the Caddo Nation of Oklahoma; Cheyenne and Arapaho Tribes, Oklahoma (previously listed as the Cheyenne-Arapaho Tribes of Oklahoma); Comanche Nation, Oklahoma; Kiowa Indian Tribe of Oklahoma; Pawnee Nation of Oklahoma; Wichita and Affiliated Tribes (Wichita, Keechi, Waco & Tawakonie), Oklahoma; and the Cohuiltecan Nation, an Indian group that is not federally recognized, that this notice has been published.

    Dated: May 30, 2017. Melanie O'Brien, Manager, National NAGPRA Program.
    [FR Doc. 2017-15217 Filed 7-19-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4312-52-P
    INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation No. 337-TA-989] Certain Automated Teller Machines, ATM Modules, Components Thereof, and Products Containing the Same Commission's Final Determination Finding a Violation of Section 337; Issuance of a Limited Exclusion Order and Cease and Desist Orders; Termination of the Investigation AGENCY:

    U.S. International Trade Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade Commission has found a violation of section 337 in this investigation and has issued a limited exclusion order prohibiting importation of infringing automated teller machines, ATM modules, components thereof, and products containing the same, as well as issued cease and desist orders directed to Diebold Nixdorf, Incorporated and Diebold Self-Service Systems both of North Canton, Ohio. The investigation is terminated.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Panyin A. Hughes, Office of the General Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW., Washington, DC 20436, telephone 202-205-3042. Copies of non-confidential documents filed in connection with this investigation are or will be available for inspection during official business hours (8:45 a.m. to 5:15 p.m.) in the Office of the Secretary, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW., Washington, DC 20436, telephone 202-205-2000. General information concerning the Commission may also be obtained by accessing its Internet server (https://www.usitc.gov). The public record for this investigation may be viewed on the Commission's electronic docket (EDIS) at https://edis.usitc.gov. Hearing-impaired persons are advised that information on this matter can be obtained by contacting the Commission's TDD terminal on 202-205-1810.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    The Commission instituted this investigation on March 14, 2016, based on a complaint filed by Nautilus Hyosung Inc. of Seoul, Republic of Korea and Nautilus Hyosung America Inc. of Irving, Texas (collectively, “Nautilus”). 81 FR 13149 (Mar. 14, 2016). The complaint alleges violations of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1337), in the importation into the United States, the sale for importation, and the sale within the United States after importation of certain automated teller machines, ATM modules, components thereof, and products containing the same by reason of infringement of one or more of claims 1-3 and 5 of U.S. Patent No. 7,891,551 (“the '551 patent”); claims 1 and 6 of U.S. Patent No. 7,950,655 (“the '655 patent”); claims 1-4, 6, and 7 of U.S. Patent No. 8,152,165 (“the '165 patent”); and claims 1-3, 6, 8, and 9 of U.S. Patent No. 8,523,235 (“the '235 patent”). Id. The notice of investigation named the following respondents: Diebold, Incorporated of North Canton, Ohio and Diebold Self-Service Systems of North Canton, Ohio (collectively, “Diebold”). Id. The Office of Unfair Import Investigations is not a party to the investigation.

    On June 30, 2016, the ALJ granted a motion by Nautilus to terminate the investigation as to all asserted claims of the '551 patent and the '165 patent. See Order No. 11 (June 30, 2016). The Commission determined not to review Order No. 11. See Notice of non-review (July 27, 2016).

    On July 21, 2016, the ALJ granted a motion by Nautilus to terminate the investigation as to all asserted claims of the '655 patent. See Order No. 17 (July 21, 2016). The Commission determined not to review Order No. 17. See Notice of non-review (Aug. 16, 2016).

    On February 6, 2017, the ALJ granted a motion to amend the complaint and notice of investigation to reflect a corporate name change of Diebold, Incorporated to Diebold Nixdorf, Incorporated. See Order No. 32 (Feb. 6, 2017). The Commission determined not to review Order No. 32.

    On March 13, 2017, the ALJ issued his final ID, finding a violation of section 337 by Diebold in connection with claims 1-3, 6, 8, and 9 of the '235 patent. Specifically, the ID finds that the Commission has subject matter jurisdiction, in rem jurisdiction over the accused products, and in personam jurisdiction over Diebold. ID at 9, 104-107. The ID finds that Nautilus satisfied the importation requirement of section 337 (19 U.S.C. 1337(a)(1)(B)). Id. The ID finds that the accused products directly infringe asserted claims 1-3, 6, 8, and 9 of the '235 patent, and that Diebold contributorily infringes those claims. See ID at 111-160, 163-172. The ID, however, finds that Diebold failed to establish that the asserted claims of the '235 patent are invalid for indefiniteness, anticipation, or obviousness. ID at 232-311. Finally, the ID finds that Nautilus established the existence of a domestic industry that practices the asserted patent under 19 U.S.C. 1337(a)(2). See ID at 212.

    The ALJ's recommended determination on remedy and bonding issued concurrently with the final ID. RD at 330-40. The ALJ recommends that in the event the Commission finds a violation of section 337, the Commission should issue a limited exclusion order prohibiting the importation of Diebold's automated teller machines, ATM modules, components thereof, and products containing the same that infringe the asserted claims of the '235 patent. RD at 335. The ALJ also recommends issuance of cease and desist orders based on the presence of Diebold's commercially significant inventory in the United States. RD at 338. With respect to the amount of bond that should be posted during the period of Presidential review, the ALJ recommends that the Commission set a bond in the amount of zero (i.e., no bond) during the period of Presidential review because Nautilus “did not attempt any type of price comparison.” RD at 341.

    On March 27, 2017, Diebold filed a petition for review of the ID. On April 4, 2017, Nautilus filed a response to Diebold's petition for review.

    On May 15, 2017, the Commission determined to review the final ID in part and requested the parties to brief certain issues. See 82 FR 23064-66 (May 19, 2017). On May 25, 2017, the parties filed submissions to the Commission's question and on remedy, the public interest, and bonding. On June 1, 2017, the parties filed reply submissions.

    Having examined the record of this investigation, including the final ID, and the parties' submissions, the Commission has determined to (1) affirm the ALJ's finding that the accused products and domestic industry products satisfy the claim limitation “horizontally transfer sheets along the main transfer path” and (2) reverse the ALJ's finding that certain prior art does not disclose the preamble to claim 1: “Automatic depositing apparatus for automatically depositing a bundle of banknotes including at least one cheque.” The Commission adopts the ID's findings to the extent they are not inconsistent with the Commission opinion issued herewith.

    Having found a violation of section 337 in this investigation, the Commission has determined that the appropriate form of relief is: (1) A limited exclusion order prohibiting the unlicensed entry of automated teller machines, ATM modules, components thereof, and products containing the same that infringe one or more of claims 1-3, 6, 8, and 9 of the '235 patent that are manufactured on or behalf of, or imported on or behalf of Diebold or any of their affiliated companies, parents, subsidiaries, or other related business entities, or their successors or assigns, except under license of the patent owner or as provided by law, and except for service or repair articles imported for use in servicing or repairing automated teller machines, ATM modules, components thereof, and products containing the same, for identical articles that were imported as of the date of this Order. This exception does not permit the importation of automated teller machines to replace such articles that were previously imported; and (2) cease and desist orders prohibiting Diebold from conducting any of the following activities in the United States: Importing, selling, marketing, advertising, distributing, transferring (except for exportation), and soliciting U.S. agents or distributors for, automated teller machines, ATM modules, components thereof, and products containing the same covered by one or more of claims 1-3, 6, 8, and 9 of the '235 patent. The proposed cease and desist orders include the following exemptions: if in a written instrument, the owner of the patents authorizes or licenses such specific conduct, such specific conduct is related to the importation or sale of covered products by or for the United States, or such specific conduct is related to service or repair articles imported for use in servicing or repairing automated teller machines, ATM modules, components thereof, and products containing the same, for identical articles that were imported as of the date of this Order. This exception does not permit the importation of automated teller machines to replace such articles that were previously imported.

    The Commission has also determined that the public interest factors enumerated in section 337(d) and (f) (19 U.S.C. 1337(d) and (f)) do not preclude issuance of the limited exclusion order or cease and desist orders. Finally, the Commission has determined that a bond in the amount of zero is required to permit temporary importation during the period of Presidential review (19 U.S.C. 1337(j)) of automated teller machines, ATM modules, components thereof, and products containing the same that are subject to the remedial orders. The Commission's orders and opinion were delivered to the President and to the United States Trade Representative on the day of their issuance.

    The authority for the Commission's determination is contained in section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1337), and in Part 210 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR part 210).

    By order of the Commission.

    Issued: July 14, 2017. Lisa R. Barton, Secretary to the Commission.
    [FR Doc. 2017-15200 Filed 7-19-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020-02-P
    INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [USITC SE-17-030] Sunshine Act Meeting AGENCY HOLDING THE MEETING:

    United States International Trade Commission.

    TIME AND DATE:

    July 27, 2017 at 11:00 a.m.

    PLACE:

    Room 101, 500 E Street SW., Washington, DC 20436, Telephone: (202) 205-2000.

    STATUS:

    Open to the public.

    MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:

    1. Agendas for future meetings: None.

    2. Minutes.

    3. Ratification List.

    4. Vote in Inv. Nos. 701-TA-563 and 731-TA-1331-1332 (Final) (Finished Carbon Steel Flanges from India and Italy). The Commission is currently scheduled to complete and file its determinations and views of the Commission by August 14, 2017.

    5. Vote in Inv. No. 731-TA-669 (Fourth Review) (Cased Pencils from China). The Commission is currently scheduled to complete and file its determination and views of the Commission by August 17, 2017.

    6. Outstanding action jackets: None.

    In accordance with Commission policy, subject matter listed above, not disposed of at the scheduled meeting, may be carried over to the agenda of the following meeting.

    By order of the Commission.

    Issued: July 17, 2017. William R. Bishop, Supervisory Hearings and Information Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2017-15340 Filed 7-18-17; 11:15 am] BILLING CODE 7020-02-P
    INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation Nos. 701-TA-583 and 731-TA-1381 (Preliminary)] Cast Iron Soil Pipe Fittings From China; Institution of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Investigations and Scheduling of Preliminary Phase Investigations AGENCY:

    United States International Trade Commission.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    The Commission hereby gives notice of the institution of investigations and commencement of preliminary phase antidumping and countervailing duty investigation Nos. 701-TA-583 and 731-TA-1381 (Preliminary) pursuant to the Tariff Act of 1930 (“the Act”) to determine whether there is a reasonable indication that an industry in the United States is materially injured or threatened with material injury, or the establishment of an industry in the United States is materially retarded, by reason of imports of cast iron soil pipe fittings from China, provided for in subheading 7307.11.00 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States, that are alleged to be sold in the United States at less than fair value and alleged to be subsidized by the Government of China. Unless the Department of Commerce extends the time for initiation, the Commission must reach a preliminary determination in antidumping and countervailing duty investigations in 45 days, or in this case by August 28, 2017. The Commission's views must be transmitted to Commerce within five business days thereafter, or by September 5, 2017.

    DATES:

    July 13, 2017.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Amelia Shister ((202) 205-2047), Office of Investigations, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW., Washington, DC 20436. Hearing-impaired persons can obtain information on this matter by contacting the Commission's TDD terminal on 202-205-1810. Persons with mobility impairments who will need special assistance in gaining access to the Commission should contact the Office of the Secretary at 202-205-2000. General information concerning the Commission may also be obtained by accessing its internet server (https://www.usitc.gov). The public record for this investigation may be viewed on the Commission's electronic docket (EDIS) at https://edis.usitc.gov.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Background.—These investigations are being instituted, pursuant to sections 703(a) and 733(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1671b(a) and 1673b(a)), in response to a petition filed on July 13, 2017, by the Cast Iron Soil Pipe Institute, Mundelein, IL.

    For further information concerning the conduct of these investigations and rules of general application, consult the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, part 201, subparts A and B (19 CFR part 201), and part 207, subparts A and B (19 CFR part 207).

    Participation in the investigations and public service list.—Persons (other than petitioners) wishing to participate in the investigations as parties must file an entry of appearance with the Secretary to the Commission, as provided in sections 201.11 and 207.10 of the Commission's rules, not later than seven days after publication of this notice in the Federal Register. Industrial users and (if the merchandise under investigation is sold at the retail level) representative consumer organizations have the right to appear as parties in Commission antidumping duty and countervailing duty investigations. The Secretary will prepare a public service list containing the names and addresses of all persons, or their representatives, who are parties to these investigations upon the expiration of the period for filing entries of appearance.

    Limited disclosure of business proprietary information (BPI) under an administrative protective order (APO) and BPI service list.—Pursuant to section 207.7(a) of the Commission's rules, the Secretary will make BPI gathered in these investigations available to authorized applicants representing interested parties (as defined in 19 U.S.C. 1677(9)) who are parties to the investigations under the APO issued in the investigations, provided that the application is made not later than seven days after the publication of this notice in the Federal Register. A separate service list will be maintained by the Secretary for those parties authorized to receive BPI under the APO.

    Conference.—The Commission's Director of Investigations has scheduled a conference in connection with these investigations for 9:30 a.m. on Thursday, August 3, 2017, at the U.S. International Trade Commission Building, 500 E Street SW., Washington, DC. Requests to appear at the conference should be emailed to [email protected] and [email protected] (DO NOT FILE ON EDIS) on or before August 1, 2017. Parties in support of the imposition of countervailing and antidumping duties in these investigations and parties in opposition to the imposition of such duties will each be collectively allocated one hour within which to make an oral presentation at the conference. A nonparty who has testimony that may aid the Commission's deliberations may request permission to present a short statement at the conference.

    Written submissions.—As provided in sections 201.8 and 207.15 of the Commission's rules, any person may submit to the Commission on or before August 8, 2017, a written brief containing information and arguments pertinent to the subject matter of the investigations. Parties may file written testimony in connection with their presentation at the conference. All written submissions must conform with the provisions of section 201.8 of the Commission's rules; any submissions that contain BPI must also conform with the requirements of sections 201.6, 207.3, and 207.7 of the Commission's rules. The Commission's Handbook on E-Filing, available on the Commission's Web site at https://www.usitc.gov/secretary/documents/handbook_on_filing_procedures.pdf, elaborates upon the Commission's rules with respect to electronic filing.

    In accordance with sections 201.16(c) and 207.3 of the rules, each document filed by a party to the investigations must be served on all other parties to the investigations (as identified by either the public or BPI service list), and a certificate of service must be timely filed. The Secretary will not accept a document for filing without a certificate of service.

    Certification.—Pursuant to section 207.3 of the Commission's rules, any person submitting information to the Commission in connection with these investigations must certify that the information is accurate and complete to the best of the submitter's knowledge. In making the certification, the submitter will acknowledge that any information that it submits to the Commission during these investigations may be disclosed to and used: (i) By the Commission, its employees and Offices, and contract personnel (a) for developing or maintaining the records of these or related investigations or reviews, or (b) in internal investigations, audits, reviews, and evaluations relating to the programs, personnel, and operations of the Commission including under 5 U.S.C. Appendix 3; or (ii) by U.S. government employees and contract personnel, solely for cybersecurity purposes. All contract personnel will sign appropriate nondisclosure agreements.

    Authority:

    These investigations are being conducted under authority of title VII of the Tariff Act of 1930; this notice is published pursuant to section 207.12 of the Commission's rules.

    By order of the Commission.

    Issued: July 14, 2017. Lisa R. Barton, Secretary to the Commission.
    [FR Doc. 2017-15201 Filed 7-19-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020-02-P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Antitrust Division Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993—Cooperative Research Group on Hedge IV

    Notice is hereby given that, on June 9, 2017, pursuant to Section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301 et seq. (“the Act”), Southwest Research Institute—Cooperative Research Group on HEDGE IV (“HEDGE IV”) has filed written notifications simultaneously with the Attorney General and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing changes in its membership. The notifications were filed for the purpose of extending the Act's provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages under specified circumstances. Specifically, Diamond Electric, Ann Arbor, MI, and Honeywell International, Inc., Plymouth, MI, have been added as parties to this venture.

    No other changes have been made in either the membership or planned activity of the group research project. Membership in this group research project remains open, and HEDGE IV intends to file additional written notifications disclosing all changes in membership.

    On February 14, 2017, HEDGE IV filed its original notification pursuant to Section 6(a) of the Act. The Department of Justice published a notice in the Federal Register pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act on March 27, 2017 (82 FR 15238).

    The last notification was filed with the Department on May 10, 2017. A notice was published in the Federal Register pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act on June 7, 2017 (82 FR 26514).

    Patricia A. Brink, Director of Civil Enforcement, Antitrust Division.
    [FR Doc. 2017-15238 Filed 7-19-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
    Department of Justice Antitrust Division Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993—Wireless Industrial Technology Konsortium, Inc.

    Notice is hereby given that, on June 20, 2017, pursuant to Section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301 et seq. (“the Act”), Wireless Industrial Technology Konsortium, Inc. (“WITEK”) has filed written notifications simultaneously with the Attorney General and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing changes in its membership. The notifications were filed for the purpose of extending the Act's provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages under specified circumstances. Specifically, Texas Instruments, Inc., Dallas, TX, has been added as a party to this venture.

    No other changes have been made in either the membership or planned activity of the group research project. Membership in this group research project remains open, and WITEK intends to file additional written notifications disclosing all changes in membership.

    On August 8, 2008, WITEK filed its original notification pursuant to Section 6(a) of the Act. The Department of Justice published a notice in the Federal Register pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act on September 18, 2008 (73 FR 54170).

    The last notification was filed with the Department on June 24, 2015. A notice was published in the Federal Register pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act on July 22, 2015 (80 FR 43473).

    Patricia A. Brink, Director of Civil Enforcement, Antitrust Division.
    [FR Doc. 2017-15240 Filed 7-19-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Antitrust Division Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993—Advanced Media Workflow Association, Inc.

    Notice is hereby given that, on June 26, 2017, pursuant to Section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993, (“the Act”), Advanced Media Workflow Association, Inc. has filed written notifications simultaneously with the Attorney General and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing changes in its membership. The notifications were filed for the purpose of extending the Act's provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages under specified circumstances. Specifically, Calrec Audio, Inc., West Yorkshire, UNITED KINGDOM; IML Co. Ltd., Seoul, REPUBLIC OF KOREA; and Nextera Video, LLC, El Dorado Hills, CA, have been added as parties to this venture.

    Also, Arkena, Paris, FRANCE; Aspera, Inc., Emeryville, CA; TransMedia Dynamics Ltd., Aylesbury, UNITED KINGDOM; and Sebastien Crème (individual member), Paris, FRANCE, have withdrawn as parties to this venture.

    No other changes have been made in either the membership or planned activity of the group research project. Membership in this group research project remains open, and Advanced Media Workflow Association, Inc. intends to file additional written notifications disclosing all changes in membership.

    On March 28, 2000, Advanced Media Workflow Association, Inc. filed its original notification pursuant to Section 6(a) of the Act. The Department of Justice published a notice in the Federal Register pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act on June 29, 2000 (65 FR 40127).

    The last notification was filed with the Department on March 24, 2017. A notice was published in the Federal Register pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act on April 12, 2017 (82 FR 17693).

    Patricia A. Brink, Director of Civil Enforcement, Antitrust Division.
    [FR Doc. 2017-15236 Filed 7-19-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Antitrust Division Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993—Cable Television Laboratories, Inc.

    Notice is hereby given that, on June 28, 2017, pursuant to Section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993, (“the Act”), Cable Television Laboratories, Inc. (“CableLabs”) has filed written notifications simultaneously with the Attorney General and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing changes in its membership. The notifications were filed for the purpose of extending the Act's provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages under specified circumstances. Specifically, Stofa A/S. Horsens, DENMARK; NBN Co. Limited, Melbourne, AUSTRALIA; NOWO Communications, S.A., Lisbon, PORTUGAL; and Guangdong Cable Corporation Limited, Guangzhou, PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC of CHINA, have been added as parties to this venture.

    No other changes have been made in either the membership or planned activity of the group research project. Membership in this group research project remains open, and CableLabs intends to file additional written notifications disclosing all changes in membership.

    On August 8, 1988, CableLabs filed its original notification pursuant to Section 6(a) of the Act. The Department of Justice published a notice in the Federal Register pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act on September 7, 1988 (53 FR 34593).

    The last notification was filed with the Department on January 30, 2017. A notice was published in the Federal Register pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act on February 27, 2017 (82 FR 11943).

    Patricia A. Brink, Director of Civil Enforcement, Antitrust Division.
    [FR Doc. 2017-15237 Filed 7-19-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE [OMB Number 1123-0010] Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed eCollection; eComments Requested; Request for Registration Under the Gambling Devices Act of 1962 AGENCY:

    Criminal Division, Department of Justice.

    ACTION:

    30-Day notice.

    SUMMARY:

    Department of Justice (DOJ), Criminal Division will be submitting the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. This proposed information collection was previously published in the Federal Register on May 11, 2017 allowing for a 60 day comment period.

    DATES:

    Comments are encourages and will be accepted for an additional 30 day until August 21, 2017.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Written comments and/or suggestions regarding the items contained in this notice, especially the estimated public burden and associated response time, should be directed to U.S. Department of Justice, Criminal Division, Office of Enforcement Operations, JCK Building, Room 1210, Washington, DC 20530-0001.

    The Office of Management and Budget, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attention Department of Justice Desk Officer, Washington, DC 20503 or sent to [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information are encouraged. Your comments should address one or more of the following four points:

    —Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; —Evaluate the accuracy of the agencies estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; —Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and —Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. Overview of this Information Collection

    (1) Type of Information Collection: Revision of a currently approved collection.

    (2) Title of the Form/Collection: Request for Registration Under the Gambling Devices Act of 1962.

    (3) Agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of the Department sponsoring the collection: Agency form number: DOJ\CRM\OEO\GDR-1. Sponsoring component: Department of Justice, Criminal Division.

    (4) Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as well as a brief abstract: Primary: Business or other for-profit. Other: Not-for-profit institutions, individuals or households, and State, Local or Tribal Government. The form can be used by any entity required to register under the Gambling Devices Act of 1962 (15 U.S.C. 1171-1178).

    (5) An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated for an average respondent to respond/reply: It is estimated that 7,800 respondents will complete each form within approximately 5 minutes.

    (6) An estimate of the total public burden (in hours) associated with the collection: There are an estimated 650 total annual burden hours associated with this collection.

    If additional information is required contact: Melody Braswell, Department Clearance Officer, United States Department of Justice, Justice Management Division, Policy and Planning Staff, Two Constitution Square, 145 N Street NE., 3E.405A, Washington, DC 20530.

    Dated: July 17, 2017. Melody Braswell, Department Clearance Officer, PRA, U.S. Department of Justice.
    [FR Doc. 2017-15269 Filed 7-19-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-14-P
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Notice of Filing of Proposed Settlement Agreement Under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act

    On July 14, 2017, a proposed Settlement Agreement among the Governments (United States, five States, seven Tribes, the Debtors (Peabody Energy Corporation and its 152 debtor-affiliates), and the Gold Fields Liquidating Trust was filed with the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of Missouri in In re Peabody Energy Corporation, No. 16-42529-399 (Bankr. E.D. Mo.).

    The proposed Settlement Agreement will resolve certain proofs of claim asserted against Debtors under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (“CERCLA”), 42 U.S.C. 9601-9675, and similar state laws, for costs incurred and to be incurred by the Governments in connection with certain sites, and for natural resource damages and costs of assessment at or in connection with certain sites.

    The sites included in the settlement are:

    (1) The 5-acre portion of the Former American Zinc, Lead and Smelting Company Site or AZLS in Montgomery County, Kansas also referred to as the “Caney Parcel” or the “Caney Repository” that was previously owned by Gold Fields Mining, LLC.

    (2) The Anderson-Calhoun Mine and Mill Superfund Site in Stevens County, Washington.

    (3) The ASARCO Taylor Springs Superfund Site in Montgomery County, Illinois.

    (4) The Bautsch Gray Mine Superfund Site in Jo Daviess County, Illinois.

    (5) The Caney Residential Yards Site in Montgomery County, Kansas.

    (6) The Carpenter-Snow Creek Mining District Superfund Site in Cascade County, Montana.

    (7) The Cherokee County Superfund Site in Cherokee County, Kansas.

    (8) The East La Harpe Smelter Site in Allen County, Kansas.

    (9) The Grandview Mine and Mill Superfund Site in Pend Oreille County, Washington.

    (10) The Jasper County Superfund Site in Jasper County, Missouri, also known as the Oronogo/Duenweg Mining Belt Site.

    (11) The Klondyke Tailings Removal Site in Graham County, Arizona.

    (12) The Old American Zinc Plant Superfund Site in St. Clair County, Illinois.

    (13) The Tar Creek Superfund Site in Ottawa County, Oklahoma.

    The Settlement Agreement includes payments for the above Sites as described therein and certain covenants not to sue under Sections 106 and 107 of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. 9606 or 9607, and Section 70003 of RCRA, 42 U.S.C. 6973 with respect to the above referenced Sites.

    The publication of this notice opens a period for public comment on the Settlement Agreement. Comments should be addressed to the Assistant Attorney General, Environment and Natural Resources Division, and should refer to In re Peabody Energy Corporation, DOJ No. 90-11-3-11582. All comments must be submitted so that they are received by no later than 30 days after the date of publication in the Federal Register. Comments may be submitted either by email or by mail:

    To submit comments: Send them to: By email [email protected] By mail Assistant Attorney General, U.S. DOJ—ENRD, P.O. Box 7611, Washington, DC 20044-7611. Under Section 7003(d) of RCRA, a commenter may request an opportunity for a public meeting in the affected area.

    During the public comment period, the Settlement Agreement may be examined and downloaded at this Justice Department Web site: http://www.justice.gov/enrd/consent-decrees. We will provide a paper copy of the Settlement Agreement upon written request and payment of reproduction costs. Please mail your request and payment to: Consent Decree Library, U.S. DOJ—ENRD, P.O. Box 7611, Washington, DC 20044-7611.

    Please enclose a check or money order for $ 7.75 (25 cents per page reproduction cost) payable to the United States Treasury.

    Susan M. Akers, Assistant Section Chief, Environmental Enforcement Section, Environment and Natural Resources Division.
    [FR Doc. 2017-15199 Filed 7-19-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-15-P
    NATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDS ADMINISTRATION [NARA-2017-055] Records Management; General Records Schedule (GRS); GRS Transmittal 28 AGENCY:

    National Archives and Records Administration (NARA).

    ACTION:

    Notice of new General Records Schedule (GRS) Transmittal 28.

    SUMMARY:

    NARA is issuing a new set of General Records Schedules (GRS) via GRS Transmittal 28. The GRS provides mandatory disposition instructions for administrative records common to several or all Federal agencies. Transmittal 28 announces changes we have made to the GRS since we published Transmittal 27 in January. We are concurrently disseminating Transmittal 28 (the memo and the accompanying records schedules and documents) directly to each agency's records management official and have also posted it on NARA's Web site.

    DATES:

    This transmittal is effective the date it publishes in the Federal Register.

    ADDRESSES:

    You can find this transmittal on NARA's Web site at http://www.archives.gov/records-mgmt/grs/. You can download the complete current GRS, in PDF format, from NARA's Web site at http://www.archives.gov/records-mgmt/grs.html.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    For more information about this notice or to obtain paper copies of the GRS, contact Kimberly Keravuori, External Policy Program Manager, by email at [email protected] or by telephone at 301.837.3151.

    Writing and maintaining the GRS is the GRS Team's responsibility. This team is part of Records Management Services in the National Records Management Program, Office of the Chief Records Officer at NARA. You may contact NARA's GRS Team with general questions about the GRS at [email protected]

    Your agency's records officer may contact the NARA appraiser or records analyst with whom your agency normally works for support in carrying out this transmittal and the revised portions of the GRS. You may access a list of the appraisal and scheduling work group and regional contacts on our Web site at http://www.archives.gov/records-mgmt/appraisal/index.html.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    GRS Transmittal 28 announces changes to the General Records Schedules (GRS) made since NARA published GRS Transmittal 27 in January 2017. The GRS provide mandatory disposition instructions for records common to several or all Federal agencies. We are nearing the end of our five-year plan to completely rewrite the GRS. With Transmittal 28, 92% of old items are now superseded.

    Transmittal 28 includes only schedules newly issued or updated since the last transmittal, those schedules' associated new-to-old crosswalks and FAQs, an update to the FAQs for GRS 6.1 (but not schedule 6.1 itself, which remains unchanged), and an update to the FAQs about Flexible Dispositions. This means that many current GRS schedules are not included in this Transmittal.

    This means that many current GRS schedules are not included in this Transmittal. You can find all schedules (in Word, PDF, and CSV formats), crosswalks and FAQs for all schedules, and FAQs about the whole GRS at http://www.archives.gov/records-mgmt/grs.html. At the same location, you can also find the entire GRS (just schedules—no crosswalks or FAQs) in a single document (https: //www.archives.gov/files/records-mgmt/grs/trs28-sch-only.pdf).

    What changes does this transmittal make to the GRS?

    GRS Transmittal 28 publishes nine new schedules:

    GRS 2.1 Employee Acquisition Records DAA-GRS-2014-0002 GRS 2.2 Employee Management Records DAA-GRS-2017-0007 GRS 2.3 Employee Relations Records DAA-GRS-2015-0007 GRS 2.4 Employee Compensation and Benefits Records DAA-GRS-2016-0015 GRS 5.1 Common Office Records DAA-GRS-2016-0016 GRS 5.2 Transitory and Intermediary Records DAA-GRS-2017-0003 GRS 5.6 Security Records DAA-GRS-2017-0006 GRS 5.8 Administrative Help Desk Records DAA-GRS-2017-0001 GRS 6.5 Public Customer Service Records DAA-GRS-2017-0002

    It also publishes a new item in one schedule: GRS 1.1, Financial Management and Reporting Records (see question 3). In addition, it supersedes in its entirety GRS 4.3, Input Records, Output Records, and Electronic Copies (see question 4).

    This transmittal also includes an updated table of contents that shows some alterations to the previously published schedule titles. Research led us to conclude that it is not possible at this time to write a GRS for legal records, so the number assigned to that anticipated schedule—GRS 6.3—has been assigned instead to Information Technology Records. A new schedule for rulemaking records is GRS 6.6. Both 6.3 and 6.6 should be published in Transmittal 29.

    This transmittal publishes a revised Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) for GRS 6.1. The revisions include adding new GRS citations where appropriate; removing unnecessary references to some CFR citations in Q3; clarifying Q4 text; clarifying culling in Q22; and clarifying how to report calendars, appointments, tasks, chat transcripts, and other communications on NA-1005 in Q27. Finally, this transmittal publishes updated FAQs on Flexible Dispositions, adding a new Q6 about batching records for disposal.

    How has GRS 1.1 changed? How might these changes affect my agency?

    We added one new item (080) to cover administrative claims made by or against the Federal Government. We also added three new questions to the GRS 1.1 FAQs concerning travel receipts scanned into e-systems (question 9), audit records (question 16) and use of item 080 (question 18).

    Why did you delete GRS 4.3?

    We deleted GRS 4.3, Input Records, Output Records, and Electronic Copies, because we have superseded its seven items with two new items in GRS 5.1 and 5.2. We superseded GRS 4.3, item 040, Non-recordkeeping copies of electronic records, with the closely parallel and identically titled GRS 5.1, item 020. We moved it to 5.1 to place it in context with other common office records. The new item is media-neutral. We superseded GRS 4.3, items 010, 011, 020, 030, 031, and 040 with GRS 5.2, item 020, Intermediary records. We found we could gather records of various formats from various sources into a single unit by recognizing this unifying trait: They are stopping points en route to a final record scheduled elsewhere.

    What GRS items does GRS Transmittal 28 rescind?

    Many old GRS items are superseded by new GRS items. A few old items, however, have outlived their usefulness and cannot be crosswalked to new items. The table below lists old items newly rescinded by GRS Transmittal 28.

    GRS Item Title Reason 1 1a Official Personnel Folders: Transferred employees Was simply a filing/handling instruction and never had an associated disposition authority. 1 2a
  • 2b
  • Service Record Cards The Service Record Card (SF 7) became obsolete in 1994.
    1 6 Employee Record Cards The Employee Record Card (SF 7b) became obsolete in 1993. 1 7a1 Position Classification Standards Files Non-record technical reference in all agencies but OPM, where they are mission records. 1 7a2b Position Classification Standards Review Files No longer exist in the electronic world. If on paper, they are non-record duplicates. 1
  • 1
  • 7c1
  • 7c2
  • Classification survey reports
  • Inspection, audit, and survey files
  • OPM believes these records no longer exist.
    1 11 Position Identification Strips These records no longer exist. 1 13 Incentive Awards Program Reports Agencies are no longer required to complete OPM Form 1465. Instead, OPM extracts data from the Enterprise Human Resources Integration-Statistical Data Mart to report Government-wide data on cash and time-off awards. 1 25b Copies of EEO Complaint Case Files These are non-record duplicates. 1 25e Employee Housing Requests Item does not appear to be in use. 1 33d Test Material Stock Control Blank unused forms are not records. 1 33h Letters to Applicants Denying Transfer of Eligibility OPM Form 4896 is obsolete and the entire work process no longer exists. 1 35b1 Health benefits denied, appealed to OPM for reconsideration: Appeal successful—benefits granted Replaced by GRS 2.4, item 110. Like the old item, the new item instructs about filing, not disposition. As a result, it cannot be entered into ERA so cannot supersede the old. The old item must therefore be rescinded. 2 1a Pay record for each employee as maintained in an electronic data base Item was not a disposition instruction but rather an instruction to make sure the current record is full and correct. 2 2 Noncurrent Payroll Files Item authorized periodic disposal of system data after long-term records were downloaded and safeguarded. Such data is now covered under 5.1, item 020. 2 14a
  • 14b
  • 14c
  • Savings Bond Purchase Files Paper savings bond purchase via payroll deduction was discontinued in 2010. Payroll deductions under the current TreasuryDirect e-system are covered in GRS 2.4, item 010.
    2 23b Payroll Change Files: all other files Electronic payroll processing means these records no longer exist. 26 1b Internal agency committees related to an agency's mission Item is not a disposition instruction. It tells agencies to submit a schedule for records. Now handled via a note in GRS 5.1, item 030.

    Rescinded items are shown in context of their schedules in the old-to-new crosswalk.

    How do I cite new GRS items?

    When you send records to an FRC for storage, you should cite the records' legal authority—the “DAA” number—in the “Disposition Authority” column of the table. For informational purposes, please include schedule and item number. For example, “DAA-GRS-2013-0001-0004 (GRS 4.3, item 020).”

    Do I have to take any action to implement these GRS changes?

    NARA regulations (36 CFR 1226.12(a)) require agencies to disseminate GRS changes within six months of receipt.

    Per 36 CFR 1227.12(a)(1), you must follow GRS dispositions that state they must be followed without exception.

    Per 36 CFR 1227.12(a)(3), if you have an existing schedule that differs from a new GRS item that does not require being followed without exception, and you wish to continue using your agency-specific authority rather than the GRS authority, you must notify NARA within 120 days of the date of this transmittal.

    If you do not have an already existing agency-specific authority but wish to apply a retention period that differs from that specified in the GRS, you must submit a records schedule to NARA for approval via the Electronic Records Archives.

    How do I get copies of the new GRS?

    You can download the complete current GRS, in PDF format, from NARA's Web site at http://www.archives.gov/records-mgmt/grs.html.

    Whom do I contact for further information?

    Writing and maintaining the GRS is the responsibility of the GRS Team. You may contact the team with general questions about the GRS at [email protected] This team is part of Records Management Services in the National Records Management Program of the Office of the Chief Records Officer at NARA.

    Your agency's records officer may contact the NARA appraiser or records analyst with whom your agency normally works for support in carrying out this transmittal. A list of the appraisal and scheduling work group and regional contacts is on the NARA Web site at http://www.archives.gov/records-mgmt/appraisal/index.html.

    David S. Ferriero, Archivist of the United States.
    [FR Doc. 2017-15250 Filed 7-19-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7515-01-P
    NATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDS ADMINISTRATION [NARA-2017-056] Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection; Comment Request AGENCY:

    National Archives and Records Administration (NARA).

    ACTION:

    Notice of proposed extension request.

    SUMMARY:

    NARA proposes to request an extension from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) of approval to use a voluntary survey of visitors to the Public Vaults located at the National Archives in Washington, DC. We use this information to determine how the various components of the Public Vaults affect visitors' level of satisfaction with the Public Vaults and how effectively the venue communicates to them that records matter. And we use it to make changes that improve the overall visitor experience. We invite you to comment on this proposed information collection.

    DATES:

    We must receive written comments on or before September 18, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Send comments to Paperwork Reduction Act Comments (MP), Room 4100; National Archives and Records Administration; 8601 Adelphi Road; College Park, MD 20740-6001, fax them to 301-837-0319, or email them to [email protected]

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Contact Tamee Fechhelm by telephone at 301-837-1694 or email at [email protected] with requests for additional information or copies of the proposed information collection and supporting statement.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Public Law 104-13), NARA invites the public and other Federal agencies to comment on proposed information collections. The comments and suggestions should address one or more of the following points: (a) Whether the proposed information collection is necessary for NARA to properly perform its functions; (b) our estimate of the burden of the proposed information collection and its accuracy; (c) ways we could enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information we collect; (d) ways we could minimize the burden on respondents of collecting the information, including through information technology; and (e) whether this collection affects small businesses. We will summarize any comments you submit and include the summary in our request for OMB approval. All comments will become a matter of public record. In this notice, we solicit comments concerning the following information collection:

    Title: National Archives Public Vaults Survey.

    OMB number: 3095-0062.

    Agency form number: N/A.

    Type of review: Regular.

    Affected public: Individuals who visit the National Archives' Public Vaults in Washington, DC.

    Estimated number of respondents: 1,050.

    Estimated time per response: 10 minutes.

    Frequency of response: On occasion (when an individual visits the Public Vaults in Washington, DC).

    Estimated total annual burden hours: 175 hours.

    Abstract: The information collection is prescribed by EO 12862 issued September 11, 1993, which requires Federal agencies to survey their customers concerning customer service. The general purpose of this voluntary data collection is to measure customer satisfaction with the Public Vaults and identify additional opportunities for improving customers' experience.

    Swarnali Haldar, Executive for Information Services/CIO.
    [FR Doc. 2017-15212 Filed 7-19-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7515-01-P
    NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION Proposal Review Panel for Materials Research; Notice of Meeting

    In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, as amended), the National Science Foundation (NSF) announces the following meeting:

    Name and Committee Code: Proposal Review Panel for Materials Research—Partnership for Research and Education in Materials, University of Puerto Rico at Humacao (UPRH) (#1203) Site Visit

    Date and Time: August 17, 2017; 8:00 a.m.-6:00 p.m.; August 18, 2017; 8:00 a.m.-12:00 p.m.

    Place: University of Puerto Rico at Humacao, PR 908, Humacao, 00792 Puerto Rico.

    Type of Meeting: Part-Open.

    Contact Person: Dr. Jose Caro, Program Director, Partnership for Research and Education in Materials, PREM. Division of Materials Research, Room 1065, National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, VA 22230; Telephone (703) 292-4914.

    Purpose of Meeting: NSF site visit to provide advice and recommendations concerning further NSF support for the Center.

    Agenda Thursday, August 17, 2017 7:15 a.m.  Bus leaves Hotel in Palmas del Mar, Humacao to UPRH 7:45 a.m.-8:15 a.m. Continental Breakfast Executive Session for Site Visit Team. (Closed) 8:15 a.m.-8:30 a.m. Break 8:30 a.m.-8:45 a.m. Welcome and Overview by Administration 8:45 a.m.-9:30 a.m. PI's Overview of PREM 9:30 a.m.-9:45 a.m. Q&A for PI's and Administrator's Overviews 9:45 a.m.-10:15 a.m. Partner Institutions Interactions Q&A 10:15 a.m.-10:30 a.m. Break 10:30 a.m.-12:00 a.m. Research Presentations/Q&A 12:00 p.m.-12:15 p.m. Q&A for Science Presentations 12:15 p.m.-1:15 p.m. Lunch with students and post docs (no faculty). 1:15 p.m.-2:15 p.m. Facilities Overview and Visit 2:15 p.m.-2:45 p.m. Visiting Team with University Management (Closed) 2:45 p.m.-4:00 p.m. Poster Session with refreshments 4:00 p.m.-5:00 p.m. Executive session—SV Team only (Closed) 5:00 p.m.-5:45 p.m. SV Team meets with PREM Management Team 5:45 p.m. Adjourn 6:00 p.m. Bus leaves from Natural Sciences Building for dinner 6:30 p.m. Dinner (Panel and Faculty): El Makito Restaurant, Naguabo,PR 9:00 p.m. Bus leaves Restaurant to Hotel (Approximate time) Friday, August 18, 2017 7:00 a.m. Bus leaves hotel to UPRH 7:30 a.m.-8:00 a.m. Continental Breakfast 8:00 a.m.-9:30 a.m. Education and Outreach Activities 9:30 a.m.-9:45 a.m. Q&A for Educational and Outreach Presentations 9:45 a.m.-10:00 a.m. Break 10:00 a.m.-11:45 a.m. Executive Sessions for Site Visit Team only (Closed) 11:45 a.m.-12:00 p.m. NFS Debriefing with PREM PI 12:00 p.m. End of Site Visit 12:00 p.m. Working Lunch for Site Visit Team

    Reason for Closing: The work being reviewed during closed portions of the site visit will include information of a proprietary or confidential nature, including technical information; financial data, such as salaries and personal information concerning individuals associated with the proposals. These matters are exempt under 5 U.S.C. 552b(c), (4) and (6) of the Government in the Sunshine Act.

    Dated: July 17, 2017. Crystal Robinson, Committee Management Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2017-15264 Filed 7-19-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7555-01-P
    NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION Sunshine Act Meeting; National Science Board

    The National Science Board, pursuant to NSF regulations (45 CFR part 614), the National Science Foundation Act, as amended (42 U.S.C. 1862n-5), and the Government in the Sunshine Act (5 U.S.C. 552b), hereby gives notice of the scheduling of a teleconference for the transaction of National Science Board business, as follows:

    TIME AND DATE:

    Closed teleconference of the Committee on Strategy of the National Science Board, to be held Tuesday, July 25, 2017 from 10:30 a.m. to 12:00 Noon. EDT.

    PLACE:

    This meeting will be held by teleconference at the National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson Blvd., Arlington, VA 22230.

    STATUS:

    Closed.

    MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:

    Committee Chair's opening remarks; Review and discussion of the FY 2019 budget submission to the Office of Management and Budget; Committee Chair's closing remarks.

    CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION:

    Point of contact for this meeting is: Kathy Jacquart, 4201 Wilson Blvd., Arlington, VA 22230. Telephone: (703) 292-8000.

    You may find meeting information and updates (time, place, subject matter or status of meeting) at http://www.nsf.gov/nsb/notices/.

    Dated: July 17, 2017. Chris Blair, Executive Assistant to the NSB Office.
    [FR Doc. 2017-15309 Filed 7-18-17; 11:15 am] BILLING CODE 7555-01-P
    NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket No. 72-1050; NRC-2016-0231] Waste Control Specialists LLC's Consolidated Interim Spent Fuel Storage Facility Project AGENCY:

    Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

    ACTION:

    License application; withdrawal of notice of opportunity to request a hearing.

    SUMMARY:

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is withdrawing the notice of opportunity to request a hearing for Waste Control Specialists LLC's application to construct and operate a Consolidated Interim Storage Facility (CISF) for spent nuclear fuel at WCS's facility in Andrews County, Texas.

    DATES:

    July 20, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2016-0231 when contacting the NRC about the availability of information regarding this document. You may obtain publicly-available information related to this document using any of the following methods:

    Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2016-0231. Address questions about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher; telephone: 301-415-3463; email: [email protected] For technical questions, contact the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document.

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

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

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    John-Chau Nguyen, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-0262; email: [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background

    By letter dated April 28, 2016, as supplemented on July 20, August 19, August 31, September 27, October 7, November 16, December 16, December 22, 2016, and March 16, 2017, WCS submitted an application for a specific license pursuant to part 72 of title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), “Licensing Requirements for the Independent Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel, High-Level Radioactive Waste, and Reactor-Related Greater Than Class C Waste.” In its letter, WCS requested authorization to store up to 5,000 metric tons of uranium for a period of 40 years in a CISF.

    In addition, by letter dated July 21, 2016, WCS requested that the NRC initiate its environmental impact statement (EIS) process for the WCS CISF license application as soon as practicable. By letter dated October 7, 2016, the NRC informed WCS of its decision to start the EIS process in advance of making a decision on docketing the application. On November 14, 2016 (81 FR 79531), the NRC published a notice in the Federal Register announcing its intent to prepare an EIS and to open the scoping period for the EIS.

    By letter dated January 26, 2017, the NRC informed WCS of its decision to accept the application and proceed with the technical review. Subsequently, on January 30, 2017 (82 FR 8773), the NRC published a notice in the Federal Register announcing the acceptance for docketing and opportunity to request a hearing and to petition for leave to intervene of the WCS application.

    By letter dated March 16, 2017, WCS submitted Revision 1 to its license application. By letter dated April 18, 2017, WCS requested that the NRC temporarily suspend all safety and environmental review activities as well as public participation activities associated with WCS' license application. On April 19, 2017, WCS and the NRC staff jointly requested that the Commission withdraw the hearing notice, explaining that a new Federal Register notice to provide a fresh opportunity for interested persons to request a hearing would be issued if review of the application resumes. On May 10, 2017, the NRC staff granted WCS' request to temporarily suspend all safety and environmental review activities as well as public participation activities associated with its license application. On June 22, 2017, the Commission granted WCS's and the NRC staff's request and further directed that the NRC staff to publish a Federal Register notice withdrawing the opportunity to request a hearing on this license application and directed the NRC staff to publish a new notice of opportunity to request a hearing in the Federal Register if WCS requests that the NRC staff resume its review of WCS's application.

    II. Availability of Documents

    The documents identified in the following table are available to interested persons through one or more of the following methods, as indicated.

    Document ADAMS
  • Accession No.
  • WCS submittal of CISF license application, with Environmental Report ML16132A533 WCS letter with schedule for response to NRC request for supplemental information ML16193A314 WCS initial submittal in response to NRC request for supplemental information ML16229A537 WCS submittal of supplemental security information ML16235A467 WCS request for NRC to begin EIS process as soon as practicable ML16229A340 WCS second submittal in response to NRC request for supplemental information ML16265A454 WCS submittal of additional supplemental security information ML16280A300 NRC response to WCS request to begin EIS process as soon as practicable ML16285A317 WCS third submittal in response to NRC request for supplemental information ML16287A527 WCS fourth submittal in response to NRC request for supplemental information ML16330A116 WCS fifth submittal in response to NRC request for supplemental information ML16356A346 WCS sixth submittal in response to NRC request for supplemental information ML17018A292 NRC letter accepting application for review ML17018A168 WCS license application Revision 1 submittal ML17082A007 WCS request NRC to temporarily suspend all safety and environmental review activities ML17110A206 NRC granting WCS request to temporarily suspend all safety and environmental review activities ML17129A314
    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 13th day of July 2017.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

    John McKirgan, Chief, Spent Fuel Licensing Branch, Division of Spent Fuel Management, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards.
    [FR Doc. 2017-15239 Filed 7-19-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
    SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-81146; File No. SR-NYSEMKT-2017-44] Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE MKT LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend Rule 7.38E To Specify the Ranking of an Odd Lot Order That Has a Display Price That Is Better Than Its Working Price July 14, 2017.

    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) 1 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Act”) 2 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,3 notice is hereby given that on June 30, 2017, NYSE MKT LLC (the “Exchange” or “NYSE MKT”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II below, which Items have been prepared by the self-regulatory organization. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.

    1 15 U.S.C.78s(b)(1).

    2 15 U.S.C. 78a.

    3 17 CFR 240.19b-4.

    I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change

    The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 7.38E (Odd and Mixed Lots) to specify the ranking of an odd lot order that has a display price that is better than its working price. The proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's Web site at www.nyse.com, at the principal office of the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

    II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, the self-regulatory organization included statements concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of those statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant parts of such statements.

    A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and the Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose

    The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 7.38E (Odd and Mixed Lots) to specify the ranking of an odd lot order that has a display price that is better than its working price.

    Rule 7.38E provides that the working price of an odd lot order will be adjusted both on arrival and when resting on the Exchange Book based on the limit price of the order as follows:

    • If the limit price of an odd lot order is equal to or worse than the contra-side PBBO, it will have a working price equal to the limit price.

    • If the limit price of an odd lot order is better than the contra-side PBBO, it will have a working price equal to the contra-side PBBO.

    • If the PBBO is crossed, the odd lot order will have a working price equal to the same-side PBB or PBO.

    By moving the working price, an odd lot order to buy (sell) will not trade at a price above (below) the PBO (PBB), or if the PBBO is crossed, above (below) the PBB (PBO). In either case, if the odd lot order is ranked Priority 2—Display Orders,4 its display price would not change when its working price is adjusted.

    4 As described in Rule 7.36E(e)(2), Priority 2—Display Orders are non-marketable Limit Orders with a displayed working price.

    Exchange rules are currently silent regarding how a resting odd lot order that has a display price that is better than its working price would be ranked for trading at that working price.5 This scenario would only occur if a resting odd lot order is displayed at a price, and then an Away Market PBBO crosses that display price. In that limited scenario, pursuant to Rule 7.38E(b)(1) described above, the working price of the odd-lot order would be adjusted to a price inferior to the display price, but it would remain displayed at the now crossed price.

    5 Pursuant to Rule 7.38E(b)(1), on arrival, an odd lot order's working price may be adjusted consistent with the terms of the order. However, an arriving odd-lot order would not be assigned a working price that would be inferior to the price at which the arriving odd lot order would be displayed.

    The Exchange proposes to specify that in such case, the ranking and priority category applicable to such an order at its display [sic], i.e., the price it is displayed and Priority 2—Display Orders, would govern its ranking for purposes of a trade at its different, inferior working price.6 This ranking would differ from the Exchange's general rule that an order is ranked based on its working price.7 However, the Exchange believes that if the display price of an order is better than its working price, such order has already demonstrated a public willingness to trade at a more aggressive price because it continues to be published in a market data feed at the more aggressive display price.8 In such case, the order should receive the benefit of the ranking (both price and priority category) associated with its better display price when determining how that order would be traded at its working price. In other words, an odd-lot order with a better display price than its working price would not be ranked based on its working price, including that it would not be assigned Priority 3—Non-Display Orders at its working price.

    6 As described in Rule 7.36E(c), an order is ranked based on price, priority category, and time. Such ranking is only applicable once an order is resting on the Exchange Book.

    7 Rule 7.36E(d) provides that all orders are ranked based on the working price of the order. Rule 7.36E(e)(3) generally provides that non-marketable orders for which the working price is not displayed have third priority behind Market Orders and non-marketable Limit Orders that are displayed at their working price. This proposed rule change would be an exception to these rules.

    8See Rule 7.36E(b)(1) (odd-lot sized orders are considered displayed for ranking purposes).

    The Exchange further believes that if an odd-lot order is assigned a new working price that is worse than its display price, such order should not be assigned a new working time. In other words, when trading at its working price, its time ranking would be based on the working time associated with its display price.9 Maintaining the original working time of such order would ensure that it maintains its original ranking, even if it trades at a different price.

    9 Rule 7.36E(f)(2) provides that an order is assigned a new working time any time the working price of the order changes. This proposed rule change would be an exception to this general rule.

    To effect this change, the Exchange proposes to amend Rule 7.38E(b)(1) to provide that an odd-lot order ranked Priority 2—Display Orders would not be assigned a new working time if its working price is adjusted under Rule 7.38E(b)(1). In addition, if the display price of an odd lot order to buy (sell) is above (below) its working price, it would be ranked based on its display price.10

    10 For example, assume the PBBO is 10.07 × 10.10 and the Exchange receives orders ranked Priority 2—Display Orders in the following sequence: T1 to buy 25 shares displayed at 10.08, T2 to buy 25 shares displayed at 10.09, T3 to buy 25 shares displayed at 10.08, and T4 to buy 100 shares displayed at 10.07. Assume next that the PBO changes to 10.07. The working price of T1, T2, and T3 will be adjusted to 10.07, but they would keep their original working time. Next, the Exchange receives an incoming order to sell 100 shares at 10.07. The Exchange would trade the incoming order with the resting orders in the following sequence: T2, T1, T3, and then T4 would be allocated the remaining 25 shares. T2 would trade before T1 because it has a better price ranking based on its display price. If the incoming order to sell were for 50 shares, only T2 and T1 would trade.

    Because once on Pillar, the Exchange would trade an odd lot order with a display price better than its working price trades in this manner [sic], these changes will be in effect when the Exchange implements Pillar.

    2. Statutory Basis

    The proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Act”),11 in general, and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5),12 in particular, because it is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in facilitating transactions in securities, to remove impediments to, and perfect the mechanism of, a free and open market and a national market system and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest.

    11 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).

    12 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).

    Specifically, the Exchange believes that the proposed rule change would remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system because the Exchange believes that an order that has been displayed should receive the benefit of the ranking of that displayed price if it trades at a less aggressive working price. This scenario would only occur if a resting odd-lot order has been displayed at a price, and then an Away Market PBBO crosses that price and then the working price of that order is adjusted to a price inferior to its display price. In such case, while the odd lot order would be executed at its working price, because it was both willing to trade at a better price and is still displayed at that better price, the Exchange proposes that it would be ranked based on its display price for purposes of its execution at the working price. If the PBBO had not crossed the odd-lot order, such order would have had the benefit of the ranking based on its display price and the Exchange believes it would be consistent with the protection of investors and the public for the odd-lot order to retain such ranking when its working price is moved to an inferior price. The Exchange further believes that the proposed rule change would promote fair and orderly markets that would protect investors and the public interest because it would to [sic] promote the display of liquidity by ensuring that a displayed odd lot order maintains its ranking even if it trades at a less aggressive price.

    The Exchange further believes that the proposed rule change would remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system because it would promote transparency in Exchange rules and reduce potential confusion regarding how an odd-lot order would be ranked and execute in the limited scenario when the display price of a resting odd lot has been crossed, and it has been assigned a working price inferior to its display price.

    B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is not designed to address any competitive issues but rather to provide an incentive for market participants to enter aggressively-priced displayed liquidity.

    C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others

    No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the proposed rule change.

    III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (i) Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii) become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 13 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.14

    13 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).

    14 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). The Commission has waived the requirement under Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) that the Exchange provide it with written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change, along with a brief description and the text of the proposed rule change, at least five business days prior to the date of the filing of the proposed rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission.

    A proposed rule change filed pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6) under the Act 15 normally does not become operative for 30 days after the date of its filing. However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) 16 permits the Commission to designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange has asked the Commission to waive the 30-day operative delay. The Exchange represents that it anticipates beginning the migration of symbols to Pillar on July 24, 2017. Waiver of the 30-day operative delay would allow the Exchange to implement the proposed rule change concurrently with the commencement of its migration of symbols to Pillar, and thus reduce any potential for confusion of how odd-lot orders would be processed on the new trading platform. Accordingly, the Commission finds that waiving the 30-day operative delay is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest and designates the proposal operative upon filing.17

    15 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).

    16 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).

    17 For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is: (i) Necessary or appropriate in the public interest; (ii) for the protection of investors; or (iii) otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule change should be approved or disapproved.

    IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:

    Electronic Comments

    • Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or

    • Send an email to [email protected] Please include File Number SR-NYSEMKT-2017-44 on the subject line.

    Paper Comments

    • Send paper comments in triplicate to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090.

    All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEMKT-2017-44. This file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549 on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEMKT-2017-44 and should be submitted on or before August 10, 2017.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.18

    Jill M. Peterson, Assistant Secretary.

    18 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    [FR Doc. 2017-15191 Filed 7-19-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
    SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-81152; File No. SR-BatsBZX-2017-45] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Bats BZX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change to BZX Rule 14.13, Company Listing Fees, To Amend the Fees Applicable to Securities Listed on the Exchange July 14, 2017.

    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Act”),1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,2 notice is hereby given that on July 3, 2017, Bats BZX Exchange, Inc. (the “Exchange” or “BZX”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II and III below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.

    1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).

    2 17 CFR 240.19b-4.

    I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change

    The Exchange filed a proposed rule change to amend the fees applicable to securities listed on the Exchange, which are set forth in Exchange Rule 14.13. Changes to the Exchange's fees pursuant to this proposal are effective upon filing.

    The text of the proposed rule change is available at the Exchange's Web site at www.bats.com, at the principal office of the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

    II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant parts of such statements.

    A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose

    On August 30, 2011, the Exchange received approval of rules applicable to the qualification, listing, and delisting of companies on the Exchange,3 which it modified on February 8, 2012 in order to adopt pricing for the listing of exchange traded products (“ETPs”) 4 on the Exchange,5 which it subsequently modified again on June 4, 2014.6 On October 16, 2014, the Exchange modified Rule 14.13, “Company Listing Fees,” to eliminate the annual fees for ETPs not participating in the Exchange's Competitive Liquidity Provider Program pursuant to Rule 11.8, Interpretations and Policies .02 (the “CLP Program”).7 On May 22, 2015, the Exchange further modified Rule 14.13 to eliminate the application fee for ETPs, effectively eliminating any compulsory fees for both new ETP issues and transfer listings onto the Exchange.8 On September 30, 2015, the Exchange began offering an incentive payment to ETPs that are listed on the Exchange based on the consolidated average daily volume (the “CADV”) of the ETP (the “Issuer Incentive Program”).9 The Exchange subsequently made an administrative change to the Issuer Incentive Program that required an issuer to enroll in order to receive payment.10

    3See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 65225 (August 30, 2011), 76 FR 55148 (September 6, 2011) (SR-BATS-2011-018).

    4 As defined in Exchange Rule 11.8(e)(1)(A), the term “ETP” means any security listed pursuant to Exchange Rule 14.11.

    5See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 66422 (February 17, 2012), 77 FR 11179 (February 24, 2012) (SR-BATS-2012-010).

    6See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 72377 (June 12, 2014), 79 FR 34822 (June 18, 2014) (SR-BATS-2014-024).

    7See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 73414 (October 23, 2014), 79 FR 64434 (October 29, 2014) (SR-BATS-2014-050).

    8See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 75085 (June 1, 2015), 80 FR 32190 (June 5, 2015) (SR-BATS-2015-39).

    9See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 76113 (October 8, 2015), 80 FR 62142 (October 15, 2015) (SR-BATS-2015-80).

    10See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 77960 (June 1, 2016), 81 FR 36632 (June 7, 2016) (SR-BatsBZX-2016-20).

    The Exchange submits this proposal to decommission the Issuer Incentive Program. Currently, under Exchange Rule 14.13(b)(2)(C), the issuer of each class of securities that is a domestic or foreign issue listed on the Exchange as an ETP is eligible to receive payments from the Exchange on a quarterly basis based on the CADV of the ETP for each trading day of the preceding calendar quarter that the ETP was listed on the Exchange. The annualized payments range from the lowest bracket of $3,000 for CADV between 1-3 million shares to the highest bracket of $400,000 for CADV greater than 35 million shares. The Exchange is proposing to eliminate such payments.

    Implementation Date

    The Exchange proposes to implement the amendments to Rule 14.13(b)(2)(C) effective July 3, 2017.

    2. Statutory Basis

    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder that are applicable to a national securities exchange, and, in particular, with the requirements of Section 6 of the Act.11 Specifically, the Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b)(4) and 6(b)(5) of the Act,12 in that it provides for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees and other charges among issuers and is designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in facilitating transactions in securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest, and are not designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers.

    11 15 U.S.C. 78f.

    12 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) and (5).

    The Exchange is proposing to decommission the Issuer Incentive Program, which established payments from the Exchange to ETP issuers that list on the Exchange and achieve a particular CADV threshold. The Exchange believes that the proposal is equitable, reasonable, and non-discriminatory because decommissioning the Issuer Incentive Program will affect all ETP issuers listing on the Exchange equally. The Exchange also believes that the proposal to eliminate the Issuer Incentive Program is reasonable, fair and equitable, and not an unfairly discriminatory allocation of fees and other charges because it would apply equally to all Issuers and eliminating the payment will allow the Exchange to better allocate its resources in order to make it a more attractive listing venue for ETPs. Additionally, the payments under the Issuer Incentive Program have not had the impact that the Exchange sought when it was implemented.

    Based on the foregoing, the Exchange believes that the proposed amendment to Rule 14.13(b)(2)(C) to eliminate the Issuer Incentive Program is a reasonable, equitable, and non-discriminatory allocation of fees and other charges to issuers.

    B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    The Exchange believes that the proposal would not impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The Exchange acknowledges that it operates in a highly competitive environment, and that ETP issuers may opt to disfavor listing on the Exchange if they believe that alternatives offer them better value. Accordingly, the Exchange does not believe that the proposed changes will impair the ability of ETP issuers or competing venues to maintain their competitive standing in the financial markets. The Exchange does not believe that the proposed changes to the Exchange's standard fees, rebates and tiered pricing structure burdens competition, but instead, enhances competition as it is intended to increase the competitiveness of the Exchange.

    C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants or Others

    The Exchange has not solicited, and does not intend to solicit, comments on this proposed rule change. The Exchange has not received any written comments from members or other interested parties.

    III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 13 and paragraph (f) of Rule 19b-4 thereunder.14 At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

    13 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).

    14 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f).

    IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposal is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:

    Electronic Comments

    • Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or

    • Send an email to [email protected] Please include File No. SR-BatsBZX-2017-45 on the subject line.

    Paper Comments

    • Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090.

    All submissions should refer to File No. SR-BatsBZX-2017-45. This file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing will also be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File No. SR-BatsBZX-2017-45 and should be submitted on or before August 10, 2017.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.15

    15 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    Jill M. Peterson, Assistant Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2017-15197 Filed 7-19-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
    SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-81151; File No. SR-MRX-2017-02] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq MRX, LLC; Notice of Designation of a Longer Period for Commission Action on Proposed Rule Change in Connection With a System Migration to Nasdaq INET Technology July 14, 2017.

    On May 17, 2017, Nasdaq MRX, LLC (“MRX” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”) 1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,2 a proposed rule change to amend various Exchange rules in connection with a system migration to Nasdaq, Inc. supported technology. The proposed rule change was published for comment in the Federal Register on June 5, 2017.3 The Commission received no comment letters on the proposed rule change.

    1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).

    2 17 CFR 240.19b-4.

    3See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 80815 (May 30, 2017), 82 FR 25827 (“Notice”).

    Section 19(b)(2) of the Act 4 provides that, within 45 days of the publication of notice of the filing of a proposed rule change, or within such longer period up to 90 days as the Commission may designate if it finds such longer period to be appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or as to which the self-regulatory organization consents, the Commission shall either approve the proposed rule change, disapprove the proposed rule change, or institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule change should be disapproved. The 45th day for this filing is July 20, 2017.

    4 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

    The Commission is extending the 45-day time period for Commission action on the proposed rule change. The Commission finds that it is appropriate to designate a longer period within which to take action on the proposed rule change so that it has sufficient time to consider the Exchange's proposal, as described above.

    Accordingly, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,5 the Commission designates September 3, 2017, as the date by which the Commission should either approve or disapprove or institute proceedings to determine whether to disapprove the proposed rule change (File No. SR-MRX-2017-02).

    5 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.6

    6 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(31).

    Jill M. Peterson, Assistant Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2017-15196 Filed 7-19-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
    SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-81144; File No. SR-ISE-2017-69] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq ISE, LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend the Schedule of Fees in Connection With the ISE System Migration July 14, 2017.

    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”),1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,2 notice is hereby given that on July 3, 2017, Nasdaq ISE, LLC (“ISE” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC” or “Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.

    1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).

    2 17 CFR 240.19b-4.

    I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change

    The Exchange proposes to amend the Schedule of Fees to indicate the treatment of various symbols which are migrating to INET technology in July 2017.

    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's Web site at www.ise.com, at the principal office of the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

    II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.

    A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose

    The purpose of the proposed rule change is to amend the Schedule of Fees to: (1) Exclude certain Select Symbols 3 which will migrate to INET from July 3rd through July 30th 2017 from the Market Maker Plus 4 Tiers for the month of July 2017; and (2) exclude certain activity for certain Select Symbols which will migrate to INET on July 31, 2017 from the Market Maker Plus Tiers for the month of July 2017. Each rule change will be described in greater detail below.

    3 “Select Symbols” are options overlying all symbols listed on ISE that are in the Penny Pilot Program.

    4 A Market Maker Plus is a Market Maker who is on the National Best Bid or National Best Offer a specified percentage of the time for series trading between $0.03 and $3.00 (for options whose underlying stock's previous trading day's last sale price was less than or equal to $100) and between $0.10 and $3.00 (for options whose underlying stock's previous trading day's last sale price was greater than $100) in premium in each of the front two expiration months. The specified percentage is at least 80% but lower than 85% of the time for Tier 1, at least 85% but lower than 95% of the time for Tier 2, and at least 95% of the time for Tier 3. A Market Maker's single best and single worst quoting days each month based on the front two expiration months, on a per symbol basis, will be excluded in calculating whether a Market Maker qualifies for this rebate, if doing so will qualify a Market Maker for the rebate.

    These rule changes are being made in connection with the migration of the Exchange's trading system to the Nasdaq INET technology, which began on June 12, 2017.5 On June 9, 2017, the Exchange filed a proposed rule change that eliminated fees and rebates for trades in FX Options that began trading on INET with the launch of the re-platformed trading system.6 In addition, on June 27, 2017 the Exchange filed another proposed rule change that eliminated fees and rebates for trades in symbol KANG that began trading on INET on that date.7 The Exchange recently filed a proposed rule change that eliminated fees and rebates for trades executed on June 30, 2017 in the following symbols: ACN, ACOR, AEO, AFSI, AMJ, AOBC, BKD, BTE, BV, CBI, CCL, CLR, CME, CNQ, ADM, ADSK, AGNC, ASHR, BBT, BK, BSX, CIEN, and IBM.8 Additionally, that rule change also proposed that activity in the following Select Symbols will not be counted for purposes of determining Market Maker Plus tiers: ADM, ADSK, AGNC, ASHR, BBT, BK, BSX, CIEN, and IBM.9

    5See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 80432 (April 11, 2017), 82 FR 18191 (April 17, 2017) (SR-ISE-2017-03). See also Options Trader Alert 2017-51.

    6See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 80999 (June 22, 2017) 82 FR 29354 (June 28, 2017) (SR-ISE-2017-59).

    7See SR-ISE-2017-63 (publication pending).

    8 See SR-ISE-2017-66 (publication pending).

    9Id.

    Current Proposal—Number 1

    The Exchange proposes that Select Symbols which will migrate to INET from July 3rd through July 30th 2017, as noticed by the Exchange in Options Trader Alert #2017-5110 (“Migrated Symbols”) will not be subject to Market Maker Plus Tiers 1-3 for the month of July 2017. These Migrated Symbols will be subject to Market Maker Plus Tiers 1-3 as of August 1, 2017 and thereafter.

    10 This alert contains a link to the specific symbols that migrate on each date.

    During the transition symbols will migrate from the legacy T7 system to the INET system. The two systems utilize different billing systems. For ease of transition and to ensure that Members are not impacted by the transition to a new billing system, the Exchange is proposing to simply not apply the Market Maker Plus Tiers to the symbols which will be transitioning from July 3rd through July 30th 2017 for the month of July 2017. In August 2017, the Migrated Symbols will all be subject to the INET billing system and therefore the Exchange would begin applying the Market Maker Plus Tiers at that time.

    Current Proposal—Number 2

    The Exchange proposes to exclude Select Symbols which will migrate to INET on July 31, 2017, as noticed by the Exchange at Options Trader Alert #2017-51 (“July 31 Migrated Symbols”) and only include activity from July 3, 2017 through July 30, 2017 for purposes of qualifying for the Market Maker Plus Tiers for the month of July 2017.

    As noted above, since the July 31 Migrated Symbols will migrate from the legacy T7 system to the INET system and utilize two different billing systems the Exchange proposes this exclusion. The Exchange believes that the exclusion will provide ease of transition and ensure that Members are not impacted by the transition to a new billing system. In August 2017, the July 31 Migrated Symbols will be subject to the INET billing system and therefore the Exchange would begin applying the Market Maker Plus Tiers at that time for the entire month of August 2017.

    2. Statutory Basis

    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the provisions of Section 6 of the Act,11 in general, and Section 6(b)(4) of the Act,12 in particular, in that it is designed to provide for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among its members and other persons using its facilities.

    11 15 U.S.C. 78f.

    12 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).

    Current Proposal—Number 1

    The Exchange's proposal that Migrated Symbols will not be subject to Market Maker Plus Tiers 1-3 for the month of July 2017 is reasonable because the Exchange will utilize two billing systems with the migration from legacy T7 to INET. For ease of transition and to ensure that Members are not impacted by the transition to a new billing system, the Exchange believes it is reasonable to not apply the Market Maker Plus Tiers to the symbols which will be transitioning from July 3rd through July 30th 2017 for the month of July 2017. The new INET system would result in higher performance, scalability, and more robust architecture for ISE Members.

    The Exchange's proposal that Migrated Symbols will not be subject to Market Maker Plus Tiers 1-3 for the month of July 2017 is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory as it will apply to all transactions in Migrated Symbols on INET.

    Current Proposal—Number 2

    The Exchange's proposal that July 31 Migrated Symbols will only include activity from July 3, 2017 through July 30, 2017 for purposes of qualifying for the Market Maker Plus Tiers for the month of July 2017 is reasonable because the Exchange will utilize two billing systems with the migration from legacy T7 to INET. For ease of transition and to ensure that Members are not impacted by the transition to a new billing system, the Exchange believes it is reasonable to exclude the July 31, 2017 trading activity from the Market Maker Plus Tiers for the July 31 Migrated Symbols and only apply activity from July 3rd through July 30th 2017 for purposes of qualifying for the Market Maker Plus Tiers for the month of July 2017. The new INET system would result in higher performance, scalability, and more robust architecture for ISE Members.

    The Exchange's proposal to exclude activity for July 31, 2017 for the July 31 Migrated Symbols qualification for July 2017 and only include activity from July 3, 2017 through July 30, 2017 for purposes of qualifying for the Market Maker Plus Tiers for the month of July 2017 is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory as it will apply to all transactions in July 31 Migrated Symbols on INET.

    B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    In accordance with Section 6(b)(8) of the Act,13 the Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule changes will impose any burden on intermarket or intramarket competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The proposed changes are intended to ease members' transition to the re-platformed INET trading system and is not designed to have any significant competitive impact. The proposed changes will apply to all transactions in both the Migrated Symbols and the July 31 Migrated Symbols. The Exchange operates in a highly competitive market in which market participants can readily direct their order flow to competing venues. In such an environment, the Exchange must continually review, and consider adjusting, its fees and rebates to remain competitive with other exchanges. For the reasons described above, the Exchange believes that the proposed fee changes reflect this competitive environment.

    13 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(8).

    C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others

    No written comments were either solicited or received.

    III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act,14 and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) 15 thereunder. At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is: (i) Necessary or appropriate in the public interest; (ii) for the protection of investors; or (iii) otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.

    14 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).

    15 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).

    IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:

    Electronic Comments

    • Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or

    • Send an email to [email protected]. Please include File Number SR-ISE-2017-69 on the subject line.

    Paper Comments

    • Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090.

    All submissions should refer to File Number SR-ISE-2017-69. This file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-ISE-2017-69 and should be submitted on or before August 10, 2017.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.16

    Jill M. Peterson, Assistant Secretary.

    16 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    [FR Doc. 2017-15189 Filed 7-19-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
    SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-81147; File No. SR-GEMX-2017-30] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq GEMX, LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Remove Outdated Language in the Exchange's Rulebook and Fee Schedule July 14, 2017.

    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”),1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,2 notice is hereby given that on July 5, 2017, Nasdaq GEMX, LLC (“GEMX” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and III, below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.

    1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).

    2 17 CFR 240.19b-4.

    I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change

    The Exchange proposes to remove outdated rule text from GEMX's Rulebook and Fee Schedule.

    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's Web site at www.ise.com, at the principal office of the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

    II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.

    A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose

    The Exchange proposes to remove certain rule text in the GEMX Rulebook and Fee Schedule which reflects certain dates which are no longer applicable. The Exchange proposes to remove the proposed outdated rule text to avoid confusion in the Rulebook and Fee Schedule. Each change is discussed below.

    The Exchange proposes to remove text from GEMX Rule 716, entitled “Block Trades.” Specifically, the Exchange proposes to remove the following rule text, “The Block Order Mechanism in Rule 716(c) will not be available on a date prior to February 27, 2017, the date to be announced in a separate Market Information Circular. The Exchange will recommence the Block Order Mechanism on Nasdaq GEMX prior to June 1, 2017, the date to be announced in a separate Market Information Circular.” This rule text was added at the time the Exchange proposed to delay this functionality.3 The Exchange recommenced the Block Order Mechanism on May 30, 2017.4 The text is no longer applicable.

    3See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 80101 (February 24, 2017), 82 FR 12380 (March 2, 2017) (SR-ISEGemini-2017-05).

    4See Options Trader Alert #2017-38.

    The Exchange proposes to remove the following outdated sentences in Sections I and II of the Fee Schedule:

    • There will be no fees or rebates for trades in options overlying Symbol CPN executed on February 27-28, 2017.5

    5 This rule text was added to the Fee Schedule in connection with a pricing change. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 80184 (March 9, 2017), 82 FR 13893 (March 15, 2017) (SR-ISEGemini-2017-09).

    • For March 2017 only, all Qualifying Tier Threshold ADV calculations will be based on the better of (1) the member's full month ADV for the period of March 1-31, 2017, or (2) the member's ADV for the period of March 1-24, 2017.6

    6Id.

    • Volume executed in options overlying Symbol CPN on February 27-28, 2017 will not be counted towards a member's tier for February activity.7

    7Id.

    The operative dates for the pricing noted above has expired. The Exchange desires to remove the outdated text from its Fee Schedule to avoid confusion.

    2. Statutory Basis

    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act,8 in general, and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,9 in particular, in that it is designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and, in general to protect investors and the public interest, by removing outdated text in the Exchange's Rulebook and Fee Schedule which applied at one point in time and is no longer applicable. Removing the outdated text will avoid confusion as to its applicability.

    8 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).

    9 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).

    B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The Exchange's proposal to remove the outdated text does not impose an undue burden on competition because the specified text does not apply to any market participant.

    C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others

    No written comments were either solicited or received.

    III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (i) Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii) become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act 10 and subparagraph (f)(6) of Rule 19b-4 thereunder.11

    10 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).

    11 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6) requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change at least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission. The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is: (i) Necessary or appropriate in the public interest; (ii) for the protection of investors; or (iii) otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.

    IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:

    Electronic Comments

    • Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or

    • Send an email to [email protected] Please include File Number SR-GEMX-2017-30 on the subject line.

    Paper Comments

    • Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090.

    All submissions should refer to File Number SR-GEMX-2017-30. This file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-GEMX-2017-30 and should be submitted on or before August 10, 2017.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.12

    12 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    Jill M. Peterson, Assistant Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2017-15192 Filed 7-19-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
    SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-81148; File No. SR-ISE-2017-67] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq ISE, LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change to Re-Letter Rulebook Definition July 14, 2017.

    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”),1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,2 notice is hereby given that on July 5, 2017, Nasdaq ISE, LLC (“ISE” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and III, below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.

    1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).

    2 17 CFR 240.19b-4.

    I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change

    The Exchange proposes to correct a lettering issue with the ISE Rulebook.

    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's Web site at www.ise.com, at the principal office of the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

    II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.

    A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose

    The Exchange proposes to correct a lettering reference in the ISE Rulebook. The Exchange recently added a new definition to Rule 715. The Exchange filed to add a new definition of Opening Sweep at Rule 715(t).3 The ISE Rulebook already has a definition at Rule 715(t) for QCC with Stock Orders. In light of the QCC with Stock Orders definition, the Exchange proposes re-lettering the Opening Sweep definition as Rule 715(u). The Exchange proposes to re-letter the Opening Sweep definition to avoid confusion in the Rulebook.

    3See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 80225 (March 13, 2017, 82 FR 14243 (March 17, 2017) (SR-ISE-2017-02) (Order Approving Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment No. 1, To Amend the Exchange Opening Process). The Exchange defined an Opening Sweep as a Market Maker order submitted for execution against eligible interest in the system during the Opening Process pursuant to Rule 701(b)(1).

    2. Statutory Basis

    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act,4 in general, and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,5 in particular, in that it is designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and, in general to protect investors and the public interest, by re-lettering the Opening Sweep definition to avoid confusion in the Rulebook and will also permit market participants to reference the Opening Sweep definition.

    4 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).

    5 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).

    B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The Exchange's proposal to re-letter the Opening Sweep definition will avoid confusion in the Rulebook.

    C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others

    No written comments were either solicited or received.

    III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (i) Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii) become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act 6 and subparagraph (f)(6) of Rule 19b-4 thereunder.7

    6 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).

    7 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6) requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change at least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission. The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is: (i) Necessary or appropriate in the public interest; (ii) for the protection of investors; or (iii) otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.

    IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:

    Electronic Comments

    • Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or

    • Send an email to [email protected]. Please include File Number SR-ISE-2017-67 on the subject line.

    Paper Comments

    • Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090.

    All submissions should refer to File Number SR-ISE-2017-67. This file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-ISE-2017-67 and should be submitted on or before August 10, 2017.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.8

    8 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    Jill M. Peterson, Assistant Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2017-15193 Filed 7-19-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
    SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-81149; File No. SR-IEX-2017-23] Self-Regulatory Organizations: Investors Exchange LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Make a Clarifying Amendment to IEX Rule 16.135 July 14, 2017.

    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) 1 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Act”) 2 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,3 notice is hereby given that, on July 7, 2017, the Investors Exchange LLC filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II and III below, which Items have been prepared by the self-regulatory organization. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.

    1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).

    2 15 U.S.C. 78a.

    3 17 CFR 240.19b-4.

    I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change

    Pursuant to the provisions of Section 19(b)(1) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”),4 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,5 Investors Exchange LLC (“IEX” or “Exchange”) is filing with the Commission a proposed rule change to amend IEX Rule 16.135(b)(1) to clarify that the description in a proposal under Section 19(b) of the Act to list a series of Managed Fund Shares constitutes continued listing standards for such series of Managed Fund Shares.

    4 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).

    5 17 CFR 240.19b-4.

    The text of the proposed rule change is available at the Exchange's Web site at www.iextrading.com, at the principal office of the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

    II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and the Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, the self-regulatory organization included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statement [sic] may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The self-regulatory organization has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.

    A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and the Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose Overview

    The Exchange proposes to amend IEX Rule 16.135(b)(1) to clarify that the description in a proposal under Section 19(b) of the Act to list a series of Managed Fund Shares constitutes continued listing standards for such series of Managed Fund Shares. The proposed rule change is substantially identical to a recent Nasdaq Stock Market (“Nasdaq”) rule change.6

    6See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 80810 (May 30, 2017), 82 FR 26205 (June 6, 2017) (SR-NASDAQ-2017-052).

    Specifically, the Exchange proposes to amend the applicability section of IEX Rule 16.135(b)(1) to specify that any of the statements or representations regarding not just the description of the portfolio, but also of the reference assets, among other things, will constitute continued listing requirements for listing of shares. This revision will conform the language to current criteria in IEX Rule 16.135(d)(2)(C)(iv) with respect to criteria for IEX to consider the suspension of trading and initiation of delisting proceedings of a series of Managed Fund Shares under the IEX Rule Series 14.500.7

    7See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 80545 (April 27, 2017), 82 FR 20648 (May 3, 2017) SR-IEX-2017-03).

    The Exchange does not currently list any Managed Fund Shares.

    2. Statutory Basis

    IEX believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) 8 of the Act in general, and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,9 in particular, in that it is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in facilitating transactions in securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest.

    8 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).

    9 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).

    The Exchange believes that the proposed change to amend the applicability section of IEX Rule 16.135(b)(1) to specify that any of the statements or representations regarding not just the description of the portfolio, but also of the reference assets, among other things, will constitute continued listing requirements for listing of shares will provide clarity and accurately reflect the intent of the rule to the benefit of investors and the public interest.

    Accordingly, based on the foregoing, the Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act.

    B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    IEX does not believe that the proposed rule change will result in any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change may enhance competition since it addresses an inconsistency in the applicability of listing standards applicable to Managed Fund Shares.

    C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others

    Written comments were neither solicited nor received.

    III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action

    The Exchange has designated this rule filing as non-controversial under Section 19(b)(3)(A) 10 of the Act and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) 11 thereunder. Because the proposed rule change does not: (i) Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii) become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.

    10 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).

    11 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings under Section 19(b)(2)(B) 12 of the Act to determine whether the proposed rule change should be approved or disapproved.

    12 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).

    IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:

    Electronic Comments

    • Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or

    • Send an email to [email protected] Please include File Number SR-IEX-2017-23 on the subject line.

    Paper Comments

    • Send paper comments in triplicate to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090.

    All submissions should refer to File Number SR-IEX-2017-23. This file number should be included in the subject line if email is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and printing in the Commission's Public Reference Section, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing will also be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange and on its Internet Web site at www.iextrading.com. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-IEX-2017-23 and should be submitted on or before August 10, 2017.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.13

    13 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    Jill M. Peterson, Assistant Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2017-15194 Filed 7-19-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
    SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-81145; File Nos. SR-BatsBZX-2017-37; SR-BatsEDGX-2017-23; SR-BOX-2017-17; SR-C2-2017-018; SR-CBOE-2017-041; SR-FINRA-2017-013; SR-ISE-2017-46; SR-IEX-2017-18; SR-MIAX-2017-20; SR-PEARL-2017-23; SR-NASDAQ-2017-055; SR-BX-2017-027; SR-PHLX-2017-43; SR-NYSE-2017-23; SR-NYSEArca-2017-57; SR-NYSEArca-2017-59; SR-NYSEMKT-2017-29; SR-NYSEMKT-2017-30] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Bats BZX Exchange, Inc.; Bats EDGX Exchange, Inc.; BOX Options Exchange LLC; C2 Options Exchange, Incorporated; Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated; Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc.; International Securities Exchange, LLC; Investors Exchange LLC; Miami International Securities Exchange LLC; MIAX PEARL, LLC; The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC; NASDAQ BX, Inc.; NASDAQ PHLX, Inc.; New York Stock Exchange LLC; NYSE Arca, Inc.; NYSE MKT LLC; Notice of Designation of Longer Period for Commission Action on Proposed Rule Changes To Eliminate Requirements That Will Be Duplicative of CAT July 14, 2017.

    On May 15, 2017, Bats BZX Exchange, Inc. (“Bats BZX”); Bats EDGX Exchange, Inc. (“Bats EDGX”); BOX Options Exchange LLC (“BOX”); C2 Options Exchange, Incorporated (“C2”); Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated (“CBOE”); Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc. (“FINRA”); International Securities Exchange, LLC (“ISE”); Investors Exchange LLC (“IEX”); Miami International Securities Exchange LLC (“MIAX”); MIAX PEARL, LLC (“PEARL”); NYSE Arca, Inc. (“NYSE Arca”); and NYSE MKT LLC (“NYSE MKT”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”) 1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,2 proposed rule changes to eliminate or modify certain rules that require the collection or reporting of information that is duplicative of the information that will be collected by the Consolidated Audit Trail (“CAT”) established pursuant to the National Market System Plan contemplated by Rule 613 of Regulation NMS.3 On May 22, 2017, the New York Stock Exchange LLC (“NYSE”) filed with the Commission a proposed rule change for the same purpose, and each of NYSE Arca and NYSE MKT filed an additional proposed rule change for the same purpose. On May 26, 2017,4 the NASDAQ Stock Market LLC (“NASDAQ”) and NASDAQ PHLX LLC (“Phlx”) filed with the Commission proposed rule changes for the same purpose. On May 30, 2017,5 NASDAQ BX, Inc. (“BX”) filed with the Commission a proposed rule change for the same purpose. On June 1, 2017, the proposed rule changes submitted by Bats BZX, Bats EDGX, BOX, C2, CBOE, FINRA, IEX, ISE, MIAX, and PEARL; both proposed rule changes submitted by NYSE MKT; and one of the proposed rule changes submitted by NYSE Arca were published for comment in the Federal Register.6 On June 2, 2017, the proposed rule change submitted by NYSE and the other proposed rule change submitted by NYSE Arca were published for comment in the Federal Register.7 On June 5, 2017, the proposed rule changes submitted by NASDAQ, BX, and Phlx were published for comment in the Federal Register.8 Four comments were submitted to File No. SR-FINRA-2017-013.9 On June 22, 2017, each of NASDAQ, BX, ISE, and Phlx filed a technical amendment to its proposed rule change.10

    1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).

    2 17 CFR 240.19b-4.

    3 17 CFR 242.613.

    4 Nasdaq and Phlx initially filed proposed rule changes on May 15, 2017 (SR-NASDAQ-2017-050 and SR-PHLX-2017-38). On May 26, 2017, Nasdaq and Phlx withdrew these filings and submitted new proposed rule changes (SR-NASDAQ-2017-055 and SR-PHLX-2017-43) that remain pending before the Commission.

    5 BX initially filed a proposed rule change on May 15, 2017 (SR-BX-2017-025). On May 30, 2017, BX withdrew that initial filing and submitted a new proposed rule change (SR-BX-2017-027) that remains pending before the Commission.

    6See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 80796 (May 26, 2017), 82 FR 25374 (SR-BatsBZX-2017-37); Securities Exchange Act Release No. 80795 (May 26, 2017), 82 FR 25358 (SR-BatsEDGX-2017-23); Securities Exchange Act Release No. 80789 (May 26, 2017), 82 FR 25492 (SR-BOX-2017-17); Securities Exchange Act Release No. 80798 (May 26, 2017), 82 FR 25385 (SR-C2-2017-018); Securities Exchange Act Release No. 80797 (May 26, 2017), 82 FR 25429 (SR-CBOE-2017-041); Securities Exchange Act Release No. 80783 (May 26, 2017), 82 FR 25423 (SR-FINRA-2017-013); Securities Exchange Act Release No. 80788 (May 26, 2017), 82 FR 25400 (SR-IEX-2017-18); Securities Exchange Act Release No. 80787 (May 26, 2017), 82 FR 25469 (SR-ISE-2017-46); Securities Exchange Act Release No. 80790 (May 26, 2017), 82 FR 25366 (SR-MIAX-2017-20); Securities Exchange Act Release No. 80792 (May 26, 2017), 82 FR 25436 (SR-PEARL-2017-23); Securities Exchange Act Release No. 80791 (May 26, 2017), 82 FR 25362 (SR-NYSEArca-2017-59); Securities Exchange Act Release No. 80793 (May 26, 2017), 82 FR 25443 (SR-NYSEMKT-2017-29); Securities Exchange Act Release No. 80794 (May 26, 2017), 82 FR 25439 (SR-NYSEMKT-2017-30).

    7See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 80799 (May 26, 2017), 82 FR 25635 (SR-NYSE-2017-23); Securities Exchange Act Release No. 80800 (May 26, 2017), 82 FR 25639 (SR-NYSEArca-2017-57).

    8See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 80813 (May 30, 2017), 82 FR 25863 (SR-NASDAQ-2017-055); Securities Exchange Act Release No. 80814 (May 30, 2017), 82 FR 25872 (SR-BX-2017-027); Securities Exchange Act Release No. 80811 (May 30, 2017), 82 FR 25863 (SR-PHLX-2017-43).

    9See letters from William H. Herbert, Managing Director, Financial Information Forum, dated June 22, 2017; Manisha Kimmel, Chief Regulatory Officer, Wealth Management, Thomson Reuters, dated June 22, 2017; Marc R. Bryant, Senior Vice President, Deputy General Counsel, Fidelity Investments, dated June 22, 2017; and Ellen Greene, Managing Director and Theodore R. Lazo, Managing Director and Associate General Counsel, SIFMA, dated June 23, 2017.

    10 These amendments modified Section 2 of the Form 19b-4 submitted by each of NASDAQ, BX, ISE, and Phlx to state that on June 1, 2017, the exchange obtained the necessary approval from its Board of Directors for the proposed rule change.

    Section 19(b)(2) of the Act 11 provides that, within 45 days of the publication of notice of the filing of a proposed rule change, or within such longer period up to 90 days as the Commission may designate if it finds such longer period to be appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or as to which the self-regulatory organization consents, the Commission shall either approve the proposed rule change, disapprove the proposed rule change, or institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule change should be disapproved. The 45th day for the proposed rule changes published on June 1, 2017, is July 16, 2017. The 45th day for the proposed rule changes published on June 2, 2017, is July 17, 2017. The 45th day for the proposed rule changes published on June 5, 2017, is July 20, 2017.

    11 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

    The Commission is extending the 45-day time period for Commission action on each of the proposed rule changes. The Commission finds that it is appropriate to designate a longer period within which to take action on the proposed rule changes so that it has sufficient time to consider the comments received and any response to the comments that the self-regulatory organizations might provide.

    Accordingly, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2)(A)(ii)(I) of the Act 12 and for the reasons stated above, the Commission designates August 30, 2017, as the date by which the Commission shall approve or disapprove, or institute proceedings to determine whether to disapprove, the proposed rule changes (File Nos. SR-BatsBZX-2017-37; SR-BatsEDGX-2017-23; SR-BOX-2017-17; SR-C2-2017-018; SR-CBOE-2017-041; SR-FINRA-2017-013; SR-ISE-2017-46; SR-IEX-2017-18; SR-MIAX-2017-20; SR-PEARL-2017-23; SR-NASDAQ-2017-055; SR-BX-2017-027; SR-PHLX-2017-43; SR-NYSE-2017-23; SR-NYSEArca-2017-57; SR-NYSEArca-2017-59; SR-NYSEMKT-2017-29; SR-NYSEMKT-2017-30).

    12 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(A)(ii)(I).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.13

    13 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(31).

    Jill M. Peterson, Assistant Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2017-15190 Filed 7-19-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
    SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-81150; File Nos. SR-NYSE-2016-71 and SR-NYSEMKT 2016-99] Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC; NYSE MKT LLC; Order Disapproving Proposed Rule Changes Amending Exchange Rule 104 To Delete Subsection (g)(i)(A)(III), Which Prohibits Designated Market Makers From Engaging in Transactions, During the Last Ten Minutes of Trading Before the Close, That Establish a New High (Low) Price for the Day on the Exchange in an Assigned Security in Which the DMM Has a Long (Short) Position July 1, 2017. I. Introduction

    On October 27, 2016, New York Stock Exchange LLC (“NYSE”) and NYSE MKT LLC (“NYSE MKT”) (each an “Exchange,” and collectively the “Exchanges”) each filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) 1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,2 a proposed rule change amending its respective Rule 104 to delete subsection (g)(i)(A)(III)—“Prohibited Transactions.” 3 Exchange Rule 104(g)(i)(A)(III) prohibits Designated Market Makers (“DMMs”) from engaging in a transaction that establishes, during the last ten minutes of trading before the close, a new high (low) price for the day on the Exchange in an assigned security in which the DMM has a long (short) position (“Prohibited Transactions Rule”). The proposed rule changes were published for comment in the Federal Register on November 17, 2016.4

    1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).

    2 17 CFR 240.19b-4.

    3 This order refers to both NYSE Rule 104 and NYSE MKT Rule 104—Equities as “Exchange Rule 104.” NYSE MKT Rule 104—Equities is based on and, in relevant part, substantively identical to NYSE Rule 104. See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 58705 (Oct. 1, 2008), 73 FR 58995 (Oct. 8. 2008) (SR-Amex-2008-63) and 59022 (Nov. 26, 2008), 73 FR 73683 (Dec. 3, 2008) (amending NYSE MKT equity rules to conform to NYSE New Market Model Pilot rules).

    4See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 79284 (Nov. 10, 2016), 81 FR 81222 (Nov. 17, 2016) (“NYSE Notice”) and 79283 (Nov. 10, 2016), 81 FR 81210 (Nov. 17, 2016) (“NYSE MKT Notice”).

    On December 20, 2016, the Commission extended to February 15, 2017, the time period in which to approve or disapprove the proposed rule changes or to institute proceedings to determine whether to approve or disapprove the proposals.5 On February 15, 2017, the Commission instituted proceedings to determine whether to approve or disapprove the proposed rule changes.6 The Commission then received a comment letter, as well as a combined response letter from NYSE and NYSE MKT.7 On April 28, 2017, the Commission designated a longer period for Commission action on proceedings to determine whether to approve or disapprove the proposed rule changes.8 This order disapproves the proposed rule changes.

    5See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 79612 (Dec. 20, 2016), 81 FR 95205 (Dec. 27, 2016) and 79611 (Dec. 20, 2016), 81 FR 95205 (Dec. 27, 2016).

    6See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 80044 (Feb. 15, 2017), 82 FR 11388 (Feb. 22, 2017) (“NYSE Order Instituting Proceedings”) and 80043 (Feb. 15, 2017), 82 FR 11379 (Feb. 22, 2017) (“NYSE MKT Order Instituting Proceedings”) (collectively, the “Orders Instituting Proceedings”).

    7See Letter from Stephen John Berger, Managing Director, Government and Regulatory Policy, Citadel Securities, to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Commission (Mar. 15, 2017) (“Citadel Letter”); Letter from Elizabeth K. King, General Counsel and Corporate Secretary, NYSE, to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Commission (Mar. 16, 2017) (“NYSE Letter”). The Citadel Letter addressed only the NYSE proposal, which is substantively identical to the NYSE MKT proposal. The NYSE Letter was submitted on behalf of both NYSE and NYSE MKT.

    8See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 80552 (Apr. 28, 2017), 82 FR 20927 (May 4, 2017) and 80550 (Apr. 28, 2017), 82 FR 20926 (May 4, 2017).

    II. Description of the Proposals

    Currently, under Exchange Rule 104(g)(i)(A)(III), a DMM with a long (short) position in an assigned security cannot, during the last ten minutes before the close of trading, make a purchase (sale) in that security that results in a new high (low) price on the Exchange for the day.9 The Prohibited Transactions Rule provides two exceptions that permit a DMM to: (1) Match another market's better bid or offer price; or (2) bring the price of a security into parity with an underlying or related security or asset.10 The Exchanges propose to remove the Prohibited Transactions Rule from their rulebooks.

    9See Exchange Rule 104(g)(i)(A)(III).

    10See id.; see also Exchange Rule 104(g)(i)(A)(II)(2)(i).

    The Exchanges assert that, in light of developments in the equity markets and in their trading model, the Prohibited Transactions Rule has lost its original purpose and utility.11 Specifically, the Exchanges assert that in today's electronic marketplace—where DMMs have replaced specialists and control of pricing decisions has moved away from market participants on the Exchange trading floor—the Prohibited Transactions Rule is no longer necessary.12 According to the Exchanges, eliminating the Prohibited Transactions Rule would not eliminate other existing safeguards that prevent DMMs from inappropriately influencing or manipulating the close.13

    11See NYSE Notice, supra note 4, 81 FR at 81223; NYSE MKT Notice, supra note 4, 81 FR at 81211.

    12See NYSE Notice, supra note 4, 81 FR at 81222; NYSE MKT Notice, supra note 4, 81 FR at 81212.

    13See NYSE Notice, supra note 4, 81 FR at 81222-23; NYSE MKT Notice, supra note 4, 81 FR at 81212.

    The Exchanges assert that the rationale behind the Prohibited Transactions Rule—preventing specialists from setting the price of a security on the Exchange in the final ten minutes of trading—was to prevent a specialist from inappropriately influencing the price of a security at the close to advantage the specialist's proprietary position.14 According to the Exchanges, in today's fragmented marketplace, a new high (low) price for a security on one of the Exchanges in the last ten minutes of trading does not have a significant effect on the market price for that security, because a new high (low) price on one of the Exchanges may not be the new high (low) market-wide price for a security—prices may be higher (lower) in away markets, where the majority of intra-day trading in Exchange-listed securities takes place—and because any advantage to a DMM from establishing a new high or low on the Exchange during the last ten minutes can rapidly evaporate following trades in away markets.15 The Exchanges assert that, because DMMs do not have the ability to direct or influence trading or to control intra-day prices that specialists had before the implementation of Regulation NMS, the Prohibited Transactions Rule is anachronistic.16

    14See NYSE Notice, supra note 4, 81 FR at 81223; NYSE MKT Notice, supra note 4, 81 FR at 81211.

    15See id.

    16See id.

    III. Summary of Comment Letter and the Exchanges' Response

    The Commission received one comment letter in support of the NYSE proposal and a combined response letter from NYSE and NYSE MKT.17 The commenter asserts that the Prohibited Transactions Rule is no longer necessary. First, the commenter states that, when the Prohibited Transactions Rule was originally adopted, structural advantages enjoyed by NYSE specialists—including a dominant position in NYSE-listed securities and an advance look at incoming orders—warranted imposing prescriptive limitations on their trading activities, particularly at certain critical pricing points during the day, such as the pre-closing period.18 The commenter states that, because DMMs no longer have these same structural advantages, and because DMMs do not have the dominant position that NYSE specialists once had in the trading of NYSE-listed securities, DMMs should be able to engage in the sorts of transactions barred under the Prohibited Transactions Rule.19

    17See supra note 7. While Citadel submitted its letter solely to the NYSE proposal, the Commission will consider the comment letter to be applicable to the NYSE MKT proposal, as both proposals are substantively identical.

    18See Citadel Letter, supra note 7, at 1-3.

    19See id. The commenter states that, for example, in February 2017, NYSE market share for NYSE-listed stocks was approximately 24% including auctions and 19% excluding auctions. See id. at 2. The commenter further states that, during the same month, a stock in which NYSE is the primary exchange and the DMM is the commenter, NYSE market share during the last ten minutes was approximately 27% on a share-weighted basis. See id.

    Second, the commenter states that the Prohibited Transactions Rule is unnecessary because existing NYSE and Commission rules “prohibit all market participants, including DMMs, from engaging in market manipulation, including around the close.” 20 Finally, the commenter states that the Prohibited Transactions Rule is “artificial” and creates an “uneven playing field” in the current market structure because it only prohibits trading activity on a single exchange.21 According to the commenter, this restriction affects a DMM's ability to provide competitive quotations during the last ten minutes of trading, thereby hindering price discovery, reducing liquidity at NYSE, and causing trading activity to migrate to venues where participants are not subject to the same artificial restriction.22

    20Id. at 3.

    21See id. at 3-4.

    22See id.

    According to NYSE and NYSE MKT, in today's electronic marketplace, where increased automation of trading has decentralized control of pricing decisions away from the DMM and from other market participants on the Exchanges' trading floor, retaining the Prohibited Transactions Rule is no longer necessary.23 NYSE and NYSE MKT believe that the Prohibited Transactions Rule is anachronistic because DMMs do not have the same ability to direct or influence trading or control intra-day prices that specialists had before Regulation NMS.24 Further, NYSE and NYSE MKT assert that the proposal does not alter the existing balance of DMM benefits and obligations because, despite the elimination of the Prohibited Transactions Rule, remaining DMM obligations would be sufficient to safeguard against the possibility that DMMs may act to inappropriately influence prices or manipulate the close.25 Finally, NYSE and NYSE MKT state that the Exchanges would use their existing suite of trading surveillances to assess whether a particular transaction was effectuated to manipulate a security's price going into the close to benefit the DMM's position.26

    23See NYSE Letter, supra note 7, at 3.

    24See id.

    25See id. at 3-6. The Exchanges state that these obligations include the obligations: (1) Not to destabilize the market when buying or selling to increase a position or reaching across the market; (2) to facilitate the close; (3) to effect transactions in a reasonable and orderly manner; and (4) to refrain from causing or exacerbating excessive price movements. See id.

    26See id. at 5.

    IV. Discussion and Commission Findings

    Under Section 19(b)(2)(C) of the Exchange Act,27 the Commission shall approve a proposed rule change by a self-regulatory organization if the Commission finds that the proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of the Exchange Act and the applicable rules and regulations thereunder.28 The Commission shall disapprove a proposed rule change if it does not make such a finding.29 The Commission's Rules of Practice, under Rule 700(b)(3), state that the “burden to demonstrate that a proposed rule change is consistent with the Exchange Act and the rules and regulations issued thereunder . . . is on the self-regulatory organization that proposed the rule change” and that a “mere assertion that the proposed rule change is consistent with those requirements . . . is not sufficient.” 30

    27 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(C).

    28See 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(C)(i).

    29See 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(C)(ii).

    30 17 CFR 201.700(b)(3). The description of a proposed rule change, its purpose and operation, its effect, and a legal analysis of its consistency with applicable requirements must all be sufficiently detailed and specific to support an affirmative Commission finding. See id. Any failure of a self-regulatory organization to provide the information elicited by Form 19b-4 may result in the Commission not having a sufficient basis to make an affirmative finding that a proposed rule change is consistent with the Exchange Act and the rules and regulations issued thereunder that are applicable to the self-regulatory organization. See id.

    After careful consideration of the proposals, and for the reasons discussed below, the Commission does not believe that the proposed rule changes are consistent with the requirements of the Exchange Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities exchange.31 Specifically, the Commission does not find that the proposals are consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Exchange Act, which, among other things, requires that the rules of a national securities exchange not be designed to permit unfair discrimination and that those rules be designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest.32

    31 In disapproving the proposed rule changes, the Commission has considered the proposed rules' impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).

    32See 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).

    The Exchanges propose to eliminate the Prohibited Transactions Rule—a negative obligation imposed on DMMs to restrict aggressive trading immediately before the close—and the Commission analyzes the proposed rule changes in the context of the unique role played by DMMs on the Exchanges. Because the Exchanges' proposal would alter the balance of the benefits and obligations of DMMs, and in light of the special responsibilities that DMMs have for the closing auction on the Exchanges, the Commission sought comment in the Orders Instituting Proceedings on these topics. Specifically, the Commission asked for public comment on whether each Exchange's proposal “would maintain an appropriate balance between the benefits and obligations of being a DMM on the Exchange and whether the obligations of DMMs under remaining Exchange rules are reasonably designed to prevent DMMs from inappropriately influencing or manipulating the close in light of DMMs' special responsibility for closing auctions under Exchange rules.” 33

    33 NYSE Order Instituting Proceedings, supra note 6, 82 FR at 11389; NYSE MKT Order Instituting Proceedings, supra note 6, 82 FR at 11380.

    The Prohibited Transactions Rule was originally adopted by NYSE in 2006 as NYSE moved to its “hybrid market” model,34 and NYSE retained Prohibited Transactions Rule in 2008, when it adopted its New Market Model, which replaced the specialists on its floor with DMMs.35 NYSE MKT subsequently adopted the NYSE's New Market Model, including the Prohibited Transactions Rule, pursuant to its merger with the NYSE.36

    34See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 54860 (Dec. 1, 2006), 71 FR 71221 (Dec. 8, 2006) (SR-NYSE-2006-76) (order approving amendments to Rule 104 that included Prohibited Transactions in Supplementary Material .10 of Rule 104).

    35See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 58845 (Oct. 24, 2008), 73 FR 64379 (Oct. 29, 2008) (SR-NYSE-2008-46) (order approving New Market Model pilot program).

    36See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 75952 (Sept. 18, 2015), 80 FR 57645, 57646 & n.6 (Sept. 24, 2015) (describing filings by which NYSE MKT adopted NYSE equity trading rules).

    Exchange Rule 104 sets forth the obligations of DMMs on each Exchange, which include the affirmative obligation to engage in a course of dealings for their own account to assist in the maintenance of a fair and orderly market in securities for which they have been assigned responsibility as the DMM, to maintain quotes in their assigned securities at the inside market a specified percentage of time, and to facilitate certain transactions in their assigned securities, most notably the opening and closing auctions.37 Under Exchange rules, DMMs have significant responsibilities to “facilitate the close of trading” in their assigned securities.38 The closing price for a security on its listing exchange is widely used as a reference price (e.g., by mutual funds calculating their net asset value), and the listing exchange tends to have a dominant market share at the close.39

    37See Exchange Rule 104.

    38See Exchange Rule 104; NYSE Rule 123C; NYSE MKT Rule 123C—Equities.

    39See, e.g., NYSE Opening and Closing Auctions Fact Sheet (stating that NYSE has a 100% market share in the closing auction for Tape A securities), https://www.nyse.com/publicdocs/nyse/markets/nyse/NYSE_Opening_and_Closing_Auctions_Fact_Sheet.pdf.

    Supporting these general obligations, Exchange Rules 104(g) and 104(h) regulate specific types of DMM transactions: Neutral Transactions, Non-Conditional Transactions, Conditional Transactions, and Prohibited Transactions.40 DMMs may engage in Conditional Transactions throughout the trading day—generally, crossing the market to take liquidity by buying (selling) at an increasing (decreasing) price—if those transactions are followed by “appropriate” re-entry on the opposite side of the market “commensurate with the size of the DMM's transaction.” 41 During the last ten minutes of the day, however, DMMs are subject to the Prohibited Transactions Rule at issue here—a bright-line rule against aggressively taking liquidity and moving prices on the exchange immediately before the closing auction.42

    40See Exchange Rule 104(g)(i)(A)(I)-(III) (defining Neutral Transactions, Non-Conditional Transactions, and Prohibited Transactions); Exchange Rule 104(h)(i) (defining Conditional Transaction). A Neutral Transaction is a purchase or sale by which a DMM liquidates or decreases a position and may be made without regard to price, but the DMM's “obligation to maintain a fair and orderly market may require re-entry on the opposite side of the market trend . . . in accordance with the immediate and anticipated needs of the market.” See Exchange Rule 104(g)(i)(A)(I). A Non-Conditional Transaction is a DMM's bid or purchase and offer or sale that establishes or increases a position, other than a transaction that reaches across the market to trade with the Exchange best bid or offer, and may be made without regard to price in order to match another market's better bid or offer price; to bring the price of a security into parity with an underlying or related security or asset; to add size to an independently established bid or offer on the Exchange; to purchase at the published bid price on the Exchange; to sell at the published offer price on the Exchange; to purchase or sell at a price between the Exchange BBO; or to purchase below the published bid or sell above the published offer on the Exchange. See Exchange Rule 104(g)(i)(A)(II). Following a Non-Conditional Transaction, a DMM's obligation to maintain a fair and orderly market “may require re-entry on the opposite side of the market trend . . . commensurate with the size of the Non-Conditional Transactions and the immediate and anticipated needs of the market.” Id.

    41See Exchange Rule 104(h)(i)-(iv). According to their rules, the Exchanges periodically issue guidelines, called “price participation points” that “identify the price at or before which a DMM is expended to re-enter the market after effecting a Conditional Transaction.” See Exchange Rule 104(h)(iii)(A).

    42See Exchange Rule 104(g)(i)(A)(III).

    In return for their obligations and responsibilities, DMMs have significant priority and informational advantages in trading on the Exchanges, both during continuous trading and during the closing auction. During continuous trading, DMMs trade on parity with the entire order book and with floor brokers, which “provides DMMs with a substantial advantage over off-Floor orders” sent to the NYSE order book.43 Moreover, during the trading day, including the ten minutes before the close, DMMs have unique access to aggregated information about closing auction interest at each price level, and, during the auction itself, DMMs are aware of interest represented by floor brokers, which is not publicly disseminated.44 When offsetting an imbalance during the closing auction, DMM interest trades at parity with limit orders on the Exchange order book, and DMM interest takes priority over limit-on-close orders with a price equal to the closing price and over closing-offset orders.45 In approving the entire set of advantages given to DMMs in 2008 through the New Market Model, the Commission specifically assessed “whether the rewards granted to DMMs . . . are commensurate with their obligations” and found that the proposed New Market Model pilot reflected “an appropriate balance of DMM obligations against the benefits provided to DMMs.” 46

    43See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 58845 (Oct. 24, 2008), 73 FR 64379, 64389 (Oct. 29, 2008) (Order approving SR-NYSE-2008-46). See also NYSE Rule 72(c)(ii) and NYSE MKT Rule 72(c)(ii)—Equities (stating that, for the purpose of share allocation in an execution, each single floor broker, the DMM, and orders on the Exchange book shall constitute individual participants and that the orders on the Exchange book shall constitute a single participant).

    44See Exchange Rule 104(j); see also NYSE Rule 123C and NYSE MKT Rule 123C—Equities.

    45See NYSE Rule 123C(7)(b); NYSE MKT Rule 123C(7)(b)—Equities.

    46 Securities Exchange Act Release No. 58845 (Oct. 24, 2008), 73 FR 64379, 64388-89 (Oct. 29, 2008) (SR-NYSE-2008-46).

    In proposing to remove the Prohibited Transactions Rule, however, NYSE and NYSE MKT have failed to adequately explain or justify how the proposed alteration to the balance of benefits and obligations of a DMM previously approved by the Commission is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Exchange Act, or how allowing DMMs to aggressively take liquidity in the last ten minutes of trading is both consistent with a DMM's obligation to maintain a fair and orderly market in its assigned securities and designed to prevent fraudulent or manipulative acts and practices regarding the closing auction, for which a DMM has crucial responsibilities.

    The Exchanges and Citadel in their comment letters argue that changes in market structure such as the inability of DMMs, compared to specialists, to “set prices” in their assigned securities, and the movement of trading volume in NYSE-listed securities away from the NYSE, support the elimination of the Prohibited Transactions Rule. But, as noted above, the Prohibited Transactions Rule was included in the New Market Model rule filing that established the role of DMMs, and the market-share statistics offered by Citadel—which purportedly establish the relatively weak pricing power of a DMM 47 —fail to acknowledge that the Exchanges have a dominant market share in the closing auction,48 and that a DMM has discretion and informational advantages that place the DMM in a unique position to choose its own level of participation in the auction and to influence the closing price.49 Additionally, the argument by Citadel that the current prohibition creates an uneven playing field, and that it limits DMMs' “ability to provide competitive quotations,” 50 fails to address that DMMs have unique privileges on NYSE and NYSE MKT and that the proposed rule change is not limited to circumstances in which DMMs would be allowed to quote competitively and provide liquidity, but would also allow them to aggressively take liquidity.

    47See Citadel Letter, supra note 7, at 2.

    48See supra note 39 and accompanying text.

    49See supra notes 42-44 and accompanying text.

    50 Citadel Letter, supra note 7, at 2-3.

    Additionally, while NYSE and NYSE MKT have argued that the proposal is consistent with the Exchange Act because remaining exchange rules address the possibility of disruptive or improper DMM trading during the last ten minutes of the day, the Commission does not believe that NYSE and NYSE MKT have met their burden to demonstrate that these other rules—which require the exercise of judgment as to what is “reasonable,” “excessive,” “appropriate,” or “commensurate” 51 —are adequate substitutes for a clear, meaningful, and enforceable bright-line rule that limits aggressive DMM trading at a particularly sensitive and important time of the trading day and that addresses the risk of destabilizing or even manipulative activity. Additionally, the Commission believes that NYSE and NYSE MKT have merely asserted that, but not explained how, existing surveillances can act as an adequate substitute for this bright-line rule.

    51See supra notes 25 & 40 and accompanying text.

    Thus, because the Exchanges' arguments in favor of the proposed rule changes do not adequately address significant issues raised by the proposals, the Commission does not find that the proposed rule changes are consistent with the requirements of the Exchange Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities exchange and, in particular, with Section 6(b)(5) of the Exchange Act.

    V. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered that, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Exchange Act,52 the proposed rule changes (SR-NYSE-2016-71 and SR-NYSEMKT-2016-99) be, and hereby are, disapproved.

    52 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.53

    53 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    Jill M. Peterson, Assistant Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 2017-15195 Filed 7-19-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF STATE [Delegation of Authority: 437] Delegation of Authority to the Director of the Office of U.S. Foreign Assistance Resources To Concur in Assistance Programs

    By virtue of the authority vested in the Secretary of State, including section 1 of the State Department Basic Authorities Act (22 U.S.C. 2651a) and 10 U.S.C. 333, I hereby delegate to the Director the Office of U.S. Foreign Assistance Resources, to the extent authorized by law, the authority to concur in programs authorized by section 333 of title 10 of the U.S. Code.

    Notwithstanding this delegation of authority, any function or authority delegated herein may be exercised by the Secretary or a Deputy Secretary. Any reference in this delegation of authority to any statute or delegation of authority shall be deemed to be a reference to such statute or delegation of authority as amended from time to time.

    This delegation of authority shall be published in the Federal Register.

    Dated: May 1, 2017. Rex W. Tillerson, Secretary of State.
    [FR Doc. 2017-15226 Filed 7-19-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4710-10-P
    DEPARTMENT OF STATE [Public Notice: 10062] Notice of Determinations; Culturally Significant Objects Imported for Exhibition Determinations: “Delirious: Art at the Limits of Reason, 1950-1980” Exhibition

    Notice is hereby given of the following determinations: Pursuant to the authority vested in me by the Act of October 19, 1965 (79 Stat. 985; 22 U.S.C. 2459), E.O. 12047 of March 27, 1978, the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998 (112 Stat. 2681, et seq.; 22 U.S.C. 6501 note, et seq.), Delegation of Authority No. 234 of October 1, 1999, Delegation of Authority No. 236-3 of August 28, 2000 (and, as appropriate, Delegation of Authority No. 257-1 of December 11, 2015), I hereby determine that certain objects to be included in the exhibition “Delirious: Art at the Limits of Reason, 1950-1980,” imported from abroad for temporary exhibition within the United States, are of cultural significance. The objects are imported pursuant to loan agreements with the foreign owners or custodians. I also determine that the exhibition or display of the exhibit objects at The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, New York, from on or about September 12, 2017, until on or about January 14, 2018, and at possible additional exhibitions or venues yet to be determined, is in the national interest. I have ordered that Public Notice of these Determinations be published in the Federal Register.

    For further information, including a list of the imported objects, contact the Office of Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs in the Office of the Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State (telephone: 202-632-6471; email: [email protected]). The mailing address is U.S. Department of State, L/PD, SA-5, Suite 5H03, Washington, DC 20522-0505.

    Alyson Grunder, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy, Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs, Department of State.
    [FR Doc. 2017-15214 Filed 7-19-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4710-05-P
    SURFACE TRANSPORTATION BOARD [Docket No. AB 33 (Sub-No. 333X)] Union Pacific Railroad Company—Discontinuance Exemption—in Grundy County, IL

    Union Pacific Railroad Company (UP) has filed a verified notice of exemption under 49 CFR pt. 1152 subpart F—Exempt Abandonments and Discontinuances of Service to discontinue service over a 2.85-mile portion of the Pequot Subdivision from milepost 56.85, along BNSF's Transcon Line, to Reed Road at milepost 59.70 (the Line). The Line traverses United States Postal Service Zip Codes 60416 and 60407.

    UP has certified that: (1) No local or overhead traffic has moved over the Line for at least two years; (2) there is no need to reroute any traffic over other lines; (3) no formal complaint filed by a user of rail service on the Line (or by a state or local government entity acting on behalf of such user) regarding cessation of service over the Line is pending either with the Surface Transportation Board (Board) or with any U.S. District Court or has been decided in favor of complainant within the two-year period; and (4) the requirements at 49 CFR 1105.12 (newspaper publication) and 49 CFR 1152.50(d)(1) (notice to governmental agencies) have been met.

    As a condition to this exemption, any employee adversely affected by the discontinuance of service shall be protected under Oregon Short Line Railroad—Abandonment Portion Goshen Branch Between Firth & Ammon, in Bingham & Bonneville Counties, Idaho, 360 I.C.C. 91 (1979). To address whether this condition adequately protects affected employees, a petition for partial revocation under 49 U.S.C. 10502(d) must be filed.

    Provided no formal expression of intent to file an offer of financial assistance (OFA) to subsidize continued rail service has been received, this exemption will be effective on August 19, 2017, unless stayed pending reconsideration. Petitions to stay that do not involve environmental issues and formal expressions of intent to file an OFA to subsidize continued rail service under 49 CFR 1152.27(c)(2) 1 must be filed by July 28, 2017.2 Petitions for reconsideration must be filed by August 9, 2017, with the Surface Transportation Board, 395 E Street SW., Washington, DC 20423-0001.

    1 Each OFA must be accompanied by the filing fee, which is currently set at $1,700. See 49 CFR 1002.2(f)(25).

    2 Because this is a discontinuance proceeding and not an abandonment, interim trail use/rail banking and public use conditions are not appropriate. Because there will be an environmental review during abandonment, this discontinuance does not require an environmental review.

    A copy of any petition filed with the Board should be sent to Mack H. Shumate, Jr., Union Pacific Railroad Company, 101 North Wacker Drive, Room 1920, Chicago, IL 60606.

    If the verified notice contains false or misleading information, the exemption is void ab initio.

    Board decisions and notices are available on our Web site at WWW.STB.GOV.

    Decided: July 14, 2017.

    By the Board, Scott M. Zimmerman, Acting Director, Office of Proceedings.

    Rena Laws-Byrum, Clearance Clerk.
    [FR Doc. 2017-15115 Filed 7-19-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4915-01-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Highway Administration [Docket No. FHWA-2017-0027] Agency Information Collection Activities: Request for Comments for a New Information Collection AGENCY:

    Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Notice and request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    FHWA invites public comments about our intention to request the Office of Management and Budget's (OMB) approval for a new information collection, which is summarized below under SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. We published a Federal Register Notice with a 60-day public comment period on this information collection on June 19, 2017. We are required to publish this notice in the Federal Register by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

    DATES:

    Please submit comments by August 21, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may send comments within 30 days to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th Street NW., Washington, DC 20503, Attention DOT Desk Officer. All comments should include the Docket number FHWA-2017-0027.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Bruce Bradley, 202-493-0564, Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Office of Real Estate Services, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590. Office hours are from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    You are asked to comment on any aspect of this information collection, including: (1) Whether the proposed collection is necessary for the FHWA's performance; (2) the accuracy of the estimated burden; (3) ways for the FHWA to enhance the quality, usefulness, and clarity of the collected information; and (4) ways that the burden could be minimized, including the use of electronic technology, without reducing the quality of the collected information.

    Title: FHWA Excellence in Right-of-Way Awards and Utility Relocation and Accommodation Awards.

    Background: In 1995, the Federal Highway Administration established the biennial Excellence in Right-of-Way Awards Program to recognize partners, projects, and processes that use FHWA funding sources to go beyond regulatory compliance and achieve right-of-way excellence. Excellence in Right-of-Way awardees have contributed to outstanding innovations that enhance the right-of-way professional's ability to meet the challenges associated with acquiring real property for Federal-aid projects.

    Similarly, FHWA established the Excellence in Utility Relocation and Accommodation Awards Program to honor the use of innovative practices and outstanding achievements in reducing the cost or shortening the time required to accommodate or relocate utilities associated with highway improvement projects. The goal of the program is to showcase exemplary and innovative projects, programs, initiatives, and practices that successfully integrate the consideration of utilities in the planning, design, construction, and maintenance of transportation facilities.

    Award: Anyone can nominate a project, process, person or group that has used Federal Highway Administration funding sources to make an outstanding contribution to transportation and the right-of-way or utility fields. The nominator is responsible for submitting via email, fax, or mail an application form that summarizes the outstanding accomplishments of the entry. FHWA will use the collected information to evaluate, showcase, and enhance the public's knowledge on addressing right-of-way challenges on transportation projects and on relocating and accommodating utilities associated with highway improvement projects. Nominations will be reviewed by an independent panel of judges from varying backgrounds. It is anticipated that awards will be given every two years. The winners are presented plaques at an awards ceremony.

    Respondents: Anyone who has used Federal Highway funding sources in the fifty states, the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico.

    Frequency: The information will be collected biennially.

    Estimated Average Burden per Response: 6 hours per respondent per application.

    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: It is expected that the respondents will complete approximately 50 applications for an estimated total of 600 annual burden hours.

    Public Comments Invited: You are asked to comment on any aspect of this information collection, including: (1) Whether the proposed collection is necessary for the FHWA's performance; (2) the accuracy of the estimated burdens; (3) ways for the FHWA to enhance the quality, usefulness, and clarity of the collected information; and (4) ways that the burden could be minimized, including the use of electronic technology, without reducing the quality of the collected information. The agency will summarize and/or include your comments in the request for OMB's clearance of this information collection.

    Authority:

    The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995; 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35, as amended; and 49 CFR 1.48.

    Issued on: June 11, 2017. Michael Howell, Information Collection Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2017-15186 Filed 7-19-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Highway Administration Notice of Final Federal Agency Actions on Proposed Highway in California AGENCY:

    Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Notice of Limitation on Claims for Judicial Review of Actions by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), pursuant to 23 U.S.C. 327.

    SUMMARY:

    The FHWA, on behalf of Caltrans, is issuing this notice to announce actions taken by Caltrans that are final. The actions relate to a proposed highway project, State Route 242/Clayton Road Ramps Project, on State Route 242, in the City of Concord, in the County of Contra Costa, State of California. Those actions grant licenses, permits, and approvals for the project.

    DATES:

    By this notice, the FHWA, on behalf of Caltrans, is advising the public of final agency actions subject to 23 U.S.C. 139(l)(1). A claim seeking judicial review of the Federal agency actions on the highway project will be barred unless the claim is filed on or before December 18, 2017. If the Federal law that authorizes judicial review of a claim provides a time period of less than 150 days for filing such claim, then that shorter time period still applies.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    California Department of Transportation, Attn: Cristin Hallissy, Environmental Branch, Chief Office of Environmental Analysis, MS-8B, 111 Grand Avenue, Oakland, CA 94612, (510) 622-8717, [email protected], Normal Office Hours: 9-5, M-F.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Effective July 1, 2007, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) assigned, and the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) assumed, environmental responsibilities for this project pursuant to 23 U.S.C. 327. Notice is hereby given that the Caltrans has taken final agency actions subject to 23 U.S.C. 139(l)(1) by issuing licenses, permits, and approvals for the following highway project in the State of California: State Route (SR) 242/Clayton Road Ramps Project: Caltrans proposes to modify the existing partial interchanges at SR 242 at Clayton Road and Concord Avenue, in the City of Concord. The SR 242/Clayton Road interchange would be reconfigured from a partial interchange to provide new northbound and southbound SR 242 on- and off-ramps. Proposed local roadway improvements include a combination of additional travel lanes and the extension of left-turn pockets on Willow Pass Road, Concord Avenue, Franquette Avenue, Clayton Road, Market Street, and Commerce Avenue, in the City of Concord. The project will relieve local street congestion. The actions by the Federal agencies, and the laws under which such actions were taken, are described in the Final Initial Study with Negative Declaration/Environmental Assessment with Finding of No Significant Impact (IS-ND/EA-FONSI) for the project, approved on December 27, 2016, in the Caltrans Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) also issued on December 27, 2016, and in other documents in the Caltrans project records. The IS-ND/EA-FONSI and other project records are available by contacting Caltrans at the addresses provided above. The Caltrans IS-ND/EA-FONSI can be viewed and downloaded from the project Web site at http://www.dot.ca.gov/dist4/envdocs.htm, or viewed at public libraries in the project area.

    This notice applies to all Federal agency decisions as of the issuance date of this notice and all laws under which such actions were taken, including but not limited to:

    1. General: National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4351 et seq.).

    2. Council on Environmental Quality Regulations.

    3. Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1970, 23 U.S.C. 109.

    4. Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7401-7671(q)).

    5. Migratory Bird Treaty Act (16 U.S.C. 703-712).

    6. Historic and Cultural Resources: Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, (16 U.S.C. 470(f) et seq.).

    7. Clean Water Act (Section 401) (33 U.S.C. 1251-1377) of 1977 and 1987 (Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972).

    8. Federal Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531-1543).

    9. Noise Control Act of 1972.

    10. Executive Order 12898, Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice and Low-Income Populations.

    11. Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended.

    12. Fair Housing Law (Title VIII of the Civil Right Act of 1968).

    13. Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970.

    14. Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Section 4(f) (49 U.S.C. 303).

    (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Number 20.205, Highway Planning and Construction. The regulations implementing Executive Order 12372 regarding intergovernmental consultation on Federal programs and activities apply to this program.) Authority:

    23 U.S.C. 139(l)(1).

    Issued on: July 14, 2017. Larry Vinzant, Senior Environmental Protection Specialist, Federal Highway Administration, Sacramento, California.
    [FR Doc. 2017-15221 Filed 7-19-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-RY-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Highway Administration [Docket No. FHWA-2017-0128] Agency Information Collection Activities: Request for Comments for a New Information Collection AGENCY:

    Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Notice and request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    FHWA invites public comments about our intention to request the Office of Management and Budget's (OMB) approval for a new information collection, which is summarized below under SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. We published a Federal Register Notice with a 60-day public comment period on this information collection on June 19, 2017. We are required to publish this notice in the Federal Register by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

    DATES:

    Please submit comments by August 21, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may send comments within 30 days to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th Street NW., Washington, DC 20503, Attention DOT Desk Officer. All comments should include the Docket number FHWA-2017-0128.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    John Moulden, 202-493-3470, Turner-Fairbank Highway Research Center, Office of Corporate Research, Technology, and Innovation Management, Federal Highway Administration, Department of Transportation, 6300 Georgetown Pike, McLean, VA 22101. Office hours are from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    You are asked to comment on any aspect of this information collection, including: (1) Whether the proposed collection is necessary for the FHWA's performance; (2) the accuracy of the estimated burden; (3) ways for the FHWA to enhance the quality, usefulness, and clarity of the collected information; and (4) ways that the burden could be minimized, including the use of electronic technology, without reducing the quality of the collected information.

    Title: Federal Highway Administration Research, Development and Technology Agenda Web site.

    Background: Title 23, United States Code, Section 502(a)(5) requires that Federal surface transportation research and development activities address the needs of stakeholders, including “States, metropolitan planning organizations, local governments, the private sector, researchers, research sponsors, and other affected parties, including public interest groups.” As part of its effort to ensure that Federal research, development and technology (RD&T) activities are addressing the most critical national challenges, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) is developing the RD&T Agenda Web site. This Web site will communicate FHWA's RD&T goals, objectives and strategies to its stakeholders and highlight notable initiatives or projects that illustrate FHWA's RD&T approach. The Web site will include an electronic mechanism for stakeholders to provide feedback on the overall RD&T Agenda, FHWA's approach to addressing national transportation challenges, and potential opportunities for FHWA to collaborate with stakeholders to address them.

    Respondents: Approximately 1,000 annual respondents.

    Frequency: Annually.

    Estimated Average Burden per Response: Approximately 10 minutes per respondent per year.

    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: Approximately 167 hours per year.

    Authority:

    The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995; 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35, as amended; and 49 CFR 1.48.

    Issued on: June 11, 2017. Michael Howell, Information Collection Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2017-15184 Filed 7-19-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Highway Administration [Docket No. FHWA-2017-0029] Agency Information Collection Activities: Request for Comments for a New Information Collection AGENCY:

    Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Notice and request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    FHWA invites public comments about our intention to request the Office of Management and Budget's (OMB) approval for a new information collection, which is summarized below under SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. We published a Federal Register Notice with a 60-day public comment period on this information collection on June 19, 2017. We are required to publish this notice in the Federal Register by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

    DATES:

    Please submit comments by August 21, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may send comments within 30 days to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th Street NW., Washington, DC 20503, Attention DOT Desk Officer. All comments should include the Docket number FHWA-2017-0029.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Mark Ferroni, 202-366-3233, Office of Planning, Environment, and Realty, Federal Highway Administration, Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590. Office hours are from 6:00 a.m. to 3:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    You are asked to comment on any aspect of this information collection, including: (1) Whether the proposed collection is necessary for the FHWA's performance; (2) the accuracy of the estimated burden; (3) ways for the FHWA to enhance the quality, usefulness, and clarity of the collected information; and (4) ways that the burden could be minimized, including the use of electronic technology, without reducing the quality of the collected information.

    Title: Noise Barrier Inventory.

    Background: The basis of the Federal-aid highway program is a strong federal-state partnership. At the core of that partnership is a philosophy of trust and flexibility, and a belief that the states are in the best position to make investment decisions and that states base these decisions on the needs and priorities of their citizens. The FHWA noise regulation (23 CFR 772) gives each state department of transportation (SDOT) flexibility to determine the feasibility and reasonableness of noise abatement by balancing of the benefits of noise abatement against the overall adverse social, economic, and environmental effects and costs of the noise abatement measures. The SDOT must base its determination on the interest of the overall public good, keeping in mind all the elements of the highway program (need, funding, environmental impacts, public involvement, etc.).

    Reduction of highway traffic noise should occur through a program of shared responsibility with the most effective strategy being implementation of noise compatible planning and land use control strategies by state and local governments. Local governments can use their power to regulate land development to prohibit noise-sensitive land use development adjacent to a highway, or to require that developers plan, design, and construct development in ways that minimize noise impacts. The FHWA noise regulations limit Federal participation in the construction of noise barriers along existing highways to those projects proposed along lands where land development or substantial construction predated the existence of any highway.

    The data reflects the flexibility in noise abatement decision-making. Some states have built many noise barriers while a few have built none. Through the end of 2010, 47 SDOTs and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico have constructed over 2,748 linear miles of barriers at a cost of over $4.05 billion ($5.44 billion in 2010 dollars). Three states and the District of Columbia have not constructed noise barriers. Ten SDOTs account for approximately sixty-two percent (62%) of total barrier length and sixty-nine percent (69%) of total barrier cost. The type of information requested can be found in 23CFR772.13(f).

    The previously distributed listing can be found at http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/noise/noise_barriers/inventory/summary/sintro7.cfm.

    This listing continues to be extremely useful in the management of the highway traffic noise program, in our technical assistance efforts for State highway agencies, and in responding to inquiries from congressional sources, Federal, State, and local agencies, and the general public. An updated listing of noise barriers will be distributed nationally for use in the highway traffic noise program. It is anticipated that this information will be requested in 2014 (for noise barriers constructed in 2011, 2012 and 2013) and then again in 2017 (for noise barriers constructed in 2014, 2015 and 2016). After review of the “Summary of Noise Barriers Constructed by December 31, 2004” document, a SDOT may request to delete, modify or add information to any calendar year.

    Respondents: Each of the 50 SDOTs, the District of Columbia, and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico.

    Frequency: Every 3 years.

    Estimated Average Burden per Response: It is estimated that on average it would take 8 hours to respond to this request.

    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: It is estimated that the estimated total annual burden is 139 hours.

    Public Comments Invited: You are asked to comment on any aspect of this information collection, including: (1) Whether the proposed collection is necessary for the FHWA's performance; (2) the accuracy of the estimated burdens; (3) ways for the FHWA to enhance the quality, usefulness, and clarity of the collected information; and (4) ways that the burden could be minimized, including the use of electronic technology, without reducing the quality of the collected information. The agency will summarize and/or include your comments in the request for OMB's clearance of this information collection.

    Authority:

    The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995; 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35, as amended; and 49CFR 1.48.

    Issued on: July 11, 2017. Michael Howell, Information Collection Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2017-15183 Filed 7-19-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Highway Administration [Docket No. FHWA-2017-0026] Agency Information Collection Activities: Notice of Request for Extension of Currently Approved Information Collection AGENCY:

    Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Notice and request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995, this notice announces that FHWA will submit the collection of information described below to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and comment. The Federal Register Notice with a 60-day comment period soliciting comments on the following collection of information was published on June 19, 2017. The PRA submission describes the nature of the information collection and its expected cost and burden.

    DATES:

    Please submit comments by August 21, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments identified by DOT Docket ID 2017-0026 by any of the following methods:

    Web site: For access to the docket to read background documents or comments received go to the Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting comments.

    Fax: 1-202-493-2251.

    Mail: Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001.

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

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Michael Dougherty, 202-366-9234, Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Office of Highway Policy Information, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Title: Certification of Enforcement of the Heavy Vehicle Use Tax.

    OMB Control #: 2125-0541.

    Background: Title 23 United States Code, Section 141(c), provides that a State's apportionment of funds under 23 U.S.C. 104(b)(1) shall be reduced in an amount up to 8 percent of the amount to be apportioned during any fiscal year beginning after September 30, 1984, if vehicles subject to the Federal heavy vehicle use tax are lawfully registered in the State without having presented proof of payment of the tax. The annual certification by the State Governor or designated official regarding the collection of the heavy vehicle use tax serves as the FHWA's primary means of determining State compliance. The FHWA has determined that an annual certification of compliance by each State is the least obtrusive means of administering the provisions of the legislative mandate. In addition, States are required to retain for 1 year a Schedule 1, IRS Form 2290, Heavy Vehicle Use Tax Return (or other suitable alternative provided by regulation). The FHWA conducts compliance reviews at least once every 3 years to determine if the annual certification is adequate to ensure effective administration of 23 U.S.C. 141(c).

    The estimated annual reporting burden is 102 hours; the estimated recordkeeping burden is 510 hours for a total of 612 hours. The 50 States and the District of Columbia share this burden. Preparing and processing the annual certification is estimated to require 2 hours per State. Recordkeeping is estimated to require an average of 10 hours per State.

    Respondents: 50 State Transportation Departments, and the District of Columbia for a total of 51 respondents.

    Frequency: Annually.

    Estimated Average Annual Burden per Response: The average burden to submit the certification and to retain required records is 12 hours per respondent.

    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: Total estimated average annual burden is 612 hours.

    Authority:

    The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995; 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35, as amended; and 49 CFR 1.48.

    Issued on: July 11, 2017. Michael Howell, Information Collection Officer.
    [FR Doc. 2017-15185 Filed 7-19-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-22-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration [Docket No. FMCSA-2005-20027; FMCSA-2005-20560; FMCSA-2006-26653; FMCSA-2007-27333; FMCSA-2008-0021; FMCSA-2008-0398; FMCSA-2009-0054; FMCSA-2009-0121; FMCSA-2010-0327; FMCSA-2010-0413; FMCSA-2011-0024; FMCSA-2011-0092; FMCSA-2011-0102; FMCSA-2012-0338; FMCSA-2013-0022; FMCSA-2013-0027; FMCSA-2013-0028; FMCSA-2014-0302; FMCSA-2014-0304; FMCSA-2014-0305; FMCSA-2014-0048; FMCSA-2015-0049; FMCSA-2015-0052] Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Vision AGENCY:

    Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Notice of renewal of exemptions; request for comments.

    SUMMARY:

    FMCSA announces its decision to renew exemptions for 88 individuals from the vision requirement in the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs) for interstate commercial motor vehicle (CMV) drivers. The exemptions enable these individuals to continue to operate CMVs in interstate commerce without meeting the vision requirement in one eye.

    DATES:

    Each group of renewed exemptions was applicable on the dates stated in the discussions below and will expire on the dates stated in the discussions below. Comments must be received on or before August 21, 2017.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ms. Christine A. Hydock, Chief, Medical Programs Division, 202-366-4001, [email protected], FMCSA, Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Room W64-224, Washington, DC 20590-0001. Office hours are from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m., e.t., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. If you have questions regarding viewing or submitting material to the docket, contact Docket Services, telephone (202) 366-9826.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments bearing the Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) Docket No. FMCSA-2005-20027; FMCSA-2005-20560; FMCSA-2006-26653; FMCSA-2007-27333; FMCSA-2008-0021; FMCSA-2008-0398; FMCSA-2009-0054; FMCSA-2009-0121; FMCSA-2010-0327; FMCSA-2010-0413; FMCSA-2011-0024; FMCSA-2011-0092; FMCSA-2011-0102; FMCSA-2012-0338; FMCSA-2013-0022; FMCSA-2013-0027; FMCSA-2013-0028; FMCSA-2014-0302; FMCSA-2014-0304; FMCSA-2014-0305; FMCSA-2014-0048; FMCSA-2015-0049; FMCSA-2015-0052 using any of the following methods:

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

    Mail: Docket Management Facility; U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.

    Hand Delivery: West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., e.t., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

    Fax: 1-202-493-2251.

    Instructions: Each submission must include the Agency name and the docket number(s) for this notice. Note that all comments received will be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided. Please see the Privacy Act heading below for further information.

    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or comments, go to http://www.regulations.gov at any time or Room W12-140 on the ground level of the West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., e.t., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The FDMS is available 24 hours each day, 365 days each year. If you want acknowledgment that we received your comments, please include a self-addressed, stamped envelope or postcard or print the acknowledgement page that appears after submitting comments online.

    Privacy Act: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT posts these comments, without edit, including any personal information the commenter provides, to http://www.regulations.gov, as described in the system of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at http://www.dot.gov/privacy.

    I. Background

    Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA may grant an exemption for two years if it finds “such exemption would likely achieve a level of safety that is equivalent to or greater than the level that would be achieved absent such exemption.” The statute also allows the Agency to renew exemptions at the end of the two-year period.

    The physical qualification standard for drivers regarding vision found in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10) states that a person is physically qualified to driver a CMV if that person:

    Has distant visual acuity of at least 20/40 (Snellen) in each eye without corrective lenses or visual acuity separately corrected to 20/40 (Snellen) or better with corrective lenses, distant binocular acuity of a least 20/40 (Snellen) in both eyes with or without corrective lenses, field of vision of at least 70° in the horizontal meridian in each eye, and the ability to recognize the colors of traffic signals and devices showing red, green, and amber.

    The 88 individuals listed in this notice have requested renewal of their exemptions from the vision standard in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10), in accordance with FMCSA procedures. Accordingly, FMCSA has evaluated these applications for renewal on their merits and decided to extend each exemption for a renewable two-year period.

    II. Request for Comments

    Interested parties or organizations possessing information that would otherwise show that any, or all, of these drivers are not currently achieving the statutory level of safety should immediately notify FMCSA. The Agency will evaluate any adverse evidence submitted and, if safety is being compromised or if continuation of the exemption would not be consistent with the goals and objectives of 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA will take immediate steps to revoke the exemption of a driver.

    III. Basis for Renewing Exemptions

    Under 49 U.S.C. 31315(b)(1), an exemption may be granted for no longer than two years from its approval date and may be renewed upon application. In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, each of the 88 applicants has satisfied the renewal conditions for obtaining an exemption from the vision requirement (70 FR 2701; 70 FR 16887; 70 FR 17504; 70 FR 30997; 72 FR 8417; 72 FR 12666; 72 FR 25831; 72 FR 27624; 72 FR 36099; 73 FR 15567; 73 FR 27015; 74 FR 7097; 74 FR 11988; 74 FR 15584; 74 FR 19270; 74 FR 21427; 74 FR 21796; 74 FR 26461; 74 FR 26466; 74 FR 34630; 75 FR 19674; 75 FR 65057; 75 FR 79081; 76 FR 1493; 76 FR 12408; 76 FR 17481; 76 FR 25762; 76 FR 25766; 76 FR 28125; 76 FR 29022; 76 FR 34135; 76 FR 37168; 76 FR 37173; 76 FR 37885; 76 FR 44082; 77 FR 23797; 77 FR 74731; 78 FR 800; 78 FR 12811; 78 FR 12815; 78 FR 22596; 78 FR 22602; 78 FR 24300; 78 FR 24798; 78 FR 26106; 78 FR 27281; 78 FR 34140; 78 FR 37270; 78 FR 41188; 78 FR 46407; 78 FR 51268; 78 FR 51269; 78 FR 57679; 79 FR 23797; 80 FR 603; 80 FR 12248; 80 FR 14220; 80 FR 14223; 80 FR 16502; 80 FR 18696; 80 FR 22773; 80 FR 25766; 80 FR 26139; 80 FR 26320; 80 FR 29152; 80 FR 31636; 80 FR 31640; 80 FR 31957; 80 FR 33007; 80 FR 33011; 80 FR 35699; 80 FR 36395; 80 FR 36398; 80 FR 45573; 80 FR 48404; 80 FR 48409; 80 FR 48413). They have submitted evidence showing that the vision in the better eye continues to meet the requirement specified at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10) and that the vision impairment is stable. In addition, a review of each record of safety while driving with the respective vision deficiencies over the past two years indicates each applicant continues to meet the vision exemption requirements. These factors provide an adequate basis for predicting each driver's ability to continue to drive safely in interstate commerce. Therefore, FMCSA concludes that extending the exemption for each renewal applicant for a period of two years is likely to achieve a level of safety equal to that existing without the exemption.

    In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, the following groups of drivers received renewed exemptions in the month of July and are discussed below:

    As of July 2, 2017, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, the following 32 individuals have satisfied the conditions for obtaining a renewed exemption from the vision requirements (70 FR 2701; 70 FR 16887; 70 FR 17504; 70 FR 30997; 72 FR 8417; 72 FR 27624; 72 FR 36099; 73 FR 15567; 73 FR 27015; 74 FR 7097; 74 FR 11988; 74 FR 15584; 74 FR 19270; 74 FR 21427; 74 FR 21796; 74 FR 26466; 75 FR 19674; 75 FR 65057; 76 FR 17481; 76 FR 25762; 76 FR 25766; 76 FR 28125; 76 FR 37173; 76 FR 37885; 77 FR 23797; 77 FR 74731; 78 FR 800; 78 FR 12811; 78 FR 12815; 78 FR 22596; 78 FR 22602; 78 FR 24300; 78 FR 26106; 78 FR 37270; 78 FR 57679; 79 FR 23797; 80 FR 603; 80 FR 12248; 80 FR 14220; 80 FR 14223; 80 FR 16502; 80 FR 18696; 80 FR 22773; 80 FR 25766; 80 FR 26139; 80 FR 26320; 80 FR 29152; 80 FR 31640; 80 FR 31957; 80 FR 33011; 80 FR 45573; 80 FR 48409):

    Michael W. Anderson (NM) Michael R. Bradford (MD) Ralph H. Bushman (IL) William D. Cardiff (IL) John J. Caricola, Jr. (NC) Adan Cortes-Juarez (WA) David L. Ellis (OK) Denise M. Engle (GA) Robert A. Goerl, Jr. (PA) Wade M. Hillmer (MN) Paul M. Hinkson (TN) Michael W. Jensen (CA) Clifford D. Johnson (VA) Michael Lafferty (ID) Mark L. LeBlanc (MN) Michael J. McGregan (FL) Felix L. McLean (NM) Anthony R. Miles (NV) Jerry D. Paul (OK) John P. Perez (FL) Raymond W. Pitts (FL) William A. Ramirez Vasquez (CA) Donald W. Randall (OR) Raymond Sherrill (PA) Kyle C. Shover (NJ) Charles H. Smith (IN) George Stapleton (GA) David B. Stone (OK) David M. Stout (OR) James K. Waites (AR) John E. Westbrook (LA) Jason R. White (OH)

    The drivers were included in one of the following docket Nos: FMCSA-2005-20027; FMCSA-2005-20560; FMCSA-2006-26653; FMCSA-2008-0021; FMCSA-2008-0398; FMCSA-2009-0054; FMCSA-2010-0327; FMCSA-2011-0024; FMCSA-2011-0092; FMCSA-2012-0338; FMCSA-2013-0022; FMCSA-2014-0302; FMCSA-2014-0304; FMCSA-2014-0305; FMCSA-2015-0048. Their exemptions are applicable as of July 2, 2017, and will expire on July 2, 2019.

    As of July 7, 2017, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, the following 8 individuals have satisfied the conditions for obtaining a renewed exemption from the vision requirements (80 FR 31636; 80 FR 48413):

    Robert A. Buckley (IN) Jose J. Guzman-Olguin (IL) Stephen T. Hines (NJ) James J. Keranen (MI) Herbert S. Lear (PA) Nathan C. Nissen (IA) Gregory S. Richter (PA) George Tomecek (PA)

    The drivers were included in docket No. FMCSA-2015-0049. Their exemptions are applicable as of July 7, 2017, and will expire on July 7, 2019.

    As of July 9, 2017, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, the following 5 individuals have satisfied the conditions for obtaining a renewed exemption from the vision requirements (78 FR 41188; 78 FR 27281; 78 FR 41188; 80 FR 33007):

    Brian G. Dvorak (IL) Charles T. Spears (VA) Brian E. Tessman (WI) Gregory J. Thurston (PA) Donald Torbett (IA)

    The drivers were included in docket No. FMCSA-2013-0028. Their exemptions are applicable as of July 9, 2017, and will expire on July 9, 2019.

    As of July 16, 2017, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, the following 7 individuals have satisfied the conditions for obtaining a renewed exemption from the vision requirements (74 FR 26461; 74 FR 34630; 76 FR 1493; 76 FR 12408; 76 FR 37168; 78 FR 51269):

    Steven L. Forristall (WI) Rocky D. Gysberg (MN) Charles H. Lefew (VA) Joseph B. Peacock (NC) James M. Tennyson (MD) Steven L. Thomas (IN) Daniel A. Wescott (CO)

    The drivers were included in one of the following docket Nos: FMCSA-2009-0413; FMCSA-2009-0121. Their exemptions are applicable as of July 16, 2017, and will expire on July 16, 2019.

    As of July 22, 2017, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, the following 12 individuals have satisfied the conditions for obtaining a renewed exemption from the vision requirements (72 FR 72666; 72 FR 25831; 74 FR 19270; 76 FR 29022; 76 FR 34135; 76 FR 44082; 78 FR 34140; 78 FR 51268; 80 FR 36398):

    Stanley C. Anders (SD) Joel A. Cabrera (FL) Sherman W. Clapper (ID) Eric Esplin (UT) Ronald R. Fournier (NY) Ronald D. Jackman II (NV) Thomas W. Kent (IN) Robert J. MacInnis (MA) Steven A. Proctor (TX) Rodney W. Sukalski (MN) Larry D. Warneke (WA) Lonnie Wendinger (MN)

    The drivers were included in one of the following docket Nos: FMCSA-2007-27333; FMCSA-2011-0102. Their exemptions are applicable as of July 22, 2017, and will expire on July 22, 2019.

    As of July 23, 2017, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, the following 19 individuals have satisfied the conditions for obtaining a renewed exemption from the vision requirements (80 FR 35699; 80 FR 48404):

    Robert J. Bickel (MI) Steven R. Brinegar (TX) Garry D. Burkholder (PA) Dennis W. Cosens (NM) William J. Garigulo (OH) Wladyslaw Gogola (IL) Antonio Gomez (PA) Mark A. Grenier (CT) Acquillious Jackson III (SC) Jimmy D. Johnson, II (TN) Bradley J. Kearl (UT) Larry G. Kreke (IL) Christopher P. Mrockza (MD) Gary A. Oster (OR) Mark A. Pleskovitch (IL) Edward J. Puto (CT) Andrew P. Risner (OH) Kyle B. Sharp (MI) Francis A. St. Pierre (NH)

    The drivers were included docket No. FMCSA-2015-0052. Their exemptions are applicable as of July 23, 2017, and will expire on July 23, 2019.

    As of July 31, 2017, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, the following 5 individuals have satisfied the conditions for obtaining a renewed exemption from the vision requirements (76 FR 25766; 76 FR 37885; 78 FR 37270; 80 FR 31640):

    Anthony Luciano (CT) David McKinney (OR) Frank L. O'Rourke (NY) Larry F. Reber (OH) Edward Swaggerty, Jr. (OH)

    The drivers were included in docket No. FMCSA-2011-0092. Their exemptions are applicable as of July 31, 2017, and will expire on July 31, 2019.

    Conditions and Requirements

    The exemptions are extended subject to the following conditions: (1) Each driver must undergo an annual physical examination (a) by an ophthalmologist or optometrist who attests that the v\vision in the better eye continues to meet the requirements in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10), and (b) by a certified Medical Examiner, as defined by 49 CFR 390.5, who attests that the driver is otherwise physically qualified under 49 CFR 391.41; (2) each driver must provide a copy of the ophthalmologist's or optometrist's report to the Medical Examiner at the time of the annual medical examination; and (3) each driver must provide a copy of the annual medical certification to the employer for retention in the driver's qualification file and retains a copy of the certification on his/her person while driving for presentation to a duly authorized Federal, State, or local enforcement official. The exemption will be rescinded if: (1) The person fails to comply with the terms and conditions of the exemption; (2) the exemption has resulted in a lower level of safety than was maintained before it was granted; or (3) continuation of the exemption would not be consistent with the goals and objectives of 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315.

    IV. Preemption

    During the period the exemption is in effect, no State shall enforce any law or regulation that conflicts with this exemption with respect to a person operating under the exemption.

    VI. Conclusion

    Based upon its evaluation of the 88 exemption applications, FMCSA renews the exemptions of the aforementioned drivers from the vision requirement in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10), subject to the requirements cited above (49 CFR 391.64(b)). In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, each exemption will be valid for two years unless revoked earlier by FMCSA.

    Issued on: June 8, 2017. Larry W. Minor, Associate Administrator for Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2017-14919 Filed 7-19-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration [Docket No. FMCSA-2006-24016; FMCSA-2009-0067; FMCSA-2011-0040; FMCSA-2011-0058; FMCSA-2013-0012; FMCSA-2013-0014; FMCSA-2014-0315; FMCSA-2015-0057] Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Diabetes AGENCY:

    Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Notice of final disposition.

    SUMMARY:

    FMCSA announces its decision to renew exemptions of 132 individuals from its prohibition in the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs) against persons with insulin-treated diabetes mellitus (ITDM) from operating commercial motor vehicles (CMVs) in interstate commerce. The exemptions enable these individuals with ITDM to continue to operate CMVs in interstate commerce.

    DATES:

    Each group of renewed exemptions was applicable on the dates stated in the discussions below and will expire on the dates stated in the discussions below.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Ms. Christine A. Hydock, Chief, Medical Programs Division, 202-366-4001, [email protected], FMCSA, Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Room W64-224, Washington, DC 20590-0001. Office hours are from 8 a.m. to 5:30 p.m., e.t., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. If you have questions regarding viewing or submitting material to the docket, contact Docket Services, telephone (202) 366-9826.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Electronic Access

    You may see all the comments online through the Federal Document Management System (FDMS) at: http://www.regulations.gov.

    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or comments, go to http://www.regulations.gov and/or Room W12-140 on the ground level of the West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., e.t., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

    Privacy Act: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT posts these comments, without edit, including any personal information the commenter provides, to http://www.regulations.gov, as described in the system of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at http://www.dot.gov/privacy.

    II. Background

    On April 17, 2017, FMCSA published a notice announcing its decision to renew exemptions for 132 individuals from the insulin-treated diabetes mellitus prohibition in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(3) to operate a CMV in interstate commerce and requested comments from the public (82 FR 18206). The public comment period ended on May 17, 2017, and no comments were received.

    As stated in the previous notice, FMCSA has evaluated the eligibility of these applicants and determined that renewing these exemptions would achieve a level of safety equivalent to or greater than the level that would be achieved by complying with the current regulation 49 CFR 391.41(b)(3).

    The physical qualification standard for drivers regarding diabetes found in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(3) states that a person is physically qualified to drive a CMV if that person has no established medical history or clinical diagnosis of diabetes mellitus currently requiring insulin for control.

    III. Discussion of Comments

    FMCSA received no comments in this preceding.

    IV. Conclusion

    Based upon its evaluation of the 132 renewal exemption applications and that no comments were received, FMCSA confirms its' decision to exempt the following drivers from the rule prohibiting drivers with ITDM from driving CMVs in interstate commerce in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(3):

    As of May 3, 2017, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, the following nine individuals have satisfied the renewal conditions for obtaining an exemption from the rule prohibiting drivers with ITDM from driving CMVs in interstate commerce (78 FR 16032; 78 FR 26107):

    Maryland A. Chandler (KY) Ronald D. Clark (AR) Larry L. Eberly (PA) Steven J. Fessler (IL) Patrick L. Morningstar (MD) Russell L. Stiley (CO) Gary T. Stoutamyer (VA) Jack K. Webster (KY) Harry V. Wilhite, Jr. (AL)

    The drivers were included in docket No. FMCSA-2013-0014. Their exemptions are applicable as of May 3, 2017, and will expire on May 3, 2019.

    As of May 6, 2017, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, the following nine individuals have satisfied the renewal conditions for obtaining an exemption from the rule prohibiting drivers with ITDM from driving CMVs in interstate commerce (78 FR 16758; 78 FR 26422):

    Victor L. Daniels (DE) Kenneth T. Faborito (HI) Kevin P. Lee (MN) Duane W. Mansur (NH) Fritz R. McBride (WI) Arthur H. Olsen (AZ) Jacob D. Parnaby (OH) Brandon P. Wilson (NC) Peter S. Zipperer (LA)

    The drivers were included in docket No. FMCSA-2013-0012. Their exemptions are applicable as of May 6, 2017, and will expire on May 6, 2019.

    As of May 8, 2017, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, the following 50 individuals have satisfied the renewal conditions for obtaining an exemption from the rule prohibiting drivers with ITDM from driving CMVs in interstate commerce (80 FR 18681; 80 FR 37716):

    Rafael M. Alvarado (TX) Mark J. Avedisian (NY) Timothy J. Burke (MA) Roger D. Cassada (VA) Leonard W. Cleaves (MA) Larry A. Cramer (SD) Bradford A. Davies (ME) Larry A. DeSanno (OR) Robert S. Doering (IL) Michael L. Domarus (MN) Adan A. Espinoza (CA) Howard E. Fruehling (IA) Michael F. Gabbianelli (NJ) James E. Goins (NJ) Gregory J. Goodenbour (IA) Michael D. Howell (NC) Mayer Indorsky (NY) Raymond J. Jacobs (NY) Lyle J. Kaehler (WI) Charles F. Kennedy (PA) Curtis G. Krichbaum (PA) Walter P. Leck (PA) John R. Mauney (NC) Derrell R. McCaskill (MD) Eric O. McLamb (NC) Michael S. Murray (IA) Benjamin M. Naastad (ND) Richard G. Niemi (WI) Kenthia E. Norfleet (AL) Donald M. Oakes (NH) Robert E. Piernik (FL) Harold E. Pratt (MO) Jack C. Reed (NE) Fernando Rivera (IL) William J. Schmidt (MN) Todd J. Schoeller (WI) Gary H. Schrot (WI) Ryan A. Snow (PA) Kevin L. Sundh (UT) William H. Terry (IN) Duane K. Torlish, Jr. (NY) Ronald W. Truitt (PA) Timothy E. Vanderwiele (NY) Leo D. Vermeire (WA) Brian W. Walls (PA) Gary L. Webster (VT) Lance A. Wendinger (MN) Allan W. Widener (GA) Shane D. Wildoner (PA) Kyle A. Wright (WA)

    The drivers were included in docket No. FMCSA-2014-0315. Their exemptions are applicable as of May 8, 2017, and will expire on May 8, 2019.

    As of May 9, 2017, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, the following 38 individuals have satisfied the renewal conditions for obtaining an exemption from the rule prohibiting drivers with ITDM from driving CMVs in interstate commerce (76 FR 17475; 76 FR 26792; 80 FR 18928; 80 FR 37726):

    James R. Bledsoe (FL) Sammy W. Bowlin (KS) Durwin A. Brannon (NC) Larry J. Carril (IL) Jimmy E. Cole (TN) Robert S. Colosimo (ND) Joel F. Cook (NY) James N. Coombs (NJ) David A. Daniels (ME) John A. DelGiudice (RI) Mark J. Dias (MA) Brian A. Foss (WY) William A.H. Gardner (CA) Steven M. Gilmour (MA) Ismael Gonzalez (IN) Charles A. Gudaitis (PA) Cory A. Harker (UT) Clark D. Holdeman (TX) David A. Holwenger (WA) Conrad J. Janik (NY) David F. Kenny (NY) George W. Key, Jr. (AL) Michael O. Lancial (MI) Robert E. McKenna (NY) Gregory O. Morton (AL) Frank A. Mowers (IL) Charles H. Nichols (MI) Robert L. Rush (PA) Derek J. Scougal (VA) Roy Silva (IL) James L. Skinner (IA) Crispin Tabangcura Jr. (HI) Robert L. Terry (TN) Rafael Torres, Jr. (FL) Harold E. Watters (IN) Joseph E. Weitzel (PA) John B. Wojcicki (OH) Steven L. Wolvers (IA)

    The drivers were included in one of the following docket Nos: FMCSA-2011-0058; FMCSA-2015-0057. Their exemptions are applicable as of May 9, 2017, and will expire on May 9, 2019.

    As of May 11, 2017, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, the following 8 individuals have satisfied the renewal conditions for obtaining an exemption from the rule prohibiting drivers with ITDM from driving CMVs in interstate commerce (76 FR 17478; 76 FR 27376):

    Peter N. Amendola (MA) Steven V. Callison (LA) Douglas A. Carroll (IN) Tamara D. Folsom (SD) Ernest Martinelli, III (RI) Johnathon C. Morgan (TN) David R. Smith (ME) Adam J. Stegenga (MI)

    The drivers were included in docket No. FMCSA-2011-0040. Their exemptions are applicable as of May 11, 2017, and will expire on May 11, 2019.

    As of May 18, 2017, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, Thomas G. Deke (MO) has satisfied the renewal conditions for obtaining an exemption from the rule prohibiting drivers with ITDM from driving CMVs in interstate commerce. (71 FR 17558; 71 FR 28913).

    This driver was included in docket No. FMCSA-2006-24016. The exemption is applicable as of May 18, 2017, and will expire on May 18, 2019.

    As of May 22, 2017, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, the following 17 individuals have satisfied the renewal conditions for obtaining an exemption from the rule prohibiting drivers with ITDM from driving CMVs in interstate commerce (74 FR 15578; 74 FR 24072):

    William C. Arrington (MD) Raymond Barajas (KS) William N. Carpenter (KY) Darin L. Carpenter (MT) Jeffery W. Cotner (OR) Juan A. Hartwell (CT) David A. Holzbach (SC) Joseph T. Jackson (CT) Donald A. Lambrecht (NC) William M. Liebert (NV) Curtis J. Panther (MN) Eric S. Ritter (CA) Gary L. Robinson (TN) Kevin J. Sears (IL) Peter A. Storm (LA) Don A. Wisnosky (WI) Patrick D. Yosten (NE)

    The drivers were included in docket No. FMCSA-2009-0067. Their exemptions are applicable as of May 22, 2017, and will expire on May 22, 2019.

    In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31315, each exemption will be valid for two years from the applicable date unless revoked earlier by FMCSA. The exemption will be revoked if the following occurs: (1) The person fails to comply with the terms and conditions of the exemption; (2) the exemption has resulted in a lower level of safety than was maintained prior to being granted; or (3) continuation of the exemption would not be consistent with the goals and objectives of 49 U.S.C. 31136 and 31315.

    Issued on: June 8, 2017. Larry W. Minor, Associate Administrator for Policy.
    [FR Doc. 2017-14917 Filed 7-19-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION National Highway Traffic Safety Administration [Docket No. NHTSA-2017-0016; Notice 1] Mack Trucks, Inc., Receipt of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance AGENCY:

    National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), Department of Transportation (DOT).

    ACTION:

    Receipt of petition.

    SUMMARY:

    Mack Trucks, Inc. (MTI), has determined that certain model year (MY) 2017 Mack heavy duty trucks do not fully comply with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 120, Tire selection and rims and motor home/recreation vehicle trailer load carrying capacity information for motor vehicles with a GVWR of more than 4,536 kilograms (10,000 pounds). MTI filed a noncompliance information report dated February 9, 2017. MTI also petitioned NHTSA on February 28, 2017, and revised its petition on April 29, 2017, for a decision that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.

    DATES:

    The closing date for comments on the petition is August 21, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments on this petition. Comments must refer to the docket and notice number cited in the title of this notice and submitted by any of the following methods:

    Mail: Send comments by mail addressed to 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 comments by hand to U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590. The Docket Section is open on weekdays from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. except Federal Holidays.

    Electronically: Submit comments electronically by logging onto the Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) Web site at https://www.regulations.gov/. Follow the online instructions for submitting comments.

    • Comments may also be faxed to (202) 493-2251.

    Comments must be written in the English language, and be no greater than 15 pages in length, although there is no limit to the length of necessary attachments to the comments. If comments are submitted in hard copy form, please ensure that two copies are provided. If you wish to receive confirmation that comments you have submitted by mail were received, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard with the comments. Note that all comments received will be posted without change to https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided.

    All comments and supporting materials received before the close of business on the closing date indicated above will be filed in the docket and will be considered. All comments and supporting materials received after the closing date will also be filed and will be considered to the fullest extent possible.

    When the petition is granted or denied, notice of the decision will also be published in the Federal Register pursuant to the authority indicated at the end of this notice.

    All comments, background documentation, and supporting materials submitted to the docket may be viewed by anyone at the address and times given above. The documents may also be viewed on the Internet at https://www.regulations.gov by following the online instructions for accessing the dockets. The docket ID number for this petition is shown in the heading of this notice.

    DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement is available for review in a Federal Register notice published on April 11, 2000, (65 FR 19477-78).

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Overview: Mack Trucks, Inc. (MTI), has determined that certain model year (MY) 2017 Mack heavy duty trucks do not fully comply with paragraph S5.2(b) of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 120, Tire selection and rims and motor home/recreation vehicle trailer load carrying capacity information for motor vehicles with a GVWR of more than 4,536 kilograms (10,000 pounds). MTI filed a noncompliance report dated February 9, 2017, pursuant to 49 CFR part 573, Defect and Noncompliance Responsibility and Reports. MTI also petitioned NHTSA on February 28, 2017, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h) and 49 CFR part 556, and revised its petition on April 29, 2017, to obtain an exemption from the notification and remedy requirements of 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301 on the basis that this noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.

    This notice of receipt of MTI's petition is published under 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120 and does not represent any agency decision or other exercise of judgment concerning the merits of the petition.

    II. Vehicles Involved: Approximately 226 MY 2017 Mack Pinnacle, Granite, TerraPro and LR heavy duty trucks, manufactured between August 15, 2016, and December 12, 2016, are potentially involved.

    III. Noncompliance: MTI explains that the noncompliance is that the wheels on the subject vehicles incorrectly identify the rim size as 24.5″ x 8.25″ instead of 22.5″ x 8.25″, and therefore do not meet the requirements of paragraph S5.2(b) of FMVSS No. 120. Specifically, the marking error overstates the wheel diameter by 2″.

    IV. Rule Text: Paragraph S5.2 of FMVSS No. 120 states:

    S5.2 Rim marking. Each rim or, at the option of the manufacturer in the case of a single-piece wheel, wheel disc shall be marked with the information listed in paragraphs (a) through (e) of this paragraph, in lettering not less than 3 millimeters high, impressed to a depth or, at the option of the manufacturer, embossed to a height of not less than 0.125 millimeters. . .

    (b) The rim size designation, and in case of multipiece rims, the rim type designation. For example: 20 x 5.50, or 20 x 5.5.

    V. Summary of MTI's Petition: MTI described the subject noncompliance and stated its belief that the noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.

    In support of its petition, MTI referenced a letter to NHTSA, dated December 5, 2016, from Arconic Wheel and Transportation Products (Arconic), which is the rim manufacturer, and provided the following:

    1. A 24.5″ tire will not seat on the rim; therefore, if someone tries to mount a 24.5″ tire to the rim, it will not hold air and therefore cannot be inflated.

    2. When tires are replaced, the technician will select the tire based on the size and rating of the tire being replaced. When Mack manufactured the vehicle, the tire used was a 22.5″ (i.e., the correct size for the rim). Therefore, the tires installed by Mack have the correct size on the sidewall of the tire.

    3. Mack is required to list the tires size and inflation pressures on the certification label as required by 49 CFR 567. The information printed on the label is the correct size, a 22.5″ tire and reflects the tires that were installed when manufactured. The certification label is located inside the driver's door and can be easily accessed by the tire installer.

    MTI concluded by expressing the belief that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety, and that its petition to be exempted from providing notification of the noncompliance, as required by 49 U.S.C. 30118, and a remedy for the noncompliance, as required by 49 U.S.C. 30120, should be granted.

    To view MTI's petition analyses in its entirety you can visit https://www.regulations.gov by following the online instructions for accessing the dockets and by using the docket ID number for this petition shown in the heading of this notice.

    NHTSA notes that the statutory provisions (49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h)) that permit manufacturers to file petitions for a determination of inconsequentiality allow NHTSA to exempt manufacturers only from the duties found in sections 30118 and 30120, respectively, to notify owners, purchasers, and dealers of a defect or noncompliance and to remedy the defect or noncompliance. Therefore, any decision on this petition only applies to the subject vehicles that MTI no longer controlled at the time it determined that the noncompliance existed. However, any decision on this petition does not relieve vehicle distributors and dealers of the prohibitions on the sale, offer for sale, or introduction or delivery for introduction into interstate commerce of the noncompliant vehicles under their control after MTI notified them that the subject noncompliance existed.

    Authority:

    49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120: delegations of authority at 49 CFR 1.95 and 501.8.

    Jeffrey M. Giuseppe, Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
    [FR Doc. 2017-15254 Filed 7-19-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-59-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION National Highway Traffic Safety Administration [Docket No. NHTSA-2016-0109; Notice 2] Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC, Grant of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance AGENCY:

    National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), Department of Transportation (DOT).

    ACTION:

    Grant of petition.

    SUMMARY:

    Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC (MBUSA), has determined that certain model year (MY) 2015-2016 Mercedes-Benz CLS-Class motor vehicles do not fully comply with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 110, Tire Selection and Rims and Motor Home/Recreation Vehicle Trailer Load Carrying Capacity Information for Motor Vehicles with a GVWR of 4,536 kilograms (10,000 pounds) or Less. MBUSA filed a Safety Recall Report dated September 12, 2016. MBUSA also petitioned NHTSA on October 4, 2016, for a decision that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.

    ADDRESSES:

    For further information on this decision contact Kerrin Bressant, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), telephone (202) 366-1110, facsimile (202) 366-5930.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Overview

    Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC (MBUSA), has determined that certain model year (MY) 2015-2016 Mercedes-Benz CLS-Class motor vehicles do not fully comply with paragraph S4.3(a) of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 110, Tire Selection and Rims and Motor Home/Recreation Vehicle Trailer Load Carrying Capacity Information for Motor Vehicles with a GVWR of 4,536 kilograms (10,000 pounds) or Less. MBUSA filed a report dated September 12, 2016, pursuant to 49 CFR part 573, Defect and Noncompliance Responsibility and Reports. MBUSA also petitioned NHTSA on October 4, 2016, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h) and 49 CFR part 556, for an exemption from the notification and remedy requirements of 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301 on the basis that this noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.

    Notice of receipt of the petition was published, with a 30-day public comment period on December 20, 2016, in the Federal Register (81 FR 92964). No comments were received. To view the petition and all supporting documents log onto the Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) Web page at: http://www.regulations.gov/. Then follow the online search instruction to locate docket number “NHTSA-2016-0109.”

    II. Vehicles Involved

    Approximately 6,773 MY 2015-2016 Mercedes-Benz CLS 400 and Mercedes-Benz CLS 400 4MATIC motor vehicles manufactured between May 23, 2014 and April 21, 2016, are potentially involved.

    III. Noncompliance

    MBUSA explains that the noncompliance is that the subject vehicles have tire and loading information placards affixed to their B-pillars that incorrectly identify the maximum combined weight of occupants and cargo. Specifically, the Mercedes CLS 400 was manufactured with a tire and loading information placard that identifies a maximum combined weight of 420 kilograms (926 pounds) and the Mercedes CLS 400 4MATIC was manufactured with a tire and loading information placard that identifies a maximum combined weight of 355 kilograms (783 pounds). However, the maximum combined weight of occupants and cargo should be 315 kilograms (694 pounds) for the Mercedes CLS 400 and 325 kg (717 pounds) for the CLS 400 4MATIC. Therefore, the vehicles do not comply with paragraph S4.3 of FMVSS No. 110.

    IV. Rule Text

    Paragraph S4.3 of FMVSS No. 110 states:

    S4.3 Placard. Each vehicle, except for a trailer or incomplete vehicle, shall show the information specified in S4.3 (a) through (g), and may show, at the manufacturer's option, the information specified in S4.3 (h) and (i), on a placard permanently affixed to the driver's side B-pillar. . . .

    (a) Vehicle capacity weight expressed as “The combined weight of occupants and cargo should never exceed XXX kilograms or XXX pounds

    V. Summary of MBUSA's Petition

    MBUSA described the subject noncompliance and stated its belief that the noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.

    In support of its petition, MBUSA submitted the following reasoning:

    (a) The tires originally equipped on the subject vehicles are able to carry the additional weight indicated on the tire and loading information placard. Further, the tire pressure detailed on the placard is sufficient to carry those weights. The maximum tire and vehicle load information detailed in the table below demonstrates that the tire is designed to carry a higher load than that which was incorrectly set out on the tire label:

    Tire dimension Maximum tire load
  • (lbs)
  • Maximum vehicle load
  • (per tire)
  • CLS 400
  • (lbs)
  • CLS 400
  • 4MATIC
  • (lbs)
  • 18″ front 1708 1243 1289 18″ rear 1609 1256 1278 19″ front 1565 1243 1289 19″ rear 1653 1256 1278

    (b) Should the driver follow the maximum combined weight of occupants and cargo displayed on the tire and information placard, motor vehicle safety is not negatively impacted. The vehicle platform (including chassis and axles) serves other CLS vehicle lines and is designed for vehicles with a higher gross vehicle weight rating (“GVWR”). The platform therefore can handle the potential additional weight.

    (c) Subject vehicles are equipped with the B-pillar certification information label in accordance with 49 CFR part 567 indicating a GVWR of 2260 kilograms (4982 pounds) for vehicle type 218.365, the CLS 400, and a GVWR of 2330 kg (5137 pounds) for vehicle type 218.367, the CLS 400 4MATIC. The GVWR information detailed on the B-pillar certification information label is correct. Therefore, the driver can refer to this alternative source of information in order to determine the correct maximum load weight of the vehicle.

    (d) After identifying the potentially incorrect values in the tire label, Daimler AG (DAG) analyzed potential technical implications, specifically with respect to the requirements of FMVSS No. 110, including potential effects on axles, suspension, brakes, driving dynamic, and crashworthiness. Based on this analysis, an impact on steering, braking or other vehicle dynamics as a result of the tire label weight discrepancy can be excluded.

    (e) Moreover, MBUSA is not aware of any customer complaints, accidents or injuries alleged to have occurred as a result of this non-compliance. Hence, field data supports the assertion that the issue described above will have an inconsequential impact on safety.

    MBUSA concluded by expressing the belief that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety, and that its petition to be exempted from providing notification of the noncompliance, as required by 49 U.S.C. 30118, and a remedy for the noncompliance, as required by 49 U.S.C. 30120, should be granted.

    NHTSA'S Decision

    NHTSA's Analysis: FMVSS No. 110 specifies requirements for tire selection to prevent tire overload. The intent of the standard is to ensure that vehicles are equipped with tires appropriate to handle the vehicle manufacturer's designed maximum vehicle weight.

    The maximum weight of a vehicle is determined by adding to the vehicle the manufacturer specified maximum weight of occupants and cargo. FMVSS No. 110, paragraph 4.3(a) requires that vehicles be labeled with a “Vehicle Capacity Weight (VCW)” value which is the specified maximum occupant and cargo weight that can be loaded into a vehicle. This value is equal to 68 kgs times the vehicle's designated seating capacity plus the rated cargo/payload of the vehicle. FMVSS No. 110, (S4.2.1.1 and S4.3.4(b)), requires that the vehicle maximum load on the tire shall not be greater than the applicable maximum load rating as marked on the sidewall of the tire or greater than the load rating of the tire at the manufacturer specified cold inflation pressure listed on the tire and loading information placard.

    For the subject vehicles, MBUSA noted that the VCW values on the placards are incorrect. The tire and information placard on the CLS 400 model vehicle specifies a 420 kg VCW which should have been 315 kg, an increase of 105 kg. The label on the CLS 400 4MATIC model vehicle specifies a 355 kg VCW which should have been 325 kg, an increase of 30 kg. These errors could cause a consumer to load the subject vehicles beyond their original design specifications.

    In its' petition, MBUSA provided an analysis indicating the mounted tires on the subject vehicles are sufficient for carrying the maximum vehicle loads derived from the higher, incorrect, VCW values. For the CLS 400 vehicles the analysis indicates the tire load carrying capabilities exceed the maximum tire load by at least 147 kg (710 kg tire load rating minus 563 kg maximum tire load). For the CLS 400 4MATIC vehicles the analysis indicates the tire load carrying capabilities exceed the maximum tire load by at least 125 kg (709 kg tire load rating minus 584 kg maximum tire load). NHTSA verified the tire load ratings specified by MBUSA in accordance with the European Tyre and Rim Technical Organisation (ETRTO) manual. As shown by MBUSA, the tire capacities are more than adequate to handle the additional weight of the higher VCW values. MBUSA's analysis shows that the tires mounted on the subject vehicles exceed the load requirements of FMVSS No. 110.

    MBUSA also mentioned that the certification labels affixed to the subject vehicles provide the vehicle's gross axle weight ratings (GAWRs) and the gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR)in accordance with 49 CFR 567, Certification. MBUSA stated that the GAWRs and GVWR values provided on the subject vehicles are correct as labeled. These ratings are established by the vehicle manufacturer and provided as an alternative source of information consumers can use to ensure a vehicle and its' axles are not overloaded. Vehicle manufacturers specify that these ratings should not be exceeded when loading any vehicle. The agency reviewed the maximum loads on the axles and vehicles, using the higher labeled VCW values, against the certified GAWRs and GVWR of the subject vehicles. For the CLS 400 4MATIC vehicles, maximum loads were well below the GAWR and GVWR values. For the CLS 400 vehicles, the maximum loads are essentially at the certified GAWRs and GVWR values. MBUSA also stated in its petition that the platform (chassis and axles) utilized on the subject vehicles is used with other CLS vehicle lines and is designed for vehicles with higher GVWRs. It appears from this analysis the subject vehicles can safely accommodate the higher VCW loads without overload concerns.

    No comments were received during the receipt notice comment period.

    NHTSA Decision: In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA finds that MBUSA has met its burden of persuasion that the FMVSS No. 110 noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety. Accordingly, MBUSA's petition is hereby granted and MBUSA is exempted from the obligation to provide notification of, and a remedy for, that noncompliance under 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120.

    NHTSA notes that the statutory provisions (49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h)) that permit manufacturers to file petitions for a determination of inconsequentiality allow NHTSA to exempt manufacturers only from the duties found in sections 30118 and 30120, respectively, to notify owners, purchasers, and dealers of a defect or noncompliance and to remedy the defect or noncompliance. Therefore, this decision only applies to the subject vehicles that MBUSA no longer controlled at the time it determined that the noncompliance existed. However, the granting of this petition does not relieve vehicle distributors and dealers of the prohibitions on the sale, offer for sale, or introduction or delivery for introduction into interstate commerce of the noncompliant vehicles under their control after MBUSA notified them that the subject noncompliance existed.

    Authority:

    49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120: delegations of authority at 49 CFR 1.95 and 501.8.

    Jeffrey M. Giuseppe, Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
    [FR Doc. 2017-15255 Filed 7-19-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-59-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION National Highway Traffic Safety Administration [Docket No. NHTSA-2017-0015; Notice 1] Volvo Trucks North America, Receipt of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance AGENCY:

    National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), Department of Transportation (DOT).

    ACTION:

    Receipt of petition.

    SUMMARY:

    Volvo Trucks North America (VTNA), has determined that certain model year (MY) 2017 Volvo VNL and 2017 Volvo VNM heavy duty trucks do not fully comply with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 120, Tire selection and rims and motor home/recreation vehicle trailer load carrying capacity information for motor vehicles with a GVWR of more than 4,536 kilograms (10,000 pounds). VTNA filed a noncompliance information report dated February 9, 2017. VTNA also petitioned NHTSA on February 28, 2017, and revised its petition on April 29, 2017, for a decision that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.

    DATES:

    The closing date for comments on the petition is August 21, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments on this petition. Comments must refer to the docket and notice number cited in the title of this notice and submitted by any of the following methods:

    Mail: Send comments by mail addressed to 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 comments by hand to U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590. The Docket Section is open on weekdays from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. except Federal holidays.

    Electronically: Submit comments electronically by logging onto the Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) Web site at https://www.regulations.gov/. Follow the online instructions for submitting comments.

    • Comments may also be faxed to (202) 493-2251.

    Comments must be written in the English language, and be no greater than 15 pages in length, although there is no limit to the length of necessary attachments to the comments. If comments are submitted in hard copy form, please ensure that two copies are provided. If you wish to receive confirmation that comments you have submitted by mail were received, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard with the comments. Note that all comments received will be posted without change to https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided.

    All comments and supporting materials received before the close of business on the closing date indicated above will be filed in the docket and will be considered. All comments and supporting materials received after the closing date will also be filed and will be considered to the fullest extent possible.

    When the petition is granted or denied, notice of the decision will also be published in the Federal Register pursuant to the authority indicated at the end of this notice.

    All comments, background documentation, and supporting materials submitted to the docket may be viewed by anyone at the address and times given above. The documents may also be viewed on the Internet at https://www.regulations.gov by following the online instructions for accessing the dockets. The docket ID number for this petition is shown in the heading of this notice.

    DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement is available for review in a Federal Register notice published on April 11, 2000, (65 FR 19477-78).

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Overview: Volvo Trucks North America (VTNA), has determined that certain model year (MY) 2017 Volvo VNL and 2017 Volvo VNM heavy duty trucks do not fully comply with paragraph S5.2(b) of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 120, Tire selection and rims and motor home/recreation vehicle trailer load carrying capacity information for motor vehicles with a GVWR of more than 4,536 kilograms (10,000 pounds). VTNA filed a noncompliance report dated February 9, 2017, pursuant to 49 CFR part 573, Defect and Noncompliance Responsibility and Reports. VTNA also petitioned NHTSA on February 28, 2017, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h) and 49 CFR part 556, and revised its petition on April 29, 2017, to obtain an exemption from the notification and remedy requirements of 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301 on the basis that this noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.

    This notice of receipt of VTNA's petition is published under 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120 and does not represent any agency decision or other exercise of judgment concerning the merits of the petition.

    II. Vehicles Involved: Approximately 862 MY 2017 Volvo VNL and 2017 Volvo VNM heavy duty trucks, manufactured between August 15, 2016, and November 10, 2016, are potentially involved.

    III. Noncompliance: VTNA explains that the noncompliance is that the wheels on the subject vehicles incorrectly identify the rim size as 24.5″ x 8.25″ instead of 22.5″ x 8.25″, and therefore do not meet the requirements of paragraph S5.2(b) of FMVSS No. 120. Specifically, the marking error overstates the wheel diameter by 2″.

    IV. Rule Text: paragraph S5.2 of FMVSS No. 120 states:

    S5.2 Rim marking. Each rim or, at the option of the manufacturer in the case of a single-piece wheel, wheel disc shall be marked with the information listed in paragraphs (a) through (e) of this paragraph, in lettering not less than 3 millimeters high, impressed to a depth or, at the option of the manufacturer, embossed to a height of not less than 0.125 millimeters . . .

    (b) The rim size designation, and in case of multipiece rims, the rim type designation. For example: 20 x 5.50, or 20 x 5.5.

    V. Summary of VTNA's Petition: VTNA described the subject noncompliance and stated its belief that the noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.

    In support of its petition, VTNA referenced a letter to NHTSA, dated December 5, 2016, from Arconic Wheel and Transportation Products (Arconic), which is the rim manufacturer, and provided the following:

    1. A 24.5″ inch tire will not seat on the rim; therefore, if someone tries to mount a 24.5″ tire to the rim, it will not hold air and therefore cannot be inflated.

    2. When tires are replaced, the technician will select the tire based on the size and rating of the tire being replaced. When Volvo manufactured the vehicle, the tire used was a 22.5″ (i.e., the correct size for the rim). Therefore, the tires installed by Volvo have the correct size on the sidewall of the tire.

    3. Volvo is required to list the tires size and inflation pressures on the certification label as required by 49 CFR 567. The information printed on the label is the correct size, a 22.5″ inch tire and reflects the tires that were installed when manufactured. The certification label is located inside the driver's door and can be easily accessed by the tire installer.

    Volvo concluded by expressing the belief that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety, and that its petition to be exempted from providing notification of the noncompliance, as required by 49 U.S.C. 30118, and a remedy for the noncompliance, as required by 49 U.S.C. 30120, should be granted.

    To view VTNA's petition analyses in its entirety you can visit https://www.regulations.gov by following the online instructions for accessing the dockets and by using the docket ID number for this petition shown in the heading of this notice.

    NHTSA notes that the statutory provisions (49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h)) that permit manufacturers to file petitions for a determination of inconsequentiality allow NHTSA to exempt manufacturers only from the duties found in sections 30118 and 30120, respectively, to notify owners, purchasers, and dealers of a defect or noncompliance and to remedy the defect or noncompliance. Therefore, any decision on this petition only applies to the subject vehicles that VTNA no longer controlled at the time it determined that the noncompliance existed. However, any decision on this petition does not relieve vehicle distributors and dealers of the prohibitions on the sale, offer for sale, or introduction or delivery for introduction into interstate commerce of the noncompliant vehicles under their control after VTNA notified them that the subject noncompliance existed.

    Authority:

    49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120: Delegations of authority at 49 CFR 1.95 and 501.8.

    Jeffrey M. Giuseppe, Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
    [FR Doc. 2017-15253 Filed 7-19-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-59-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Reports, Forms and Record Keeping Requirements; Agency Information Collection Activity Under OMB Review AGENCY:

    National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, DOT.

    ACTION:

    Notice.

    SUMMARY:

    In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this notice announces that the Information Collection Request (ICR) abstracted below has been forwarded to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and comment. The ICR describes the nature of the information collections and their expected burden. The Federal Register Notice with a 60-day comment period was published on January 4, 2017.

    DATES:

    Comments must be submitted on or before August 21, 2017.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Coleman Sachs, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance (NEF-230), National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, West Building, 4th Floor, Room W43-481, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

    Title: 49 CFR part 566 Manufacturer Identification.

    OMB Number: 2127-0043.

    Type of Request: Extension of a Currently Approved Collection.

    Abstract: The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has requested OMB to extend that agency's approval of the information collection that is incident to NHTSA's administration of the regulations at 49 CFR part 566 Manufacturer identification. Those regulations require manufacturers of motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment, other than tires, to which a Federal motor vehicle safety standard (FMVSS) applies, to submit to NHTSA, on a one-time basis, identifying information on themselves and a description of the products that they manufacture to those standards. The information that must be submitted includes: (a) The full individual, partnership, or corporate name of the manufacturer; (b) the residence address of the manufacturer and State of incorporation, if applicable; and (c) a description of each type of motor vehicle or of covered equipment manufactured by the manufacturer, including, for motor vehicles, the approximate ranges of gross vehicle weight ratings (GVWR) for each type. The information must be submitted no later than 30 days after the manufacturer begins to manufacture motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment subject to the FMVSS. No specific form need be used for the submission of this information. NHTSA provides an online portal with a fillable web-based format for use in submitting the required information. This is described in a handbook entitled Requirements for Manufacturers of Motor Vehicles and Motor Vehicle Equipment that can be accessed on the agency's Web site at https://vpic.nhtsa.dot.gov. A description of the reporting requirement is included on pages 8 and 9 of the handbook. With changes implemented in 2015, manufacturers have been able to make these submissions using an online portal on the above agency Web site. Manufacturers who have previously submitted identifying information must ensure that the information on file is accurate and complete by submitting revised information no later than 30 days after a change in the business that affects the validity of that information has occurred.

    This information collection is necessary to ensure that manufacturers of motor vehicles and motor vehicle equipment subject to the Federal motor vehicle safety standards identify themselves and their products to NHTSA so that NHTSA may contact them in the event that one of their products is suspected or found to contain a defect related to motor vehicle safety or fails to comply with an applicable FMVSS. Manufacturers of defective or noncompliant motor vehicles or replacement motor vehicle equipment are required under 49 U.S.C. 30118 to furnish notification of the defect or noncompliance to the Secretary of Transportation, and as well as to owners, purchasers, and dealers of the motor vehicle or replacement equipment, and to remedy the defect or noncompliance without charge to the owner.

    Affected Public: New manufacturers of motor vehicles and motor vehicle equipment, other than tires, subject to the Federal motor vehicle safety standards.

    Estimated Total Annual Burden: 131 hours; $3,930.

    ADDRESSES:

    Send comments, within 30 days, to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th Street NW., Washington, DC 20503, Attention NHTSA Desk Officer.

    Comments are invited on: Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Department, including whether the information will have practical utility; the accuracy of the Department's estimate of the burden of the proposed information collection; ways to enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information to be collected; and ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

    A Comment to OMB is most effective if OMB receives it within 30 days of publication.

    Jeffrey M. Giuseppe, Acting Associate Administrator, Enforcement.
    [FR Doc. 2017-15252 Filed 7-19-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-59-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION National Highway Traffic Safety Administration [Docket No. NHTSA-2017-0011; Notice 2] Daimler Trucks North America, LLC, Grant of Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance AGENCY:

    National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), Department of Transportation (DOT).

    ACTION:

    Grant of petition.

    SUMMARY:

    Daimler Trucks North America, LLC (DTNA), has determined that certain model year (MY) 2016-2017 Freightliner trucks do not fully comply with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 101, Controls and Displays. DTNA filed a noncompliance report dated January 19, 2017, and amended it on January 25, 2017. DTNA also petitioned NHTSA on January 20, 2017, for a decision that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.

    ADDRESSES:

    For further information on this decision contact Stu Seigel, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), telephone (202) 366-5287, facsimile (202) 366-3081.

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    I. Overview: Daimler Trucks North America (DTNA), has determined that certain model year (MY) 2016-2017 Freightliner trucks do not fully comply with Table 2 of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 101, Controls and Displays. DTNA filed a noncompliance report dated January 19, 2017, and amended it on January 25, 2017, pursuant to 49 CFR part 573, Defect and Noncompliance Responsibility and Reports. DTNA also petitioned NHTSA on January 20, 2017, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h) and 49 CFR part 556, for an exemption from the notification and remedy requirements of 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301 on the basis that this noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.

    Notice of receipt of the petition was published with a 30-day public comment period, on April 7, 2017, in the Federal Register (82 FR 17069). No comments were received. To view the petition and all supporting documents log onto the Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) Web site at: https://www.regulations.gov/. Then follow the online search instructions to locate docket number “NHTSA-2017-0011.”

    II. Vehicles Involved: Affected are approximately 81,641 MY 2016-2017 versions of the following trucks, manufactured between March 2, 2015 and September 8, 2016:

    • Freightliner 108SD • Freightliner Business Class M2 • Freightliner Cascadia • Freightliner 114SD

    III. Noncompliance: DTNA explains that the noncompliance is that the Low Brake Air Pressure telltale for air brake systems displays the word “BRAKE” and a message on an adjacent display screen says “LOW AIR”, rather than the words “BRAKE AIR,” as specified in Table 2 of FMVSS No. 101. DTNA states that the telltale is accompanied by an audible alert and pressure gauges.

    IV. Rule Text: Paragraph S5 of FMVSS No. 101 provides: “Each passenger car, multipurpose passenger vehicle, truck and bus that is fitted with a control, a telltale, or an indicator listed in Table 1 or Table 2 must meet the requirements of this standard for the location, identification, color, and illumination of that control, telltale or indicator.”

    Paragraph S5.2.1 of FMVSS No. 101 provides, in pertinent part: “. . . each control, telltale and indicator that is listed in column 1 of Table 1 or Table 2 must be identified by the symbol specified for it in column 2 or the word or abbreviation specified for it in column 3 of Table 1 or Table 2.”

    BILLING CODE 4910-59-P EN20JY17.000 BILLING CODE 4910-59-C

    V. Summary of DTNA's Petition: DTNA described the subject noncompliance and stated its belief that the noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.

    In support of its petition, DTNA submitted the following reasoning:

    (a) DTNA notes that the purpose of the low brake air pressure telltale is to alert the driver to a low air condition, consistent with the requirements of FMVSS No. 121, S5.1.5 (warning signal). The word “BRAKE” instead of “BRAKE AIR,” together with a message on the display screen saying “LOW AIR!” and an audible alert that occurs in the subject vehicles would alert the driver to an air issue with the brake system. Once alerted, the driver can check the actual air pressure by reading the primary and secondary air gauges and seeing the contrasting color on the gauges indicating low pressure.

    (b) NHTSA stated in a 2005 FMVSS No. 101 rulemaking that the reason for including vehicles over 10,000 pounds in the requirements of FMVSS No. 101 is that there is a need for drivers of heavier vehicles to see and identify their displays, just as there is for drivers of lighter vehicles. See 70 FR 48295, 48298 (Aug. 17, 2005). The telltale in the subject vehicles saying “BRAKE” and the message on the display screen that says “LOW AIR!” would allow the driver to see and identify the improper functioning system as was the intent of the rule, thus serving the purpose of the FMVSS No. 101 requirement.

    (c) Drivers of commercial vehicles would conduct daily pre-trip inspections of their vehicles paying particular attention to the warning signs and gauges to ensure correct functionality of their vehicles braking system, before driving the vehicle. Drivers therefore would be very familiar with the telltales and other warnings, and their meaning, in the event a low air warning was to occur while the vehicle was driven.

    (d) There are two scenarios when a low brake air pressure condition would exist: A parked vehicle and a moving vehicle. Each of these are discussed separately below; in each scenario, there is ample warning provided to the driver of low brake air pressure.

    1. Parked Vehicle

    The driver of an air-braked vehicle must ensure that the vehicle has enough brake air pressure to operate safely. At startup, the vehicle will likely be in a low air condition. When in a low air condition the following warnings would occur, conditioning the driver over time as to the purpose of the telltale, message and audible alerts and under what conditions they are activated.

    • Red contrasting color of the telltale saying “BRAKE” • Message on the display screen that says “LOW AIR!” • Audible alert to the driver as long as the vehicle has low air • Air gauges for the primary and secondary air tanks clearly showing the air pressure in the system • Red contrasting color on the air gauges indicating when the pressure is low • Difficulty/inability of releasing the parking brakes with low air • Reduced drivability if the driver attempts to drive with the parking brakes applied 2. Moving Vehicle

    If a low brake air pressure situation occurs while driving, the function of the service brakes may be reduced or lost and, eventually if the pressure gets low enough, the parking brakes will engage. The driver must pull to the side of the road and apply the parking brakes as soon as possible. A loss of brake air pressure while driving represents a malfunctioning brake system and requires immediate action from the driver. Drivers recognize that a telltale illuminated in red represents a malfunction which needs to be remedied.

    The following warning would occur if a low air condition occurred while driving.

    • Red contrasting color of the telltale saying “BRAKE” • Message on the display screen that says “LOW AIR!” • Audible alert to the driver as long as the vehicle has low air • Air gauges for the primary and secondary air tanks clearly showing the air pressure in the system • Red contrasting color on the air gauges indicating when the pressure is low.

    (e) The functionality of both the parking brake system and the service brake system remains unaffected by the “BRAKE” telltale used in the subject vehicles.

    (f) NHTSA Precedents—DTNA notes that NHTSA has previously granted petitions for decisions of inconsequential noncompliance for similar brake telltale issues. See Docket No. NHTSA-2012-0004, 78 FR 69931 (November 21, 2013) (grant of petition for Ford Motor Company) and Docket No. NHTSA-2014-0046, 79 FR 78559 (December 30, 2014) (grant of petition for Chrysler Group, LLC). In both of these instances, the vehicles at issue did not have the exact wording as required under FMVSS No. 101. The available warnings were deemed sufficient to provide the necessary driver warning. DTNA respectfully suggest that the same is true for the subject vehicles: The red “BRAKE” telltale and the “LOW AIR!” pop-up message, together with other warnings and alerts, are fully sufficient to warn the driver of a low brake air pressure situation.

    DTNA concluded by expressing the belief that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety, and that its petition to be exempted from providing notification of the noncompliance, as required by 49 U.S.C. 30118, and a remedy for the noncompliance, as required by 49 U.S.C. 30120, should be granted.

    NHTSA'S Decision

    NHTSA's Analysis: NHTSA has reviewed DTNA's analyses that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Specifically, the telltale marking for low brake air pressure says “Brake” instead of “Brake Air” as required in table 2 of FMVSS No. 101 and FMVSS No. 121. We believe that this incomplete labeling poses no risk to motor vehicle safety because multiple sources of information, as discussed below, are simultaneously activated to properly warn the driver of the low air condition.

    1. When a low air pressure situation exists, for both a parked or moving vehicle, the “Brake” telltale will activate in red letters with a black background. There are no requirements in FMVSS No. 101 or 121 for the color of the telltale, but DTNA's use of red, which is an accepted color representing an urgent condition, provides a definitive indication of a situation that needs attention.

    2. Activation of the “Brake” telltale is accompanied by illumination on the instrument cluster message display screen with the words “LOW AIR!” in white, upper case lettering with a green background. The height of the lettering appears greater than that of the surrounding telltales and is followed by an exclamation point for increased importance. In a follow-up telephone conversation with DTNA after notice of receipt of petition was published, DTNA confirmed that the lettering height was one quarter inch. Although there is no lettering height requirement for “Brake Air,” and the specification is only that the warning be visible, for reference, a common minimum height for many FMVSS visual indicators is one-eighth inch. This combined with the green rectangular background, which also is comparatively large, is readily visible to the operator and is unlikely to be overlooked. Both the “BRAKE” telltale and the “LOW AIR!” message are in clear view of the driver and when activated will alert the driver of a brake system malfunction.

    3. Simultaneous to illumination of both the “Brake” telltale and “LOW AIR!” in the message center, is activation of an audible alert, further notifying the operator that a malfunction exists requiring corrective action. Although the alert would not in and of itself identify the problem, a driver would be prompted by the warning tone to heed the telltales and warning messages activated in the instrument cluster (i.e., “Brake” and “LOW AIR!”).

    4. In a low pressure situation, the operator is provided additional feedback by the primary and secondary instrument cluster air gauges which are marked with PSI numerical values along with red-delineated ranges where the needle pointers would be positioned during a low pressure condition.

    5. NHTSA agrees with DTNA that for a vehicle that is parked, if a low air condition were present, along with the operator feedback described above, there would be difficulty or an inability to release the parking brake and/or reduced drivability, as sufficient air in the system is required to release the parking brake.

    6. Further, NHTSA agrees with DTNA's contention that the functionality of the parking brake system and the braking performance of the service brake system remains unaffected by use of the telltale word “Brake” instead of “Brake Air” on the subject vehicles.

    7. Lastly, NHTSA believes that, as these affected trucks are predominately used as commercial vehicles with professional drivers, operators will monitor their vehicle's condition and take note of any warning signs and gauge readings to ensure proper functionality of all systems. As DTNA states, and we agree, drivers will be familiar with the meaning of telltales and other warnings and the feedback provided to the driver in these vehicles if a low brake pressure condition exists would be well understood.

    NHTSA concludes that simultaneous activation of red “Brake” telltale with a black contrasting background, message center wording “LOW AIR!” in large white letters on a substantially sized green contrasting background, and an audible alert for a low air pressure condition, along with the primary and secondary air gauge indicators, and the reduced drivability of the vehicles under a low air pressure condition, provides adequate notification to the operator that a brake malfunction exists. NHTSA further concludes that the discrepancy with the labeling requirement is unlikely to lead to any misunderstanding since other sources of correct information beyond the “Brake” telltale, are always provided.

    NHTSA's Decision: In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA finds that DTNA has met its burden of persuasion that the FMVSS No. 101 noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety. Accordingly, DTNA's petition is hereby granted and DTNA is consequently exempted from the obligation to provide notification of, and remedy for, the subject noncompliance in the affected vehicles under 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120.

    NHTSA notes that the statutory provisions (49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h)) that permit manufacturers to file petitions for a determination of inconsequentiality allow NHTSA to exempt manufacturers only from the duties found in sections 30118 and 30120, respectively, to notify owners, purchasers, and dealers of a defect or noncompliance and to remedy the defect or noncompliance. Therefore, this decision only applies to the subject vehicles that DTNA no longer controlled at the time it determined that the noncompliance existed. However, the granting of this petition does not relieve vehicle distributors and dealers of the prohibitions on the sale, offer for sale, or introduction or delivery for introduction into interstate commerce of the noncompliant vehicles under their control after DTNA notified them that the subject noncompliance existed.

    Authority:

    49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120: delegations of authority at 49 CFR 1.95 and 501.8.

    Jeffrey M. Giuseppe, Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
    [FR Doc. 2017-15256 Filed 7-19-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-59-P
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION National Highway Traffic Safety Administration [U.S. DOT Docket No. NHTSA-2017-0051] Reports, Forms, and Record Keeping Requirements AGENCY:

    National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), DOT.

    ACTION:

    Request for public comment on proposed collection of information.

    SUMMARY:

    Before a Federal agency can collect certain information from the public, it must receive approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). Under procedures established by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, before seeking OMB approval, Federal agencies must solicit public comment on proposed collections of information, including extensions and reinstatements of previously approved collections. This document describes the collection of information for which NHTSA intends to seek OMB approval.

    DATES:

    Comments must be received on or before September 18, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    You may submit comments identified by DOT Docket Number NHTSA-2017-0051 using any of the following methods:

    Electronic submissions: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting comments.

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

    Hand Delivery: 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.

    Fax: 1-202-493-2251.

    Each submission must include the agency name and the docket number for this notice. Note that all comments received will be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Kathy J. Sifrit, Contracting Officer's Representative, Office of Behavioral Safety Research (NPD-320), National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, W46-466, Washington, DC 20590. Dr. Sifrit's phone number is 202-366-0868, and her email address is [email protected]

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, before an agency submits a proposed collection of information to OMB for approval, it must publish a document in the Federal Register providing a 60-day comment period and otherwise consult with members of the public and affected agencies concerning each proposed collection of information. The OMB has promulgated regulations describing what must be included in such a document. Under OMB's regulations (at 5 CFR 1320.8(d)), an agency must ask for public comment on the following:

    (i) 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;

    (ii) 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;

    (iii) How to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

    (iv) How 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, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.

    In compliance with these requirements, NHTSA asks public comment on the following proposed collection of information:

    Title: Older Driver Rearview Video Systems.

    Type of Request: New information collection.

    OMB Clearance Number: None.

    Form Number: NHTSA Forms 1398 and 1399.

    Requested Expiration Date of Approval: 3 years from date of approval.

    Summary of the Collection of Information: The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) proposes to collect information from older licensed drivers about their driving performance, driving habits, and levels of familiarity with rearview video systems (RVSs), and to measure their ability to avoid obstacles while backing using an RVS as compared to using only mirrors and shoulder checks. Following initial data collection, the research team will develop a training protocol based on common errors participants made during the first study segment. During the training segment of the study, a new sample of participants will complete backing tasks similar to those in the first segment. Then participants will be randomly assigned to either a training group or a placebo group. Following training all participants will again complete a series of backing tasks. Analyses will test whether the training improved drivers' ability to use the RVS appropriately. This research would give the traffic safety community greater insight into the extent to which older drivers are able to use RVSs effectively and whether training in proper use of the devices improves their ability to use the systems to back safely.

    Study participation will be voluntary and will be solicited among residents of residential communities, senior centers, and/or service- or faith-based organizations in the southeastern Pennsylvania area through community newsletters and other community media. Interested older adults will attend a public meeting to learn about the research opportunity including inclusion and exclusion criteria. Following the meeting, interested older adults will provide their name and telephone number on a signup sheet. A project assistant will then call individuals on the signup sheet and conduct a brief telephone pre-screening to ensure that all participants meet inclusion and exclusion criteria; the project assistant will also answer questions about study participation. For interested candidate participants who meet inclusion criteria, the project assistant will make appointments to conduct either a controlled, off-road backing performance evaluation or a training protocol evaluation, at a mutually convenient time. At the beginning of the appointment, the project assistant will obtain a signature from each participant on an informed consent. A driving rehabilitation specialist (DRS) will then conduct the off-road backing performance evaluation or training protocol evaluation. Participants will then receive compensation of $100 for study participation.

    Throughout the project, the privacy of all participants would be protected. Access to the participants' data would be controlled using password-protection for both the computer and the files. Personally-identifiable information, such as participants' postal addresses, would be kept separate from the data collected and would be stored in a wall safe in password-protected folders on an external hard drive that is only accessible to study staff who need to access such information. In addition, all participant data would be reported in aggregate, and identifying information would not be used in any reports resulting from this data collection effort. Rigorous de-identification procedures would be used to prevent participants from being identified through reconstructive means.

    Description of the Need for the Information and Proposed Use of the Information—NHTSA was established by the Highway Safety Act of l970 (23 U.S.C. 101) to carry out a Congressional mandate to reduce deaths, injuries, and economic losses resulting from motor vehicle crashes on the Nation's highways. As part of this mandate, NHTSA is authorized to conduct research as a foundation for the development of traffic safety programs.

    A 2014 final rule issued by NHTSA (Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 111, “Rear visibility”) requires rear visibility technology in all new vehicles with a Gross Vehicle Weight Rating (GVWR) under 10,000 pounds by May 2018, but the anticipated safety gains depend in part on the extent to which drivers understand and use the technology as intended. This study has two purposes. The first purpose is to assess the driving performance of adults 50 and older using mirrors and an RVS while operating a motor vehicle in reverse. The second purpose is to develop, implement, and assess the effectiveness of an RVS training protocol. Findings will provide information about whether people ages 50 and older differ in backing performance when using RVS versus only mirrors, whether elements of RVS use are particularly difficult for this cohort, and whether RVS training improves older drivers' ability to avoid obstacles while backing. NHTSA will use the information to inform recommendations to the driving public regarding safe backing practices.

    Description of the Likely Respondents (Including Estimated Number, and Proposed Frequency of Response to the Collection of Information)—Respondents will include independently living licensed drivers, age 50 and older, in the southeastern Pennsylvania area. It is estimated that 300 one-time telephone conversations will be conducted with those who sign up after the public meeting, to yield 200 participants. Of the 200 participants, 120 will complete a one-time controlled, off-road backing performance evaluation that will inform the development of the training. The remaining 80 will complete the one-time training protocol evaluation.

    Estimate of the Total Annual Reporting and Record Keeping Burden Resulting from the Collection of Information—The total estimated burden for this information collection is 365 hours. The 300 telephone pre-screening will average 15 minutes in length including introduction, qualifying questions, potential participant questions, logistical questions, and conclusion for an estimated total burden of 75 hours. For the 120 participants who complete the controlled, off-road backing performance evaluation, the estimated average burden is 75 minutes (15 minutes for the informed consent form plus 60 minutes for the backing evaluation) for a total estimate of 150 hours. For the 80 participants who complete the training protocol evaluation, the estimated average burden is 105 minutes because of the additional 30 minutes for training (or placebo) for a total estimate of 140 hours. Participants will incur no costs from the data collection and participants will incur no record keeping burden and no record keeping cost from the information collection.

    Authority:

    44 U.S.C. Section 3506(c)(2)(A).

    Issued in Washington, DC on July 17, 2017. Jeff Michael, Associate Administrator, Research and Program Development.
    [FR Doc. 2017-15219 Filed 7-19-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-59-P
    82 138 Thursday, July 20, 2017 Proposed Rules Part II Department of Health and Human Services Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services 42 CFR Parts 416 and 419 Medicare Program: Hospital Outpatient Prospective Payment and Ambulatory Surgical Center Payment Systems and Quality Reporting Programs; Proposed Rule DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services 42 CFR Parts 416 and 419 [CMS-1678-P] RIN 0938-AT03 Medicare Program: Hospital Outpatient Prospective Payment and Ambulatory Surgical Center Payment Systems and Quality Reporting Programs AGENCY:

    Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), HHS.

    ACTION:

    Proposed rule.

    SUMMARY:

    This proposed rule would revise the Medicare hospital outpatient prospective payment system (OPPS) and the Medicare ambulatory surgical center (ASC) payment system for CY 2018 to implement changes arising from our continuing experience with these systems and certain provisions under the 21st Century Cures Act (Pub. L. 114-255). In this proposed rule, we describe the proposed changes to the amounts and factors used to determine the payment rates for Medicare services paid under the OPPS and those paid under the ASC payment system. In addition, this proposed rule would update and refine the requirements for the Hospital Outpatient Quality Reporting (OQR) Program and the ASC Quality Reporting (ASCQR) Program.

    DATES:

    Comment period: To be assured consideration, comments on this proposed rule must be received at one of the addresses provided in the ADDRESSES section no later than 5 p.m. EST on September 11, 2017.

    ADDRESSES:

    In commenting, please refer to file code CMS-1678-P when commenting on the issues in this proposed rule. Because of staff and resource limitations, we cannot accept comments by facsimile (FAX) transmission.

    You may submit comments in one of four ways (no duplicates, please):

    1. Electronically. You may (and we encourage you to) submit electronic comments on this regulation to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions under the “submit a comment” tab.

    2. By regular mail. You may mail written comments to the following address ONLY:

    Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, Department of Health and Human Services, Attention: CMS-1678-P, P.O. Box 8013, Baltimore, MD 21244-1850.

    Please allow sufficient time for mailed comments to be received before the close of the comment period.

    3. By express or overnight mail. You may send written comments via express or overnight mail to the following address ONLY:

    Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, Department of Health and Human Services, Attention: CMS-1678-P, Mail Stop C4-26-05, 7500 Security Boulevard, Baltimore, MD 21244-1850.

    4. By hand or courier. If you prefer, you may deliver (by hand or courier) your written comments before the close of the comment period to either of the following addresses:

    a. For delivery in Washington, DC—

    Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, Department of Health and Human Services, Room 445-G, Hubert H. Humphrey Building, 200 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20201.

    (Because access to the interior of the Hubert H. Humphrey Building is not readily available to persons without Federal Government identification, commenters are encouraged to leave their comments in the CMS drop slots located in the main lobby of the building. A stamp-in clock is available for persons wishing to retain a proof of filing by stamping in and retaining an extra copy of the comments being filed.)

    b. For delivery in Baltimore, MD—

    Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, Department of Health and Human Services, 7500 Security Boulevard, Baltimore, MD 21244-1850.

    If you intend to deliver your comments to the Baltimore address, please call the telephone number (410) 786-7195 in advance to schedule your arrival with one of our staff members.

    Comments mailed to the addresses indicated as appropriate for hand or courier delivery may be delayed and received after the comment period.

    For information on viewing public comments, we refer readers to the beginning of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section.

    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    (We note that public comments must be submitted through one of the four channels outlined in the ADDRESSES section above. Comments may not be submitted via email.)

    Advisory Panel on Hospital Outpatient Payment (HOP Panel), contact the HOP Panel mailbox at [email protected].

    Ambulatory Surgical Center (ASC) Payment System, contact Elisabeth Daniel at 410-786-0237 or via email [email protected].

    Ambulatory Surgical Center Quality Reporting (ASCQR) Program Administration, Validation, and Reconsideration Issues, contact Anita Bhatia at 410-786-7236 or via email [email protected].

    Ambulatory Surgical Center Quality Reporting (ASCQR) Program Measures, contact Vinitha Meyyur at 410-786-8819 or via email [email protected].

    Blood and Blood Products, contact Josh McFeeters at 410-786-9732 or via email [email protected].

    Cancer Hospital Payments, contact Scott Talaga at 410-786-4142 or via email [email protected].

    Care Management Services, contact Scott Talaga at 410-786-4142 or via email [email protected].

    CPT Codes, contact Marjorie Baldo at 410-786-4617 or via email [email protected].

    CMS Web Posting of the OPPS and ASC Payment Files, contact Chuck Braver at 410-786-6719 or via email [email protected].

    Composite APCs (Low Dose Brachytherapy and Multiple Imaging), contact Twi Jackson at 410-786-1159 or via email [email protected].

    Comprehensive APCs (C-APCs), contact Lela Strong at 410-786-3213 or via email [email protected].

    Hospital Outpatient Quality Reporting (OQR) Program Administration, Validation, and Reconsideration Issues, contact Anita Bhatia at 410-786-7236 or via email [email protected].

    Hospital Outpatient Quality Reporting (OQR) Program Measures, contact Vinitha Meyyur at 410-786-8819 or via email [email protected].

    Hospital Outpatient Visits (Emergency Department Visits and Critical Care Visits), contact Twi Jackson at 410-786-1159 or via email [email protected].

    Inpatient Only (IPO) Procedures List, contact Lela Strong at 410-786-3213 or via email [email protected].

    New Technology Intraocular Lenses (NTIOLs), contact Scott Talaga at 410-786-4142 or via email [email protected].

    No Cost/Full Credit and Partial Credit Devices, contact Twi Jackson at 410-786-1159 or via email [email protected].

    OPPS Brachytherapy, contact Scott Talaga at 410-786-4142 or via email [email protected].

    OPPS Data (APC Weights, Conversion Factor, Copayments, Cost-to-Charge Ratios (CCRs), Data Claims, Geometric Mean Calculation, Outlier Payments, and Wage Index), contact Erick Chuang at 410-786-1816 or via email [email protected] or contact Elisabeth Daniel at 410-786-0237 or via email [email protected].

    OPPS Drugs, Radiopharmaceuticals, Biologicals, and Biosimilar Products, contact Elisabeth Daniel at 410-786-0237 or via email [email protected].

    OPPS New Technology Procedures/Services, contact the New Technology APC email at [email protected].

    OPPS Exceptions to the 2 Times Rule, contact Marjorie Baldo at 410-786-4617 or via email [email protected].

    OPPS Packaged Items/Services, contact Elisabeth Daniel at 410-786-0237 or via email [email protected].

    OPPS Pass-Through Devices, contact the Device Pass-Through email at [email protected].

    OPPS Status Indicators (SI) and Comment Indicators (CI), contact Marina Kushnirova at 410-786-2682 or via email [email protected].

    Partial Hospitalization Program (PHP) and Community Mental Health Center (CMHC) Issues, contact the PHP Payment Policy Mailbox at [email protected].

    Potential Revisions to the Laboratory Date of Service Policy, contact Rasheeda Johnson at 410-786-3434 or via email [email protected] or Susan Janeczko at 410-786-4529 or via email [email protected].

    Rural Hospital Payments, contact Josh McFeeters at 410-786-9732 or via email [email protected].

    Skin Substitutes, contact Josh McFeeters at 410-786-9732 or via email [email protected].

    All Other Issues Related to Hospital Outpatient and Ambulatory Surgical Center Payments Not Previously Identified, contact Lela Strong at 410-786-3213 or via email [email protected].

    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Inspection of Public Comments: All comments received before the close of the comment period are available for viewing by the public, including any personally identifiable or confidential business information that is included in a comment. We post all comments received before the close of the comment period on the following Web site as soon as possible after they have been received: http://www.regulations.gov/. Follow the search instructions on that Web site to view public comments.

    Comments received timely will also be available for public inspection, generally beginning approximately 3 weeks after publication of the rule, at the headquarters of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, 7500 Security Boulevard, Baltimore, MD 21244, on Monday through Friday of each week from 8:30 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. EST. To schedule an appointment to view public comments, phone 1-800-743-3951.

    Electronic Access

    This Federal Register document is also available from the Federal Register online database through Federal Digital System (FDsys), a service of the U.S. Government Printing Office. This database can be accessed via the Internet at https://www.thefederalregister.org/fdsys/.

    Addenda Available Only Through the Internet on the CMS Web Site

    In the past, a majority of the Addenda referred to in our OPPS/ASC proposed and final rules were published in the Federal Register as part of the annual rulemakings. However, beginning with the CY 2012 OPPS/ASC proposed rule, all of the Addenda no longer appear in the Federal Register as part of the annual OPPS/ASC proposed and final rules to decrease administrative burden and reduce costs associated with publishing lengthy tables. Instead, these Addenda are published and available only on the CMS Web site. The Addenda relating to the OPPS are available at: https://www.cms.gov/Medicare/Medicare-Fee-for-Service-Payment/HospitalOutpatientPPS/index.html. The Addenda relating to the ASC payment system are available at: https://www.cms.gov/Medicare/Medicare-Fee-for-Service-Payment/HospitalOutpatientPPS/index.html.

    Alphabetical List of Acronyms Appearing in This Federal Register Document AHA American Hospital Association AMA American Medical Association AMI Acute myocardial infarction APC Ambulatory Payment Classification API Application programming interface APU Annual payment update ASC Ambulatory surgical center ASCQR Ambulatory Surgical Center Quality Reporting ASP Average sales price AUC Appropriate use criteria AWP Average wholesale price BBA Balanced Budget Act of 1997, Public Law 105-33 BBRA Medicare, Medicaid, and SCHIP [State Children's Health Insurance Program] Balanced Budget Refinement Act of 1999, Public Law 106-113 BIPA Medicare, Medicaid, and SCHIP Benefits Improvement and Protection Act of 2000, Public Law 106-554 BLS Bureau of Labor Statistics CAH Critical access hospital CAHPS Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems CAP Competitive Acquisition Program C-APC Comprehensive Ambulatory Payment Classification CASPER Certification and Survey Provider Enhanced Reporting CAUTI Catheter-associated urinary tract infection CBSA Core-Based Statistical Area CCM Chronic care management CCN CMS Certification Number CCR Cost-to-charge ratio CDC Centers for Disease Control and Prevention CED Coverage with Evidence Development CERT Comprehensive Error Rate Testing CFR Code of Federal Regulations CI Comment indicator CLABSI Central Line [Catheter] Associated Blood Stream Infection CLFS Clinical Laboratory Fee Schedule CMHC Community mental health center CMS Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services CoP Condition of participation CPI-U Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers CPT Current Procedural Terminology (copyrighted by the American Medical Association) CR Change request CRC Colorectal cancer CSAC Consensus Standards Approval Committee CT Computed tomography CV Coefficient of variation CY Calendar year DFO Designated Federal Official DME Durable medical equipment DMEPOS Durable Medical Equipment, Prosthetic, Orthotics, and Supplies DOS Date of service DRA Deficit Reduction Act of 2005, Public Law 109-171 DSH Disproportionate share hospital EACH Essential access community hospital EAM Extended assessment and management ECD Expanded criteria donor EBRT External beam radiotherapy ECG Electrocardiogram ED Emergency department EDTC Emergency department transfer communication EHR Electronic health record E/M Evaluation and management ESRD End-stage renal disease ESRD QIP End-Stage Renal Disease Quality Improvement Program FACA Federal Advisory Committee Act, Public Law 92-463 FDA Food and Drug Administration FFS [Medicare] Fee-for-service FY Fiscal year GAO Government Accountability Office GI Gastrointestinal GME Graduate medical education HAI Healthcare-associated infection HCAHPS Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems HCERA Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010, Public Law 111-152 HCP Health care personnel HCPCS Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System HCRIS Healthcare Cost Report Information System HCUP Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project HEU Highly enriched uranium HH QRP Home Health Quality Reporting Program HHS Department of Health and Human Services HIE Health information exchange HIPAA Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, Public Law 104-191 HOP Hospital Outpatient Payment [Panel] HOPD Hospital outpatient department HOP QDRP Hospital Outpatient Quality Data Reporting Program HPMS Health Plan Management System IBD Inflammatory bowel disease ICC Interclass correlation coefficient ICD Implantable cardioverter defibrillator ICD-9-CM International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification ICD-10 International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision ICH In-center hemodialysis ICR Information collection requirement IDTF Independent diagnostic testing facility IGI IHS Global Insight, Inc. IHS Indian Health Service I/OCE Integrated Outpatient Code Editor IOL Intraocular lens IORT Intraoperative radiation treatment IPFQR Inpatient Psychiatric Facility Quality Reporting IPPS [Hospital] Inpatient Prospective Payment System IQR [Hospital] Inpatient Quality Reporting IRF Inpatient rehabilitation facility IRF QRP Inpatient Rehabilitation Facility Quality Reporting Program IT Information technology LCD Local coverage determination LDR Low dose rate LTCH Long-term care hospital LTCHQR Long-Term Care Hospital Quality Reporting MAC Medicare Administrative Contractor MACRA Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act of 2015, Public Law 114-10 MAP Measure Application Partnership MDH Medicare-dependent, small rural hospital MedPAC Medicare Payment Advisory Commission MEG Magnetoencephalography MFP Multifactor productivity MGCRB Medicare Geographic Classification Review Board MIEA-TRHCA Medicare Improvements and Extension Act under Division B, Title I of the Tax Relief Health Care Act of 2006, Public Law 109-432 MIPPA Medicare Improvements for Patients and Providers Act of 2008, Public Law 110-275 MLR Medical loss ratio MMA Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003, Public Law 108-173 MMEA Medicare and Medicaid Extenders Act of 2010, Public Law 111-309 MMSEA Medicare, Medicaid, and SCHIP Extension Act of 2007, Public Law 110-173 MPFS Medicare Physician Fee Schedule MR Medical review MRA Magnetic resonance angiography MRgFUS Magnetic Resonance Image Guided Focused Ultrasound MRI Magnetic resonance imaging MRSA Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus Aures MS-DRG Medicare severity diagnosis-related group MSIS Medicaid Statistical Information System MUC Measure under consideration NCCI National Correct Coding Initiative NEMA National Electrical Manufacturers Association NHSN National Healthcare Safety Network NOTA National Organ and Transplantation Act NOS Not otherwise specified NPI National Provider Identifier NQF National Quality Forum NQS National Quality Strategy NTIOL New technology intraocular lens NUBC National Uniform Billing Committee OACT [CMS] Office of the Actuary OBRA Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1996, Public Law 99-509 O/E Observed to expected event OIG [HHS] Office of the Inspector General OMB Office of Management and Budget ONC Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology OPD [Hospital] Outpatient Department OPPS [Hospital] Outpatient Prospective Payment System OPSF Outpatient Provider-Specific File OQR [Hospital] Outpatient Quality Reporting OT Occupational therapy PAMA Protecting Access to Medicare Act of 2014, Public Law 113-93 PCHQR PPS-Exempt Cancer Hospital Quality Reporting PCR Payment-to-cost ratio PDC Per day cost PDE Prescription Drug Event PE Practice expense PEPPER Program Evaluation Payment Patterns Electronic Report PHP Partial hospitalization program PHSA Public Health Service Act, Public Law 96-88 PN Pneumonia POS Place of service PPI Producer Price Index PPS Prospective payment system PQRI Physician Quality Reporting Initiative PQRS Physician Quality Reporting System QDC Quality data code QIO Quality Improvement Organization RFA Regulatory Flexibility Act RHQDAPU Reporting Hospital Quality Data for Annual Payment Update RTI Research Triangle Institute, International RVU Relative value unit SAD Self-administered drug SAMS Secure Access Management Services SCH Sole community hospital SCOD Specified covered outpatient drugs SES Socioeconomic status SI Status indicator SIA Systems Improvement Agreement SIR Standardized infection ratio SNF Skilled nursing facility SRS Stereotactic radiosurgery SRTR Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients SSA Social Security Administration SSI Surgical site infection TEP Technical Expert Panel TOPs Transitional Outpatient Payments USPSTF United States Preventive Services Task Force VBP Value-based purchasing WAC Wholesale acquisition cost Table of Contents I. Summary and Background A. Executive Summary of This Document 1. Purpose 2. Summary of the Major Provisions 3. Summary of Costs and Benefits B. Legislative and Regulatory Authority for the Hospital OPPS C. Excluded OPPS Services and Hospitals D. Prior Rulemaking E. Advisory Panel on Hospital Outpatient Payment (the HOP Panel or the Panel) 1. Authority of the Panel 2. Establishment of the Panel 3. Panel Meetings and Organizational Structure F. Public Comments Received in Response to CY 2017 OPPS/ASC Final Rule With Comment Period II. Proposed Updates Affecting OPPS Payments A. Proposed Recalibration of APC Relative Payment Weights 1. Database Construction a. Database Source and Methodology b. Proposed Calculation and Use of Cost-to-Charge Ratios (CCRs) 2. Proposed Data Development Process and Calculation of Costs Used for Ratesetting a. Proposed Calculation of Single Procedure APC Criteria-Based Costs (1) Blood and Blood Products (2) Brachytherapy Sources b. Proposed Comprehensive APCs (C-APCs) for CY 2018 (1) Background (2) Proposed Additional C-APCs for CY 2018 (3) Brachytherapy Insertion Procedures (4) C-APC 5627 (Level 7 Radiation Stereotactic Radiosurgery (SRS)) (5) Proposed Complexity Adjustment for Blue Light Cystoscopy Procedures (6) Analysis of C-APC Packaging under the OPPS c. Proposed Calculation of Composite APC Criteria-Based Costs (1) Mental Health Services Composite APC (2) Multiple Imaging Composite APCs (APCs 8004, 8005, 8006, 8007, and 8008) 3. Proposed Changes to Packaged Items and Services a. Background and Rationale for Packaging in the OPPS b. CY 2018 Drug Administration Packaging Proposal (1) Background of Drug Administration Packaging Policy (2) Proposed Packaging of Level 1 and Level 2 Drug Administration Services (3) Comment Solicitation Regarding Unconditionally Packaging Drug Administration Add-On Codes c. Analysis of Packaging Services in the OPPS d. Comment Solicitation on Packaging of Items and Services Under the OPPS 4. Proposed Calculation of OPPS Scaled Payment Weights B. Proposed Conversion Factor Update C. Proposed Wage Index Changes D. Proposed Statewide Average Default CCRs E. Proposed Adjustment for Rural Sole Community Hospitals (SCHs) and Essential Access Community Hospitals (EACHs) Under Section 1833(t)(13)(B) of the Act F. Proposed Payment Adjustment for Certain Cancer Hospitals for CY 2018 1. Background 2. Proposed Policy for CY 2018 G. Proposed Hospital Outpatient Outlier Payments 1. Background 2. Proposed Outlier Calculation for CY 2018 H. Proposed Calculation of an Adjusted Medicare Payment From the National Unadjusted Medicare Payment I. Proposed Beneficiary Copayments 1. Background 2. Proposed OPPS Copayment Policy 3. Proposed Calculation of an Adjusted Copayment Amount for an APC Group III. Proposed OPPS Ambulatory Payment Classification (APC) Group Policies A. Proposed OPPS Treatment of New CPT and Level II HCPCS Codes 1. Proposed Treatment of New HCPCS Codes That Were Effective April 1, 2017 for Which We Are Soliciting Public Comments in This CY 2018 OPPS/ASC Proposed Rule 2. Proposed Treatment of New HCPCS Codes Effective July 1, 2017 for Which We Are Soliciting Public Comments in This CY 2018 OPPS/ASC Proposed Rule 3. Proposed Process for New Level II HCPCS Codes That Will Be Effective October 1, 2017 and January 1, 2018 for Which We Will Be Soliciting Public Comments in the CY 2018 OPPS/ASC Final Rule With Comment Period 4. Proposed Treatment of New and Revised CY 2018 Category I and III CPT Codes That Will Be Effective January 1, 2018 for Which We Are Soliciting Public Comments in This CY 2018 OPPS/ASC Proposed Rule 5. Proposed Care Management Coding Changes Effective January 1, 2018 (APCs 5821 and 5822) B. Proposed OPPS Changes—Variations Within APCs 1. Background 2. Application of the 2 Times Rule 3. Proposed APC Exceptions to the 2 Times Rule C. Proposed New Technology APCs 1. Background 2. Proposed Revised and Additional New Technology APC Groups 3. Proposed Procedures Assigned to New Technology APC Groups for CY 2018 a. Overall Proposal b. Magnetic Resonance-Guided Focused Ultrasound Surgery (MRgFUS) (APCs 1537, 5114, and 5415) c. Retinal Prosthesis Implant Procedure d. Pathogen Test for Platelets D. Proposed OPPS APC-Specific Policies 1. Blood-Driven Hematopoietic Cell Harvesting 2. Radiology and Imaging Procedures and Services a. Imaging APCs b. Non-Ophthalmic Fluorescent Vascular Angiography (APC 5524) 3. Comment Solicitation on Intraocular Procedure APCs IV. Proposed OPPS Payment for Devices A. Proposed Pass-Through Payments for Devices 1. Beginning Eligibility Date for Device Pass-Through Status and Quarterly Expiration of Device Pass-Through Payments a. Background b. Expiration of Transitional Pass-Through Payment for Certain Devices 2. New Device Pass-Through Applications a. Background b. Applications Received for Device Pass-Through Payment for CY 2018 B. Proposed Device-Intensive Procedures 1. Background 2. HCPCS Code-Level Device-Intensive Determination 3. Changes to the Device Edit Policy for CY 2017 and Subsequent Years 4. Proposed Adjustment to OPPS Payment for No Cost/Full Credit and Partial Credit Devices a. Background b. Policy for CY 2017 and Subsequent Years 5. Proposed Payment Policy for Low-Volume Device-Intensive Procedures V. Proposed OPPS Payment Changes for Drugs, Biologicals, and Radiopharmaceuticals A. Proposed OPPS Transitional Pass-Through Payment for Additional Costs of Drugs, Biologicals, and Radiopharmaceuticals 1. Background 2. 3-Year Transitional Pass-Through Payment Period for All Pass-Through Drugs, Biologicals, and Radiopharmaceuticals and Expiration of Pass-Through Status 3. Proposed Drugs and Biologicals With Expiring Pass-Through Payment Status in CY 2017 4. Proposed Drugs, Biologicals, and Radiopharmaceuticals With New or Continuing Pass-Through Status in CY 2018 5. Proposed Provisions for Reducing Transitional Pass-Through Payments for Policy-Packaged Drugs, Biologicals, and Radiopharmaceuticals to Offset Costs Packaged Into APC Groups B. Proposed OPPS Payment for Drugs, Biologicals, and Radiopharmaceuticals Without Pass-Through Payment Status 1. Proposed Criteria for Packaging Payment for Drugs, Biologicals, and Radiopharmaceuticals a. Proposed Packaging Threshold b. Proposed Packaging of Payment for HCPCS Codes That Describe Certain Drugs, Certain Biologicals, and Therapeutic Radiopharmaceuticals Under the Cost Threshold (“Threshold-Packaged Policy”) c. Policy Packaged Drugs, Biologicals, and Radiopharmaceuticals d. Proposed High Cost/Low Cost Threshold for Packaged Skin Substitutes e. Proposed Packaging Determination for HCPCS Codes That Describe the Same Drug or Biological But Different Dosages 2. Proposed Payment for Drugs and Biologicals Without Pass-Through Status That Are Not Packaged a. Payment for Specified Covered Outpatient Drugs (SCODs) and Other Separately Payable and Packaged Drugs and Biologicals b. Proposed CY 2018 Payment Policy c. Biosimilar Biological Products 3. Proposed Payment Policy for Therapeutic Radiopharmaceuticals 4. Proposed Payment Adjustment Policy for Radioisotopes Derived From Non-Highly Enriched Uranium Sources 5. Proposed Payment for Blood Clotting Factors 6. Proposed Payment for Nonpass-Through Drugs, Biologicals, and Radiopharmaceuticals With HCPCS Codes But Without OPPS Hospital Claims Data 7. Alternative Payment Methodology for Drugs Purchased Under the 340B Drug Discount Program VI. Proposed Estimate of OPPS Transitional Pass-Through Spending for Drugs, Biologicals, Radiopharmaceuticals, and Devices A. Background B. Estimate of Pass-Through Spending VII. Proposed OPPS Payment for Hospital Outpatient Visits and Critical Care Services VIII. Proposed Payment for Partial Hospitalization Services A. Background B. Proposed PHP APC Update for CY 2018 1. Proposed PHP APC Geometric Mean Per Diem Costs 2. Development of the Proposed PHP APC Geometric Mean Per Diem Costs a. CMHC Data Preparation: Data Trims, Exclusions, and CCR Adjustments b. Hospital-Based PHP Data Preparation: Data Trims and Exclusions 3. PHP Service Utilization Updates 4. Minimum Service Requirement: 20 Hours Per Week C. Proposed Outlier Policy for CMHCs IX. Proposed Procedures That Would Be Paid Only as Inpatient Procedures A. Background B. Proposed Changes to the Inpatient Only (IPO) List C. Solicitation of Public Comments on the Possible Removal of Partial Hip Arthroplasty (PHA) and Total Hip Arthroplasty (THA) Procedures From the IPO List 1. Background 2. Topics and Questions for Public Comments X. Proposed Nonrecurring Policy Changes A. Payment for Certain Items and Services Furnished by Certain Off-Campus Departments of a Provider 1. Background 2. Summary of Public Comments and Our Responses Regarding Expansion of Services by Excepted Off-Campus Hospital Outpatient Departments 3. Implementation of Section 16002 of the 21st Century Cures Act (Treatment of Cancer Hospitals in Off Campus Outpatient Department of a Provider Policy) B. Medicare Site-of-Service Price Transparency (Section 4011 of the 21st Century Cures Act) C. Appropriate Use Criteria for Advanced Diagnostic Imaging Services D. Enforcement Instruction for the Supervision of Outpatient Therapeutic Services in Critical Access Hospitals (CAHs) and Certain Small Rural Hospitals E. Payment Changes for Film X-Rays Services and Proposed Payment Changes for X-Rays Taken Using Computed Radiography Technology F. Potential Revisions to the Laboratory Date of Service Policy 1. Background on the Medicare Part B Laboratory Date of Service Policy 2. Current Medicare DOS Policy (“14-Day Rule”) 3. Billing and Payment for Laboratory Services Under the OPPS 4. ADLTs Under the New Private Payor Rate-Based CLFS 5. Potential Revisions to the Laboratory DOS Policy XI. Proposed CY 2018 OPPS Payment Status and Comment Indicators A. Proposed CY 2018 OPPS Payment Status Indicator Definitions B. Proposed CY 2018 Comment Indicator Definitions XII. Proposed Updates to the Ambulatory Surgical Center (ASC) Payment System A. Background 1. Legislative History, Statutory Authority, and Prior Rulemaking for the ASC Payment System 2. Policies Governing Changes to the Lists of Codes and Payment Rates for ASC Covered Surgical Procedures and Covered Ancillary Services 3. Definition of ASC Covered Surgical Procedures B. Proposed Treatment of New and Revised Codes 1. Background on Current Process for Recognizing New and Revised Category I and Category III CPT Codes and Level II HCPCS Codes 2. Proposed Treatment of New and Revised Level II HCPCS Codes Implemented in April 2017 for Which We Are Soliciting Public Comments in This Proposed Rule 3. Proposed Treatment of New and Revised Level II HCPCS Codes Implemented in July 2017 for Which We Are Soliciting Public Comments in This Proposed Rule 4. Process for New and Revised Level II HCPCS Codes That Will Be Effective October 1, 2017 and January 1, 2018 for Which We Will Solicit Public Comments in the CY 2018 OPPS/ASC Final Rule With Comment Period 5. Process for Recognizing New and Revised Category I and Category III CPT Codes That Will Be Effective January 1, 2018 for Which We Will Be Soliciting Public Comments in the CY 2018 OPPS/ASC Final Rule With Comment Period C. Proposed Update to the List of ASC Covered Surgical Procedures and Covered Ancillary Services 1. Covered Surgical Procedures a. Covered Surgical Procedures Designated as Office-Based (1) Background (2) Proposed Changes for CY 2018 to Covered Surgical Procedures Designated as Office-Based b. Proposed ASC Covered Surgical Procedures Designated as Device-Intensive (1) Background (2) Proposed Changes to List of ASC Covered Surgical Procedures Designated as Device-Intensive for CY 2018 c. Proposed Adjustment to ASC Payments for No Cost/Full Credit and Partial Credit Devices d. Proposed Additions to the List of ASC Covered Surgical Procedures e. Comment Solicitation on Adding Additional Procedures to the ASC Covered Procedures List 2. Covered Ancillary Services D. Proposed ASC Payment for Covered Surgical Procedures and Covered Ancillary Services 1. Proposed ASC Payment for Covered Surgical Procedures a. Background b. Proposed Update to ASC Covered Surgical Procedure Payment Rates for CY 2018 2. Proposed Payment for Covered Ancillary Services a. Background b. Proposed Payment for Covered Ancillary Services for CY 2018 E. New Technology Intraocular Lenses (NTIOLs) 1. NTIOL Application Cycle 2. Requests to Establish New NTIOL Classes for CY 2018 3. Payment Adjustment F. Proposed ASC Payment and Comment Indicators 1. Background 2. Proposed ASC Payment and Comment Indicators G. Proposed Calculation of the ASC Conversion Factor and the Proposed ASC Payment Rates 1. Background 2. Proposed Calculation of the ASC Payment Rates a. Updating the ASC Relative Payment Weights for CY 2018 and Future Years b. Updating the ASC Conversion Factor 3. Comment Solicitation on ASC Payment System Reform 4. Display of CY 2018 ASC Payment Rates XIII. Requirements for the Hospital Outpatient Quality Reporting (OQR) Program A. Background 1. Overview 2. Statutory History of the Hospital OQR Program B. Hospital OQR Program Quality Measures 1. Considerations in the Selection of Hospital OQR Program Quality Measures 2. Accounting for Social Risk Factors in the Hospital OQR Program 3. Retention of Hospital OQR Program Measures Adopted in Previous Payment Determinations 4. Removal of Quality Measures From the Hospital OQR Program Measure Set a. Considerations in Removing Quality Measures From the Hospital OQR Program b. Criteria for Removal of “Topped-Out” Measures c. Measures Proposed for Removal From the Hospital OQR Program 5. Proposal To Make Reporting ofOP-37a-e: Outpatient and Ambulatory Surgery Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (OAS CAHPS) Survey-Based Measures Voluntary for CY 2018 Reporting and Subsequent Years 6. Previously Adopted Hospital OQR Program Measure Set for the CY 2020 Payment Determination and Subsequent Years 7. Summary of the Hospital OQR Program Measure Set Proposed for the CY 2020 and CY 2021 Payment Determination and Subsequent Years 8. Hospital OQR Program Measures and Topics for Future Consideration a. Future Measure Topics b. Possible Future Adoption of the Electronic Version of OP-2: Fibrinolytic Therapy Received Within 30 Minutes of Emergency Department Arrival 9. Maintenance of Technical Specifications for Quality Measures 10. Public Display of Quality Measures a. Background b. Public Reporting of OP-18c: Median Time From Emergency Department Arrival to Emergency Department Departure for Discharged Emergency Department Patients—Psychiatric/Mental Health Patients C. Administrative Requirements 1. QualityNet Account and Security Administrator 2. Requirements Regarding Participation Status a. Background b. Proposed Changes to the NOP Submission Deadline D. Form, Manner, and Timing of Data Submitted for the Hospital OQR Program 1. Hospital OQR Program Annual Payment Determinations 2. Requirements for Chart-Abstracted Measures Where Patient-Level Data Are Submitted Directly to CMS for the CY 2021 Payment Determination and Subsequent Years 3. Claims-Based Measure Data Requirements for the CY 2020 Payment Determination and Subsequent Years 4. Data Submission Requirements for OP-37a-e: Outpatient and Ambulatory Surgery Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (OAS CAHPS) Survey-Based Measures for the CY 2020 Payment Determination and Subsequent Years 5. Data Submission Requirements for Previously Finalized Measures for Data Submitted via a Web-based Tool for the CY 2020 Payment Determination and Subsequent Years 6. Population and Sampling Data Requirements for the CY 2020 Payment Determination and Subsequent Years 7. Hospital OQR Program Validation Requirements for Chart-Abstracted Measure Data Submitted Directly to CMS for the CY 2020 Payment Determination and Subsequent Years a. Clarification b. Proposed Codification c. Proposed Modifications to the Educational Review Process for Chart-Abstracted Measures Validation 8. Extraordinary Circumstances Exception Process for the CY 2020 Payment Determination and Subsequent Years a. ECE Policy Nomenclature b. Timeline for CMS Response to ECE Requests 9. Hospital OQR Program Reconsideration and Appeals Procedures for the CY 2020 Payment Determination and Subsequent Years—Clarification E. Payment Reduction for Hospitals That Fail To Meet the Hospital Outpatient Quality Reporting (OQR) Program Requirements for the CY 2017 Payment Determination 1. Background 2. Reporting Ratio Application and Associated Adjustment Policy for CY 2017 XIV. Requirements for the Ambulatory Surgical Center Quality Reporting (ASCQR) Program A. Background 1. Overview 2. Statutory History of the ASCQR Program 3. Regulatory History of the ASCQR Program B. ASCQR Program Quality Measures 1. Considerations in the Selection of ASCQR Program Quality Measures 2. Accounting for Social Risk Factors in the ASCQR Program 3. Policies for Retention and Removal of Quality Measures From the ASCQR Program a. Retention of Previously Adopted ASCQR Program Measures b. Proposed Measure Removal 4. Proposal To Delay ASC-15a-e: Outpatient and Ambulatory Surgery Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (OAS CAHPS) Survey-Based Measures Beginning With the 2020 Payment Determination 5. ASCQR Program Quality Measures Adopted in Previous Rulemaking 6. Proposed ASCQR Program Quality Measures for the CY 2021 and CY 2022 Payment Determinations and Subsequent Years a. Proposed Adoption of ASC-16: Toxic Anterior Segment Syndrome Beginning With the CY 2021 Payment Determination b. Proposed Adoption of ASC-17: Hospital Visits After Orthopedic Ambulatory Surgical Center Procedures Beginning With the CY 2022 Payment Determination c. Proposed Adoption of ASC-18: Hospital Visits After Urology Ambulatory Surgical Center Procedures Beginning With the CY 2022 Payment Determination d. Summary of Previously Adopted Measurers and Newly Proposed ASCQR Program Measures for the CY 2022 Payment Determination and Subsequent Years 7. ASCQR Program Measures and Topics for Future Consideration 8. Maintenance of Technical Specifications for Quality Measures 9. Public Reporting of ASCQR Program Data C. Administrative Requirements 1. Requirements Regarding QualityNet Account and Security Administrator 2. Requirements Regarding Participation Status D. Form, Manner, and Timing of Data Submitted for the ASCQR Program 1. Requirements Regarding Data Processing and Collection Periods for Claims-Based Measures Using Quality Data Codes (QDCs) 2. Minimum Threshold, Minimum Case Volume, and Data Completeness for Claims-Based Measures Using QDCs 3. Requirements for Data Submitted via an Online Data Submission Tool a. Requirements for Data Submitted via a Non-CMS Online Data Submission Tool b. Proposals Regarding Requirements for Data Submitted via a CMS Online Data Submission Tool 4. Requirements for Claims-Based Measure Data 5. Requirements for Data Submission for ASC-15a-e: Outpatient and Ambulatory Surgery Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (OAS CAHPS) Survey-Based Measures 6. Extraordinary Circumstances Extensions or Exemptions for the CY 2019 Payment Determination and Subsequent Years a. Background b. ECE Policy Nomenclature c. Timeline for CMS Response to ECE Requests 7. ASCQR Program Reconsideration Procedures E. Payment Reduction for ASCs That Fail To Meet the ASCQR Program Requirements 1. Statutory Background 2. Reduction to the ASC Payment Rates for ASCs That Fail To Meet the ASCQR Program Requirements for a Payment Determination Year XV. Request for Information and Public Comments A. Request for Information on CMS Flexibilities and Efficiencies B. Eliminating Inappropriate Medicare Payment Differentials for Similar Services in the Inpatient and Outpatient Settings C. Request for Information Regarding Physician-Owned Hospitals XVI. Files Available to the Public via the Internet XVII. Collection of Information Requirements A. Statutory Requirement for Solicitation of Comments B. ICRs for the Hospital OQR Program C. ICRs for the ASCQR Program XVIII. Response to Comments XIX. Economic Analyses A. Regulatory Impact Analysis 1. Introduction 2. Statement of Need 3. Overall Impacts for the Proposed OPPS and ASC Payment Provisions 4. Regulatory Review Costs 5. Detailed Economic Analyses a. Estimated Effects of Proposed OPPS Changes in This Proposed Rule (1) Limitations of Our Analysis (2) Estimated Effects of Proposed OPPS Changes to Part B Drug Payment on 340B Eligible Hospitals Paid Under the OPPS (3) Estimated Effects of Proposed OPPS Changes on Hospitals (4) Estimated Effects of Proposed OPPS Changes on CMHCs (5) Estimated Effects of Proposed OPPS Changes on Beneficiaries (6) Estimated Effects of Proposed OPPS Changes on Other Providers (7) Estimated Effects of Proposed OPPS Changes on the Medicare and Medicaid Programs (8) Alternative OPPS Policies Considered b. Estimated Effects of Proposed CY 2018 ASC Payment System Policies (1) Limitations of Our Analysis (2) Estimated Effects of Proposed CY 2018 ASC Payment System Policies on ASCs (3) Estimated Effects of Proposed ASC Payment System Policies on Beneficiaries (4) Alternative ASC Payment Policies Considered c. Accounting Statements and Tables d. Effects of Proposed Requirements for the Hospital OQR Program e. Effects of Proposed Requirements for the ASCQR Program B. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) Analysis C. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act Analysis D. Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs E. Conclusion XX. Federalism Analysis Regulation Text I. Summary and Background A. Executive Summary of This Document 1. Purpose

    In this proposed rule, we are proposing to update the payment policies and payment rates for services furnished to Medicare beneficiaries in hospital outpatient departments (HOPDs) and ambulatory surgical centers (ASCs) beginning January 1, 2018. Section 1833(t) of the Social Security Act (the Act) requires us to annually review and update the payment rates for services payable under the Hospital Outpatient Prospective Payment System (OPPS). Specifically, section 1833(t)(9)(A) of the Act requires the Secretary to review certain components of the OPPS not less often than annually, and to revise the groups, relative payment weights, and other adjustments that take into account changes in medical practices, changes in technologies, and the addition of new services, new cost data, and other relevant information and factors. In addition, under section 1833(i) of the Act, we annually review and update the ASC payment rates. We describe these and various other statutory authorities in the relevant sections of this proposed rule. In addition, this proposed rule would update and refine the requirements for the Hospital Outpatient Quality Reporting (OQR) Program and the ASC Quality Reporting (ASCQR) Program.

    2. Summary of the Major Provisions

    OPPS Update: For CY 2018, we are proposing to increase the payment rates under the OPPS by an Outpatient Department (OPD) fee schedule increase factor of 1.75 percent. This proposed increase factor is based on the proposed hospital inpatient market basket percentage increase of 2.9 percent for inpatient services paid under the hospital inpatient prospective payment system (IPPS), minus the proposed multifactor productivity (MFP) adjustment of 0.4 percentage point, and minus a 0.75 percentage point adjustment required by the Affordable Care Act. Based on this proposed update, we estimate that proposed total payments to OPPS providers (including beneficiary cost-sharing and estimated changes in enrollment, utilization, and case-mix), for CY 2018 would be approximately $70 billion, an increase of approximately $5.7 billion compared to estimated CY 2017 OPPS payments.

    We are proposing to continue to implement the statutory 2.0 percentage point reduction in payments for hospitals failing to meet the hospital outpatient quality reporting requirements, by applying a proposed reporting factor of 0.980 to the OPPS payments and copayments for all applicable services.

    Proposed High Cost/Low Cost Threshold for Packaged Skin Substitutes: As we did for CY 2017, we are proposing to assign skin substitutes with a geometric mean unit cost (MUC) or a per day cost (PDC) that exceeds either the MUC threshold or the PDC threshold to the high cost group. In addition, for CY 2018, we are proposing that a skin substitute product that does not exceed either the CY 2018 MUC or PDC threshold for CY 2018, but was assigned to the high cost group for CY 2017, will be assigned to the high cost group for CY 2018. The goal of our proposal is to maintain similar levels of payment for skin substitute products for CY 2018 while we study our current skin substitute payment methodology to determine whether refinements to our existing methodologies may be warranted.

    Supervision of Hospital Outpatient Therapeutic Services: In the CY 2009 and CY 2010 OPPS/ASC proposed rule and final rule with comment period, we clarified that direct supervision is required for hospital outpatient therapeutic services covered and paid by Medicare that are furnished in hospitals, CAHs, and in provider-based departments (PBDs) of hospitals, as set forth in the CY 2000 OPPS final rule with comment period. For several years, there has been a moratorium on the enforcement of the direct supervision requirement for CAHs and small rural hospitals, with the latest moratorium on enforcement expiring on December 31, 2016. In this proposed rule, we are proposing to reinstate the nonenforcement of direct supervision enforcement instruction for outpatient therapeutic services for CAHs and small rural hospitals having 100 or fewer beds for CY 2018 and CY 2019.

    340B Drug Pricing: We are proposing changes to our current Medicare Part B drug payment methodology for 340B hospitals that we believe would better, and more appropriately, reflect the resources and acquisition costs that these hospitals incur. Such changes would allow the Medicare program and Medicare beneficiaries to share in some of the savings realized by hospitals participating in the 340B program. For CY 2018, we are proposing to exercise the Secretary's authority to adjust the applicable payment rate as necessary for separately payable drugs and biologicals (other than drugs on pass-through and vaccines) acquired under the 340B program from average sales price (ASP) plus 6 percent to ASP minus 22.5 percent. In addition, in this proposed rule, we state our intent to establish a modifier to identify whether a drug billed under the OPPS was purchased under the 340B Drug Discount Program.

    Device Pass-Through Applications: For CY 2018, we evaluate five devices for eligibility to receive pass through payments and are seeking comments on whether each of these items meet the criteria for device pass-through status.

    Rural Adjustment: We are proposing to continue the adjustment of 7.1 percent to the OPPS payments to certain rural sole community hospitals (SCHs), including essential access community hospitals (EACHs). This proposed adjustment would apply to all services paid under the OPPS, excluding separately payable drugs and biologicals, devices paid under the pass-through payment policy, and items paid at charges reduced to cost.

    Cancer Hospital Payment Adjustment: For CY 2018, we are proposing to continue to provide additional payments to cancer hospitals so that the cancer hospital's payment-to-cost ratio (PCR) after the additional payments is equal to the weighted average PCR for the other OPPS hospitals using the most recently submitted or settled cost report data. However, beginning CY 2018, section 16002(b) of the 21st Century Cures Act requires this weighted average PCR be reduced by 1.0 percentage point. Based on the data and the required 1.0 percentage point reduction, a proposed target PCR of 0.89 would be used to determine the CY 2018 cancer hospital payment adjustment to be paid at cost report settlement. That is, the proposed payment adjustments would be the additional payments needed to result in a PCR equal to 0.89 for each cancer hospital.

    Changes to the Inpatient Only List: In CY 2017 OPPS/ASC rulemaking, we solicited comment from the public on whether total knee arthroplasty should be removed from the inpatient only list. Several commenters to the CY 2017 OPPS/ASC proposed rule were supportive of the removal. In addition, the Advisory Panel on Hospital Outpatient Payment recommended at its Summer 2016 meeting that this procedure be removed from the inpatient only list. After evaluating the procedure, for CY 2018, we are proposing to remove total knee arthroplasty from the inpatient-only list. In addition, we are soliciting comment on whether partial and total hip should also be removed from the inpatient only list and added to the ASC Covered Surgical Procedures List.

    Comprehensive APCs: For CY 2018, we are not proposing to create any new C-APCs or any extensive changes to the already established methodology used for C-APCs. There will be a total number of 62 C-APCs as of January 1, 2018. We note that for CY 2018, for the C-APC for Stereotactic Radio Surgery (SRS), specifically, C-APC 5627 (Level 7 Radiation Therapy), we are proposing to continue to make separate payments for the 10 planning and preparation services adjunctive to the delivery of the SRS treatment using either the Cobalt-60-based or LINAC-based technology when furnished to a beneficiary within 30 days of the SRS treatment. In addition, the data collection period for SRS claims with modifier “CP” is set to conclude on December 31, 2017. Accordingly, for CY 2018, we are deleting this modifier and discontinuing its required use.

    Packaging Policies: In CY 2015, we implemented a policy to conditionally package ancillary services assigned to APCs with a geometric mean cost of $100 or less prior to packaging, with some exceptions, including drug administration services. For CY 2018, we are proposing to remove the exception for certain drug administration services and conditionally package payment for low-cost drug administration services. We are not proposing to package drug administration add-on codes for CY 2018, but are soliciting comments on this policy. In addition, we are broadly soliciting comments on existing packaging policies that exist under the OPPS, including those related to drugs that function as a supply in a diagnostic test or procedure or in a surgical procedure.

    Payment Changes for X-rays Taken Using Computed Radiography Technology: Section 502(b) of Division O, Title V of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2016 (Pub. L. 114-113) amended section 1833(t)(16) of the Act by adding new subparagraph (F). New section 1833(t)(16)(F)(ii) of the Act provides for a phased-in reduction of payments for imaging services that are taken using computed radiography technology. That section provides that payments for such services furnished during CYs 2018 through 2022 shall be reduced by 7 percent, and if such services are furnished during CY 2023 or a subsequent year, payments for such services shall be reduced by 10 percent. We are establishing a new modifier that would be reported on claims to identify those HCPCS codes that describe X-rays taken using computed radiography technology. Specifically, this modifier, as allowed under the provisions of new section 1833(t)(16)(F)(ii) of the Act, would be reported with the applicable HCPCS code to describe imaging services that are taken using computed radiography technology/cassette-based imaging beginning January 1, 2018.

    ASC Payment Update: For CY 2018, we are proposing to increase payment rates under the ASC payment system by 1.9 percent for ASCs that meet the quality reporting requirements under the ASCQR Program. This proposed increase is based on a projected CPI-U update of 2.3 percent minus a multifactor productivity adjustment required by the Affordable Care Act of 0.4 percentage point. Based on this proposed update, we estimate that proposed total payments to ASCs (including beneficiary cost sharing and estimated changes in enrollment, utilization, and case-mix), for CY 2018 would be approximately $4.68 billion, an increase of approximately $155 million compared to estimated CY 2017 Medicare payments. In addition, we are soliciting comment on payment reform for ASCs, including the collection of cost data which may support a rate update other than CPI-U.

    Comment Solicitation on ASC Payment Reform: We are broadly interested in feedback from stakeholders and other interested parties on potential reforms to the current payment system, including, but not limited to (1) the rate update factor applied to ASC payments, (2) whether and how ASCs should submit data relating to costs, (3) whether ASCs should bill on the institutional claim form rather than the professional claim form, and (4) other ideas to improve payment accuracy for ASCs.

    Changes to the List of ASC Covered Surgical Procedures: For CY 2018, we are proposing to add three procedures to the ASC Covered Procedures List. In addition, we are soliciting comment on whether total knee arthroplasty, partial hip arthroplasty and total hip arthroplasty meet the criteria to be added to the ASC-CPL. We also are soliciting comments from stakeholders on whether there are codes that are outside the AMA-CPT surgical code range that nonetheless, should be considered to be a covered surgical procedure.

    Potential Revisions to the Laboratory Date of Service Policy: To better understand the potential impact of the current date of service (DOS) policy on billing for molecular pathology tests and advance diagnostic laboratory tests (ADLTs) under the new private payor rate-based Clinical Laboratory Fee Schedule (CLFS), we are soliciting public comments on billing for molecular pathology tests and ADLTs ordered less than 14 days of a hospital outpatient discharge.

    Hospital Outpatient Quality Reporting (OQR) Program: For the Hospital OQR Program, we are proposing to remove and delay certain measures for the CY 2020 payment determination and the CY 2021 payment determination and subsequent years. For the CY 2020 payment determination and subsequent years, we are proposing to remove OP-21: Median Time to Pain Management for Long Bone Fracture and OP-26: Hospital Outpatient Volume Data on Selected Outpatient Surgical Procedures. We are also proposing to delay the OAS CAHPS Survey measures (OP-37-a-e) beginning with the CY 2020 payment determination (CY 2018 reporting). In addition, for the CY 2020 payment determination and subsequent years we are: (1) Providing clarification on our procedures for validation of chart-abstracted measures to note that the 50 poorest performing outlier hospitals will be targeted for validation; (2) proposing to formalize the validation educational review process, update it to allow corrections of incorrect validation results for chart-abstracted measures, and modify the CFR accordingly; (3) proposing to change the Notice of Participation (NOP) deadline and make corresponding changes to the CFR; (4) proposing to align the first quarter for which to submit data for hospitals that did not participate in the previous year's Hospital OQR Program and make corresponding changes to the CFR; (5) proposing to publicly report OP-18c: Median Time from Emergency Department Arrival to Emergency Department Departure for Discharged Emergency Department Patients—Psychiatric/Mental Health Patients; and (6) proposing to align the naming of the Extraordinary Circumstances Exceptions (ECE) policy with that used in our other quality reporting and value-based payment programs and make corresponding changes to the CFR. For the CY 2021 payment determination and subsequent years, we are proposing to remove: (1) OP-1: Median Time to Fibrinolysis; (2) OP-4: Aspirin at Arrival; (3) OP-20: Door to Diagnostic Evaluation by a Qualified Medical Professional; and, (4) OP-25: Safe Surgery Checklist Use.

    Ambulatory Surgical Center Quality Reporting (ASCQR) Program: For the ASCQR Program, we are proposing to adopt measures and policies for the CY 2019 payment determination, 2021 payment determination, and CY 2022 payment determination and subsequent years. Specifically, we are proposing, beginning with the CY 2019 payment determination, to remove three measures from the ASCQR Program measure set: (1) ASC-5: Prophylactic Intravenous (IV) Antibiotic Timing; (2) ASC-6: Safe Surgery Checklist Use; and, (3) ASC-7: Ambulatory Surgical Center Facility Volume Data on Selected Ambulatory Surgical Center Surgical Procedures. In addition, we are also proposing to delay the OAS CAHPS Survey measures (ASC-15a-e) beginning with the CY 2020 payment determination (CY 2018 data collection). Furthermore, starting with CY 2018 and beyond, we are proposing to: (1) Expand the CMS online tool to also allow for batch submission of measure data and make corresponding changes to the CFR; and (2) align the naming of the Extraordinary Circumstances Exceptions (ECE) policy with that used in our other quality reporting and value-based payment programs and make corresponding changes to the CFR. We are also proposing, beginning with the CY 2021 payment determination, to adopt one new measure, ASC-16: Toxic Anterior Segment Syndrome. In addition, we are proposing, beginning with the CY 2022 payment determination, to adopt two new measures collected via claims, ASC-17: Hospital Visits after Orthopedic Ambulatory Surgical Center Procedures and ASC-18: Hospital Visits after Urology Ambulatory Surgical Center Procedures.

    3. Summary of Costs and Benefits

    In sections XIX. and XX. of this proposed rule, we set forth a detailed analysis of the regulatory and Federalism impacts that the proposed changes would have on affected entities and beneficiaries. Key estimated impacts are described below.

    a. Impacts of the Proposed OPPS Update (1) Impacts of All OPPS Proposed Changes

    Table 38 in section XIX. of this proposed rule displays the distributional impact of all the proposed OPPS changes on various groups of hospitals and CMHCs for CY 2018 compared to all estimated OPPS payments in CY 2017. We estimate that the proposed policies in this proposed rule would result in a 1.9 percent overall increase in OPPS payments to providers. We estimate that proposed total OPPS payments for CY 2018, including beneficiary cost-sharing, to the approximate 3,900 facilities paid under the OPPS (including general acute care hospitals, children's hospitals, cancer hospitals, and CMHCs) would increase by approximately $897 million compared to CY 2017 payments, excluding our estimated changes in enrollment, utilization, and case-mix.

    We estimated the isolated impact of our proposed OPPS policies on CMHCs because CMHCs are only paid for partial hospitalization services under the OPPS. Continuing the provider-specific structure that we adopted beginning in CY 2011 and basing payment fully on the type of provider furnishing the service, we estimate a 2.1 percent increase in CY 2018 payments to CMHCs relative to their CY 2017 payments.

    (2) Impacts of the Proposed Updated Wage Indexes

    We estimate that our proposed update of the wage indexes based on the FY 2018 IPPS proposed rule wage indexes results in no change for urban and rural hospitals under the OPPS. These wage indexes include the continued implementation of the OMB labor market area delineations based on 2010 Decennial Census data.

    (3) Impacts of the Proposed Rural Adjustment and the Cancer Hospital Payment Adjustment

    There are no significant impacts of our proposed CY 2018 payment policies for hospitals that are eligible for the rural adjustment or for the cancer hospital payment adjustment. We are not proposing to make any change in policies for determining the rural hospital payment adjustments. While we are implementing the required reduction to the cancer hospital payment adjustment in Section 16002 of the 21st Century Cures Act for CY 2018, the adjustment amounts do not significantly impact the budget neutrality adjustments for these policies.

    (4) Impacts of the Proposed OPD Fee Schedule Increase Factor

    We estimate that, for most hospitals, the application of the proposed OPD fee schedule increase factor of 1.75 percent to the conversion factor for CY 2018 would mitigate the impacts of the budget neutrality adjustments. As a result of the OPD fee schedule increase factor and other budget neutrality adjustments, we estimate that rural and urban hospitals would experience increases of approximately 2.0 percent for urban hospitals and 2.0 percent for rural hospitals. Classifying hospitals by teaching status or type of ownership suggests that these hospitals would receive similar increases.

    b. Impacts of the Proposed ASC Payment Update

    For impact purposes, the surgical procedures on the ASC list of covered procedures are aggregated into surgical specialty groups using CPT and HCPCS code range definitions. The proposed percentage change in estimated total payments by specialty groups under the proposed CY 2018 payment rates compared to estimated CY 2017 payment rates ranges between 5 percent for integumentary system procedures and 1 percent for genitourinary system procedures.

    c. Impacts of the Hospital OQR Program

    We do not expect our proposed CY 2018 policies to significantly affect the number of hospitals that do not receive a full annual payment update.

    d. Impacts of the ASCQR Program

    We do not expect our proposed CY 2018 policies to significantly affect the number of ASCs that do not receive a full annual payment update.

    B. Legislative and Regulatory Authority for the Hospital OPPS

    When Title XVIII of the Social Security Act was enacted, Medicare payment for hospital outpatient services was based on hospital-specific costs. In an effort to ensure that Medicare and its beneficiaries pay appropriately for services and to encourage more efficient delivery of care, the Congress mandated replacement of the reasonable cost-based payment methodology with a prospective payment system (PPS). The Balanced Budget Act of 1997 (BBA) (Pub. L. 105-33) added section 1833(t) to the Act authorizing implementation of a PPS for hospital outpatient services. The OPPS was first implemented for services furnished on or after August 1, 2000. Implementing regulations for the OPPS are located at 42 CFR parts 410 and 419.

    The Medicare, Medicaid, and SCHIP Balanced Budget Refinement Act of 1999 (BBRA) (Pub. L. 106-113) made major changes in the hospital OPPS. The following Acts made additional changes to the OPPS: The Medicare, Medicaid, and SCHIP Benefits Improvement and Protection Act of 2000 (BIPA) (Pub. L. 106-554); the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003 (MMA) (Pub. L. 108-173); the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 (DRA) (Pub. L. 109-171), enacted on February 8, 2006; the Medicare Improvements and Extension Act under Division B of Title I of the Tax Relief and Health Care Act of 2006 (MIEA-TRHCA) (Pub. L. 109-432), enacted on December 20, 2006; the Medicare, Medicaid, and SCHIP Extension Act of 2007 (MMSEA) (Pub. L. 110-173), enacted on December 29, 2007; the Medicare Improvements for Patients and Providers Act of 2008 (MIPPA) (Pub. L. 110-275), enacted on July 15, 2008; the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (Pub. L. 111-148), enacted on March 23, 2010, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 (Pub. L. 111-152), enacted on March 30, 2010 (these two public laws are collectively known as the Affordable Care Act); the Medicare and Medicaid Extenders Act of 2010 (MMEA, Pub. L. 111-309); the Temporary Payroll Tax Cut Continuation Act of 2011 (TPTCCA, Pub. L. 112-78), enacted on December 23, 2011; the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012 (MCTRJCA, Pub. L. 112-96), enacted on February 22, 2012; the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 (Pub. L. 112-240), enacted January 2, 2013; the Pathway for SGR Reform Act of 2013 (Pub. L. 113-67) enacted on December 26, 2013; the Protecting Access to Medicare Act of 2014 (PAMA, Pub. L. 113-93), enacted on March 27, 2014; the Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act (MACRA) of 2015 (Pub. L. 114-10), enacted April 16, 2015; the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2015 (Pub. L. 114-74), enacted November 2, 2015; the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2016 (Pub. L. 114-113), enacted on December 18, 2015, and the 21st Century Cures Act (Pub. L. 114-255), enacted on December 13, 2016.

    Under the OPPS, we pay for hospital Part B services on a rate-per-service basis that varies according to the APC group to which the service is assigned. We use the Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System (HCPCS) (which includes certain Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes) to identify and group the services within each APC. The OPPS includes payment for most hospital outpatient services, except those identified in section I.C. of this proposed rule. Section 1833(t)(1)(B) of the Act provides for payment under the OPPS for hospital outpatient services designated by the Secretary (which includes partial hospitalization services furnished by CMHCs), and certain inpatient hospital services that are paid under Medicare Part B.

    The OPPS rate is an unadjusted national payment amount that includes the Medicare payment and the beneficiary copayment. This rate is divided into a labor-related amount and a nonlabor-related amount. The labor-related amount is adjusted for area wage differences using the hospital inpatient wage index value for the locality in which the hospital or CMHC is located.

    All services and items within an APC group are comparable clinically and with respect to resource use (section 1833(t)(2)(B) of the Act). In accordance with section 1833(t)(2) of the Act, subject to certain exceptions, items and services within an APC group cannot be considered comparable with respect to the use of resources if the highest median cost (or mean cost, if elected by the Secretary) for an item or service in the APC group is more than 2 times greater than the lowest median cost (or mean cost, if elected by the Secretary) for an item or service within the same APC group (referred to as the “2 times rule”). In implementing this provision, we generally use the cost of the item or service assigned to an APC group.

    For new technology items and services, special payments under the OPPS may be made in one of two ways. Section 1833(t)(6) of the Act provides for temporary additional payments, which we refer to as “transitional pass-through payments,” for at least 2 but not more than 3 years for certain drugs, biological agents, brachytherapy devices used for the treatment of cancer, and categories of other medical devices. For new technology services that are not eligible for transitional pass-through payments, and for which we lack sufficient clinical information and cost data to appropriately assign them to a clinical APC group, we have established special APC groups based on costs, which we refer to as New Technology APCs. These New Technology APCs are designated by cost bands which allow us to provide appropriate and consistent payment for designated new procedures that are not yet reflected in our claims data. Similar to pass-through payments, an assignment to a New Technology APC is temporary; that is, we retain a service within a New Technology APC until we acquire sufficient data to assign it to a clinically appropriate APC group.

    C. Excluded OPPS Services and Hospitals

    Section 1833(t)(1)(B)(i) of the Act authorizes the Secretary to designate the hospital outpatient services that are paid under the OPPS. While most hospital outpatient services are payable under the OPPS, section 1833(t)(1)(B)(iv) of the Act excludes payment for ambulance, physical and occupational therapy, and speech-language pathology services, for which payment is made under a fee schedule. It also excludes screening mammography, diagnostic mammography, and effective January 1, 2011, an annual wellness visit providing personalized prevention plan services. The Secretary exercises the authority granted under the statute to also exclude from the OPPS certain services that are paid under fee schedules or other payment systems. Such excluded services include, for example, the professional services of physicians and nonphysician practitioners paid under the Medicare Physician Fee Schedule (MPFS); certain laboratory services paid under the Clinical Laboratory Fee Schedule (CLFS); services for beneficiaries with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) that are paid under the ESRD prospective payment system; and services and procedures that require an inpatient stay that are paid under the hospital IPPS. We set forth the services that are excluded from payment under the OPPS in regulations at 42 CFR 419.22.

    Under § 419.20(b) of the regulations, we specify the types of hospitals that are excluded from payment under the OPPS. These excluded hospitals include: Critical access hospitals (CAHs); hospitals located in Maryland and paid under the Maryland All-Payer Model; hospitals located outside of the 50 States, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico; and Indian Health Service (IHS) hospitals.

    D. Prior Rulemaking

    On April 7, 2000, we published in the Federal Register a final rule with comment period (65 FR 18434) to implement a prospective payment system for hospital outpatient services. The hospital OPPS was first implemented for services furnished on or after August 1, 2000. Section 1833(t)(9)(A) of the Act requires the Secretary to review certain components of the OPPS, not less often than annually, and to revise the groups, relative payment weights, and other adjustments that take into account changes in medical practices, changes in technologies, and the addition of new services, new cost data, and other relevant information and factors.

    Since initially implementing the OPPS, we have published final rules in the Federal Register annually to implement statutory requirements and changes arising from our continuing experience with this system. These rules can be viewed on the CMS Web site at: https://www.cms.gov/Medicare/Medicare-Fee-for-Service-Payment/HospitalOutpatientPPS/Hospital-Outpatient-Regulations-and-Notices.html.

    E. Advisory Panel on Hospital Outpatient Payment (the HOP Panel or the Panel) 1. Authority of the Panel

    Section 1833(t)(9)(A) of the Act, as amended by section 201(h) of Public Law 106-113, and redesignated by section 202(a)(2) of Public Law 106-113, requires that we consult with an external advisory panel of experts to annually review the clinical integrity of the payment groups and their weights under the OPPS. In CY 2000, based on section 1833(t)(9)(A) of the Act, the Secretary established the Advisory Panel on Ambulatory Payment Classification Groups (APC Panel) to fulfill this requirement. In CY 2011, based on section 222 of the PHS Act which gives discretionary authority to the Secretary to convene advisory councils and committees, the Secretary expanded the panel's scope to include the supervision of hospital outpatient therapeutic services in addition to the APC groups and weights. To reflect this new role of the panel, the Secretary changed the panel's name to the Advisory Panel on Hospital Outpatient Payment (the HOP Panel, or the Panel). The Panel is not restricted to using data compiled by CMS, and in conducting its review, it may use data collected or developed by organizations outside the Department.

    2. Establishment of the Panel

    On November 21, 2000, the Secretary signed the initial charter establishing the HOP Panel, and at that time named the APC Panel. This expert panel is composed of appropriate representatives of providers (currently employed full-time, not as consultants, in their respective areas of expertise), reviews clinical data, and advises CMS about the clinical integrity of the APC groups and their payment weights. Since CY 2012, the Panel also is charged with advising the Secretary on the appropriate level of supervision for individual hospital outpatient therapeutic services. The Panel is technical in nature, and it is governed by the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA). The current charter specifies, among other requirements, that: The Panel may advise on the clinical integrity of Ambulatory Payment Classification (APC) groups and their associated weights; may advise on the appropriate supervision level for hospital outpatient services; continues to be technical in nature; is governed by the provisions of the FACA; has a Designated Federal Official (DFO); and is chaired by a Federal Official designated by the Secretary. The Panel's charter was amended on November 15, 2011, renaming the Panel and expanding the Panel's authority to include supervision o